WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  G/SG/N/8/TUR/12 
G/SG/N/10/TUR/12 
G/SG/N/11/TUR/13/Suppl.1
3 November 2009 
 
 (09-5474) 
Committee on Safeguards Original:   English 
 
 
NOTIFICATION UNDER ARTICLE 12.1(B) OF THE AGREEMENT 
ON SAFEGUARDS ON FINDING A SERIOUS INJURY OR  
THREAT THEREOF CAUSED BY INCREASED IMPORTS 
 
NOTIFICATION PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 12.1(C) 
OF THE AGREEMENT ON SAFEGUARDS 
 
NOTIFICATION PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 9, FOOTNOTE 2 
OF THE AGREEMENT ON SAFEGUARDS 
 
TURKEY 
 
(Matches ) 
   The following notification, dated 31 October 2009, is being circulation at the request of the 
Delegation of Turkey.   
 
_______________ 
 
 
 Concerning imports of matches, Turkey had no tified the initiation of a safeguard investigation 
along with its decision to take a provisional safeguard measure and not to apply the measure against certain developing countries with WTO Do cument G/SG/N/6/TUR/15-G/SG/N/7/TUR/3-
G/SG/N/11/TUR/13 dated 6 May 2009.    
 Turkey hereby provides notification to the Committee on Safeguards of findings of serious 
injury or threat thereof caused by increased imports and notification of a proposed definitive 
safeguard measure.   Consistent with Article 12.3 of the Agreement on Safeguards , Turkey is prepared to consult 
with those Members having a substantial inte rest as exporters of the products concerned. 
 
I. EVIDENCE OF SERIOUS INJURY OR THREAT THEREOF CAUSED BY 
INCREASED IMPORTS 
A. E
VIDENCE OF SERIOUS INJURY  
 In order to make a determination of serious in jury or threat thereof to the domestic producer 
of the like product, an evaluation of all relevant fa ctors of an objective and quantifiable nature having 
a bearing on the situation of the domestic industr y has been undertaken.  In this analysis, data 
submitted by the applicant company, which constitu tes major proportion of domestic production, were 
used.  Therefore, the figures in this section are show n by indexes so as to maintain the confidentiality 
of the information provided by the applicant compan y.  Information below covers the 5-year period 
from 2004 to 2008 and also the first 6-month period of the years 2008 and 2009, where necessary.   G/SG/N/8/TUR/12 
G/SG/N/10/TUR/12 G/SG/N/11/TUR/13/Suppl.1 
Page 2 
  
  1. Production 
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 
Production  
(Tons – Index)  100 112 109 72 20 
 
 Having increased by 12 per cent in 2005, domes tic production of matches fell by 3 per cent 
and 34 per cent in the following two years, respec tively.  Production decreased further by 72 per cent 
in 2008.  The domestic producer suspended its production in 2008.    2. Domestic Sales 
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2008 
(1-6) 2009 
(1-6) 
Domestic Sales  
(Tons – Index)  100 109 72 47 55 27 55 
 
 Domestic sales of the applicant company rose by 9 per cent in 2005.  Thereafter, sales 
recorded a decrease of 34 per cent on annual basis in 2006 and 2007.  Having increased by 16 per cent 
in 2008, domestic sales improved significantly in th e first 6-month period of 2009.  The main reason 
behind this recovery in sales was the increase in inventory costs that gave a strong motive to the 
applicant company to follow a sales strategy that partic ularly aims at reducing the level of inventories.   
 
