RESTRICTED  
  
G/VAL/M/66  
 
13 June 2018  
(18-3663) Page: 1/15 
Committee on Customs Valuation    
 
MINUTES OF THE MEETI NG OF 23 APRIL  2018 
CHAIRPERSON : MS LUCIANA NADER (UR UGUAY)  
The agenda proposed for the meeting, circulated in  document  WTO/AIR/VAL/ 7, was adopted as 
follows:  
 
1   REPORT OF THE WORK O F THE TECHNICAL COMM ITTEE ON CUSTOMS 
VALUATION  ................................ ................................ ................................ ......................  2 
2   INFORMATION ON IMPLE MENTATION AND ADMINI STRATION OF THE 
AGREEMENT  ................................ ................................ ................................ .....................  2 
2.1   Notification of national legislation  ................................ ................................ ..................  2 
A. Kingdom of Bahrain  ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 3 
B. Belize  ................................ ................................ ................................ .......................  3 
C. China  ................................ ................................ ................................ ........................  4 
D. Guinea  ................................ ................................ ................................ ......................  5 
E. Honduras  ................................ ................................ ................................ ..................  5 
F. Kazakhstan  ................................ ................................ ................................ ...............  5 
G. Malawi  ................................ ................................ ................................ ......................  6 
H. Nepal  ................................ ................................ ................................ ........................  6 
I. Nigeria  ................................ ................................ ................................ ......................  6 
J. Russian Federat ion ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 6 
K. Rwanda ................................ ................................ ................................ .....................  7 
L. Solomon Islands  ................................ ................................ ................................ ........  7 
M. Sri Lanka  ................................ ................................ ................................ ..................  7 
N. The Gambia  ................................ ................................ ................................ ...............  8 
3   INFORMATION ON THE A PPLICATION OF DECISI ONS OF  THE COMMITTEE ON 
CUSTOMS VALUATION  ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 8 
3.1   The status of notifications under the Committee's Decisions  ................................ ..............  8 
3.2   Uruguay's proposal to update the carrier media decision  ................................ ..................  8 
4   TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE  ................................ ................................ .............................  9 
4.1   Information on Technical Assistance  ................................ ................................ ..............  9 
4.2   Article  20.3 Technical Assistance and Trade -Related Technical Assistance  ...........................  9 
5   ARMENIA'S REFE RENCE PRICE SYSTEM I N CONNECTION WITH TH E 
VALUATION OF GOODS – REQUEST BY THE UNITE D STATES  ................................ ..........  11 
6   PAKISTAN'S DETERMINA TION OF CUSTOMS VALUES OF PA PER – REQUEST BY 
THAILAND  ................................ ................................ ................................ ......................  12 G/VAL/M/6 6 
 
- 2 - 
 
  7   OMAN'S CUSTOMS VALUA TION OF CIGARETTES A ND INTRODUCTION OF T HE 
SELECTIVE TAX  – REQUEST BY SWITZERLA ND ................................ ...............................  12 
8   PRESHIPMENT INSPECTI ON ................................ ................................ ......................  13 
8.1   Status of notifications by Members  ................................ ................................ ............... 13 
8.2   Questions and Responses by the United States and Indonesia  ................................ .......... 13 
8.3   Information on PSI  programmes  ................................ ................................ ................... 14 
8.4   Fourth Triennial Review of the PSI  Agreement  ................................ ................................ 14 
9   EGYPT'S STATUS OF NO TIFICATION OF PSI – REQUEST BY THE UNITE D 
STATES ................................ ................................ ................................ ...........................  14 
10   OTHER BUSINESS  ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 15 
10.1   Format of official communications to be sent to Members  ................................ .............. 15 
10.2   Date of next meeting  ................................ ................................ ................................ 15 
11   ELECTION OF CHAIRPER SON ................................ ................................ ...................  15 
 
_______________  
 
 
1  REPORT OF THE WORK O F THE TECHNICAL COMM ITTEE ON CUSTOMS VAL UATION  
1.1.  The representative of the World Customs Organization  (WCO) , Mr Ian Cremer , reported on 
the upcoming ac tivities of the Technical Committee on Customs Valuation . The 46th session of the 
Technical Committee would  take place from 7 to 9  May 2018 and would be taking up the technical 
questions that had been raised at the 45th session, as well as three  new questions raised by 
Members ; two from China and one from Uruguay.  
1.2.  In June, the Technical Committee would report to the high -level WCO  Council to seek 
approval for a Technical C ommittee instrument, Case Study  14.2, which had been concluded by 
the Technical Committee at its 45th session . 
1.3.  The Chairperson  thanked Mr Cremer for h is report  and expressed the Committee's 
appreciation for the continued valuable work of the Technical Committee on Customs Valuation.  
1.4.  The Committee took note  of the report.  
2  INFORMATION O N IMPLEMENTATION AND  ADMINISTRATION OF TH E AGREEMENT  
2.1  Notification of national legislation  
2.1.  The Chairperson  recalled that , pursuant to Article  22 of the Agreement and the Decision on  
"Notification and circulation of national legislation in accordance with Article 22 of the Agreement" , 
Members must submit the complete texts of their national legislation on customs valuation in one 
of the three  official WTO  languages. They should also inform the Committee of any changes 
relevant to this Agreement in their law s and regulations , including any changes to  the 
administration of their laws and regulations. The notification procedures had been adopted by the 
Committee at its meeting of 12  May 1995 and were contained in section  B.2 of document  G/VAL/5. 
As agreed at th e Committee's meeting of 25  October  2012, the Se cretariat had issued a document  
summariz ing the current status of notifications ; the latest version of this document had been 
circulated as document  G/VAL/ W/232/Rev. 8. As agreed at the Committee 's meeting  of 
7 October  2015, this document ha d been revised  to include references to documents containing 
the questions and responses regard ing notifications.  
2.2.  The Chairperson  also recalled that  the situation regarding the notification of  Chinese Taipei 's 
legislation remain ed unchanged . G/VAL/M/6 6 
 
