RESTRICTED  
  
G/IT/M/62  
 
24 September 2015  
(15-4943)  Page: 1/9  
Committee of Participants on the Expansion of Trade in 
Information Technology Products    
 
 MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF 8 MAY 2015 
CHAIRMAN: MR FREDERIC PAYOT (SWITZERLAND) 
INTRODUCTION 
The Committee adopted the proposed agenda for the meeting circulated in 
document WTO/AIR/IT/1, dated 24 April 2015. An annotated agenda for the meeting was 
circulated in document JOB/IT/15, also dated 24 April 2015. The Chairman stated that he would take up the issue of the date of the next meeting under "Other Business".  
INTRODUCTI ON ............................................................................................................... 1
 
1   REVIEW OF THE STATUS OF IMPLEMENTATION OF THE MINISTERIAL 
DECLARATION ON TRADE IN INFO RMATION TECHNOLOGY PRODUCTS 
(G/IT/1/REV.53) ............................................................................................................. 1  
2   REVIEW OF PR ODUCT COVERAGE ................................................................................ 2  
3   NON-TARIFF MEASURES  WORK PROGRAMME .............................................................. 5  
4   EMC/EMI PILOT PROJECT – DRAF T LIST OF TYPES OF CONFORMITY 
ASSESSMENT PROCEDURES FOR EMC/EMI USED BY ITA PARTICIPANTS (G/IT/W/17/REV.12) ...................................................................................................... 7
 
5   DIVERGENCES IN CLASSIFYING INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PRODUCTS 
(G/IT/14/REV.1/ADD.1, G/IT/W/6/REV.3, G/IT/W/33, G/IT/W/34, G/IT/27, 
JOB/IT/12 AND G/ IT/W/40) .......................................................................................... 7  
6   NEW PARTICIPANTS ................................................................................................... 9  
7   ELECTION OF CHAIRPERSON ....................................................................................... 9  
8   OTHER BU SINESS ........................................................................................................ 9  
-  Date of next meeting  ................................................................................................ 9  
 
 1  REVIEW OF THE STATUS OF IMPLEMENTATION OF THE MINISTERIAL DECLARATION ON TRADE IN INFORMATION TECHNO LOGY PRODUCTS (G/IT/1/REV.53) 
1.1. The Chairman informed Participants that an over view of the Status of Implementation of the 
Ministerial Declaration on Trade in IT Products co uld be found in document G/IT/1/Rev.53. As at 
the previous meetings, he flagged the following two issues: (1) the completion of El Salvador's 
domestic legal procedural requirements was still pending; and (2) Morocco had not yet submitted 
its final ITA schedule of commitments although it had become a participant to the ITA on 14 November 2003. Despite the Chair's letter to the delegation of Morocco, on 14 November 2011, 
and the Chair's subsequent contacts with them earlier this year concerning the status of Morocco's 
ITA schedule, there had still been no formal response received. 
1.2. The representative of El Salvador stated that she did not have any updates from her capital 
on the issue, and she would continue to be in contact with her authorities so as to be able to 
promote progress regarding this matter with high priority. G/IT/M/62 
 
