RESTRICTED  
  
G/VAL/M/63  
 
15 December  2016 
(16-6855) Page: 1/16 
Committee on Customs Valuation    
 
MINUTES OF THE MEETI NG OF 31 OCTOBER  2016 
CHAIRPERSON : MR YASSER KORANI, (EGYP T) 
The agenda proposed for the meeting, circulated in  WTO/AIR/VAL/ 4, was adopted as follows:  
 
1   REPORT OF THE WORK O F THE TECHNICAL COMM ITTEE O N 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. Cabo Verde  ................................ ................................ ................................ ...............  3 
D. Colombia  ................................ ................................ ................................ ...................  3 
E. Ecuador  ................................ ................................ ................................ ....................  4 
F. The Gambia  ................................ ................................ ................................ ...............  4 
G. Guine a ................................ ................................ ................................ ......................  4 
H. Honduras  ................................ ................................ ................................ ..................  5 
I. Kazakhstan  ................................ ................................ ................................ ...............  5 
J. Montenegro  ................................ ................................ ................................ ...............  5 
K. Nepal  ................................ ................................ ................................ ........................  5 
L. Nicaragua  ................................ ................................ ................................ ..................  6 
M. Nigeria  ................................ ................................ ................................ ......................  6 
N. Russian Federation  ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 7 
O. Rwanda ................................ ................................ ................................ .....................  7 
P. Solomon Islands  ................................ ................................ ................................ ........  7 
Q. Sri Lanka  ................................ ................................ ................................ ..................  7 
R. Ukraine  ................................ ................................ ................................ .....................  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 pr oposal to update the carrier media decision  ................................ ..................  9 
4   TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE  ................................ ................................ .............................  9 
4.1   Information on Technical Assistance  ................................ ................................ ..............  9 
4.2   Article  20.3 Technical Assistance and Trade -Related Technical Assistance  .......................... 10 G/VAL/M/6 3 
 
- 2 - 
 
  5   UNITED STATES - ARMENIA'S REFERENCE PRICE SYSTEM IN CONN ECTION 
WITH THE VALUATION O F GOODS ................................ ................................ ..................  10 
6   UKRAINE - ABOLITION OF THE RES OLUTION OF THE CABIN ET OF MINIS TERS 
OF UKRAINE "ON THE U SE OF BENCHMARKS FOR  CUSTOMS VALUATION OF  
GOODS IN THE SYSTEM OF RISK MANAGEMENT" NO. 724 DATED 16 SEP TEMBER 
2015  ................................ ................................ ................................ ..............................  10 
7   THAILAND - PAKISTAN'S DETERMINA TION OF CUSTOMS VALU ES OF PAPER  ............  11 
8   PARAGRAPH 12 OF THE DOHA MINISTERIAL DEC LARATION: 
IMPLEMENTATION -RELATED ISSUES  ................................ ................................ .............  12 
9   PRESHIPMENT INSPECTI ON ................................ ................................ ......................  13 
9.1   Status of notifications by Members  ................................ ................................ ............... 13 
9.2   Questions and Responses by the United States and Indonesia  ................................ .......... 13 
9.3   Information on PSI  programmes  ................................ ................................ ................... 14 
10   ANNUAL REVIEW OF THE  IMPLEMENTATION AND O PERATION OF THE 
CUSTOMS VALUATIO N AGREEMENT  ................................ ................................ ................  14 
11   ANNUAL REPORT OF THE  COMMITTEE ON CUSTOMS  VALUATION TO THE 
COUNCIL FOR TRADE IN  GOODS  ................................ ................................ ....................  14 
12   OTHER BUSINESS  ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 14 
12.1   Date of next meeting  ................................ ................................ ................................ 14 
 
_______________  
 
 
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 Luximan Baba jee, reported 
on the activities of the Technical Committee on Custo ms Valuation at its 43nd session , which had 
been held on 17-20 October  2016. His report is contained in the Annex  to this document . 
1.2.  The Chairperson  thanked Mr. Babajee for h is report  and expressed the Committee's 
appreciation for the continued valuable wor k of the Technical Committee on Customs Valuation.  
1.3.  The Committee took note  of the report.  
2  INFORMATION ON IMPLE MENTATION AND ADMINI STRATION OF THE AGRE EMENT  
2.1  Notification of national legislation  
2.1.  The Chairperson  recalled that  pursuant to Article  22 of the Agr eement and the Decision on  
"Notification and circulation of national legislation in accordance with Articl e 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 in 
their laws and regulations relevant to this Agreement and in the administration of such 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 the 
Committee's meeting of 25  October  2012, the Se cretariat had issued a document  summariz ing the 
current status of notifications and this had been circulated as G/VAL/ W/232/Rev. 4. As agreed at 
the Committee 's meeting  of 7 October 2015, t he status document ha d been revised  to include 
references to documents containing the questions and responses raised  with regard to 
notifications.  
2.2.  The Chairperson  recalled that  the situation regard ing the notification of  Chinese Taipei 's 
legislation remain ed unchanged . G/VAL/M/6 3 
 