3. Capacity and Capacity Utilization Ratio (CUR) 
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 CUR 
(% – Index)  100 112 109 72 20 
 
 Production capacity of the applicant company remained unchanged throughout the period of investigation.  Therefore, capacity utilization ratio developed in the same direction with the level of 
production and fell to its lowest value in 2008.    4. End of Period Inventories 
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2008 
(1-6) 2009 
(1-6) 
Inventories  
(Tons – Index)  100 87 129 220 175 229 66 
 
 Having fallen to its lowest leve l in 2005, end of period inventories reached its peak in 2007, 
mainly due to the decrease in the level of domestic  sales.  Inventories began to decrease with the 
suspension of production in 2008.    5. Employment 
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 
Employment  
(Workers – Index)  100 103 101 85 22  G/SG/N/8/TUR/12 
 G/SG/N/10/TUR/12 
 G/SG/N/11/TUR/13/Suppl.1 
 Page 3 
  
   Employment showed a parallel trend to the level of production due to the labor-intensive 
production process of matches.  The entire workforce was laid off in 2008.   
 6. Labor productivity 
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 
Productivity  
(Tons/Worker – 
Index)  100 109 107 85 91 
 
 Having risen by 9 per cent in 2005, labor productivity decreased by 1 per cent and 21 per cent 
in 2006 and 2007, respectively.  Productivity figure improved slightly in 2008.  The reason behind 
this increase in productivity is the dramatic  fall in employment in that year.   
 
7. Profits 
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 
(1-6) 
 Profitability 
(% – Index)  100 49 -35 -50 -31 30 
 
 Profitability recorded positive values in 2004 and 2005.  However, the applicant company 
incurred losses in the following three years.  There was an improvement in pr ofitability in 2009 owing 
to the recovery in the domestic ma rket in that period that will be explained in the following sections.  
Also, it is worth mentioning that, compared with its  initial level, the actual figure of profitability for 
the first 6-month period of 2009 is far from being a satisfactory level to provide a stimulus to the 
applicant company to resume its production activity.   
 
8. Conclusion 
 Production of matches slowed down gradually in 2006 and 2007.  Also, decreasing domestic 
sales and employment along with increasing stocks and negative profits were recorded in these two 
years.  The applicant company suspended its pr oduction and laid off its workers in 2008.   
 
 Taking account of all of these factors, inves tigating authority concludes that the domestic 
industry has suffered serious injury for all f our products subject to investigation.   
 B. C
AUSATION ANALYSIS  
 In order to examine the existence of a causal  link between increased imports and the serious 
injury, and in order to ensure that  injury caused by other factors is not attributed to increased imports, 
the investigating authority analyzed th e effects of the following factors:   
 
1. Analysis of Causation Factors 
(a) Effect of increased imports 
 It was determined, in the investigation, th at the imported products with unit prices higher 
than 3.10 USD per kilogram are promotional ma tches or matches for special use purposes that 
compete on a completely different market segment  than the domestic products.  Accordingly, the 
products having unit prices above this threshold leve l were excluded in the analysis.  Hence, the G/SG/N/8/TUR/12 
G/SG/N/10/TUR/12 G/SG/N/11/TUR/13/Suppl.1 
Page 4 
  
  information given below relating to imports covers the products that have unit import prices 
below 3.10 USD per kilogram.    
 2006 was the year when annual decreases in production and sales along with negative profits 
were recorded for the first time in the period of inves tigation.  Also, the rate of increase in the quantity 
of imports reached its peak with 97 per cent in that same year.  Imports grew again by 97 per cent in 2008 when the domestic producer suspended th e production of the like product and laid off its 
workers.  Besides, market share of imports doubled on annual basis in 2006 and 2008.  Therefore, it is 
concluded that the increase in imports and the dete rioration in the economic indicators of the domestic 
industry followed a similar pattern throughout the period analysed.     The product concerned competes in the market ma inly with its price level advantage.  Hence, 
a summary table to compare the unit prices of imported and domestic pr oducts is given below.  In the 
table, IP shows the weighted average unit price of the imported product whose customs procedures 
are completed.  DP-1 indicates the weighted aver age domestic sales price of the applicant company 
whereas DP-2 was constructed by adding a reasonable level of profit to the industrial cost of the 
domestic product.  In determining this level, the profitability rates achieved by the domestic producer 
in 2004 and 2005 and by the importers from re-sale of the imported product in the recent past were 
taken into account.   
 
