RESTRICTED  WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  TN/TF/M/23 
1 April 2008 
 (08-1430) 
Negotiating Group on Trade Facilitation  
  
 
SUMMARY MINUTES OF THE MEETING 
 
Held in the Centre William Rappard
 
from 18-22 February 2008  
 
Chairman:  H.E. Mr. Eduardo Ernesto Sperisen-Yurt (Guatemala) 
 
 
1. The Chairman  recalled that the proposed agenda fo r the meeting had been circulated in 
WTO/AIR/3148.  As Members would have seen from th e airgram, the meeting sought to conclude the 
current cycle of focussed textual work on the vari ous elements of the mandate and to advance the 
tabling of revised proposals in all fields.  In addition, it would address the standing item of 
participation by the Annex D organizations. 
2. The agenda was adopted.  
3. The Chairman  explained that the current session resembled that of its predecessor, at least as 
far as structure was concerned.  Similar to what Members would recall from last time, it was foreseen 
for the meeting to open and close in plenary mode, leaving the middle days for focussed textual work. 
Those drafting initiatives were set to take place in a variety of formats to ensure maximum flexibility. 
The mornings of the sessions would be conducted under his chairmanship in open-ended, informal 
mode, working on the textual proposals as set out in  the compilation document.  He also intended to 
chair part of the afternoon discussions while equa lly leaving room for engagements amongst the 
Membership.  
4. The results of the inter-delegation activities w ould be fed back into the Chair-led process 
through reports by the Members involved, info rming the Negotiating Group (NG) about progress 
made and yet to be achieved.  A report would al so be provided from the Chair's side, offering a 
personal evaluation of the negotiating week. It woul d be complemented by a written summary of the 
textual suggestions made to assist Members with their preparations for future work.  
5. All of these activities aimed at another successfu l meeting that moved Members an additional 
step forward on their negotiating path.  There wa s a considerable amount of work still ahead and 
limited time available for its completion.  
6. With respect to the organizational sequencing of the week's working sessions, it was foreseen 
for Members to start with the proposals on GATT Arti cle V, followed by work on the area of customs 
cooperation the next day.  Worksheets had again been  prepared by the Secretariat to facilitate the 
drafting tasks.  On Wednesday morning there would be a switch to the areas of technical assistance and S&D.  To ensure sufficient time for their discussion and allow for a balanced distribution of 
overall meeting time, the NG would continue its delib erations on these matters in the afternoon, their 
precise format being determined as the meeting progressed.  Room for further work on the 
implementation pillar and/or on other elements of  the mandate – including GATT Articles VIII and X 
– would be given on the following day with the morning session having been reserved to that end.  TN/TF/M/23 
Page 2  
 
  7. Given the current situation and the overall stat e of the Round, he also wished to say a few 
words on how he saw work proceeding after the current negotiating week.  
8. Members would all be aware of the intensificati on of the Doha negotiations and the efforts to 
bring them to a close by the end of the year.  Th ey would also recall the TNC Chair's reference to 
having to " step up the pace " and " a collective determination to conclude the talks by (...) 2008 ".  He 
had further alluded to an Easter process and the need to " give all necessary comfort to the 
membership ", stressing the importance of “hav(ing) the assurance that [all areas] were moving 
forward within [a] broad and balanced final outcome ."  
9. This meant that Members had to be ready to make  a contribution to this process.  As much as 
it was understood that each Group had its own mode of  operation and particular steps to take, the 
NGTF continued to be part of a broader package and had to be in a positio n to show its progress 
towards the common goal.  He was aware of this  Negotiating Group having a particularly strong 
bottom-up tradition that had done much to bring Memb ers to where they were today.  Their  proposals 
had been driving the process and woul d continue to do so in the months to come.  At the same time, 
one had to get to a point where one had more to s how than simply a collection of proposals that got  
updated on a regular basis.  
10. That was not to say that he was suddenly proposing a Chair's text or that he planned on 
undermining the Member-driven nature of the NGTF's wo rk in any way.  He continued to be a strong 
believer in the usefulness of this principle and had no intention to do away with it.  Rather, he would 
like to keep it alive and reinforce its potential in terms of what it was able to deliver.  What he was 
suggesting – and urging Members to bring forward – was a substantive new wave of revised proposals 
that could be assembled into an Easter product from the TF Group.  Many delegations had already 
been working on such texts for so me time.  They should now be taken out of the drawers and put on 
the negotiating table.  Those texts were needed  as a reflection of the NGTF's progress in refining 
proposals and as an evidence that  the Member-driven process still worked.  They should mark a 
substantial improvement of the exis ting compilation in that they would revise large parts of its current 
texts. In other words, a " compilation plus ".  
11. While there would be more time to discuss the matter at the end of the week, he already 
wished to inform Members about what he saw as the key requirement for the next steps from 
Members' side at this stage.  To make it into the Easter product, Members' proposals would need to 
reach the Secretariat at the beginning of 7 March.  Th at was not meant to be a final cut-off date for the 
presentation of new ideas. He was perfectly aware that  the process of revising suggestions would have 
to continue, and doors would not be closed for that.  But for the purposes of this particular exercise 
input would need to be received by 7 March.  He would then instruct the Secretariat to prepare the 
compilation plus document shortly thereafter in order to have it ready when the time came.  When 
doing so, he would also ask the Secretariat to cl ean up the paper by getting rid of empty sections, 
merging some of the headings, where possible, and regrouping the texts accordingly.  
12. Once again, this would not be a Chair's text and would not pretend to constitute an agreed 
draft Agreement. He was perfectly aware of Memb ers' views on the matter and continued to respect 
them. Members would remain in charge of the proc ess with the Easter product still being a collection 
of Members' texts.  But it was necessary to step  up the pace and to demonstrate that the Member-
driven process continued to deliver the required results. 
A. NEW AND REVISED PROPOSALS  
13. This part of the meeting was conducted in info rmal mode with the exception of the following 
introduction of new submissions:  TN/TF/M/23 
 Page 3 
 