- 3 - 
 
  A. Kingdom of Bahrain  
2.3.  The Chairperson  recalled that it had been agreed at the last meeting to revert to the 
examination of Bahrain's notification of national legislation and responses  to the checklist of issues 
which 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 United States had submitted questions which had been  circulated in 
documents  G/VAL/ W/181 and G/VAL/W/201 , to which Bahrain had provided responses in 
document s G/VAL/ W/191  and G/VAL/W/217 . Follow -up questions had been  submitted by the 
United States in document  G/VAL/W /223.  
2.4.  The representative of the United States  stated that his delegation looked forward to receiving 
written responses t o their questions which had been submitted in 2013. 
2.5.  The representative of Bahrain  stated that the questions were  still being considered by the 
committee reviewin g the Gulf Cooperation Council C ommon Customs  Law.   
2.6.  The Committee took note  of the statement s made and agreed  to revert to Bahrain's 
notification  at the next meeting.  
B. Belize  
2.7.  The Chairperson  recalled that it had been agreed at the last meeting to revert  to the 
examination of Belize's notification of national legislation and responses to the check list of issues 
which had been circulated in documents  G/VAL/N/1/BLZ/1 a nd G/VAL/N/2/BLZ/1 . Canada had 
submitted questions in document  G/VAL/W/176 and the United States had submitted  questions in 
G/VAL/W/1 75. Belize had responded to some of tho se questions in document G/VAL/W/183.  The 
United States had raised  additional  questions in documents  G/VAL/W/188 , G/VAL/W/272 and 
G/VAL/W/272/Corr.1 . 
2.8.  The representative of the United States  stated that his delegation looked forward to receiving 
written  responses  to the ir quest ions. 
2.9.  The Committee took note  of the statement made and agreed  to revert to Belize's notification  
at the next meeting.  
C. Cabo Verde  
2.10.   The Chairperson  recalled that it had been agreed at the last meeting to revert to the 
examination of Cabo  Verde's n otification of national legislation which had been circulated in 
documents  G/VAL/ N/1/CPV/1  and G/VAL/N/1/CPV/2 . Questions from the  United States on 
G/VAL/ N/1/CPV/1  had been circulated in document  G/VAL/ W/224  and Cabo Verde  had provided 
responses  in documen t G/VAL/ W/239.  The United States had raised  follow -up questions in 
document  G/VAL/ W/244  to which Cabo Verde had provided responses  in document  G/VAL/W/263. 
The United States had submitted  questions on G/VAL/N/1/CPV/2 which had been  circulated in 
document  G/VAL/W/270.  Cabo Verde 's responses to those questions had been circulated in 
document G/VAL/ W/295 .    
2.11.   The representative of Cabo Verde  stated that his delegation believed that their national 
legislation implemented the provisions of Article 8.1 (b) of the Customs Valuation Agreement.  
2.12.   The representative of the United States  stated that it would review Cabo Verde's responses.  
2.13.   The Committee took note  of the statement s made and agreed  to revert to Cabo Verde's 
notification  at the  next meeting.  
D. Colombia  
2.14.   The Chairperson  recalled that it had been agreed at the last meeting to revert to the 
examination of Colombia's notification of changes to its national legislation and revised responses 
to the checklist of issues which had been circulated in documents  G/VAL/N/1 /COL/2, 
G/VAL/N/1/COL/3, and G/VAL/N/2/COL/2.  The United States had raised  questions which were G/VAL/M/6 3 
 
- 4 - 
 
  circulated in document  G/VAL/W/258 /Rev.1 , to which Colombia had provided responses  in 
document  G/VAL/W/276 and G/VAL/W/276/Corr.1  (in Spanish only) . Canada and Honduras had 
also raised questions which had been  circulated as document  G/VAL/W/290 . 
2.15.   The representative of Canada  asked when they might receive responses to their questions.   
2.16.   The representative of the European Union  stated that her delegation  had similar  concern s as 
Canada and Honduras,  and they looked forward to receiving the responses .   
2.17.   The representative of the United States  stated that his delegation was  interested in 
Colombia's replies to Canada's questions as they were also deeply concerned about t he use of 
reference prices and reference price databases in lieu of declared customs values.  He thanked 
Colombia for the responses received by the United States and they had no further questions.  
2.18.   The representative of the Honduras  stated that his delegatio n was also awaiting responses 
to its questions . 
2.19.   The representative of Colombia  stated that it would be sending the written responses over 
the next few days.  
2.20.   The Committee took note  of the statements made and agreed  to revert to Colombia's 
notification  at the next meeting.  
E. Ecuador  
2.21.   The Chairperson  recalled that it had been agreed at the last meeting to revert to the 
examination of Ecuador's responses to the checklist of issues  which had been circulated in 
document  G/VAL/N/2/ECU/1.  The United States had raised questions which had been circulated in 
document  G/VAL/W/220  to which Ecuador had provided replies  in document  G/VAL/W/226. 
Subsequently, Ecuador had notified a compilation of changes to its national legislation in 
document  G/VAL/N/1/ECU/3.  The United States had raised  questions in document  G/VAL/W/260  to 
which E cuador ha d responded  in document  G/VAL/ W/277.  
2.22.   The representative of the United States  stated that it had no further questions . 
2.23.    The Committee took note  of the statement  made and agreed  to conclu de the examination 
of Ecuador's national legislation . 
F. The Gambia  
2.24.   The Chairperson  recalled that it had been agreed at the last meeting to revert to the 
examination of The Gambia's notification of national legislation which had been circulated in 
document s G/VAL/N/1/GMB/1 and G/VAL/N/4/GMB/1.  The United States had submitted questions 
in document  G/VAL/W/245.  
2.25.   The representative of the United States  stated that his delegation  remained interested in 
receiv ing the replies.  
2.26.   The Committee took note  of the statem ent made and agreed  to revert to The Gambia's 
notification  at the next meeting.  
G. Guinea  
2.27.   The Chairperson  recalled that it had been agreed at the last meeting to revert to the 
examination of Guinea's notification of national legislation which had been circulated in 
document  G/VAL/ N/1/GIN/1.  The United States had raised q uestions and they had been  circulated 
in document  G/VAL/W/ 266. 
2.28.   The representative of the United States  stated that his delegation looked forward to 
receiving the replies . G/VAL/M/6 3 
 
