RESTRICTED  WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3 
24 January 2005 
 (05-0275) 
Working Party on the Accession  
of the Russian Federation  
 
 
 
DRAFT REPORT OF THE WORKING PARTY ON THE  
ACCESSION OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION  
TO THE WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION 
 
Addendum   WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3 
 Page i 
 
 
 TABLE OF CONTENTS  
 
General comments ............................................................................................................... ..................1  
Introductory Statements ........................................................................................................ ...............1  
ECONOMY, ECONOMIC POLICIES AND FOREIGN TRADE ...................................................1  
- Fiscal and Monetary Policies ................................................................................................... 1 
- Foreign Exchange and Payments System ...............................................................................2  
- Investment Regime.............................................................................................................. ......4  
- State Ownership and Privatization .........................................................................................7  
- Pricing Policies ............................................................................................................... ...........9  
- Competition Policy............................................................................................................. .....15  
FRAMEWORK FOR MAKING AN D ENFORCING POLICIES .................................................16  
- Powers of Executive, Legislative and Judicial Branches of Government ..........................17  
- Government Entities Responsible for Making and Implementing Policies 
Affecting Foreign Trade – Right of Appeal..........................................................................17  
- Division of Authority between Cent ral and sub-Central Governments ............................18  
POLICIES AFFECTING TRADE IN GOODS ................................................................................19  
Registration Requirements for Import/Export Operations .............................................................19  
- Alcoholic Beverages ............................................................................................................ ....23  
- Pharmaceuticals ................................................................................................................ ......24  
- Precious Stones and Metals....................................................................................................2 5 
- Other licensing requirements.................................................................................................30  
- Encryption Devices ............................................................................................................. ....31  
1. Import Regulations ............................................................................................................. ....31  
- Customs Regulations and Customs Tariff............................................................................31  
- Ordinary Cust oms Duties.......................................................................................................3 4 
- Tariff Quotas .................................................................................................................. .........36  
- Tariff Exemptions .............................................................................................................. .....41  
- Other Duties a nd Charges......................................................................................................4 3 
Other Fees..................................................................................................................... ........................45  
Fees and Charges for Services Rendered and Other Fees................................................................46  
- Application of Internal Taxes on Imports ............................................................................47  
Excise Taxes................................................................................................................... .......................48  
Value-Added Tax ................................................................................................................ .................49  
- Quantitative Import Restrictions, including Prohibitions and Quotas..............................51  
- Import Licensing Systems ......................................................................................................5 5 
- Customs Valuation.............................................................................................................. ....59  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3 
Page ii  
 
 -
 Rules of Origin ................................................................................................................ ........62  
- Other Customs Formalities....................................................................................................63  
- Preshipment Inspection......................................................................................................... .64 
- Balance of Payments............................................................................................................ ...68 
- Anti-Dumping, Countervailing and Safeguard Measures...................................................68  
2. Export Regulations ............................................................................................................. ....71  
- Export Duties.................................................................................................................. .........71  
- Quantitative Export Restrictions, In cluding Prohibitions and Quotas..............................72  
- Export Licensing Procedures.................................................................................................74  
- Other Customs Export  Formalities.......................................................................................76  
3. Internal Policies Affect ing Trade in Goods ..........................................................................77  
- Industrial Policies, Including Subsidies ................................................................................77  
- Technical Barriers to Trade...................................................................................................8 1 
- Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures ..................................................................................89  
- Trade-Related Investment Measures ....................................................................................96  
- State-Trading Enterprises...................................................................................................... 99 
- Free Zones and Special Economic Zones............................................................................103  
- Government Procurement....................................................................................................104  
- Regulation of Trade in Transit ............................................................................................105  
- Policies Affecting Foreign Trade in Agricultural Products ..............................................106  
- Trade in Ci vil Aircraft........................................................................................................ ..109  
TRIPS ......................................................................................................................... .......................110  
1. General........................................................................................................................ ...........110  
Substantive standards of protection, including procedures for the acquisition and 
maintenance of intellectual property rights........................................................................113  
- Geographical Indications .....................................................................................................11 3 
- Inventions and Industrial Designs.......................................................................................113  
- Requirements on undisclosed information, including trade secrets and test data..........113  
POLICIES AFFECTING TRADE IN SERVICES.........................................................................114  
TRANSPARENCY ................................................................................................................... .........117  
FREE TRADE AND CUSTOMS UNION AGREEMENTS..........................................................118  
ANNEX II ....................................................................................................................... ....................120  
 
  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3
 Page 1 
Paragraph No. Comment 
General comments  [EC] 
Fine-tuning of terminology .  
We note that the commitment paragraphs will need to be reviewed on consistency of terminology used. 
 
Implications of Art XVI(4) WTO .  
We note that Art XVI(4) WTO agreement requires that at all levels legislation have to be in conformity with the WTO. We conside r it therefore 
insufficient to refer to an internal system  defining the hierarchy between obligations deriving from international treaties and  national legislation.   
 
Nature of commitments 
We recall that amongst the main purposes of commitments is to pr ovide assurances in reply to concerns raised by Members in the descriptive part. This 
implies that commitments will need the necessary level of detail. 
4-7 Introductory Statements 
 [JPN] 
With regard to the words, "In particular,…size enterprises" refe rred to in the second line of paragraph 5. Japan is of the view  that inclusion of these 
words in the Report needs to be reconsider ed as elements to be included in the Report should be those relating to trade and tra de-related issues. 
8-91 ECONOMY, ECONOMIC PO LICIES AND FOREIGN TRADE 
8-17 Fiscal and Monetary Policies  
 [JPN] 
In the present section, there is a description concerning current policies by the Government of the Russian Federation (e.g. pa ragraphs 9, 10 and 12). As 
policies of the Government may be changed in the future, the present section should focus on the information concerning the ins titutional aspects of the 
Russian Federation's fiscal and monetary field.  
 [USA] 
Paragraph 16 :  Does the term “customs duties” refer to both impor t and export duties?  If so, the text should be revised to in clude that information, as 
indicated below.   
 
 Specific Drafting Suggestions :   
 
Paragraph 16 :  The text should also include a short description of the types of regional and local taxes that can be applied, similar to that given for 
federal taxes and, if available, the relative proportion of fede ral, regional, and local taxes applied to goods and services.  The last portion of paragraph 16 
should be revised to read: 
 
16. . . . . That Law distinguished between federal taxes, regional  taxes, and local taxes.  He noted, that Federal taxes compri sed:  the value-
added tax, excise tax, uniform social tax,  securities transaction tax, customs duties, both import and export,  royalty tax for use of natural 
resources and extraction of minerals, profit tax imposed on legal persons, income tax imposed on natural persons, state duties,  succession and 
gift tax, tax on the use of the word s “Russia,” “the Russian Federation, ” gambling tax and water use tax.  Regional taxes comprised [add list 
of types of taxes] and local taxes comprised [add list of types of taxes].   
 WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3 
Page 2 Paragraph No. Comment 
18-37 Foreign Exchange and Payments System 
 [AUS] 
We request Russia to adopt commitment language in response to th e following paragraphs which we would like to see included in t his section.
 
x. A member of the Working Party considered the provision for the purchase of foreign currency for making advance payments for 
imports requiring the opening of a deposit in the currency of the Russian Federation and the formalities, fees and requirements  associated with 
this provision to be inconsistent with the non-discrimination requirements of Artic le III of GATT 1994 and the requirements of Article XI of 
GATT 1994 and Article 4 of the Agreement on Agriculture, and calle d upon the Russian Federation to explain how these measures w ill be 
eliminated no later than the date of accession. 
 x. A member of the Working Party considered the mandatory requir ement to transfer [x] per cent of the currency earnings of expo rters to 
the domestic currency to be an unjustifiable export restriction und er Article XI of GATT 1994, and by restricting the subsequen t use of foreign 
currency for imports to also be inconsistent with Article III of GATT 1994, and called upon the Russian Federation to explain h ow these 
measures will be eliminated no later than the date of accession.. 
 [EC] 
Descriptive part : further clarifications are necessary on surrender and on prepayment  requirements. We note that this section  refers to a maxi mum level 
for the surrender requirement of 30% but that  the Central Bank lowered recently to 15%. 
 
Commitment : the commitment proposed by Members will need to be updated. We note that the commitment proposed by the Russian Federation is  no 
basis for discussions. 
 [JPN] 
1. The contents of and the basic framework established by "On Currency Regulation and Currency Control" should be mentioned at the  beginning of 
the present section. 
 
2. For the sake of ensuring a fair balance in  the contents of the present section, the element that foreigners are allowed to tran smit the currency up to 
US$10,000 without supporting document since February 2003 as a measure of liberalization of the export of currency out of the R ussian Federation 
should be included in  the present section. 
 
3. The subparagraph 2 of paragraph 31 which requests the Russian Federation to abolish fr om the date of the accession to the WTO s eems to be 
referring to the requirement for importers that they are requested to make a deposit in Rubles corresponding to the amount of t he advance payment 
paid in foreign currency. Th erefore, subparagraph 2 should be drafte d in order to clearly reflect the above. 
 4. The element that a resident of Russian must obtain advance approval from the Ministry of Finance to convert Rubles into foreign  currency to make 
related payments of more than US$10,000 to a non-resident Russian under a contract for provision of services should be included  in the present 
section as a currency control issue. And the Russian Federation's response to the above should also be included in the Report. 
 
5. With regard to the issue of limitation on the period between ad vanced payment and customs clearan ce, a reference that a Member raised the issue 
should be included in the pres ent section together with the Russian side's reply thereon.    
  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3
 Page 3Paragraph No. Comment 
 [NOR] 
We request that the Russian Federation eliminates its import pr epayment and export surrender re quirements upon accession, as pr oposed in paragraph 36 
of the Draft Report of the Working Party. 
 [USA] 
Requests for Information or Clarifications That Should be Reflected in the Text :   
 
Paragraphs 26-27 :  The text states that the Russian Federatio n has the authority to require “r eservation and use of special ba nk accounts” until 
1 January 2007, but that the Government is not using the instruments provided in Article 7 of Federal Law 173-FZ , as amended b y Federal Law 58-FZ 
of June 2004, to regulate currency transactions pertaining to capital movement.   
 - The text should clarify what guidance or limitation exists in  the new Law on Russia’s application of this measure, the import  prepayment 
requirement, the foreign exchange surrender requirements, or any tax on foreign exchange acquisition. 
- A specific list of products subject to the import prepayment requi rement should be described, if it exists, and its relationshi p to the list of 
“Commodity Classification of Foreign Economic Activities” clarified in the text. 
 
Paragraph 30 :  The meaning of the statement “the mandatory su rrender requirement was in force until 1 January 2007” should be clarified in the text. 
 
The text should be updated to note that the minimum level of foreign exchange subject to surrender requirements has been reduce d further, to 10 
percent, and the timeframe. 
 
Paragraphs 32 and 34 :  Russia has indicated that prior import de posit requirements, still authorized by the new Currency law ( Law No. 173-FZ of 
10 December 2003 “On Currency Regulation and Currency Control,” as amended by Federal Law 58-FZ of June 2004), are not now enfo rced.   
 
- The text should clarify Russia’s intentions on enforcement of  such requirements and indicate the WTO-consistent conditions un der which 
reinstatement could occur.   
 
Elements of a Commitment
: 
- Confirm that from the date of  accession, advance import prepayme nt and the tax on foreign exch ange acquisition will not be ap plied and will 
not be re-introduced. 
- Confirm that mandatory foreign exchange surrender requirements will be eliminated no later than 1 January 2007 and will not b e re-introduced 
after their elimination.   
 WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3 
Page 4 Paragraph No. Comment 
38-47 Investment Regime 
 [CAN] 
Specific Problems:  
 1. In paragraph 54, Russia states that:  
 
"Furthermore, pursuant to Federal Law No. 160-FZ of "On Foreign Investments in the Russian Federa tion" foreigners were allowed to participate in 
privatization of federal and municipal property, state and municipal enterprises, etc., if the Government decides otherwise in each individual case." 
 
Could Russia explain the circumstances under which foreigners would be prevented from participating in a privatization process?  
 
2. In paragraph 47, Russia states that: 
 "Article 4.1 of Federal Law No.160-FZ of 9 July 1999 "On Fore ign Investments in the Russian Federation" ensured national treatm ent for foreign 
investors.  However, exceptions could be imposed, for example,  if required to protect the fundamental constitutional requiremen ts or to ensure 
national security and defence interests, public order, morals , health, right and legitimate interests of other persons." 
 
Could Russia explain what "right and legitimate interests of other persons" means?  How is this exception applied?  Does "right  and legitimate 
interests of other persons" refer only to domestic persons, or are the interests of foreign persons considered under this excep tion?  Where can 
Canada find additional information on this exception and its application? 
 3. Paragraph 40 of the Working Party Report states: 
 
"He noted that for national security reas ons, foreign nationals and foreign legal entities could not own agricultural land, lan d located in the border 
territories determined as such by Presiden t of the Russian Federation in accordance with  federal laws on State Border of the Ru ssian Federation, or 
in closed administrative areas and other te rritories of the Russian Federation as specially stipulated by federal laws.  Border  zones were, as a rule, 
established within five kilometers (of the ward, city) from the State Border, the sea coast, banks of border rivers, lakes and other reservoirs and 
within the territories of the islands of these reservoirs." 
 
This section of the report states that "a s a rule", border zones are "established with in five kilometers (of the ward, city) fr om the State Border, the 
sea coast, banks of border rivers, lakes and other reservoirs and within the territories of the islands of these reservoirs."    Are there any exceptions 
to this "rule" for determining border zones?  Could Russia pleas e confirm that territory around "lakes" and "sea coast" is only  considered "border 
territory", and therefore not available for ownership by a foreig n national, when it lies within five kilometers of the border?  
 
Possible Solutions and Drafting Proposals:
 
 
1. Russia should add a sentence that explains what factors are used to determine foreign participation in privatization of federal  and municipal 
property, state and municipal enterprises, etc.  Furthermore, can Russia explain why this discrimination is in their interest? 
2. Russia could solve this problem in the text by adding some info rmation on the term "right and legitimate interests of other per sons" such as  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3
 Page 5Paragraph No. Comment 
how it is defined and applied and if it applies to persons other than domestic persons. 
3. Russia could solve this problem by changing the text as follows: 
 
"Border zones were, as a rule, established  are defined as territory  within five kilometers (of the ward , city) from the State Border, the sea 
coast, banks of border rivers, lakes and other reservoirs and within the territories of the islands of these reservoirs." 
 Russia should further clarify that "border zo nes" are the same as "border territory", wh ich is earlier referred to in the parag raph, or define 
how border territory is determined, if these two words do not have the same meaning. 
 [EC] 
Descriptive part . 
Concerns to be addressed include: 
 
- investment incentives : examples given are not complete, whilst this  section serves to give a picture of the relevant investmen t incentives which 
the Russian Federation has in place. The list should be completed. 
- Exceptions to NT for foreign investors: a new paragraph has been included in third revision of  the draft Working Party Report  stating that 
there are exceptions to NT. So far, the understanding was that there were no excep tions. Whilst Russia has a right to put limit s on foreign 
investors, the way the paragraph is drafted gives the impression th at decisions on exceptions can be taken on an ad-hoc basis a nd without any 
clear criteria. This could imply that ma rket access commitments can be jeopardised. 
 
Commitment.  
No commitment has been proposed in the Working Party Report. Depending on the clarifications provided for in the descriptive pa rt, we may request 
assurances in the form of a commitment to confirm that exceptio ns to NT of foreign investors will not undermine market access c ommitments in GATS 
or GATT. 
 [JPN] 
1. In paragraph 40, only Articles' number of "Land Code" is mentione d. Therefore, the contents of these Articles should be briefly  explained.  
2. In paragraph 40, it provides that "for national security reason s, foreign nationals and foreign legal entities could not own ag ricultural land, land 
located in the border territories determined as such by the Pr esident of the Russian Federation."  We would like to know how a mechanism for 
avoiding the situation where the above-mentioned land would be determined arbitrarily and in a not transparent manner will be e nsured.  
3. As both paragraphs 40 and 42 deal with the same subject matter,  they could be merged. As regard s agricultural land lease, parag raph 42 provides 
that foreign national persons, foreign legal entities and legal entities with foreign participation exceeding 50 % are permitte d to leasehold up to 49 
years. Is it possible to renew this leasehold?  If so, procedures pertaining to renewal should be mentioned briefly.  
4. In paragraph 43, it states that the number of BITs concluded by the Russian Federation is 57. We would like to seek clarificati on from the Russian 
Federation on how many out of 57 BITs have signed, but yet to be concluded. 
5. In paragraph 44, reference is made to the investment incentives to foreign investors. It should be clarified whether these ince ntive measures are 
compatible with the WTO agreements includi ng the TRIMs Agreement. And the Russian Fede ration's commitment to that effect is req uired. 
6. In paragraph 47, it states that national treatment for foreign investors is ensured pursuant to "On Foreign Investments in the Russian Federation", 
however, certain exceptions are enumerated. We would like to s eek clarification from the Russian Federation on what the terms " protect the 
fundamental constitutional requirements" and "right and legitimate interests of other persons" mean concretely. We would also l ike to seek  
 WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3 
Page 6 Paragraph No. Comment 
clarification from the Russian Federation on whether "national security interests" refe rred to in the second sentence of paragr aph 47 are only those 
that are indicated as "the following security related restricti ons (i)…,(ii)……" referred to in the third sentence of the same p aragraph. In any event, 
the Russian Federation's commitment to the e ffect that these exceptions are fully comp atible with the WTO agreements is require d.  
 [SUI] 
In paragraph 45 it is mentioned that "foreign investors, inte r alia, has the right to export without hindrance any revenues, et c ... after fulfilment of tax 
and other obligations. "  
Switzerland is of the opinion that from its nature the free transf er should not be restricted in such a manner, in other words fulfilment of a contractual 
obligation, e. g. a debatable claim should not be per se a basis for restricting the free transfer. It might be helpful to lear n what kind of concrete criteria 
would form sufficient grounds for the competent Ru ssian authority to restrict the free transfer.  
In paragraph 47 it was indicated by Members during the Working Party meeting, that some additional information would be very he lpful to understand 
the implication of paragraph 47 in terms of investment. Please elaborate on the meaning of "fundamental constitutional requirem ents" and "legitimate 
interests of other persons". Which are the criteria to consider that other persons have legitimate interests in order to restri ct national treatment for foreign 
investors and are these domestic or foreign interests?  
 [USA] 
Paragraph 41 :  Confirm in the text the statement by the representative of the Russian Federation made at the November 2004 mee ting of the Working 
Party that “the pre-emptive right to purchase or l ease real property or land applies to foreigners.”  
 Paragraph 42 :  Confirm in the text that agricultural land leas es may be extended, by mutual agreement between investors and th e responsible authorities, 
beyond the 49-year period indicated. 
 
Paragraph 47 :  Restore information in this section recorded in previous versions of the draft WP  report text deleted from Rev. 3, i.e.: 
  - on how foreign investors can acquire information on investment opportunities; and   
- the quote from Article 4.2  of the Foreign Investment Law that “restrictions for foreign investors could be imposed by the fe deral legislation 
solely to the extent which is necessary for the protection of the fundamentals of the constitutional system, morality, health, rights and legitimate 
interests of other persons, ensuring the defence and security of the state.”   
 
Additional information should be provided on: - the definition of the term, “right and legitimate interests of other persons” which is regarded as grounds for denial of nati onal treatment; 
- the legal basis and any regulatory or judicial interpretations of this phrase; 
- any additional circumstances/conditions (other than those specified in the Law on Foreign Investment) under which foreign inv estment can be 
restricted under Russian law. 
 
Specific Drafting Suggestions
: 
Paragraphs 40 and 47 both contain information on foreigners’ right to own land in Russia.  The information in these paragraphs should be consolidated 
for clarity.   
   
  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3
 Page 7Paragraph No. Comment 
Elements of a Commitment : 
- Pending:  Depending upon responses to our requests for further information in the text and developments in services negotiati ons, a more 
detailed commitment may be required for clarity.  
48-60 State Ownership and Privatization  
 [EC] 
Descriptive part  
Some aspects of the descriptive part in this section will need to  be discussed/reviewed in connection with the section on state  trading enterprises. 
Paragraph 53 and 54 could be drafted with more clarity.   
Commitment
.  
We attach importance to the general idea reflected behind the commi tment proposed by Members. We consider the transparency comm itment to contain 
a relevant signal and we consider that there is a systemic intere st for such commitment. We also  consider that this commitment needs to be completed 
with an appropriate instrument through whic h Members will be informed on a regular basis about the developments in the privatis ation programmes and 
other economic reforms relevant for WTO obligations. 
 [JPN] 
In paragraph 56, there is a detail explanation on unitary enterp rises. In view of nature and activities of unitary enterprises,  it is appropriate to provide a 
description on unitary enterprises in the section of "State-tradi ng enterprises" comprehensively.  Therefore, if necessary, we s hould provide a cross 
reference concerning unitary enterprises in this present section. 
 [SUI] 
According to paragraph 54 foreign participation in privatization of selected industries , is now governed by Federal Law No 160-FZ (1999) "On 
Foreign Investment in the Russian Federation". According to this law, foreign investors are allowed to participate in the priva tization of federal and 
municipal property, unless the Government decided otherwise in each individual case . Could the Russian Federation please elaborate on the specific 
criteria and on the basis which are used in these cases? 
Paragraph 57:  Please provide a copy of the programme of privatiza tion of State assets in 2004 that  have been approved by the R ussian Government in 
July 2003. 
Paragraph 58 (Progress achieved in the privatization process):  Could the Russian Federation provide information on the new rou nd of privatisation that 
the Russian authorities have recen tly announced which is intende d to take place during 2005-2007?  
 [USA] 
As this section in WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3 focuses almost exclusively on the Russian Federation’s privatization program and gi ven that 
discussion of state-owned and state trading enterprises has been substantially entwined in WP deliberations, we suggest placing  information addressing 
State ownership in an expanded section on “State-owned and State Trading Enterprises” and renaming this section “Privatization. ”   
 
Requests for Information or Clarifications That Should be Reflected in the Text:   
Paragraph 49 :  Federal Law No. 160-FZ “On Foreign Investment in  the Russian Federation” should be added to the list of investm ent laws.  (See 
paragraph 54). 
Paragraph 54 :  The text should clarify th e criteria that the government uses in its  case-by-case decisions on whether a foreig ner can participate in the 
privatization of federal and municipal property. Paragraph 55 :  The text should also include information on state “ownership” based on less than 50 percent equity including in stances where the  
 WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3 
Page 8 Paragraph No. Comment 
government can exercise management control (i.e. to prevent or direct an enterprise’s actions in certain situations, through a “golden share” or similar 
mechanism). 
Tables 2 and 3, reporting on privatizations in the periods 1993-2001 should be updated.    
Paragraph 57 :  The text should indicate where the Government’s new privatization program for the period 2004-2006 is published , and should describe 
the following: - its provisions for enterprises exempted from privatization by name or without Presidential order; 
- if such exemptions applied only to unitary or “strategic” enterprises; and 
- if there is a new list of  state unitary enterprises and joint stock holdings exempted from privatization.  
The text should also clarify the relationship of the ne w privatization program to the two previous programs. 
  
Specific Drafting Suggestions
:     
Restore the information on Russia’s privatization plans provided below (as provided in WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.2) after paragraph 57 of 
WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/Rev.3:  
 
“Thus, the Government continued the privatisation process, liquidating its financial holdings in many economic sectors where th e state still had owned 
assets.  In 2004, the Government intended to privatise stakes in all remaining incorporated companies where it owned less than 25% of the shares.  In its 
programme for further privatization, the Government excepted from selling only those assets that are either banned from privati sation by law or have 
'strategic importance'. For instance, the government planned to keep its stakes in electricity companies until the completion o f the reform of Unified 
Energy Systems (UES). The Government also planned to keep its stake in Gazprom and other companies in natural gas production an d distribution. 
Their future privatisation would be organised separately, as part of reform of the gas monopoly. The government also planned to  keep some of the 
transport infrastructure (e.g. some airports) in state ownership.  Rail privatisation would also be handled separately, within t he railway reform 
programme. 
 In 2005, the government plans to sell stakes in all remaining in corporated companies where it owns  stakes of shares of between 25% and 50%. This 
means that the state will no longer have a direct financial or equity ownership presence in firms and enterprises involved in m achine-building, foreign 
trade, banking, coal-mining, textiles, car-making, tim ber, fisheries, cinema production and distribution. 
In 2006, the government will sell companies in which it owns stakes over 50% and which do not have 'strategic value' as defined  in . . . . . . It will no 
longer directly participate in the financial aspects or commercia l management of airlines and ai rports, the chemical and petroc hemical industries, 
printing, geological prospecting and agriculture.”  
Elements of a Commitment
: 
Paragraphs 59-60 :  We support the commitment text in para graph 59 as a basis to build a commitment in this section.     
  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3
 Page 9Paragraph No. Comment 
61-85 Pricing Policies 
 [AUS] 
1. We request Russia adopt the following commitment language in this section in relation to minimum prices on alcohol (subject of paragraph 67) 
applied at the retail level to both domestic and imported products.  
67. […]  A member of the Working Party noted however that WTO jurisprudence had established that a regulation requiring that do mestic 
and imported products both adhere to a mi nimum-price requirement is not consistent with Article III of GATT 1994 because the im ported 
product is prevented from being supplied at a price below that of the domestic product.  This member asked how the minimum pric e 
requirements for vodka, liquor products and other alcohol stronger than 28 per cent will be brought into conformity with Articl e III by the date 
of accession.  The representative of th e Russian Federation replied […]. 
 
2. We seek inclusion in the text of approp riate factual references to administered pr ices for agricultural products, as a basis  for commitment 
language.  In addition to this factual information we seek:  
- inclusion, as appropriate, in Tables 4 and 5 of such information relating to the administered prices applied in 2004 (if any); 
- insertion of the following paragraph after amended paragraph 67: 
 
 
67A. In reply to a question from a member of the Working Part y, the representative of the Russi an Federation confirmed that gov ernment 
purchases of a number of agricultural products were undertaken at pre-announced administ ered prices in order to provide market price support 
to domestic producers.  Programs had been operated to undertake such purchases at administered prices of cattle, sheep and goat s, pork, 
poultry, dairy products, eggs, wool, wheat, rye, corn, barley, sunflower seeds, sugar beets, flax and hemp, and potatoes.  This  list of such 
products is exhaustive.  However, in recent years such purchases were undertaken only for [milling wheat in […]] […].  In reply  to another 
question from this member, the representative of the Russian Federation confirmed that no regulations were applied that could p revent imports 
of any like product mentioned in this paragraph from being supplied at a price below that of the domestic product. 
 
3. We note that the world price-contingent tariffs for imported raw cane sugar introduced on 1 January 2004 is based on a varia ble import levy, 
and that the internal reference price for the levy falls to the range US$347 to US$369 per tonne when the world price of sugar is between US$0.045 and 
US$0.090 per pound.  We request that: 
 - the internal reference price range of US$347 to US$369 per tonne (when the world price of raw cane sugar is in the range US$0.0 45 to 
US$0.090 per pound) for this variable import levy be recorded in Table 4; 
 - a column be added to Tables 4-6 for the "legal basis for the pr ice measure", and another column added for the "WTO justificatio n or date of 
elimination".  In this column we seek a reference to the elim ination of these internal reference prices, and the variable impor t levy used to 
establish them, before the date of accession; 
 
- the insertion of the following paragraph after the proposed paragraph 67A: 
  
 WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3 
Page 10 Paragraph No. Comment 
67B. In reply to a question from a member of the Working Party, the representative of the Russian Federation confirmed that wor ld price-
contingent tariffs for imported raw cane sugar had been introduc ed on 1 January 2004 and that such an arrangement was based on a variable 
import levy.  The internal reference price for this variable levy  fell to the range, US$347 to US$369 per tonne when the world price of sugar 
fell to the range, US$0.045 to US$0.090 per pound.  The member concerned sought details of how the internal reference prices an d the variable 
import levy that established them would be eliminated before acce ssion to achieve conformity with  the prohibition on measures o f this kind 
under Article 4 of the Agriculture Agreement.  The representative of the Russian Federation said […]. 
 
4. The title and contents of Table 5 taken together suggest that  Sub-Federal Executive Bodies do not have powers to regulate pr ices, including to 
impose mark-up restrictions, for any agricultural product.  We seek clarification as to whether this is correct, and:  
- if so, the insertion of the following text after paragraph 69: 
 
69A. In response to a question by a member of the Working Party, the representative of the Russian Federation confirmed that Su b-Federal 
Executive Bodies did not have any powers to regulate prices, including to impose mark-up restrictions, for any agricultural pro duct and 
accordingly did not maintain or apply such regulations. 
 
- if not, details of the price regulations (including mark-up rest rictions) in Table 5, elaboration of the powers of Sub-Federal Executive Bodies in 
the context of paragraph 69, and descriptions of any such measures applied by these bodies. 
 
5. We note Russia provided details of ceiling prices applied under the "Program for Federal Budget Compensation of 30 per cent for Mineral 
Fertilizer and Chemical Plant Protection Product Costs" in  its Non Paper No.13 of 24 September 2002.  We seek: 
- inclusion in Tables 4 and/or 5, of details relati ng to the ceiling prices applied under this program; 
 
- insertion after paragraph 69 the following paragraph: 
 
69B. In reply to a question from a member of the Working Party, the representative of the Russian Federation confirmed that cei ling prices 
were applied to purchases under auctioned state contracts under the "Program for Federal Budget Compensation of 30 per cent for  Mineral 
Fertilizer and Chemical Plant Protection Product Costs".  He also  confirmed that the Agriculture Ministry and Sub-Federal bodie s applied 
mark-up restrictions on, and fixed service charges relating to, the sale of mineral fertilizers and chemical plant protection p roducts supplied to 
agricultural producers under this program.   
 [CAN] 
General Comments:  
 
In paragraph 74, there is a good description of the problem with energy prices that do not fully reflect production costs and a  reasonable profit.  
However, there is unacceptable Russian text which suggests it is not a subsidy, that it may not be resolved in a timely manner and may not be addressed 
at all for gas consumers in remote locati ons.  The current commitment la nguage lacks specificity in its description of the cost s that must be covered in 
gas prices and fails to provide a timeline for reforming the current pricing regime. 
 
  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3
 Page 11Paragraph No. Comment 
Specific Problems:  
 
- Despite questions raised by Canada and others, Russia continues to insist in paragraph 77 that its system of state control of e nergy pricing does 
not, under the terms of the WTO Agreement on Subsidies and Coun tervailing Measures (SCM), constitute a countervailable subsidy.  
- Canada does not agree with this interpretation and would like to a much fuller explanation of how non-market pricing on input p roducts (gas, 
electricity, oil) used by industries (fer tilizers) could not be countervailable.  
- In Canada's view, the system of such state control on energy pricing is clearly covered by the definition of subsidy in the SCM  Agreement. 
- There is no indication of when gas pricing reflecting the cost of production and a reasonable profit would be achieved.  Paragr aph 75 refers to it 
"not occurring overnight'.  Paragraph 76 suggests it might not occur until 2020.  The draft commitment text in paragraph 83 has  no time frame 
associated with it. 
- The draft commitment text in paragraph 83 does not provide a sufficiently detailed description of the different cost elements t hat need to be 
covered in determining the appropriate cost of gas (N.B. the fertilizer industry is working on this). 
- Paragraph 76 indicates that gas consumers in remote locations are not subject to price setting based on cost recovery plus a pr ofit.  Fertilizer 
production occurs in remote locations. 
- We also note that several references to telecoms services in this section have been changed or deleted. Specifically, the previ ous version 
identified telecom as one of the sectors considered to be a na tural monopoly (i.e. it used the phrase "electric and postal comm unication 
services," and "electric" was de fined as including telecom services: para. 63, footnote 4). The new version of the report delet es the references to 
telecoms and "electric" and now merely lists "postal and communi cation services"; it is not clear whether this still includes t elecommunications. 
Could the report be clarified in this regard? 
 
 
Possible Solutions and Drafting Proposals:  
 - In general, there is a need for a much fu ller explanation of how non-market pricing on input products (gas, electricity, oil) u sed by industries 
(fertilizer) could not be countervailable.  
- Paragraph 75 must be modified to remove the reference to gas pr icing reform not occurring overnight.  This is not an accurate r eference to what 
Members recognized. 
- Paragraph 77 needs to be redrafted to substantiate why non-market gas prices are not a subsidy or removed. 
- Paragraph 83 needs to be redrafted to: 
 
- indicate that gas pricing for industria l users will be reformed upon accession; 
 - include a more fulsome description of th e currently enumerated costs to be reflected  in gas prices for industrial users; and  
 - clearly state that the Energy Strategy of the Russian Federa tion referenced in paragraph 76 will be changed to meet the obli gations in -
 paragraph 83 upon accession, including gas pric ing reform for industries in remote locations. 
 [EC] 
Descriptive part  
 
The following issues will need to be resolved: 
  
 WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3 
Page 12 Paragraph No. Comment 
- Natural monopolies. We take note of the definition of natural monopolies provided for in Russia's legislation but disagree with  the economic 
rationale for such definition and are concerned about the room th is definition may leave for arbitrary extension of these exclu sive rights. We do 
not wish to explicitly or implicitly recognise this definition. We therefore propose to delete any definition based on Russia's  legislation. 
- Discriminatory railway fees. We are concerned about the step back wards as compared to rev2, in particular deletion of the inten tions to 
harmonise railway freight fees for exports destinations through la nd border points with domestic destinations (including Russia n ports). We 
request a redrafting of this secti on reflecting adequately the current situation and future prospects. 
 
The EU is satisfied with paragraph 83 on gas pricing and with paragraph 67 on alcoholic beverages.  
 Commitment
 
 
The commitment will need to include the following elements  
- The commitment proposed by Members contain the elements we would like to see addressed. The concrete language may need to be fi ne-tuned. 
We disagree with Russia's view that GATS is irrelevant for price controls. The sentence on alcoholic beverages may need to be r edrafted and 
taken up on the reply given in paragraph 67. 
- A commitment to eliminate the discriminatory elements in Russia´s railway freight fees will need to  be added, i.a. the equalisa tion of tariffs for 
domestic destinations (including to and from Russian ports) a nd international itineraries using a land border crossing (both im ports and 
exports). We consider this commitment can be met through introd uction of harmonised railway freight fees. We consider this comm itment will 
meet requirements of Articles III and XI GATT. We note that a si milar commitment is necessary in the section on Transit in orde r to avoid 
differentiated fees for goods transiting Russia as compared to domestic fees. 
- Even if for the EU the question of gas price and of alcoholic beverages have been resolved, the commitment paragraph will need to be 
completed for these two points: paragraph 83 could be removed af ter the general commitment, and brackets around "the Working Pa rty took 
note of this commitment" should be removed. For alcoholic be verages, paragraph 67 should be retaken in a commitment.  
 [JPN] 
1. In paragraph 62, the definition of "natural monopoly" is provided. From the structural point of view concerning the present sec tion, such 
definition should be in the footnote ra ther than placed in the text itself. 
2. We would like to clarify the difference between "local natural monopoly" referred to in paragraph 69 and "natural monopoly" ref erred to in 
paragraph 62. 
3. In paragraphs 70-73, information on tariffs for railways as well prices for cargoes is provided. However, it should be more sim plified and 
concise. From this point of view, we should re-consider including the contents of structural reform of the railway system in th e Report. 
4. Since the first sentence of the paragraph 76 only states the legal status concerning underground resources in general and is no t much related to 
these paragraphs dealing with the prices of gas, it should either be deleted or be moved to some other appropriate places. 
5. In paragraph 75, reference is made to the Russian Federation's regu latory reform in the energy fi eld in a sympathetic way. We s hould re-
consider the necessity of inclusion of this reference in the Report. Given the lengthy description on gas prices and in light o f making the section 
concise, we should consider deletion of such reference. 
6. Since paragraphs 81-83 describe gas pri ces, it is appropriate to place them afte r paragraph 77 in light of sequence.  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3
 Page 13Paragraph No. Comment 
 [NOR] 
We thank the Russian delegation for the information provided with regard to railway tariffs and the reform of the railway syste m in paragraphs 70 – 73.  
We would, however, appreciate more exact info rmation as to when the second stage of the unification of tariffs will be implemen ted, and the current 
discriminatory pricing for transportation of  railway freight be fully eliminated.  
 
The pricing of natural gas (except when sold for domestic household consumption), and especially the impact of dual pricing in favour of manufacturing 
industry such as the fertilizers industry, will have to  be further discussed (c.f. paragraphs 74 - 85).  
We would appreciate further information about the refo rm of the gas sector as mentioned in paragraph 78.  
 [SUI] 
As regards the future unification of railway freight tariffs mentioned in paragraphs 71, 72 and 73 , additional information needs to be added on the 
second stage of tariff unifica tion, specifically how and when the elimination of the discrimination between domestic and foreig n railway freight rates 
would be completed and if the harmonization concerns only imports or also imports and exports and in which cases. 
If we have understood paragraph 73 correctly, the same pricing scheme on import-export cargoes and domestic products would be c ompleted in 2005. 
Please confirm this and specify how it will be realised. 
Paragraph 73:  what do you mean by "competitive sectors"? 
 [USA] 
Requests for Information or Clarifications That Should be Reflected in the Text :   
 
Paragraph 71 :  When will Price-List 10-01 be extended to im port cargos shipped through Russia’s border land checkpoints?   
Paragraph 73 :  The description of the second phase of the reform  program (2003-2005) for the railw ay sector states that this i nvolves “the transition to 
free pricing in competitive sectors.” 
 
- Additional information should be included in the text on the stat us of this transition, on whic h sectors are considered compe titive, and whether 
a “transition to free pricing” has occurred for any sector. 
 
The Russian Federation should discuss in the text what it considers to be the “cost of production, overhead, financing charges,  transportation, 
maintenance and upgrade of extraction and distribution infrastructure, investment in the exploration and development of new fie lds.”  (Note:  This 
material should be added in a separate paragraph in the factual part of the section, to support what is suggested by Russia in paragraph 83.  End note). 
 
Specific Drafting Suggestions :  
  Paragraph 62, penultimate sentence:  Replace the words “natural m onopoly sectors included. . .” with the words “the natural mon opoly sectors consisted 
of” preceding the list of natural monopoly sectors, to make the text consistent with the statement in the following sentence indi cating that the list is 
exhaustive.   Paragraph 76 :  The statement that "except those situated in remote geographical [sic] locations," implicitly acknowledges that  cost-recovery-based 
pricing does not apply in remote areas, thus leaving open the possibility that some industrial enterprises situated in such loc ations will continue to 
receive below-cost gas.     
 WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3 
Page 14 Paragraph No. Comment 
- Does paragraph 76 apply to both industries and households?  It is our understanding, based on statements such as that in para graph 83, that 
pricing of natural gas sold to households and non-commercial cons umers is “based on considerations  of domestic social policy.”  The reference 
in paragraph 76 to “all gas co nsumers” needs clarification. 
- The paragraph should indicate how "remote"  locations are defined and approximately what proportion of customers receives such  treatment. 
- We question the statement that “the deregulated price . . . is close  to the regulated price.” (Emphasis added).  Additional language should be 
provided in paragraph 76 reflecting the following information, wh ich Russia provided previously to the Working Party, as follow s:  
 
- For new industrial customers, and fo r any increased quantity of gas supplied by Gazprom to its existing customers, and for gas from 
producers other than Gazprom,  the price of gas is was not regulated .. and that t The unregulated price was generally 30 to 40 percent 
higher than the regulated price.  Approximately 70 percent of natural gas in Russia is sold at the regulated price and 30 percent 
is sold at the unregulated price.   
 
