WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  G/RO/W/116 
4 April 2008 
 (08-1501) 
Committee on Rules of Origin Original:   English 
  
 
CONSOLIDATED TEXT OF NON-PREFERENTIAL RULES OF ORIGIN 
 
Harmonization Work Programme
 
 
Communication from The United States 
 
  The following communication, dated 3 April 2008, is being circulated at the request of the Delegation of the United States.  
_______________ 
  
U.S. COMMENTS ON G/RO/W/111/REV.1 
DRAFT CONSOLIDATED TEXT OF NON-PREFERENTIAL RULES OF ORIGIN 
 
 
1. Chapter 1 
 Ex 01.02(a), ex 01.03(a), and ex 01.05(a)
 
  It is not clear what rule would apply for animals in these categories that were not fattened for 
the required time period.  We believe it is necessar y to add the "otherwise…" phrase that is used in 
headings 01.01, 01.04, and 01.06.    Furthermore, we don’t understand the purpose of specifying that the fattening process brings the cattle, swine and poultry from under the threshold weight to over the threshold weight?  Isn’t it 
enough just to specify the fattening period as is done for horses, sheep and camels?   
 
2. Chapters 2-14 
 No comments. 
 
3. Chapter 15 
3.1 Definition of the term "refining"
 
 
The current drafting is an improvement over the text presented in the original G/RO/W/111.  However, we believe it would be clearer if the wo rd "only" were added be fore the word "if" in 
the first sentence.  Also we are not sure what the phrase “to be the last substantial 
transformation” means in the context of this defi nition.  It would be clearer to say "to have 
occurred".  With these changes the first sentenc e of the definition would read:  "Refining 
(chemically or physically) is considered to have occurred only if all
 of the following 
operations have been carried out on crude oils in a single country:" G/RO/W/116 
Page 2  
 
  3.2 Definition of "chemical reaction"
 
  We do not believe it is necessary to include th is definition.  CTH and change by chemical 
reaction are essentially the same thing for the headings under discussion.  The rule for 
heading 1518 should simply be CTH.  
 
3.3 Headings 15.07, 15.08 and 15.12
  
  These three tariff lines are highly sensitive for th e United States.  The U.S. cannot agree to a 
rule of origin that would confer origin based  on refining.  The United States could support a 
"CTH" only, without change by refining. 
 3.4 Heading 15.16
  
  The United States cannot support a rule that confers origin based on CTH or refining.  This is 
a highly sensitive tariff line for the U.S.  U.S. cannot agree to a rule for heading 15.16 that 
allows refining to confer origin.  Unite d States proposes a change of chapter rule. 
 
4. Chapters 16-21 
 No comments. 
 5. Chapter 22 
5.1 EU proposed changes for vinegar (22.09), ethyl alcohol (2207.10) and the residual rule for brandy
 
  We note that these are substantive changes to  the agreed rules based on the JOB document 
W/111 (15 October 2007) document that we revi ewed.  However, the U.S. could support 
these proposals, if the EC, Japan and Chair w ould support CTH for 15.07, 15.08, and 15.12, 
and CC for 15.16. 
 5.2 2204.30,  Other grape must
  
  The proposed rule doesn’t make sense, since all other grape juice products, including wine 
have a CTH rule.  We propose that this rule be changed to CTH.  
 
6. Chapters 23-24 
 No comments. 
 7. Heading 25.23 
 The U.S. can accept the bracketed  rules for the various cements, together with the proposed 
Chapter Note on clinkers.  
8. Chapters 30-38 
 The Chapter Note on Change in Particle Si ze is inconsistent across these chapters – 
sometimes it is merely "change", which could be la rger or smaller, and sometimes only reduction in 
particle size.  Is this difference necessary ?   G/RO/W/116 
 Page 3 
 
 
  9. Chapters 30-38 
 The U.S. still strongly supports the bracketed Chapter Note concerning addition of the 
materials described in Note 6 to Chapte r 29 – anticaking agents, colorants, etc. 
 
10. Chapter 30 
 The Chapter Note on Mixtures and Blends would not apply to heading 30.03, which consists 
of medicaments produced from mixed constituents .  The U.S. could accept making this Note 
applicable to the goods of heading 30.03.  
11. Headings 30.03, 30.04 and subheading 3006.30 
 The U.S. can accept thes e bracketed rules.  
 
12. Chapter 39 
 The residual rule in the Chapter Note covers  headings 39.01 through 39.14, but there is no 
residual rule for the remainder of the chapter.  Is it the intention to use the "major portion" approach 
for the remaining headings ? 
 
13. Heading 39.26  
 Because the effect of any de minimis provision is not yet known, and because it is very likely 
that certain assembly operations will involve the use of small plastic parts classified within heading 
39.26, there should be an understanding that "parts of  general use" such as nuts, bolts, gaskets, etc. 
when made of plastic should be permitted, even if their use does not result in a change of tariff 
classification at the heading level (CTH).  On that condition the U.S. could accept CTH as the rule for 
this heading.  The same considerations are relevant also for headings 39.22 and 39.25. 
 
14. Chapters 33-38, 40 
 No Chapter Residual Rule is given.  Default to "major portion" ? 
 
15. Subheading 4002.80 
 The given rule (no brackets) is "CTH, except from 40.01.  Consideration should be given to 
whether this is coherent with the proposed bracket ed Chapter Note on Mixtures and Blends, given that 
the subheading provides for mixtures of products of heading 40.01.   
 
16. Chapters 42-43 and 61-63 
 The U.S. suggests a comparison of the Chapter Notes on "complete making up" which are 
proposed for Chapters 42-43 and the Chapter Notes in  61-63 on "assembly in a single country".  All 
the goods in question are textile-related.  Are not these rules really effectively the same ? 
 
17. Chapters 64-66 
 The U.S. can support the proposed Chapter Residual Rule. 
 
18. Heading 69.08 
 The U.S. can support the proposed rule (CTH, except from 69.07). G/RO/W/116 
Page 4  
 
  19. Heading 70.05 
 The U.S. can support the proposed rule (CTH, except from 70.03 & 70.04). 
 
20. Chapters 73-81 
 The bracketed Chapter Note on "assembly operations, other than simple assembling 
operations" will not be administrable without meani ngful definitions of these terms.  The notes should 
be re-worked or dropped.  
21. Headings 87.09 and 87.10 
 These should be compared for coherence of a pproach.  The rule for 87.09 provides for the 
goods only, presumably allowing for the parts to be covered by a chapter note, while 87.10 provides 
specially for parts, and even for parts of parts.  A consistent approach to the articulation would be 
desirable.  N.B., the same  issue arises throughout Chapter 90, for example.   
 
22. Chapter 92 
 Is the full array of Chapter 84-90 types of Ch apter Rules needed here ?  A simplification 
should be considered.   
__________