 
  14. The representative of Switzerland  introduced the revised version of transit proposal 
TN/TF/W/133 (now TN/TF/W/133/Rev.1) which was the fruit of a very long consultation process 
among Members concerned and among experts.  The initial version W/133 had been a merger of two 
comprehensive proposals, one led by the EC (TN/TF/W/l13) and the other led by Switzerland (TN/TF/W/119).  The two proposals had looked at transit issues from different angles: where W/l13 
had proposed various elements essen tially to c1arify and improve vari ous shortcomings of the current 
Article V, W/119 looked at transit issues from a more practical angle; which issues were most frequently quoted to be an impediment to efficien t transit and which ones proved to be a valuable 
solution in existing transit arrangements?  These two approaches had been merged in W/133, putting 
the two proposals into one document without doing any consolidation.  Members had then been 
discussing W/133 since July 2006.  Switzerland had take n careful note of the concerns raised and the 
proposals made during the plenaries.  It had also consulted the private sector, experts from the WCO 
and UNCTAD, and had taken on board comments made by an expert of the World Bank on the initial 
proposal TN/TF/W/39.  Switzerland had also taken ev ery opportunity to share and discuss the changes 
with landlocked least-developed countries (LLDCs ) and had organized an informal working session 
with interested Members on the matter in early Nove mber last year.  The revised proposal now on the 
table was the result of those consultations.  
15. The proposed measures all strived to strike the right balance between legitimate safety, 
security and fiscal concerns and the faster and more efficient movement of goods in transit. Switzerland wished to once more underscore th e high economic relevance of efficient transit 
procedures for landlocked Members whose economic growth had lagged behind  as a consequence of 
their geographical situation.  Transaction costs had a high bearing on a country's competitiveness and 
therefore on its volume of trade.  Studies had indi cated that the annual growth rate of LLDCs was 
0.7% inferior to that of their coastal neighbour s. It was not only cost but also speed and low 
predictability of shipping times, highly dependent on  transport infrastructure and transit procedures in 
their transit neighbours, that left LLDCs a neglec ted destination for FDI, thus impeding vertical 
diversification, an indispensable precondition to reduce transportation costs.  Landlocked developing–
country Members therefore hoped that transit recei ved particularly positive consideration by the 
Negotiating Group.  
16. The main changes made in the revi sed proposal were the following:   
17. While no modifications had been made on the scope  side, the new text contained an alteration 
of the general and security exception.  It now stat ed in a simple and straightforward way that GATT 
Articles XX and XXI would be fully applicable.  This  kind of provision would probably at the end of 
the day be a horizontal provision applicable to the entire Trade Facilitation Agreement.  
18. With respect to the section on freedom of transit and the choice of the routes of transport most 
convenient for international transit there was a minor  error in that the two words "and means" in the 
subtitle in paragraph 4 should be de leted.  This area had been one of the most controversial areas in 
the previous version, where it was stipulated that traders were the ones to choose the most convenient 
route.  The concerns expressed in that regard had been taken on board with the new text trying to 
balance the interests of traders with those of governme nts.  Normally a trader should be able to choose 
the route, but there might be circumstances – te mporary or long-lasting – which impeded the free 
choice of the route.  The same balance was sought for traffic in transit under escort.  
19. As for the non-discrimination area, the only ch ange made in the revised proposal concerned 
the scope of application of the national treatment obligation.  This obliga tion was now limited to 
transit fees and charges and not any more to goods  in transit generally.  The problem with the 
previous scope was that it was difficult to assess its full implication.  Now the implications were 
straightforward and easy to understand.  TN/TF/M/23 
Page 4  
 