 
Paragraph 78 :  The current status of Order No. 12/1 must be clarified, i.e., is it repealed, suspended, simply not applied?   
 - The following statement should be added to the text:  “Price reductions are not being pr ovided to any other industries.”
 
 
Paragraphs 81-83:  These paragraphs remain unclear.  Paragraphs  75-76 imply that for an interim period, price increases for na tural gas will be needed 
to achieve the basic principle also stated in paragraph 76, i.e., ensuring economically viable production and recovery of costs , which also includes costs 
of investments done or planned, and recovery of profits. 
 
- Specific drafting suggestions for Paragraph 82 :   
 
82.    Members of the Working Party noted that discussions in the Working Party had served to clarify the pricing of gas.  Howe ver, those 
Members remained concerned that the regulated price for gas used by industrial consumers was not fixed at a level that permitte d a gas supplier 
a full and proper recovery of all costs and an amount for profit.  According to a detailed examination of the costs required fo r production and 
sustainability of production of natural gas,  the World Bank (as referenced in the most  recent OECD Economic Survey of the Feder ation of 
Russia) has estimated Gazprom’s full long run marginal cost of producing natural gas at US$35 to US$40 per thousand cubic meter s.  They 
also pointed out that Gazprom entered into a long-term contract to purchase natural gas from Turkmenistan (April 2003) at US$44  per thousand 
cubic meters, which indicates that Gazprom ma y be unable over the long term to produ ce gas itself at lower a price.  They reque sted a 
confirmation from the Russian Federation that gas suppliers would act on the basis of commercial considerations, based on full recovery of 
costs and a reasonable profit. 
 
Elements of a Commitment : 
 Following are specific drafting suggestions to clarify the commitment in paragraph 83 :  
 
83.    In response to the concerns expressed, the representative of the Russian Federation indicated
 stated  that immediately upon accession 
producers/distributors of natural gas in Russia would  will operate within the relevant regulatory framework on the basis of normal commercial  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3
 Page 15Paragraph No. Comment 
considerations, based on recovery of costs and profit.  He confirmed that his Government’s policy was to  will, in regulating prices,  ensure 
immediately upon acce ssion, and thereafter,  that these economic operators, in respect of  their supplies to industrial users, would will recover 
their costs (including the cost of production, overheads, financing charges, transportation, maintenance and upgrade of extract ion and 
distribution infrastructure, investment in the exploration and development of new fields) and will would be able to make a reasonable profit, in 
the ordinary course of their business.  He added that his Government would continue to price supplies for to households and other non-
commercial users, based on considerations of domestic social policy.  [ The Working Party took note of this commitment.]  
 
In addition, the text of paragraph 84 is a good starting point for development of a general commitment for this section, includ ing the following elements: 
a date, by which time Russia will unify its railway rates; - as indicated in the redraft of paragraph 83, a clear statemen t of when the elements of this commitment will take effect; 
- that application of price controls on goods and services w ill be in a manner consistent with  Russia’s WTO obligations, includ ing Article III:9 of 
GATT 1994; 
- that price controls will not be used for purposes of affording protection to domestic industr ies or service providers; 
- that there will be full transparency in: (1) the process by wh ich gas is rationed domestically at the regulated price; (2) th e methodology and 
process by which regulated gas prices are determined; and, (3) the unbu ndling of the accounts of Gazp rom and its subsidiaries a ccording to 
activity – production, transp ortation, processing, storage and distribution; and  
- that during the interim betw een the date of accession and the date when pri ces will permit full cost recovery, including futu re investment costs, 
54in particular the text should specify that “the percentage of gas sold to industrial users at unregulate d  prices will increase  [by X 
percent] each year.”  
86-91 Competition Policy 
 [CAN] 
General Comments:  
 
Although summarized, the text does provide a considerable level of detail on the efforts/activities of the Federal Anti-Monopol y Service to break up 
monopoly activity and anti-competitive activity in Russian commodity market s in particular. The text could use further informat ion on the relationship 
of the infringement of intellectual pr operty rights and competition law.  
 
Specific Problems:  
 
There is no explanation regarding the stated relationship between  infringement of intellectual property rights and anti-competi tion behaviour.  
 There is no explanation as to the conditions under which acti on by the federal Anti-Monopoly Service can be triggered.   
 
Paragraph 91 refers to the disposition of 8,540 cases in which the federal anti-monopoly service was invoked. Russian authoriti es could be encouraged 
to provide more detail as to the outcome of these cases.  
 
Further explanation regarding the definition of and differences between administrative sanctions and administrative caution wou ld be helpful.   
 WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3 
Page 16 Paragraph No. Comment 
 [JPN] 
1. As we understand it, Article 18 of "the General Competition Law" stipulates that important mergers and acquisitions are subject  to prior 
notification and preliminary consent of the anti-monopoly authority. We would like to s eek clarification from the Russian Feder ation on 
whether there is any case that merger of a foreign company and a Russian comp any was rejected pursuant to this Article. 
2. We understand that issues relating to consumer protection which used to be the responsibilities of the Ministry of Anti-Monopol y Policy have 
been transferred to Federal Service for Supervision in the Area of Protection of Consumer's Rights and Human Welfare and that t he newly 
established Federal Service on Tariff is responsible for the re gulation of natural monopolies and prices (tariffs) in the power  industry, oil and 
gas complex, railways and transport terminals, postal communicatio n, etc. These facts should be briefly mentioned in the presen t section as an 
example of the Government of the Russian Federation's administra tive reforms which aims at closely monitoring the relationship between 
competition issues and tariffs. 
 [NOR] 
In paragraph 87 it is stated "...that any anti-competitive market structure and unfair business practices that impeded competit ion were subject to anti-
monopoly laws."  However in paragraph 86 where the report lists relevant le gislation in this area, apart from the financial sector 
 (that is regulated by Law No 117-FZ of 23 June 1999) we fi nd it difficult to identify competition legislation that applies to the services sector.  We 
attach great importance to the services sector, since this sector  constitutes a vital part of most of the developed economies. Hence, we would like to 
receive further clarification on this issue. 
 [USA] 
Requests for Information or Clarifications That Should be Reflected in the Text :  
 
- Include information on where the Government’s competition policy is published or made available to the public.  
92-119 FRAMEWORK FOR MAKING AND ENFORCING POLICIES 
 [EC] 
Descriptive part  
 
We note that the right of appeal is well addressed for custom s issues, but that other aspects are only briefly elaborated. A pr iori, we consider other areas 
need more detail. To be checked in connection with explanations on right of appeal in the corresponding sections (e.g. TBT, TRI Ps). 
 
 
Commitment:  
 
We consider that the commitment proposed contain the elements we would like to see included, in particular: 
 - Assurances that WTO Agreements are applied through out the entire RF territory, in a uniform manner. 
- Assurances that the federal government, when informed of non-ap plication or non-uniform application, will be proactive in resol ving such 
question and to not just send interested persons to the courts.   
- Confirmation of the right to independent legal review for matters involving international trade, with the specific legal remedy  instruments 
provided for  in the corresponding WTO articles (X GATT, TBT, GATS etc).   
  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3
 Page 17Paragraph No. Comment 
 [USA] 
Elements of a Commitment:  
 We support the commitment language proposed in paragraphs 117-8 ra ther than the Russian alternative in paragraph 119. While we are willing to 
address Russia’s concerns over paragraph 117 regarding the references to “other territories under the Russian Federation’s cont rol within its state border, 
including in regions engaging in border trade or frontier traffi c,” the basic commitment on uniform application in this text is  important to the United 
States and the commitment sh ould remain as proposed. 
92-100 Powers of Executive, Legislative and Judicial Branches of Government 
 [JPN] 
1. There should be a brief description in the Report on the fact that in March 2004 as a result of the administrative reform the G overnment 
structure was streamlined into th ree categories, i.e. Federal Mini stries, Services and Agencies and description on the respecti ve responsibilities 
of these three bodies.   
2. In paragraph 94, there is an explanation on judicial system. Ther e should be an additional explanation in this paragraph that t he public 
prosecutor's office is the main body responsible to ensure general observance of legal acts and regulations by federal and regi onal 
administrations. 
3. Since the last sentence in paragraph 99 deals with the relationship between the central government and regional governments, it  should be 
moved to the section deals with such relationship. 
4. As regards judicial system, reference should be made to a system of different levels of trials in the Russian Federation's judi cial field. And if 
administrative tribunal has some relevancy with trad e issues, reference should also be made to it. 
101-107 Government Entities Re sponsible for Making and Implementing Policies Affecting Foreign Trad e – Right of Appeal 
 [JPN] 
1. As the Ministry of Economic Development and Trade is the Russian Federation's Government entity primarily responsible for forei gn trade, its 
main areas of responsibilities as well as those Services and Agencies under the umbrella of the Ministry should be mentioned in  the Report. 
2. With regard to the right to appeal, there ar e explanations on appeal or review in th e fields of custom (paragraphs 103-105), ta x (paragraph 106) 
and technical regulation (paragraph 107). Howeve r, no reference is made to appeal or re view in the fields of IPR, TRIMs, SPS, e tc. Therefore, 
it should also be included in this section or it should be addr essed in such section dealing with  IPR, TRIMs, SPS, etc respecti vely. Additionally, 
the fact that Article 27 of the Code of Civil Proceedings provides the possibility of appealing to the Supreme Court against th e Government and 
other administrative authorities concerning rights and lawful interests of persons including customs regulations and measures s hould be 
included in the Report. 
3. In paragraph 101, it provides that "the central Government would monitor and take active steps…by a WTO member or other interes ted party.". 
It should be moved to the section of "Division of authority be tween central and sub-central governments" as it would be better dealt with in that 
section.  
 WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3 
Page 18 Paragraph No. Comment 
108-119 Division of Authority between Central and sub-Central Governments 
 [JPN] 
1. Under the Russian Constitution, there are areas that the federa l government has the responsibilities as well as areas that both  the federal 
government and its components jointly have responsibilities and co mpetence. For the sake of clarity, these facts should be ment ioned in a 
paragraph comprehensively (Currently, these facts are scattered in various paragraphs including paragraph 109). In doing so, th e following 
elements should be briefly included; 
i No legislation to be adopted by subjects should be contradict ory to the Constitution. In case of contradiction, the federal l aws override 
such legislation. 
ii Article 71 of the Constitution provides an exhaustive list of matters to which the federal government has an exclusive juris diction. 
Those matters not contained in the list are regarded as the ones to which subjects have jurisdiction. 
iii Article 72 of the Constitution provides a list containing those matters subject to the joint jurisdiction. In this regard, laws enacted by 
the federal government precede laws enacted by subjects.  
iv All treaties and conventions which the Russian Federation concl uded precede domestic laws and regulations (Reference is made  to this 
point in paragraph 109). 
 
2. As we understand it, in November 2002, the Commission under the President of the Russian Federation to Prepare Proposals on the  Delineation 
of subjects of Jurisdiction and Authorities between the Federal Stat e Bodies of Powers, Bodies of  State Power of the Russian Fe deration 
Member and Bodies of local Self-Governmen t submitted two draft laws which clarify areas of responsibilities among the federal, regional and 
municipal governments. We would like to seek  clarification from the Russian Federation on the current status  of these two draft  laws. If 
appropriate and necessary, they should be concisely included in paragraph 115. 
 3. In paragraph 110, reference is made to "On the fundamentals of State Regulation of Foreign Trade Activity" and there is an expl anation on the 
legal framework concerning foreign trade in Russia. With regard to the above Law, the following reference should be made in the  paragraph; 
(i) It establishes the relative competence of the fede ral and regional governments in foreign trade; 
(ii) It assigns the federal government the responsibilities of developing federation's trade policies, etc; 
(iii) It also provides that joint responsibilities are assigned to those areas such as export promotion, etc; 
(iv) Commitments provided in paragraph 117 should include an explicit reference to Paragraph 3(a) of Article 10 of GATT 1994.  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3
 Page 19Paragraph No. Comment 
120-560 POLICIES AFFECTING TRADE IN GOODS 
120-127  Registration Requirements for Import/Export Operations  
 [AUS] 
1. We welcome Russia's efforts to date to bring its registrati on and activity licensing requirements into conformity with WTO r ules.  We would 
appreciate further clarification of facts to enable us to move to considering commitment language (Russia could provide this in  an updated paper on 
Import Licensing Procedures – WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/21/Rev.1).  In particular we seek further information in paragraphs 120-124 on: 
 
- procedures for making applications and receivi ng responses, including when submissions can be submitted, approval periods, and grounds for 
refusal of state registration (paragraph 122); 
- confirmation that "engaging in economic activity" (paragraph 122) also includes export and import activity 
- other administrative means of appealing the refusal of registration than through application to a court. 
 
2. In paragraph 126, Russia contests whether Article VIII:1(a) of GATT 1994 is applicable to licensing fees, suggesting that it  only concerns 
customs fees.  We note that Article VIII:4 indicates clearly that provisions of the Ar ticle also extend to requirements such as  licensing.  We request that 
amendments to paragraphs 125 and 126 as follows: 
 
125. Several members…. .  Furthermore, fees and charges levied on the right to import should be limited to the cost of services  rendered as 
under Article VIII:1(a) of GATT 1994 and Article VIII:4(c),  and taxes and charges on the right to trade in imported goods should not lead to 
discrimination in favour of like domestic produc ts as required by Article III of GATT 1994. 
 [EC] 
Descriptive part :  
 
General trading right.  the WPR contains an error in that foreign persons (as defined in Foreign Trade Activity Law, Article 2(11)) are allowed to eng age 
in import and export operations in conformity with Article III GATT and XI GATT and that there is no requirement to be establis hed or permanent 
resident in RF.  
 Exceptions . The list of areas subject to an activity licence needs to be completed. We understand ICT products are included in that list and note that 
further discussions on this issue will be necessary as we do no t see how restrictions to non-sensitive ICT products could be ju stified under Art XX or 
XXI GATT. We will analyse other products included in exceptions.   
Fees for activity licences . Fees for activity licensing will need to be commensurate to the cost of the service rendered, to the extent that the activity  
licence is required in order to engage in import or export oper ations. An explanation of how Russia applies its fees in this re spect is still missing in the 
WPR. 
 
There are some precisions to be made in the descriptive part, including on the question of exports of energy products for which  further clarification is 
necessary of the regulatory instrument  used (see also paragraph 144).  
 
  
 WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3 
Page 20 Paragraph No. Comment 
Commitment  
The commitment proposed contain the elem ents we would like to see included.  
Specific language will need to be added for changes introduced to the scope of activity licensing (e.g. elimination of activity  licence for imports and 
exports of alcoholic beverages, including the elimination of a turnover requirement).  
 [JPN] 
1. In paragraph 121, there is an explanation on "On the Fundamentals of the State Regulation of Foreign Trade Activity". In the co ntext of the 
present paragraph, since  the Law is described as the legal framework stipulating responsibilities of the federal authorities c oncerning foreign trade, the 
paragraph should include a comprehensive explanation on the Law, i. e. the Law deals with the princi pal concepts pertaining to f oreign trade such as 
trade in goods and services, free trade zones, etc. In addition to  these, the provisions in the Law containing elements of the following general principles 
should be highlighted: 
 (a)National Treatment; 
 (b)Non-discrimination; 
 (c)Avoidance of trade restrictive measures;  (d)Transparency 
 
2. In paragraph 126, a reply to the question concerning activity licensing submitted in paragraph 125 is provided. With regard to activity licensing, 
reference should be made to the point that Article 17 of the Law on Licensing of Specific Activities provides a list of activit ies for which a license may 
be required and also to the point that activity licensing concer ning a number of activities excluded from the Law are covered b y each legislation. 
Furthermore, we have learned that under the Law on Licensing of Specific Activities the number of activities subject to licensi ng was reduced, that the 
validity of licenses was extended from three years to five years and that  licensing fees were reduced from 3000 Rubles to 1300 Rubles. These points 
need to be clarified and included in the Report in a concise manner.  
3. In paragraph 125, Members of the Working Party pointed out that "registration requirements" or "activity licensing" should not operate to 
restrict imports in a manner violating Article XI:1 of GATT 1994. The Russian side responded in paragraph 126 that such matters  as the right to trade in 
goods, "registration requirements" or "ac tivity licensing" were regulated by the provisions of the WTO agreement on trade in se rvices. Bearing in mind 
that such measures restricting the right to  trade in goods should be abolished, clarification should be made with respect to th e meaning of the above 
Russian response as it is not clear. 
 [SUI] 
We welcome the additional information provided and the improveme nts foreseen in some areas.. However some additional clarificat ions are needed in 
this section. 
Paragraph 121:  Contrary to what is indicated in this paragraph, there seems to be more than three products subject to activity  licence. Please provide an 
exhaustive list of the goods subject to activity licence. 
Paragraph 122 :  Please also confirm that the possibility to resubm it the application for registration is foreseen by Federal l aw No 129-FZ of 
8 August 2001 and specify the relevant article of the law. 
Paragraph 124 : Please specify the article of the law that foresees that any interested person can request information on the e stablishment, reorganization 
and liquidation of legal persons. 
Paragraph 125-126 : Contrary to the opinion of the Russian Fede ration, Article VIII.1a GATT is not limited to customs related f ees, as Article VIII:1a 
speaks of "all fees and charges of whatev er character" and Article VIII:4 GATT adds th at the provisions of Article VIII shall e xtend to fees, charges,  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3
 Page 21Paragraph No. Comment 
formalities and requirements imposed by governmental authorities in connection with importation and exportation, including thos e relating to c) 
licensing." Thus, licensing fees are also subject to Article VI II GATT and will be limited to the approximate cost of services rendered. 
We therefore seek a commitment fr om the Russian Federation to limit all fees and charges within the purvie w of Article VIII GAT T to the approximate 
cost of services rendered so that they do not represent an indirect protection to domestic products or a taxation of imports or  exports for fiscal purposes.  
 [USA] 
Elements of a Commitment  
 General
 
 
- All laws, regulations and other measures relating to registration as an importer or exporter and their application, e.g., req uirements that must be 
met to be the importer of record, will be, as of the date of accession, in complian ce with WTO requirements, including Articles  III, XI and VIII 
of GATT 1994.   
- In particular, the Russian Fe deration should confirm that: 
 
 - all products may be imported into the Russian Federation without requiring an import/export activity license; in other words , the 
Russian Federation will eliminate any such re quirement that may apply to the business of import or export of pharmaceuticals; e thyl 
alcohol; precious metals and stones; commercially available produc ts with encryption devices; or any other product that has not  
previously been identified as subject to such licenses;  
 - an import license will be granted to an importer of record of  such products  without requiring an activity license to engage  in 
distribution or production of the product; 
 - establishment of a representative office or other investment in  the Russian Federation will not be required to register as a n importer or 
exporter or to acquire import or export licenses; and  
 - transparency requirements, including those set out in other s ections of the Report of the Working Party, will apply to regis tration as an 
importer and/or exporter. 
 
- Any commitments relating to registration as an importer or ex porter are without prejudice to th e Russian Federation’s require ments for those 
who engage in the distribution or productio n of products.  While imported products  mu st be provided non-discriminatory access to Russia’s 
channels of distribution, engaging in distribution itself is su bject to the limitations set out in the Russian Federation’s Sch edule of Specific 
Commitments under the General Ag reement on Trade in Services; 
- An importer or exporter of record must meet its customs and fiscal responsibilities to the Russian Federation, including comp liance with TBT, 
SPS and other requirements; and 
- The Russian Federation can require an importer of record to provide information on the further disposition of imported produc ts to help assure 
compliance with Russian Federation requirements relating to distribution and other WTO-consistent measures. 
 
Requests for Information or Clarifications That Should be Reflected in the Text  :   
 General 
 
 
Russian legislation/regulations n ecessary to implement WTO rules are pending for this section.  
 WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3 
Page 22 Paragraph No. Comment 
 
Earlier texts used the term “resident” when describing someone who could get a license to import.   
 - Clarify in the text whether one must be a resident to acquire  either an activity license, or import or export licenses.  If t hat term is still legally 
valid for the requirements described in this section, a definition should be provided in the text. 
  
The reference in previous versions of WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25 to the requirement that there be “a documentary confirmation of deposi tion of no less 
than 50 per cent of the charter capital of the firm with the respective bank” has been removed.  
 - If this requirement still exists, the text should clarify the scope and application of this requirement for a foreign firm. I f the requirement has 
been abolished, the text should so state. 
 
Paragraph 121 :  Russia has stated previously that there are only three exceptions to the general rule that engaging in import and/or export operations 
does not require special permission or an ac tivity license. It appears, however, that in addition to alcoho l, pharmaceuticals, and precious stones and 
metals, importing products with encryptio n also requires such a license.   
 
- Provide in the text (or a chart) a comp rehensive list of areas, including product coverage, for which an activity license is necessary to acquire 
import or export licenses, and explain the reasons for the requirement.  
Specific Drafting Suggestions
 
 
Paragraphs 126:  This text is inaccurate and should be removed.  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3
 Page 23Paragraph No. Comment 
128-132 - Alcoholic Beverages  
 [AUS] 
1. We welcome reforms Russia is seeking to undertake in relation to licensing of the import and export of alcoholic beverages.  These reforms 
appear to be still before Russia's Parliament.  Once they are pa ssed, we suggest their incorporation into this part of the text .  In particular, we would 
suggest inclusion of information on: 
 
- the nature of the reforms – i.e. what previo us restrictions or procedures have been abolished, what has replaced them in law or  administrative 
procedures, and all necessary information on fees and formalities underpinning the administration of the new form of activity l icensing. 
 
2. We note that paragraph 131 signals the intention to remove previous restrictions on the volume of imported alcoholic product s (paragraph 119) 
which constituted prohibited quantitative restriction under Article XI of GATT 1994.  These include restrictions on the volume of alcohol imported 
under a single-contract license (in terms of both overall volume of produce sold in Russia, and restrictions on the share of al cohol no more than 15 per 
cent in content).  We seek:  
- clarification in the text as to whether Russi an law requires that this restriction be observed, or whether it only provides for  the imposition of 
such a restriction; 
- inclusion in the text of a reference to existence an d eventual removal of these quantitative restrictions. 
128-132 [BRA] 
Paragraph 128 takes note of the concern expressed by some members over the restrictive consequences of the Russian Federation's  current activity 
licensing system for the sale of alcoholic beverages. At the same time, it mentions that the fees charged on the distribution o f imported beverages could 
exceed those applied to the distributio n of nationally produced beverages. 
As this situation may constitute a violation of Article XI and of Article III of GATT 1994, Brazil expects the Russian Federati on to proceed with the 
reform in this system in order to ensure  that, upon accession, it does not hamper tr ade, nor discriminates against imported bev erages. 
 [SUI] 
Paragraph 131 and Table 7: paragraph 131 indi cates that a draft federal law under examination by the Duma will unify the fee le vied for activity 
licences. This is a welcomed improvement. Could the Russian Fede ration confirm that this unifie d fee will replace the previous fees levied ? When do 
you foresee to implement the new simplified licensing procedure? 
 [USA] 
In addition to the general commitment, the Russian Federation s hould confirm that it will eliminate the requirement for an acti vity license to engage in 
production or distribution as a condition for obtaining an import license for ethyl alcohol.  
Paragraph 129 :  This section states that, in addition to the ac tivity license and the import license : “With regard to exports  and imports, an additional 
license is required issued by the Federal Tax Service.”    
- The text should clarify whether this additional license will con tinue to be required and provide details on issuance, e.g., r esponsible authority 
and requirements for obtaining a license.  
 
Please indicate in the text whether it is n ecessary to have a representative office to  request an activity license to import al cohol.  
 WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3 
Page 24 Paragraph No. Comment 
 
The text should clarify precisely, in this paragraph, what products (alcoholic beverages and alcohol-containing products) are s ubject to the requirements 
of Federal Law No. 171-FZ of 22 November 1995 "On State Regulation of Production and Turnover of Ethyl Alcohol, Alcoholic and Alcohol-Containing Products and the other legislation described in this section.   
 
Paragraph 131 :  The text should clarify that an importer currently must have an import activity license in order to request an  import license from 
MEDT.  Confirm in the text that after the simplified system has been implemented, there will no longer be a need for an import activity license.  As 
previously noted, we seek elimination of the requirement for an importer to obtain an activity license to produce or distribute  alcohol within Russia in 
order to obtain import licenses from MEDT.   
 
Concerning fees:  describe in the text the scope, nature, and point of application of the fees for licenses and, as possible, i ndicate how the elements that 
provide less favorable treatment to imports will be eliminated.   
Identify in the text the legislative vehicle for making the proposed changes to the activity licensing requirements for the imp ortation and exportation of 
alcoholic beverages and alcohol-containing products. 
133-140 - Pharmaceuticals 
 [AUS] 
1. In relation to pharmaceutical pr oducts, Russia has not demonstrated that in practice the procedures and fees underpinning it s system of non-
automatic licensing to imports comply with all relevant article s of the Agreement on Import Licensi ng.  In order to clarify the  WTO consistency of its 
regime, we seek inclusion of the following in the text: 
 
- a list of activities which attract the fee of 1,300 rubles referred to in paragraph 120 concerning "On Licensing of Certain Typ es of Activities" 
and how long this type of license is issued for. 
- information on all fees, formalities, requirements and eligibility  requirements for obtaining activity and import licenses.  In  particular, we 
request that Russia expand its description of the "uniform pro cedure" for obtaining a license to import medicines (paragraph 13 7).   
 
2. In the previous draft of the Working Party report (WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.2), Russia noted that once a company obtained an a ctivity 
license, it would be eligible for the recei pt of import licenses each time it wished to  import or export goods subject to licen sing.  We seek either:
 
- clarification in the text as to whether that this requirement re mains in force, and an explana tion of its justification given i mporters are also 
required to obtain activity licenses in this sphere.   
 [SUI] 
Paragraph  137-138 : Our understanding is that Federal Law No. 86 of 22 June 1998 On Medicines is being currently revised. Plea se provide 
information on the revision and changes foreseen regarding activity  licence. This part of the dr aft report will need to be revi sited once the amendments 
to the law have been adopted.  As the activity license requirement in the case of alcoholic beverages has been simplified so that an activity license will onl y be required for doing 
business and not for import/export activities, for which reasons could the Russian Federation not consider to also simplify in the same way the activity 
license requirements in the case of pharmaceuticals ?  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3
 Page 25Paragraph No. Comment 
Paragraph 136 :  According to paragraph 136 foreign legal persons are required to open a representative office if they want to import pharmaceuticals in 
the Russian Federation. Could the Russian Federation clarify wh y it seems not possible for representative offices to import pha rmaceutical as they 
apparently cannot seek a licence? 
 [USA] 
In addition to the general commitment, the Russian Federation sh ould confirm that it will eliminate the requirement for (1) the  establishment of a 
representative office as a condition for impor ting pharmaceuticals: and (2) an activity license to engage in production or dist ribution as a condition for 
obtaining an import license for pharmaceuticals.  
Paragraphs 136-137 :  As described, it would appear that a foreign firm that is not engaged in the production or distribution o f pharmaceuticals is 
precluded from being the importer of record of such products.    
- The text should reflect Members’ views that requiring an importer to obtain an activity license to engage in production or di stribution as a 
condition for obtaining an import license is inconsistent with GATT 1994, and that importation and distribution are not the sam e.   
Prior to finalization, this section of the re port should describe the changes being made in the Law on Medicine to simplify the  current system for meeting 
requirements to import pharmaceuticals. 
141-142 - Precious Stones and Metals 
 [AUS] 
1. We welcome steps Russia has taken to reform aspects of its licensing regime in relation to precious metals and stones.  Ther e is additional 
information which should be reflected in the text of the report in order to indicate Russia's compliance with all relevant WTO provisions.  We seek: 
 
- responses to our comments/questions on Russia's paper, Information on the Liberalization of Trade in Precious Stones and Precious Metals in 
the Russian Federation , as a basis for developing additional text for this section of the report. 
 2. In paragraph 141, Russia indicates that it is in the proces s of amending laws to abolish quantitative restrictions for plati num, raw diamonds and 
permit export of ferrous metals scrap and wastes and "future lib eralisation of international trad e involving this category of g oods". The status of these 
reforms are unclear.  We seek:  
- inclusion in the text of updated information on whether these reforms have been completed, the full details of what they enta il and how they 
will be implemented.  
3. We note a reference in the section of the report "Quantitative Export Restrictions' (paragraph 362) on the existence of lice nsing for exports of 
natural diamonds and cut diamonds.  These licensing requirements, however, are not listed in this section of the report.  We se ek: 
 
- inclusion in this section of the report all relevant details of these licensing requirements, and any other licensing requireme nts on exports of 
precious metals and stones.  
 WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3 
Page 26 Paragraph No. Comment 
 [AUS] 
Comments on Russia's paper on "Liberalisation of trade in precious stones and precious metals in the Russian Federation" 
 We welcome Russia's intention to liberalize trade in precious stones and precious metals.  This most useful document helps clar ify the basis for, and 
Russia's policy directions in, this area of its foreign trade regime.  We have some comments and questions to which we would ap preciate responses in 
writing.  
General 
 - Please indicate the standard acts referred to in the document that have been translated  into English and lodged with the Secret ariat. 
- Please lodge with the Secretariat English translations of any sta ndard acts referred to in the document and other legislation r equested that have 
not yet been provided. 
 
Item 1 
 It is stated that the Federal Law of 8 August 2001 No.128-FZ "On Licensing of Certain Types of Activities" abolished the activi ty licensing requirement 
for trade of precious metals, precious stones and jewelry containing precious metals and precious stones. 
 - Please indicate the products (tariff code and description) that were previously subject  to activity licensing requirements in r espect of trade in 
precious stones, precious metals and jewelry cont aining precious metals and precious stones. 
- What did the activity licensing requirement for these products that was abolished cover?  
- The internal purchase or sale of these products? 
 - Their importation?  - Their exportation? 
 - Their internal purchase or sale for subsequent exportation? 
 Their exportation, on the condition that they would be processed in a foreign country and subsequently imported in processed fo rm? 
 
- What activity licensing requirements remain for these products in respect of internal purchase and sale, importation or exporta tion?  What is the 
legal basis for any remaining activity licensing? 
 
Item 2  
It is stated that the Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of 21 July 2001 No.742 "On the Procedure of Importation  into the Russian 
Federation and Exportation from the Russian Federation of Preciou s Metals and Precious Stones" abolished quantitative restricti ons and licensing 
requirements for export of jewelry, articles for production and technical purposes made from precious stones, precious metals i n the form of products 
and articles, natural pearls and coins. 
 - Please indicate:  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3
 Page 27Paragraph No. Comment 
- the products (tariff code and description) that remain subj ect to quantitative export restrictions and export licensing requi rements; 
 - the quantitative export restrictions and export licen sing requirements that remain for these products; 
 - the laws and legal acts under which those quantitative export restrictions and export licensing requirements are maintained.  
 
Item 3 
 It is stated that, under the Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of 30 November 2002 No.1373 "On Approval of Regu lations on Importation 
to the Russian Federation and Exportation from the Russian Federation of Natural Diamonds and Brilliants": 
  - "subjects of production of brilliants" have the possibility of export "and (or) exportation in customs regime" of processed natural 
diamonds they have by the right of ownership; 
  - "subjects of production of brilliants" at present have the po ssibility of export "and (or) exportation in customs regime" up  to a 
maximum of the 15% of the cost of natural diamonds obtained by them in regions of mining natural diamonds or in the State depos itory of precious 
metals and gemstones (Gokhran);  
 - the licensing of export  of brilliants and raw diamonds has been abolished. 
 - Please indicate the products (tariff code and description)  that are classified as brilliants and natural diamonds. 
- We would be grateful for clarification of what constitutes a "s ubject of production of brilliants".  Does this cover diamond mi ning, diamond 
processing, or both mining and processing?  Please indicate how th e status of "subject of production of brilliants" is conferre d, the legal basis 
for conferring this status, and the terms and conditions for conferring and maintaining this status. 
- We would appreciate an explanation of the difference between export and "exportation in customs regime". 
- Do "subjects of production of brilliants" have the possibility of ex port "and (or) exportation in customs regime", rather than the right to export, 
because they are still subject to requirements for export, such as the need to obt ain necessary approvals,  or to obtain an acti vity license?  If so, 
please indicate the requirements that need to  be met by the intending exporter, the body (or bodies) from wh ich the necessary a pprovals are 
obtained, any grounds for refusal, and any other circumstances under which approvals may be refused. 
- Does the possibility of export "and (or) exportation in customs regime" apply to processed natural diamonds that "subjects of p roduction of 
brilliants" have by the right of ownership because they own the diamonds but might not be in posse ssion of them, given that the re is a 
requirement to keep them in the State depository of precious metals and gemstones (Gokhran)?  Please provide details of the req uirement to 
keep diamonds in the State depository of precious metals and gemstones. 
- Within what timeframe is the 15% maximum limit on the cost of natural diamonds determined? 
- Please explain what is meant by the cost of natural diamonds.  Is this their market price, their actual cost of production, an arbitrary cost 
assigned to them, the amount that processors pay for them (however determined), or something else? 
- Please provide details of the export licensing requirements that we re abolished in relation to:  who could be issued with an ex port license;  the 
terms and conditions for being granted an export license;  the grounds on which an export license could be refused;  and the bo dy (or bodies) 
which provided approvals and granted the export license. 
- Does the abolition of the export licensing eliminate all requireme nts for "subjects of production of brilliants" to obtain appr ovals from 
authorities to engage in sale for subsequent internal resale, fo r sale for subsequent export, or for export?  For example, are such approvals still  
 WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3 
Page 28 Paragraph No. Comment 
required from Gokhran, the CBR or any other authority for the sale  for subsequent internal resale , for sale for subsequent expo rt, or for export?  
If so, please provide details of approvals re quirements that are now applicable in respect of:  the terms and conditions granti ng approvals;  the 
grounds on which approvals could be refused;  the bodies involved in granting the required approvals;  and the legal basis for the approvals 
regime. 
- Was exportation previously contingent on further processing in a foreign country and subsequent re-importation of the processed  product, and 
now such a requirement is no longer applied?    Please provide details of what has chan ged in respect of how this requirement wo rks, by whom 
it is administered and its legal basis. 
 
Item 4  
It is stated that Amendments of 11 November 2003 to Article 5 of the Federal Law of the Russian Federation "On State Secrets" e xcluded data on 
extraction, transfer and consumption of precious metals and precious stones from the list of state secret data and simplified t he procedure of performing 
transactions with these valuables and creates conditions fo r organization of balanced secondary market in Russia. 
 
- Please indicate how the procedure of performing transactions with precious metals and precious stones was simplified, and what has changed in 
respect of applicable requirements. 
- What were the objectives involved in changing the organization of the secondary market in Russia? 
- We would be grateful details of the planned publication of import and export statistics for precious metals and precious stones . 
 
Item 5 
 
It is stated that Federal Law of 10 December 2003 No. 173-FZ "On Currency Regulation and Currency  Control" excluded precious st ones and metals 
from the list of currency valuables, thereby removing a number of restrictions on the sale of precious metals and precious ston es, such as special 
authorities and functions of services for currency regulation and control, and restrictions on the rights of legal entities wit h respect to the ownership and 
disposal of this category of goods. 
 - What is the purpose of and legal basis for the "list of currency valuables"?  How is the list maintained? 
- It appears that the presence of a good on the list of currency valuables may subj ect the good to certain restrictions.  We woul d appreciate details 
of the following restrictions, including a description of them, an indication of their purpose and details of their legal basis  (as they had applied 
to precious stones and precious metals): 
 
- special authorities and functions of services for currency regulation and control; 
 - restrictions on the rights of legal entities with respect to the ownership and disposal of this category of goods. 
 
Item 8  
It is stated that the Draft Decree of the President of the Russi an Federation "On Amendments and Additions to Regulations on Im portation to the 
Russian Federation and Exportation from the Russian Federation of Precious Metals, Precious Stones and Raw Materials Containing  Precious Metals 
Approved by the Decree of the President of the Russian Federa tion of 21 June 2001 No.742" envisages the abolition of quantitati ve restrictions for  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3
 Page 29Paragraph No. Comment 
export of non-refined platinum and metals of the platinum group and raw materials containing precious metals, and removes the b an on the export of 
scrap and waste of precious metals and or es and concentrates of precious metals. 
 - Please describe the quantitative export restrictions (including the export bans) that have applied to these products, their pur pose and how they 
are applied?  Which bodies apply these restrictions and what is their legal basis? 
- Please indicate the tariff codes for the products that  will be subject to the provisions of the Decree. 
- We would be grateful for advice of when the Decree will be sign ed and enter in force? Will all of the quantitative export restr ictions (including 
the export bans) that apply to these products be eliminated upon entry in to force of the Decree? 
 Item 9 
 
It is stated that the Draft Decree of the President of the Russi an Federation "On Amendments and Additions to Regulations on Im portation to the 
Russian Federation and Exportation from the Russian Federation of  Natural Diamonds and Brilliants Approved by the Decree of the  President of the 
Russian Federation of 30 November 2002 No. 1373" envisages ab olition of quantitative restrictions for export of natural diamond s for mining subjects 
and diamonds of 10.8 carats and more, if these natural diamonds are obtained by foreign persons from mining subjects at auction s carried out in 
accordance with the legislation of the Russian Federation. 
 
- Please define the term "mining subjects".  Can foreign persons be "mining subjects"?  Please indicate the requirements that nee d to be met for a 
person to be a "mining subject", and their legal basis. 
- Please indicate the tariff codes for the natural diamonds th at will be subject to the provisions of the Decree. 
- Please describe the quantitative export rest rictions for the export of natural diamonds , their purpose and how they are applied .  What bodies 
apply these restrictions, and under what laws? 
- What is the nature of the remaining restriction on foreign persons purchasing diamonds of less than 10.8 carats?  What is the r ationale and 
WTO justification for this restriction?  What is its legal basis? 
- What is the rationale and WTO justification for requiring foreign persons to obtain diamonds at auction rather than by purchasi ng them from 
"mining subjects", when "mining subjects" will be able to export directly? 
- Please provide advice on the legislation unde r which the auctions will be carried out. 
- We would be grateful for an indication of when will the Decree be signed and enter in force.  Will all of the quantitative expo rt restrictions 
(including the export bans) that apply to these products be eliminated upon entry into force of the Decree? 
 
Item 10 
 It is stated that the Draft Federal Law "On amendments and Ad ditions to the Federal Law "On Precious Metals and Precious Stones " (of 26 March 1998 
No. 41)" envisages bringing the Federal Law "On precious metals and precious stones" into conformity with the adopted Federal L aw "On Currency 
Regulation and Currency Control", wherein precious metals and precious stones are excluded from the list of currency valuables and do not fall under 
the currency legislation.  It is also stated that amendments and additions to this Law are aimed at the future liberalization o f trade in precious metals and 
precious stones, including the abolition of unjustified restrictions  on the sale of precious metals in domestic and foreign mar kets. 
 - Please provide details of plans for the future liberalization of  trade in precious metals and precious stones envisaged in the amendments and  
 WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3 
Page 30 Paragraph No. Comment 
additions to the Federal Law "On Precious Metals and Precious Stones". 
- Please indicate the unjustified restrictions on the sale of precious metals in domestic  and foreign markets that are intended t o be removed.  
What is the legal basis for these restrictions? 
- Please provide advice on when  the Draft Federal Law is expected to be enacted. 
 