- 3 - 
 
  2.3.  The Chairperson  said that, at its last meeting , the Committee had examined 13  national 
legislations , of which  11 were stalled because of continuing delay s in providing responses to 
Members' questions. In some cases , questions had first been raised back in 2009 and ha d 
remained on the agenda ever since.  
2.4.  No responses ha d been notified since the last Committee meeting and so it appeared  unlikely 
that the Committee would make any progress on this item during the course of the current 
meeting . The situation continue d to delay the work of the Committee and the Chairperson s trongly 
urged Members that we re in the process of  preparing their responses to complete the task as soon 
as possible.  
A. Kingdom of Bahrain  
2.5.  The Chairperson  recalled that it had been agreed at the last meeting that the Committee 
would  revert to the examination of Bahrain's notification of national legislation and responses to 
the checklist of issues that had been circulated in documents  G/VAL/ N/1/BHR/ 1, 
G/VAL/ N/1/BHR/ 2, and G/VAL/N/ 2/BHR/ 1. The latest questions raised by the United States had 
been circulated  in document  G/VAL/ W/223  and Bahrain had provided its responses in 
document  G/VAL/W/308.  
2.6.  The representative of the United States  thank ed Bahrain for its responses , to which the 
United States was in the process of preparing follow -up questions . 
2.7.  The representative of Canada  referred to document  G/VAL/W/308 , containing  Bahrain's 
responses , and raised in particular Bahrain's response to question  14 raised by  the United States.1 
Bahrain's response suggested that Bahrain verified both test values and the circumstances 
surrounding the sale. However, the Customs Valuation Agreement provided that , when customs 
had doubts over the price  of a good , the transaction value would b e accepted if the  importer could 
demonstrate that the value closely approximated to one of the three test values (Article 1.2(b) ), or 
failing that, that customs would examine the circumstances surrounding the sale to determine 
whether the relationship had influenced the price.  
2.8.  Since test values were rarely available to importers, the application of both options by 
Bahrain would mean that , in practice , the transaction value was automatically rejected in cases 
where the sale of goods was between related parties ; in this regard, Canada asked Bahrain to 
confirm its understanding that Bahrain  verified the transaction value in such cases by using both 
test values and assessing the circumstances of the sale.  
2.9.  The representative of Kingdom of Bahrain thanked the United States and Canada for their 
interest and said that the questions would be transmitted to Capital . 
2.10.   The Chairperson  requested Canada to submit the question s in writing.  
2.11.   The Committee took note  of the statement made and agreed  to reve rt to Bahrain's 
notification  at its next meeting.  
B. Belize  
2.12.   The Chairperson  recalled that it had been agreed at the Committee's previous  meeting to 
revert  to the examination of Belize's notification of national legislation and responses to the 
checklist of  issues , which had been circulated in documents  G/VAL/N/1/BLZ/1 a nd 
                                                
1 Question: How does the ROI  implement Article  1.2(a), CVA, which provides, "the fact that the buyer 
and seller are related within the meaning of Article  15 shall not itself be grounds for regarding transaction 
value as unacceptable"?  
Answer: Being related to the exporter is not a sufficient reason to reject the value, but in case of doubt 
that this correlation has affected the value, it is verified in two ways:  
(1) Examine the circumstances surrounding the sale process and whether it is in agreement with the 
  sale process of unrelated persons; and  
(2) Use the standard values of goods previously acc epted (TEST VALUE), which is the most used.  
 G/VAL/M/6 6 
 
- 4 - 
 
  G/VAL/N/2/BLZ/1 . The Committee was awaiting responses from Belize to the latest questions 
raised by the United States in documents  G/VAL/ W/188 , G/VAL/ W/272 , and G/VAL/ W/272/Corr.1.  
2.13.   The representative of the United States  said that her delegation continued to look forward 
to receiving written  responses  from Belize to their quest ions, which had first been raised in 
September  2015. 
2.14.   The Committee took note  of the statement made and agreed  to revert to Belize's 
notification  at its next meeting.  
C. China  
2.15.   The Chairperson  drew the Committee 's attention to China's notification of its amended 
national legislation , which had been circulated in document  C/VAL/1/CHN/6.  
2.16.   The representative of China  stated that the amended national legislation  had taken into 
consideration the views and suggestions of WTO Members and was now more consistent with the 
Agreement on Customs Valuation.  It reflect ed the latest development s in China's  customs 
valuation given  the new international trade  environment . The amendment had also absorbed the 
results of research on valuation theory and new experience s and practice s. China b elieve d that  the 
amend ed legislation would provide guidance in the area  of customs valuation in China.  
2.17.   The representative of the United States  thanked China for its notification , which they were 
in the process of reviewing. They would follow  up with written questions should any arise.  
2.18.   The representative of the European Union  thanked China for its notification , which they 
would review  in due course . China's explanation of the background to the amendment had been 
very helpful ; in particular, the European Union noted that this had not been a complete makeover 
of China's valuation legislation , and nor had it set out to reproduce all of the content and 
provisions of the Customs Valuation A greement . 
2.19.   The representative of Canada  thank ed China for its notification. Article  3 of Decree No.  213 
indicated that China currently applied different customs valuatio n procedures for casual and 
commercial goods. The CVA , on the other hand , made no distinction between commercial and 
casual goods ; valuation procedures should therefore have a general application, without drawing 
any distinction between sources of supply , and mu st apply to all imported goods.  
2.20.   The CVA remained the sole legal framework constituting the reference for customs valuation 
and must be applied indiscriminately to all imported goods. Canada requested  China to explain the 
rules applicable to its customs valuation of ca sual goods and how these were  consistent with the 
CVA. Specifically , in Articles  17 and 18 the CVA provide d that, when customs authorities were 
unsure of  the price  of a good , the importer could demonstrate  that the value approximate d to one 
of three  possible test values . Alternatively,  circumstances surrounding the sale would be used to 
determine whether the commercial relationship had influenced the price. However , Canada's  
reading of Article s 17 and 18 of Decree No.  213 suggest ed that C hina systematically verifie d not 
only test values but also the circumstances surrounding the sale.  
2.21.   Since test values were rarely available to importers, the application of both methodologies  
by China mean t that, in practice , the transaction values were automatically rejected in cases 
where the sale of goods occurred  between related parties . Canada requested China to confirm that 
it verifie d the transaction value in such cases by using both test values and an assessment of  the 
circumstances of the sale . 
2.22.   The representative of China  thanked Canada for its questions and requested to receive them 
in writing. They would revert to them at a later date. 
2.23.   The Committee took note  of the statement s made and agreed  to revert to China's 
notification  at its next meet ing. G/VAL/M/6 6 
 