- 2 - 
 
  1.3. The representative of Morocco said that his delegation had not communicated the schedule 
up until now but, once received, his delegation would convey it to the Committee. 
1.4. On the question of certain recently joined Pa rticipants' ITA schedules of commitments that 
were pending for rectification and modification, as required by the 1980 Decision on Procedures for 
Modification and Rectification of Schedules of Tariff Concessions, the Chairman recalled that the 
Russian Federation became an ITA Participant on  13 September 2013; however, the submission of 
the Russian Federation's ITA schedule of commitments for rectification and modification was still 
pending. He invited the delegation of the Russian Federation to report and update. 
1.5. The representative of the Russian Federation st ated that her capital was still considering the 
schedule and she would update the Committee once she had received new information. 
1.6. The representative of the United States of America stated that her delegation remained 
disappointed that Russia had still failed to submit its modification to the bound tariff schedules to 
incorporate its ITA commitments that was approv ed by the Committee over one and a half years 
ago. This step was outlined in the 1980 Decision on Procedures for Modification and Rectification of 
Schedules of Tariff Concessions. This was an important final step to complete ITA participation. 
She urged Russia to submit the necessary documentation to the WTO Secretariat without delay. 
1.7. The Chairman thanked delegations that had in tervened and urged those Members that had 
not yet completed the procedures for the formal rectification and modification of schedules, as 
required by the Decision of 26 March 1980 on Proc edures for Modification and Rectification of 
Schedules of Tariff Concessions, to do so as soon as possible. He suggested that the Committee take note of all the statements made. 
1.8. It was so agreed. 
2  REVIEW OF PRODUCT COVERAGE 
2.1. The Chairman recalled that, since the Committee meeting of 15 May 2012, as requested by 
some delegations, "review of product coverage" had been included as a regular agenda item. It 
offered an opportunity for the Committee to receive reports and updates from those participants who were engaged in consultations relating to the review of product coverage pursuant to 
Paragraph 3 of the Annex to the ITA. He invi ted delegations to report on this matter. 
2.2. The representative of the European Union th ought that few people in the room needed 
convincing on how important the ITA was as an Agreement, with 5 trillion dollars in annual trade 
covered and 80 Members participating. It was clea r that the duty-free treatment had helped a lot 
in the development of IT trade and the quadruplin g of this trade since the agreement had entered 
into force. He felt that the ITA expansion was necessary to update the Agreement. Many innovative products that had come on the market since the ITA-1 were simply not covered by the 
Agreement, and the development of those produc ts was hindered by duties. Products of key 
interest to the world's leading IT companies were currently not covered, but would be included in the ITA Expansion that was emerging from three years of negotiations, including products such as 
television cameras, set top boxes, video recorders, television parts, next generation 
semi-conductors and manufacturing equipment, optical lenses, GPS, loudspeakers, software media, video game consoles, and so on. 
2.3. He stated that not all the products proposed by all participants were on the list. Many items 
proposed originally did not find consensus among participants. The EU had not obtained all the 
products it had wanted to include on the list. In particular, many products in electrical machinery, and in the area of appliances and instruments of key interest to EU exports, were not covered 
because consensus could not be found. Meetings at the end of last year had ended without full 
consensus and now almost six months had passed without a result. 
2.4. He noted that, with regard to a large number of products that were on the ITA Expansion 
list, there was better and quicker elimination of tariffs than found even in some FTAs, which by 
their nature should be more ambitious. He further thought that concluding the ITA expansion would have systemic advantages for the WTO. In hi s view, without it, it would be very hard to see 
how even more ambitious market access agreements could be finalized, including the DDA. He G/IT/M/62 
 