- 5 - 
 
  2.29.   The Committee took note of the statement made and agreed  to revert to Guinea's  
notification  at the next meeting.  
H. Honduras  
2.30.   The Chairperson  recalled that it had been agreed at the last meeting to revert to the 
examination of Honduras' notification of national legislation an d responses to the checklist 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.  
2.31.   The representative of the United States  stated that his delegation  looked forward to 
receiving a written response to its questions.  
2.32.   The Committee took note  of the statement made and agreed  to revert to Honduras'  
notification  at the next meeting.  
I. Kazakhstan  
2.33.   The Chairperson  drew attention to Kazakhstan 's notification of  its responses to the Checklist 
of Issues circulated in document G/VAL/N/2/KAZ/1.  
2.34.   The representative of Kazakhstan  stated that his delegation would be pleased to answer any 
questions in due course.  
2.35.   The representative of the European Union  welcomed Kazakhstan's  notification and stated 
that they would review it before the next meeting.  
2.36.   The representative of the United States  thanked Kazakhstan for the notification  which they 
were currently r eviewing.  
2.37.   The Committee took note  of the statements made and agreed  to rever t to Kazakhstan's  
notification at the next meeting.  
J. Montenegro  
2.38.   The Chairperson  recalled that it had been agreed at the last meeting to revert to the 
examination of Montenegro's  notification of  national legislation and responses to the checklist of 
issues which had been circulated in documents  G/VAL/ N/1/MNE/1  and G/VAL/ N/2/MNE/1. 
Questions had been raised by the  United States in document  G/VAL/W/267  and Montenegro had 
provided responses in documents  G/VAL/ W/279 and G/VAL/W/284 . 
2.39.   The representative of the United States  thanked Montenegro for its response and stated 
that h is delegation would follow up bilaterally to confirm that the customs law referred to  in the 
response  had been provided.  
2.40.   The representative of Montenegro  thanked the United States for its c onstructive interest in 
Montenegro's notifications.  Her delegation  was ready to engage in follow -up bilateral talks and 
they would provide any additional documents mentioned, including the texts of the amended 
customs law that included the criteria set  out in Article 15.4 of the Customs Valuation Agreement.  
2.41.    The Committee took note  of the statements made and agreed  to revert to Montenegro's 
notification  at the next meeting.  
K. Nepal  
2.42.   The Chairperson  recalled that it had been agreed at the last meeting to revert to the 
examination of  Nepal's notification of national legislation which had been circulated in 
document  G/VAL/N/1/NPL/1.  The United States had raised questions and they had been circulated 
in document  G/VAL/W/286.  G/VAL/M/6 3 
 
- 6 - 
 
  2.43.   The representative of the United Stat es stated  that his delegation  looked forward to  
receiving the responses . 
2.44.   The representative of Canada  stated that his delegation was interested in Nepal's responses  
as they had also posed questions to Nepal during the Committee's October 2015 meeting  
regar ding its legislative notification . Section 14.6 of Nepal's legislation provided for the use of an 
estimated amount for likely freight insurance and other related expenses in order to calculate 
customs value. As the Customs Valuation Agreement precluded the  use of arbitrary customs 
values, his delegation remained interested in Nepal's explanation as to how it determined the 
estimated amounts and how its practices were consistent with the Agreement.   
2.45.   The Committee took note  of the statements made and agreed  to revert to Nepal's 
notification  at the next meeting.  
L. Nicaragua  
2.46.   The Chairperson  recalled that it had been agreed at the last meeting to revert to the 
examination of Nicaragua's notification of legislation and responses to the checklist of issues which 
had been circulated in documents  G/VAL/N/1/NIC/1 and G/VAL/N/2/NIC/1. Questions from the 
United States had been circulated in document  G/VAL/W/261  with replies from Nicaragua 
circulated  in document  G/VAL/W/265 . The United States had raised  additional quest ions in 
document  G/VAL/W/273  to which Nicaragua had provided responses  in document  G/VAL/W/28 1. 
The United States had subsequently posed  additional question s which had been circulated  in 
document  G/VAL/W/289  to which Nicaragua had provided responses in doc ument G/VAL/W/294 .   
2.47.   The representative of the United States  thanked Nicaragua for its response,  which it would 
review . 
2.48.   The representative of Nicaragua  thanked the United States and looked forward to any 
further developments.  
2.49.   The Committee took note  of the  statements made and agreed  to revert to Nicaragua's 
notification  at the next meeting.  
M. Nigeria  
2.50.   The Chairperson  recalled that it had been agreed at the last meeting to revert to the 
examination of Nigeria's notification of national legislation and respon ses to the checklist of issues  
which had been circulated in documents in 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.  
2.51.   The representa tive of Canada  reiterated its interest in receiving responses to the questions 
which  they had raised  in 2009 . 
2.52.   The representative of the United States  stated that his delegation remained interested in 
receiving replies to the questions posed by itself and  Canada . 
2.53.   The representative of the European Union  expressed h er delegation's interest in receiving 
answers to the questions raised so far , and her delegation  was preparing to submit some 
additional questions and comments.  
2.54.   The representative of Nigeria  stated that some of the concerns raised had already been 
addressed by way of amendments which had been  forwarded  for review  to the Nigerian National 
Assembly. Her delegation requested more time for bilateral discussions since the national 
consultation amongst Ni gerian stakeholders and relevant agencies was still ongoing.  The 
delegation assured the Committee of Nigeria' s commitment to its WTO obligations.  
2.55.   The representative of the United States  thanked Nigeria for its engagement , and to the 
extent that there had b een some responses to the questions,  encouraged the delegation  to provide 
written replies to the Committee for review.  G/VAL/M/6 3 
 