- 5 - 
 
  D. Guinea  
2.24.   The Chairperson  recalled that the Committee had  agreed at its previous meeting to revert to 
its examination of Guinea's notification of national legislation , which had been circulated in 
document  G/VAL/ N/1/GIN/1.  Questions raised by t he United States had been  circulated in 
document  G/VAL/W/ 266. 
2.25.   The representative of the United States  said that her delegation continued to look forward 
to receiving written replies  to the ir questions . 
2.26.   The Committee took note  of the statement made and agreed  to revert to Guinea's  
notification  at its next meeting.  
E. Honduras  
2.27.   The Chairperson  recalled that the Committee had  agreed at its previous meeting to revert to 
its examination of Honduras' notification of national legislation and its responses to the chec klist of 
issues , which had been  circulated in documents  G/VAL/ N/1/HND/1 and G/VAL/ N/2/HND/1 . The 
United States had submitted questions in document  G/VAL/W/268.  
2.28.   The representative of the United States  said that her delegation  looked forward to receiving 
a written response to its questions , which  had been submitted in September  2015. 
2.29.   The representative of Honduras  thanked the United States for its interest. He hoped to 
receive the written replies for submission to the Committee  very soon . 
2.30.   The Committee took note  of the statement s made and agreed  to revert to Honduras'  
notification  at its next meeting.  
F. Kazakhstan  
2.31.   The Chairperson  drew the Committee's attention to Kazakhstan 's notification of  its national 
legislation , which had been circulated in document  G/VAL/N/ 1/KAZ/1. Questions had been raised 
by the United States and circulated in document  G/VAL/W/302.  
2.32.   The representative of the United States  thanked Kazakhstan for its notification and said that 
her delegation looked forward to receiving Kazakhstan's responses  to their questions . 
2.33.   The representative of the European Union  also thanked Kazakhstan for its notification . 
2.34.   Kazakhstan's notification notified an  agreement on valuation of goods from 2008 and a 
series of instruments  and regulation s running from 2010 to 2015. The European Union asked if all 
of these measures remain ed individually applicable and if they were being individually 
implemented, or if they were part , rather,  of an overall package of legislation ? If so, the European 
Union ask ed if Kazakhstan had made plans to recast, reform , or update these instruments and 
regulations , or if Members should continue to focus on th e notified set of legal provisions and tools 
as they were. 
2.35.   The European Union asked Kazakhstan if, in  the context of  the Eurasian Economic Union , 
there were any overall updates  of the Eurasian Economic Union's customs code, which might also 
include a n updat e of the entire valuation content . If an updated version were forthcoming , the 
European Union noted that it would take that into consideration and not dwell too much on earlier 
instruments.  The European Union  looked forward to hearing Kazakhstan's responses . 
2.36.   The representative of Kazakhstan  thanked the United States and the European Union for 
their interest . Kazakhstan's responses to the United States were undergoing a final verification and 
would be circulated shortly . The general question  from the European Union would be convey ed to 
Capital . 
2.37.   The Committee took note  of the statements made and agreed  to revert to Kazakhstan's  
notification at its next meeting.  G/VAL/M/6 6 
 
- 6 - 
 
  G. Malawi  
2.38.   The Chairperson  recalled that the Committee had agreed at its previous meeting to revert to 
its examination of the national legislation of Malawi,  which ha d been circulated in 
document  G/VAL/ N/1/MWI/2 . Subsequent to th at meeting, Malawi's notification of its responses to 
the checklist of issues had been circulated  in document  G/VAL/N/2/MWI/1. The United States had 
raised additional questions in document  G/VAL/W/303.  
2.39.   The representative of  the United States  thanked Malawi for the notification of its national 
legislation and stated that it looked forward to receiving Malawi's written responses  to its 
questions . 
2.40.   The Committee took note  of the statement made and agreed  to revert to Malawi 's 
notification  at its next meeting.  
H. Nepal  
2.41.   The Chairperson  recalled that the Committee had  agreed at its previous meeting to revert to 
its examination of  Nepal's notification of its national legislation , which had been circulated in 
document  G/VAL/N/1/NPL/1.  The United States had raised questions , which had been circulated in 
document  G/VAL/W/286 , to which Nepal had provided its responses in document  G/VAL/W/300 . 
The United States had raised follow -up questions in document  G/VAL/W/301.  
2.42.   The representative of t he United States  thanked Nepal for its written responses  to their 
initial questions  and looked forward also to receiving written responses  to their follow -up 
questions.  
2.43.   The representative of Nepal  stated that the responses would be forthcoming.  
2.44.   The Committee took note  of the statements made and agreed  to revert to Nepal's 
notification  at its next meeting.  
I. Nigeria  
2.45.   The Chairperson  recalled that the Committee had  agreed at its previous  meeting to revert to 
its examination of Nigeria's notification of national legislation and responses to the checklist of 
issues , which had been circulated in documents  G/VAL/N/1/NGA/1 and G/VAL/N/2/NGA/1. The  
United  States and Canada had raised  questions , which had been circulated in 
documents  G/VAL/W/175  and G/VAL/W/176, respectively.  
2.46.   The representative  of Canada  expressed  Canada' s interest in receiving responses to the ir 
questions , which they had first submitted more than nine years ago. 
2.47.   The representative of the United States  said that h er delegation also remained interested in 
receiving replies to the ir questions , first posed in 2009 . She request ed that th e agenda item 
remain open until all outstanding questions ha d been addressed.  
2.48.   The representative of the European Union  echoed the statements made by  the delegations 
of Canada and the United States.  
2.49.   The Committee took note  of the statements made and agreed  to revert to Nigeria's 
notification  at its next meeting.  
J. Russian Federation  
2.50.   The Chairperson  recalled that the Committee had  agreed at its previous meeting to revert to 
its examination of the Russian Federation's notification of legislation , which had been circulated in 
the series of documents  G/VAL/N/1/RUS/1  and G/VAL/N/1/RUS/1/Add.1, G/VAL/N/1/RUS/2  and 
G/VAL/N/1/RUS/2 /Add.1 , and G/VAL/ N/1/RUS/3  and G/VAL/N/1/RUS/3 /Add.1 . The Russian 
Federation's response s to the checklist of issues  had been circulated  in G/VAL/M/6 6 
 