Item 11  
We would be grateful for clarif ication as to whether the Draft Decree of the Pr esident of the Russian Federation "On Changes to  the List of State Secret 
Data Approved by the Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of 30 November 1995 No. 1203" is designed to give effect  to provisions of 
Federal Law of 11 November 2003 No.153-FZ "On changes to Article 5 of the Law of the Russian Federation "On State Secrets"". 
 
- We would be grateful for an indication of the specific provisions of  the Draft Decree.  
- Please provide advice on when the Decree will be signed and enter in force. 
 [SUI] 
Paragraph 142 :  In the texts provided in June 2004, paragraph 313 ter was dealing with other customs formalities in the case o f precious stones and 
metals and watches in precious metals, i.e. only certain customs checkpoints could carry out customs operations for these goods . As paragraph 142 deals 
with customs formalities it should be moved to the relevant sec tion of this report. In addition, watches and parts of watches i n precious metals should be 
added to the list of products subject to restrictions if it is still the case as we understood from the information given in Ju ly that the legislation is being 
revised. 
A marker should be put on this section as a new law is pending. This section will need to be revised once the law has been adop ted. We would 
appreciate to receive additional information on  the state of adoption of the legislation. 
A paragraph containing the commitments should be added at the end of this section.  
 [USA] 
Paragraph 141 :  Describe in the text the status of legislative amendments in development to eliminate import restrictions on t rade in these goods.  
 Paragraph 142 :  The text of this section confirms that trade must be conducted through specifi ed customs check points. Describ e in the text the 
requirement for “customs registration” and distinguish it from corporate registration and registration for an activity license.  
 Paragraph 146 :  This paragraph as currently drafted repeats some major themes underlying Members’ concerns and the issues that  need to be addressed 
in a commitment paragraph relating to authorization/registration requirements for importing and/or exporting goods, which is on e aspect of the 
conditions imposed on imported or exported goods. It should remain as written. 
143-147 - Other licensing requirements 
 [AUS] 
1. We propose that the fifth sentence of paragraph 146 be amended to read:  "Without prejudice to other relevant provisions of the WTO 
Agreement, the Russian Federation should en sure any laws and regulations relating to the right to trade in goods would not rest rict imports or exports of 
goods in violation of the general prohibition on quantitative restri ctions under Article XI:1 of GATT 1994, nor should they dis criminate against 
imported goods in violation of the non-discriminat ory provisions under Article III:4 of GATT 1994." 
  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3
 Page 31Paragraph No. Comment 
2. We look forward to the inclusion in the report of a commitment paragraph embracing all proposed obligations in paragraph 146 , subject to our 
proposed amendment to the fifth sentence of paragraph 146. 
 [SUI] 
Paragraph 146 : As already mentioned in July and in our written co mments the last sentence of this paragraph should not be limi ted to alcoholic 
beverages. We request again that the mention of pharm aceutical products be added at  the end of paragraph 146.  
 - Encryption Devices 
 [USA] 
In addition to the general commitment, the Russian Federation shoul d confirm that an activity license to engage in production o r distribution will not be 
a requirement for obtaining an import license for these products. 
148-347 1. Import Regulations 
148-160  Customs Regulations and Customs Tariffs  
 [ARG] 
Paragraph 156 
The text of this section needs to be updated to facilitate speci fic additional information, so as to clarify that Russia will c omply with corresponding 
WTO provisions:  
1) whether the State Customs Committee (SCC) and the regional offices publish or offer information about customs regulations to im porters and 
exporters; 
2) the measures that the Russian Federation adopts or intends to adopt in order to guarantee that importers and exporters have acc ess to all relevant 
information in light of the fact that, as the last part of para graph 156 indicates, there are ac ts or parts thereof which are n ot published. 
 Russia does not respond to the question in paragraph 156, whether it will comply with art. 13 of the Agreement on the Implement ation of Article VII of 
GATT 94. 
 [BRA] 
With reference to paragraph 151, Brazil joins members who expressed concerns regarding possible inconsistencies in the applicat ion of customs laws 
and regulations by regional customs authorities and expects that the Russian Federation ensure the uniform application these la ws and regulations 
throughout its territory. 
 Furthermore, Brazil expresses concern about the use of "secret orders" (administrative orders issued by the SCC and its regiona l offices, whose contents 
are not publicized to traders), mentioned in  paragraph 158. Brazil is of the view that the Russian authorities should restrict their use purely to operational 
and investigative procedures. 
 [EC] 
Descriptive part  
We consider that some clarification work needs to be done in this section, in particular: 
- The intentions of the Russian Federation as regards ratificati on of Kyoto and revised Kyoto conventions. Whilst it declares to apply the general 
principles, we are concerned that in some area s the legislation seems to deviate from Kyoto. 
- Completion of the areas for which the Customs Code provides fo r the possibility for implementing decisions or regulatory acts. 
- Guarantee system in paragraph 156 (on guarantee system allowing an importer to withdraw goods from customs pending final determ ination of  
 WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3 
Page 32 Paragraph No. Comment 
the customs value). 
- Secret orders for "performing operational an d investigation activities" (paragraph 158) 
- Clarification of circumstances under which customs escort (especially for internal tr ansit within Russia) and customs storage i s taking place. 
This could be included either in this section or in another section if considered more appropriate 
 
Commitment  
Section may require commitment. 
 [JPN] 
1. Paragraph 149 simply states the requests by the Members concerning a description of changes to customs regulations, etc. So lon g as the 
Russian side provides its response to these requests in another paragraph, paragraph 149 may not be needed. 
 
2. In paragraph 150, it provides that "only provisions of the Custom s Code were not directly applicable". Also in paragraph 152, i t provides that 
"the vast majority of provisions of the Customs Code of the Ru ssian Federation were of direct application". We would like to se ek clarification from the 
Russian Federation on what are things which belong to "not directly applicable" and how  such things will be implemented. These clarified points should 
be included in paragraph 150 or 152. 
 3. In paragraphs 154 and 155, there are descriptions concerning customs payments under the Customs Code. Also in paragraph 154, cu stoms 
procedures and formalities under the Customs Code are concisely me ntioned. The following elements concerning customs procedures  and formalities 
which are of Japan's interest should be duly included in the present section (If appropriate, it may be included in the section  o f  " O t h e r  C u s t o m s  
Formalities"): 
 (a)Observance of three working days for examination of a customs declaration;  (b)Filing a customs declaration 15 days before foreign goods arrival; 
 (c)Special simplified customs formalities for persons having been  pursuing foreign economic activities at least three years an d not having 
committed administrative offences; 
 (d)Extension of the maximum period of bonded storage of goods        
 
4. In paragraph 158, there is an explanation on "secret orders". The legal basis in the Customs Code concerning secret orders shou ld be stated in 
the Report. And the Russian Federation's commitment to the effect that secret orders will in no way hinder implementation of th e Customs Code and 
other relevant legislation should also be included. 
 5. The contents of the Customs Code are provided in several paragrap hs such as paragraphs 150,152 and 154. However, for the sake o f clarity and 
for ease of reading, we should consider consolidating the main elements contained in the Customs Code into one paragraph accord ing to the following 
classification:  
 (a) Non-discrimination, ensuring due process; 
 (b) Simplification of procedures, avoidance of unnecessary trade restriction;  (c) Transparency and Openness; 
 (d) Harmonization with international measures; 
  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3
 Page 33Paragraph No. Comment 
6. We understand that the following elements are introduced under the Customs Code, in particular for the purpose of simplifying c ustom system 
and procedures and establishing a user-friendly customs system: 
  (a) Observance of three working days fo r examination of a customs declaration; 
 (b) Filing a customs declaration 15 days before foreign goods arrival; 
 (c) Special simplified customs formalities for persons having been pursuing foreign economic activities at least three years a nd not having 
committed administrative offences 
 (d) Extension of the maximum period of bonded storage of goods        
 7. A major challenge for the Russian Federation's customs procedures and formalities is to ensure a unified application of these p rocedures and 
formalities to all the customs territories of the Russian Federa tion (e.g. avoidance of arbitral interpretation and application  of laws and regulations by 
local authorities). In this connection, we would like to seek cl arification from the Russian Federation on the concrete measure s by the Government and 
legal mechanism to achieve the above. And the clarified points sh ould be duly reflected in the Report.             
 [SUI] 
Paragraph 149 :  The Customs Code has been enacted in 2004 according to our understanding and not in 2003. 
 Paragraph 156 :  Several members noted that the legislation curr ently applied does not appear to fully implement article 13 of agreement on Customs 
Valuation which provides for a guarantee system allowing an importer to withdraw goods from customs pending final determination  of the customs 
value. Have the recently adopted legislation addressed this issue ? 
This section of the report should also be completed with a dditional information on the regulation on customs fees once it has b een adopted. Please also 
provide an English translation of his regulation to the working party.  
 [USA] 
Elements of a Commitment : 
 
- Confirm that following accession to  the WTO the Russian Federation will apply MFN tariff treatment, in accordance with its ri ghts and 
obligations under WTO agreement.  
- Confirm that no customs ruling will be enforced unless it is published. 
- Pending:  A more detailed commitment will be suggested if clarity is not forthcoming on the nature of “unpublished administra tive orders” and 
if we do not receive sufficient guarantees that all “regulati ons, orders, rules, instructions, dispositions and administrative decrees” are published 
where traders can become acquainted with them. 
 Paragraphs 155-156 :  This section states that there are customs rulings that are not published or  circulated.  These include “ regulations, orders, rules, 
instructions, dispositions and administrative decrees.”   
 - Clarify in the text explicitly the nature of the Customs rulings that are not required to be published.   
- The text should explain why these customs rulings should not be included in the general requirement for publication, why they  are not 
considered “normative,” how they are “reco mmendatory,” and why it matters that they are used only internally within the customs .  
 WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3 
Page 34 Paragraph No. Comment 
161-168 Ordinary Customs Duties 
 [AUS] 
1. We note reference in paragraph 162 to products subject to ad  valorem tariffs or combined or specific tariffs with ad valorem  equivalents 
(AVEs) in the 0-30 per cent range.  We seek:  
- expansion of this paragraph to include out-of-quota rates for tariff quota products and the AVEs of the combined and specific t ariffs levied on a 
number of agricultural products. 
- unit import prices in respect of MFN imports for the products subj ect to combined or specific du ties for each of the calendar y ears 2002, 2003 
and 2004.  This will enable a full an alysis of AVEs in this context. 
 2. We recommend the last sentence of paragraph 168 be amended as follows: 
 
x. The representative of the Russian Fede ration said that upon accession the Russian  Federation would extend unconditional most  
favoured nation treatment in respect to all measures, rules and formalities applied in relation to imported and exported goods,  including in 
respect of commitments in its Schedule of Concessions and Commitments for Goods, and that it would depart from unconditional mo st 
favoured treatment only as allowed under the WTO and through the observance of WTO rules governing such departures.  The Workin g Party 
took note of these commitments
. 
 
3. We note the omission of a reference in this section to the world price-contingent tariffs for imported raw cane sugar introd uced on  
 1 January 2004.  We propose the following text for inclusion in the report: 
 
x. A member of the Working Party noted that world price-contingent rates of import duty for raw cane sugar of HS subheading 170 1.11 
had replaced the tariff rate quota on 1 January 2004, and that th is was a measure of a kind required to be eliminated in the Ur uguay Round and 
prohibited under Article 4 of the Agriculture Agreement.  The member concerned called for its early elimination. 
 
x. The representative of the Russian Federation said that the wo rld price-contingent rates of import duty for raw cane sugar wo uld be 
eliminated prior to the date of accession, an d that this measure and any other of a kind  required to be eliminated in the Urugu ay Round and 
prohibited under Article 4 of the Agriculture Agreement would not be applied to any product after the date of accession.  The W orking Party 
took note of these commitments . 
 [BRA] 
According to paragraph 162, from a total of 11,032 tariff lines, 1,630 are subject to compound (mixed) rates, ranging from meat  and butter to watches 
and cars, and 92 subject to specific rates, incl uding chocolate and strong alcoholic beverages. 
 
Brazil notes its expectation that compound (mixed) and specific rates be replaced by ad valorem  tariffs upon Russian Federation's accession, a measure 
that would increase transparency and reduce distortions in trade. 
 
Additionally, Brazil suggests that the Russian Federation make available an English version of its customs service site  (www.customs.ru/ru/ ), as a means 
of facilitating members' access to inform ation on the Russian customs system.  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3
 Page 35Paragraph No. Comment 
Finally, Brazil requests, for transparency pur poses, that a clear explanation on the functioning of world-price contingent tari ffs for imported raw cane 
sugar, a system introduced by Resolution 72, of 29 November 2003, and which entered into force on 1 January, 2004 , be included in the Draft Report. 
 At the same time, Brazil requests a commitm ent from the Russian Federati on to eliminate this system prior to the date of access ion of the Russian 
Federation to the WTO, since it is not in conformity  with Article 4.2 of the Agreement on Agriculture. 
 [EC] 
Descriptive part  
 
Some factual information to be completed, notably products su bject to specific duties exceeding a duty equivalent to 30%.  
 [JPN] 
1. In paragraph 162, items subject to compound tariff rates are prov ided. We would like to seek cl arification from the Russian Fed eration on the 
concrete time frame toward abolishing these compound tariff rates. 
 
2. In paragraph 165, the method of calculating combined duties is provided. We would like to seek clarification from the Russian F ederation on 
whether this method is consistent with the WTO agreement. 
 
3. In paragraph 168, it provides that "He added that following accession to the WT O the Russian Federation would apply MFN treatme nt in 
accordance with its rights and obligations under the WTO agreemen t". Such statement by the Russi an Federation should be replace d by the Russian 
Federation's commitment on this matter. Therefore, language should be amended accordingly. 
 [SUI] 
Paragraph 165 : An example with figures added in this paragraph would help to understand how the calculation is made.   
 [USA] 
Requests for Information or Clarifications That Should be Reflected in the Text: 
 Negotiations of Russia’s tariff schedule are taking place in HS 1996, while Russia’s applied rates are currently in HS 2002.   
 
- At this juncture in the negotiations, it would be helpful to advise in the text the status of preparation of a concordance fo r conversion of the 
results of the negotiations prior to finalization. 
 
Paragraph 162 :  Include in the text HS numbers for the products  for which applied duties exceed 30  percent, as identified in p aragraph 162: 
-sugar;  
-ethyl alcohol and beer;  
-used truck tractors older than 7 years; -used trucks older than 7 years;     
-used passenger motor cars older than 7 years; 
 -furniture [for] which cost is lower than 1.8 euro per 1 kg.
  
 WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3 
Page 36 Paragraph No. Comment 
169-185 Tariff Quotas 
 [ARG] 
Paragraphs 169-185: 
A. Distribution of TRQs : Argentina reserves its right to further comment on this issue, as its bilateral negotiation in market access on goods have no t 
concluded. At this stage Argentina expresses it concern on this issue, as it established a discriminatory distribution of the R ussian market in bovine and 
poultry meats. 
 B. Administration of Tariff Rate Quotas
 
 
1. Paragraph 177 indicates that foreign-ow ned firms established as Russian legal entities could participate in TRQ distribution .  Russia also confirms 
that there were no other legal requirements to particip ate in TRQ auctions that could favor local production. 
This paragraph, however, does not provide information about the requisites that foreign companies have to fulfil to establish t hemselves as legal entities, 
and, therefore, have the right to particip ate in auctions. For the sake of the clar ity and transparency, please provide complet e information about the 
conditions which are required to become legal entities.  
 
2. General comments about quota administration and auctioning :  Russia must ensure that, through this syst em, exporters' incomes do not decrease in 
favor of the Russian Federation or that the system does not beco me a trade restriction. Also, Ar gentina emphasizes that there s hould be a termination 
date of the TRQs during or before 2010, rather than a review. 
 
3. In particular, the auctioning method for TRQ is inconsistent with following WTO provisions: 
a) Agreement on Agriculture : The auctioning fee is a "similar border measure" to those referred  in article 4.2. of the Agreemen t, because it operates in a 
systemic way to increase the effective price of importation to th e equivalent price of out-of-quota imports. Therefore, the auc tioning fee is 
inconsistent with this article. 
 b) Of GATT 94:  
 
 (i) Article I:1, because it would discriminate in respect of "l ike products" of different origin  due to different levels of th e auctioning charge. 
 (ii) Article II:1(b), because the auctio ning fee, which is in connection of the importation, will violate the bound ceilings o f tariffs and erode the 
value of the concession. As an ex ample, the starting auctioning fee informed under Working Paper Nr. 39
1, is equivalent to 102, 42,60 and 93 
Euros per tonne in for the pork, beef and poultry TRQs, respectiv ely. This starting price represents an additional and substant ive cost. 
 (iii) Article II:2(c), because the auctioning fee, due to its na ture, can not be "commensurate with the cost of the services r endered". 
 (iv) Article III:2, because imported products can not be subject to internal charges of any kind in excess of those applied to  domestic products. 
 (v) Article III:4, because imported prod ucts would be accorded a less than favora ble treatment than domestic products. 
 (vi) Article VIII:1(a), because the auctioning fee, due to its nature, can not be "limited to the approximate cost of services  rendered". The 
auctioning fee would also represent an "indirect protection to domestic producers or a taxation of imports" inconsistent with t his article. 
  c) Agreement on Import Licensing. Taking into account that auctioning implies a non-automatic import licensing, it would be i nconsistent with 
                                                      
1 : Job No. 6280.4, 23/9/2004. Table in page 4.  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3
 Page 37Paragraph No. Comment 
 article 3.2. of this Agreement, as the auctioning fee would ha ve a more trade-restrictive or –distortive effect additional to those caused by the 
 imposition of the restriction (in this case the TRQ). 
 4. Could Russia inform the auctioning fees obtained in the auction carried out on 11 October, 2004, as announced in the Working  paper No. 39 (see 
above). 
 5. Paragraph 163: The average of imports made to obtain export licenses should be based on the 2002-2004 period (more recent). 
 [AUS] 
1. We refer to the last sentence of paragraph 170, and propose that new paragraph be included. 
 
170A. A member of the Working Party said that it considered the elimination of the preferential tariff rate quota on raw cane s ugar 
mentioned in paragraph 170 on 31 December 20 03 to be a positive step given that this measure had represented an increase in the  level of 
import restriction on previous levels.  The member however considered that a backward step had been taken on 1 January 2004 by the 
replacement of the tariff quota not with a si ngle rate of import duty but  a world-price contingent im port tariff, which was a m easure of a kind 
required to be eliminated in the Uruguay Round and prohibited under Article 4.2 of the Agriculture Agreement. 
 2. We request paragraph 169 also include a reference to meeting the provisions of Articles I, VIII and X of GATT 1994 (in addit ion to II, XI and 
XIII). 
 
3. In relation to paragraph 172, we seek reference in the text to the existence of minimum auc tion prices in these arrangements  and factual details 
on them.  Such minimum auction prices serve as a minimum import price by placing a floor under the auction price, and therefore  violate the prohibition 
on such measures under Article 4.2 of the Agriculture Agreement.  We also ask that the minimum auction prices applied to tariff  rate quotas be notified 
to Table 4 as minimum import prices. 
 4. We note exclusion from this draft of our concerns about the auctioning of tariff rate quotas.   We request inclusion of the following text after 
paragraph 182 (to be followed by commitment language in a subs equent paragraph in this subsection indicating how Russia will ab ide by its WTO 
obligations in respect of tariff quota allocation and other administration):  
182A. A member of the Working Party noted that tariff quota under the preferential tariff rate quota on raw cane sugar mentione d in 
paragraph 170 had been allocated by auctioning, and observed that the auctioning of quota had raised the internal price of impo rted raw cane 
sugar to such a level that a number of im porters had found it uncompetitive to resell or use the amounts they had purchased.  T he member 
concerned called upon the Russian Federation to refrain from auctioning of tariff quota in the future in order to guarantee con ditions of market 
access under the quota that are no more  restrictive than the in-quota rate. 
 
182B. The member raised further concerns over the proposed us e of auctioning as a method of allocating tariff quota after acces sion.  In the 
view of this member, auction prices repr esented additional imposts on amounts imported under the quota that would be inconsiste nt with tariff 
commitments established under Article II of  GATT 1994 and Article 4 of the Agriculture  Agreement where the total imposts on tho se amounts 
were raised to levels that exceed the in-quota bound rate.  The member was also of the view that the auction prices represented  minimum 
import prices to purchasers of products th at enter under the quota where they placed a floor under the pri ces payable by those purchasers for  
 WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3 
Page 38 Paragraph No. Comment 
imports and accordingly afforded additional protection to domestic  production, inconsistently with Article XI of GATT 1994 and Article 4 of 
the Agriculture Agreement.  Moreover, where a starting price was used under a normal auctioning method, the starting price woul d itself 
represent a minimum import price and accordingly would be inconsistent with Article XI of GATT 1994 and Article 4 of the Agricu lture 
Agreement.  In addition, the terms and conditions of importation of a product subject to auctioning could not be fully known in  advance and 
could therefore not meet appropriate standa rds of transparency and pred ictability under Article X of GATT 1994 and Article 4 of  the 
Agriculture Agreement.  The member called upon the Russian Federation to allocate tariff quota consistently with WTO obligation s from the 
date of accession. 
 
5. In relation to paragraph 175, we seek clarification in the text of Russia's intentions in relation to providing a legal basi s for the eligibility of 
most favoured nation suppliers to recei ve quota and tariff quota allocations. 
 
6. At this stage, we request the inclusion of a paragraph on commitments in relation to the following matters:  
- The introduction of a process for consultation with trading partners, importers and exporters prior to the amendment of tariff quota regulations, 
including public notification of intended arrangements and adequate opportunity for comments to be made before final decisions are taken and 
implemented on such changes; 
- The coverage of this consultation process for consultations to be  held in the event that changes are required to tariff quota a llocations owing to 
abnormal events affecting trade,  such as outbreaks of BSE; 
- The implementation by Russia of an effici ent and timely system for reallocation of unused quota allocations through a transpare nt process that 
will be completed in August each year enabling sufficient time for shipments to be arranged; 
- The publication by Russia on a regular basis of detailed informati on on allocations and usage of ta riff quota so that importers  and exporters can 
monitor market access opportunities on an  ongoing basis th roughout each year; 
- That Russia will refrain from allocating tariff quota through auctioning. 
 
7. Further commitments will be sought subject to explanations provided in response to questions raised in relation to the repor t and in plurilateral 
sessions on tariff-rate quotas.  We reserve our rights in relation to these issues. 
169-185 [BRA] 
As regards paragraph 169, Brazil reiterates its concerns regarding the Russian Federation's intention to have recourse to TRQs — particularly for beef, 
pork and poultry —, a step back ward from trade liberalization. 
 In this respect, Brazil notes that key products of its export in terest are currently subject to the restrictions posed by the e xistence of Tariff-Rate Quotas 
(TRQs) and is deeply concerned, as far as the compatibility with the GATT 1994 and the Agreement on Agriculture are concerned, with the rationale to 
be adopted by the Russia Federation to allocate quotas, for the period 2003-2009, along country-specific criteria.  
Brazil's position is that a tariffs-only regime is much preferable than TRQs as it allows for the market to select suppliers th at provide the best 
combination of price, quality, and stable offer of goods.  Howeve r, the creation of TRQs on a MF N basis could be considered as an option in certain 
cases and for a transitional period. As a result, the allocation of TRQs on a  country specific basis, as proposed by the Russi a party, cannot be accepted, 
since it  freezes market situations and does  not take into consideration productivity differentials, comparative advantages and  other dynamic factors. 
Moreover, it creates a discrimination that cont radicts the very principles of the WTO.   
  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3
 Page 39Paragraph No. Comment 
 [CAN] 
General Comments:  
 Before April of  2003, Russia's imports of meat products were subject to tariff only.  In Canada's view, the TRQs introduced by  Russia in 2003 should 
be only an interim measure in order to pr ovide a period of stabilization for domestic meat production sectors.  Canada seeks fi rm commitment from the 
Russia Federation to terminate its TRQs by 1 January, 2009.   
Specific Problems:
 
 Russia's current  TRQs and its administrati on have crated quota reserves only for certain Members.  This practice has reduced p re-TRQ access for other 
Members and eliminated equal opportunity to all Members to supply their products.  Russia's country reserves in TRQs are discri minatory - a clear 
departure from the MFN principle.     
Possible Solutions and Drafting Proposals:
 
 On termination of TRQs: we need Russia to  confirm that the TRQs on meat products w ill be replaced by a single tariff on MFN bas is for all Members 
by 1 January, 2009.   
 Before the termination of the interim TRQs , Canada seeks that Russia's TRQ administ ration addresses the following specific conc erns and makes 
commitments: 
 
Russia's Tariff Quota Administration:  Specific Questions 
 
 Noting that Russia's tariff quota administration methods should be consistent with the GATT 1994 and the WTO Agreement on Impor t Licensing 
Procedures, as well as the general principl es of transparency and predictability, Canada wishes to submit the following questio ns. 
 1.   The remaining 10 % of annual meat quotas was reported to be auctioned in mid-October 2004.  October is too late in a quota  year for this 
distribution as it provides insufficient time for long distance suppliers to be able to compet e effectively for these opportuni ties, as contracting,  preparing 
and transporting shipments takes at least six weeks.  For 2005 and subsequent quota years could Russia move the date of auction ing (10%) up to June so 
that all exporters have a fair and adequate oppor tunity to compete and fill the quotas obtained? 
 
2.   We understand that in the 2004 quota year Russia allocated quota shares in the beginning of the year and importers who rec eived quota shares 
have until the end of 2004 to use their allocations.  In these circumstances and throughout the quota year, how does Russia kee p track of how much of 
the quota allocations have actually been used, and how much remains unused by an importer during the quota year 2004.   What pr ovisions are made to 
provide transparency on a week to week basis on actual quota fill during the quota period, so that exporters know the extent to  which the quota is filled 
or remains unfilled?      
 
3.   What provisions are in place to address the situ ation of  importers who received a quota allocation but can not use their allocation (for any 
reason)?  Are there provisions for importers to return without pena lty allocations that they will not be able to use?  If alloc ations are unused by a certain  
 WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3 
Page 40 Paragraph No. Comment 
point in the year (e.g. 2 or 3 months before the end of the qu ota year), are there any provisio ns to reassign and reallocate th ese shares, so that the market 
access opportunities they represent can be used? 
 4.   Are there penalties in place to addre ss the situation where importe rs have recei ved an allocation but will not or cannot u se a certain threshold 
level by a certain point in the year?  If an importer is assigned access and is unable  to use it, are there consequences for th e size of their allocation in the 
next period?  What are the specific consequences of under-utilization under Russia s policies?  
5.   What provision is made for new entrants, both in the initial allocations given to importers and in any reassignment of unf illed or returned 
portions during the quota period?   
 [EC] 
Descriptive part  
 
This section will need to be reviewed upon completion of bilateral negotiations.  
EU recalls the conclusion of the chair during the last meeting of the Working Party that "and discriminated against those membe rs that did not provide 
export subsidies" can be deleted (paragraph 174). 
 [JPN] 
1. At the end of paragraph 17 2, reference is made to the possibility of changes in administrative methods. We need to seek clarifi cation from the 
Russian Federation on which way such administrative methods could be changed. And the clarified points should be included in th is paragraph. 
2. We understand that the Russian side is under discussions with the Members concerned on the special measures for high-quality be ef under 
which such beef will be excluded from TRQ regime. In light of en suring transparency concerning the special measures, the detail  on such measure 
should be included in  the present section. 
3. At the end of paragraph 173, it provides that "the representative of the Russian Federation said that his Government intended t o consider 
conversion of the safeguard quota into TRQ."  We would like to seek clarification from the Russian Federation on the concrete p lans for such conversion 
(e.g. timing, methods, etc) and they need to be reflected in the Report. 
 [USA] 
Requests for Information or Clarifications That Should be Reflected in the Text :   
 
Russian legislation/regulations necessary to implement WTO rules are pending for this section, e.g. the legal basis for applica tion of the beef and pork 
TRQs and poultry quotas for 2005.  These should be provided to the Working Party for review. 
 
The quantitative data (on quota amounts and allocations) in paragrap hs 171 and 173 needs to be re moved and placed in a summary table that can be 
easily updated (data for 2005 will also need to be added). 
 
Information should be included on the Government Resolution allowing importers to reapply for import licenses in the event of a  livestock disease 
outbreak in the supplying country.  We reserve our righ t to provide comments in writing on this legislation. 
  
  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3
 Page 41Paragraph No. Comment 
Specific Drafting Suggestions : 
 
Paragraph 171 :  The information on the legislative basis for application of the TRQs should be updated and the information on quota amounts and 
allocations moved to a table which includes the TRQ parameters for 2005, as follows: 
 
171.  With regard to meat, he noted that in 2003 -2004 a two-level tariff had been applied to imports of beef (HS 0201 and 0202) and pork (HS 
0203) since April 2003 .  The legal bases for this measure were Government Resolutions No.49 and No.50 of 23 January 2003 and No. 721, 
722, 723 of 29 November 2003 [Update references to include most recent government resolutions. Delete rest of  paragraph and reformat 
information on quota amounts and allocations to a table.  Provide TRQ parameters for 2005 in that table.]   
 
 
Paragraph 172 :   
 
172. . . . For pork and beef, 90 per cent of the import volume was distributed by granting licenses to historical importers bas ed on their 
representative imports over last three years (2000-2002) with a portion (10 per cent) reserved for new entrants.  [Update this information for 
2005, as the shares have changed.]   These . . . . 
 
Paragraph 179 : 
 
179. . . . The importation of poultry, as well as beef and pork also required a n import permit from the Federal Veterinary Service.  Of the 
import licenses issued by MEDT, 90% of import licenses  were granted to historical importers based on average imports from 2000- 2002, 
with a 10% portion reserved for new entrants.  [Update this information for 2005.]  
 
Paragraph 180 :  The entire paragraph should be updated with 2005 information.   
Paragraph 183 :  The statement “In response, the representative of the Russian Federation stated that importers would be requir ed to present an import 
license from MEDT as a precondition to import.  This requirement also applied for imports of products that would be used for fu rther processing or into 
retail sale.” does not respond to the concerns outlined in paragraph 182. 
 
Elements of a Commitment
: 
 
To administer TRQs in a manner that is consistent with GATT Articles XI and XIII; the Agreem ent on Import Licensing Procedures;  and the Agreement 
on Agriculture. 
186-189 Tariff Exemptions 
 [AUS] 
Paragraph 187 on tariff exemptio ns suggests that access to a quota or tariff quota allocation in Russi a depends on eligibility for a tariff exemption.  We 
request the following paragraphs be included after paragraph 187: 
  
 WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3 
Page 42 Paragraph No. Comment 
187A. In response to questions from a member of the Working Party, the representative of the Russian Federation said that the F ederal Law 
No. 5003-1 "On Customs Tariff" did not provide for the allocation of quota or tariff quota to foreign most favoured nation supp liers and that 
there was no legal basis in the Russian Federation for making such  allocations.  Under provisions of Article […] of the Law, qu ota or tariff 
quota could only be allocated to […].   He confirmed that th e Federal Law "On Amending the Federal Law No. 5003-1 of 28 May 200 3 "On 
Customs Tariff" " when enacted would contain provisions that would allow for the allocation of quota and tariff quota to most f avoured nation 
suppliers.  In response to a further question from this member , the representative of the Russian Federation said that the Fede ral Law "On 
Amending the Federal Law No. 5003-1 of 28 May 2003 "On Customs Tariff" " which entered into force on […] did not include provis ions that 
would allow for the allocation of quota and tariff quota to forei gn most favoured nation suppliers.  The member concerned asked  how provision 
for the allocation of quota or tariff quota to foreign most favoured nation suppliers would be made in the legislation of the R ussian Federation, 
given that provision for this was not included in the Federal Law "On Amending the Federal Law No. 5003-1 of 28 May 2003 "On Cu stoms 
Tariff" ".  The representative of the Russian Federation replied […]. 
 187B. The representative of the Russian Federation said that from the date of accession the Russian Federation would maintain a  continuous 
legal basis for the eligibility of most fa voured nation suppliers  to receive quota and tariff q uota allocations. The Working Pa rty took note of 
these commitments
. 
 [CAN] 
General Comments:  
 
The section only refers to some of the products facing preferential tariff exemptions and contains no commitment language. 
 
Specific Problems:  
 
- It is Canada's view that Russia's future WTO obligations clearly  require Russia to provide MFN tr eatment and waive the 10% to 3 0% import 
duty being applied to certain imports of space equipment. 
 
- There are indications of discriminatory tariff exemptions for aircraft and Russia is being asked to confirm that they have been  terminated. 
 - There is no commitment language obliging Russia to bring its tariff exemptions into conformity with WTO obligations. 
 
Possible Solutions and Drafting Proposals:
 
 
- Addition of the following commitment language: 
 
- The representative of the Russian Federati on confirmed that no later than the date  of accession any tariff reductions or exem ptions for 
goods, including aerospace equipment […] would be granted on an MFN basis.  The Working Party took note of this commitment.  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3
 Page 43Paragraph No. Comment 
 [EC] 
Descriptive part  
 Replies to questions concerning tariff exemptions (paragraph 1 89) will eventually need to be included in this section.  
 
Commitment
 
Pending discussions on the substance of exemptions. 
 [JPN] 
In paragraph 187, industrial and other equipments related foreign investment are listed as items not subject to customs duties.  We would like to seek 
clarification from the Russian Federation on the detailed contents of such industrial and other equipments. Also, in paragraph 189, it provides that "these 
types of exemption were discussed in the sections on "TRIMs" and "Industrial Subsidies" of this Draft Report." We need, first o f all, to clarify the detail 
of what are envisaged by such "types", and then need to examine whether they relate to TRIMs or Industrial Subsidies. In case t here are some items in 
which no relation with TRIMs or Industrial Subsidies is established, the WTO consistency concerning exemption from customs duti es on such items 
should be included in  the present section. 
 [USA] 
Elements of a Commitment : 
 Pending:  Possible submission of commitment language concerning tariff exemptions, depending upon the situation of exemptions a ddressed in other 
sections of the report (e.g., TRIMS, FTZs, and subsidies). 
190-192 Other Duties and Charges   
 [AUS] 
The proposed commitment language in paragraph 192 does not provide clear enough recognition of the disciplines on ODCs under Ar ticle II:1(b) of 
GATT.  We suggest the proposed commitments be amended (and simplified) to read: 
 
192. The representative of the Russian Fede ration said that the Russian Federation wo uld from the date of accession to the WTO not apply 
other duties and charges in the meaning of Article II:1(b) of GATT 1994 and would bind such other duties and charges at zero in  relation to all 
products included in its Schedule of Concessions and Commitments  for Goods.  The Working Party took note of these commitments . 
 [BRA] 
According to paragraph 190 of the Working Party Draft Report, "t he representative of the Russian Federation stated that the Rus sian Federation had not 
applied any duties and charges (ODCs) within the meaning of Artic le II:1(b) of the GATT 1994". The following paragraph mentions  that "noting this 
statement, several members asked the Russian Federation to bind at  zero all such ODCs in its Sche dule of Concessions and Commit ments on Goods and 
to undertake a commitment that it would not apply such measures except in conformity with WTO obligations". Brazil joins those members in that 
request.  
 WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3 
Page 44 Paragraph No. Comment 
 [EC] 
Descriptive part  
No comments  
Commitment
 
We expect that the brackets in paragraph 192 will eventually be lifted. 
 [JPN] 
There are terms "Authority to apply such measures" in paragraph 190. Although we believe that the Russian Federation has no pla n of introducing 
ODCs in the future, we would like to seek clarification from th e Russian Federation on this point. If the Russian Federation ha s no plan to do so in the 
future, the language, "and that any such charges applied to im ports after accession would be in accordance with WTO provisions"  referred to in 
paragraph 192 should be deleted as they may prejudge the possibility of introducing ODCs in the future. 
 [USA] 
Elements of a Commitment : 
 - The commitment language in paragraph 192 should be finalized. 
193-210 
193-197 Fees and Charges for Services Rendered and Other Fees 
Fees and Charges for Services Rendered  
 [BRA]  
According to Article VIII of the GATT 1994, all fees and charges of whatever character  (other than import and export duties) im posed on or in 
connection with importation or exportation shall be limited in amou nt to the approximate cost of services rendered. Brazil, the refore, expects the Russian 
Federation to bring its customs fees regime into fu ll conformity with Article  VIII prior to accession. 
 [CAN]  
General Comments:  
 
This section fails to adequately describe how Russia will ensure that its customs fees meet its GATT Article VIII obligation to  limit them to the 
approximate cost of the service being provided.  However, it is encouraging that Russia is now making the general statement tha t it will meet this 
objective. 
 Specific Problems:
 
 
- Russia has indicated that its draft federal law on amendments to the Customs Code of the Russian federation will replace the cu rrent 15% ad 
valorum customs fee with customs fees that equal the approximate cost of service, as required by GATT Article VIII.  However, i t has not 
provided the detailed fee structure that is needed to verify that it will meet this important obligation.  Given that the new l egislation will come 
into effect on 1 January, 2005 this is problematic. 
- There is no commitment language obliging Russia to meet its Article VIII obligations. 
 
Possible Solutions and Drafting Proposals:  
  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3
 Page 45Paragraph No. Comment 
- It is up to Russia to provide a detailed fee schedule to Memb ers and describe it in this sec tion of the Working Party Report. 
- Once Members have received the schedule they will need to assess the need for an improved description, and determine what commi tment 
language will be needed to mandate improvements to it. 
 [JPN] 
1. In paragraph 194, it provides that "fees for customs clearance were applied temporarily on an ad valorem basis". We would like to seek 
clarification from the Russian Fe deration on what basis those items subject to specific duties as well as items subject to comb ined duties will be 
calculated.   
2. We would like to seek clarification from the Russian Federatio n on how the Russian Federation ensures that charges for customs clearance, 
charges for escort of goods and charges for the storage of goods respectively be set at appropriate levels (In paragraph 194, i t merely provides that "fees 
for customs clearance were applie d "temporarily" on an ad valorem basis".). In ad dition to this, we need to clarify the procedu res for submitting a claim 
with respect to the levels of these charges by importers. 
 [SUI] 
Paragraph 194 and Table 10 : We are still of the view that the ad valorem fees for customs charge and additional customs charge  for customs clearance 
are not consistent with Article VIII GATT as  they are not limited to the approximate co st of services rendered. In which cases the customs charge and 
the additional customs charge are levied ? As these fees are app lied temporarily on an ad valorem basis when do you foresee to replace these ad valorem 
fees ? Will it be the case with the new amendmen ts to the customs code (Paragraph 195)?  
Paragraph 195 :  Have the implementing regulations defining the precise level of fees and procedures been adopted yet? This par agraph will need to 
updated once the relevant legislation has been adopted.  
198-210 Other Fees 
 [ARG] 
Paragraphs 198- 210: Please respond to the questions which have pr eviously been formulated concer ning state taxes and clarify w hat measures Russia 
adopts to guarantee that they are perceive d in an non -discriminatory manner and that  they are compatible with WTO rules. 
 [JPN]  
1. In the present section, clarification is provided concerning port fees, state duties and consular fees in response to the quest ions posed by the 
Members. However, first of all, the detail of "other fees" shou ld be provided in a comprehensive manner in paragraph 198. We wo uld like to seek 
clarification from the Russian Federation on why "state duties" are classified as fees. 
2. In paragraph 205, reference is made to consular fees by quoti ng the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations. As consular fees t o be referred 
to in this section should be of relevance only in rela tion to import/export, paragraph 205 should be deleted. 
 [SUI] 
Paragraph 200 and Table 12 : Table 12 still contains State duties th at are not consistent with Ar ticle VIII GATT as three of th em are ad valorem, i.e. a 
percentage of the value of the agreement or of the amount of the obligation or of accepted mone tary sum and value of securities . When do you foresee to 
modify these ad valorem fees in a WTO consistent manner? This section of the report will need to be revisited. 
Paragraph 204 in relation to paragraph 200 and Table 12 : How do you reconcile the first sentence of paragraph 204 stating for instance that attestation 
of agency agreements do not require any payments such as State duty and Table 12 that foresees the payment of a state duty in s uch a case?   
 WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3 
Page 46 Paragraph No. Comment 
193-210 Fees and Charges for Services Rendered and Other Fees 
 [EC] 
Descriptive part : 
The EU remains concerned about the amount of  fees included in this and other sections . Further clarifications are needed to mak e an assessment about 
the WTO compatibility of the different fees.  
 