- 7 - 
 
  2.56.   The Committee took note  of the statements made and agreed  to revert to Nigeria's 
notification  at the next meeting.  
N. Russian Federation  
2.57.   The Chairperson  recalled that it had been agreed at the last meeting to revert to the 
examination of the Russian Federation's notification of legislation which had been circulated in 
documents G/VAL/N/1/RUS/1 , G/VAL/N/1/RUS/2 , G/VAL/N/1/RUS/2 /Add.1 , 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 document  G/VAL/N/2/RUS/1 . The Russian Federation had subsequently circulated in 
document  G/VAL/N/1/RUS/1/Add.1 legislation referred to  in document  G/VAL/N/1/RUS/1 . 
Questions raised by t he United States had been circulated in document  G/VAL/W/287.  
2.58.   The representative of the United States  thanked the Russian Federation for having provided 
some advance responses and they looked forward to re ceiving them in writing.   
2.59.   The representative of the European Union  thanked the Russian Federation for the 
notification , with which her delegation still had some concerns. A number of modifications were 
still ongoing and the European Union would like to re tain the item on the agenda  and to review the 
notification  along with additional information provided by the Russian Federation.   
2.60.   The representative of the Russian Federation  stated that his delegation had provided replies 
to the United States on the ques tion raised in document G/VAL/W/287 . The matter of updating its 
notification and legislation, as well as the checklist of issues, was being considered in capital.  
2.61.   The Committee took note of the statements made and agreed  to revert to the 
Russian  Federation 's notification  at the next meeting.  
O. Rwanda  
2.62.   The Chairperson  recalled that it had been agreed at the last meeting to revert to the 
examination of Rwanda's notification of national legislation and responses to the checklist of issues  
which had been  circul ated in documents  G/VAL/ N/1/RWA/1 and G/VAL/N/2/RWA/1. Questions 
raised by the  United States had been circulated in document  G/VAL/W/215.  
2.63.   The representative of the United States  stated that his delegation remained interested in 
receiving Rwanda's written replies . 
2.64.   The Committee took note  of the statement made and agreed  to revert to Rwanda's 
notification  at the next meeting.  
P. Solomon Islands  
2.65.   The Chairperson  drew attention to the notification by the Solomon Islands of its national 
legislation circulated  in document G/VAL/N/SLB/1 .   
2.66.   The representative of  the United States  stated that the notification was being reviewed and 
that they would follow up with any questions in writing.   
2.67.   The Committee took note  of the statement made and agreed  to revert to the Solom on 
Islands' notification  at the next meeting.  
Q. Sri Lanka  
2.68.   The Chairperson  recalled that it had been agreed at the last meeting to revert to the 
examination of Sri Lanka's notification of national legislation and its responses to the checklist of 
issues wh ich had been circulated in documents  G/VAL/N/1/LKA/1  and 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 . G/VAL/M/6 3 
 
- 8 - 
 
  2.69.   The representative of the United States  thanked Sri Lanka for the responses.  His delegation 
had a follow -up question regarding  Sri Lanka's Customs Amendment Act No. 2 of 2003.  Schedule 
E appeared to allow for the use of minimum customs values in Article 10, while the WTO 
Agreement o n Customs Valuation specifically prohibited the use of minimum customs values.  His 
delegation requested further information and clarification from Sri Lanka regarding the basis of 
Article 10 and how Sri Lanka used , or planned to use , minimum customs value s in customs 
operations. His delegation  looked forward to receiving Sri Lanka's response as well as updates 
regarding the steps being undertaken to address th e United States'  concerns.  
2.70.   The representative of the European Union  stated that her delegation had  a similar concern 
about the Customs Amendment Act , particularl y regarding Article 10 , on the use of minimum 
values .  Her delegation was  interested in receiving much more detailed explanations , as well as 
the written replies , from Sri Lank a.   
2.71.   The Committe e took note  of the statement s made and agreed  to revert to Sri Lanka's 
notification  at the next meeting.  
R. Ukraine  
2.72.   The Chairperson  recalled that Ukraine had submitted a notification of its legislation in 
document  G/VAL/N/1/UKR/1. Norway had raised  questio ns in document  G/VAL/ W/199 to which 
Ukraine had provided responses in document  G/VAL/W/2 48. Ukraine had subsequently provided 
updated responses to Norway's questions in the light of the Customs Code of Ukraine No.  4495-VI 
of 13 March  2012. Those updated re sponses had been  circulated in document  G/VAL/W/288 . 
2.73.   The representative of Norway  thanked Ukraine for its responses  and had no further 
questions.  Her delegation underlined that customs valuation was an issue of great importance for 
Norwegian business es exporting to Ukraine and that they would continue to follow the issue 
closely.  
2.74.   The representative of the United States  thanked Ukraine for the responses , which it would 
review.   His delegation had no follow -up questions at th at time. However , they had great c oncerns 
about the use of reference prices as a systemic approach to customs valuation.  While a customs 
authority had a right to ask for further documents that support ed the value claimed, the Customs 
Valuation Agreement set out a hierarchy for valuing goo ds when the value could not be 
determined by using transaction value. Arbitrary and fictitious prices, including prices sourced from 
publications available through a subscription and made available online, were prohibited. His 
delegation would continue to follow the matter closely.  
2.75.   The Committee took note  of the statements made and agreed  to conclude the examination 
of Ukraine's notification . 
2.76.   The Chairperson  thanked Members that had notified their national legislation and had 
provided responses to the check list of issues. He strongly encouraged the still considerable number 
of Members  that had not notified their national legislation , nor provided responses to the checklist 
of issues , to work with their capitals to do so as soon as possible. He reminded Membe rs that the 
Secretariat was available for any assistance in fulfilling the notification obligations.  
2.77.   The Committee took note  of the information.  
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 : the 
status of notifications under the Committee's Decisions and the proposal by Uruguay circulated in 
document  G/VAL/W/241/Rev.1.  
3.1  The status of notifications under the Committee's Decisions  
3.2.  The Chairperso n recalled that the Committee examined notifications pursuant to 
two Decisions that had been adopted by the Committee at its meeting of 12  May 1995 and G/VAL/M/6 3 
 