Price/Cost 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 
IP 
($/Kg – Index)  100 86 66 74 66 
DP-1 
($/Kg – Index)  100 98 76 84 88 
DP-2 
($/Kg – Index)  100 113 113 144 149 
Price Undercutting 
(%) - - 18 29 39 
 
 Unit price of the imported product moved dow nwards, except for 2007, during the period of 
investigation.  On the other hand, unit price of  the domestic product also fell gradually in 2005 
and 2006 while there were slight increases in 2007 a nd 2008.  Also, the actual domestic price, DP-1, 
fell below the "constructed" sales price, DP-2, in th e last three years.  Besides, the imported product 
undercut the actual sales price of the domestic produc t, DP-1, in the last three years and undercutting 
margin reached its peak in 2008.  Therefore, an evaluation of these figures reveals that the imported 
product has caused price undercutting and price suppression on the domestic product during the 
period concerned.   
 
 For the foregoing reasons, the investigating au thority concludes that there is a correlation 
between the increase in imports and the serious inju ry suffered by the domestic industry and that the 
increase in imports has had injurious effects.    
(b) Other factors 
(i) Consumption 
 Some interested parties asserted, during the i nvestigation, that the decrease in the demand for 
matches in Turkey had been one of the main reasons , with several factors other than the increase in 
imports, behind the worsening situation of th e domestic industry.  Table below shows the  G/SG/N/8/TUR/12 
 G/SG/N/10/TUR/12 
 G/SG/N/11/TUR/13/Suppl.1 
 Page 5 
  
  development of consumption of matches by years in  Turkey.  Here, consumption was calculated by 
aggregating domestic sales of the domestic producer  and domestic sales of the biggest importer of 
matches with imports figures of other importers of matches in Turkey.   
 
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2008  
(1-6) 2009 
(1-6) 
Consumption  
(Tons – Index)  100 104 91 77 64 38 52 
 
 Having risen to its peak in 2005, consumption of the product concerned decreased constantly 
from 2006 to 2008.  However, consumption rec overed notably in January-June of 2009.  
Nevertheless, it would be fair to  argue that there was a gradual fall in consumption of the product 
concerned throughout the years investigated.  Theref ore, a separate analysis was carried out in order 
to assess the impact of the fall in consumption on th e injury suffered by the domestic producer.  The 
results of this analysis is summarized below.  In the table, market share 1 (MS-1) shows the actual 
level of market share taken by the applicant compan y.  Also, assuming that the consumption remained 
constant at its 2005-level in the following 4 years, market share 2 (MS-2) was calculated by adding 
the residual amount proportionately to the domestic sales of the applicant company.   
 
Market Share 2005 2006 2007 2008 
MS-1 (% – Index) 100 75 58 82 
MS-2 (% – Index)  100 77 68 88 
 
 The domestic producer lost its share in a contr acting market in 2006 and 2007.  Market share 
recovered in 2008 due to the reason explained in S ection A.  On the other hand, MS-2 follows a 
similar trend to that of the actual market share desp ite achieving levels that are slightly higher than 
MS-1 from 2006 to 2008.  Hence, the fall in the consumption of the product concerned had a limited 
effect on the injury suffered by the applicant company.   
 
(ii) Exports 
 Another argument put forward by the interested  parties during the investigation was that the 
poor export performance of the applicant company ha d contributed to the serious injury.  Hence, 
export sales and the weight of export sales in total sales are shown in the table below.   
 
Exports 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 
Export Sales 
(Tons – Index) 100 110 116 33 1 
Share of Export 
Sales (% – Index)  100 105 175 114 2 
 
 Export sales increased by 10 per cent in 2005.  Imports grew by a further 6 per cent in 2006 when a marked deterioration in several economic indicators, such as the fall in domestic sales by 
34 per cent, occurred.  Export sales went down notably in the following two years.   
 