- 3 - 
 
  wondered whether waiting a few more years would really give the group a better list of products. 
He asked participants not to block an ITA Expansion, and to accept what had already been put on the table. 
2.5. The representative of Japan said that since the last round of negotiations five months had 
passed but there had so far been no substantial progress. While timing was important for trade 
negotiations in general, it was especially so for IT products. He recalled the appeals calling for an early conclusion of the ITA Expansion negotiations  from ICT industry around the world, including 
those made at the NTB workshop. The group needed to share that sense of urgency. He felt that 
the group could reach a common understanding and it was time to take proper action and to swiftly conclude. He recognized the reality that the group faced and drew attention to the ministerial meetings of APEC in May, and the OECD in June, which presented a last political 
opportunity before the summer break. 
2.6. The representative of the United States of America stated that the conclusion of an 
agreement to expand the product coverage of the ITA remained a top trade priority for her 
Government. Last December the group was on the brink of concluding an ITA expansion 
agreement, which would have been the first tariff-cutting agreement at the WTO in 17 years. But the group had not succeeded, unfortunately. Today, after nearly five months, the group was still 
no closer to reaching an agreement on ITA pr oduct coverage expansion than they were last 
December. This was very alarming and generated a still greater sense of urgency to finalize an 
agreement without delay. The ICT industry in the United States and around the world was growing 
impatient. The industry was beginning to question the ability of the WTO to deliver any negotiating 
outcomes on market access. The industry wond ered how WTO Members could be successful in 
reaching an agreement on a post-Bali work pr ogramme, which was much more complicated, and 
involved more Members, when they could not seal the deal to eliminate tariffs on 200 products 
under an ITA expansion. She said that her delegation and others had provided space and had 
waited patiently for participants with outstanding concerns to find solutions, but that such patience was not without limits. She appreciated the discussion held with many ITA expansion participants 
this week and looked forward to continuing discussions aimed at finding solutions in the coming 
days. Her delegation remained hopeful that the group would be in a position to successfully conclude the plurilateral negotiations in Geneva very soon. She recalled that, a few weeks ago, Director-General Azevêdo had urged ITA expansio n Members' Ambassadors to reach an agreement 
in the first semester, remarking that their ability to reach a deal would not get any easier over 
time. Her delegation could not agree more, and urged all Members at the negotiating table to reflect on their current positions with that reality in mind. 
2.7. The representative of Norway stated that her delegation attached great importance to the 
conclusion of the ITA Expansion. The value of the Information Technology Sector was enormous, 
and was one of the truly global industries. The original ITA was one of the most successful 
WTO agreements, with trade growing at an unprecedented rate since it entered into force. The 
IT industry had evolved beyond imagination but the agreement had not. Norway needed the ITA Expansion Agreement to cover new products that had come onto the market since the original agreement was crafted almost twenty years ago. The economic benefits of an updated ITA would 
be huge and an important boost to the economy. An d to conclude the ITA Expansion would also be 
to make a commitment to the multilateral trading system. She thought that the group collectively needed the deal. The industry needed the deal and the multilateral trading system needed the 
deal. In her view, the benefits of a conclusion woul d far outweigh the costs, even if the deal were 
not perfect and even if the updated product list di d not go as far as many would like. The group 
had made tremendous efforts over the past three years and, in her opinion, the group had been 
very close to a final deal last December. That had been the result of a lot of work, many hard 
deliberations, and many hard choices. It was ther efore unfortunate that the group seemed still to 
be in exactly the same place. She felt an incr eased sense of urgency and thought that the group 
could not and should not wait any longer to conclude the deal. She doubted that more time would 
result in a better list of products. She also highligh ted the issue of the lifespan of the products that 
the group was talking about. Norway would not want the ITA Expansion to be outdated even 
before it entered into force. She urged all participants in the negotiations to work together, to take 
the hard decisions that would be needed, and to  bring the Expansion to a quick and successful 
conclusion so as to unlock the deal's great potential. 
2.8. The representative of Switzerland said that the ITA Expansion negotiations had now been 
ongoing for three years, although they had actu ally been scheduled to conclude in July 2013. G/IT/M/62 
 