- 9 - 
 
  contained in document  G/VAL/5. Those were 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 notifications received had been 
circulated in document  G/VAL/W/5/Rev.2 6 and G/VAL/W/ 5/Rev.2 6/Corr.1 . 
3.3.  The Committe e took note  of the information.  
3.2  Uruguay's proposal to update the carrier media decision  
3.4.  The Chairperson  recalled that the Committee had agreed at the last meeting to revert to the 
proposal by Uruguay contained in document  G/VAL/W/241/Rev.1 , which was  to am end the Carrier 
Media Decision, also known by Customs as "Decision  4.1". According to Uruguay, software was 
increasingly being imported using new types  of carrier media, e.g.  USB flash drives or other similar 
devices, which might not fall under the definit ion of "carrier medium" in the Decision. This meant 
that such importations of software would be treated differently from those 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 with statistics on imports of these products  which had been 
circulated in G/VAL/W/249 . 
3.5.  During the last meeting, one Member had indicated that t he proposal, in amending an existing 
obligation, would require his country to make legislative changes in order to implement the 
proposal, and as other Members may have the same situation, he proposed that a transitional 
period be provided before the new o bligation took effect. Other Members supporting the proposal 
stated that their position remained unchanged. One other  Member had stated that its position, 
which was that there was no reason to review Decision 4.1 or to consider changing it, also 
remained u nchanged.  
3.6.  The representative of the United States  expressed support for the expansion of the definition of 
carrier media to include semi -conductor media such as USB  flash drives. His delegation  also agreed 
with Switzerland's comments . 
3.7.  The representative of  the European Union  stated that its position remained unchanged. They 
did not see any need to revisit or amend Decision  4.1. However, her delegation was ready to engage 
informally with all interested Members.   
3.8.  The representative of China  stated that her d elegation supported, in principle, Uruguay's 
proposal, and they expected Uruguay to further improve  the scope and definition of the proposal . In 
particular, the definition and corresponding tariff line s of carrier media and data processing 
equipment should  be clarified so as to ensure  the coheren ce of understanding and implementation 
of WTO Members . In light of the  impact of the expanded scope of D ecision 4.1  on custom s 
administration and implementation , and with a view to better identifying the customs val uation of 
carrier media, it was proposed to strengthen the requirements and procedures for declarations on 
tariff lines related to this Decision.   
3.9.  The representative of Switzerland  thanked the United States, the European Union and China.  
There was no chan ge in Switzerland's proposition. His delegation was happy to engage with 
Members.   
3.10.   The Chairperson  propose d that the Committee take note of the statements made and return 
to the issue at the appropriate time , that is to say when  there was a change in the situation and 
the Chair had been  so advis ed.   
3.11.   The Committee so agreed .  
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 Committe e on Customs Valuation had agreed that greater transparency of G/VAL/M/6 3 
 
- 10 - 
 
  technical assistance activities would be ensured if information documents prepared for the 
WCO Technical Committee  on Customs Valuation were also made available as a WTO  document. 
Document  G/VAL/8/Add.3 3 contain ed the most recent information compiled by the Technical 
Committee on Customs Valuation concerning technical assistance activities carried out by Members  
as well as by the WCO  Secretariat.  
4.2.  The Committee  took note  of the information . 
4.2  Article 20.3 Technical Assistance and Trade -Related Technical Assistance  
4.3.  The Chairperson  went on to recall that the Committee's Work Programme on t echnical 
assistance for capacity building  regard ing the implementation and a dministration of the 
WTO Agreement on  Customs Valuation was now incorporated in to the overall technical assistance 
program of the WTO. The WTO was  currentl y implementing the 201 6-2017 Biennial TA  Plan 
contain ed in document  WT/COMTD/W/2 11. Requests for technical assistance could be made by 
individual Members at any time  and would be met by a national activity designed to meet the 
needs of the recipient.  
4.4.  The Committee  took note  of the information . 
5  UNITED STATES - ARMENIA'S REFERENCE PRICE SYSTEM IN CONN ECTION WITH THE 
VALUATION OF GOODS  
5.1.  The Chairperson  recalled that it had been agreed at the last 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 subseque ntly submitted questions in 
document  G/VAL/W/214.  
5.2.  The representative  of Canada  referred to the outstanding questions that it had submitted in 
2012 related to the possible use of reference prices.  It was an important issue and his delegation  
remained intere sted in receiving responses as soon as possible.  
5.3.  The Committee  took note  of the statement made and agreed  to revert to th e issue at the 
next meeting.  
6  UKRAINE - ABOLITION OF THE RES OLUTION OF THE CABIN ET OF MINISTERS OF 
UKRAINE "ON THE USE OF BENCHMARKS FOR  CUSTOMS VALUATION OF  GOODS IN THE 
SYSTEM OF RISK MANAG EMENT" NO. 724 DATED  16 SEPTEMBER 2015  
6.1.  The representative of Ukraine  stated that Ukraine's customs administration system was 
undergoing considerable reforms.  Customs reform was a top priority f or the Government and the 
aim of the reform was the elimination of corruption, overcoming smuggling  and customs  rules 
violations, automation of the customs services processes , and facilitation of customs procedures.  
6.2.  Within the scope of the reform of  5 October 201 6, the Government abolished the Resolution 
of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine "On the use of Benchmarks for Customs Valuation of Goods 
in the System of Risk Management" dated 16 September 2015. Thereby, the procedure and 
methods of customs valuation of  goods crossing the customs border of Ukraine were determined 
only by Section III of the Customs Code of Ukraine, adopted in 2012 , and which was based on the 
provisions of Article VII of the GATT  1994 and the Agreement on Implementation of Article VII of 
the GATT 1994.   
6.3.  According to Article 57 of the C ustoms Code, the basic method of determining the customs 
value was the method of the contract price , i.e. the transaction value of imported goods . During 
2016, the transaction value  method  was used in 90% of cases. Ukraine did not  have any other 
legislative acts except the Customs Code of Ukraine which regulate d the determination of customs 
value.   G/VAL/M/6 3 
 