- 7 - 
 
  document  G/VAL/N/2/RUS/1 . Questions raised by t he United States had been circulated in 
document  G/VAL/W/287.  
2.51.   The representative of the  United States  thanked the Russian Federation for the ir additional 
notifications and looked forward  to receiving written replies to the ir questions . 
2.52.   The representative of the European Union  asked  whether there would be a revised customs 
code or a similar set of legislation from the Russian Federation that would encompass the totality 
of measures that the Russian Federation had notified sequentially and over time . The  European 
Union looked forward to receiving the Russian Federation's responses  to Members' specific 
questions.  
2.53.   The representative of the Russian Federation  welcomed the United States'  and the European 
Union's interest  in Russia's customs valuation legislation. Responses  to the questions as well as an 
update on its legislation in the resp ective areas would be forthcoming.  
2.54.   The Committee took note  of the statement s made and agreed  to revert to the Russian 
Federation's notification  at its next meeting.  
K. Rwanda  
2.55.   The Chairperson  recalled that the Committee had  agreed at its previous meeting to revert to 
its examination of Rwanda's notification of its national legislation and its responses to the checklist 
of issues , which had been  circulated in documents  G/VAL/ N/1/RWA/1 and G/VAL/N/2/RWA/1. The 
United States had raised questions in document  G/VAL/W/215.  
2.56.   The representative of the United States  said that her delegation remained interested in 
receiving Rwanda's written replies . 
2.57.   The Committee took note  of the statement made and agreed  to revert to Rwanda's 
notification  at its next meeting.  
L. Solomon Islands  
2.58.   The Chairperson  recalled that the Committee had  agreed at its previous meeting to revert to 
its examination of  the Solomon Islands' national legislation , which had been  circulated  in 
document  G/VAL/N/ 1/SLB/1 . The United States had raised questions , which had been circulated in 
document  G/VAL/W/298.  
2.59.   The representative of  the United States  said that her delegation looked forward to receiving 
written replies to their questions.  
2.60.   The Committee took note  of the statement made and agreed  to revert to the Solomon 
Islands' notification  at its next meeting.  
M. Sri Lanka  
2.61.   The Chairperson  recalled that the Committee had  agreed at its previous meeting to revert to 
its examination of Sri Lanka's notification of its national legislation and its responses to the 
checklist of issues , which  had been circulated in documents  G/VAL/N/1/LKA/1 , 
G/VAL/N/1/LKA/1 /Corr.1, and G/VAL/N/2/LKA/1.  The United States had raised  questions in 
document  G/VAL/W/269  and Sri Lanka had provided responses in document  G/VAL/W/291 . The 
United States had raised a dditional questions in document  G/VAL/W/297 , to which Sri Lanka had 
provided its written responses in document  G/VAL/W/304 . 
2.62.   The representative of the United States  thanked Sri Lanka for its written responses, which 
were currentl y being review ed. She also requested Sri Lanka to provide a copy of Gazette 
No. 1971/10 , dated 14  June 2016, concerning customs valuation.  
2.63.   The representative of Sri Lanka  thanked the United States for its request and stated that 
the Gazette would be provided soon.  G/VAL/M/6 6 
 
- 8 - 
 
  2.64.   The Committee took note  of the statement s made and agreed  to revert to Sri Lanka's 
notification  at its next meeting.  
N. The Gambia  
2.65.   The Chairperson  recalled that the Committee had  agreed at its previous meeting to revert to 
its examination of The Gambia's notification of national legislation , which had been circulated in 
documents  G/VAL/N/1/GMB/1 and G/VAL/N/4/GMB/1.  The United States had submitted questions 
to The Gambia in document  G/VAL/W/245.  
2.66.   The representative of the United States  said that her delegation  continued to look forward 
to receiv ing replies  to its questions . 
2.67.   The Committee took note  of the statement made and agreed  to revert to The Gambia's 
notification  at its next meeting.  
2.68.   The Chairperson  thanked Members that had notified their national legislation and respon ses 
to the checklist of issues. The notification and examination of national legislation were important 
parts of the Committee's work and she urged Members once again to expedite their responses to 
questions raised by Members . 
2.69.   In that regard, the current Chairperson proposed that the incoming Chairperson write to the 
relevant delegations that were working on their responses, informing them that the Chair and the 
Secretariat were available to provide any support and assista nce in the matter.  
2.70.   It was so agreed . 
2.71.   The Committee took note  of the information  and of the statements made . 
3  INFORMATION ON THE A PPLICATION OF DECISI ONS OF THE COMMITTEE  ON 
CUSTOMS VALUATION  
3.1.  The Chairperson  stated that the Committee had two  issues  under this agenda item : (i) the 
status of notifications under the Committee's Decisions ; and (ii) the proposal by Uruguay,  which 
had been circulated in document  G/VAL/W/241/Rev.1.  
3.1  The status of notifications under the Committee's Decisions  
3.2.  The Chairperson  recalled that the Committee had examined notifications pursuant to 
two Decisions that had been adopted by the Committee at its meeting of 12  May 1995 and which 
were contained in document  G/VAL/5 ; namely,  the Decisions on "Treatment of Interest Charges in 
the Customs Value of Imported Goods" , and "Valuation of Carrier Media Bearing Software for Data 
Processing Equipment". A report by the Secretariat listing the notifications received had been 
circulated in document  G/VAL /W/5/Rev.2 9. 
3.3.  The Committee took note  of the information.  
3.2  Uruguay's proposal to update the carrier media decision  
3.4.  The Chairperson  recalled Uruguay's  proposal to amend the Carrier Media Decision, also 
known by Customs as "Decision  4.1", which was contained in document  G/VAL/W/241/Rev.1. 
According to Uruguay, software was increasingly being imported using new types  of carrier media, 
such as USB flash drives or other similar devices, which did not necessarily fall under the definition 
of "carrier medium" as se t out in the Decision. This meant that imports  of certain software could 
be treated differently from software  imported using other types of media, such as CDs or DVDs. 
Switzerland had submitted comments on Uruguay's proposal , which had been circulated in 
document  G/VAL/W/254. At the request of the Committee, the Secretariat had also prepared a 
report containing  statistics on imports of these products , which had been circulated in 
document  G/VAL/W/249.  G/VAL/M/6 6 
 
