RESTRICTED  
  
G/STR/M/25  
 
15 October 2013  
(13-5646)  Page: 1/3  
Working Party on State Trading Enterprises   
 
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE WORKING PARTY 
ON STATE TRADING ENTERPRISES 
HELD ON 7 OCTOBER 2013 
CHAIRMAN: MR HUMBERTO JIMENEZ TORRES (ECUADOR) 
 
1  ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA ......................................................................................... 1  
2  REVIEW OF NEW AND FULL NOTIFI CATIONS SUBMITTED BY MEMBERS ...................... 1  
3  REVIEW OF UPDATING NOTIFICA TIONS SUBMITTED BY MEMBERS ............................. 2  
4  NOTIFICATION OF GAZPROM BY RUSSIA AS AN STE – ITEM REQUESTED BY 
THE EUROPEAN UNION AND THE UNITED STATES ............................................................ 3  
5  ANNUAL REPORT (2013) TO THE COUNCIL FOR TRAD E IN GOODS ............................... 3  
6  OTHER BUSINESS ......................................................................................................... 3  
 
1  ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA 
1.  The Chairman referred to the proposed agenda contained in document WTO/AIR/4192 and 
Add.1, circulated on 25 September and 4 Octo ber 2013 respectively, and informed the Working 
Party that he would make a statement under "Other Business", relating to the date of the next 
regular meeting of the Working Party in 2014. 
2.  The Working Party adopted the agenda, as amended. 
2  REVIEW OF NEW AND FULL NOTI FICATIONS SUBMITTED BY MEMBERS 
3.  The Chairman recalled that, pursuant to paragraph 5 of the Understanding on the 
Interpretation of Article XVII of the GATT 1994, the Working Party was tasked with reviewing the 
notifications and counter-notifications submitted by  Members on their state trading enterprises. In 
light of this review, the Council for Trade in Goods, to which the Working Party reported, would 
make recommendations on the adequacy of notifica tions and the need for further information. The 
Chairman also reminded Members that, pursuant to document G/STR/8, new and full notifications 
on state trading were due every two years. 
4.  The Chairman suggested that the Working Party conduct its review in the same manner used 
for the review of notifications at previous meetin gs, that is, with a focus on two main elements: 
(i) whether the notification responded adequately to the information requested in the 
questionnaire contained in document G/STR/3/Rev.1; and (ii) whether more information was 
needed in order to permit – in the language of paragraph 2 of the Understanding – "a clear appreciation of the manner of operation of the enterprises notified and the effect of their 
operations on international trade". 
5.  The Working Party reviewed the new and full notifications submitted by Members. G/STR/M/25 
 
- 2 - 
 
  6.  No questions were posed regarding the notifications of Armenia (G/STR/N/13/ARM and 
G/STR/N/14/ARM); Australia (G/STR/N/14/AUS/Rev.11); Barbados (G/STR/N/11/BRB/Rev.1 and 
G/STR/N/12/BRB/Rev.1); Ecuador (G/STR/N/14/ ECU); Liechtenstein (G/STR/N/14/LIE); Mali 
(G/STR/N/1/MLI, G/STR/N/4/MLI, G/STR/N/7/MLI, G/STR/N/10/MLI, G/STR/N/11/MLI, 
G/STR/N/12/MLI, G/STR/N/13/MLI, and G/STR/N/14/MLI); Moldova (G/STR/N/14/MDA); Peru 
(G/STR/N/11/PER, G/STR/N/12/PER, G/STR/ N/13/PER, and G/STR/N/14/PER); Singapore 
(G/STR/N/7/SGP and G/STR/N/14/SGP); South Africa (G/STR/N/10/ZAF, G/STR/N/11/ZAF, 
G/STR/N/12/ZAF, G/STR/N/13/ZAF, and G/ST R/N/14/ZAF); and Uruguay (G/STR/N/4/URY, 
G/STR/N/7/URY, G/STR/N/10/URY, G/STR/N/11/URY, G/STR/N/12/URY, G/STR/N/13/URY, and 
G/STR/N/14/URY/Suppl.12). 
7.  The European Union posed a question regarding India's notification (G/STR/N/12/IND and 
G/STR/N/13/IND).3 The EU was concerned about the possible negative effects on world trade of 
numerous Indian agricultural state trading enterp rises. The EU was particularly concerned about 
the potential adverse spill-over effects of the operations aimed at maintaining stocks of food grains 
by procuring the products at minimum support prices and managing imports. Regardless of 
whether the STEs were directly involved in the imports of the products concerned, the EU asked India to provide information on the extent to whic h the food grains concerned, upon release from 
the stocks, were exported, and at which price? Pakistan also shared the EU concern and asked how 
many Indian food-related state trading enterprises were also receiving price support. India did not 
respond to the questions. 
8.  Pakistan asked Malaysia, with respect to it s notifications (G/STR/N/11/MYS, G/STR/N/12/MYS, 
G/STR/N/13/MYS, and G/STR/N/14/MYS), if there was a market price support for rice. Malaysia 
said that it would respond to this question in writing. 
3  REVIEW OF UPDATING NOTIFICATIONS SUBMITTED BY MEMBERS 
9.  No questions were posed regarding the notifications of Mali (G/STR/N/2/MLI, G/STR/N/3/MLI, 
G/STR/N/5/MLI, G/STR/N/6/MLI, G/STR/N/ 8/MLI, and G/STR/N/9/MLI); Singapore 
(G/STR/N/8/SGP); South Africa (G/STR/N /9/ZAF); and Uruguay (G/STR/N/5/URY, 
G/STR/N/6/URY, G/STR/N/8/URY, and G/STR/N/9/URY). 
10.  Before moving to the next agenda item, the Chairman drew the attention of Members to the 
table in room document RD/STR/4, which contained the draft document G/STR/10. The Chairman 
explained that the table attempted to record all notifications, including "nil notifications", made 
from N1 in 1995 to N14 in 2012, as of 25 September 2013. 
11.  The Chairman noted that the large number of  blank boxes in the table indicated that many 
Members remained in arrears in terms of completing  their notification obligations. In the light of 
the increased interest among Members regarding tr ansparency, as well as the duty of Members to 
comply with their WTO obligations, the Chairman encouraged Members to continue to work with their Capitals and, where necessary, to take ad vantage of the resources of the Secretariat, to 
improve the notification record. 
12.  The Chairman noted that for N14, the new and full notification requirement for 2012, the 
Working Party had, to date, received notifications from just 37 Members. The Chairman urged Members to continue to make every effort to improve their performance, and encouraged them to 
do what they could to ensure compliance with their outstanding notification obligations. This was 
particularly important because next year, by 30 June 2014, new and full notifications for the years 2012-2013 would be due.   
13.  The Working Party took note of the Chairman's statement. 
                                               