"fees and charges for services rendered"   
- customs clearance
 : we note that customs clearance is norm ally free of charge, unless an unusual servi ce is rendered (e.g. after normal working 
hours). As far as the fee as such is conc erned, we note that the draft amendment to  the customs tariff law makes clear that the  customs clearance 
fee has to be related to the service rendered. At the same time, we note that criteria for this fee will be stipulated in imple menting legislation. 
We would appreciate receiving a draf t of these implementing criteria. 
- escort fee : we note that the draft law does not specify that this fee must  be commensurate to the cost of the service rendered. It establ ishes an 
escort fee per km and transport unit. We would like to receive further information on the basis for these calculations to asses s whether these are 
commensurate to the service rendered. (see also previous comments on escort as such) 
- storage fee  : we note that the draft law does not specify this fee must be commensurate to the cost of the service rendered and instead 
establishes a fixed fee for storage. We would like to receive further information/calculations indicating how this fee is comme nsurate to the 
service rendered.  
 
"other fees"  
 - Further work is needed to assess if the fees are commensurate to the cost of  the service rendered.  
 
We note that a number of fees included in  other sections, in particular a fee for ac tivity licence (insofar as they affect impo rt and export operations), 
import licence and PSI, will also need to reflect the cost of the service rendered. The same goes for fees in connection with t ransit operations.  
 
Commitment
 
 
The commitment for fees needs to include the following elements: 
 - That all fees and charges which are impos ed in connection with import and export op erations shall be commensurate to the serv ice rendered 
(Art VIII GATT). The fees and charges to which this discipline is applicable may need specifica tion to the extent doubt has in the examination 
of the descriptive part (examination not yet completed). Fees in clude those mentioned in the sections "fees and charges for ser vices rendered" 
and "other fees". In add ition, a commitment on fees should also include fees  for import licences (currently this section does n ot include a 
commitment on fees), registration rights/activity licence (currently  this section includes a commi tment on fees and taxes) and PSI (currently 
this section includes compliance with Art VIII ). The latter three fees could either be  included in the section "fees and charge s" or in the 
corresponding sections.  
- Transparency: publicatio n of fees and submission of information upon request of Members.   
  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3
 Page 47Paragraph No. Comment 
 [USA] 
Requests for Information or Clarifications That Should be Reflected in the Text :   
 Russian legislation/regulations n ecessary to implement WTO rules are pending for this section. 
 
Update in the text the status of the legislation that will impl ement the new customs fees, i.e., where are the amendments to th e Customs Code in the 
process of legislative enactment?  
 
Please describe Russia’s new fees for customs escort and for warehousing in the text of the draft WP report. 
 
Paragraph 199 :  Last sentence:  indicate in the text which government body collects the port charges. 
 Paragraph 200 :  Clarify in the text that  state duties are required to be paid for  authenticating customs documents  and othe r mandatory customs 
functions, as indicated later in this section. The text should be corrected to reflect that im port/export documents and customs  appeals are subject to state 
duties, e.g., that state duties don’t apply to the act of import or export except
 for the applications described in the text. 
 
Paragraph 204 :  Indicate in the text whether the customs fee of  300 Rubles for the import/export of securities is applied to a ny other economic sectors. 
 Paragraph 207 :  There should be response in the text to the concerns noted in paragraph 206 regarding the application of state  duties to customs 
documents, appeals, or other requirements for import/export.   
 
Specific Drafting Suggestions
: 
 Paragraph 194 :  Insert a statement in this  paragraph describing the previous regime, e.g., “These fees included . . . . The Cu stoms Clearance Fee was an 
ad valorem fee, and not based on th e cost of the service performed.”  
 Elements of a Commitment
: 
 
- The text in paragraph 209 is an adequate basis for building a commitment for this section. Inclusion of additional elements m ay be necessary 
depending on review of the legislation as enacted with respect to the issues raised. 
211-235 Application of Internal Taxes on Imports 
 [BRA] 
Brazil shares the concerns expressed by so me members regarding the deduction of charge s for excise taxes collected on imports f rom Belarus to the 
Russian Federation, which could constitute a violation of Article  I of the GATT 1994 by providing better treatment to imports f orm Belarus than from 
other suppliers. Brazil seeks further information on Russia Federation's practice in that regard. 
 [EC] 
Descriptive section :  
Some further clarification is needed in th is section, including on cars,  aircraft, pharmaceuticals, a nd deviations from the app lication of the MFN  
 WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3 
Page 48 Paragraph No. Comment 
principle in this area. 
 
Commitment  
 
Specific points to be addre ssed in a commitment include: 
- A confirmation that the Russian Federation will not apply to importe d alcoholic products any system of excise taxation that wou ld be 
discriminatory, either in terms of national treatment, or in term s of the MFN obligation.  This also explains the reference to regional destination. 
- Confirmation that if changes are to be made to the system of taxation and controls of alcoholic products, the government will a void creating 
market conditions that would be less favourable to imported products than to domestic products. 
 [MOL] 
The commitment, regarding the application of the indirect taxes in  conformity with the principles  of the country of destination , without any exceptions 
for the energy resources, represents one of the mo st important concern of the Republic of Moldova. 
In this regard, we would like to propose that the provisions of  the paragraph 235 of the chapter Policies affecting trade in go ods include the following 
commitment, which has been previously proposed by our Mission: 
 
"The representative of the Russian Federation confirmed that, fr om the date of accession, the Russian Federation would apply ex port regulations, in 
particular export duties and VAT, on a non-discriminatory basis vis-à-vis  to all WTO members and goods, without any exceptions. The Working Party 
took note of this commitment." 
 [USA] 
Requests for Information or Clarifications That Should be Reflected in the Text :   
 
Russian legislation/regulations necessary to implement WTO rules (e.g., ratification of the Agreement with Belarus, revision of  the tax regime for used 
autos) are pending for this section. 
 
Confirm in the text that with implementation of this agreement,  there are no longer any circum stances under which Russia collec ts indirect taxes on 
imports based on the country of origin principle. 
211-223 - Excise Taxes 
 [JPN] 
In paragraph 215, the issue of the WTO consistency is raised by  the Members concerning its taxation policy vis-à-vis Belarus. W e would like to know 
the Russian Federation's views on how to ensu re the WTO consistency concerning excise taxes dealt with in its bilateral agreeme nt with Belarus. And 
there need a commitment from the Russian Federation in this regard. 
 [SUI] 
Paragraph 215 : During the last Working Party with Belarus (30 September 2004), Belarus indicated that it signed an agreement w ith the Russian 
Federation to switch to the destination principle from 1 Januar y 2005 for VAT. Please confirm that  it is the case and that the Russian Federation will 
also switch to the destination principle and that it will also apply in the case of excise duties.  
Paragraph 223 and Table 14 :  how the ad valorem part of combin ed rate of excise tax for cigarettes, i.e. 65 rubbles per 1,000 pieces plus 8% can be 
equal to 1%?   
  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3
 Page 49Paragraph No. Comment 
 [USA] 
Paragraphs 214-5:  Please confirm in the text: 
-that Russia and Belarus signed an Agreement in September entitled «Concerning the main rules in collecting indirect taxes in s phere of export, 
import, execution of work and service»  that provides for the collection of indirect taxes in trade (e.g., VAT and excise taxes) between the two 
countries on basis of the country of destination principle;  
-that the Agreement will go into effect from th e date of its ratification by both parties; 
-that Russia’s legal authority to  apply its indirect taxes vis-à-vis Belarus on this principal is contained in recent «Amendmen ts to the second 
Part of Tax Code of Russian Federation and the other legislative acts of Russian Federation» dated 18 August 2004; and  
-that it entered into effect on 1 January 2005.   
 
Paragraph 217 :  This paragraph, especially the last sentence, should be expanded and made more precise, i.e., detailing specif ically how the excise tax 
on autos, based on engine size, could be applied to ensure that it does not discriminate.  It should also deal with the special  tax on used autos imported 
by persons. 
224-235 - Value-Added Tax 
 [AUS] 
We seek the inclusion of the following paragraphs in the draft report after proposed paragraph 233. 
 
x. In response to questions from a member, the representative of the Russian Federation confirmed that there was a temporary pr ovision 
for VAT exemptions for enterprises in the agricultural sector in relation to products used for making payments in kind to their  employees in lieu 
of monetary payments for part or all of the labour income owed.  […] provided the legal basis for such VAT exemptions.  The tax  authorities 
allowed such exemptions where three conditions were fulfilled:  70 per cent or more of the producer's own income was generated from the sale 
of the agricultural products of its own manufacture;  the producer was unable to fund through its own accounts the payment of l abor income 
owed to its employees;  and the producer paid such labour income in kind only to its employees and only with agricultural produ cts of its own 
manufacture.  These VAT exemptions were widely used in the 1990s but their usage had since declined to negligible levels. 
 x. In response to further questions from this member, the repr esentative of the Russian Federation said that the temporary prov ision for 
VAT exemptions under […] would be  eliminated by the date of accession.  From th e date of accession, the tax authorities of the Russian 
Federation would also ensure that all payments in kind would be treated on an identical basis to monetary payments in the deter mination of 
VAT liabilities for all enterprises both in the agricultural sector  and all other sectors of the economy.  The Working Party to ok note of these 
commitments
.  
 WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3 
Page 50 Paragraph No. Comment 
 [CAN] 
General Comments:  
 
While there is a useful description of the discriminatory VAT tr eatment that a number of products are facing, none is included of the discriminatory 
treatment of space equipment.  In Canada's  opinion, the basis of acceptable commitment la nguage is included in brackets in para graph 234 of the current 
draft of the Working Party Report.  
Specific Problems:
 
 - While there is a detailed examination of other examples of goods facing discriminatory application of the Russian VAT (e.g. agr icultural 
products, fish, used cars, medical equipment and pharmaceuticals) there is no description of the discriminatory treatment of sp ace equipment 
from countries which do not have space treaties with Russia. 
- There is no agreed text committing Russia to provide MFN and national treatment vis-à-vis the application of the VAT and new br acketed 
commitment text has been introduced in paragraph 235 which, while it repeats the general obligations, is not linked to the spec ific examples of 
discrimination contained in this section of the Working Party Report. 
 
Possible Solutions and Drafting Proposals:
 
 - Insertion of the following "some Members text' describing the discriminatory VAT treatment of space equipment: 
- Some Members noted that space eq uipment originating in some countries face, at  a minimum, a 20% VAT while those from other 
countries enjoy an exemption from the VAT.  They indicated that this is inconsistent  with the MFN provisions of GATT Article I and 
sought the immediate application of equivalent VAT treatment to all space equipment regardless of its country of origin. 
 
- Adoption of the following bracketed, commitment text currently in  paragraph 234 as the commitment paragraph  with the addition of: the 
italicized text; and a reference to a paragraph describing the discriminatory treatment of sp ace equipment (i.e. the draft para graph above): 
- The representative of the Russian Federati on confirmed that from the date of acce ssion, the Russian Federation would apply it s 
domestic taxes, including VAT, excise taxes, and other taxes applied to goods including those listed in Table […] and paragraph s […] 
in compliance with Articles I and III of the GATT 1994, in a non- discriminatory manner to imports regardless of the country of origin 
and to domestically produced goods, without exceptions, regardless of the regional destination of goods.  The Working Party took note 
of this commitment.  
 [JPN] 
1. As set out at the end of paragraph 227, we would like to seek clarification from the Russian Federation on its views on the WTO  consistency 
concerning the taxation policy vis-à-vis  Belarus. 
2. In response to the questions posed by Members concerning discriminatory application of VAT in imports of used cars as set out i n paragraph 
230, in paragraph 233 it provided that "Government Resolution No.718 equalized customs payments made by legal and natural perso ns in the 
importation of motor cars into the customs territories of the Russi an Federation". It is not clear whether VAT is included in " customs payments" and 
also whether used cars are included in "motor cars". The above stat ement in paragraph 233 is insufficient as an answer to the q uestions referred to in 
paragraph 230 and therefore need to be further clarified.  
3. At present, the method of payment of VAT in the Russian Federation is that VAT corresponding to the vale of customs clearance i s required to  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3
 Page 51Paragraph No. Comment 
be paid at the time of custom s clearance and claim for refunding the amount of th e VAT paid is submitted after sale of goods, c alculating the VAT 
equivalent to the amount of value added (Paragraph 2 of Article 327 of the Customs Code). We would like to seek clarification f rom the Russian 
Federation on technical reasons why the Russian Federation will not be able to let VAT be paid in a lump sum after sale of good s as the system 
practiced in Europe. 
 [SUI] 
Paragraph 230 and 233 : As indicated in paragraph 230 we would like to know on which basis and for which reason does the Russia n Federation apply a 
higher (20%) VAT for clinical trials than  for pharmaceuticals (10%) in the absence of a special permit from the Ministry of Hea lth? We also ask the 
Russian Federation to consider VAT exemption for clinical trials as they are not intended for resale and as the Tax Code allows  for exemptions. 
This section (Application of internal taxes on imports) of the repo rt needs to be updated to refl ect the change from the countr y of origin principle to the 
country of destination principle in the case of Belarus.  
 [USA] 
Paragraph 225 :  If Russia confirms the ad option of the destination principle for indirect taxation of imports from Belarus, th is paragraph should be 
updated to indicate that, as of 1 January 2005, the VAT will be applied in a WTO-consistent fashion vis-à-vis Belarus as well a s the CIS.   
 Mention should also be made of the recent decision of Russia to apply the destination principle for application of the VAT on e xports to the CIS.   
 
Paragraph 233 :  We question the explanati ons given concerning ta xation of autos and pharmaceutical s, and require further clari fication of the taxation 
issues that Members have raised.   
 
 
Elements of a Commitment:
 
 Paragraph 234 :  The commitment text in paragraph 234 is an adequate basis for building a commitment for this section. 
236-245 Quantitative Import Restrictions, including Prohibitions and Quotas 
 [ARG] 
Paragraph 236 states that import restrictions could be applied purs uant to Article 32 of Federal Law No 164-FZ and that these q uotas could be justifiable 
under Articles XX and XXI of the GATT 1994.  Please revise th is section to add an explanation for this statement.   
 
Paragraphs 237 and 238: These paragraphs indicate that Russia co uld apply, in exceptional cases, quantitative restrictions on a gricultural or fishery 
products in accordance with Article XI:2 of  the GATT 1994. The paragraphs seem to refer to paragraph 2-c of that article. Howev er, quantitative 
restrictions of article XI:2-C of GATT 94 have been derogated by article 4.2. of the Agreement on Agriculture, which superseded  Article XI:2-C of 
GATT 94. 
 First, Argentina would like to know whether import restrictions under Article XI:2 (c) of GATT 94 have been or are being applie d. 
 
Second, Argentina would like to point out that according to the General Interpretativ e Note to Annex 1 A of the WTO Multilatera l Agreements on Trade 
in Goods, "in the event of conflict between a provision of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 and the provision of  another Agreement in 
Annex 1 A to the Agreements establishing the WTO, the provision of the other agreement shall prevail to the extent of the confl ict"    
 WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3 
Page 52 Paragraph No. Comment 
Therefore, Argentina requests that Russia commits itself to comply  with article 4.2. of the Agreement on Agriculture as from it s accession date and 
removes any measures that could be inconsistent with that article. 
 [AUS] 
1. In paragraph 236, Russia notes import restrictions could be applied pursuant to Article 32 of Federal Law 164-FZ and in acco rdance with 
federal laws and international treaties of the Russian Federatio n as "measures not carrying an economic character  and affecting  trade in goods."  It 
further notes that such measures were justifiable under Articles XX and XXI of GATT 1994.  We agree with the concerns raised in  paragraph 239 on 
this issue and seek the following:  
- clarification in paragraph 236 of the definition of "not carry ing an economic character and affecting foreign trade in goods".   
- information on the types of measures justifiable under this law, and whether the law specifies the appropriate intent of such m easures (eg to 
protect public morals, protect human, animal or plant life etc) 
- clarification of the consistency of this la w with provisions of the chapeau to Article  XX, which requires that measures (includ ing import 
restrictions) are not applied in a manner which would constitute a means of arbitrary or unjustifiable discrimination between c ountries where 
the same conditions prevail, or a disguised restriction on international trade. 
- adoption of commitment language to effect  of that outlined in paragraph 239. 
 2. We note the absence in this section of a reference to quantitative restrictions allowable under Article 24 of Federal Law No . 164-FZ, which are 
referred to in paragraph 250 on Import Licensing.  We seek: 
 
- inclusion of text in this section relating to this provision, including a full explanation of the nature of these restrictions,  their WTO justification 
and how they are applied. 
 
3. We note references in paragraph 240-241 to legal provisions for the application of quantitative restrictions on the importat ion of alcohol (eg 
restrictions on distilled imports to no more than 10 per cent of the Russian market, and a further restriction within this quot a that at least 60 per cent of 
imports contain 15 per cent alcohol content or less).  We  note this provision still exists in law and recommend: 
 
- adoption of commitment language for the removal of these provisions from Russian law. 
 
4. We note reference to draft legislation in the State Duma entitled "On Amending the Federal Law On State Regulation of Produc tion and 
Turnover of Ethyl Alcohol, Alcoholic and Alcohol-containing Products".  We seek:  
- inclusion in the text of more recent in formation on these reforms following the eventual approval of these amendments. 
 [BRA] 
Regarding the issue of quantitative import restrictions, including  prohibitions and quotas, Brazil requests further clarificati on on how Federal Law N.º 
164-FZ, of 12 December 2003, would be  consistent with GATT 1994, particularly with  Articles XX and XXI. 
 
In particular, Brazil seeks: 1) an explanation on the parameters to be followed by the Russian Federation for applying import r estrictions pursuant to 
Article 32 of Federal Law N.º 164-FZ and in accordance with fede ral laws and international trea ties of the Russian Federation, as "measures not carrying  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3
 Page 53Paragraph No. Comment 
an economic character and affecting foreign trade in goods"; and 2)  clarification on  how those measures can be justifiable und er Articles XX and XXI 
of the GATT 1994. 
 [CAN] 
General Comments:  
 
Like all Members, Russia should be in compliance of Article 4.2 of Agreement on Agriculture by eliminating prohibitions and quo tas at the date of 
accession.  
Specific Problems:
 
 The current quota for poultry in Russia has a prohibition above the annual quota limit.  Russia has refereed Article XI:2 of th e GATT as a justification 
for this quantitative restrictions.  It should be noted that this  article had been superseded in the Uruguay Round by Article 4 :2 of Agreement on 
Agriculture.  
Possible Solutions and Drafting Proposals:
 
 Before the termination of quota for poultry, we need Russia to  confirm replacing  the current prohibition above the annual quot a limit with a single out-
of quota tariff rate for poultry. 
 
More importantly, quota for poultry were introduced as an emerge ncy safeguard action in May 2003.  The duration of the poultry safeguard measure 
were set for three years.  Consequently, it is expected that Russia will  confirm that the quota rest rictions be replaced by a s ingle tariff rate for all 
Members on a MFN basis in May of 2006. 
 [EC] 
Descriptive part :  
- We understand that Article 32 of the Foreign Trade Activity Law is  intended to cover Article XX GATT, whilst Art 21 of that law  intends to 
cover exceptions provided for in Art XI GATT. We would like to se e a clarification that both Artic les are not to be applied bey ond the scope 
provided for in the GATT. 
- We welcome confirmation that the legislative provision provid ing for a QR for alcohol is withdrawn (paragraph 243).  
- We note that a reply to paragraph 244 (on possible introduction of a State monopoly) is missing. This paragraph (together with a reply) could 
probably be moved to the STE section. We expect a commitment for this point (see hereafter) 
Commitment   
The commitment language for QRs is currently included at the end of the section on import licences, paragraph 270. Whether it r emains there or is 
moved to the section on QRs, specific additions will be necessary: 
 - Confirmation that the exceptions provided for in the Foreign trad e activity will be applied in strict conformity with Article X I and XX GATT. 
- Confirmation that amendments to Federal Law 171-FZ will be in place by WTO entry, in cluding the elimination of quantitative res trictions to 
export and import pursuant to Article 13 of that law and that the government does not have the intention to introduce any quant itative 
restrictions on alcoholic beverages or ethyl alcohol in the future, unless allowed under the WTO Agreement.  
 WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3 
Page 54 Paragraph No. Comment 
- Confirmation that in the event of introducing a monopoly in th e area of alcohol the Russian Federation will observe provisions of GATT 1994, 
in particular, Articles I and III.  
 [JPN] 
1. In paragraph 236, there is an explanation on import restricti on as measures not carrying an ec onomic character and affecting fo reign trade in 
goods under Article 32 of Federal Law No.164-FZ. Also in paragraph 237, there is an explanation on import restriction on agricu ltural or fishery 
products under Article 21 of the said Law. We would like to seek clarification from the Russian Federation on whether there are  some other subjects to 
which measures of import restriction are applicable under the said Law. 
2. In response to the question posed by a Member in paragraph 239,  there should be a clear and c oncrete commitment therein by the Russian side 
in the same paragraph. 
3. In paragraph 245, there is a description on introduction of safeguard measures in the form of an import quota. This should be e xplained in the 
section of "Anti-dumpi ng, countervailing and safeguard meas ures" including explanations on its treatment after the accession to  the WTO as well as its 
WTO consistency. 
 [USA] 
Requests for Information or Clarifications That Should be Reflected in the Text :   
 
Russian legislation/regulations n ecessary to implement WTO rules are pending for this section. 
 Paragraph 236 :   
- The text should include, at the outset, a comprehensive list, by  HS number, of products curren tly subject to such measures. 
- The last two sentences of this paragrap h are unclear and describe a rather sweepi ng mandate to use quantitative restrictions.    
- The text should clarify whether the refe rence to international treaties means that Russia will not apply such measures if the y are inconsistent 
with WTO provisions (note: see paragraph 239). 
Paragraph 237 :   
- The text should elaborate on the process by which the Russian  Federation will determine the exceptional and/or special cases in which 
quantitative restrictions may be applied to agricultural and fisher ies products under FZ-164.  Is this process outlined in the law or in separate 
regulations?  The intent of the measures should be described. 
- This paragraph refers to imposition of measures in compliance w ith Article XI:2 of the GATT.  We note that the provisions of the Agriculture 
Agreement have superceded Article XI:2 and that any m easures must comply with the Agriculture Agreement. 
Paragraph 238 : 
- The text should be redrafted to clarify the substantive basis or justifications for application of the authorized measures.  What procedures would 
the Government use to apply QRs without an MEDT recommendation?   Please clarify the reasons an d criteria Russia would use.  
Paragraph 243 : 
- The text should be updated to describe the status of efforts to amend Law FZ-171 and the “automatic import licensing” system that will be 
introduced. 
  
Elements of a Commitment
: 
The report should be structured so that the commitment applicable for Import Licensing Systems is applied to this section as we ll.  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3
 Page 55Paragraph No. Comment 
246-271 Import Licensing Systems 
 [AUS] 
1. We note reference in paragraph 248 to a draft Government Resolution "On the Procedure for Licensing Export and Import of Goo ds (work, 
services) in the Russian Federation".  We further note that th e draft would reduce the documents required and terms for issuing  the import licenses.  We 
seek: 
 
- further details in the text on what the Government Resolution will provide for. 
 
2. We note that the Russian Federation has provided justifica tions for controls under GATT Article XX and XXI.  We seek: 
 - further information on how import licensing requirements are justified under these articles, and how they are relevant to the a chievement of 
these objectives. 
 3. In paragraph 250, Russia states that licensing would also be established when introducing temporary quantitative restriction s (in accordance 
with Article 24 of Federal Law 164-FZ) on  certain types of goods.  We seek: 
 - further information on the types of temporary quantitative restric tions envisaged and the goods they were likely to be applied to. 
 
4. We note that in document WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3, raw cane sugar of HS subheading 1701.11 has not been included in the list  of 
products subject to automatic import licensing in Table 16(b).  We recall however that raw cane sugar of HS subheading 1701.11 had been included in 
the list of products subject to automatic import licensing appended to the Consolidated Texts in the Working Document of 28 Jun e 2004 circulated to all 
members of the Working Party, and we would like to pick up the constructive discussion on this measure.  We seek the insertion of paragraphs on 
automatic import licensing, to follow the discussion on non-automatic import licensing and precede the general commitment parag raph 270 on 
quantitative import restrictions and import licensing:  
269A. A member of the Working Party asked what products were su bject to automatic import licensing  and how the requirements of Articles 
1 and 2 of the Agreement on Import Licensing Procedures were me t.  The representative of the Russian Federation stated that all  products 
subject to automatic import licensing were listed in Table [16(b) ].  All legal and natural persons seeking to import those prod ucts were equally 
eligible to apply for and obtain such licen ses.  License applications could be submitted on any working day prior to the custom s clearance of the 
goods.  Appropriately completed applications were approved in  all cases and in a period not exceeding three working days.  Ther e were no 
reasons for refusing a license and no circumstances under which a license could be refused. 
 
269B. The member commended the Russian Federation for the standard of conformity achieved in relation to those aspects of its s ystem and 
requested an explanation of the circumstances surrounding and the rationale for the introduction of the automatic import licens ing requirement 
for raw cane sugar of HS subheading 1701.11.  The representative of the Russian Federation said that this requirement had been introduced to 
monitor imports of this product from 1 Ja nuary 2004 under the world pr ice-contingent rates of im port duty which had replaced th e tariff rate 
quota on that date.  The member concerned noted that the world price-contingent rates of import duty for this product were a me asure of a kind 
required to be eliminated in the Uruguay Round, were prohibite d under Article 4.2 of the Agriculture Agreement and could not be  maintained 
or applied after accession.  This member considered it appropriat e that, upon the elimination of the world price-contingent rat es of import duty  
 WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3 
Page 56 Paragraph No. Comment 
prior to the date of accession, the automatic import licensing requirement for ra w cane sugar of HS subheading 1701.11 used to monitor that 
measure also be eliminated.  The member also noted that, given the circumstances surrounding and the rationale for the introduc tion of this 
requirement, the use of automatic import licensing to monitor imports of this product but not competing products which also aff ected the 
Russian Federation's domestic market for sugar discriminated against the products of members which exported raw cane sugar, and  called upon 
the Russian Federation to not apply such a requirement to this product for monitoring purposes unless the same requirement was also applied to 
competing products.  
269C. The representative of the Russian Federation confirmed that  from the date of accession auto matic import licensing would b e used only 
in conformity with the provisions of Articles 1 and 2 of the Agreement on Import Licensing Procedures and all other relevant pr ovisions of the 
WTO, including other applicable provisions of the Agreement on Import Licensing Procedures and those of Article I:1 of GATT 199 4.  
Automatic import licensing requirements would not be maintained unless the circumstances which gave rise to their introduction prevailed and 
as long as their underlying administrative purposes could not be achieved in a more appropriate way.  The automatic import lice nsing 
requirement for raw cane sugar of HS subheading 1701.11 would be eliminated upon the elimination of the world price-contingent rates of 
import duty prior to the date of accession and not reapplied to  this product for monitoring pu rposes unless all other products falling to HS 
headings 17.01 and 17.02 imported into the Russian Federation from all sources were subject to the same automatic import licens ing 
requirement.  The Working Party took note of these commitments
. 
 
270. The representative of the Russian Federation also confirmed that the Russian Federation would …  …  The Working Party took note of 
these commitments . 
  [BRA] 
As paragraph 250 states, "According to the Article 24 of Federal Law N.º 164-FZ, licensing was also required in the event of te mporary quantitative 
restrictions on imports of certain types of goods". Brazil re quests clarification on which would be those temporary quantitativ e restrictions and to which 
goods they would apply.  
 [EC] 
Descriptive part :  
Pending issues in this section include: 
- Completion of the general examination of import licensing: draft implementing legislation pending 
- Change of the import licensing system for ICT products: we welc ome Russia's intentions as regards facilitation of trade in ICT products, and 
note that further discussions will be nece ssary after submission of draft legislation distinguishing between sensitive and non- sensitive 
encryption products. We consider the Wa ssenaar agreement to contain a useful basis for making such a distinction. 
- Clarification on paragraph 261, in particular what happens when the quantity shipped is larger than that listed in the contract . 
 
Commitment  
Commitment will need to include: - A general confirmation of the relevant GATT articles and the Agreement on import licensing 
- Specific commitments as regards the elimin ation of non-automatic licences upon accessi on for "non-sensitive"  ICT products, alco holic 
beverages (including a confirmation of simplified procedures), 
- The current commitment proposed by Member s does not include reference to Art VIII GA TT for fees imposed for import licences. A  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3
 Page 57Paragraph No. Comment 
commitment will need to be added either in this section or in the section fees and charges. We would like to see specification that for alcoholic 
beverages that any discriminatory fee between imported and domestic products in relation to licensing procedures will be elimin ated upon 
accession. 
 [JPN] 
1. In paragraph 248, it provides that the Government is working on a draft Government Resolution "On the Procedure for Licensing E xport and 
Import of Goods in the Russian Federation". Under this draft Reso lution, there are three types of licenses; one time, general a nd exclusive. Clarification 
is required as to the difference among and the purposes of these licenses, etc. We also need to seek clarification from the Rus sian Federation on how the 
procedures for renewing one time license will be improved. 
2. In paragraph 249, it provides that a draft Government Resolution concerning monitoring of export and import of certain types of  goods would 
be prepared. Since the detail of the draft Resolution is not set out in the paragraph, we would like to seek clarification from  the Russian Federation on its 
detail and would like to obtain confirmation by the Russian side that such monitoring will not be NTB. 
3. In paragraph 250, it provides that licenses are required for the purpose of ensuring the protection of physical or legal person 's property and State 
or municipal property. We would like to seek clarification from the Russian Federation on the meaning of "ensuring the protecti on of physical or legal 
person's property and State or municipal property". 
4. In paragraph 252, the Russian Federation does not seem to provide a sufficient answer to the questions concerning non-automatic  licenses, etc. 
posed by the Members in paragraph 250. Therefore more detailed answers should be provided in that paragraph. 5. The Russian commitments referred to in the first sentence of paragraph 270, in the first and second sentences of paragraph 271 seem to be 
covering wide ranging areas or be rather focusing on different issues. Therefore, language could be modified so as to focus on commitment relating to 
import license issues. 
 [SUI] 
General comment : We very much welcome the new presentation of th is section which is much clearer than the previous version. Ho wever, the text does 
still not make a clear distinction between the requirements for automatic and non-automatic licenses.  Paragraph 247 :  it would be useful to specify for how long and how many times the licence can be requested. It would also be b etter to specify that it is 
in the case of non-automatic import licences.  
Paragraph 248 :  Please explain in detail what is an exclusive license? What is the difference with the one-time and the genera l licences? Will the fee 
charged for issuing a license under the "draft government resolution on the procedure for licensing export and import of goods"  still be the same as in 
Order no 363 ? What is the fee charged in the case of  an exclusive license? Is it a flat fee? How much? 
Paragraph 249 :  indicates that a draft government resolution will be prepared on the procedure to monitor export and import ce rtain types of goods. This 
paragraph should indicate that these licenses will be automatic. How are the goods subject to this monitoring selected? How oft en will the list be 
revised? Please indicate where the list is available. 
Paragraph 250 : Which are the goods considered as "sensitive"? How many goods will be on the list ? Please provide the list of these goods with the 
indication of HS codes and a full description. Are these goods the same as those listed in tables 16a? 
 
We are still of the view that the licensing requirements for pharmaceuticals are burdensome, for instance the obligation to re- register periodically 
(paragraph 259). We encourage th e Russian Federation to simplify its requirements in the case of pharmaceu tical products and ho pe that the new draft 
law on foreign trade and import/export licensing will put th e Russian legislation in conformity with WTO rules. 
Paragraph 262 and 264: what has been undertaken to address the inconsistency of the ad valorem fee (0.05% of the contract value ) charged for issuing 
permits and preliminary to import pharmaceutical products? Has this  fee been eliminated yet? Plea se also explain the rationale for requesting a  
 WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3 
Page 58 Paragraph No. Comment 
preliminary import permit for pharmaceuticals and how it is consiste nt with the import licensing ag reement (Article 1.6 :  Appl ication procedures shall 
be as simple as possible)? What is th e duration of such a preliminary permit? 
Paragraph 263 :  several information in this paragraph relate to activity licences and should be moved to the relevant section of this Working Party 
report, i.e. the following sentences should be moved to the sec tion "registration requirements fo r import/export operations : " They asked the Russian 
Federation to confirm that activity licences would be made avail able to all registered companies (domestic or foreign), which s atisfied government 
regulatory criteria. They noted that this could not prevent th e Russian Federation  from operating state-trading enterprises or  applying controls on 
imports and exports for example for purposes of human health, as long as these were applied in a manner consistent with relevan t WTO obligations ." 
As the current law no 86 on medicines is inconsistent with th e new draft laws on foreign trade and import/export licensing whic h steps have been 
undertaken to amend or repeal th is law to ensure that it will be consistent with  WTO rules by the date of accession ? Could the  Russian Federation give 
some information on the amendments foreseen in th e new draft in the case of pharmaceutical products ? 
 [USA] 
Requests for Information or Clarifications That Should be Reflected in the Text :   
 Russian legislation/regulations n ecessary to implement WTO rules are pending for this section. 
 
More information is needed on the content and status of the new Government Resolution on licensing, pursuant to FZ-164. In part icular, information is 
needed on provisions relating to licensing used to administer tariff rate quotas. 
 
More information is needed on Russia’s intentions on use of Ar ticle 26 to establish additional state trading enterprises, e.g.,  for alcohol. 
 
For products containing encryption devices or technology, Russia justifies its discretionary licensing regime on national secur ity grounds.  We question 
whether there are national security issues involved in commercially traded electronic and other high technology products.   
 
Russia should elaborate on this issue, indicating how it intend s to limit the scope of the discretionary licensing requirement to avoid interference with 
commercially traded imports. 
 
Specific Drafting Suggestions
:   
 
This section should be revised to ensure that the distinction between activity licensing and im port licensing is clear, and tha t the information provided on 
import licensing is comprehensive.   
For each of the items subject to import licensing listed, the text should note: 
 - If an activity license is required and the activity that  is licensed, e.g., production, distribution, etc.; 
- If an import contract must be provided; 
- If fees are charged, including the special .0 5 percent fee for pharmaceutical licensing; and  
- If a fee has been eliminated, please provide confirmation that the fee is no longer in effect and is no longer being applied.    
 
  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3
 Page 59Paragraph No. Comment 
Elements of a Commitment : 
 
Paragraph 270 : The commitment text in paragraph 270 is an ade quate basis for building a commitment for both this section and f or Import Quantitative 
Restrictions.   
 
We seek an additional commitment that Russia will develop a narr ow positive list of products incorporating encryption devices o r technology for which 
import licensing is required, and that the list will not include commercial products.  
272-291 Customs Valuation 
 [ARG] 
Paragraph 277: "Special technique" 
Would the delegation of Russia further revise the text of this section in order to incorporate more details about the "special technique" of customs 
valuation used with respect to the valuation of certain importe d products?  Having checked documents WT/ACC/RUS/28, WT/ACC/RUS/ 33 and 
WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3, it remains unclear what this "special technique" consists of, how it is applied and whether the Feder ation of Russia 
intends to continue using it in the future. 
 [AUS] 
Paragraph 285 refers to a number of deficiencies in the new legislation in relation to customs valuation.  We seek: 
 
- Russia's response to these issues; and  
- a timetable for meeting its commitment that its customs valuation laws, regulations and practices would be in full conformity w ith the relevant 
WTO provisions from the date of accession, without recourse to any transition period , and it would not use minimum values, refe rence prices or 
fixed valuation schedules. 
 [BRA] 
Given that paragraph 285 points out several deficiencies in the draft Law amending the Customs Tariff Law, Brazil suggests that  the Russian Federation 
be requested to submit further comments on this matter as well as undertake commitments regarding a deadline to bring its legis lation on customs 
valuation into full conformity with the provisions of GATT 1994. 
 [CAN] 
General Comments:  
 A number of problems remain with the Russian customs valuation system.  In particular, the absence of a proper guarantee system  is problematic. 
 
Specific Problems:
 
 
- Russian legislation does not adequately provide for a guarantee system allowing goods to be withdrawn from customs pending the 
determination of value.  This problem is not sufficiently well explained and no specific commitment text exists requiring an am endment to the 
current legislation.  
 
Possible Solutions and Drafting Proposals:  
  
 WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3 
Page 60 Paragraph No. Comment 
- Additional text is required describing the problem and committing Ru ssia to reforming its practices to be in conformity with th e Agreement on 
Implementation of Article VII of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994. 
 [EC] 
Descriptive part .  
Pending clarifications include 
- Further explanations on the "special technique of customs control aimed at preventing gross under-invoicing of customs value" ( paragraph 274) 
and the methods of the "decision making authorities of the customs bodies" for checking the truth of the stated value of produc ts (277). 
- Replies to questions raised in paragraph 285 
- A further discussion on methods used for risk assessment will be necessary.  
- How the interpretative notes (which are an in tegral part of WTO) will be incorporated. 
- What method is used for customs valuation of exports (custo ms valuation for exports is included in Article VII GATT). 
 