  20. No far-reaching modification had been made to  the chapters on fees and charges or on 
transparency, but text had been harmonized with  the texts on the table under GATT Articles VIII and 
X. 
21. Aspects falling under transit formalities and document requirements had been fully 
rearranged, although there was not much change in  substance.  The language regarding physical 
inspections of goods had been modified and the prov ision related to the sealin g of consignments had 
been removed from the proposal.  
22. The text relating to bonded transit regime and guarantees had been totally overhauled to take 
on board the concern of some Members that had difficulties with applying a guarantee system.  It now 
made clear that the objective was not to impose any guarantee system, but rather to ban the collection of cash guarantees.  Indeed, cash guarantees were extremely costly for traders and might even have the effect of impeding trade by SMEs.  When a pplying a guarantee system, the condition for doing so 
were spelled out in the text as it had been in the previous version.  
23. Hardly any change had been made in the rema ining chapters.  The chapter on international 
standards had been removed from th e proposal. For Switzerland, this did not mean that the issue had 
been dropped, but they preferred to deal with it on a horizontal basis as proposed in TN/TF/W/131/Rev.1. 
24. The representative of Hong Kong, China
 introduced proposal TN/TF/W/124/Rev.2 on behalf 
of his delegation and Switzerland.  In July 2006,  Hong Kong, China and Sw itzerland had submitted to 
the Negotiating Group on Trade Facilitation a proposal  for improving GATT Article VIII in document 
TN/TF/W/124/Rev.1.  The prime objective of the pr oposal was to strengthen paragraph 1(c) of GATT 
Article VIII.  The sponsors of the proposal had received constructive feedback and comments from 
Members.  In response to the positive contributio n by the proponents of various proposals in a 
focussed drafting mode, revisions had been made to the proposal as set out in document 
TN/TF/W/124/Rev.2.  
25. Document TN/TF/W/124/Rev.1 had attempted to establish two benchmarks with a view to 
taking paragraph 1(c) of GATT Article VIII1 one step forward with respect to the benchmarks of 
necessity and efficiency so that due consideration would be given by Members in the formulation and 
implementation of formalities a nd documentation requirements.  
26. All changes made in the current submission were  related to the benchmark of necessity (set 
out in the first bullet in the revised text), the mo st prominent one being the deletion of the phrase "no 
more administratively burdensome or trade restric tive than necessary" and the associated footnote l, 
which listed the factors to be considered when de termining whether formalities and requirements were 
more trade restrictive than necessary to achieve their legitimate objectives. 
27. The changes made to the proposal primarily ai med at addressing Members' concerns about the 
scope, interpretation, as well as the operation of th e necessity benchmark as augmented by the factors 
under footnote 1, for example, whether and how weighting should be given to these factors.  
28. While Hong Kong, China still believed that the be nchmark of "necessity" and some, if not all, 
of the factors listed in footnote 1 in TN/TF/W/124/Re v.1 would be considered one way or another by 
Members in formulating or reviewing their forma lities and requirements, it appreciated and respected 
                                                      
1 The existing paragraph 1(c) of GATT Articl e VIII merely stipulated that Members "recognize the 
need for" minimizing the incidence and complexity of import and export formalities and for decreasing and 
simplifying import and export documentation requirements.  It did not elaborate on how minimization and 
simplification of formalities and documentation requirements can be achieved.  TN/TF/M/23 
 Page 5 
 