- 4 - 
 
  Switzerland welcomed the good offices of the Director-General in trying to help to identify a 
possible common ground among delegations, and he believed that a successful conclusion was very close. However, the group still had work to do, including to discuss and establish the staging, to determine the starting date of the expansion' s implementation, and to address other issues in 
addition to the product list. However, this work would take time. Switzerland was serious about 
this negotiation and urged participants to the expansion negotiations to go on with them vigorously in order to finish this negotiation at the latest by the Nairobi Ministerial Conference. 
2.9. The representative of Canada stated that Canada, as a strong supporter to expand the 
ITA from the outset, remained committed to concluding the negotiations as soon as possible. She 
highlighted two key upcoming events, also mentioned by Japan, that offered opportunities to re-engage and conclude the negotiations, name ly: the APEC trade ministers' meeting on 
23-24 May; and the OECD mini-ministerial meeting in early June. And she agreed with 
Director-General Azevêdo's view, conveyed to ITA Expansion Ambassadors, that the time to 
conclude would be now. The group needed to finish this negotiation in the first semester of the 
year, both for the IT industry and for the multilateral trading system. Canada looked forward to 
work with others to make this happen. 
2.10.  The representative of Chinese Taipei said th at ITA expansion was extremely important for 
his delegation because Chinese Taipei was one of the major traders of IT products globally. His 
delegation had always been a strong supporter of trade liberalization for IT products, and had very high expectations that ITA expansion could reach a balanced and commercially meaningful outcome. To facilitate the whole negotiating process, his delegation had always maintained a very 
constructive attitude and had no sensitive products. This did not mean that Chinese Taipei had no 
sensitivity. Instead, Chinese Taipei had shown a great deal of flexibility during the negotiating process with a view to achieving its early conclusion. Based on the consideration of the interests of 
its related industries, and after strenuous discussions with the stakeholders involved, the Chinese 
Taipei delegation had demonstrated flexibility through informal bilateral discussions with other participants during the past few days, and would continue to do so in due course. He said that, 
without reflecting Chinese Taipei's commercial interests in the final product list, it would be 
extremely difficult for them to accept the deal because of the tremendous pressure they were facing from industry and parliament. Nevertheless, Chinese Taipei was ready and willing to fully engage with all participants with a view to finding consensus and to reaping the benefits of a 
mutually acceptable outcome as soon as possible. 
2.11.  The representative of Montenegro stated that, as a country recently acceded to the WTO, 
Montenegro would like to align itself with the statement of the European Union. Montenegro joined 
the technical group on ITA Expansion in April 2013 and had participated in the negotiations ever 
since. Montenegro had shown flexibility and submitted its list five months ago, a list still valid. She 
recalled the statement of Director-General Azevêdo, saying that failing to conclude this negotiation 
would have systemic consequences on the multilat eral trading system. The opportunity was there, 
and so Montenegro wished to call on all participants to engage constructively in the time that remained, and to conclude swiftly the negotiations that would be crucial for the future success of the multilateral system. Montenegro still remained flexible and committed to engage in 
constructive discussions with the rest of the participants in the technical group. 
2.12.  The representative of Hong Kong, China stat ed that Hong Kong, China remained fully 
supportive of ITA expansion. She hoped that participants concerned would redouble their efforts to 
engage with each other and to display the necessa ry flexibility such that remaining differences 
could be reconciled as soon as possible. She looked  forward to an early resu mption of the technical 
discussion and would continue to engage actively in the process. 
2.13.  The representative of Singapore reiterated Singapore's interest for an expanded 
ITA Agreement, which would be commercially significant and reflective of modern supply chains. 
She believed that everyone in the room shared this interest. She observed that it was unfortunate that the group had not managed to seal the deal that had been within reach in December last 
year. Singapore was, however, heartened that so me engagement between participants, some of 
which involving the Director-General, had taken place after the December 2014 impasse. While such engagements had yet to achieve a breakthrough, Singapore remained optimistic that a 
successful outcome could soon be achieved. As others had mentioned, time was of the essence, 
and the credibility of the multilateral trading system was at stake. Singapore was committed to G/IT/M/62 
 