 With regard to the share of export sales in total sales, it was found out that the company has a 
domestic market oriented structure.  However,  the company achieved to increase both the quantity G/SG/N/8/TUR/12 
G/SG/N/10/TUR/12 G/SG/N/11/TUR/13/Suppl.1 
Page 6 
  
  and the share of its export sales in 2006.  On the ot her hand, export sales decreased in the following 
period on account of the worsening situation of th e company in the domestic market which inevitably 
led to a significant fall in production.  Hence, it is concluded that the export performance of the 
domestic producer had no impact on the serious injury.   
 
(iii) Substitute products 
 Some of the interested parties maintained th at lighters as substitute products, particularly low 
priced ones of Far East origin, had injurious effects on the situation of the domestic industry.  In this 
regard, Turkey's imports of lighters with HS Codes 9613.10 and 9613.20 is given below.   
 
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 
Imports of 
Lighters  
(Million pieces) 35 60 62 46 43 
 
 Having risen by 71 per cent and 3 per cent in 2005 and 2006, respectively, imports of lighters 
fell notably in the following period .  At the same time, domestic sales of the applicant company also 
increased in 2005.  Besides, sales fell by 34 per cent in 2007 when imports of lighters decreased by a 
significant rate as well.  Considering these facts, no relationship could be found between the demand 
for the substitute products and the serious injury suffered by the domestic producer of matches.   
 (iv) Costs 
 Some interested parties argued that the increas e in the production costs affected the situation 
of the applicant company negatively.  In the table be low, IC-1 indicates the unit industrial cost of the 
product concerned whereas IC-2 shows the unit cost  that the company would have incurred if the 
costs had recorded same rates of increase with  Consumer Prices Index (CPI) of Turkey.   
 
Cost 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 
IC-1 ( $/Kg – Index)  100 107 114 132 136 
IC-2 ( $/Kg – Index)  100 108 117 124 146 
 
 Recording its highest annual increase in 2007 w ith 16 per cent, unit cost increased by 36 per 
cent during the whole period of investigation.  On the other hand, although it follows a smoother trend 
up to 2008, IC-2 shows an increase by 46 per cent in the 5-year period.     Finally, the table below shows, for the period analysed, what the profitabilty was and what it 
would have been if the unit cost had increased by the same percentage with CPI.   
 
Profits 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 
P-1 (% – Index)  100 49 -35 -50 -31 
P-2 (% – Index)  100 44 -51 -18 -66 
 
 The realized and hypothetical profitability ra tes follow the same trend.  Only in 2007 the 
hypothetical loss was lower than the actually incurred loss.    G/SG/N/8/TUR/12 
 G/SG/N/10/TUR/12 
 G/SG/N/11/TUR/13/Suppl.1 
 Page 7 
  
   To sum up, the production costs have not been in a position to create a negative impact on the 
position of the domestic industry.    (v) Production Capacity 
 Excess capacity cannot be considered as a factor  having an effect on the serious injury since 
the production capacity of the applicant company did not show any change throughout the period 
examined.    2. Conclusion on Causation 
 Having examined the injurious effects of othe r known factors, the investigating authority 
reaches the conclusion that there is a genuine and substantial causal link between increased imports 
and serious injury suffered domestic industry.    II. INFORMATION ON WHETHER THERE IS AN ABSOLUTE INCREASE IN 
IMPORTS OR AN INCREASE IN IMPORTS RELATIVE TO DOMESTIC PRODUCTION  
A. U
NFORESEEN DEVELOPMENTS  
 The investigation was conducted in accordance with the requirements of Turkish Legislation 
on Safeguard Measures and the procedures prescrib ed by the WTO Agreement on Safeguards and 
Article XIX of GATT 1994, i.e. determination of th e existence of unforeseen developments and effect 
of obligations, including tariff concessions which led to an increase in imports.   
  Statistics on exports of matches worldwide a nd the country shares in exports are provided 
below.   
 