 
  Members' comments about the risk of being "over-p rescriptive" in their approach.  They would, 
however, emphasize the importance of establishing benchmark guideline for assisting Members in their efforts to "minimize the incidence and comple xity of import and export formalities and decrease 
and simplify import and export documentation requireme nts" as enshrined in paragraph 1(c) of GATT 
Article VIII.  
29. Against this backdrop, the revised proposal (TN/TF/W/124/Rev.2) adopted a simpler 
approach in the implementation of the "necessity" be nchmark by requesting Members first to consider 
whether alternative formalities and requirements th at could achieve the legitimate objectives were 
reasonably available, and, second, to adopt those formalities and requirements which were considered 
by Members to be significantly less trade restrictiv e.  Such an approach had been drawn up with 
reference to the relevant rulings in dispute settle ment cases regarding the interpretation of the term 
"necessity"
2. 
30. TN/TF/W/124/Rev.2 did not propose any defin ition of terms such as "alternative formalities 
and requirements", "legitimate objectives", "reasona bly available" and "s ignificantly less trade 
restrictive", as individual Members should be entrus ted with flexibility having  regard to the nature 
and objective of their formalities and requirement s in place as well as prevalent circumstances. 
31. Having regard to feedback from Members, H ong Kong, China did not see the need to make 
major alterations to the other elements in the propo sal lest the spirit of the proposal would be eroded. 
For example, the benchmark of efficiency was essential in ensuring that formalities and requirements 
had to be applied in an efficient manner, so that  the benefits gained from the concerted efforts to 
strengthen paragraph 1(c) of GATT Article VIII w ould not be undermined by burdensome/inefficient 
administrative procedures.   
32. As regards the proposition that formalities and requirements should not be maintained when 
the circumstances or objectives giving rise to their a doption no longer existed, this was also a useful 
guideline to assist Members in strengthening paragr aph 1(c) of GATT Article VIII by ensuring that 
''unnecessary'' and "outdated" formalities and docum entation requirements could be minimized and 
reduced.  
33. As for the self-review mechanism for formalities and requirements in the proposal, the 
sponsors had deleted the phrase "including the private sector" after "interested parties".  In Hong 
Kong, China's view, "interested parties" were tho se affected by the formalities and requirements in 
question and as such should have already included those from the private sector.  This change was 
also an attempt to follow the ge neral consensus recorded in the Aide Memoire on the November 2007 
meeting. 
34. He also wished to take this opportunity to respond to some comments regarding Members' 
responsibility under the proposal, e.g., who was to decide what was an "unnecessary obstacle to 
trade"; whether "circumstances or objectives giving rise to the adoption of formalities and 
requirements no longer existed"; and what shoul d be included as "relevant new information and 
business practices, availability and adoption of t echniques and technology, as well as international 
best practices".  It would not be easy to provide answers to these questions lest the risk of "over-
prescriptive" would again emerge.  Members would be  allowed to exercise flexibility and judgement 
having regard to the nature and objective and thei r respective formalities and requirements in place 
and prevalent circumstances, bearing in mind that th e spirit of paragraph 1(c) of GATT Article III was 
                                                      
2 I.e. Korea – Measures Affecting Imports of Fr esh, Chilled and Frozen Beef (WT/DS161/AB/R and 
WT/DS169/AB/R) and European Communities – Measures  Affecting Asbestos and Asbestos – Containing 
Products (WT/DS/135/AB/R).  
 TN/TF/M/23 
Page 6  
 
  to "minimize the incidence and complexity of im port and export formalities and decrease and simplify 
import and export documentation requirements."
 