- 9 - 
 
  3.5.  The representative of the  United States  expressed her delegation's support for the expansion 
of the definition  in question  to include semi -conductor media such as USB  flash drives. They also 
agreed with Switzerland's comment circulated in document  G/VAL/W/254.  
3.6.  The representative o f Japan  stated that there was no change in their position and they could 
accept the proposals made by Uruguay and Switzerland. They would closely monitor the situation.  
3.7.  The representative of Switzerland  reiterated her delegation's support for Uruguay's pro posal, 
including Switzerland's suggested amendment.  
3.8.  The representative of Uruguay  said that they were still reflecting  on the proposal with their 
technicians in Capital and requested that the item remain on the agenda of the Committee's next 
meeting.  
3.9.  The representative of the European Union  stated that h is delegation's position remain ed 
unchanged . They looked forward to hearing  more from Uruguay on the basis of their reflections 
and about their technical discussions with experts.  
3.10.  The representative of China  said that China generally supported Uruguay's  proposal and 
hoped that Uruguay could clarify its scope and definition, such as the definition of carrier media 
and data -processing equipment , and the corresponding tariff headings. In order  to ensure a 
uniform understanding among  Members, China suggest ed that the Committee on Customs 
valuation consult with the WCO in order to sub -divide the relevant carrier -media tariff heading.  
3.11.  The representative of Uruguay  thank ed Members for their intervention s. In ord er to discuss 
the matter further, his delegation would request a bilateral meeting with the European Union once 
Uruguay had finalized its report on the proposal.  
3.12.   The Committee took note  of the statement s made and agreed  to revert to Uruguay's 
proposal at its next meeting.  
4  TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE  
4.1  Information on Technical Assistance  
4.1.  The Chairperson  recalled that , at its meeting of 12  May 1995, and as reflected in section  B.4 of 
document  G/VAL/5, the Committee on Customs Valuation had agreed that greater transpa rency with 
regard to  technical assistance activities would be ensured if information documents prepared for the 
WCO Technical Committee  on Customs Valuation were also made available as WTO  document s. 
Accordingly, d ocument  G/VAL/8/Add.3 6 contain ed the most recent information compiled by the 
Technical Committee on Customs Valuation concerning technical assistance activities carried out by 
WCO Members  and the WCO Secretariat.  
4.2.  The Committee  took note  of the information . 
4.2  Article  20.3 Technical Assistan ce and Trade -Related Technical Assistance  
4.3.  The Chairperson  recalled that the Committee's work programme on t echnical assistance for 
capacity building  regard ing the implementation and a dministration of the CVA had now been 
incorporated in to the WTO's  overall  technical assistance program me. The WTO was currentl y 
implementing the 201 8-2019 Biennial TA  Plan as contain ed in document  WT/COMTD/W/ 227/Rev.1 . 
4.4.  A member of the  Secretariat (Ms Dolores Halloran) presented a report on technical assistance 
activity for the period following  the Committee's previous meeting , in November  2017. The 
majority of the technical assistance on the Customs Valuation Agreement was being undertaken  in 
WTO Regional Trade Policy Courses. The Secretariat had not received any request for national 
assistance on implementation of the CVA.  
4.5.  The representative of Senegal  said that his country continued to  face a number of difficulties 
with regard to customs valuation and that technical assistance could help his authorities to 
overcome  those difficulties. Technical assistance was also all the more important in view of G/VAL/M/6 6 
 
- 10 - 
 
  Senegal's  implementation of the Trade Facilitation Agreement. Therefore, Senegal would be 
interested in further discussing the possibility of receiving technical assistance and would contact 
the Secretariat for further information on the issue.  
4.6.  The representative of Japan  said that h er delegation had appreciated Senegal's intervention.  
Japan continued to believe that technical assistance was an important tool in helping Members to 
enhance their capacity effectively  to implement the CVA. Japan had implemented and supported a 
number of technical assistance programmes and it continued to be engage d in such activities. 
While technical assistance was important, Japan believed that there could also be other possible 
solutions to the challenges faced by Members. In considering possible solutions, the first step was 
to know what kind of difficul ties certain  Members were experiencing in implementing the CVA. In 
this regard, it would be useful to analyse any specific issues that had been discussed in previous 
meetings of the Committee and in other bodies, such as the Trade Policy Review Mechanism . The 
Committee should take a realistic and technical approach that would address the specific problems 
actually being faced by Members. In addition , it would be worth while to  consider holding informal 
discussions in order to provide to Members a further opportunity for them to share their views.  It 
would also be useful if the Committee could work  closely  with the Committee on Trade Facilitation 
and other international organizations, such as the WCO. Japan was looking forward to being 
further eng aged in this matter with a view to enhancing implementation of the CVA. 
4.7.  The representative of Thailand  said that Thailand share d Japan's view that technical 
assistance for capacity building could allow Members more effectively to implement the CVA as 
well as to take fuller advantage of the multilateral trading system.  Thailand was open to discuss ing 
the issue further with a view to improving and strengthening implementation of the CVA. 
4.8.  The representative of Chinese Taipei  said that , while the CVA had been in force for 20 years, 
it seem ed that some Members still ha d difficulty in following the guidelines set  out in the 
Agreement for determinin g the value of imported good s. In July of last year , G90 Members had 
expressed their respective difficulties with implementing the CVA and had subsequently  made a 
joint proposal , circulated  in document  JOB/DEV/48 . Chinese Taipei  agreed w ith Japan's proposal 
that technical assistance could  help Members  more effectively  to implement the A greement.  His 
delegation also believed that knowing what kind of difficulties Members ha d in implementing an 
agreement was essential to develop ing an effective and useful technical assistance programme  
specifically designed to meet Member s' requirements. Therefore , Chinese Taipei strongly 
support ed the Japanese proposal of holding  informal discussion s in order to identify the specific 
problems actually faced by Members . 
4.9.  The representative of the European Union  said that they continued to believe that technical 
assistance and capacity building remained  relevant  and referred to t he CVA  provision that , in 
agreement with partners,  Members should provide  technical assistance and capacity building. 
There were no time -limits to the provision of such assistance and the Europ ean Union understood 
that it had been and should continue to be provided on the basis of need . The European Union 
observed that Members  could be facing some new challenges in implementing the CVA in recent 
years , and likewise that there could be new ways of addressing those challenges, including 
through technical assistance and capacity building. In general, the European Union support ed the 
comments made by those delegations that had previously taken the floor , and note d that Japan,  in 
particular , had outlined several good ideas . Accordingly, the European Union wished  to part icipate  
in any future informal discussion of the issue. There was an active and positive approach to issues 
of trade facilitation in the WTO and it  was obvious that there were linkages between technical 
assistance for trade facilitation and technical assistance for customs valuation. Both of the 
agreements ha d a substantial customs valuation aspect and both agreements were substantially 
implemented and managed  by customs administrations , and so  supporting good implementation of 
the CVA a lso deliver ed on implementation of th e TFA , and vice versa. The time was therefore  right 
in terms of finding linkages that the European Union could support in a dynamic way . The current 
discussion  was very timely and the European Union  would be willing to engage with interested 
Members , as well as with  other international organizations , like the WCO, in order to work on 
concrete follow -up action.  
4.10.   The representative of Togo thanked Japan and Chinese Taip ei for their readiness to discuss 
these matters with countries , such as Togo  herself , still experiencing difficulty  in implementing the 
CVA. Togo intend ed to contact  the Secretariat and to participate in any future discussion of this 
issue in order to clearly explain  the challenges Togo still faced in implementing the CVA . G/VAL/M/6 6 
 