- 11 - 
 
  6.4.  According to Article 54 of the C ustoms Code, the customs authorities could  reject a declared 
value only if incom plete and/or inaccurate data ha d been declared regarding the customs value .  
This includ ed situations  where the customs value ha d been determined incorrectly  such as  in the 
following cases:  the customs value  had been calculated incorrectly;  the main or ad ditional 
documents ha d not been submitted , or the documents lacked data about the components of the 
customs value or price;  the selected method of customs valuation did not meet the conditions set 
by the Customs Code;  and, receiving data regarding the unre liability of the customs value  from 
the customs of other countries . If the customs office was not able to argue that the declarant had 
determined the customs value incorrectly, the customs value  should be accepted automatically.  
6.5.  The determination of custom s value on the basis of minimum, arbitrary or fictitious values, 
including indicative or reference prices, was not provided by Ukrainian legislation , Ukraine was not 
implement ing it in practice , and it did not have the intention to do so in the future. Ukraine 
assure d Members that its customs reform was aimed at simplifying procedures , stimulating foreign 
trade and reducing trade costs . 
6.6.  The representative of the United States  thanked Ukraine for the report  and encouraged it to 
continue with the reforms , and to keep the Committee updated accordingly. H is delegation had no 
further questions.   
6.7.  The representative of Norway  acknowledged the abolition of Resolution No. 724. She 
expressed her delegation's appreciation for the cooperation with Ukraine on customs va luation and 
they looked forward to continuing the constructive dialogue with Ukraine so as  to ensure that  
customs valuation in practice was transparent, predictable and in accordance with the WTO 
regulations.  
6.8.  The representative of the European Union  thanke d Ukraine for the report and welcomed the 
abolition of Resolution No. 724. Her delegation also looked forward to reviewing all the new 
developments with Ukraine, and to continuing their close cooperation.   
6.9.  The representative of Switzerland  thanked Ukraine  for the update. His delegation welcomed 
Ukraine's positive developments as well as its continued efforts to resolve the  current  issue. They 
hoped that those efforts could be reflected in practice. His delegation looked forward to continuing 
to work closel y with Ukraine.   
6.10.   The representative of Ukraine  thanked Members for their statements. His delegation 
appreciated Members' continued interest in further simpli fying Ukraine's customs procedures , and 
value d the Committee's  cooperation  on a range of issues .  Ukraine would oversee  the fulfilment of 
the customs code provisions .   
6.11.   The Committee took note  of the statements made . 
7  THAILAND - PAKISTAN'S DETERMINA TION OF CUSTOMS VALU ES OF PAPER  
7.1.  The representative of Thailand  raised his delegation's concern on Pakistan 's Valuation Ruling 
No. 827/2016 dated 6 April 2016 "Regarding the Determination of Customs Values of One Side 
Coated Duplex Board and Uncoated Offset Paper for Writing, Printing and Photocopying".   
7.2.  According to that V aluation Ruling, Pakistan applied the  fall-back method to derive a single 
customs value of paper imported from each country without taking into consideration different 
qualities and transaction values of paper from each supplying market. In addition, the customs 
value of uncoated offset paper  for writing, printing and photocopying from Thailand had been 
assessed by Pakistan at US$1.07 per kilogram , which was the highest figure compared to other 
countries, leading to a negative impact on Thailand's paper exporters. Thailand was of the view 
that such a measure may fail to comply with the commitments pursuant to Article VII of the GATT 
1994 and the Customs Valuation Agreement , for a number of reasons .  
7.3.  A customs value should be determined using the transaction value or any other sequential 
method for each importation , based on the application of the Customs Valuation Agreement 
methodology. However, Pakistan had determined the customs value of imported paper in advance , 
before  the actual importation from all countries.  G/VAL/M/6 3 
 