Commitment :  
 
- Specific elements may need to be addressed through a commitment, depending on the clarifications to follow on the descriptive p art 
 [JPN] 
In paragraph 289, it provides that minimum prices are not applicable for customs valuation purposes. And the Russian Federation 's commitment to that 
effect is provided in paragraph 290. In this connection, as minimum customs values have been applicable to automobiles and elec tric products, we would 
like to request the Russian Federation to confirm that applicati on of such minimum customs value will be terminated. We would a lso like to obtain the 
Russian Federation's confirmation th at the system of minimum customs values for audio visual products in  each charact er of thes e products as well as in 
each place of manufacturers' headquar ters will be amended. In any event, we should  establish an independent paragraph to addres s the issue of minimum 
customs values. 
 [SUI] 
Paragraph 274 should be moved before paragraph 277 as paragraph 275 and 276 contain the questions and concerns of members and p aragraph 274 the 
answer of the Russian Federation to th e question about the special technique.  
Paragraph 280 :  As a draft Law dealing with customs valuation is still pending, this section of the Working Party report will need to be revised and 
updated once this draft has been adopted.  
Paragraph 283 :  What do you mean by "the 90 days requirement could be administered flexibly" in determining the customs value using the deductive 
method? Paragraph 288 :  Please confirm that the right of appeal to a j udicial authority without penalty is foreseen in the customs leg islation and where (which 
article of which law)?  
 [USA] 
Requests for Information or Clarifications That Should be Reflected in the Text :   
 
Russian legislation/regulations n ecessary to implement WTO rules are pending for this section. 
 Paragraph 278 :  The text should contain a substantive response from Russia to the concerns of Members about the “special techn ique” of customs 
valuation, or an indication of how this measure will be altered to comply with WTO norms, and include information on the follow ing specific points:  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3
 Page 61Paragraph No. Comment 
 
- Given that SCC Order No. 755 appears to perpetuate the system of identifying prior to entry imports for special valuation han dling, clarify how 
Russia will ensure that such a system is not used as a form of administratively applied valuation. 
- Clarify how the “special technique” of valuation will be eliminated or changed. 
 
Paragraphs 285 and 286 :  Russia has not addressed all the concerns  listed in these paragraphs or raised bilaterally.  To ensur e that these issues are 
addressed, the text should describe how the Ru ssian Federation will address the following points: 
 
- The draft law has poor provisions dealin g with the acceptance of a related party tran saction value, i.e., it does not stipula te that the test for 
accepting a related party transaction value shall only be applied at the initiative of the importe r, nor does it include the ci rcumstances of sale 
test for determining the acceptability of relate d party pricing for the transaction value. 
 - The draft law does not specify wh ere the rate of exchange used in paying fines,  fees and charges for customs can be found (Ar ticle 9). 
- The draft law does not indicate that information readily available in the buyer’s commercial record system should be used to the extent possible 
in order to minimize the burden on the importer and the Customs Administration for the addition of assists under Article 8.1(b) (iv) of the 
Agreement to the price act ually paid or payable. 
- The alternatives to the “fallback” provision method of valuation described in Article 21.3 of the draft Amendments is not con tained in the list of 
permissible valuations under the fallback provision in Article 7 of the Agreement. 
- The draft law lacks confidentiality  requirements (Article 10).   
- The draft law does not specifically provide for the right of appeal, without penalty, by the importer.  This right of appeal must include the right 
of appeal without penalty to a judicial authority (Article 11).   
- The draft law should provide for an improved surety bond syst em (Article 13) and a list of types of surety bond facilities an d firms that can be 
used (Article 11).   
- There is no provision for adoption of paragraph 2 of Decision 4.1 on “Valuation of Carrier Media Bearing Software.”   
 
Paragraph 285-286 :  We seek more current information on the percentage of importations released under Russia’s current guarant ee system, e.g., in 
2001 or 2002. According to WT/ACC/RUS/38, in  response to question 16, Russia stated that in 1998, only 8.1% of importations wer e released against 
security of payment of customs charges.   This is a very low percentage.   
 While Russia has incorporated portions of the Interpretative Notes into the draft law, we strongly encourage Russia to adopt th e remainder of the 
Interpretative Notes in a law or regulations as soon as possible. 
 
It is clear that, in addition to this information, we will need to revisit this text after the legislation, including the new P SI regime and regulations for both, 
is available.   
  Specific Drafting Suggestions
: 
 
- There should be reference to and discussion of the new PSI valu ation scheme, which is very pertinent to customs valuation, an d additional text 
laying out precisely how the new valuation regime, with its PSI co mponent, will work.  As we un derstand it, the current proposa l on PSI that  
 WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3 
Page 62 Paragraph No. Comment 
the Russian Federation has under consideratio n is inconsistent with WTO requirements. 
 
Elements of a Commitment : 
 
- The language in the text in paragraph 290 is a good basis for developing a commitment.   
- Pending:  depending on the content of the Amendments to the Customs Tariff Law, there may be a need for additional detail in the 
commitment. 
292-310 Rules of Origin 
 [AUS] 
We request inclusion of a legal citation for and other details of the Government Resolution on origin criteria for sugar, relat ing to the degree that 
imported raw sugar and refined sugar must be processed in the exporting country.  We would appreciate an English translation of  this resolution for 
consideration by the Working Party. 
 [CAN] 
General Comments:  
 Russia requires that a good's origin be proven before it is exempted from paying twice the MFN tariff rate, even though only go ods originating in several 
countries face this high tariff rate. This is unacceptable to Canada. 
 Specific Problems:
 
 
- Russia obliges importers to verify the orig in of a good is from a country benefiting from MFN treatment, otherwise it is assess ed twice the 
MFN duty rate.  This is unduly burdensome as goods originating in only a small number of countries face this high rate of duty.  
 Possible Solutions and Drafting Proposals:
 
 
- Commitment language is needed obliging Russia to assess the MFN duty on all goods arriving from countries enjoying MFN duty rat es upon 
accession. 
 [EC] 
Descriptive part .  
Concerns remain on whether or not MFN treatment is granted by default and if certificates of or igin will be systematically requ ired to EC products 
entering in the Russian Federation customs territory to enjoy MFN treatment. Paragraph 293 and 294 do not give very clear answe rs on this point. In 
relation to the request of an origin assessment prior to shipment,  it should be verified that the Russian regulation refers to  this as an obligation of the 
customs administration to issue the information when reques ted by operators and not as a possibility (paragraph 299). 
 
Commitment  
The commitment proposed by Members contains the elements we would like to see included. Depending on the clarifications given o n the question of 
double MFN, some further precision may be necessary.  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3
 Page 63Paragraph No. Comment 
 [USA] 
Requests for Information or Clarifications That Should be Reflected in the Text :   
  Paragraph 294 :  The text should clarify whether the “competent body” referred to that issues a certificate of origin is design ated by the exporting 
country or by Russia.  If it is designated by Russia, more in formation should be provided on what constitutes a “competent body .” 
 Elements of a Commitment
: 
 
- The language in the text in paragraph 309 is a good basis for developing a commitment, which should include a further commitm ent to 
eliminate the practice of using double MFN rates as the default tariff rate for imports of undeterminable origin. 
311-322 Other Customs Formalities 
 [EC] 
Descriptive part  
Some adaptations of a technical nature may be necessary, in particular on customs checkpoints.  
Commitment
 
Rev3 does not include a proposal for a commitment. This may be needed, notably to respond to the invitation in paragraph 320. I n addition, we would 
like to see a commitment confirming that applications of customs checkpoints shall be consistent with Articles I and XI GATT.  
 [JPN] 
1. In response to the question posed by a Member in paragraph 313, the Russian Federation's answer provided in paragraph 315 refer s to "the 
designation of customs clearance of particul ar goods to certain border customs points". We would like to request the Russian Fe deration to provide some 
materials indicating which items are subjected to which customs points. 
2. Paragraph 317 enumerates cases under which the Russian Federation's executive governmental body is entitled to designate specif ic customs 
points. We would like to request the Russian Federation to provide some materials indicating how many customs points will be de signated and which 
customs points will be used, etc.    
3. In paragraph 317, reference is made to special control for goods containing objects of intellectual property (ref;(iv)). We wou ld like to seek 
clarification from the Russian Federation on the meaning of (iv) in detail. 
4. In paragraph 319, it provides that "a particular customs office could have the exclusive right to carry out customs procedures in respect of 
certain categories of goods". As Table 17(b) contained in the Rev.3 does not indicate which customs office is entitled to such exclusive right, we would 
like to request the Russian Federation to provide some materials clarifying the above point. We wo uld also like to seek clarifi cation from the Russian 
Federation on what criteria these offices are entitled to such right. 
5. We are concerned about situation where system of specific custom s points may cause the effect of de fact import restrictive NTB  in case 
importers are forced to use certain specifi c customs points located in a far away regi on in order to carry out customs clearanc e of certain items. We 
would like to request the Russian Federation to clarify the abov e concern and in any event the Russian Federation's commitment that specific customs 
control will be implemented in conformity with the WTO agreement is required. 
 [SUI] 
Paragraph 319 and Table 17b :  This paragraph should be further elaborated on the reasons to restrict the right to carry out cu stoms procedures to a 
particular customs office. What is the reason to impose restric tion in the case of goods meant for demonstration at exhibitions  etc... and watches in  
 WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3 
Page 64 Paragraph No. Comment 
precious metal? Have the relevant legislation already been provided to the WTO Secretaria t? If not, please provide it.  
 [USA] 
Requests for Information or Clarifications That Should be Reflected in the Text :   
 Paragraph 313 :  The text should confirm if  any aspect of the treatment described th ere still exists, or if it disappeared with  the “invalidation” of SCC 
Order 155. 
 There is a serious typo in paragraph 313 that should be correct ed, as follows:  “As well as raising concerns in relation to con formity with WTO 
requirements on trade in transit, these d ecrees made it impossible for companies export ing to the Russian Federation to use raw  materials from the Far 
East for sub-contracting and subsequently created a barrier to business cooperation. “  
The text should indicate whether the public is permitted to comment on lists of products designated for special treatment or on  the development of such 
special methods of customs handling prior to implementation. 
 
The text should clarify whether there are other forms of special customs treatment, in addition to those listed in paragraph 31 7 and the special technique 
for valuation of certain high risk imports.  
The text of paragraph 319 should state where the list of goods found in Table 17(b) “pursuant to Article 402” of the Customs Co de can be found in 
Russian Law (Note:  It is not listed in Article 402 of the Customs Code.  End note) 
 
Elements of a Commitment
: 
 
- Confirmation that Tables 17(a) and 17 (b) are a comprehe nsive list of the current restrictions on customs points. 
- Confirmation that these restrictions will be  eliminated as of the date of accession. 
- Confirmation that from the date of accession, all regulations , formalities and requirements c onnected with the importation of  goods, statistical 
control, customs clearance, documents, documentation and certifi cation, inspection and analysis, and any changes to these regul ations, 
formalities and requirements will be published sufficiently in adva nce for importers to be aware of them and that the Russian F ederation will 
apply them in a uniform, impartial and reasonable manner across its customs territory, as required by he  WTO , including Artic les VIII and X 
of the GATT 1994 
323-328 Preshipment Inspection  
 [CAN] 
General Comments:  
 
Russia has indicated that it is preparing the first draft of le gislation which would permit it to implement a pre-shipment insp ection (PSI) regime as a 
transitional measure for three years.  Private firms would be hired to inspect goods to verify, among other things, their quant ity and quality.  In general, 
while PSI can be WTO consistent, it is not th e preferable way to address the shortcomings of the Russian customs regime.  By ou tsourcing the 
inspection of goods it would allow the customs authority to avoi d addressing its failings.  Moreover, it adds the expense of us ing private firms.  
  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3
 Page 65Paragraph No. Comment 
If a PSI regime is to be instituted it is important that Members have access to the dr aft legislation and it be described in th e Working Party Report so 
Members can address any of its shortcomings.  As well, it would be  important that the three year transition period be included in the commitment text.  
To date this has not been done.    
Specific Problems:
 
 - In Canada's view, it is important that there be a description of Russia's proposed PSI regime (e.g. the draft legislation) so M embers can provide 
their comments on it. 
- As currently stated in paragra ph 324 it would be preferable if Russia did not put  in place a PSI regime as it would be best if the needed reforms 
to the Russian Customs authority were implemented instead of relyin g on PSI.  If, nonetheless, a PSI regime is to be put in pla ce it is important 
that, as Russia has indicated it will do, this regime is made transitional and terminated three years after its implementation.  
  
Possible Solutions and Drafting Proposals:
 
 - Agreement to modified version the current br acketed commitment language in paragraph 327 that commits Russia to the termination  of any PSI 
regime three years after its implementation: 
 
- "327. [The representative of the Russian Federation confirmed that if a pre shipment inspection system would be introduced in  the 
future, it would be temporary and would be terminated three years from the date of its implementation
.  The Government of the 
Russian Federation would take responsibility to ensure that the operations of any pre shipment inspection companies it retained  would 
comply with the requirements of the WTO Agreements, in particular  the Agreements on Pre shipment   Inspection, Import Licensing 
Procedures, Customs Valuation, Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures  and Technical Barriers to Trad e.  He further confirmed that 
charges and fees applied by such companies would be consistent with Article VIII of the GATT 1994, and that such system would 
comply with the due process and transparency  requirements of the WTO Agreements, in particular Article X of the GATT 1994, and 
the Agreement on the Implementation of Arti cle VII of the GATT 1994.  The Working Pa rty took note of these commitments.]." 
 [EC] 
Descriptive part   
Concerns remain on the possible introduction of PSI, its possibl e features and the WTO compatibility. We take note that Russia has not yet taken a 
decision on whether or not PSI should be  introduced. Further examination may be n ecessary if such a system is introduced. 
 
 
Commitment  
The commitment will need to reconfirm the applicability of the re levant GATT disciplines to PSI, and a maximum duration of 3 ye ars of PSI measures.  
 [SUI] 
Paragraph 326:  please provide the translation of the draft government resolution on the approval of the regulations on pre-shi pment inspection as well as 
the exhaustive list of goods that will be subject to PSI. Pleas e provide additional information on the timeframe and the reason s for which the Russian 
Federation plans to introduce pre-shipment inspection. Has the draft resolution been adopted yet?  
 WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3 
Page 66 Paragraph No. Comment 
 [USA] 
Requests for Information or Clarifications That Should be Reflected in the Text :   
 Russian legislation/regulations n ecessary to implement WTO rules are pending for this section. 
 
Paragraph 325 :  This paragraph should be expanded to include the following information:  
- Confirmation that Russia will use this facility for no more th an 3 years and that all costs for the valuation will be deducted from tariff 
payments. 
- An illustrative list of products for mandatory valuation by a pres hipment inspection (PSI) firm and information as to whether t his list is similar 
to that used by Customs to apply fixed minimum values to imports under the “special technique” of valuation. 
- Clarification as to whether the goods subj ect to PSI will again be subject to inspection and/or valuation when they enter Russi a, i.e., that they 
can be examined twice. 
  
Paragraph 326 : This paragraph, or a sepa rate paragraph, should clarify that Russia understands that the utilization of PSI fir ms does not abrogate its 
responsibility to apply WTO provisions in the conduct of all as pects of customs administration, including customs valuation. 
 
The following requests for information and clarification are keyed to the sections of an early draft of the PSI legislation. Th ese points should be clarified 
in the text of this section: 
 
Section 13 :  There is a reference in this  section of the draft decree to a “list of goods that are not s ubject to preshipment inspection.”   
- Will the list of imports specified by the GR be a positive list of  goods subject to PSI valuation, qualified by a list of circu mstances, if any, in 
which goods so listed may not require inspections?  Or is ther e to be a negative list, as is implied by section 13?   
- We request that Russia provide an illustrative list of products fo r mandatory valuation by a PSI firm.  Is this list similar to  that used by Customs 
to apply fixed minimum values to imports under the “special technique” of valuation?  To what extent are these products also di verted to 
specific customs ports of entry? 
 
Section 15 indicates that costs for a pres hipment inspection will be at least 12,000 rubles but cannot exceed 1 percent of the cost of goods.  This ad 
valorem based fee system is inconsistent  with Article VIII of the GATT.   
- Please specify how PSI costs will be calculated, and confir m that they will reflect costs of the service, not an ad valorem share of shipment 
value. 
 Section 16:  Concerning adjudication of disputes, the draft GR st ates that complaints about insp ection results are “given to an  organ of the inspection ... 
in Russian, in writing.”  
- Are complaints or appeals to be made directly to the entity/e ntities that conduct inspections, or to a separately-designated bo dy or agency 
within the Russian Government? 
- How will Russia monitor the entity’s/entities’ use of WTO provisions  to ensure compliance?  How will the right of appeal to an independent 
tribunal provided for in the Customs Valuation Agreement be implemented? 
  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3
 Page 67Paragraph No. Comment 
Sections 19-24:  These sections refer to  a Commission for adjudication of PSI disputes.  Please explain the envisioned composit ion and authority of this 
Commission.   
- Please confirm that this Commission will opera te in accordance with Article 4 (“Independ ent Review Procedures ”) of the Agreemen t on 
Preshipment Inspections, and the similar relevant Articles of other WTO Agreements.   
 
While Section 19 allows the inspection organ up to two days to ru le upon an appeal or complaint,  the draft stipulates no deadli ne/maximum time by 
which the Commission must issue a ruling.  
- Please confirm whether Commission action will also be under deadline and state what that will be. 
 Section 31 of the draft states that “The Russian Federation doe s not bear responsibility for actions or non-actions of an organ  of the inspection.”   
- Please explain how, if this is to be the case, the Russian Fede ration plans to assume operational responsibility for ensuring th at inspection 
entities (organs of inspection) comply with WTO provisions?  
- We understand that the goods will be subject to inspection again when they enter Russia, i.e., that they can be examined twice.   If so, this 
appears to be an additional burden on imports.   
 Russian officials have reported that their intention is that PSI s will not add to importers’ costs, and that the cost of PSIs w ill be deducted from any 
applicable import tariff.  This issue is not a ddressed in the September 10, 2004 draft decree. 
- Could the Russian Federation please explain how this “cost-neutrality” principle will be implemented?  Also, please specify whe ther this rebate 
from the import tariff due will be extended to excise duties and/or VAT, in any possible instances in which the PSI inspects go ods that may be 
tariff-free, but are  subject to excise taxes and/or VAT? 
 
Specific Drafting Suggestions
: 
 The text of this section should provide: 
 
- Information on the issues discussed above; and 
- The schedule for implementation of this new concept. 
 
Elements of Commitment
: 
 
- The language in the text of paragraph 327 is a good basis for de veloping a commitment, as it addr esses directly the need for Ru ssia to take full 
responsibility for any mandatory customs activities that it transf ers to other actors and establishes that the activities of th e PSI firms selected to 
perform mandatory customs processing are subject to the requirements of the relevant WTO Agreements. 
- The commitment may require addition of specific elements addressi ng individual concerns, e.g. right of appeal, fees approximate  to the cost of 
services, transparency and publica tion of rulings, etc., as follows: 
- That fees will be applied in accordance with the provisions of  Article VIII of the GATT and not on an ad valorum basis; and   
 - That Russia will provide the same transparency and due proce ss protections to importers and exporters whose trade is inspect ed by PSI   
firms that would be due if the services were undertaken by its government agencies  
 WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3 
Page 68 Paragraph No. Comment 
329-332 Balance of Payments 
 [JPN] 
In paragraph 332, some Members mention that "the provisions of Federal Law No.63-FZ that address trade remedies…would only be r eplaced by other 
legal provisions". We would like to seek clarification from th e Russian Federation on the meaning of "other legal provisions" a nd if necessary it should 
be amended. 
 [SUI] 
Paragraph 331 :  the Government could adopt a decision to impose measures towards restriction of foreign trade in goods. The re striction of trade in 
goods could be implemented by means of in troducing an import quota or other measures for a term required to restore the equilib rium of the balance of 
payments.  
Article 3 of the Understanding on BOP clearly states that " Members shall seek to avoid the imposition of ne w quantitative restricti ons for BOP purposes 
... unless price-bases measures cannot arrest a shar p deterioration in the external payments position ". Thus, the Understanding clearly imposes and 
order of priority. Could Russia explain how this order of priority is reflected in its domestic laws?  
 [USA] 
Requests for Information or Clarifications That Should be Reflected in the Text :   
 The text should identify any other provisions in Russian Law that deal with BOP measures. 
 
Elements of a Commitment
: 
 
We suggest the following commitment: 
 
332bis.  The representative of  the Russian Federation confirmed  that its authority to apply mea sures to restrict imports to pr otect the 
balance of payments was provided in  the Law No. 164-FZ of 8 December 2003 “On the Fund amentals of State Regulation of Foreign 
Trade Activity,” and that from the date of accession, his govern ment would ensure that any measures   applied to imports for bal ance of 
payments purposes would be in a manner cons istent with the requirements of the Understanding on Balance-of-Payments Provisions of 
the GATT 1994, as well as Article XII of the GATT 1994.  The Working Party took no te of these commitments.  
333-347 Anti-Dumping, Countervailing and Safeguard Measures 
 [CAN] 
General Comments:  
 
Several issues remain to be clarified.   
Specific Problems: 
 
 While an acceptable level of progress is being made with specific issues being addressed,  
statements by Russian officials, as recorded in paragraphs 344-345, that the WTO consistency of their own legislation is depend ent somehow on the 
consistency of the legislation of other members is not helpful.      
  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3
 Page 69Paragraph No. Comment 
Possible Solutions and Drafting Proposals:  
 
In the last draft report, paragraphs 333-334 had suggested that measures could be terminated prior to the maximum duration for anti-dumping, 
countervailing or safeguard measures provided for by the WTO Agr eements, suggesting some sort of changed circumstances provisio n. The current draft 
has no such reference. This should be clarified.  
 While Paragraph 336 and the Working Party meeting of November 18 provided additional detail, the administrative framework under  which Russian 
authorities will conduct trade remedy investigations has not been described in sufficient specificity.  It still might be usefu l to propose that a more 
detailed description of the institutional apparatus be included (i.e.,. Which administrative unit is doing which administrative  function?) Further, the use 
of the term cancellation in paragraph 335 is interesting in the context. Which and on what basis may measures be cancelled? Who  makes that decision?  
 
The correct reference in paragraph 340 is the Agreement on Safeguards, not the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measur es (ASCM). 
  
The last sentence of paragraph 342 is still incorrect.  The concept of de minimis dumping has nothing to do with whether price undercutting in the 
context of Article 3.2 of the Agreement is significant or not.  The margin of dumping is the comparison between prices of the p roduct under 
investigation and normal values (i.e. prices in the home market  or costs), while price undercutti ng in Article 3.2 suggests a c omparison between prices of 
the product under investigation and prices of the domestic industry. 
 [EC] 
Descriptive part  
- Review of measures taken prior to accession: we do not expect a se lf initiated formal review but would like to see that EC or e xporters could 
request a review. 
- Paragraph 340 relates to the Agreement on Safeguards (not subsid ies and countervailing measures). The invitation to enter into the commitment 
referred to is to do so upon WTO entry.  
 Commitment
 
The commitment in paragraph 346 will need to be completed. Seve ral paragraphs in the descriptive section contain a request for a specific commitment. 
We expect these to be specifically addressed in the commitment (including paragraph 337, 338, 339, 340, 342 and following) ensu ring that the WTO 
articles referred to will be ap plied as from WTO entry. 
 [JPN] 
1. In paragraph 334, it provides that "Any investigation which ha d been initiated upon a written application lodged prior to the e ntry into force of 
Federal Law No.165-FZ would be conducted under the still operative Fe deral Law No.63-FZ". Clarifica tion is required as to wheth er any measures 
taken under the Federal Law No.63-FZ continue to be regulated by this Law even after entry into force of the Federal Law No.165 -FZ. If this seems to 
be the case, we would like to seek clarifi cation from the Russian Federation on how th e WTO consistency with regard to the abov e mentioned measures 
will be ensured in reality. 2. Taking the Safeguard Agreement as an example, in this section, clarification is sought by the Members concerning Articles 2 and  6 of the 
Agreement and the Russian Federation's commitments concerning such Articles are included in paragraph 346 accordingly. With reg ard to trade remedy 
measures, careful consideration is  required on which Articles of the Subsidiary Agreement, the Anti-dumping Agreement and the S afeguard Agreement 
the Russian Federation's commitments should be sought, in addition to its comprehensive commitments to ensure the WTO consisten cy vis-à-vis these  
 WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3 
Page 70 Paragraph No. Comment 
three Agreements. In particular, given that we need to ensure that concrete procedur es for taking measures  under these trade re medy related agreements 
should be implemented appropriately, the Ru ssian Federation's commitments to be included in the Report should not be confined o nly to certain parts of 
each respective Agreement. 3. In paragraph 344, the Members request the Russian Federation that measures taken by the latter should be fully consistent with the WTO 
agreement. However, the Russian Federation, in paragraph 345, seeks these WTO Members maintaining WTO-inconsistent trade measur es against 
exports from the Russian Federation to bring these measures into conformity with the WTO agreement. Japan is of the view that s uch Russian 
Federation's statement in paragraph 345 does not seem to be cons onant with the purposes and obj ectives of the present Report wh ich describes the 
Russian Federation's domestic legal regimes, etc. Ther efore, the paragraph needs to be reviewed.     
 [USA] 
Trade Remedy Measures  
 
Requests for Information or Clarifications That Should be Reflected in the Text :   
 Russian legislation/regulations n ecessary to implement WTO rules are pending for this section. 
 
The text should provide response to the comments in paragraphs 337-343, and include information reflecting Russia’s more detail ed response to the 
written comments provided bilaterally. 
 
Clarification should be provided in the text on how the law is  being implemented, e.g., are regulations originally written for the previous legislation in 
place and being applied for the new law or will there be new regulations?  What are the amendments contemplated?   
 Elements of a Commitment
: 
 
Paragraphs 345-346:  The commitment text in these paragraphs is inadequate.  We suggest the following as a basic commitment: 
 
xx.    The representative of the Russian Federation confirmed that, upon accession, the Russian Federation would ensure that al l 
relevant legislation in place in the areas of trade defense instruments would be in full conformity with the Agreement on the 
Implementation of Article VI, the Agreement on Subsidies and Co untervailing Measures, and the Agreement on Safeguards.  He 
further confirmed that the Russian Federation would not apply any anti-dumping, countervailing or safeguard measure after acces sion 
until it had notified and implemented appropri ate laws and regulations in  conformity with the prov isions of these WTO Agreement s.  
The elaboration of any legislation concerning anti-dumping, coun tervailing and safeguard measures , the Russian Federation would  
ensure their full conformity with  the relevant WTO provisions, including the Ag reements on the Implementation of Article VI, th e 
Agreement on Subsidies and Coun tervailing Measures and the Agreement on Safeguards.  
 
- Additional commitment language may be necessa ry to address individual issues, such as review of trade remedy measures in plac e upon 
accession or issues in the text of the law. 
       -     Given the paucity of information provided to date in a number of areas, Members may also require recourse to a spe cial safeguard mechanism 
regarding imports from Russia for a transitional period.  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3
 Page 71Paragraph No. Comment 
348-381 2.  Export Regulations 
348-354  - Export Duties  
 [AUS] 
1. We welcome Russia's preparedness to phase out or reduce most of the currently applied export duties.  We would encourage it to establish a 
timetable to phase out all of its export duties and not apply export duties to any product except in accordance with the schedu le for their elimination. 
 
2. In relation to paragraph 354, we suggest the following correction (in italics ) to the commitment text: 
 
x. The representative of the Russian Federation confirmed that…… the Russian Federation would not introduce, or re-introduce export 
duties….." 
 [EC] 
Descriptive part   
The descriptive part may need to be completed af ter conclusion of Russia's bilateral negotiations. 
 
Commitment  
We welcome the commitment proposed by Russia in paragraph 354. This paragraph will need to be merged with the commitment propos ed by Members 
in paragraph 353. Paragraph 353 should also be redrafted slightly in order to cover internal taxes and other internal regulatio ns more generally.   
 [JPN] 
1. In paragraph 348, it provides that timber is listed as item subject  to imposition of export duties. We would like to seek clari fication from the 
Russian Federation on particular reasons wh y the export duties are imposed on timber. 
2. Referring to the list of export tariffs contained in WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.2, export duties are imposed on timber produc ts such as 
44.03, but, not imposed on products of 44.12 or higher processed products. We would like to seek clarification from the Russian  Federation on concrete 
reasons why the export dutie s are imposed only on certain types of timber products. 
3. In paragraph 351, it provides that export duties are subject to regular review mechanism. Clarification is required from the Ru ssian Federation 
as to the detail of such mechanism including the purpose of conducting review. 
 [USA] 
Requests for Information or Clarifications That Should be Reflected in the Text :   
 Paragraph 348 :  The text should include additional and updated information on Russia’s overall plan for its export duties, i.e ., a schedule for eliminating 
all the remaining duties. 
 Elements of a Commitment
:  
  
Paragraphs 353-54 :  Neither of these commitments is adequate, given the level, scope and effect of Russia’s export duties.    
We propose the following: 
 
xx.    The representative of the Russian Federation confirmed that the Russian Federation would reduce or eliminate the export duties listed  
 WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3 
Page 72 Paragraph No. Comment 
in WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.2 prior to accession or by 1 Ja nuary 2006, whichever is earlier,  with the exception of those pr oducts 
listed in table xx.  In particular, he conf irmed that export duties on steel scrap and copper cathode had been eliminated well in advance of 
accession.  He further confirmed that the Russian Federation woul d not increase the level of export duties still in effect  pri or to 1 January 
2009, nor would Russia introduce or reintro duce such measures prior to that time.  Th e Working Party took note of these commitm ents.   
355-366 - Quantitative Export Restrictio ns, Including Prohibitions and Quotas 
 [AUS] 
1. It is clear from paragraph 363 that Russia continues to apply a number of unjustifiable export restrictions and further refo rms are still pending 
to Russia's system.  We seek:  
- detailed additional text in this section once th e full extent of Russia's reforms are clear;  
 
- a response to comments we have provided (s ee Attachment A) on Russia's paper on "Liber alisation of Trade in  Stones and Precious  Metals".  
This provides a useful step  for clarifying outstanding text for this section.   
 2. We note Russia continues to require that diamond producer's exports of natural diamonds be limited to 15 per cent of its val ue of natural 
diamonds purchased within the year from agents of natural diamonds' extraction or the State Fund of Precious Metals and Preciou s Stones of the Russian 
Federation.  We seek:  
- clarification in the text as to when will this quantitative export restriction be eliminated in order that Russia's regime for the export of natural 
diamonds will be brought into conformity  with Article XI:1 of GATT 1994. 
 [EC] 
Descriptive part  
 - some linguistic improvements would be useful (e.g. paragraph 357).  
- Paragraph 364 could be more precise on the stated intentions (in particular in terms of timing). 
 Commitment
 
 
- The commitment proposed by Members in paragraph 365 contains the main elements we would like to see included in a commitment.  
- We invite Russia to provide clarificati ons which exceptions for imposing QRs it has envisaged by quoting Art XVII in the commit ment it 
proposes in paragraph 366. 
 [JPN] 
In paragraph 357, the Russian Federation stat es that measures with no economic charac ter and concerning foreign trade in goods will not be a means of 
unjustifiable discrimination or a disguised restriction on international trade in goods and further states that they will not b e applied to goods originating 
in countries or groups of co untries towards which the Russian Federation has no legal obligation to accord treatment no less fa vourable than that 
accorded to other countries or groups of countries. Are the abov e statements compatible with the Russian Federation's commitmen t in paragraphs 365 
and 366 that it will ensure the WTO consistency concerning its export quantitative restriction ?  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3
 Page 73Paragraph No. Comment 
 [USA] 
Concerning Registration for Exportation : 
 Paragraph 361 :  The second half of this paragraph states: 
 
“. . . export licensing was mandatory for exports of  refined platinum and metals of platinum group in form of ingots, plates, powder and 
granules; unprocessed precious metals (excl uding natural pieces of metals not subject to  refining ); unprocessed gold and silve r (only refined in 
form of ingots, plates, powder and granules as well as gold used to produce coins); natural processed and unprocessed precious stones 
(sapphire, ruby, emerald); mine rals (only unique amber pieces); mineral and seco ndary raw materials containing precious metals,  including 
concentrated ores and residuals of non-ferrous metals and their semi-manufactures.” 
 
The text should be clarified as to whether this “licen sing” is activity licensing or export licensing, or both. 
 
Requests for Information or Clarifications That Should be Reflected in the Text
:   
 Russian legislation/regulations necessary to implement WTO rules are pending for this section.  The text should include explici t reference to existing 
and pending legislation (e.g., Law No. 164-Fz and the draft GR th at implements licensing requirements) that will have an effect  on export restrictions. 
 Paragraph 290 bis :  The draft working party report should have a list of all cu rrent export Quantitative Restrictions  and bans (QRs). It shoul d be:  
(a) comprehensive for all QRs, including export bans and quotas; and  
(b) be incorporated in a chart by HS export number. 
 
- In this regard, we note that other sections of this report, e.g., Registration for Import/Expor t Operations and Export Licensin g, indicate that 
there is an export ban on waste and scrap of precious metals.  This should be noted in this section.   
- If restrictions do not have an adequate WTO justification, Russia should indicate in the text its specific plans for reviewing and altering or 
removing these barriers. 
 
Paragraph 358 :  We note that Members’ concerns regarding qu antitative restrictions on exporting natural gas and its consistenc y with Article XI are not 
specifically addressed.  As provided for in Russian law (On Gas Supply in the Russian Federation; No. 69-FZ, March 31, 1999) an d noted in the most 
recent OECD Economic Survey, Gazprom is requi red to supply the domestic market, which we consider to be a de facto restraint on  exports (see p. 
143).  In return for supplying the domestic market at below-cost prices Gazprom has a monopoly on non-CIS exports. 
 - Please include information on these points in the text. 
 
Specific Drafting Suggestions
: 
 
In addition to the points listed above, in Para 289:  Item 4:  The word “values” should be “valuables.” 
   
 WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3 
Page 74 Paragraph No. Comment 
Elements of a Commitment : 
 
The language in paragraphs 365 and 366 is not a good basis for developing a commitment.  The commitment text should include the  following elements: 
 
- To eliminate from the date of accession, qu antitative restrictions on exports (including  requirements and rest rictions having e quivalent effect) 
that cannot be justified under the provisions of the WTO Agreement; 
- Not to introduce, re-introduce or ap ply such measures after accession;  
- To use from the date of accession any discretionary authority to suspend exports or otherwise restrict the quantity of trade, i ncluding the 
provisions of Federal Law No. 164-Fx, “On the State Regulation of Foreign Trade Activities,” in conformity with the requirement s of the 
WTO; and 
- An explicit commitment that any restrictions on exports of dome stic materials to ensure essential quantities of such materials to a domestic 
processing industry shall not operate to increase the exports of or the protection of such domestic industry. 
 
We suggest the following commitment language: 
 
xx.    The representative of the Russian Federation confirmed th at his Government would, from the date of accession, eliminate and not 
introduce, re-introduce, or apply directly or indirectly, quantitative restrictions or  other non-tariff barri ers on exported go ods, such as 
quotas, bans, permits, prior authorization requirements, licen sing requirements, domestic market  supply requirements and other 
restrictions having equivalent effect that  cannot be justified under the provisions of the WTO Agreement.  He further confirmed  that 
discretionary authority to suspen d exports or otherwise restrict the quantity of trade, including provisio ns of  Federal Law No . 164-Fz, 
“On the State Regulation of Foreign Trade Activities,” would be  applied from the date of acces sion in conformity with the 
requirements of the WTO, in particular Articles XI, XIII, XVII, XX and XXI of the GATT 1994.  He also confirmed that any 
restrictions on exports of domestic materials to ensure essential quantities of such materials to  a domestic processing industr y shall not 
operate to increase the exports of or the protection of such domestic industry.  The Working Pa rty took note of these commitmen ts. 
367-375 - Export Li censing Procedures  
 [AUS] 
1. We note that much of the text of this section will need to be updated for ongoing reforms to the Russian system of export re strictions and 
licensing.  In particular, Russia continues to operate non-automatic export licensing rules in order to implement WTO-inconsist ent quantitative 
restrictions in relation to precious metals and stones.  We seek: 
- a response from Russia on our attached paper (Attachment A) in order to provide the necessary information to move forward on th is section. 
 2. In relation to draft commitment language in paragraph 374, we seek a reference to Article VIII of GATT 1994 in relation to f ees and formalities 
connected with export ation and importation. 
 [EC] 
Descriptive part  
 
- Same comment as for import licensing (implementing legislation pending). We suggest that a redraft includes an explanation of a ll circumstances 
under which export licences are applied.  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3
 Page 75Paragraph No. Comment 
- We continue to have doubts about the justifications of some non-automatic export licences included in table 18 (includes also n on-sensitive ICT 
products) 
- Licence for energy products: we would still like to see some furthe r clarifications (reference is made to the section on regist ration requirements, but 
the answer cannot be fo und in that section) 
 
Commitment  
 
The commitment proposed by Members in paragraph 374 contains the elements we would like to see in cluded in a commitment. Some r edrafting may be 
necessary as the word "export co ntrol" could cause confusion.  
 [JPN] 
In paragraph 373, it provides that there are no export licensing requirements for export of gas, oil, oil products. We need to seek clarification from the 
Russian Federation on the relationship between activity licensing requirements and export licensing requirements. For example, activity licensing 
requirements are said to be regulated by trade in services. Do such activity licensing  requirements include automatically expor t permissions? These 
clarified points should be reflected in  the present section if appropriate. 
 [USA] 
Requests for Information or Clarifications That Should be Reflected in the Text :   
 Russian legislation/regulations n ecessary to implement WTO rules are pending for this section.   
 
Paragraph 367 :  The text should clarify the relationship between the various legal instruments that govern export licensing pr ocedures (e.g., between GR 
No. 1299 of 31 October 1996, Law No. 164-Fz, and the draft GR that implements licensing requirements). 
  
Specific Drafting Suggestions
: 
 Paragraph 367 and Tables 18 (a) and (b ):   
 
Please confirm in the text that the list of items subject to export licensing in Tables 18(a) and (b) is comprehensive. 
 
Please include in the charts listing curren t exports subject to  export licensing: 
  - what Ministries, and how many, must be approached to acquire a license; and  
- whether an activity license for exporting, production, or distribution is required in order to acquire an export license. 
 Confirm in the text that MEDT issues all licenses except for th ose involving weapons, often based on the requirement for an imp ort permit from some 
other ministry. 
  Indicate in the text Russia’s specific plans for reviewing and altering or removing any requirements where discretionary import  licensing is not  
 WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3 
Page 76 Paragraph No. Comment 
justifiable under the WTO. 
  
Paragraph 371 :  The reference to the export ban on waste and scra p of precious metals should be moved to the QR section, as th is is not an export 
licensing issue.   
 
Elements of a Commitment  
 
-  Paragraphs 374 and 375 do not provide for the elimination of current measures, except  those applied to precious stones and me tals, and do not 
cover discretionary authority.  The commitmen t elements recommended for the WP report section on Export QRs apply equally to th e licensing 
section of the draft WP report. Both sections should be covered by the commitment paragraph. 
376-381 - Other Customs Export Formalities  
 [EC] 
Descriptive part  
- We would like to see some elaboratio n on customs checkpoints (criteria).  
 
Commitment  
Rev3 does not include a proposal for a commitment. This may be n eeded, to confirm that applications of customs checkpoints shal l be consistent with 
Articles I and XI GATT.  
 [JPN] 
1. In paragraph 376, it provides that "State border check-points were established by the Government…". We need to seek clarificati on from the 
Russian Federation on how State border check-points differ from customs check-points and wish to request the Russian Federation  to provide some 
materials concerning the purposes and functions of such State border check-points. 
2. We would like to seek clarification from the Russian Federation on what is envisaged by "possible export restrictions" set out at the end of 
paragraph 378. If they refer to the measures mentioned in some other sections of the Report, we should make a cross-reference. 
 [SUI] 
Paragraph 378 : Please provide the exhaustiv e list of possible export restrictions.  
 [USA] 
Requests for Information or Clarifications That Should be Reflected in the Text :   
 
- Does Law No.4730-1 of 1 April 1993 “On the State Border of the Russian Federation” au thorize the designation of specific export  customs 
points or only the creation of such points?   
- What is the relationship of this law to Article 119 of the Customs Code?  Are Articles 125 and 402 relevant, or do they only de al with imports? 
 