World Exports of Matches, Thousand $ 
Exporter 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 
World 179,283 192,715 202,728 225,272 224,374 
India 12,743 23,499 25,542 35,610 37,047 
Sweden 22,733 25,548 29,656 32,677 36,503 
Russia 21,344 19,982 22,408 27,975 28,955 
Pakistan 18,071 18,596 23,829 25,234 25,657 
Belarus 6,651 7,832 9,453 11,613 14,113 
Indonesia 3,732 6,028 7,262 7,244 9,433 
Source :  ITC.   
 
Country Shares in World Exports of Matches, % 
Exporter 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 
India 13 13 15 15 16 
Sweden 12 10 11 12 13 
Russia 10 10 12 11 11 
Pakistan 4 4 5 5 6 
Belarus 2 3 4 3 4 
Indonesia 7 12 13 16 17 
Source :  ITC.   
 G/SG/N/8/TUR/12 
G/SG/N/10/TUR/12 G/SG/N/11/TUR/13/Suppl.1 
Page 8 
  
   Exports of matches increased gradually th roughout the last five years and reached 
224 million USD in 2008.  Sorted by export values in 2008, 5 of the first 6 exporters consist of 
developing countries.  Also, the weight of these countries in total exports increased during the same 
period.   
  Also, the development of world imports of matches is shown in the table below.   
 
World Imports of Matches, Tons 
Importer 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 
World - 123,273 118,947 128,502 120,884 
Nigeria - - 3,066 6,576 12,081 
Ukraine 10,637 10,597 10,901 10,930 10,370 
Kazakhstan 7,365 5,906 7,471 9,232 6,744 
Uganda 3,297 3,720 3,002 3,539 6,189 
Angola - 2,020 3,060 1,597 5,541 
USA - 4,661 4,127 3,774 3,519 
Source :  ITC.   
 
 Total imports of matches worldwide fluctuated from 2005 to 2008.  However, it is observed 
that the first 5 importers of matches in 2008 are developing countries.  Also, it is possible to argue that imports of these countries followed an increasing trend, in general.     The figures relating to the world match market re veal that the share of developing countries in 
the world production and exports of matches has incr eased in the recent past depending mainly on the 
factors like proximity to raw materials and major markets along with the advantages relating to the 
costs of labor and raw materials.  Besides, develo ped countries have lost their weight in the world 
demand for imports in the same period due to the changes in the factors lik e tobacco products use 
tendencies, demographic conditions, devel opment of substitute products, etc.   
 
 These changes in the world match market ha ve affected Turkey's imports of matches 
dramatically.  The increase in the production cap acity, production and exports of matches of 
developing countries that are charact erized with low production costs, and the decline in the share of 
developed countries in world match demand have pu t Turkey, with its population size and tendencies 
of use of tobacco products, in a suitable market position for relatively low unit priced matches.  
Accordingly, products of Indonesian and Indian orig in constituted 92 per cent of Turkey's imports of 
matches in 2008 while there were no imports fro m these two countries up to 2005.  The substantial 
fall in the unit prices of imports, by 34 per cent from 2004 to 2008, is the indicator of the effect of unexpected changes on Turkey's imports of matches.    
B. I
NCREASE IN IMPORTS  
 An analysis of the increase in imports to Turk ey of the product concerned both in absolute 
and relative terms has been carried out over the pe riod from 2004 to January-June of 2009.  Imports 
statistics cover the products that have unit prices be low the threshold level of 3.10 USD per kilogram.  
Imports of the product concerned increased consider ably, both in absolute terms and relative to 
domestic production, during the period of investigation.   
  G/SG/N/8/TUR/12 
 G/SG/N/10/TUR/12 
 G/SG/N/11/TUR/13/Suppl.1 
 Page 9 
  