- 11 - 
 
  4.11.   The representative of the WCO said that this discussion was important for the WCO and that 
it form ed a significant part of its work. The WCO  Secretariat ha d conducted numerous nationa l and 
regional technical workshops on customs valuation, using both its own experts and a pool of 
WCO-accredited experts from national administrations. Nevertheless, there still  remained  
challenges to effective implementation of the Agreement, particularly  in developing and least 
developed countr ies; and although  good progress ha d been made by a number of customs 
administrations, where high levels of non -compliance exist ed it still remained  extremely difficult to 
verify doubtful customs values. It ha d been clear for many years that the long -term impact of 
"one-off" technical assistance events was limited. To achieve sustained development it was 
necessary, rather,  to develop long -term capacity -building programmes that took into account a 
range of needs in addition to technical knowledge . In particular , an evaluation of the Customs' 
infrastructure in relation to valuation control, internal communication channels , and contacts with 
the business community , was also  necessary . The WCO a lso recommend ed streng thening the 
capacity of national pools of valuation trainer s in order to reduce rel iance on external facilitators.  
4.12.   In addition , the WCO emphasi zed the need to establish and strengthen risk management 
systems and post -clearance audit programmes. Both topics  were enshrined as requirements in the 
TFA (Articles  7.4 and 7.5) and the WCO provide d advice on both topics in its Mercator programme, 
which had been designed to assist Members with implementation of the TFA. Therefore, further 
strengthening of valuation technical assistance  and capacity building  could be seen  as contributing 
strongly to such efforts.  
4.13.   The WCO 's Revenue Package programme ha d been designed to assist customs 
administrations in fair and effective revenue collection. Several practical tools and  guidance 
materials ha d been developed under th e programme , which focus ed on customs valuation issues 
and the challenges set out above . For example, o ne document provide d guidance to those 
countries that were seeking to terminate inspection contracts and t ake back responsibility for 
customs valuation and classification controls. This topic was anot her feature of the TFA 
(Article  10.5) and was a  standing agenda item for the Committee  on Customs Valuation . All of 
these  tools were available to customs administ rations via the WCO  Members ' website . The 
Secretariat of the WCO remain ed at the disposal of the Committee on Customs Valuation for future 
discussion and possible action in this important area . 
4.14.   The representative of Senegal  thank ed the WCO for its presentation and for its provision of 
technical assistance. Technical assistance should strengthen Members' long -term capacities and , in 
that regard , Senegal hoped that future discussions would help them to define the type of technical 
assistance that woul d best meet that requirement.  Senegal thank ed all Members that had taken 
the floor to make themselves available to contribute to technical assistance and looked forward to 
continuing discussions on this subject . 
4.15.   The Chairperson  propose d that the Committee continue its discussions on the topic.  
4.16.   It was so agreed . 
5  ARMENIA'S REFERENCE PRICE SYSTEM IN CONN ECTION WITH THE VALU ATION OF 
GOODS  – REQUEST BY THE UNITE D STATES  
5.1.  The Chairperson  recalled that the Committee  had agreed at its previous meeting to revert to 
this issue. Armenia had notified its national legislation in August  2003, in 
document  G/VAL/N/1/ARM/1 , as well as its responses to the checklist of issues , in 
document  G/VAL/N/2/ARM/1. The Committee had concluded its examination of this legislation at 
its meeting on 18  October  2005. The U nited States had raised  follow -up questions , in 
document  G/VAL/W/208 , to which Armenia had provided responses in document  G/VAL/W/213.  
Canada had subsequently submitted questions in document  G/VAL/W/214.  
5.2.  The Committee  took note of the information and agreed  to revert to th e issue at its next 
meeting.  G/VAL/M/6 6 
 