- 5 - 
 
  seeing through the fruition of an expanded ITA Agreement and remained willing to contribute and 
work with all participants to facili tate a deal as soon as possible. 
2.14.  The representative of Colombia said that, like others, Colombia recognized the importance of 
this process and was committed to the ITA expansion. Colombia hoped that the group would be 
able to resume a dialogue quickly in Geneva. He stressed that finding solutions to those few 
pending matters would be a matter of collective responsibility, and all participants involved in the negotiations had a role to play. In his view, this was key to a successful conclusion of the 
Expansion negotiations. He hoped that some progress could be made in the weeks to come. 
2.15.  The representative of the Republic of Kore a noted that, as a strong supporter of the 
ITA Expansion, Korea had actively engaged in the negotiations from the beginning. And Korea was 
anticipating a swift and successful conclusion to the negotiations. Korea was aware that the 
remaining gap was not big. However, while parties maintained their positions, time was very 
rapidly running out. To break the current impasse, parties needed more frank, constructive, and creative consultations with each other. The consultations should be based on the responsibility and 
the reciprocal flexibility of all participants in the ITA Expansion negotiations. The group should find 
a possible pathway that could finalize the negotiatio ns by striking a balance of interests among all 
participants. Korea would continue to make every effort to explore all possible avenues to bridging 
the remaining gap. Korea also wished to request the active engagement of all participants to find a 
solution. 
2.16.  The representative of Australia stated that Australia would like to join others in looking for 
an early and successful conclusion to the negotiations. It was clear to Australia that the industry 
was seeking a swift and effective deal. The group had been very close to concluding a 
commercially significant and balanced agreement last December. He hoped that the group could 
p u s h  f o r w a r d  t o  r e a c h  t h a t  r e s u l t  a s  s o o n  a s  p o s s i b l e .  T h e  g r o u p  n e e d e d  t o  d e m o n s t r a t e  t o  
industry and also to the broader WTO Membership th at the Organization was capable of liberalizing 
trade for the benefit of all. 
2.17.  The representative of China stated that Ch ina was one of the important supporters and 
contributors to the ITA Expansion negotiations. In this regard, China had done all it could, going 
through extremely difficult internal consultations with the domestic industry. She said that China was also disappointed with the current impasse. However, it was not fair or reasonable to expect one single participant to be making the contribution all the time. Therefore, it was time for all 
participants to stand up and contribute. In this regard, she called on parties to take political 
decisions and to give up their unrealistic requests. She said that China was also quite clear that the scope and staging should be discussed togeth er. The group should fully concentrate on what 
had been achieved through consensus and not fight over one or two specific products. The latter 
approach would lead the group nowhere. 
2.18.  The Chairman thanked delegations who had intervened, and encouraged them to put all 
their efforts into solving the divergences so as to conclude the negotiations as soon as possible. He 
suggested that the Committee take note of all the statements made, and agreed to revert to the matter as appropriate at the Committee's next meeting. 
2.19.  It was so agreed. 
3  NON-TARIFF MEASURES WORK PROGRAMME 
3.1. The Chairman recalled that, at the Committee meeting on 14 October 2013, agreement was 
reached on the Swiss proposal to organize an industry-driven workshop dedicated to NTBs 
affecting trade in ICT products. The workshop had taken place on 7 May 2015. In his factual report 
to the Committee, he stated that speakers made clear how NTBs could be trade restrictive in the ICT sector, including a lack of harmonization for globally used standards, and both administrative 
and technical regulations. These created barriers to  trade, increased the costs of compliance, and 
delayed market entry. He said that the industry was unanimous about these problems. Some concrete recommendations were made with re gard to transparency, conformity assessment 
procedures, and e-labelling. There was also encour agement to harmonize practices in the field of 
energy efficiency requirements and to have more global cooperation to avoid forced localization G/IT/M/62 
 