Specific Drafting Suggestions :   
 
- Ensure that the text is comprehensive in (a) listing the goods for which a restricted number of customs exit points are availab le and (b) for each 
good, the number of customs posts made ava ilable.  If the list is not comprehensive, please provide a list of all relevant prod ucts and customs 
posts.  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3
 Page 77Paragraph No. Comment 
- For each category of goods, confir m Russia’s intent, i.e., to continue the requirem ent, with suitable WTO justification, or to alter or eliminate 
current restrictions from the date of accession. 
 Elements of a Commitment
: 
 
- Confirmation that, from the date of acce ssion all regulations, formalities and requi rements connected with the exportation of  goods, statistical 
control, customs clearance, documents, documentation and certifi cation, inspection and analysis, and any changes to these regul ations, 
formalities and requirements will be published sufficiently in adva nce for importers to be aware of them and will be applied in  a uniform, 
impartial and reasonable manner across the customs territory of th e Russian Federation, consistent with WTO requirements, inclu ding Articles 
VIII , X, and XIof the GATT 1994. 
382-560 3. Internal Policies Affecting Trade in Goods 
382-397  - Industrial Policies, Including Subsidies  
 [CAN] 
General Comments:  
  The text offers a comprehensive survey of Russia industrial subsidy policies as they apply to a number of key sectors. The text  notes that total state 
support, in the form of direct transfers, loans, deferred payments and exemptions, and tariffs paid on monopolies average about  US$12 billion annually, 
including US$10 billion from the federal budget. Direct transfer s are the main delivery mechanism of state support to the indus trial sector, with 
particular emphasis on restructuring of the coal industry.  Regarding regional financial contributions, the text notes that Rus sia's objective is to reducing 
regional disparities as opposed to developing industrial productio n, social situations being the primary basis for assistance.  
 
The text also goes to considerable lengths to argue that monopoly or government pricing of oil, natural gas, and electricity is  not a subsidy. This is 
clearly problematic and will continue to be questioned by Canada an d other members. While the text provides a good deal of info rmation on the 
provision of subsidies within Russia, including amounts and methods of delivery, substantive questions remain on the specifics of certain type of 
government programs. (Please see submission on Pricing Policies).  
 Specific Problems:  
 
  
While progress has been made with respect to the provision of additional information on Russian subsidy programs, further clari fication, particularly 
with respect to monopolies and energy pricing, is required. This  may be included in the subsidy notification that Russia is com mitted to in paragraph 
396.  
 The latest version of the Working Party Report does not reflect the concern of some delegations, including Canada, that regulat ed, non-market pricing of 
energy is a subsidy. (see submission on Pricing Policies).  
 Possible Solutions and Drafting Proposals:
 
  
- The last sentence of paragraph 388 states: "The amendments made to the above-mentioned Law (referring to the State Aid Law) wou ld ensure  
 WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3 
Page 78 Paragraph No. Comment 
control over subsidies prohibited under the provisions of the WT O Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures." This sec tion should 
define the subsidies covered by the amendment in question and the conditions under which they will be provided and/or controlle d.  
- Paragraphs 391-392, which concern questions about whether Russia has reformed its natural monopoly and pricing practices on oil , natural gas 
and electricity, should include fu rther detail. Such an explanation would be connected to the pricing policy issues, particular ly the suggestion 
that non-market pricing of energy is a subsidy.   
 [EC] 
Descriptive part  
- We note that an updated notification is still awaited. Further comments may follow at a later stage.  
- Some elements in this section are interrelated with the TRIMs discussion (e.g. cars, aircraft) (in connection with RF request f or Art 27) where 
further information/discussion is needed.  
- We would like to receive further in formation on the intentions as regards export guarantees/credits.  
 
Commitment  
- For a later stage. 
 [JPN] 
1. In paragraph 389, some Members state that certain subsidy programs such as production sharing agreements and other programs for  automotive 
and civil aircraft industry appear to constitute prohibited su bsidies under the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measu res. However, there is 
no response to such statement from the Russian Federation in the present section. Therefore clarif ication is required on the po int mentioned above. The 
clarified points should be included in an appropriate paragraph. 
2. We need to examine which section should be more appropriate to  place all subsidy-related descrip tion currently pr ovided in the present section, 
including the possibility of moving such description to the sec tion of "Anti-dumping, Countervailing and Safeguard measures".    
 [USA] 
Requests for Information or Clarifications That Should be Reflected in the Text :   
 
Aircraft: 
 1)  In August 2001, the Russian Federation announced the results of an "open tender" (e.g., request for bids) for leasing compa nies seeking 
government backing and support of leasing agreements with Russi an airline companies for Russian-m ade aircraft.  The two compani es which won the 
bid were Ilyushin Finance (IFC) and Financial Leasing Company (FLC ).  Pursuant to GOR investments of US$80 million (initially) and US$29.3 
million (in 2003) in IFC and US$52.6 million (initially) and US$12. 8 million (in 2003) in FLC, these companies are 38 percent a nd 58 percent 
government-owned, respectively. 
 a.) Please explain the legal and commercial basis up on which the GOR invested in IFC and FLC. 
 
b.) Please explain why the contracts were awarded to IFC and FLC. 
 
2)  It appears that the purpose of Decree No. 466 is to encourage the purchase an d lease of Russian-made ai rcraft by lowering t he leasing costs 
of Russian-made aircraft by Russian airlines.  The nature of this support takes the form of lower financing costs and an 85 per cent government guarantee  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3
 Page 79Paragraph No. Comment 
of the financing.  Pursuant to Decree No. 466, the GOR partially reimburses the leasing company up to one-half of the interest costs it incurred in 
purchasing the aircraft.  It is assumed that the program requires that the lowered interest costs of the leasing companies B due to the interest 
reimbursements and state guarantees B must be passed on in the form of lower leas e payments to the airlines leasing the planes. 
 
a) Is the above description of how the program operates correct?  Was this program designed, effectively, to replace Government  Resolution 
No. 716?    
b)  Are only Russian-made aircraft eligible for this program? 
 c)  From whom do the leasing companies obtain loans to buy Russian-made planes?  How is the interest rate established?  
 
d)  To what extent does the government guarantee of the loans obtained by the leasing companies result in an interest rate lowe r than otherwise 
would have been provided commercially absent the guarantee? 
 
e)  What was the total amount of interest reimbursements made by the GOR in 2003?  What is the budgeted amount to fund this pro gram for 
2004 and 2005? 
 3) Please provide information regarding the merger of Russian Aircraft Production Enterprises. 
 
Agricultural equipment:  
1)  We have some additional questions on OAO Rosagroleasing , a Russian agricultural equipment leasing company whose activities are funded 
from Russia’s budget.  This information should be reflected in the text. 
 
a)  Would the Russian Federation please describe the activities of  OAO Rosagroleasing, including annual levels of authorized fe deral budgetary 
support for years 2002-2004, the interest rates and other terms of financing which it offers, and the mechanism by which this p rogram allows 
more affordable purchases of agricu ltural machinery than would otherwise be available on the market?   
 
b)  What is the value of sales financed by Rosagroleasing relative to the approximate overall value of purchases of agricultura l machinery by 
Russia's agricultural sector?   
 
c)  Do Rosagroleasing's programs support ex port transactions for Russian machinery?  
 
d)  Is receipt of government financing or  subsidized/lower leasing rates contingent u pon the purchase or lease of equipment mad e in Russia? 
 
Paragraph 382 :  We are concerned that the language in Rev.2 has been changed such that the text no longer recognizes even the theoretical possibility 
that tariff preferences could be granted by natural monopolies.  
  
 WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3 
Page 80 Paragraph No. Comment 
Paragraph 383 :  We question whethe r the last statement is accurate. 
 
Paragraph 384 :  The reference to WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/31 appears to be incorrect.  A current and complete subsidy notification for all levels of 
government has not been provided.  With respect to production subsidies, please comme nt on recent reports that the Russian Fede ration is planning to 
provide US$2.5 billion to assist the Russian aircraft industry.   
 
Paragraph 385 :  As we commented previously, this paragraph conf uses federal government transfers to the regions “aimed at redu cing financial 
disparities” with Members’ concerns that prohibited subsidies (e.g., subsidies contingent upon the use of domestic over importe d goods) may be being 
provided at sub-federal levels of governments.  It should be clarified. 
 
Paragraph 386 :  As noted, we question whether Russia has no export subsidies. 
 
Paragraph 388 :  We appreciate the recognition that subsidies may be provided through revenue foregone (e.g., tax and customs b enefits).  With respect 
to the last statement, “control” over prohibited subsidies is not the goal of the Subsidies Agreement – it is their elimination .  The text should be adjusted 
accordingly. 
 
Paragraph 391 :  In the second sentence, the phrase “closer to world market prices” should read “closer to market prices.” 
 
Paragraph 392 :  Cross-references should also be made to the State-owned and State-Trading Enterprise sections of the report.  
 
Paragraph 393 :  Given the highly technical nature of the rules w ith respect to export credits, the relevant provisions of the Agreement on Subsidies and 
Countervailing Measures, and the various dispute settlement reports in which an export credit program was an issue should be cl osely consulted prior to 
implementation of any export credit program.  We are interested in information in the text on Russia’s plans. 
   
Elements of a Commitment  
 
Paragraph 396 :  The language in the text of paragraph 396 includes most of the elements necessary for developing a commitment.   We suggest the 
following revision to deal with our concern that we lack current and complete information regarding Russia’s subsidy programs. 
[396.  The representative of the Russian Federation confirmed that for all federal and regional subsidy measures identified , the Russian 
Federation would revise its domestic law or  and regulations to eliminate all prohibited subsidies within the meaning of Article 3 of the WTO 
Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures, and Article XVI of the GATT 1994 at the levels of government – including, b ut not 
limited to, exemptions, reductions, deferrals or forgiveness of taxes and custom duties to enterprises which were contingent up on export 
performance or the use of domestic over imported goods from  -- as of the date of accession.  He further confirmed that such prohibited 
subsidies would not be introduced in the future, and that export financing and other export promo tion policies would be operated in conformity 
with WTO provisions.  [He further confirme d that the Russian Federation would, upon  accession, grant no subsidies contingent up on the use of 
domestic over imported goods in the meaning of Article 3:1(b) of the WTO Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures and that this 
commitment would cover subsidies at all levels of government, including exemptions, reductions, deferrals or forgiveness of tax es and duties to 
enterprises which were contingent upon expo rt performance or the use of domestic over imported goods.]  He also confirmed that the Russian  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3
 Page 81Paragraph No. Comment 
Federation would administer any subsidy prog rams in place or established after accession at all levels of government in conform ity with the 
WTO Agreement on Subsidies and Co untervailing Measures and that a subsidy notification in accordance with Article 25 of the Agreement  
all necessary information on programs be notified (if such programs existed) and  would be provided to the Committee on Subsidies and 
Countervailing Measures in accordance with Article 25 of the Agreement  upon entry into force of the Russian Federation's Protocol of 
Accession to the WTO.  He noted that Russia had provided Members with a limited amount of information on subsidies during the a ccession 
discussions and confirmed that Russia would provide a draft notification for review covering all subsidy programs at all levels of government 
prior to accession for review  and would comply with its notification obligations under the WTO Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing 
Measures immediately upon accession . He also confirmed that the Russian Federation woul d not invoke any of the provisions of Articles 27, 
28, 29 of the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures. The Working Party took no te of these commitments. ] 
Additional language may be required for the commitment to provid e greater precision on specific supports in the areas of agricu ltural 
machinery and aircraft. 
398-444 - Technical Barriers to Trade 
 [AUS] 
1. We seek inclusion of an extra sentence in paragraph 398 to expand on the nature and objective of Gosstandart's surveillance of compliance with 
"national standards'. 
 
2. We recommend redrafting paragraph 401 along the following lines:  
"Legislation pertaining to standardisation, metr ology and certification is listed in Annex 2. 
The representative of the Russian Federation noted that this legal framework required products to meet the mandatory technical, sanitary and 
phytosanitary  requirements  
determined by the Russian Federation.  In particular, imports of products into the Russian Federation were restricted if the products in question did not meet the statutory requirements.  (delete words thereafter) 
3. We note that in paragraph 402 a reference to a list of obje ctives which may not be legitimate ones under Article 2.2 of the TBT Agreement for 
the application of mandatory requirements.  These objectives include "uniformity in the methods of control and marking", "techn ical and informational 
compatibility", and "interchange ability of products".  We seek: 
 
- clarification in the text as to the nature and meaning of these "mandatory' requirements, whether they remain in force, and whe ther they are 
captured in the Federal Law "On Technical Regulation". 
 
4. Paragraph 403 indicates that over 50 per cent of state standards were harmonised with international standards and that the o verall harmonisation 
of "domestic standards' with "international standards' was about 35 per cent.  We seek: 
 
- clarification in the text of the difference (if any) between st ate and domestic standards, an d indicate the total number of cat egories of standards 
it applies. 
 
5. In paragraphs 406-408, Russia states that Resolution No. 287 of 29 April 2002 substantially reduced the list of good subject  to mandatory  
 WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3 
Page 82 Paragraph No. Comment 
certification.  We seek: 
 
- an updated list of such goods be annexed to the draft report. 
 
6. Paragraph 407 also refers to products whose conformity may be confirmed by conformity declaration.  We seek: 
 - An updated list of such goods be annexed to the draft report. 
 
7. We also recommend Russia provide a separate paper on the types of conformity assessment procedures to be completed for parti cular types of 
products (ranging from mandatory certification through to supplier's declaration of conformity), and the nature of those proced ures. 
 
8. We note references in paragraph 437 to necessary technical regulations being adopted within seven years of the entry into fo rce of the Federal 
Law on Technical Regulations.  We seek: 
 
- clarification in the text as to the implications for Russi a's compliance with the TBT Agreement during this period; 
- commitment language to the effect that Russia will comply fully with all obligations under the TBT Agreement by the date of acc ession. 
 [CAN] 
General Comments:  
 
Russia continues to add important details regarding the framework for, and workings of, its existing approach to the developmen t of technical 
regulations, standards, and conformity assessment procedures.  
Plurilateral meetings have allowed Members to determine, nonethel ess, that the new laws in this area do not necessarily apply t o all product sectors.  
This is problematic as Members cannot determ ine which sectors or products are not governed by new laws which are designed to br ing Russia into 
conformity with its WTO obligations under the TBT Agreement. 
 
 Specific Problems:
 
 
- In Canada's view, the text does not make clear the existing appr oaches for specific products categories or sectors (given that we are now aware 
that the approaches may differ significantly). 
- The text does not include the list of responsibilities for the new Federal Agency for Technical Regulation and Metrology (Roste chregulation) 
and the Ministry of Industry and Energy, the federal Agency an d Ministry which carry out the ma in responsibilities related to n ew federal laws 
in the area of technical regulati ons, standards and certification. 
- The text does not identify the responsibilities of all individual Ministries with TBT responsibilities in key product areas, su ch as the Ministry of 
Communications and the Ministry of Health, the powers of these Ministries and how these organizations relate to Rostechregulati on and the 
Ministry of Industry and Energy. 
- A 7 year transition period is still effectively being proposed. 
- There is a major gap in the text in the area of accreditation which is particularly cr itical given that Russia is still develop ing a federal law on  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3
 Page 83Paragraph No. Comment 
accreditation. It is no t known when this law will be approved.  
- Reference is made to a functioning Enquiry Point.  Russian officials have been made aware that the Enquiry Point has not been f unctioning of 
late. 
- The Third revision of the Russia accession working party report makes no mention of  the new (September 1, 2002) official hygien e norm for all 
food products produced, imported and sold on the territory of the Russian Federation came into effect (Sanitary-Epidemiological  Rules and 
Norms.SanPiN 2.3.2.1078-01).  This regulation introduced a mandatory labelling requirement of GMO products. 
Canada's position with respect to the labelling of genetically modified (GM) foods is consistent with WTO obligations which sta te that regulatory 
measures must be based on scientific principles. Canada requ ires labelling where the foods have undergone significant nutrition al or compositional 
changes or where there may be health and sa fety concerns, such as allergenicity. Canada  supports a voluntary, industry-based ap proach to labelling 
based on how a product was produced if it is not related to the product's characteristics (non-product related process and prod uction methods). In our 
view, mandatory labelling for non-product rela ted process and production methods may c onstitute a technical barrier to trade an d therefore could be 
contrary to international trade obligations.  
 
Possible Solutions and Drafting Proposals:
 
 
- Addition of text which describes the responsibilities of Rostech regulation and the Ministry of Industry and Energy. 
- Addition of text which describes the workings of key Ministries  (such as Health and Communications) who have law and regulation  making 
powers in the TBT area. 
- Greater detail on the Russian system for confor mity assessment, especially with respect to when two conformity assessment proce dures 
(certifications) or more are required. 
- Text which addresses the issue of duplica tive technical regulations, including a list of such regulations, as well as details o n the work program 
to eliminate duplicative measures. 
- Addition of text which identifies which documents Russian accreditation bodies are using to accredit conformity assessment bodi es, for 
example, use of ISO Guide 61, 66, 58. Is Russia intending to use the new international standard  ISO/IEC 17011 when it becomes available 
and, if so, when.  
- The text should include clarification and rationale regarding the Sanitary-Epidemiological Rules and Norms. SanPiN 2.3.2.1078-0 1 as noted 
above.     
 WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3 
Page 84 Paragraph No. Comment 
 [CHN] 
1. China would like to propose addition of the fo llowing paragraph to Paragraph 407 of the Draft Report  (TBT Part): ＂Upon request of Members, 
the representative of the Russian Federation committed to publica tion of the updated English version of the following lists alo ng with the HS 
Codes description: List of Goods Subject to Mandatory Certification and the  List of Works and Services Subject to Mandatory Certification  as well 
as the List of Products Whose Conformity May Be Confirmed by Conformity Declaration  on its official website  concerning TBT issues. ＂ 
 
Reason: The above Lists were men tioned in several places of the Draft Report  (TBT Part), including Paragraph 407, and the forms of conformity 
assessment for the products in the Lists have significant impact on international trade. 
 
2. Concepts to be further clarified by the Russian Side:  
- The Russian Federation is kindly requested to elab orate on the following terms as mentioned in the Draft Report  (TBT Part) and the Federal 
Law On Technical Regulating (English version available on Rostechregulation website:www.gost.ru): state standards; national standards; 
standards of organizations; standards of enterprises; standard s of scientific, technical, engineering institutions and other so cieties; sectoral 
standards. 
- Is the word "acts" as mentioned in "act s of a recommendatory nature" (see Paragraph 416 of the Draft Report) replaceable by "do cuments"?  
- The terms "declaration of conformity", "conformity declaration" and "supplier's declaration" are used in different places of th e Draft Report  
(TBT Part) ［e.g. Paragraphs 407 and 421 ］. The Russian Federation is kindly requested to confirm whether the all the three terms mean 
exactly the same thing, and if yes, uniformity of the wording in the Draft Report  is suggested.  
- We understand that the term "certification authorities" mentioned in Paragraphs 404 and 405 shou ld be substituted by "certifica tion bodies". 
The Russian Federation is kindly requested to confirm this. 
 
3. Request for an answer to the following questions concerning laboratory accreditation: 
 - Paragraph 421 of the  Draft Report  (TBT Part) stipulates: with regard to supplier's declaration of conformity, the applicant is required by the 
Russian Federation to "include in evidentia ry materials the reports of researches (t ests) and measurements carried out in accre dited test 
laboratory (center)". The Russian Federation is kindly requested to ex plain whether the "test laboratory (center)" is accredite d by the Russian 
government or by the Russian laboratory accreditation organiza tion. And can they also be t hose accredited foreign laboratories?  Does the 
Russian government recognize the test results of those laboratories accredited by the foreign accreditation organization that h as signed ILAC 
MRA?  
 
4. Request for document : 
 China kindly requests the Russian Federation to provide China with copies of the documents listed in ANNEX III of the Draft Report . 
 [EC] 
Descriptive part  
This section requires a considerable continuation of a clarification exercise, in particular as regards future plans of the Rus sian Federation regarding the 
drafting of technical regulations, the conformity assessment procedures related to those technical regulations, namely the need  for re-certification of 
similar products, the accreditation system a nd recognition of test results by foreign la boratories. The section need also to be  completed with information  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3
 Page 85Paragraph No. Comment 
about the institutional arrangements and the responsibilities of the agencies involved in these activities, namely the administ rative appeal system. The 
main questions raised by the EC are included  below. It would be useful to receive as  soon as possible inform ation on concrete w ork-programme for the 
drafting of technical regulations form the va rious agencies operating in the TBT field. 
 
Questions raised by the EC during the plurilateral meeting on 5 November 2004 include the following: 
 - Accreditation (paragraphs 399 and 400) – where is the line between the ministry's and the agency's responsibilities? 
- Standards (paragraphs 403 and 414) – what is the exact distinction between state, domestic and regional standards? 
- Market surveillance (paragraph 407) – how does market surveillan ce work in conjunction with the conformity declaration procedur e? 
- Transparency (in elaboration of tech nical regulations) (paragraph 409, 9
th bullet) – how will the public discussi on of draft technical regulations 
be carried out in practice? 
- Siting of facilities (paragraph 409)  – there is no mention of this (TBTA paragraph 5.2.6 refers) 
- Complaints procedure (paragraph 409) – there is no mention of this (TBTA paragraph 5.2.8 refers) 
- Norms (paragraph 419) – why are norms contained in technical regulations? 
- Quality system certificates (paragraphs. 421 and 422) – it is not clear how these are used in th e conformity declaration proced ure. 
- Conformity declaration (paragraphs. 420 etc.) – more detail required. 
- Radio devices (table 6 of non-paper 40) – not clear which ministries or agencies are involved – also not clear if conformity de claration 
procedure can apply or not. 
- Medical devices – which ministry is responsible for what? 
 
Commitment  
 
We expect a confirmation that the WTO TBT agreement will be applie d as from WTO entry. Actual commitment to be defined at a lat er stage. Several 
specific issues will need to be addressed in the commitment, including a number of sector-specific issues (pharmaceuticals, ICT  sector; textiles). 
 [JPN] 
1. At the third tiret of paragraph 409, it provides that "International standards and/or national standards could in full or in pa rt as a basis for 
development of draft technical regulations". In relation to the TBT Agreement, the principle is that mandatory regulations shou ld be developed based on 
international standards. Therefore, referenc es to "national standards" and "in full or in part" should be deleted and that tire t should read; "International 
standards should be used as a basis for development of draft technical regulations". The same thing holds true for the second s entence of paragraph 440. 
2. Liability aspects contained in "On Technical Regulations" are missi ng from the description provided in paragraph 409. Therefore , elements 
contained in Article 40(Coercive Retraction of Products), Article 41(Responsibility for Violation of Rules of Executing of Cert ification Works) and 
Article 42 (Responsibility of Accredited Test Laboratory) of "O n Technical Regulations" should be included in the Report. 
3. In paragraph 411, it provides that "A technical regulation could provide the rules and forms of conformity assessment(including  schemes of 
conformity confirmation)…". The mean ing of "A technical regulation " could  " need to be clarified. 
4. In paragraph 419, it provides that "The Federal Law provided that until the corresponding technical regulations had come into e ffect, the 
Government would determine and annually supplement the list of  products for which mandatory certification would be substituted by a conformity 
declaration." With regard to the development of each individual technical regulation, there is "Technical Regulations Developme nt Program for 2004-
2005". We would like to clarify whether Technical Regulation Deve lopment Program will be elaborated every year from 2006 onward  as mentioned 
above and like to request the Russian Federation to state in th e Report that the Russian Federation will publicize the on-going  process concerning  
 WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3 
Page 86 Paragraph No. Comment 
changes from the mandatory conformity scheme to the Declaration of Conformity scheme in a timely manner.  
5. In paragraph 421, reference is made to conformity declaration which involves participation of a third party. Paragraph 1 of Art icle 24 of "On 
Technical Regulation" provides that Declar ation of Conformity shall be carried out using either (a) assuming of supplier's decl aration on the basis of 
own proofs, or (b) assuming of supplier's declaration on the basis of own proof, the proofs obtained with participation of cert ification body and (or) 
accredited test laboratory (center). The presen t draft text of paragraph 421 does not clearly reflect the contents of the Artic le mentioned above. 
Therefore, the draft text should be amended accordingly. 6. In paragraph 437, it provides that "Mandatory requirements for products,…would not have been adopted within the specified perio d would 
cease to be effective." On the other hand, in paragraph 416, it provides that "As of  this date and until the issuance of corres ponding technical 
regulations, or should such regulations not be issued by 1 July 2010, the requirements regarding products, were subject to obli gatory implementation 
only to the extent that they ensured protection of human life or health,…".  Clarification is re quired as to the relationship a nd consistency between the 
above two paragraphs. In any event, for the sake of clarity, the contents of paragraph 416 should be moved to paragraph 437. 
7. Since reference is made to technical regulation development prog ram in paragraph 439, "Technical Regulation Development Program  for 2004-
2005" should be mentioned therein. 
8. We are informed that under "On Technical Regulations" and upon development of technical regulations, currently imposed duplicat ive 
certification requirement of both hygienic approval from the Ministry of Health and Social Development of the Russian Federatio n in addition to 
mandatory safety/EMC approval controlled by the Federal Agency for Technical Regulation and Metrology of the Russian Federation  on the same good 
will be abolished with respect to all industrial goods. We w ould like to clarify the above and these clarified points should be  duly reflected in the present 
section. We would also like to request th e Russian Federation to state in the Repo rt that it will publicize the on-going proces s toward abolishing the 
duplicative certification requirement in a timely manner. 
 [SUI]  
Paragraph 405 :  We can read in paragraph 405 that an " uniform accreditation procedure was applied to both Russian and foreign certification 
authorities and laboratories ". We insist again on this point, aski ng the Russian Federation not to require an  additional Russian accreditation for foreign 
testing and certification bodies if these bodies are already accredited by a foreign accreditation body participating in the fr amework of ILAC and IAF. 
Such a process would be contrary to the ILAC and IAF Cross Border Accreditation policy principles. Paragraph 407 :  Paragraph 407 refers to a list of products subject to mandatory certification and conformity declaration (it s eems that the list of the 
products subject to mandatory certification had been reduced by 20% and the list of products for which conformity could be conf irmed by conformity 
declaration had tripled). Switzerland would be grateful if the Russian Federation  would provide the members of the Working Par ty with the latest 
version of the two lists. 
Paragraph 437and 438 :  Paragraph 437 indicates that all necessary  technical regulations have to be adopted within seven years from the date of entry 
into force of the Federal Law on technical regulation. Thus, th ere is a transition period up to 2010 to transform all existing mandatory requirements into 
technical regulations. Could the Russian Federation specify what will happen during these 7 years if a technical regulation is incompatible with the TBT 
agreement  or if someone considers that a technical regulation is inconsistent with the TBT agreement i.e. the regulation is no t based on international 
standards as foreseen in Artic le 2.4 of the TBT agreement?  
 [USA] 
Requests for Information or Clarifications That Should be Reflected in the Text :   
 
Russian legislation/regulations n ecessary to implement WTO rules are pending for this section.   
  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3
 Page 87Paragraph No. Comment 
Paragraph 405 :  Indicates that foreign authorities and test laboratories accredited in  accordance with esta blished procedures (which appear to include 
compliance with ISO/IEC Guide 65 and Standard 17025) can provid e testing and certification for the GOST R certification system.   The United States is 
supportive of approaches that provide national treatment; however , it is our understanding that this is not currently the case.    
 
- Please clarify whether the information in th is paragraph reflects current or future practice, and what relationship it has, if any, to the changes 
foreseen in the adoption of a new Law on Accreditation. 
 
Paragraphs 406, 407, 421, 420, 421, and 422:  Since July 1999, Russia has been allowing use of a conformity declaration  for certain products subject to 
mandatory certification.  The requirements for this conformity d eclaration appear to be more stringent than international pract ice, and different than the 
new ISO standard on supplier’s declaration of conformity .  Paragraph 420 indicates registration is required for representatives of foreign manufacturers, 
as well as a contract ensuring conformity of the product to t echnical regulations and liability for non-conformity of the deliv ered products.   
 - Please explain the rationale for these requirements.   
- Does Russia plan to evaluate its approach, with a view to aligning it with the new ISO standard and removing unnecessary impedi ments to 
trade?   
 
Paragraph 421 :  Can Russia confirm that requirements for the su bmission of test or other data, or quality system registration,  are voluntary?  
 Paragraph 419 :  We note the assertion “Thus, the list of products subject to mandatory certification could only be reduced, unless otherwise provided by 
the corresponding technical regulation.”  
 
- What is the basis for this assertion?  If none, we suggest it be  deleted.  It is our understanding that in Russia’s system, a c onformity declaration 
is one alternative for mandatory certification.  Movement between  the two approaches to mandatory certification is not a reduct ion in the list of 
products subject to this requirement.   
 
Paragraph 427 and 399 :  Paragraph 427 indi cates Rostechreg is now in charge of accr editation and mandatory GOST R certificatio n.  Para 399 indicates 
the Ministry of Industry and Energy (which includes Rostechreg) is in charge of voluntary certif ication.  Please clarify whethe r Rostechreg is in charge 
of both mandatory and voluntary
 certification and if so, include  the information in one place. 
 Paragraph 427 indicates conformity assessment procedures in place as  of July 1, 2003 would rema in in effect until the issuance of new technical 
regulations.   
 - This would appear to contradict Article 46 of the Law on Technical Regulations which provides that during the transition period  (7 years from 
2003) only those regulations necessary for sa fety will be enforced.  Please clarify.   
- What happens if there is a disagreement as to the necessity of mandatory conformity assurance? 
 
Paragraph 429-434 Covers telecommunications (which is subject to a separate Law).  
 - Please review terminology -- reference is sometimes made to telecommunications “facilities” and other times to “equipment” -- t o ensure  
 WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3 
Page 88 Paragraph No. Comment 
accuracy.   
- In previous drafts, Para. 431 included further information describing the telecommunications facilities -- we found this inform ation useful and 
suggest it be re-inserted.   
- Paragraph 433 and 434 contain certain commitments that have yet to be implemented.  We would appreciate updates when these comm itments 
are actually implemented (which we expect prior to accession). 
 Paragraph 439 :  It would be helpful to update this paragraph and clarify the status and purpos e of the technical regulations d evelopment program.  
Precisely what has been approved?  Is this a one-time approval or will the annual updates require approval? 
 Paragraph 441 :  There appears to be a contradiction between the information contained in paragraph 405 (which indicates foreig n bodies can be directly 
accredited and recognized  for purposes of conformity assessment) and this pa ragraph, which indicates multilateral and/or bilate ral agreements were 
necessary to recognize foreign co nformity assessment documents.   
 
- Russia should provide examples of such agreements. 
- Please clarify whether there is an option fo r direct recognition through accreditation. 
 
The text should contain a description and clarification of Russia’s current system of registration and re-registration of pharm aceuticals and clarification 
and its plans to reform it to address issues raised by Me mbers, including the fee structure for “expert analysis.” 
 
In addition, Russia’s plans regarding the ne w "declaration of conformity" system that  will replace mandatory certification of p harmaceuticals should be 
fully described.  
 
Specific Drafting Suggestions
: 
 
Paragraph 403 :  Please revise the reference to fundamental international standards.   
 - The TBT Committee has emphasized the need for bodies developing “i nternational standards” for purposes of the TBT Agreement to adhere to 
certain principles as outlined in the relevant Committee Decision (s ee G/TBT/1/Rev.8, IX), and we prefer this formulation.  The  Committee 
itself has not identified any particular body whose standards are recommended and we are concerned that Russia’s approach may b e overly 
restrictive and not allow itself to choose the most relevant and appropriate standard for its purposes.  The text should be cha nged or clarified. 
- Further, the UN Economic Commission for Europe is a regional body and should not be included in the list. 
 Paragraph 409 :  Subpara 10:  The developer was required to save the written notices
 received....   We believe comments should replace the term notices . 
 
Paragraph 411, 422, 423 and 438:  All of these paragraphs contain information on technical regulations that is sometimes confli cting or duplicative.  
Paragraph 411 is conditional and indicates that a technical regulation could  contain conformity assessment requirements.  Paragraph 422, 423 and 438 
make similar statements but are not conditional.   
 - Please clarify and remove redundancies.  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3
 Page 89Paragraph No. Comment 
 
Paragraph 415 :  Suggest the last sentence be deleted, as  this is not a reflection of the current situation.   
 Paragraph 422 :  Content appears to be re dundant with information already provided. 
 
Paragraph 423 :  This information appears to be redundant and could be deleted.  
Paragraph 425 :  Change “export” to “import.” 
 Paragraph 428 :  Second sentence is an assertion and should be deleted. 
 
Paragraph 437 :  “or reconciled transformed” –please clarify.  
Elements of a Commitment
: 
 - The United States seeks a commitment that the Russian Federation will comply with and fully implement the TBT Agreement upon ac cession 
to the WTO and that Russia will amend and/or rescind any existi ng standard, technical regulation or conformity assessment proce dure that is 
not compliant with the TBT Agreement prior to its accession.   
-  
- We also seek specific commitments concerning: 
- communications equipment that are set out in paragraphs 433 and 434; and  
 - confirmation of the elimination of specific NTMs re lated to TBT identified in the discussion to date.  
445-472 - Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures 
 [ARG] 
Paragraph 445. The representative of the Russian Federation stated that protection of human health was currently regulated by Federal Law No. 52-FZ 
of 30 March 1999 "On Sanitary and Epidemiological Well-Being of the Population"; Federal Law No. 5487-1 of 22 July 1993 "Fundam entals of Health 
Legislation of the Russian Federation";  "Regulations of the State Sanitary and Epidemiological Service of the Russian Federati on" and "Regulations on 
State Sanitary and Epidemiological Standardization" approved by Government Resolution No. 554 of 24 July 2000;   and terms and provisions of other 
federal laws and resolutions of the Government of the Russian Federation concerning provision of safety of goods and p roducts for human health and 
environment (e.g. Federal Laws "On Environmental Protection";   "On Consumer Rights Protection";   and "On Quality and Safety of Food 
Products").  (This phrase does not seem to be  addressed in  the SPS Agreement but in the TBT Agreement).  
 
Paragraph 453.  What is the meaning of "products potentially dangerous for human life and health" (Government Resolution No. 262, dated on Apri l 4 
2001).  Further, the phrase "Safety of Food Products" mingles w ith issues governed by the TBT Ag reement.  Reference to "food sa fety", a concept 
recognized by the SPS Agre ement, is suggested.  
 
Paragraph 457. It is not appropriate to include the following se ntence into the SPS section as it deals with environmental and not sanitary certifications: 
"For imports and transit of controlled cargoes regulated by the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora  
 WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3 
Page 90 Paragraph No. Comment 
(CITES), an additional permit from the CITES agency in the exp orting country was required in addition to the required documents  (CITES agencies 
were the Ministry of Natural Resources and the State Committee of the Russian Federation for Fi shery – for sturgeon fish specie s)." The sentence 
"Imports and exports of pedigree animals, apart from the authorization from the Chief State Veterinary Inspector of the Russian  Federation and 
veterinary certificate, required an "extract from the State registry of selection achi evements allowed for us e with respect to the imported plant seeds, 
pedigree animals" for imports, and  "confirmation of compliance with the requirements with respect to protection of patent hold er rights with respect to 
the exported plant seeds, pedigree animals" for exports, signed by the Deputy Minister of Agriculture of the Russian Federation " " should be included in 
the Intellectual Property section. The following sentence should not be part of the SPS section but of the TBT one: "Imports of veterinary preparations 
were regulated by Government Resolution No. 1539 of 25 December 1998 "Regulations on Imports into and Exports from the Russian Federation of 
Medicines and Ph armaceuticals".  
 
Paragraph 462. The representative of the Russian Federation stated that pursuant to Federal Law No. 184 -FZ of 27 December 2002 "On Technical 
Regulation" mandatory requirements appli ed to products would be contained in new technical regulations (general and special). Amendments would be 
made to the relevant legislation in order to bring it in compliance with the mentioned above Federal law . (The sentence above does not correspond to 
the SPS section, but to  the TBT Agreement).  
 Paragraph 465.  As to the new regulations and legislation, it should be made clear that the publication in journals and specialized publication s does not 
replace the commitment to notify the WTO under its procedures  and to comply with WTO transparency provisions .   
 
Paragraphs 469 and 470:  SPS Issues raised by members : Argentina seeks responses to questions of  members raised in these paragraphs. 
 
Paragraph 472:   Recourse to a transitional period of three y ears for the application of the SPS Agreement  
 
The delegation of Argentina woul d like to express its concern w ith regards to this paragraph and finds this request unacceptabl e.  Moreover, there is no 
reason to request such an excep tion, taking into account that all members do comply with this Ag reement, in particular developi ng countries. Russia 
does not have a lack of resources, as evidenced by its high levels  of domestic support in the amber box. Therefore, paragraph 4 72 should be deleted and 
the Russia's commitment shou ld be clearly expressed. 
 [AUS] 
1. We refer to information in paragraph 446, and seek: 
 
- provision of information not provided in "Annex I"; 
- clarification as to when sanitary normative legal act and manda tory hygiene requirements on products, production processes, use , storage, etc 
would be elaborated to comp ly with the SPS Agreement; 
 2. We note the statement in paragraph 447 that "under current legislation, an applicant had the right to appeal a decision of G ossanepidnadzor 
through administrative or judici al procedures."  We seek: 
 - clarification of what defines an "applicant' and how administrative and judicial procedures relate to foreign trading partners who disagree with a 
decision taken by Gossanepidnadzor; 
  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3
 Page 91Paragraph No. Comment 
3. In paragraph 450 and elsewhere in this section, we note that Russia appears to use the terms "epidemiological examination", "sanitary 
epidemiological approval", "hygienic assessment' and "h ygienic approvals' interchangeably.  We suggest: 
 - Russia use one term consistently, or otherwise indicate that thes e terms refer to an identical process and not to multiple requ irements or 
processes. 
 4. We note paragraphs 452-453 concern a state "registration' system for new products produced in Russia or entering Russia "for  the first time'.  
We seek clarification in the text as to: 
 - what constitutes a "new' product in the context of this legislation; 
- the procedures and processes (including fees or formalities involved, approval periods, documentation requirements, examination s etc) required 
to obtain state registration in these cases; 
- how state epidemiological assessment and state regi stration of products "constituted a single process'; 
- the policy justification for a separate state registration system  given imports are already subj ect to a "sanitary and epidemio logical examination' 
referred to in paragraph 450; 
- what is meant in practical terms by the se ntence in paragraph 453 that a "registratio n certificate was issued… for the period o f supplies in the 
case of imported products '.  In particular, we seek cl arification as to whether the "p eriod of supplies' refers to individual cargoes or supply over 
an extended period. 
 
5. Paragraph 455 refers to important provisions concerning lodging appeals against decisions taken by the officials of the Stat e Veterinary 
Service.  We seek clarification in  the text of the following issues: 
 
- the rights of foreign trading partners to lodge appeals against d ecisions taken by officials of th e State Veterinary Service, g iven the statement 
that appeals can only be taken "by a veterinary inspector of a lower authority to a veterinary inspector of a higher authority. .". 
 