35. It was hoped that the proposed revisions c ontained in TN/TF/W/124/Rev.2 would help 
Members in further understanding the objective of the proposal and facilitate collaboration in the 
collective drafting process.  Drafting suggestions from Members would certainly help Members in 
further refining the proposal.  
36. The representative of the United States  introduced proposal TN/TF/W/144/Rev.2, explaining 
that it was a further revised version of its subm ission on expedited shipments in which the US 
attempted to address the comments received during th e previous meetings and consultations.  Three 
types of changes had essentially been made.  
37. The first related to some of the terms used .  A second addressed numerical threshold issues 
with the third type consisting of non substantive clean-up changes.  
38. The change to paragraph 1 invol ved the change to a term used  in order to address concerns 
that had been expressed with the reference to es tablishing separate customs procedures for expedited 
shipments. In order to be less prescriptive, the word "separate" had been deleted and the word 
"allowing" added.  This left it to each Member to decide how it wished to provide for express 
shipments under its customs procedures. 
39. The change to paragraph 1(b) also involved a change in a term.  The use of the word 
"manifest" had provoked questions as to whether this  was a term of art.  Therefore, the word 
"manifest" had been replaced with the term "s ingle document" throughout the proposal.  The 
substance of the definition at the end of the pro posal remained unchanged but  now defined the term 
"single document". 
40. The change to paragraph 1(d) was related to a numerical threshold.  Members had expressed 
concerns about the one-hour timeframe in sub-para graph (d).  As a result, the figure had been 
increased to three hours.  The text also made clear  that that was meant to be the timeframe under 
normal circumstances.  Paragraph 3 of the proposal ma de clear that even this timeframe would not be 
applicable where necessary to mainta in appropriate border control.  
41. No fundamental change had been made to paragraph 1(e). Instead, the United States had 
engaged in some cleaning-up, adding the phrase "to expedited shipments" to clarify the commitment 
and to match the language in the other sub-paragraphs.  The US realized that some Members had 
expressed concerns that the proposal applied without re gard to weight or customs value and wished to 
continue discussing these concerns with Members in order to understand them better, but it was 
essential that businesses and consumers were not denied  the benefits of expedited shipment delivery 
simply because the goods were valuable and/or heavy.   
42. Such shipments could be particularly importa nt for spare parts and supplies that were 
essential to a just-in-time economy.  Paragraph 3 made clear that Members were free to take steps to 
maintain border controls.  The absence of weight or value restrictions would also not prevent the 
collection of duties on these items. 
43. Paragraph 1(f) involved a clean-up change.  A f ootnote had been added that explained that 
sub-paragraph (f) might not be necessary if the separ ate proposal on this topic, TN/TF/W/136/Rev.1 – 
separation of release from clearance – adequately addressed this issue.   
44. The threshold had been changed in paragraph 1( g).  Several Members had expressed concerns 
with the de minimis  level set forth in sub-paragraph (g).  The provision had therefore been revised so  TN/TF/M/23 
 Page 7 
 
 
  that each Member was free to set its own de minimis  thresholds.  Some exemptions were required, but 
the exact amount was not prescribed.  
45. As a clean-up in paragraph 2(b), "manifest" ha d been replaced with "single document".  
Consistent with the changes to paragraphs 1(b) and (c) and in sub–paragraphs (c), the word "separate" 
had been deleted.  The benefits of the proposal we re broad.  Expedited shipments benefited everyone 
associated with those transactions.  Large and sma ll companies depended on this mode of shipment 
for timely, dependable and cost-effective deliver y of parts, accessories and final consumer and 
industrial goods.  Expedited shipments supported ju st-in-time production, lowered inventory costs and 
facilitated fast product to market.  
46. The benefits were particularly great for SM Es which could use expedited shipments to 
overcome many of the logistical advantages of larg er companies that had international experience.  
All that small businesses needed was an internet site  and the ability to make an expedited shipment 
and perhaps a description of how to import on the importing country's website to become a global 
company. 
47. Expedited shipments made possible trade that mi ght otherwise not occur, in particular for 
smaller companies.  It was fair to say that th at mode of transport was taking an important place 
alongside rail, truck and ocean freight in the global  economy.  For all of those reasons, the proposal 
could make an important contribu tion to facilitate trade.  The US looked forward to discussing it 
further with Members. 
48. The Negotiating Group took note  of the statements made. 
49. The plenary was adjourned .  
50. Upon resumption  of the plenary meeting, the discussions continued in informal mode with the 
exception of the following items: 
B.  A D HOC ATTENDANCE OF RELEVANT INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS , INCLUDING THE 
IMF,  OECD,  UNCTAD,  WCO  AND THE WORLD BANK, AT THE NEXT MEETING OF THE 
NEGOTIATING GROUP  
51. The Chairman  suggested inviting relevant internati onal organizations, including the IMF, 
OECD, UNCTAD, WCO and the World Bank to attend the next formal meeting of the Negotiating 
Group on an ad hoc basis, as provided for in the Work Plan. 
52. It was so agreed . 
C. O THER BUSINESS  
53. The Chairman  addressed the issue of the Group's next meeting, informing that a tentative slot 
had been reserved for the week of 7 April.  
54. The meeting was adjourned . 
 
__________