- 6 - 
 
  measures. The full text of his factual report on the workshop was reproduced in the 
document G/IT/28. 
3.2. The representative of Switzerland thanked the Chair for his report. He also thanked the 
Chair and the Secretariat for organizing the wo rkshop. He hoped that the workshop had been 
useful to WTO Members and had allowed them to learn from industry as to how NTBs mattered to 
SMEs, especially those from developing Members. He hoped that the workshop's conclusions would 
lead ITA Participants to kick off new work on NTBs in this Committee. ITA Participants needed to 
act to ensure that trade evolved in a manner that would enhance market access opportunities for 
IT products. In his view, the workshop highlighted some important aspects that would enhance market access opportunities for exporters of IT products, such as the difficulty in getting information on regulations applied to IT products, and the arduous procedure of testing, re-testing, 
in-country testing, and costs that were related thereto. He felt that it was important to standardize 
documents for conformity assessment purposes, and to ensure recognition of test results whenever possible. He said that he had also heard from industry representatives about some 
worrisome trends with regard to forced localization measures, for example, local testing 
requirements. He stated that Switzerland would en courage the incoming Chair to gather informally 
interested Members to try and examine the reco mmendations and avenues that were mentioned 
by industry representatives, and to report by the next Committee meeting on how to monitor more 
closely the developments regarding NTBs in the IT sector. Switzerland was ready to contribute to this work. 
3.3. The representative of the Philippines thanked the Secretariat for enabling the speaker from 
the Philippines to be heard at the workshop. She fo und the workshop to have been very useful and 
hoped that there could be some follow-up work in the Committee. She thought that the EMC/EMI pilot project, which would be discussed under the next agenda item, could be something 
concrete to move the Committee's work on NTBs forward. She said that her delegation was struck 
by what was said by one of the speakers at yesterday's NTB workshop about one standard, one test, and one supplier's declaration of conformity (SDoC). They had also heard from the 
industry yesterday that there were certain parts and components that had already been globally 
recognized. In her view, this again was one of the areas where some concrete work could be pursued. She said that some industry representati ves had told her that they had a list of some of 
these IT products already internationally recognized. Perhaps policymakers could examine that list 
to see how they could try to converge. Of course, a standard by itself might not solve all the 
problems. She agreed with what was pointed ou t by the speaker from the Philippines, that 
equivalence would be something else to which policymakers should give their attention. 
3.4. The representative of Japan thanked the Chair and the Secretariat for having organized the 
workshop. He thought that the workshop was very useful because industry was heard directly. It 
helped the policymakers to understand the issues faced by industry. With regard to the future 
process of the Committee, he said that his delegation recognized that, for some NTB issues, early 
success could be expected, but for others this might be more difficult. He stated that, as his delegation was not clear on how issues should be classified, they would prefer at least for the first stage to have a so-called parallel process, as one of the speakers had mentioned yesterday. 
His delegation was ready to contribute to the discussion on NTBs. 
3.5. The representative of Chinese Taipei appreciated the Chair's and the Secretariat's hard work 
in making the workshop a success. He said that he had heard many positive comments and hoped 
that the comprehensive presentations and the part icipation of the IT industry would help to 
remove the barriers. 
3.6. The representative of the European Union thanked the Chair and the Secretariat for their 
hard work in organizing the workshop, which had turned out to be a very good piece of work and a 
useful exercise. He said that it had clearly shown a strong interest on the part of industry in the Committee's work on NTBs. With a large degree of  consistency among all speakers, NTBs were the 
main concern and focus of the industry. The Chair's report as well as some earlier interventions 
had provided the Committee with some ideas. Thus, it was up to the Committee to better assess 
what could be done. At yesterday's workshop, the Committee had heard proposals from participants, including some step-by-step approaches and realistic objectives. In his view, the 
workshop was a result of the credibility that the WTO and this Committee had vis-à-vis the 
industry. Therefore, it was important not to waste the capital of credibility that all Participants had and were responsible for. In order to meet the expectations of the industry, the Committee should G/IT/M/62 
 