  1. Absolute Imports 
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2008 
(1-6) 2009 
(1-6) 
Imports  
(Tons)  107 175 344 611 1,203 282 1,211 
 
 Imports of the product subject to investiga tion increased constantly during the period 
analyzed.  Imports grew by 330 per cent in the first 6-month period of 2009 compared with the same period of 2008.    
2. Relative Imports 
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 
Imports/Production  
(% – Index)  100 146 296 794 5,611 
 
 Similar to imports in absolute terms, th e ratio of imports to domestic production rose 
dramatically throughout the period of investigation.    3. Market Share of Imports 
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 
Market Share of 
Imports  
(% – Index)  100 148 326 552 1,129 
 
 The imports of the product subject to investiga tion increased its market share significantly in 
the last 5-year period.  Compared with its value in 2004, an over-tenfold in crease in the market share 
was recorded in 2008.   
 
4. Share of Main Exporters 
Countries 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 
(1-6) 
Indonesia - - - 18% 76% 88% 
India - 8% 46% 46% 16% 4% 
PRC - - - 1% 2% 4% 
Germany 66% 40% 13% 9% 3% 2% 
Poland 13% 18% 4% 7% 2% 1% 
Others 21% 34% 37% 19% 1% 1% 
  The distribution of imports among supplying countries changed notably during the period 
concerned.  Particularly, the share of products of  Indonesian origin, that are characterized with G/SG/N/8/TUR/12 
G/SG/N/10/TUR/12 G/SG/N/11/TUR/13/Suppl.1 
Page 10 
  
  relatively low unit price levels, expanded dramati cally in 2008 and 2009 whereas products of German 
origin lost their position in the composition of imports.    III. PRECISE DESCRIPTION OF THE PRODUCT INVOLVED 
 Matches, other than pyrotechnic articles of h eading 36.04.  The product subject to measure is 
currently classified under HS Code 36.05.    
IV. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED MEASURE 
 It is proposed to impose a definitive safeguard measure in the form of a variable duty, which 
will be implemented against imports having CIF unit pri ce lower than the relevant threshold level.  If 
imports are undertaken at a CIF unit price equal to or above the relevant th reshold level established, 
the imports will not be subject to the proposed me asure.  If imports are undertaken at a lower unit 
price, the difference between the threshold level a nd the actual value would become payable.  Also, 
the amount of duty will not exceed a certain maximum level of duty as specified in the table below.   
 
HS Code Description 
of the 
Product Threshold/Maximum 
Level of Duty 
(USD per net kilogram) 1
st 
Period 2nd 
Period 3rd 
Period 
Threshold Level of Duty 3.10 3.05 3.00 
3605.00.00.00.00 Matches 
Maximum Level of Duty 1.00 0.95 0.90 
*  Periods in the table imply the consecutive one year terms starting from 6/6/2009 when the Decision of 
Council of Ministers numbered 2009/15014 regarding the Implementation of a Provisional Safeguard Measure 
on Imports of Matches, came into force.   
 
 Below is the list of Developing Countries ex cluded from the measures as they export less 
than 3 per cent of imports to Turkey (Article 9.1 of the Agreement on Safeguards ) 
 