- 12 - 
 
  6  PAKISTAN'S DETERMINA TION OF CUSTOMS VALU ES OF PAPER  – REQUEST BY 
THAILAND  
6.1.  The representative  of Thailand  inform ed the Committee that there had been a positive 
development in this matter  and h er delegation thanked Pakistan for their continued cooperation. In 
January  2018, Pakistan had amended a valuation ruling and reduced the customs values of paper 
imported from Thailand,  which  had eliminated the negative impact of Pakistan's earlier valuation 
ruling on Thailand's paper exporters. In order to ensure predictability, consistency , and clarity , 
Thailand requested that Pakistan comply with its WTO  commitments  in this regard . Thailand was  
ready to engage bilaterally wit h Pakistan on the issue and hoped that it would be settl ed amicably 
in the near future.  
6.2.  The representative of Pakistan  stated that Pakistan's Customs Act was the primary law that 
dealt with imports and exports in Pakistan. Its relevant section on valuation  of imported goods was 
in compliance with the WTO  Customs Valuation Agreement and Article  VII of GATT  1947. 
Under -invoicing of imports remain ed the major challenge for the country, and the paper sector 
imports were particularly susceptible to under -invoici ng and inaccurate declaration of values. 
Therefore, valuation rulings were issued on the basis of permissible methods , as provided for in 
the Agreement , so as  to ensure that they were as close to the actually paid or payable value as 
possible. Pakistan's c ustoms regime was in compliance with Article  VII of the GATT and transaction 
values were accepted as envisaged under that Article. However, in some problem cases , where 
importers of a product colluded to declare  false values , then the system made use of agreed 
values, but it was done in a most transparent manner and all stakeholders were involved in the 
process.  The process had been adopted exactly in accordance with Article  VII of GATT to arrive at 
a true transaction value.  Nevertheless, all  such agreed decisions were still appealable through a 
review procedure.  
6.3.  His delegation would convey Thailand's concerns to Capital and would continue to engage 
bilaterally with Thailand on this issue. 
6.4.  The representative of Japan  expressed Japan's specific interest  in this issue  and said that 
they would monitor it closely . 
6.5.  The Committee took note  of the statements made and agreed  to revert to the issue at its 
next meeting.  
7  OMAN'S CUSTOMS VALUA TION OF CIGARETTES A ND INTRODUCTION OF T HE 
SELECTIVE TAX – REQUEST BY SWITZERLAND  
7.1.  The representative of Switzerland  said that her delegation had first raised this issue, in 
October  2016, in the context of the Market Access Committee , and on a bilateral  basis, further to  
Oman's  increase in the specific part of its MFN  customs  duties on cigarettes. Since then , 
Switzerland had held many bilateral meetings with the Omani authorities, including three  meetings 
between the Swiss  Embassy and Omani Customs . The current issue was not one of consistency 
between Oman's  MFN duties and its bound rate for cigarettes, which was currently 100%, or 
15 Omani  riyals per 1,000  cigarettes, whichever was higher , but rel ated rather to the customs 
valuation of these  products at the border.  
7.2.  During bilateral discussions with Omani Customs , Switze rland had come to understand that 
Oman had doubts about the accuracy of the declared value  of imported cigarett es, which they 
consider ed to be too low. Therefore, the declared transaction value of imported cigarettes had not 
been taken into account by Oman i authorities.  As a result, Switzerland was of the view that , 
instead of using the declared transaction value as the basis for assessing the value  of the goods in 
question , Omani Customs had corrected the value  on the basis of a calculation or methodology 
that was unclear  to them. Switzerland considered such a practice to be in breach of A rticle 7.2 of 
the CVA, which  explicitly prohibit ed national customs authorities from using "minimum customs 
values " and "arbitrary or fictitious values ". When Omani Customs reject ed the declared transaction 
value as being "too low ", in this case,  and instead appl ied a minimum customs value as the basis 
for determining  customs duties, it applied a  practice that was inconsistent with Article 7.2 of the 
CVA. G/VAL/M/6 6 
 
- 13 - 
 
  7.3.  The Technical  Committee on Customs Valuation  had in the past provided updates on how to 
deal with situation s where customs authorities were doubtful of  the truth or accu racy of a declared 
value. Switzerland  wished  to know if Oman had used those updated procedures in th e current 
case. Finally , Switzerland was of the view that Oman's plan to introduce a new selective tax on 
tobacco products in the coming months would also not address th e current issue and could even 
worsen the situation since there would remain a high lev el of uncertainty regarding  any such 
legislative changes. In any case, Switzerland intended  to address the matter  in more detail in the 
context of the Market Access Committee . 
7.4.  The representative of Oman  said that , in addition to the meetings that had taken  place 
between the Swiss Ambassador in Muscat and the Omani Customs Authority Officials , their 
customs officials would come to Geneva in June in order to clarify the issue with the Swiss 
authorities.  
7.5.  The representative of the European Union  thanked Switzerland for  having raised the issue 
because such issue s risked becoming systemic. The CVA expressly block ed and prohibit ed the use 
of arbitrary fictitious values and customs administrations  were not entitled to use them . 
7.6.  The representative of Switzerland  thanked the delegation of Oman for its response and 
welcomed the proposed visit  of Omani customs officials . She also thanked the European Union for 
its comments . 
7.7.  The Committee took note  of the statements made and agreed  to revert to this issue at its 
next meeting.  
8  PRESHIPMENT INSPECTI ON 
8.1.  The Chairperson  noted that Preshipment Inspection was a standing item on the agenda of the 
Committee on Customs Valuation and that there  were four sub-items under it for discuss ion, 
namely : status of notifi cations ; questions and responses by the United States and Indonesia,  
respectively; information  on PSI  programmes , and the Draft Fourth Review of the Agreement on 
Preshipment Inspection.  
8.1  Status of notifications by Members  
8.2.  The Chairperson  drew attention to the compilation of notifications pursuant to Article  5 of the 
Agreement on Preshipment Inspection , which was contained in the following series of document s: 
G/PSI/N/1/Rev.2 ; G/PSI/N/1/Rev.2/ Add.1; G/PSI/N/1/Rev.2/Add. 2; G/PSI/N/1/Rev.2/Add.3 ; and 
G/PSI/N/1/Rev.2/Add.4. The latest compilation of notifications on PSI was contained in 
document  G/PSI/N/1/Rev.3.  
8.3.  The Committee  took note  of the aforementioned document s. 
8.2  Questions and Responses by the United States and Indonesia  
8.4.  The Chairperson  recalled that the Committee  had agreed at its last meeting to revert to the 
issue of Questions and Responses by the United States and Indonesia. The United States had 
raised  questions to Indonesia which had been circulated in documents  G/VAL/W/167, 
G/VAL/W/180 , and G/VAL/W/237 . Indonesia ha d provided  responses  in documents  G/VAL/W/256, 
G/VAL/W/257 , and G/VAL/W/257/Corr.1  (in Spanish and English only ). The United States had then 
submitted additional questions , which had been circulated in document  G/VAL/ W/278 , and to 
which Indonesia had provided its responses in document  G/VAL/W/30 9. 
8.5.  The representative of the United States  thanked Indonesia for its replies  and said that they 
were planning to submit follow -up questions in writing.  
8.6.  The Committee  took note  of the statement made and agreed  to revert to this issue at its next 
meeting.  G/VAL/M/6 6 
 