1 Australia's notification was reviewed by the Working Party during its meeting on 30 October 2012.  
Australia submitted a revision to this notification which was reviewed at this meeting. 
2 Uruguay's notification was reviewed by the Working Party during its meeting on 30 October 2012.  
Uruguay submitted supplemental statistical info rmation which was reviewed at this meeting. 
3 The European Union's question was subsequently  circulated in document  G/STR/Q1/IND/5, dated 
14 October 2013. G/STR/M/25 
 
- 3 - 
 
  4  NOTIFICATION OF GAZPROM BY RUSSIA AS AN STE – ITEM REQUESTED BY THE 
EUROPEAN UNION AND THE UNITED STATES 
14.  The European Union stated that transparency was central to the WTO in order to ensure that 
WTO Members were fulfilling their obligations. The EU , in noting Russia's lack of notification on 
Gazprom to this Working Party, recalled that at the previous meeting of the Working Party Russia 
had stated that it was in the process of finalizing this notification. The EU asked the Russian Federation to explain the reasons behind its delay in making this notification. The United States 
shared the EU's concern and expressed regret that  the representative of the Russian Federation 
was not present at the Working Party meeting. His delegation called for the prompt notification of Gazprom as a state trading enterprise, in line with Russia's obligations in its Accession Protocol and its statement at the Working Party meeting in 2012 
15.  The Working Party took note of the statements made. 
5  ANNUAL REPORT (2013) TO THE COUNCIL FOR TRADE IN GOODS 
16.  The Chairman informed Members that, pursuant to paragraph 5 of the Understanding on the 
Interpretation of Article XVII of the GATT 1994, and in line with the format agreed at the Working 
Party meeting in October 2012, the draft annual report was circulated as room document RD/STR/3.   
17.  The Chairman noted that, as compared to previous versions of the annual report, Section III 
was expanded to maintain the same level of transp arency with regard to the period under review, 
and that a reference to document G/STR/10, containing the status of notifications since 1995, was added. The annual report would be updated to take  into account the proceedings of this meeting. 
18.  The Working Party took note of the statements made and adopted the Annual Report (2013) 
to the Council for Trade in Goods, which was su bsequently circulated as document G/L/1046. 
19.  The Chairman also stated that the table with the status of notifications would be issued as 
document G/STR/10 and updated annually before  the next meeting of the Working Party. 
6  OTHER BUSINESS 20.  The Chairman informed Members that the next meeting of the Working Party would be held 
on 9 October 2014. 21.  Before concluding the meeting, the Chairm an urged all Members to respect the deadline of 
30 June 2014 for submitting new and complete notifications. The Chairman strongly emphasized the significance of this deadline in order to give Members ample opportunity to study the 
notifications ahead of the meeting in their pref erred WTO working language. In case of delays, 
Members should endeavour to submit their notifica tions at least 10 weeks prior to the date of the 
meeting at which the notifications were to be re viewed. The Chairman also requested that written 
questions be provided 3 weeks before the date of the meeting, and that written answers to written 
questions should be provided well in advance of the meeting. 
22.  The meeting was adjourned. 
__________