- 7 - 
 
  not lose the momentum created by the workshop, and to the extent possible act sooner rather 
than later. This was also why his delegation supported the suggestion made earlier by Switzerland. His delegation was more than eager to contribute, to the extent possible, to identifying what could be done. He referred to the useful suggestions from the Philippines and Switzerland, and the 
report by the Chair. He said that his delegation looked forward to some practical and effective 
work, and was ready to contribute. 
3.7. The representative of the United States of Amer ica joined others in congratulating the Chair 
and the Secretariat for organizing a successful workshop on NTBs in the ICT sector. She said that 
the event had brought together industry experts from across the globe to discuss emerging issues 
and barriers affecting trade in the ICT sector. They had heard many interesting presentations describing the challenges that faced ICT companie s today, throughout the global supply chain. 
They had also heard some ideas for practical solutions to challenges, such as electronic labelling 
and global alignment of product energy efficien cy requirements. Her delegation was encouraged 
that regulators in several ITA Member countries had already embraced or were actively pursuing 
electronic labelling for ICT devices. She encouraged other ITA Members to consider flexible 
labelling methods that would reduce the burden for ICT companies to comply with conformity 
labelling requirements. She said that her delegation would reflect on the suggestions from industry 
when considering how to move forward the Committee's work on NTBs. 
3.8. The representative of India thanked the Chair and the Secretariat for the tremendous effort 
put into organizing the NTB workshop. He said that his delegation had carefully listened to the 
interventions made by participants, including the suggested ways forward, and would send these, 
as well as the content of yesterday's workshop, including the Chair's report, to the capital for 
examination and further reflection. He stated that, therefore, at the moment, his delegation reserved its right to revert back with comments in due course. 
3.9. The Chairman thanked all delegations for their interventions and kind words, and suggested 
that the Committee take note of the statements made. 
3.10.  It was so agreed. 
4  EMC/EMI PILOT PROJECT – DRAFT LIST OF TYPES OF CONFORMITY ASSESSMENT 
PROCEDURES FOR EMC/EMI USED BY ITA PARTICIPANTS (G/IT/W/17/REV.12) 
4.1. The Chairman recalled that, at the previous meetings of the Committee, Participants had 
indicated that they had found the information contained therein very useful and wished to have it 
completed. To date, among the 50 ITA Participan ts (excluding Afghanistan and the Seychelles), 
29 had provided such information. However, including those most recently joined Participants, there were still a total of 21 Participants who had neither submitted a survey response nor a 
notification regarding the type of assessment proc edures used by their authorities for EMC/EMI. As 
there had not been any update since the last m eeting of the Committee, he suggested that the 
Committee revert to this agenda item at its future meetings. 
4.2. It was so agreed. 
5  DIVERGENCES IN CLASSIFYING INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PRODUCTS 
(G/IT/14/REV.1/ADD.1, G/IT/W/6/REV.3 , G/IT/W/33, G/IT/W/34, G/IT/27, 
JOB/IT/12 AND G/IT/W/40) 
5.1. The Chairman stated that under this agenda item there were two sub-items: first, 
implementation of the Decision, contained in document G/IT/27; and second, the Note by the 
Secretariat, contained in document G/IT/W/40. 
5.2. On the first sub-item, he recalled that on 20 July 2013 the Decision (G/IT/27) regarding the 
endorsement of List IA items of document G/IT/W/6/Rev.3 or the so-called 18 items (as 
reproduced in document G/IT/W/34) was approved. As required by the Decision, each participant 
should reflect the agreed classifications in its WTO Schedule of concessions, as appropriate, and 
following the procedures set forth in the 1980 Decision on Procedures for Modification and Rectification of Schedules of Tariff Concessions (BISD 27S/25). Participants should submit the relevant documentation in connection with such modification no later than 30 April 2014, as G/IT/M/62 
 