- 14 - 
 
  8.3  Information on PSI  programmes  
8.7.  The Chairperson  drew attention to document  G/VAL/W/63/Rev. 22, which contained the most 
recent update of the information received  from the International Federation of Inspection Agencies 
(IFIA) on Members that use d preshipment inspection services . 
8.8.  The Committee took note of the information . 
8.4  Fourth Triennial Review of the PSI  Agreement  
8.9.  The Chairperson  recalled that the Committee  had agreed at its last meeting to revert to the 
draft factual report on the Fourth Triennial Review of the PSI  Agreement. During the Committee's 
November  2017 meeting one  delegation had proposed an amendment to the PSI Agreement but 
had subsequently  withdrawn  that proposal . Therefore , the Fourth  Triennial Review consist ed of the 
draft factual report prepared by the Secretariat , which had been  circulated in 
document  G/VAL/W/307.  
8.10.   The Chairperson proposed that the Secretariat update the report on the basis of what had 
been agreed during the April  meeting.  
8.11.   It was so agreed . 
9  EGYPT'S S TATUS OF NOTIFICATIO N OF PSI – REQUEST BY THE UNITE D STATES  
9.1.  The Chairperson  drew the Committee's attention to the item raised by the United States 
regarding Egypt' s status of PSI  notific ations.  
9.2.  The representative of the United States  said that Decree No.  991/2015 provided 
requirements for the use of preshipment inspection as described under Article  1 of the Agreement 
on Preshipment  Inspection. As such, the United States considered that this Decree should be 
notified to the Committee on Customs Valuation under Article  5 of the Agreement on Preshipment 
Inspection.  During the Customs Valuation Committee meeting in November  2017, Egypt had 
suggested that Article  5 of the PSI  Agreement did not determine the relevant WTO  body under 
which such notifications should be submitted . The General Council , in 1999, adopting 
document  G/L/300 , determined that "monitoring of the Agreement should be un dertaken initially 
by the Customs Valuation Committee, and that PSI should be a standing agenda item".  The United 
States respectfully disagreed with Egypt's interpretation of its notification obligations.  According to 
Article  5, Members shall notify to the  Secretariat "changes in the laws and regulations relating to 
preshipment inspection  … immediately after their publication". The notification obligation did not 
make exceptions for PSI  activities, but instead the Agreement specifically included quality and  
quantity inspection, price verification, fraud or under -invoicing.  
9.3.  During the CCV  meeting in November  2017, Egypt had also stated that , under Article  2.20 of 
the PSI  Agreement , preshipment inspection was only related to customs valuation if the inspection  
were undertaken for price verification.  The United States did not understand the basis of Egypt's 
position, as Article  2.20 simply provided guidelines for PSI  entities to conduct price verification. 
Further more,  Article  1.3 specifically stated that all activities verifying the quality and quantity 
price, exchange rates, financial terms , and classifications , were activities under the 
PSI Agreement.  Egypt had also stated that the implementing authority for Decree No.  991/2015 
was the General Organization f or Export and Import Control, not the Egyptian Customs Authority. 
The United States did not understand how the issuing authority of the regulation was relevant to 
Members' notification obligations in this instance  because it was the  PSI Agreement itself th at set 
the obligations for the Member.  
9.4.  Thus, t he United States requested, as circulated in document  G/VAL/W/299, that Egypt notify 
Decree No.  991/2015 to the Committee on Customs Valuation, as well as any other measures that 
included preshipment inspection  requirements.  
9.5.  The representative of Egypt  thanked the United States for its continued interest  in this 
matter . His delegation reiterated Egypt's acknowledgement of the importance of transparency and 
Egypt's  full compliance with the transparency provisions  of the WTO  Agreements.  It was in this G/VAL/M/6 6 
 
- 15 - 
 
  vein that Egypt had already notified Decree No.  991/2015 to the Committee on Technical Barriers 
to Trade and , since then, Egypt had also held several bilateral meetings with interested Members 
on the fringe of the TBT  Committee. These meetings had been very constructive and positive with 
regard to  the application of the Decree. However, realizing that more still needed to be done to 
enhance transparency, Egypt was currently taking stock of all of its trade-related measures and 
regulations that had not previously been notified in order to submit those  notifications 
appropriately in the context of the relevant WTO  Committees, as well as revising the notifications  
previous ly submitted  so as to ensure that all of the corresponding measures had likewise been 
notified to the relevant Committee.  
9.6.  The concerns raised b y the United States in document  G/VAL/W/299 were currently being 
studied in Capital and all the comments and concerns raised during the meeting would also be 
conveyed to Capital . 
9.7.  The Committee  took note  of the statement s made  and agreed to revert to this issue at its 
next meeting . 
10  OTHER BUSINESS  
10.1  Format of official communications to be sent to Members  
10.1.   The Chairperson  drew the Committee's attention to the recent decision of the 
Director -General , announced at the HODs  meeting of 23  February  2018, regarding the  notes 
convening future HODs and TNC  meetings. A member of the Secretariat (Ms  Dolores Halloran) 
outlined the ne w procedure. The Director -General had informed Me mbers at the HODs  meeting of 
23 February that the note s convening future HODs and TNC  meetings would no longer be sent to 
delegations  by fax but only by email . The Secretariat propose d to adopt this  practice also in the 
Committee on Customs Valuation.  As a result, all official notes convening future  meetings of th e 
Committee would  be sent only by email. In addition, the  Secretariat would only use the general 
email address of Members' Permanent Missio ns for such communications – and not the add resses 
of individual delegates.  
10.2.   The Committee  took note  of the  information.  
10.2  Date of next meeting  
10.3.   The Chairperson  stated that the date of the Committee's next meeting  would be fixed in 
consultation with Members.  
10.4.   The representative of Colombia  requested the Secretariat to avoid holding future meetings 
of the Committee during the week of the meetings on Rules. The delegate of Switzerland  
supported the proposal.  
10.5.   The Committee  took note  of the  information.  
11  ELECTION OF CHAIRPERSON  
11.1  The Chairperson  reminded the Committee that the Chairperson  of the Council for Trade in 
Goods had carried out informal consultations on a slate of names for appointment of Chairpersons 
of standing bodies in accordance with the established Guide lines for Appointment of Officers. On  
the basis of his consultations, he had propos ed that the Committee elect Mr  Yuichiro Okumura  
(Japan) as Chairperson for 201 8. The Chairperson propos ed that the Committee elect 
Mr Okumura . 
11.2  The Committee elected  Mr Okumu ra by acclamation.  
11.3  The meeting was adjourned . 
__________