6. Paragraph 458 refers to the possibility of "contemplating the presence of Russian Veterinary inspectors to control complianc e of raw meat 
consignments' where a "bad epizootic situation' existed.  We seek reference in the text to: 
 
- legal or regulatory instruments providing authority to negotiate such arrangements and informati on on the provisions of those i nstruments; 
- specific information on the definition of a "bad epizootic situation', including any relevant criteria; 
- clarification as to whether Russian legisla tion or regulations allows for importation of raw meat from another country to be ma de conditional 
upon  placement of a Russian inspect or in the export country; 
- clarification as to whether Russian legislation or regulations provides for exporting countries to meet Russia's standards in r elation to raw meat 
by other means than the placement of a Russ ian inspector in the export country (as provided for under Article 4 of the SPS Agre ement on 
Equivalence). 
 
7. We seek new text cross-referencing a measure listed in paragraph 182 that the Veterinary Service require that importers obta in an import 
permit, in addition to veterinary and sanitary certification requ irements to import beef, pork and poultry into the Russian Fed eration under tariff rate 
quotas.  We seek inclusion in the text of:  
 WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3 
Page 92 Paragraph No. Comment 
 
- the procedures, processes, fees and other formalities associated with obtaining this import permit how they meet the discipline s of the WTO 
Agreement on Import Licensing Procedures; 
- the period of validity of an import permit, requirements for obt aining a permit, and grounds for refusal of a permit applicatio n; 
- an explanation of how these requirements differ from those associated with obtaining a general: (i) "hygienic approval' in orde r to export food 
and animal produce to Russia; and (ii) im port certificates under which e xporting countries already export animal products to Ru ssia. 
 
8. We note our expectation that eventual  commitment language in paragraph 472 shoul d entail a commitment from Russia to meet th e provisions 
of the SPS Agreement upon accession and w ith no recourse to a transition period. 
 [BRA] 
Brazil expects a commitment by the Russian Fe deration to fully apply the WTO Agreement on  Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures u pon its accession. 
 [CAN] 
General Comments:  
 
The three year transition period requeste d by Russia is unacceptable to Canada. 
 
The SPS Agreement encourages all WTO Member s to implement science-based regulations as  an overarching principle of their regula tory systems.  It is 
Canada's view that the transparency provisions of the SPS Agr eement are a cornerstone to its ef fective implementation.  Through  the notification process 
adopted by the SPS Committee, Members can attain a greater degr ee of predictability and clarity with respect to the adoption of  SPS measures by 
trading partners. 
 
 Specific Problems:
 
 
- In Canada's view, a 3 year transition period is not acceptable  and Russia should fully implemen t the WTO SPS Agreement upon acc ession. 
Russia has not provided satisfactory answers to this issue. 
- Canada seeks clarification whether SPS Checklist Articles 2 and 3, TBT/SPS Enquiry Point and Transparency provisions, are now i n effect.   
- Canada notes that the internet site for the TBT/SPS Enquiry Point ( http://www.ricwto.ru ) provided in the Draft WP Report is not functioning. 
- Canada notes that the websites for the Principal Computing Centre of the Ministry of Agriculture (www.aris.ru ) and the Ministry of Health 
Regulation and Certification Center ( www.crc.ru ) provided in the SPS Checklist Articles 2 an d 3, TBT/SPS Enquiry Point and Transparency 
provisions, are available in the Russian language only. 
- Canada notes that the SPS Checklist Article 6, Harmonization, makes reference to EC documents and EP PO as relevant standards. T hese are 
not relevant international standards for the purpose of Articles 3.1, 3.3 and 3.4 of the SPS Agreement. 
 Possible Solutions and Drafting Proposals:
 
 
- Addition of commitment language th at demonstrates in no uncertain terms that Russia will fully implement the SPS Agreement upon  accession. 
: " Russia confirms that from the date of accession, its laws an d regulations will be applied in full conformity with the provi sions of the WTO  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3
 Page 93Paragraph No. Comment 
SPS Agreement, and that these provisions will be  established in Russia's legal framework". 
- Further clarity on the SPS Checklist Articles 2 and 3, TBT/SPS En quiry Point and Transparency provisions, indicating whether th ese are now 
in effect.  
- Canada encourages Russia to consider impl ementation of a TBT/SPS Enquiry Point and no tification points as well as Transparency measures, 
which would be available in the English language, prior to  accession, as some previous acceding countries have done. 
- Canada encourages Russia to make reference to relevant interna tional standards in Article 6, Harmonization, of the SPS Check-li st.   
 [CHN] 
1. Request for two lists 
- It is suggested that the "Goods Nomenclature of Foreign Economic  Activity" promulgated by the Veterinary Department of the Mini stry of 
Agriculture on 16 May 2000 (Letter No.13-8-01/3009) and the "Nomenclature of Main Types of Products, Cargoes and Materials (Goo ds) 
Subject to Quarantine, for which imports into and exports from the Russian Federation required authorization by the agencies of  the State 
Service for Quarantine of Plants of the Russian Federation", approved by the Ministry of Agriculture on 19 March 1999 (as amend ed on  
- 25 December 2001) should be renewed in time and p ublicized on the official website in English. 
 
2. Request for further clarification of the meaning of "S tate Registration of New Foodstuffs, Materials and Items" 
- The meaning of "the State Registration of New Foodstuffs, Materials and Items" referred to in Paragraph 452 is not clear. What is the 
difference between it and the procedure for sa nitary epidemiological appr oval or certificate registration on the basis of sanit ary epidemiological 
assessment result? Is the registration still n ecessary when there is already sanitary epidemiological approval document or a re gistered 
certificate? Would it make the process of the inspection and quarantine on the foreign products more complicated? Further expla nation would 
be appreciated. 
 3. Request for further clarification concer ning the harmonization of the legal surveillance system of veterinary measures with the SPS Agreement. 
- The legal surveillance system of veterinary measures mentioned in Paragraphs 454, 456 and 459 is quite complicated. Pursuant to  the 
requirement of article 2 of the SPS Agreemen t, the Russian Federation is kindly request ed to provide further explanation concer ning the 
legislation and the standards on the surveillance of import animals and products of animal origin. In addition, further clarifi cation is requested 
on whether the Russian animal health standards on which these documents are based are harmonized with the international standar ds.  
 [EC] 
The EU expresses its concern about the lack of progress in this section. The descrip tive part will need a considerable improvem ent and the commitment 
will need to be elaborated after further discussions. As for TBT,  it would be useful to receive as soon as possible information  on concrete proposals for 
the elaboration of t echnical regulations. 
 General comments 
- The EU considers the SPS agreem ent should be applied as from WTO entry. The EU has difficulties in understanding the justificat ion of 
transitional periods for the application of principles such as transparency, proportionality and regionalisation.  
- The current situation as regards import conditions for animal prod ucts raises serious concerns in view of the SPS agreement. Ac cording to the 
SPS Agreement measures which are in complian ce with the relevant international standard s are deemed consistent with the SPS Agr eement 
(Article 3(2)). However, WTO Members may in troduce measures which go beyond the relevant international standards provided that such 
measures are scientifically justif ied (Article 3(3)). The SPS Agreement refers to the OIE Animal Health Code (terrestrial and a quatic codes) as  
 WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3 
Page 94 Paragraph No. Comment 
the relevant international standard for animal health and zoonoses. On a number of occasions the Russian animal health conditio ns for imports 
of animal products go beyond the recommendations of the OIE Code 2004. In these cases Russia should provide scientifically vali d justification 
for its measures. Up to now no such justification has been provided.  
 
A non-exhaustive list of inconsistencies which the EU  considers will need to be resolved includes: 
 - Implementation of the regionalisation and transparency rules under the SPS agreement  
- Horizontal requirements in violation with the SPS Agreement:  African swine fever (ASF); foot and mouth disease (FMD); Premises and 
administrative territories officially fr ee from infectious animal diseases; 
- Product specific requirements in violation with the SPS Agreement: bovine meat; pig meat; poultry meat; milk and milk products; feed and 
feed additives  
- Resident inspectors : reliance on certifying officers of exporting members and only  carrying out occasional inspections in the exporting 
countries is common practice applied in international trade. Permanent inspections are more trade restrictive than necessary. T he EU 
accordingly invites Russia to rely on certifying officers of the EU Member States for their exports to Russia and to eliminate the practice of 
resident inspectors in EU Member States.  
 [JPN] 
1. The contents of the draft text of  the present section as a whole do not seem to be clear. Therefore, furt her work is required t o improve them. We 
would like to request the Russia Federation to ensure that all SPS related measures are fully in consistent with the WTO agreem ent upon its accession to 
the WTO. In this regard, we would like to request the Russian Federation to make a commitment that it will fully implement the SPS Agreement without 
any transition period. 
2. In paragraph 457, there is a description that imports of cargoes  controlled by the State Veterinary Surveillance Agency are res tricted to 
designated cross-border checkpoints. It should be ensured that such checkpoints are not undue trade barrier to imports of cargo es. In this connection, we 
would like to seek clarification from the Russian Federation on the number of such checkpoints established all over the Russian  Federation, any future 
plans of increasing the number of checkpoints and concrete time frame contained in these plans if any. 3. In paragraph 458, the possibility of contemplating the presence of Russian Veterinary Inspectors in countries with a bad epizoo tic concerning 
transmissible animal diseases is indicated . We would like to seek clarification from the Russian Federation on the current stat e of play concerning the 
above mentioned presence of Russian Veterinary Inspectors in fo reign countries. (e.g. Is there any case where such Inspectors a re actually at present? Is 
a meat consignment, in reality, not eligible for shipment to the Russian Federation unless such Inspectors are not at present i n these countries?) 
4. In paragraph 464, reference is made to legislation concerning te chnical regulation. And reference is also made that such legisl ation fully 
complies with Federal Law No.184-FZ and that the requirements of this Law are based on the provisi ons of the SPS Agreement. Jap an is of the view 
that what the Members wish to seek a c onfirmation from the Russian Federation is its commitment to the effect that all legislat ion pertaining to technical 
regulations will be fully consistent the SPS Agreement. Therefore draft te xt of this paragraph should be amended accordingly. F urthermore, reference to 
ensuring transparency in proced ures, for example reference to procedures for recruiting public comments, etc. should be include d. 
 [NOR] 
We seek a commitment that the Russian Federation would fully a pply the SPS Agreement upon accession  without recour se to any tra nsitional period. 
 [USA] 
Requests for Information or Clarifications That Should be Reflected in the Text :   
  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3
 Page 95Paragraph No. Comment 
Despite numerous Working Party discussions of its SPS regime, Russia’s activities in this area remain problematic.   
 
Russian legislation/regulations n ecessary to implement WTO rules are pending for this section.   
 
Please provide a copy of the government-approved technical regula tions development program (see paragraph 439).  In particular,  Russia should provide 
a list of SPS measures pending review under the Law on Technical Regulations.  
Please provide information on any additional legislation that is in tended to bring the SPS regime into compliance with the WTO SPS Agreement.   
 Specific Drafting Suggestions
: 
 
It is difficult to suggest drafting changes for the current SPS s ection, as Russia has not provid ed a clear picture of its goal s for its future SPS regime.  
However, given the overlap between the TBT and SPS sections of th e Draft Working Party Report and their relationship with the “ Law on Technical 
Regulation,” we suggest taking a similar organizational approach in terms of presenting the factual basis of the regime, a disc ussion of Member’s 
concerns, and Russia’s commitments.  We suggest the following approach: 
 
- Identify the federal authorities responsible for food safety, plant and animal health; 
- Identify the relevant legal basis for Russia’s SPS requirements; 
- Explain the procedures for SPS regulation of domestic produc tion, imports, and exports in each of the three areas; and 
- Develop a section that explains how Russia’s SPS system will be revised under the new Law on Tec hnical Regulation , both with r espect to the 
legislative basis (e.g., does the new law supercede previous legi slation or is it in addition to prior normative acts?) and wit h respect to how 
Russia’s SPS regime will be brought into complian ce with the SPS Agreement.  In this section: 
 - Russia will need to explain, step by step (i.e., based on th e framework of the SPS checklist), and demonstrate how the new la w and 
implementing regulations ensure that Russia’s SPS regime meets these requirements; and 
- The text should also reflect to what extent the reorganization of Russia’s government in 2004 (i.e., Non-paper 40) has affect ed 
Russia’s SPS regime and Russia’s efforts to  comply with the WTO SPS Agreement.   
 
- Maintain the information in Rev.3 of the draft Report on WTO Memb ers’ comments and questions and add more information on how Ru ssia 
will respond to those specific concerns.  
- Include the list of all existing Russian SPS measures (e.g., Veteri nary Orders, Ministry of Health requirements) and explain ho w they will be 
addressed in the “Technical Regulations De velopment Program” (see paragraph 439 of WT /ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev. 3).  Please include 
information on the timeline for review and revision of SPS  measures for compliance with  the WTO SPS Agreement.  
 
Elements of a Commitment
 
 
- That the Russian Federation will co mply with the SPS Agreement u pon accession to the WTO and will amend its laws and rescind an y existing 
SPS measures that do not comply with the SPS Agreem ent requirements prior to its accession; and    
 WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3 
Page 96 Paragraph No. Comment 
- Additional commitment language relevant to  specific SPS issues that are not de finitively clarified may be necessary. 
473-487 - Trade-Related Investment Measures 
 [AUS] 
We note the extensive redrafting of this section.  We seek: 
 - the addition of commitment language on the removal of the local content requirement for products and services utilised in energ y projects 
subject to production sharing agreements (PSAs).  This constitutes a TRIM within the meaning of paragraph 1(a) of the Annex of the 
Agreement on Trade-Related Investment Measures that is re quired to be eliminated under Article 2 of the Agreement. 
- clarification in the text as to whethe r Russia still allows importation of certain polished diamonds on favourable terms on the  condition that 
those diamonds have originated from its own production of raw diamonds.  If our understanding of the nature of this measure is correct, we 
seek reference to the fact that it constitutes a TRIM within the meaning of paragraph 2(a) of the Annex of the Agreement on Tra de-Related 
Investment Measures that is required to be eliminated under Article 2 of the Agreement. 
 [CAN] 
Specific Problems:  
 - Canada is seeking a clear commitment from Russia that it will elim inate any measures inconsistent with the WTO TRIMS Agreement,  and 
apply the TRIMS Agreement without recourse to any transition period.   
- Some of Russia's current regulation is potentia lly not compliant with the TRIMs agreement. 
 
Possible Solutions and Drafting Proposals:
 
- Russia needs to confirm that the square brackets around paragr aphs 486 and 487 will be removed and the following changes will b e made to the 
text: 
  486.  [The representative of the Russian  Federation confirmed that, from the date of accession, the Russian Federation would e liminate and 
would not maintain any measures inconsistent with the WTO Agreement on Trade-related Investment Measures (TRIMs), and would app ly this 
Agreement without recourse to any transition period.  Specifically, Russia confirms that it will terminate or amend the following legislation to 
bring it into line with the TRIMS Agreement:  
 - Federal Law No. 225-FZ of 30 D ecember 1995 "On Production Sharing Agreements (as amended of 6 June 2003)"   
 - Presidential Decree No. 135 of 5 February  1998 "On Additional Measures to Attract In vestments for Development of Domestic Ca r 
 Making"   
 - Government Resolution No. 413 of 23 Apri l 1998 "On Additional Measure s to Attract Investments fo r Development of Domestic Ca r 
 Making".]   
487.  [The representative of the Russian Federation confirmed that, from the date of accession, the Russian Federation would co nform with the 
provisions of the Agreement on Trade-Related Investment Measures, and in particular would not conclude new agreements with fore ign 
investors which contain provisions contrary to those prohibited by the TRIMs Agreement.  The Working Party took note of this co mmitment.] 
- Canada also proposes the following change to the text: 
 
484. In response to members of the Working Party's concerns regardin g the aircraft sector, the repres entative of the Russian Federat ion  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3
 Page 97Paragraph No. Comment 
noted that Government Resolution No. 574 of 2 August 2001 "On Certain Issues of Regulation of Temporary Imports of Aircraft" su perseded 
Government Resolution No. 716 of 7 July 1998 "On Additional Measures of State Support for Civil Aviation in Russia" and termina ted the full 
exemption from customs duties and taxes for temporary import for aircraft, spare parts and engines and simulators which were im ported under 
investment agreements.  No investment agreements had been concluded since the adoption of Government Resolution No.574 of 2 Aug ust 2001 
"On Certain Issues of Regulation of Temporary Imports of Foreign Made Aircraft".  Russia confirms that Government Resolution No . 574 of 2 
August 2001 "On Certain Issues of Regulation of Temporary Imports of Aircraft" is in full conformity with the provisions in the  TRIMs 
Agreement.    
 [EC] 
Descriptive part  :  
Further discussions of substance are necessary on cars, PSAs and aircraft. We invite Russia to provide further precisions as to  how it intends to comply 
with the TRIMs Agreement/GATT. On cars, we  note recent developments/plans concerning customs duties for imports of components u sed for 
assembly in Russia. On PSA, we noted Russia's explanation during the last meeting of the WP that only a  very small part of PSA s would need to be 
adapted to bring it into conformity with the WTO and invite Russia to provide more precision in this respect.  
Commitment
:  
Our position is reflected in the commitment proposed by Members. This is a standard  commitment in all accessions and we have so  far not found 
justifications to do otherwise. 
 [NOR] - Production Sharing Agreements  
We thank the Russian Federation for the factual information provided on the Production Sharing Agreements in paragraphs 475 – 4 81.  We would, 
however, appreciate further information about the current policies in the Russian Federation with regard to the use of Producti on Sharing Agreements.  
We also seek a confirmation that the Russian Federation would no t enter into any new Production Sharing Agreements beyond the t hree existing 
agreements, and that the PSA system will be abolished at the latest when these agreements are terminated. 
 [USA] 
Requests for Information or Clarifications That Should be Reflected in the Text : 
 
Production Sharing Agreements    
Paragraph 475 :  Any tax, customs or other benefits that may be provided pursuant to the PSA law need to be explained  Although  the draft report makes 
general reference to the PSA law in paragraph 475, it omits the ph rase "tax benefits" from the list of considerations provided to investors under PSAs 
from the sentence which defines “production sharing agreement.”  
 
Paragraph 477 : We note that Russia has indicated in the past that there were no PSAs established under the 1995 PSA law.  Rega rding the three existing 
PSAs discussed in the text of this section: 
 
- Did the agreements negotiated prior to the PSA law require the purc hase of Russian-origin goods?  Was exporting mandatory for t he PSAs 
prior to Law 225-FZ?  The current text does not make this clear.   
- If giving such preferences to Russian goods  are optional, please confirm whether there are any clauses in those agreements that  impose 
additional requirements or reduce benefits in cases where the op tion to give preference to Russian goods is not chosen.   
 WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3 
Page 98 Paragraph No. Comment 
 
Paragraph 478 : This paragraph appears to indicate that Law 225-FZ does not override the provisions of earlier PSAs.   
 - Is this correct?  What is the relationship between the provisions in the pre-1995 PSAs and the 1995 PSA law with respect to any  requirements 
to purchase Russian-origin goods?  
 Domestic Car Industry 
 
Paragraph 482 : This states that the «term of the preferences» could not go beyond the term specified in the contract for the i nvestment project, or go 
beyond 7 years.   
 
- Please provide information on when the  term of preference ends fo r each investment agreement negotiated. 
- Please provide up-to-date information on any new agreements signed between the Russian Government and foreign automakers under terms of 
Decree #135 and Government Resolution 413, including any agreements signed in 2004, so that the listing remains comprehensive.   
- Please re-confirm the validity dates of any automobile industry ag reements listed in paragraph 482.  Our understanding is that under relevant 
regulations (Decree #135 and Government Resolution 413), agreements are valid for 7 years from the date when bonded warehouse l icenses are 
granted and operational.  
- Please include language (either narrative or a chart) specifying the progression of local-content thresholds required under ter ms of Decree #135 
and Government Resolution 413, as well as definitions used for determining “local content” under those measures. 
   
Paragraph 483 : What is the significance of foreign car-manufacturers not being required to incorporate in Russia? Please expla in « freezing »  the 
conclusion of new contracts. 
 Paragraph 484 : Cross-reference should be made to discussion of Decree No. 466 in the “Industrial policy, including subsidy pol icies” section of the 
draft WP Report.  
 We note that material describing the “Concept of the Russian Car-Making Industry” has been deleted.  If the “Concept of the Rus sian Car-Making 
Industry” does not envision establishing foreign investment rules, a short description of the “Concept” should be provided in a  more appropriate section, 
e.g., “Industrial policy, including subsidy policies” section of the draft WP Report or in Russia’s subsidy notification.   
 
- We ask Russia to report on whether this “c oncept” has been implemented, and to confirm that there are no benefits conferred und er this 
program, especially in exchange for investment commitments. 
 
Aircraft 
  Regarding aircraft, there will need to be a full discussion a nd commitment regarding the new aircraft leasing program pursuant to Government Decree 
No. 466 (June 26, 2002) and further intentions with respect to offsets, if any.  The text relating to aircraft should be moved to the section of the draft WP 
Report on “Industrial policy, including subsidy policies a nd export subsidies”, or, at a minimum cross-referenced. 
  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3
 Page 99Paragraph No. Comment 
Specific Drafting Suggestions : 
 
- Based on current information available, nothing requested at this time. 
 
Elements of a Commitment :   
 Pending:  Paragraph 487 provides a basis for discussion and may need to be supplemented to address TRIMS-inconsistent provision s in the PSA law, 
auto decree, and the aircraft sector, including offset policy, if any.   
488-510 - State-Trading Enterprises 
 [AUS] 
1. We welcome Russia's statement (paragraph 499) that Alrosa no longer retains exclus ive rights.  However, we seek clarificatio n in the text as to: 
 
- Alrosa's current role in the activities of diamond production an d export, and its rights to export diamonds to the world market  or sell their 
products domestically; 
- whether other companies enjoy the same rights as Alrosa, and if so, what rights and on what basis; 
- whether Alrosa and other selected compan ies enjoy rights to import polished diamonds  on favourable terms, on the condition that  those 
diamonds originated from its own production of raw diamonds. 
 
2. We also request Russia address questions/comments we have rais ed in Attachment A on the general sphere of regulation of prec ious metals and 
stones. 
 [CAN] 
Specific Problems:  
 - Canada is concerned with paragraph 505 of the Russian Working Party Report regarding the provision of exclusive rights to Russi an STEs 
involved in the importation/exportation of ethyl spirits.  We believe that, as drafted, it qu estions Russia's ability to create  WTO consistent STEs 
with exclusive rights, instead of addressing  the appropriate issue of whether the exclus ive rights that have been granted to th e STEs are being 
exercised in a manner consistent with the obligations of GATT Article XVII. 
 
Possible Solutions and Drafting Proposals:
 
 
Canada would like paragraph 505 to be redrafted as follows: 
 - Regarding the
 concerns of some Members about the way in which state trading  enterprises which were selling alcohol might be exercising their 
exclusive rights, the representative of Russian Federation stated  that Russian legislation provided the possibility, for some e nterprises, of 
obtaining exclusive rights for export/import of ethyl spirit.  
 WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3 
Page 100 Paragraph No. Comment 
 [EC] 
Descriptive part  
Further discussions of substance are necessary , including on the status of Gazprom.  
 
Commitment  
We note a potential divergence of views on th e WTO requirements in this area and consid er a substantive discussion on these req uirements and their 
coverage would be necessary prior to further drafting of commitm ents. The commitment as proposed by Members woul d benefit from some drafting 
precisions.  
 [JPN] 
1. In paragraphs 493-495, explanations on prices for gas supplied by Gazprom are provided. Some of these explanations seem to be d uplicative 
with the description in paragraphs 74-77 of the section of "Pricing Policies". Therefore, Japan is of the view that there is mu ch room for streamlining the 
contents by making a cross-references. 
2. Since there are voluminous factual references  to state trading enterprises in each fiel d throughout the section, we need to red uce the volume of 
these references in order to maintain a fair balance with the volumes of other sections. 
3. Reference is made to unitary enterprise in the section of "State  Ownership and Privatization"(par agraphs 56 and 58). However, u nitary 
enterprises themselves do not seem to be directly related to pr ivatization which is the subject of the present section. Therefo re, it may be appropriate that 
reference to unitary enterprises be consolidated in this presen t section and that only a short and concise language on them tog ether with a cross-reference 
may be included in the section of "S tate Ownership and Privatization".  
4. The last sentence of paragraph 506 is duplicative with paragraph 508. Therefore adjustment is required. 
5. We are aware that there are different views among the Members on the nature and status of Gazprom. Nevertheless, while it provi des in 
paragraph 490 that "the Russian Federation noted that Gazprom could not be considered as a state trading enterprise", at the en d of paragraph 494 it also 
provides that "Gazprom's commercial activity was fully in line with  Article XVII of GATT." Therefore, such language needs to be  reviewed from the 
point of maintaining consistency of the contents therein. 
 [SUI] 
Paragraph 500 and 501 (government-t o-government barter trade) : Si nce the expiry of the exclusiv e rights on 31 December 1995 in  the context of 
bilateral barter trade, the draft report on the working party st ates that the Russian Federation does at present not conduct an y barter trade with CIS 
countries. Is this also true for all other  countries?  
 [USA] 
Almost no information has been provided in the current section on State ownership and privatization  of WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3 on state-owned 
enterprises.  In addition, the number of state-owned firms discu ssed as state trading enterprises has been sharply restricted a nd the discussion of state-
owned and state trading enterprises has become substan tially entwined during Working Party deliberations.   
 We suggest taking the current section on State-trading enterprises
 and placing it and other information addressing state ownership and state-trading in an 
expanded section on “State-owned  and State-trading enterprises ,” then renaming the other section (originally called State ownership and privatization ) 
“Privatization .”   
 
Requests for Information or Clarifications  That Should be Reflected in the Text :   
  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3
 Page 101Paragraph No. Comment 
As noted in earlier discussions, the report should identify and describe the activities of the Russian Federation’s state-owned , as well as its state trading, 
enterprises.  In this combined section, there should be a co ncise description of Russia’s state-owned sector and information on  STEs, including but not 
limited to the following:  
- The sectors of the economy where SOEs and STEs are participants; 
- Information on the scope of state ownership in these sectors and overall, e.g., on the relative position of SOEs and STEs in GD P and trade; 
- The list of state-owned enterprises not yet privatized, particularly those (1) in the agricultural sector, (2) engaged in inter national trade, or (3) 
that compete with imports.  In particular, we seek information on firms such as Aeroflot, Alro sa, TVEL and additional informati on on the 
operations of Gazprom and other STEs and SOEs; and 
- Concerning unitary enterprises, the text should be expanded to include the tables provided earlier in WP discussions by Russia describing the 
share of imports/exports and productio n of state unitary enterprises.   
 Paragraph 489 :  Please explain how the Russian Federation will en sure that STEs established under Article 26 of the Foreign Tr ade Activities Law 
operate in a non-discriminatory manner and make purc hases and sales based on commercial considerations? 
 Paragraphs 502-504 :  The state unitary enterprise Federal Food Ma rket Agency (FFMA) appears to operate Russia’s grain interven tion system and 
maintain grain reserves, exclusively and at the behest of the Government, using state funds to do it.  This would appear to be an exclusive right that has a 
marked impact on prices.   
 
- This concern should be reflected in the text, and further informa tion should be provided by Russia on this enterprise and its o perations. 
 
Paragraph 505 :  Regarding unitary enterprises and import/export of  ethyl alcohol, under the law,  these enterprises may exercis e special rights and thus 
would be STEs.  The fact that they are no t operating on an exclusive basis does not preclude that from occurring in the future and thus raises concerns.   
 
- This concern should be reflected in the text. 
 Information on Gazprom for the text: 
 
Paragraph 493 :  Several additional facts should be added to this paragraph: 
 
- Gazprom is now, or will shortly become, 51 percent government-owned. 
- Gazprom has a monopoly on all gas exports out side the Commonwealth of Independent Stat es.  (See most recent OECD Economic Surve y of 
the Federation of Russia, p. 131).  (See also, U.S. comments on Quantitative Export Restriction 
 section.)  
- Despite the large disparity between the regulated domestic price and Gazprom’s export price, G azprom exports approximately 25 p ercent of its 
production and sells 75 percent of its production domestically. 
- The paragraph should also include a reference to the November 2003 World Bank study (per U.S. comments on Pricing Policies  section:  
“According to a detailed examination of the costs required for production and sustainability  of production of natural gas, the World Bank 
estimated Gazprom’s full long run marginal cost of producing natural gas at $35 to $40 per thousand cubic meters.”) 
- The text should reflect that Gazprom, as described in its annual  reports, directly or indirectly, owns companies in the fertili zer industry and  
 WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3 
Page 102 Paragraph No. Comment 
elsewhere, e.g., Gazprom’s substantial holdings in such sectors as banking, insurance, agriculture, mass media, construction, a nd other energy 
sectors (e.g., electricity or nuclear power).  (See most recent OECD Eco nomic Survey, p. 131.) 
 Paragraph 494 :  This paragraph as currently drafted distorts the manner in which the regulated price of natural gas is determi ned and therefore should be 
revised.  The implication that the regulated price of gas is determined in accordance with suppl y and demand or that Gazprom de termines “the levels of 
internal calculated prices” does not appear to be borne out by th e facts.  We question the asser tion that Gazprom’s costs in 20 04 were $28 per tcm.  This 
statement appears at odds with independent estimates of Gazprom’s costs, including the study performed by the World Bank (issue d in November 
2003). 
  In addition, as noted in the U.S. comments in the Pricing Policies
 section, Gazprom appears to have entered in to a long-term contract to purchase natural 
gas from Turkmenistan at $44 per thousand cubic meters in April 2003.  If Gazprom is able to produce gas profitably on a sustai ned basis over the long 
term at $28 per tcm, logically, absent information to the contrary, a question can be raised as to whether Gazpom is acting in a manner consistent with 
commercial considerations.   
 
According to the most recent OECD Economic  Survey (p. 132), the domestic gas market  in Russia operates under a rationing mechan ism with market-
based activity at the fringes.  Rationing is the result of artif icially low regulated gas prices.  According to the OECD, Gazpr om has all the relevant 
information about production, pipeline capacity, and export commitments.  Gazprom informs consumers of their quotas for the com ing year.  Any 
additional gas that consumers need must be purchased at higher, unregulated prices.  Generally, th e unregulated price is 30 to 40 percent higher than the 
regulated price.   
 
- Paragraph 494 should be redrafted to describe Gazprom’s pricing and delivery of natural gas based on historical usage and how f irms deal with 
shortfalls of state-allocat ed natural gas at the regulated price. This paragraph should include detailed information on this pr actice, including the 
relative percentage of consumption by enterprises of gas at the regulated and at the non-regulated price should be provided  as well as prices for 
unregulated gas. 
 
- Finally, the text should note that during discussions of the Working Party, the Russian representative advised Members that Rus sia will increase 
substantially the quantity of natural gas sold at the unregulated price in the process of its plans to reform the natural gas s ector.   
 
Para 495:  Cross-reference should be provided to the Industrial Policy, including subsidy policies section.  Also, in light of the rationing process 
described above, please describe the extent to which a specific enterprise or industry (see Article 2 of the Agreement on Subsi dies and Countervailing 
Measures) benefits from the allocation of gas at the regulated price 
 Specific Drafting Suggestions
:  
 
Add the following text to deal with the issue of Svyazinvest:  
498bis.  Some Members noted that their co ncerns regarding Svyazinvest related to the purchase of goods by a state-owned enterpr ise 
engaged in commercial activities.  Requirements to purchase goods from a certain producer raised concerns regarding whether the  
company’s practices complied with Articles III and XVII of GATT 1994.   
  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3
 Page 103Paragraph No. Comment 
 
Elements of a Commitment : 
 The text of paragraph 509 is a good starting point for development of a commitment applied to SOEs and STEs with the following elements:   
 
- that SOEs and STEs will make any purchases or sales not for  th e government’s own use or consumption solely in accordance with commercial 
considerations, including price, quality, availability, marketab ility, transportation and other conditions of purchase or sale;   
- that SOEs and STEs shall afford the enterprises of other Memb ers adequate opportunity, in acco rdance with customary business pr actice, to 
compete for participation in  purchases from  or sales to Russ ia’s state-owned enterprises and state trading enterprises; and   
- that any restrictions on exports of domestic materials to ensu re essential quantities of such materials to a domestic processin g industry shall not 
operate to increase the exports of or the protection of such domestic industry. 
511-526 - Free Zones and Special Economic Zones 
 [EC] 
Descriptive part  
Further clarification are necessary following  new draft legislation on the SEZ for Kalin ingrad and on the potential use of SEZ provisions in other areas 
of the customs territory of the Russian Federation. We remain concerned about the potential scope of SEZs and the WTO compatibi lity of the regime 
applicable for these potential SEZs. We consider that it is insu fficient to state that e.g. Magadan has no SEZ in operation. 
 
Commitment  
A commitment will need to include an obligation to establish, ma intain and implement/administer SEZs in conformity with the rel evant WTO 
disciplines, and that the federal government will look after correct  enforcement of WTO disciplines in these zones. This is gen erally covered in the 
commitment proposed by Members. 
 [JPN] 
In paragraph 512, privileges pertaining to SEZ are listed and exemption from trade remedy measures and other measures is listed  as one of these 
privileges. We would like to seek clarification from the Russian Federation on the detail of such exemption. We are concerned a bout, for example, the 
situation where, in the application of a safeguard measure, trade circumvention might be caused, i.e. such goods subjected to t he application of safeguard 
measures might be transferred to the other customs territories of the Russian Federation through a foreign company established in SEZ. We would like 
to seek clarification from the Russian Federation on the above mentioned points. 
 [USA] 
Requests for Information or Clarifications That Should be Reflected in the Text : 
 
Paragraph 511 :  It remains our understanding that the Magadan FT Z is operating.  Please clarify this in light of the statement s indicating otherwise. 
 Paragraph 512 :  Concerning the conditions under which exemptions fro m trade remedy measures and other measures on non-tariff s tate regulation of 
foreign trade:  please define “manufactured” for the purposes of  eligibility for this benefit, e.g., would poultry or other mea ts lightly processed meet the 
criteria for “manufact ured” in the FTZ? 
 
Concerning privileges for Russian and foreign banks granted in connection with the activities on the implementation of the “Fed eral State Programme  
 WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3 
Page 104 Paragraph No. Comment 
for the Development of the Special Economic Zone in the Kaliningrad Region:” 
 
- The reference is unclear.  The privileges are provided for in the “programme” but apparently not in subsequent legislation.  Pl ease clarify the 
situation in the text. 
 
Paragraph 524 :  The information in this paragraph on the Magadan SEZ appears to contradict the statement in paragraph 1 that t he Magadan SEZ is not 
operational.  The meaning of the last sentence is not at all cl ear.  What are the limitations that  are referred to in the text?  
 
We understand that President Putin has directed the Government to draft legislation on establishment of special economic zones aimed at fostering high 
technology industries. 
 
- Please provide information on Russia’s plans for the creation of such zones including information on location, potential benefi ts, timeframe for 
establishment of the zone, firms’ eligibility and obligations, and on the rules governing importation and exportation (e.g., el imination or 
reduction of normal taxes and tariffs on imported inputs, conditions  of export of manufactured products, rules of origin. etc.) . 
 Elements of a Commitment
: 
The language in paragraph 526 provides a good basis for developing a commitment for this section of the Working Party Report 
527-539 - Government Procurement  
 [JPN] 
In paragraph 533, reference is made to transparency of the procurement of goods and services. Japan is of the view that with re gard to government 
procurement, transparency of rules and regulations as well as timing of their publication are important. Accordingly we would l ike to seek clarification 
from the Russian Federation on transparency of relevant laws and regulations of the Russian Federation in the field of governme nt procurement and on 
the rules and regulations concerning publication. And these clarified points should be briefly reflected in the Report. 
 [SUI] 
Paragraph 533 :  The draft federal law woul d eliminate certain current restrictions on participation by foreign suppliers in th e deliveries of goods and 
services for State needs. Can the Russian Federation ex plain which current restrictions will be eliminated? 
 [USA] 
Requests for Information or Clarifications That Should be Reflected in the Text :  
 - Russian legislation/regulations n ecessary to implement WTO rules are pending for this section.   
- The text requires updating on how the draft legislation is progressing and when it might be enacted.  Information on the need f or implementing 
regulations would be useful as well. 
- We seek information for the text on what is covered by state purchases other than for government use or consumption.   
- Are the operations of the FFMA considered purchases for state needs”?  Are the purchase s of TVEL for nuclear power plants consi dered 
purchases for state needs? 
 Elements of a Commitment:
 
  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3
 Page 105Paragraph No. Comment 
- A commitment by Russia to request observership in the Agreement on Government Procurement (GPA) and to ensure that its “public 
contracting entities”  award contracts in a transparent manner according to Russia’s la ws, regulations and guidelines immediate ly upon 
accession.   
- A commitment to initiate ne gotiations to join the GPA with an agreed  date for Russia to table an offer.   
- A commitment for an agreed date for completing negotiations, if the results of the negotiation are satisfactory to Russia and G PA signatories 
540-548 - Regulation of Trade in Transit 
 [EC] 
Descriptive part  
We consider it will be necessary to add th e question of railway freight fees in this section as fees paid for transiting the te rritory of the Russian 
Federation are higher than those paid for domestic destinations. 
 
A non exhaustive list of issues on which the EU remains concerned are: - the payment of fees for customs clearance for g oods under international transit (paragraph 544) 
- the customs escort requirements for domestic  transit procedures and the payments asso ciated to this procedure, which are desc ribed in paragraphs 546-
547   Commitment
 
The commitment included in 548 will need some further additions, including specific language addressing the concern on railway freight fees. 
 [JPN] 
1. We understand that additional charges were introduced from Octobe r 2003 in respect of railway transportation fees and that thes e are a kind of 
security charges so called "convoy-fees" or  "guard-fees". It is pointed out that in  the case of a special cargo transported to Finland, rate of charges is 
lower, thus same rate of charges is not applied in all over the Russian Federation. Th is needs to be clarified. 
2. At the end of paragraph 541, it provides that "except goods whose transit was prohibited pursuant to federal law…".We need to s eek 
clarification from the Russian Federation on whether items whos e transit is prohibited are exha ustively listed in paragraph 545 . 
 [USA] 
Requests for Information or Clarifications That Should be Reflected in the Text : 
 
Russian legislation/regulations n ecessary to implement WTO rules are pending for this section.   
 Paragraph 540 :  Russia’s new fees for “customs escort” will be implemented after enactment to the amendments to the Customs Co de.   
 
- The text should reflect if these fees will apply to trade in transit, as well as to imports destined for customs ports in the i nterior of Russia. 
 
Paragraphs 543 :  The provisions of SCC Order No.631 of 2 July 2001 "On the Application of Order of the State Customs Committee  of the Russian 
Federation No.25 of 15 January 2001" that Members object to should be mentioned in this paragraph. Paragraphs 544 :  The text should clarify whether customs processing fees are charged on trade in transit.   
Paragraph 546 :  The text should indicate whether the reasons liste d here for customs escort will be expanded by the Customs Co de Amendments that 
establish customs escort fees.   
 WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3 
Page 106 Paragraph No. Comment 
Elements of a Commitment : 
 
Paragraph 548 :  The current draft commitment text is a good star ting point for discussion.  We would suggest that in addition to energy, fees for rail and 
air freight transit should also be addressed. 
 