- 12 - 
 
  7.4.  According to the Agreement, wh en customs value could not be determined under any other  
sequential method, it could be determined using the fall -back method consistent with the 
principles and general provisions of the Agreement and of Article VII of the GATT 1994, and on the 
basis of da ta available in the country of importation. However, Pakistan did not provide a 
reasonable explanation as to why it could not successfully determine the customs value of 
imported paper by using any other sequential method.  
7.5.  With reference to Article 7.2(f) of the Agreement, no customs value shall be determined 
under the provisions of th at Article on the basis of minimum customs values.  However, Pakistan's 
valuation ruling state d that "in case where declared /transaction values are higher than the 
customs val ue determined in this R uling, the accessing officers  shall apply those values" which 
could  be deemed to be applying minimum customs value and was inconsistent with the 
Agreement.  
7.6.  In order  to address their concern, Thailand had sent written questions to Pak istan on 29 
August 2016 and had held a bilateral consultation on 31 August . Thailand had yet to receive a 
response to the written question s; but, rather , Pakistan had informed them that it had used the 
fall-back method to determine the customs value of imp orted paper since 2013 under the 
Valuation Ruling No. 577/2013 dated 6  September 2013. Thailand had found that both V aluation 
Rulings of Pakistan had never been notified to the Committee on Customs Valuation.  
7.7.  Thailand wished to ask Pakistan once again to c larify the following aspects:  
(i) Could Pakistan provide a detailed explanation as to why it was unable to determine 
the customs value of imported paper by using any other sequential methods?  
(ii) How did Pakistan evaluate the customs value of the imported paper un der the fall -
back method? What information was examined and what valuation criteria were used? 
(iii) Could Pakistan explain why the customs value of uncoated offset paper for writing, 
printing and photocopying from Thailand was assessed at US$1.07 per kilogram ?   
(iv) How d id Pakistan justify the determination of customs val ue of imported paper under 
the V aluation Ruling No. 827/2016 in light of the commitments pursuant to Articl e VII 
of the GATT  1994 and the C ustoms Valuation Agreement?   
7.8.  Thailand h oped that Pakistan  would provide detailed responses to its questions and review 
the V aluation Ruling No. 827/2016 at the earliest possible  time. Thailand stood ready to meet 
bilaterally with Pakistan with a view to achieving a mutually satisfactory solution .  
7.9.  The representa tive of Pakistan  thanked Thailand for taking an interest in its customs 
valuation regime. Pakistan had discussed the issue bilaterally with Thailand and had referred 
Thailand's  concerns to the capital . They were awaiting a response.  As a preliminary reply,  the 
reason s for the adoption of the fall -back method had been  clearly mentioned in paragraph 3 of the 
valuation Ruling No. 827 of May 2016 , dated 6 April 2016.  Furthermore, paragraph 9 of the said 
ruling clearly mention ed that a review  petition could be filed by the importers if they were not 
satisfied. Pakistan took  note of Thailand's concerns and would continue to engage bilaterally . 
7.10.   The Committee  took note  of the statements made . 
8  PARAGRAPH 12 OF THE DOHA MINISTERIAL DEC LARATION: IMPLEMENTA TION -
RELATED ISSUES  
8.1.  The Chairperson  recalled that at its meeting of December  2002 the General Council had 
authorized the Committee to continue its work under the existing mandate in paragraph  8.3 of the 
"Decision on Implementation -Related  Issues and Concerns", and had asked the Committee to 
report back to the General Council once its work had been completed.  
8.2.  At the last meeting , Members had indicated that there had been no change in their positions. 
Following discussions with its capital, India had said that it wished t o retain th e item on the G/VAL/M/6 3 
 
- 13 - 
 
  agenda while some other Members had been  of the view that the Trade Facilitation Agreement 
(TFA) would have already taken care of th e issue.  
8.3.  The representative of India confirmed that there had been no change in its position. In the 
previous discussions, some Members had been making an argument that paragraph 8.3 of the 
Doha Decision on Implementation -related Issues and Concerns had lost its relevance in view of the 
subsequently negotiated TFA. However, his delegation did not share that view.  The mandate under 
the Doha Ministerial Decision was aimed at resolving the implementation -related issues and 
concerns, and that should not be equated with the negotiating mandate on the TFA.  Also, India 
did not believe that those issues and con cerns had been adequately addressed by Article 12 of th at 
Agreement . Therefore, paragraph 8.3 was very much relevant and merited discussion in the 
Committee.  Without prejudice to India' s position, the TFA had not yet entered into force  and e ven 
after its e ntry into force its full implementation would take some time. Hence , India did not 
endorse any idea of deleting the item from the agenda.  
8.4.  The representative of the United States  stated that the issue had been resolved  by the new 
article on customs coopera tion in the TFA.  Members' ability to use a new cooperation mechanism 
was dependent on that Agreement's entry into force so his delegation encouraged all Members to 
continue efforts to complete their domestic procedures so that they might notify their acce ptance 
of the TFA  to the WTO . 
8.5.  The representative of the European Union  stated that there was no change in their position.  
The issue had been resolved in the TFA and h er delegation advised Members to ratify the TFA as 
soon as possible.   
8.6.  The Committee  took note of the statements made and agreed  to revert to the issue at the 
next meeting.  
9  PRESHIPMENT INSPECTI ON 
9.1.  The Chairperson  noted that Preshipment Inspection was a standing item on the agenda of the 
Committee on Customs Valuation and that there  were three items to discuss: Status of 
notifications ; Questions and Responses by the United States and Indonesia,  respectively; and , 
Information  on PSI  Programme s. 
9.1  Status of notifications by Members  
9.2.  The Chairperson  drew attention to the compilation of notifications pu rsuant to Article  5 of the 
Agreement on Preshipment Inspection  contained in the 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 and G/PSI/N/1/Rev.2 /Add.3 . 
9.3.  G/PSI/N/1/Rev.2/Add.3 contained updated information o n PSI notifica tions received since the 
Committee's last meeting.  
9.4.  The Committee  took note  of the document.  
9.2  Questions and Responses by the United States and Indonesia  
9.5.  The Chairperson  recalled that it had been agreed at the last meeting to revert to the issues 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 a nd 
G/VAL/W/257/Corr.1 . The United States had submitted additional questions  which had been 
circulated in document  G/VAL/ W/278 . 
9.6.  The representative of the United States  thanked Indonesia for the replies to its earlier  
questions and h is delegation looked forw ard to being able to review Indonesia's responses to its 
follow -up questions at a subsequent meeting.  
9.7.  The representative of Indonesia  thanked the United States for its continued interest in the 
issue. Responses to t he questions contained in document  G/VAL/ W/278 were being prepared.  G/VAL/M/6 3 
 