- 8 - 
 
  specified in this Decision. The WTO Secretariat should provide technical assistance in making such 
modifications to developing country Participants upon request. He reported that the situation had not changed since the previous meeting of the Committee. The Secretariat had been approached 
by five ITA Participants, namely: Guatemala; the Philippines; Japan; El Salvador; and Macao, 
China; of whom four were developing country Participants. The technical work in the Secretariat 
with regard to these requests was ongoing. It should be noted that the technical work involved in this exercise was time consuming and thus could only be undertaken on a gradual basis. Most 
recently, the Secretariat had prepared a document of rectification and modification at the request 
of the delegation of Macao, China. In anticipation of additional requests, the Secretariat had undertaken a preliminary analysis of the remaining developing country Participants. He urged these developing country Participants to contact the Secretariat if they required technical 
assistance. 
5.3. The Chairman moved to the second sub-item – the Note by the Secretariat on: Divergence 
of Classification: Possible HS2007 Classification for the Remaining 37 "Attachment B" Items, which 
was circulated as document G/IT/W/40, on 17 December 2014, based on the Swiss proposal 
contained in document JOB/IT/12. 
5.4. He recalled that at the previous meeting of the Committee it was agreed that: "Participants 
are expected to submit a communication to the Secretariat no later than 30 June 2015, indicating: 
first, the items that, in the participant's opinion, should be classified differently from the HS2007 codes listed in column 8 of the Annex to this document; and, second, the relevant HS2007 subheading(s) that, in the participant's opinion, are relevant for the classification of the 
item in question." "The Secretariat will compile communications received in a separate document. 
On that basis, participants would then be expected to assess the next steps that could be taken to reduce any remaining divergence in classification." 
5.5. He invited delegations to provide an update under this sub-item. 
5.6. The representative of Norway thanked Switzerl and for its proposal (JOB/IT/12), and for the 
Secretariat for the document G/IT/W/40. She informed the Committee that they had found this to 
be a useful step forward in this important process, and had forwarded a communication with some 
comments to the document. Mostly they agreed, but did have some comments. And they looked forward to following this process closely. 
5.7. The representative of Chinese Taipei stated that his delegation supported Switzerland's 
proposal to move the discussion forward. With regard to document G/IT/W/40, his capital had 
some suggestions and would soon submit these to the Secretariat in writing. 
5.8. The representative of Switzerland agreed wi th the Chair that there had developed some 
dynamism in this regard. He stated that the Swiss delegation had consulted with the Swiss 
customs authorities who were processing inputs for submission before the deadline of 30 June 2015. The Swiss strongly encouraged other participants to do their best to submit the 
information on time, so that the Committee could then go on to assess the next steps. 
5.9. The representative of Hong Kong, China said that her authorities were still studying the 
Secretariat note and would submit their comments before the deadline. 
5.10.  The representative of the United States of America echoed her thanks to the Secretariat for 
the helpful technical work in putting together these lists. She said that her experts in customs 
were working to compile the required classification information for the Committee decision and were working to submit the information to the Secretariat by the 30 June deadline. 
5.11.  The Chairman recalled that 30 June 2015 would be due in less than eight weeks. He urged 
the delegations to indicate their opinions concerning the remaining 37 items to the Secretariat as 
soon as possible. He suggested that the Committee take note of all the statements made. 
5.12.  This was so agreed. G/IT/M/62 
 
- 9 - 
 
  6  NEW PARTICIPANTS 
6.1. The Chairman announced that, upon the Seychelles' accession to the WTO on 26 April 2015, 
its ITA commitment had also been implemented. 
6.2. He also indicated that with the completion of the participation of the Seychelles to the ITA, 
the Committee still had two more draft schedules of ITA commitments that were pending for 
Participants' consideration and approval, name ly the draft schedules of Azerbaijan and 
Kazakhstan. 
7  ELECTION OF CHAIRPERSON 
7.1. The Chairman stated that, pursuant to consultations by the Chairman of the Council for 
Trade in Goods, a consensus had been informally reached on the election of Mr Andrew STAINES 
(the United Kingdom) as the new Chairman of the Committee. 
7.2. The Committee elected Mr Andrew STAINES, by acclamation, as the new Chairman of the 
Committee of Participants on the Expansion of Trade in Information Technology Products. 
7.3. Mr Andrew STAINES assumed his role as Chairman of the Committee. 
7.4. The Outgoing Chairman (Mr Frederic Payot) expressed his thanks to Members of the 
Committee, the Secretariat, and the new Chairman. 
7.5. The Incoming Chairman, Mr Andrew Staines, expressed his appreciation to the outgoing 
Chairman, Mr Frederic Payot, for his valuable contributions to the work of the Committee over the 
past year, and wished him all the best in his future endeavours. He expressed his sincere thanks to Members of the Committee for accepting his nomination and for honouring him with the role of Chairman. He said that he would do his best to facilitate the work of the Committee impartially. 
And he would remain available to Participants for any matter related to the ITA. He would convene 
consultations on the different topics whenever needed. He would be open and in contact with delegations either directly, or via the Secretariat. 
8  OTHER BUSINESS 
- Date of next meeting 
8.1. The Chairman proposed that the next meetin g of the Committee be held on Wednesday, 
14 October 2015. 
8.2. It was so agreed. 
__________