548.  The representative of the Russian Federation confirmed that  the Russian Federation would apply all its laws and regulatio ns governing 
transit of goods, including those governing fees on trade in transit,  energy, and fees and charges for railroad and airline freight within 
Russia for trade in transit,  in conformity with the provisions of Article V of the GATT 1994 and other relevant provisions of the WTO 
Agreement.  The Working Party took note of this commitment. 
549-554 - Policies Affecting Foreign Trade in Agricultural Products 
 [ARG] 
Paragraphs 549 to 554 :  
As stated by some members, it is supporte d the need to know the domestic support po licies of the Russian agricultural sector in  a wide and updated way.  
It should be also highlighted that, Russia should indicate how does ensure that domestic support will not cause "serious damage " to the rest of the 
Members in consistency with the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures.  
Export Subsidies  
Argentina requests that Russia confirms it commitment not to apply or introduce any form of export subsidies, as in paragraph 5 52.  
Domestic Support  
1. Amber Box Base Period 
The base period should be recent and repres entative of the Russian polic ies for the change towards a market economy, especially  those related to 
agricultural domestic support, and not one corresponding to the early post-soviet period (which was a period of very high level s of trade-distorting 
domestic support).  The base period proposed by Russia is not representative of its  recent domestic support policies and will not comply with the e xisting WTO disciplines. 
But, to establish an appropriated base period, Russia should submit more recent information (2000-2003) 
2. Green and Amber Boxes Argentina wishes to reiterate the comments and issues put forward by us in relation to the Green and Amber Boxes, namely: 
A) Green Box 
- Paragraph 3 related to the constitution of public stocks for food security purposes includes the creation of an Emergency Seed Stock Program, 
through which it would be ensured the seed supply in case of na tural disasters and emergency situations, as well as the seed su pply to non-
producing or limited production areas.  
 In that sense, it is appropriate to ask the Russian Federation what the name of the food security framework program establishe d by the national 
legislation, on which the current Seed Stock Program depends, is; what seeds are susceptible to be delivered under the present program; Which 
organism determines the seeds to be delivered in case of donation; and to what extent the seed supply to limited production are as is related to 
stock piling and maintenance. (How it is ensured that the produce is only for self-consumption and is not traded.) 
 If emergency seed stock is sold at market prices, what is the support to producers in emergency situations or from non-produci ng areas about? 
All producers are supposed to purchase seeds at market prices. Also, ask the Russian Federation when the Seed Stock was created  and how 
much stock there is.  
- They are included in paragraph 2 (b) "Sub sidies for waste collecting plants." The Russian Federation is asked to explain how th is program  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3
 Page 107Paragraph No. Comment 
works and on which laws and regulations it is based. Further, which are the differences with th e Operating Payment Program (inc luding the 
cost of pest and disease control, etc.)? How does the Russian Federation ensure that said subsidy is not used for other purpose s? 
- The Russian Federation includes a Program on Credit and Financial Support to the agricultural sector under paragraph 11. We ask  the Russian 
Federation which law or regulation establishe d these credits. Also ask about the requis ites for these credits to be granted and  the payment 
conditions.  
B)  Amber Box - External reference price. Under Annex 3 of the AoA, it shall be fixed. The Russian Federation took the external reference price  of each year for 
which it estimated its AMS, highlighting that those years (1991-1995) are not considered to be representative. 
- De minimis:  The de minimis  level increased from US$64 million in  1993 to US$684 million in 1995. This change accounts for a growth of 
more than 1,000% in the de minimis level in two years. It is appropriate to require the Ru ssian Federation to explain this rise, referring to the 
specific products to which this increas e corresponds and the respective values. 
- Non product specific subsidies and compensations: The level of no n product specific subsidies almost doubles in two years (from  5,902 million 
dollars in 1993 to 11,823 million dollars in 1995.) We requir e the Russian Federation to explain this increase corresponding to  the 1993-1995 
period. 
 [AUS] 
We note this section of the report will need to be updated on ce Working Party members and Russia have resolved outstanding issu es in relation to this 
area of work. 
 [BRA] 
Export Subsidies  
In line with Annex A of the July Package (A griculture Framework), which determines the elimination of all forms of export subsi dies for agricultural 
products, Brazil seeks a commitment that the Russian Federation agrees to eliminat e all forms of export subsidies  upon its acc ession to the WTO. 
Domestic Support  
Brazil requests the Russian Federation to provide additional inform ation on domestic support for the last five years. This woul d contribute to address the 
question of the base period, in the light of which commitments could be discussed. 
 [CAN] 
General Comments:  
 
The section presents opposing arguments from Russia and from Working Party members with views similar to Canada's. The major ou tstanding 
domestic support issue (base period for measuring the base for Ru ssia's commitment on Total Aggreg ate Measurement of Support – Total AMS) is not 
resolved. The view put forth by Canada and some others, viz., that Russia could have recourse to green box measures rather than large amounts of the 
more distorting AMS support, is represented in the section. On e xport subsidies, the two square-bracketed texts represent the a s of yet unresolved status 
of Russia's entitlement to any export subsidy commitments larger than zero.       
Specific Problems:
 
 Domestic Support
. The text represents Russia's desire to obtain the entitlement to provide large amounts of distorting support in the future wi thin its 
commitment on Total AMS. Some Working Party members, including Ca nada, argue that Russia's agricultu re sector can be reformed w ith the help of 
measures meeting the criteria of Annex 2 of the Agreement on Agriculture (so-called green box).  
 WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3 
Page 108 Paragraph No. Comment 
 
Russia has been asked to provide data for years later than 1997, in order to demonstrate to Working Party members that 1998 was  an outlier crisis year 
(as claimed by Russia) and to reassure members that Russia ha s not taken advantage of the pr olonged accession process to increa se the amount of 
distorting support provided. Russia has not provided such later data, indicating that members would use any data for later year s to impose a lower 
commitment on Total AMS than the commitment resulting from 1995-97 data. 
 - While the arguments of Russia and some Work ing Party members are represented in the te xt, there is no resolution of the base pe riod and the 
resulting commitment on Total AMS. 
- Para. 553 refers to a commitment, the basis for and level of whic h have not been determined. While the para. does not refer to (and need not 
refer to) the underlying "Suppor ting Tables", they will need to be referred to in the Russia's commitment (Part IV, Section I).  The absence of 
agreement on the years for which such supporting tables are needed is holding up progress on domestic support in agriculture. 
- Technically there are some draftin g problems in the text (e.g., an amber box is not defined in the Agreement). However, these m inor problems 
need not be addressed at this stage. 
 
Export subsidies
. Russia argues that it needs to be entitled to provide export subsidies in agriculture in the future because the EU and others  use them. 
This, in Canada's view, is not a fact that should entitle Russia  to use export subsidies in the future (i.e., Russia would have  non-zero commitments on 
export subsidies). Rather, any non-zero export subsidy commitment for Russia would need to be based on Russia having provided e xport subsidies in a 
selected base period.  
Possible Solutions and Drafting Proposals:
 
 
- The gulf separating Russia and some Working Party members on dome stic support and export subsidies is large. It will need to be  
bridged before appropriate language can be inserted in the report. In general, such language would need to indicate that Russia 's 
commitments are based on data prov ided for an appropriate period. 
 [EC] 
Descriptive part  
We would like to invite Russia to provide updated information for this section [in particular as regards domestic support].  
Commitment
 
Further discussions needed. 
 [JPN] 
We understand that in recent years, the Russian Federation has not used any export subsidies for agricultural products. Neverth eless, the Russian 
Federation is reserving its position concerning use of such subsid ies. We would like to seek clarification from the Russian Fed eration on concrete 
reasons for such reservation. Also we would like to request the Russian Federation to make a commitment that it will not use an y export subsidies for 
agricultural products in the future as they may cause the most trade distortional effect. 
 [USA] 
Requests for Information or Clarifications That Should be Reflected in the Text :   
  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3
 Page 109Paragraph No. Comment 
This section will need further revision once more progress is ma de in understanding Russia’s agricultural policies, in particul ar, with respect to Russia’s 
supporting tables for domestic support and export subsidies.   
 The United States and other countries have pushed to eliminate export subsidies and there is very little support for Russia to have recourse to export 
subsidies after accession. 
 There should be cross references to the sect ion on Tariff Rate Quotas, i.e., to the de scription in these sections of measures r elating to TRQs. 
 
Russia should provide updated supporting tables (beyond 1997), which reflect Members’ technical comments to date.  While these tables will not be 
reflected in the text, they will provide the fram ework for advancing our work on this section. 
 
As this section evolves, there may need to be  additional information reflected in the text. 
 
Specific Drafting Suggestions
: 
 Delete last sentence of paragraph 551 
 
In this respect, these members also stresse d that the disciplines contained in the WT O Agreement on Agriculture on export credi ts, export credit 
guarantees or insuran ce programmes needed to be applied by the Russian Federation so as to avoid circumvention of the commitment not to 
provide export subsidies.  
 
Elements of a Commitment : 
 Paragraph 553 is acceptable, provided that th e other requests are addressed appropriately 
555-557 - Trade in Civil Aircraft 
 [USA] 
Requests for Information or Clarifications That Should be Reflected in the Text:  
 - Russian legislation/regulations necessary to implement WTO rules are pending for this section, in particular Russia’s intention  with respect to 
subsidies and offsets. 
- We seek information on Russia’s intentions with respect to its planned consolidation of the domestic civil aircraft sector. 
-  
Elements of a Commitment
 
 - Pending.  Based on information provided.  
 WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3 
Page 110 Paragraph No. Comment 
561-623 TRIPS 
561-570  1. General  
 [EC] 
Descriptive part   
- We welcome Russia´s legislative efforts in the area of IPR and consider its legisla tion is generally meeting TRIPs requirements .  
- We have some specific concerns, most notably as regards data pr otection. We consider that a legislative provision will be neces sary 
which prohibits reliance on data submitted by a first applicant in  support of an application for product approval of a second a pplicant 
during a period of at least 6 years, and which prohibits that during this period any subsequent applicant for marketing approva l will be 
granted a market authorization unless he submits his own data. 
- Further discussions will be necessary on enforcement. 
 Commitment
 
The commitment will need to include some specifications, in par ticular as regards data protection. Enforcement still under exam ination. 
 [JPN] 
1. In paragraphs 593 and 594 of the sub-section, "Requirements on undisclosed information, including trade secrets and test data",  reference is 
made to liability, etc. It is appropriate that such issues as liability be comprehensively consolidated in the sub-section, "Ci vil and administrative 
procedures and remedies"(paragraphs 612-622) for the sake of clarity.  
 2. In relation to border measures referred to in paragraphs 610- 612, we would like to seek clarif ication from the Russian Federati on on the 
following points. Based on such clarification, we should consid er including the Russian Federation's commitments in the Report:  
 
(a) Improvement of communication between customs offices and right holders: 
 When customs officials discover an item which seems to be inflicting IPR at the customs office, the company personnel holding the 
 right pertaining to the item will be called to the customs office for examining genuineness of such item. Given the large area  of the 
Russian Federation, there may be a case where a foreign company personnel stationed in Moscow has to travel to a customs office  in the 
Far-East region. And due to limitation in transportation, there ar e many cases that the personnel can not be at present to the customs office 
by the designated day. In order to avoid these situations, would it be possible to consider certain measures such as use of e-m ail 
communication between a right holder and a customs office  instead of being at present at a customs office? 
(b) Submission of deposit: 
 Upon seizure at the customs office, a right  holder is requested to submit a deposit. As we understand it, now in the Russian F ederation, 
 submission of bank guarantee (Letter of Credit) instead of cas h deposit is permitted. We would like to request the Russian Fed eration 
to clarify this point.  
(c) Registration of trade mark s at the customs office: 
 With regard to procedures for registration of trade marks at the customs office, we would like to seek clarification from the Russian 
Federation on whether a request by right holder is necessary. We would also like to seek clarifi cation from the Russian Federat ion 
concerning to what extent all customs offices in the Russian Federation are informed of registration of trade marks. Furthermor e, we 
would like to request the Russian Federation that registration of industrial designs should be made at the customs office. 
(d) Improvement on unfair competition prevention laws:  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3
 Page 111Paragraph No. Comment 
 We would like to seek clarification from the Russian Federation on treatment and regulation concerning dead copies under the c urrent 
IPR legal regime. It should be pointed out that, in the case of only changes in trade marks of goods with dead copies of design s, taking 
into account these goods ' short life span(for example 2 years) and given th e fact that a long period is required to accomplish the 
criminal procedures for prosecution, recourse to the ordina ry criminal procedures for pr osecution may not be effective. 
 
3. In paragraph 612, it provides a explanation on a flow of ex-off icio investigation procedures by customs authority. In addition to ex-officio 
investigation, it should also include a concise explanation on a mechanism of participation of customs authorities concerning p rotection of IPR. 
 
4. In light of making the "TRIPS" section comprehensive and also of enriching its contents, inclusion of the following elements wh ich are 
contained in "TRIPS Non-Paper (No.35)(18 June 2004) into relevant part of the Report should be considered; 
(a) Explanation on copyright and related rights ( 1st paragraph of page 91, "The draft law…") 
(b) Explanation on the new Code of Administrative Offences of the Russian Federation (Page 92, "The new Code of Administrative 
Offences of the Russian Federation came into force on July 1,2002…") 
(c) Explanation on specialized task forces by the Ministry of Internal Affairs(3rd paragraph of page 94, "Fight against…") 
(d) Explanation on Regulation on Protection of Intellectual Property Rights by Customs Authority (2nd paragraph of page 95, "In order 
to…") 
(e) Explanation on Federal Law "On Operational-Investigative Authority" (2nd paragraph of page 96, "It must be mentioned…") 
(f) Explanation on amendment to Article 28 of the Code of Administrative Offences(3rd  paragraph of page 96, "Draft amendment to 
Article 28…") 
(g) Explanation on international cooperation by Customs Service(4th paragraph of page 96, "Besides, one of…") 
(h) Explanation on development of uniform documentation and investigation system (3rd paragraph from the bottom of page 97, 
"Currently, in the framework…") 
(i) Explanation on amendment to Article 151 of the Criminal Procedure Code (1st paragraph of page 98, "Currently, amendments to 
Article 151…") 
(j) Explanation on specialized task for ces of the Ministry of Internal Affairs and territorial subdivisions (5th paragraph of page 98, "In 
order to intensify…") 
(k) Explanation on Article 20 of the Criminal Procedure Code (2nd paragraph from the bottom of page 99, "In accordance with…") 
(l) Explanation on uniform identification system for legal copies of audiovisual works and phonograms (1st paragraph of page 101, 
"Pursuant to…") 
(m) Explanation on joint action by the Ministry of Economic Development and the Ministry of Internal Affairs (3rd paragraph of page 101, 
"The plan of…") 
(n) Annex to TRIPS Non-Paper ("New System and Structure of Federal Bodies of Executive Power of the Russian Federation") should be 
attached to the Report of the Working Part y as it provides a useful visual list of governmental ministries, agencies concerned,  etc. 
 [USA] 
Requests for Information or Clarifications That Should be Reflected in the Text : 
 Russian legislation/regulations n ecessary to implement WTO rules are pending for this section.   
 
Please provide responses to the following questions on border enforcement under the revised Customs Code:  
 WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3 
Page 112 Paragraph No. Comment 
 
- Please describe the procedures put in place by Russian Customs to implement Articles 393-400 of the revised Customs Code. 
- Please describe actions taken by Russian Customs to advised rights holders in Russia of the new procedures. 
- Article 393 provides, inter alia, that “the measures envisaged by the present chapter shall be taken in the event of goods bein g moved across the 
customs border or other actions being committed with goods under customs control.”  Please clarify whether these measures apply  to 
importations, exportations and in transit movements. 
- Article 394 references applications filed with respect to counte rfeit goods.  Please confirm that applications may also be file d with respect to 
suspected piratical goods in violation of a copyright. 
- Please clarify whether applications will be filed in a central location or in each port for which enforcement action is request ed. 
- If applications are filed in a central location, please describe the manner in which the information will be provided to ports in Russia. 
- Article 395(2) provides that an object of intellectual property  shall be included in the register where a right holder deposits  a security or 
presents a contract of insurance for the risk of liability at l east equal to 500,000 rubles (approximately $17,326).  Please co nfirm that a security 
deposit is required for each obj ect of intellectual property protected rather th an for each enforcement action taken relating t o the object of 
intellectual property.   
- Article 397 (1) provides for the suspension of the release of goods where customs discovers counterfeit goods.  Given that a cl assification of 
copyright piracy is not referenced in the article, please confir m that Customs will suspend th e clearance of goods where pirati cal goods are 
discovered. 
- Article 399(1) provides that  unless a decision to with draw the goods, to arrest or confisca te them is received before the expir y of suspension of 
clearance of goods, the decision on  suspending clearance of the goods shall be su bject to revocation on the day following the d ate of expiry.  
Please clarify whether such action will be taken by Customs, wher e a right holder has filed a claim in court but the court has not ruled on the 
infringing nature of the goods. 
- Article 400 provides for a personal exemption where goods are of insignificant quantity.  Please clarify “insignificant quantit y”. 
- With regard to ex officio authority, we understand that the Code of Administrative Offences provides administrative responsibil ity for imports 
of goods infringing intellectual property rights in its Article 4.10 and 7.12 and that under these provisions, customs can init iate an 
administrative investigation in this case, constituting ex officio action.  Is the addition of ex officio authority into the cu stoms code 
contemplated? 
- Article 59 of TRIPS provides that competen t authorities shall have the authority to order the destruction or disposal of infrin ging goods in 
accordance with Article 46 of TRIP S.  Additionally, Article 59 pr ovides that “in regard to co unterfeit trademark goods, the aut horities shall not 
allow the re-exportation of the infringing goods in an unaltered state or subject them to a different customs procedure, other than in exceptional 
circumstances.”  Please indicate whether the revised Customs Code addresses this obligation and the provision in Russian law th at complies 
with the Article 59 obligation. 
 
Include in the draft WP report text information on key enforcement developments reported in Non Paper No. 35, submitted by the Russian Federation 
dated June 18, 2004, specifically from the following sections:   
 - From Section III (page 7) of the note, the reference to suspending release of goods for up to 20 days upon a right holder's app lication, and the 
reduction of the number of documents required and information on the Regulation on Protection of Intellectual Property Rights b y Customs 
Authorities (No. 1199).  
-  From page 8, the information in paragraphs 2 through 4 of that section.  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3
 Page 113Paragraph No. Comment 
-  From page 10 Section IV, the information on the amendments to Article 151 of the Criminal Procedure Code. 
571-603 1.  Substantive standards of protection, including procedures for th e acquisition and maintenance of intellectual property rights 
580-582 - Geographical Indications 
 [ARG] 
Paragraph 581: This paragraph would be in consistent with the TRIPS Ag reement. That is, each country  is entitled to apply the le vel of protection it 
deems appropriate, but it cannot warn a third country that it w ill protect the third country's geographical indications only if  it offers an additional TRIPS 
protection (inconsistency with TRIPS Article 1).   
 [CAN] 
Specific Problems:  
 - In Canada's view, the language on geographical indications of paragraphs 581-582 is unclear as if every geographical indication s regime that 
complies with TRIPS would automatically be sufficient to provide "similar rights".  For this reason, it is unclear if the parag raph is consistent 
with the National treatment requirements of the TRIPS agreement. 
 
Possible Solutions and Drafting Proposals:
 
 - At the 15-18 November, 2004 Working Party meeting, the Russian Delegation answered to Canada's concern by saying that the TRIPS  
agreement would be fully implemen ted upon accession, without recipro cal commitments by Members.  This should be reflected in th e text. 
583-586 - Inventions and Industrial Designs 
 [NOR] 
In paragraph 583, it is stated that the Patent Law of the Russian Federation as amended by Federal Law No. 22-FZ of 7 February 2003 conforms to the 
requirements on compulsory licensing in Article 31 of the TRIPS Agreement.  However, following th e Doha Ministerial Declaration  on TRIPS and 
public health, the General Council adopted on 30 August 2003 a waiver to Article 31 f) by permitting the use of compulsory lice nces for the production 
of patented pharmaceutical products for export  to developing country members with insufficient production capacity.  Does the present legislation in 
Russia permit the use of compulsory licences in conformity with the General Council Decision on 30 August 2003, or if not, what  are the plans of the 
Russian Federation with respect to implementing this decision?  
589-603 - Requirements on undisclosed informat ion, including trade secrets and test data 
 [SUI] 
Paragraph 603 :  Switzerland strongly encour ages the Russian Federation to endorse the commitment as explicated in this paragra ph in order to ensure 
the effective implementation of the pr otection of undisclosed information.  
 [USA] 
Elements of a Commitment : 
 
- That Russia will implement the TRIPS Agreement upon acc ession, without recourse to any transition period. 
- That the bracketed text of paragraph 603, which includes important  elements of the commitment we seek on undisclosed test and o ther data, as 
a commitment text, will be expanded as a commitment text, as follows:   
 a) to cover agricultural chemicals; 
 b) to specify that unauthorized reliance on undisclosed test and other data will not be permitted;   
 WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3 
Page 114 Paragraph No. Comment 
 c) to specify that the period of data protection is measured from the time that marketing authorization is granted; and 
 d) to confirm that data submitted to obtain marketing appr oval for patented and non-patente d pharmaceuticals qualifies for suc h 
protection.   
-  That Russia will provide national treatment in respect of prot ection of geographic indications, including, but not limited to,  the elimination of 
the reciprocity requirement for appellations of origin; 
-  That Russia will provide more effective enforcement of intellectual property rights (IPR), referencing text earlier in the sec tion that describes: 
 a) how the Russian Federation will ensure that eff ective action to address IPR infringement is taken,  
 b) how remedies are provided which constitute a deterrent to further infringements and  
 c) how effective border measures are applied to prevent import and export of pirated and counterfeit goods.   
- The proposed commitment language in bracketed paragraph 623 does not address all of the Members’ concerns. 
624-652 POLICIES AFFECTING TRADE IN SERVICES 
 [ARG] 
Argentina reserves its right to comment on this area, as its bilateral services negotiation has not been concluded yet. 
 [CAN] 
General Comments:  
 
- Although the Working Party services text is an improvement over the previous version, it is still at a basic level.  Members un derstand that this 
section will need to be revised once the services ne gotiations are concluded (EC, US, HKC, and Canada). 
 
- Overall, the text is not extensive in its coverage of the sector s which are of priority interest to Canada -- financial service s, professional 
services, oil and gas energy services, and movement of persons. For example, the WP Report mentions the large state-owned banks  and their  
competitive advantage in the Russian market, but does no t discuss many other aspects of the financial sector. 
 Specific Problems:
 
 
Accounting standards - In Canada's view, the language on accounting standards is not sufficient (par. 642-643).  In bilateral discussions, Russia indi cated that the 
international standards are already there for banking services, but plans for implementation of international standards to comp anies listed in 
stock exchanges were postponed since the process is longer and more difficult than expected.   Russia's objective is to require  that companies 
listed in stock exchange apply intern ational accounting sta ndards by 2007.   
 
Juridical person - The level of details on persons who can import/export goods (paras.122-123) compared to the level of detail on juridical person s of Russia who 
may offer services (paras. 628-629) is not co mparable.  A more balanced approach would require more details on possible forms f or juridical 
persons of Russia.   
 
Discretionary licensing 
- Canada is concerned with discretionary licen sing of services providers.  The need fo r greater transparency  and predictability i n the legislation is  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3
 Page 115Paragraph No. Comment 
a theme that appears in many instances (e.g . application of subsoil legislation) that Canada would like to see that issue well reflected in the 
report. Reform of the legal framework with respect to  licensing is mentioned in the report (par. 627).   
 Telecoms services 
- Canada would like to see some details on the implementation of the telecoms reference paper. 
 Possible Solutions and Drafting Proposals:
 
 
- In addition to the reference to the appli cation of international accounting standards to banks from Januray 2004, Russia should  confirm the 
timeline from accession for implementation of  international accounting standards to comp anies listed in stock exchanges and for  other 
companies.  
- Russia should commit to transparency and predictability of require ments and procedures with respect to licensing of service pro viders and 
address concerns with regards to di scretionary attribution of licenses. 
- Russia should clarify what forms juridical  persons may take and indicate whether individuals are juridical persons.   
 [EC] 
Descriptive part and commitment  
Further discussions necessary 
 [HGK] 
Services (paras 624-652) 
We understand that the section has yet to be discussed substantively by the WP, but we note that substantive changes have been made to the sections.  
We seek clarifications on the basis for ma king those changes, especially if there ha ve been any agreement reached on those issu es in other contexts 
including bilaterals.  
Services subsidies (para 634) 
We note that the reservation concerning on-going negotiations on services subsidies had been removed in Rev.2 of the draft WP r eport, but has now 
been re-inserted.  We seek clarifications  as to the reason for the re-insertion and remain concerned that the reservation is un warranted as all acceding 
Members are expected to comply with th e WTO agreements in full upon accession. 
 Prudential measures (para 643, last sentence) 
We seek clarifications as to what are the measures that the Russian Federation intend to take as described in the paragraph and  which of those measures 
cannot be covered by paragraph 3 of the Annex on Financial Services or other relevant exceptions of the GATS (e.g. Articles XI,  XII and XIV). 
 
Horizontal limitations (paras 644-647) 
We note that the inclusion of these horizontal limitations in both  the WP report and in the services schedule had been the subj ect of discussions at 
previous plurilaterals on services.  We seek clarifications on updated developments further to those plurilaterals, specificall y the state-of-play of those 
horizontal limitations and their inclusion in both the draft WP report and the schedule. 
 [JPN] 
Concerning paragraph 636, Japan requests the Russian Federation to  respond to the following matters that have been raised in pa ragraph 636, namely;  
 WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3 
Page 116 Paragraph No. Comment 
(a)More information on the Russian Federation's progress towards establishing the required inquiry point and other transparency  and procedural 
requirements for complying with the GATS. 
(b)Confirmation that, in services sector s requiring licensing, foreign natural and juridical persons needing activity licenses could obtain them on the 
same terms as Russian natural and juridical persons. 
(c)How the Russian Federation would implement measures in regard to protecting its "infant industries", considering that the GA TS did not 
contemplate any safeguards mechanism. 
 
International Accounting Standards  
Concerning paragraph 643, Japan requests specific information, if there is any, on the introduction of international accounting  standards. 
 
Preserving Culture 
In paragraph 645, the Russian Federation has mentioned regulations  for the purpose of cultural protection. Japan requests addit ional specific information 
on what regulations may be taken, and what kind of juridical persons were subject to such regulations.  
 
Transparency Concerning paragraph 650, Japan suggests that the Russia Federation rewrite the paragraph as following; "In response, the Russi an Federation 
confirmed its commitment to ensure  transparency of licensing requirements and procedures, qualification requirements and proced ures, as well as other 
authorisation requirements in sectors where commitments are undertaken." 
 
Distribution Services 
Japan has concerns that district administrations may implement regulations without clear explanation or justification on the su pply of distribution 
services for the purpose of city development planning and demand and supply adjustment. Therefore Japan requests that the follo wing be included in the 
accession party report. "The Russian Federati on confirmed that regulations including li censing, on the supply of services would  be based on transparent 
and objective criteria". 
 [NOR] 
In paragraph 644 the representative of the Russian Federation explained "that services  considered as public utilities and refer red to in the Horizontal part 
of the Schedule of specific commitments of the Russian Federation in services, could be subject to public monopolies or exclusi ve rights granted to 
private operators. Exclusive rights on such services could be gr anted to private operators, for instance operators with concess ions from bodies of state 
power and local self-governmental bodies, subject to specific se rvices obligations. The foreign services suppliers can apply fo r these exclusive rights on 
equal terms with national services suppliers . Services considered as public utilities were supplied on the basis of public cont ract."  
 
In an explanatory note to the last offer we have received from the Russian authoritie s regarding the schedule of specific commi tments in services it is 
stated: "Public utilities exist in sectors such as utility servi ces, related scientific and technical consulting services, R&D services, technical testing and 
analysis, environmental services, health services, transport servi ces and services auxiliary to all modes of transport. "We see k further clarification of 
how rules and regulations are applied for foreign companies within these areas. 
 We will come back with further comments on the services chapter in light of the results of the bilateral negotiations on market  access for services.  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3
 Page 117Paragraph No. Comment 
 [USA] 
Requests for Information or Clarifications That Should be Reflected in the Text  
 The text will need elaboration on any horizontal limitations and de finitions related to subsidies, privatization, juridical per sons, national identity, culture, 
and public utilities referred to in the Schedule.  
 Elements of Commitments
:  
 
In addition to the language that Russia has promised to include  on the insurance regulatory authority, we are seeking detailed commitments regarding 
transparency and licensing, esp ecially with respect to financial services.  Elements of such commitments include:  
 
- a clear definition of public utility and commitments on how Ru ssia’s measures relating to culture and national identity will be  applied; 
- publication of  measures prior to their implementation; 
- publication of a list of all organizations, including those orga nizations delegated such authority from national authorities, w ith responsibility for 
licensing service providers and any changes to that list; and  
- specific commitments pertaining to licensing, such as regular scheduling of examinations , notification of the status of an appl ication for a 
license upon request from the applicant, meaningful deadlines for decisions, and providing information regarding the reasons fo r denial of a 
license. 
 
In addition, there may be sector specific categories, such as financial services including insurance, and telecommunications, w hich require additional 
elaboration. 
653-667 TRANSPARENCY 
 [EC] 
Descriptive part  
This sections will need to be reviewed with a cross check of specific sections for which WTO has specific transparency requirem ents. 
 
Commitment  
Further discussions needed. 
 [USA] 
Elements of a Commitment  
 
- The basic elements of the commitments we are seeking are set out in bracketed paragraph 663.  These elements will need to be el aborated and 
separated, but the basic ideas are reflected in this draf t text.  In addition, we seek the following elements: 
 
 - Compliance, as of the date of Russia’s accession, with the tr ansparency provisions of each of  the WTO Agreements, including the 
Agreements on TBT, SPS, TRIMS, Rules of Origin, Customs Valuation, and TRIPS, as well as the GATS, and GATT 1994. 
 - The list of specific information that, at a minimum, the Ru ssian Federation will publish in connection with implementing tra nsparency 
obligations.   
 WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3 
Page 118 Paragraph No. Comment 
 - Provision of an opportunity for governments and traders to provide comments on  legislation, regulations and measures of sim ilar 
effect before they are adopted or ente r  into force, and provid e a process for taking th ose comments into account. 
 - For a transitional period, Members may also require recourse to a special trade review mechanis m monitoring Russia’s progress o n implementation. 
 
Elements of a Commitment
 
 
- We seek acceptance of the commitment language in paragraph 666.    
668-680 FREE TRADE AND CUSTOMS UNION AGREEMENTS 
 [AUS] 
1. This section needs to be reorganized so that it can be better understood.  We offer suggestions below on improving the text:  
 
- a recognition in paragraph 677 that the reside ncy requirement contravenes WTO obligations; 
 
- clarification of the second half of paragraph 175, which implies that FTA provisions under the CES can be implemented independe ntly by 
members to an extent determined by the member.  This is not consistent with Article XXIV of  GATT or Article of V GATS; 
 
- a substantial response to the concerns raised by members on services MFN exemptions (paragraph 676); 
 
- elaboration of the text in relation to prov isions of the Union State with Belarus, me ntioned in paragraph 674, including a prog ress report on its 
implementation and any relevant target dates; 
 
- elaboration in the text on any plans to establish a si ngle agricultural market in the CIS area, including: 
 
- how a single agricultural market is to be established; 
 - whether it involves the opening up of import quotas and export quotas of limited duration for particular products; 
 - whether the parties to it will forego recourse to anti-dumpin g, countervailing, safeguards and special agricultural safeguar ds measures  
 in relation to agricultural products traded within the area; 
 - whether all agricultural trade in the area will be covered, or only trade in certain products; 
 - whether trade in agricultural products w ithin the area be exempt from import duties (including tariff quotas), export duties  and 
 quantitative restrictions on importation and exportation. 
 
2. We understand that a form of preferen tial trade arrangement to which Russia has been a party involves the opening up of impo rt quotas and 
export quotas of limited duration for particular products.  Arrang ements of such a nature are not covered by GATT Article XXIV and are inconsistent 
with GATT Article I.  Agreements that may be established under the WTO need to be free-trade areas or customs unions in the mea ning of Article 
XXIV and the Understanding on that Article, and as such are requ ired to cover substantially all trade and be established on a p ermanent basis according 
to a plan or schedule.  We seek:   
  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3
 Page 119Paragraph No. Comment 
- details of all preferential trade arrangements  to which Russia has been a party from 2002 onwards that have involved the openin g of an import 
quota or export quota for a particular product or a limited number of products, whether permanently or for a period of limited duration. 
 [HKG] 
Paragraph 676-678: we note confirmation by the Russian Federation pr eviously that they would comply with Article V of the GATS (in addition to 
Art.XXIV of the GATT) upon accession.  That be ing the case, we seek clarifications as to why there is a need for inscription of  MFN exemptions 
pertaining to future FTAs, irrespective of the legal basis for such exemptions. 
 [JPN] 
In each paragraph of the present section, it provides explanations on preferential trade agreements to which the Russian Federa tion is a Party. Among 
these agreements, there are some agreements which have not yet entered into force. Concrete schedules for entering into force o f such agreements 
should be included in the Report. 
 [MOL] 
The current Free Trade Agreement between th e Republic of Moldova and Russian Federation was signed in 1993. Recently, in Moscow , was reached an 
understanding concerning the renegotiation and conclusion of a new Free Trade Agreement between the Republic of Moldova and Rus sian Federation 
without exception, accord ing to the WTO norms. 
 In this context, we request that the Russian Federation will ta ke the following commitment in the paragraph 669 of the chapter Free trade and customs 
union agreements: 
 "The representative of the Russian Federatio n confirmed that Russian Federation would observe all WTO provisions, including tho se of Article XXIV of 
the GATT 1994 and Article V of the GATS in the trade agreements, and would ensure that the provisions of these WTO Agreements f or notification, 
consultation and other requirements concerni ng free trade areas and customs unions of which Russian Federation  is a Member wer e met from the date 
of accession.  The Working Party to ok note of this commitment." 
 [USA] 
Requests for Information or Clarifications That Should be Reflected in the Text:  
Paragraph 668 :  What portion of Russia’s actual imports and exports are covered by the preferential arrangements described in this section, and the 
trend.   
Paragraphs 670-71:  The text of this paragraph should be expa nded to clarify in a single place th e rules of origin used in each  of the preferential 
agreements for the purpose of determining the right of imports containing third country inputs duty free treatment.  In this re gard, the terms “substantial 
transformation (per paragraph 307),” “direct shipment,” and what constitutes “residency” (per paragraph 671) should be defined and clarified, and what 
constitutes “residency” by a firm should be described.  For exam ple, is a foreign-owned firm registered under domestic law cons idered a “resident” for 
the purposes of exporting goods duty free to other members of the preferentia l trade agreements?   
 
Paragraph 671:  There is no mention of the Treaty on the Creation of the Economic Union signed by all the CIS except Turkmenist an in September 
1993, the subsequent Agreement on Creation of the Free Trade Zone, or its amending protocol.  Did any of the “36 basic intergov ernmental and 
intergovernmental documents” ag reed under the amending prot ocol ever go into effect? 
  
 WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3 
Page 120 Paragraph No. Comment 
Paragraph 671:  What individual bilateral ag reements are, or are not, in force between Russia and eac h of the other eleven CIS countries.  
 
Can Russia confirm that the destination principle for the application of indirect taxes would be followed from 1 January 2005 f or all goods for all CIS 
countries?   
 
Paragraph 673 describes the Agreement on the Customs Union and Common Economic Area and, separately, the Agreement on the Estab lishment of the 
Eurasian Economic Community (EAEC).  Both agreements appear to a pply to the same set of countries.  More information on the agr eements should be 
added to the WP report text, including the following provisions: 
   - the legal relationship between the EAEC and Customs Union; 
- the deadline for formation of the common external tariff of the Customs Union; 
- the percentage of the HS schedule lines for each member state aligned at present; and 
- a description of trade areas not covered by harmonized tariff at this time. 
 
Paragraph 673 :  Provide information on the nature and scope of the "57 additional agreements" concluded under the Customs Unio n and the EAEC, 
which address issues covered by the WTO, e.g., trade in transit, customs registratio n and customs control, market access of goo ds and services from 
third countries; application of technical, sanitary, veterinary, and phytosanitary norms to imports; and trade remedies.  What is the status of these 
agreements in Russian law?  Which ones covering WTO-related issu es have been implemented?  What will be their status vis-à-vis the WTO after 
Russia accedes? 
 
Paragraph 676 :  We would like to see information in this para graph, or earlier in the text, responding to Members’ requests fo r information, e.g., on how 
and when a common external tariff would be established and on th e additional agreements (Protocols) concluded by the Customs Un ion/EAEC 
concerning non-tariff issues covered by WTO Agreements.  Information was also sought on Russia’s participation in the Ashkabad Agreement relating 
to indicative lists of goods for trade among the CIS.  These reques ts should be noted in the text, and find response later in t he section. 
 
Paragraph 677 :  We suggest rephrasing th e statement about the PCA and preferential provisions, as there are specific services commitments in the PCA 
that are applied only to the EU and to no other MFN trading part ner, e.g., in the area of insura nce services.  Russia should ac knowledge this in the text, 
and indicate what will be done about it in the context of its WTO accession. 
  
Elements of a Commitment
: 
 The United States supports the commitments set out in paragraph 679. 
 ANNEX II 
 [USA] 
Copies of the following legislation and regulations should be provided to the WP for review. 
 Enacted Legislation Implementing WTO rules:  
  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/25/Rev.3/Add.3
 Page 121Paragraph No. Comment 
 
- GR. No. 990 of 21 December 2000 
- Federal Law “On Amending the Federal Law “On State Regulation of Production and Turnover of Ethyl Alcohol, Alcoholic and 
Alcohol-Containing Products” 
- Regulations in place being used in the app lication of the new Trade Remedies Law.  
 Outstanding Pending Legislation  
 
- Federal Law “On Amending the Federal Law “On Customs Tariff.”  
- Federal Law “On Amendments to the Customs Code,” including  those implementing licensing requirements for importation of optica l grade 
polycarbonate and expanding investigative authority for Customs officials   
- Latest draft of the decree on PSI for valuation   
- Implementing regulations under Commercial S ecrets Law to provide for protection against unfair commercial use, including unauth orized 
reliance, of undisclosed test and other data submitted to obta in marketing approval of pharmaceu ticals and agricultural chemica ls (TRIPS 
Article 39.3) 
- Law commissioned by President Putin establishing “h igh technology” SEZs and implementing regulations. 
  
Other Outstanding Pending IPR Legislation  (to address bilateral concerns/enforcement)   
- Amendment to Criminal Code Article 146 granting the Ministry of Interior (MVD) joint authority  to conduct investigations conce rning piracy 
and counterfeiting 
- Amendment to Activity Licensing Law to extend licensing to OD manufacturing facilities and implementing regulations  
 TBT Legislation, Enacted and Pending 
 
- Text of Government Resolution that ensures that “normative legal acts” under the Law on Communications are developed in accorda nce with 
the TBT Agreement (see paragraph. 433). 
- Document containing simplified procedures for extending the validity of certificates for communications equipment which has not  been 
substantially changed (see paragraph. 434). 
- Copy of the Government approved technical regulations development program (see paragraph 439). 
 
__________