- 14 - 
 
  9.8.  The Committee  took note  of the statement s made and agreed  to revert to the issue at the 
next meeting.  
9.3  Information on PSI  programmes  
9.9.  The Chairperson  drew attention to document G/VAL/W/63/Rev.19  which contained the most 
recent upd ate of the information received from the International Federation of Inspection Agencies 
(IFIA) on Members that use preshipment inspection services . 
9.10.   The Committee took note of the information . 
10  ANNUAL REVIEW OF THE  IMPLEMENTATION AND O PERATION OF THE CUST OMS 
VALUATION AGREEMENT  
10.1.   The Chairperson  drew attention to Article 23 of the Agreement  which provides that the 
Committee shall review annually the implementation and operation of the Agreement, taking into 
account the objectives thereof. The Secretariat ha d prepared a draft in  line with the previous 
reviews  and this had been circulated in document G/VAL/ W/293.   
10.2.   He proposed that the Committee adopt the Annual Review1 and instructed the Secretariat to 
update it as necessary to take account of the discussions in  the October  meeting . 
10.3.   The Committee  so agreed . 
11  ANNUAL REPORT OF THE  COMMITTEE ON CUSTOMS  VALUATION TO THE COU NCIL 
FOR TRADE IN GOODS  
11.1.   The Chairperson  recalled that Article 23 of the Agreement also required the Committee to 
annually inform the Council for Tr ade in Goods of developments during the relevant reporting 
period. The  Secretariat had prepared a draft report which had been circulated in G/VAL/W/2 92.   
11.2.   He proposed that the Committee adopt the Annual Report2 to the Council for Trade in Goods 
and instruc ted the Secretariat to update it as necessary to take account of the discussions in the 
October meeting.   
11.3.   The Committee so agreed . 
12  OTHER BUSINESS  
12.1  Date of next meeting  
12.1.   The Chairperson  stated that the date for the next meeting  of the Committee would be fixe d 
in consultation with Members.  
12.2.   The meeting was adjourned.  
_______________  
                                                
1 Subsequently  issued as G/VAL/ 75 
2 Subsequently issued as G/L/160  G/VAL/M/6 3 
 
- 15 - 
 
  ANNEX   
 
REPORT TO THE W TO COMMITTEE ON CUSTOMS VALUATION  
ON THE WORK OF THE TECHNICAL COMMITTEE ON CUSTOMS VALUATION  
AND RELATED ACTIVITI ES O F THE WCO  SECRETARIAT  
31 October  2016 
The 43rd Session of the TCCV took place from 17 to 20 October 2016.   
 
64 Member countries, 6 observer countries and 3 organisations attended.  
 
Specific Technical Questions  
 
The Technical Committee examined a number of technical questions submitted by Memb ers.  
 
− Related party transactions under the Agreement and Transfer Pricing – case based on 
resale price method submitted by China. The interaction between Customs valuation 
and transfer pricing is one of the key challenges in the effective implementation o f the 
Valuation Agreement today. The challenge is to determine to what degree commercial 
information, prepared primarily for transfer pricing purposes is both relevant and 
useful to Customs administrations when examining the circumstances surrounding the 
sale (in a related party transactions) for Customs valuation purposes. The Technical 
Committee is endeavouring to develop instruments, or guidance to assist Members, in 
the form of case studies to illustrate situations where transfer pricing data has assist ed 
Customs in such cases. One case study based on the TNMM method has already been 
approved by the Technical Committee. Good progress has been made at the recent 
Session on this case based on the Resale Price Method and examination will continue 
at the nex t Session.  
 
- Sales condition, objective and quantifiable data: submitted by Mexico. This case 
relates to the payment of royalties under a franchise contract. The Technical 
Committee has reached consensus on the conclusion of this case study at its 43rd 
Session.  The Technical Committee will examine at its 44th Session the text of the 
instrument.  
 
- International Marketing Fee: submitted by Colombia. The Technical Committee 
continued the examination of the question on the basis of the relevant extract of a 
Licence Contract /Agreement produced by Columbia. Delegates have requested 
additional information which would be scrutinised at the next Session.  
 
- Examining the circumstances surrounding the sales under the provisions of Article 1.2 
(a) – goods produced in d ifferent countries: submitted by Ecuador. This question refers 
to a related party transaction being examined by Customs and to demonstrate that the 
relationship has not influenced the price the importer produced a transfer pricing 
study. The comparables us ed in the TP Study are from countries different from the 
tested parties. The Technical Committee continued the examination of the question at 
its 43rd Session on the basis of a non -paper submitted by Ecuador, which purports to 
clarify the issues. However, this non -paper has introduced a new element and the 
Technical Committee has questioned whether a TP study is needed in the presented 
situation when examining the circumstances surrounding the sale. Examination will 
continue at the next Session.    
 
Three n ew questions were raised during the intersession:  
 
- Valuation of imported goods purchased in Flash Sales: submitted by Mauritius  
 
- Use of Transfer Pricing Documentation to examine related party transactions according 
to Article 1.2(a) of the Agreement : sub mitted by Uruguay  
 G/VAL/M/6 3 
 
- 16 - 
 
  - Interpretation of the term "to" in Article 8.2(a) and (b) of the Agreement: submitted 
by Uruguay  
 
The Committee agreed to examine the questions submitted by Mauritius and Uruguay as Specific 
Technical Questions at the next Session.  
 
Technical Assistance/Capacity Building  
 
At each Technical Committee, reports are made of both Secretariat and Members activities in 
valuation -related technical assistance and capacity building, since the last Session. At the 43rd 
Session, Canada, China, Japan  and the United States reported activities conducted by their 
administrations.  
 
The WCO Secretariat reported on their activities, which included a further joint workshop 
conducted by WCO and OECD in Ankara, on the topic of transfer pricing and Customs val uation. 
These workshops bring together officials from both Customs and tax administrations to discuss the 
issues raised and encourage closer cooperation and sharing of information, skills and knowledge.  
The list of the WCO’s and Members’ technical assista nce programmes has been provided to the 
CCV.  
 
For additional information, the WCO will continue to provide technical assistance and capacity 
building in the area of Customs valuation to a number of countries of the following regions: West 
and Central Afri ca, East and Southern Africa, MENA and Asia Pacific.  
 
Date of next meeting  
 
The 44th Session of the Technical Committee will be held at WCO Headquarters in Brussels and 
has been provisionally scheduled from 8 to 12 May 2017.  
 
____________