 Afghanistan;  Albania;  Algeria;  Anti gua and Barbuda;  Angola;  Argentina;  
American Samoa;  Anguilla;  Antarctica;  Aruba;  Azerbaijan;  Barbados;  Bangladesh;  Burkina Faso;  
Bahrain;  Burundi;  Benin;  Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela;  Brunei Darussalam;  Bolivia;  Brazil;  
Bahamas;  Bhutan;  Botswana;  Belize;  Berm uda;  Bouvet Island;  Br itish Virgin Islands;  
British Indian Ocean Territory;  Democratic Republic  of Congo;  Central African Republic;  Congo;  
Côte d'Ivoire;  Cameroon;  Chad;  Colombia;  Cost a Rica;  Cuba;  Cape Verde;  Cayman Islands;  
Chile;  Christmas Islands; Cocos Islands;  Cook Isla nds;  Djibouti;  Dominica;  Dominican Republic;  
Ecuador;  Egypt;  Eritrea;  Ethiopia;  Fiji;  Fede rated States of Micronesia;  Falkland Islands;  
French Polynesia;  French Southern Territories;  Gabon;  Grenada;  Ghana;   Gambia;  Georgia;  
Greenland;  Guinea;  Equatorial Guinea;  Guatemal a;  Guinea-Bissau;  Guyana;  Gibraltar;  Guam;  
Honduras;  Haiti;  Heard Island and Mc Donald Islands;  Iraq;  Iran (Isla mic Republic of);  Jamaica;  
Jordan;  Kazakhstan;  Kenya;  Cambodia;  Kiriba ti;  Comoros;  St Kitts and Nevis;  Kuwait;  
Kyrgyzstan;  Laos;  Lebanon;  St Lucia;  Sri Lanka;  Liberia;  Lesotho;  Libyan Arab Jamahiriya;  Morocco;  Madagascar;  Marshall Islands;  Mali;  Moldova;  Mongolia;  Mauritania;  Mauritius;  
Malaysia;  Maldives;  Malawi;  Mozambique;  Maca o;  Mayotte;  Mexico;  Montserrat;  Namibia;  
Niger;  Nigeria;  Nicaragua;  Nepal;  Nauru;  Ne therlands Antilles;  New Caledonia;  Niue Island;  
Norfolk Island;  Northern Mariana Islands;  Oman;  Panama;  Peru;  Papua New Guinea;  Philippines;  
Pakistan;  Palau;  Paraguay;  Pitcairn;  Qatar;  Ru ssian Federation;  Rwanda;  Samoa;  Saudi Arabia;  
Solomon Islands;  Seychelles;  Sudan;  Sierra Le one;  Senegal;  Somalia;  Suriname;  Sao Tomé and 
Principe;  El Salvador;  Syrian Arab Republic;  Swaziland;  South Africa;  South Georgia and  G/SG/N/8/TUR/12 
 G/SG/N/10/TUR/12 
 G/SG/N/11/TUR/13/Suppl.1 
 Page 11 
  
  South Sandwich Islands;  St Hele na and dependencies;  St Pierre  and Miquelon;  Tajikistan;  
Thailand;  Togo;  Tunisia;  Tonga;  East Timor;  Trinidad and Tobago;  Turkmenistan;  Tuvalu;  
Tanzania;  Tokelau;  Turks and Caicos Islands;  Uk raine;  United Arab Emirates;  United States Minor 
outlying islands;  Uganda;  Uruguay;  Uzbekistan;  St Vincent;  Vietnam;  Vanuatu;  Virgin Islands 
of US;  Wallis and Futuna Islands;  Yemen;  Zambia;  and Zimbabwe.   
 
V. PROPOSED DATE OF INTRODUCTION OF THE MEASURE 
 The definitive measure will come into effect with the publication of the approval of the 
Council of Ministers after all legal procedures are completed.   
 
VI. EXPECTED DURATION OF THE MEASURE 
 The expected duration of the proposed measure is three years including the duration of the 
provisional measure.   
 
VII. PROPOSED DATE FOR THE REVIEW  
 Not applicable.   
 
VIII.  EXPECTED TIMETABLE FOR PROGRESSIVE LIBERALIZATION OF THE 
MEASURE 
 In order to induce adjustment, the proposed measure will be subject to liberalization on a 
regular basis following its imposition, thereby ensuri ng that there is a strong incentive for domestic 
producers to undertake progressively the necessary r estructuring and adjustment programs.  The 
proposed measure is to be progressively liberalized as indicated in item IV above.    IX. INFORMATION RELATING TO THE EXTENSION OF A SAFEGUARD MEASURE 
 Not applicable.   
   
__________