RESTRICTED  WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  G/RO/M/49 
19 November 2007 
 (07-5023) 
Committee on Rules of Origin  
  
 
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF 25 OCTOBER 2007 
 
Chairperson:  Ms. Vera Thorstensen
 
 
Subjects Discussed  
 
I. ELECTION OF OFFICERS....................................................................................................1  
II. REPORT OF THE WORK OF THE TECHNICAL COMMITTEE ON RULES 
OF ORIGIN...................................................................................................................... .........1  
III. TECHNICAL ISSUES IN THE H ARMONIZATION WORK PROGRAMME 
(JOB(07)/84/REV.1, G/RO/W/111) – REPORTING OF THE INFORMAL 
CONSULTATIONS.................................................................................................................. 3 
IV. TRANSITIONAL REVIEW UNDER PARAGRAPH 18 OF THE PROTOCOL 
OF ACCESSION OF THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA (WT/L/432, WT/ACC/CHN/49, PARAS 97-102, G/RO/W/108)..............................................................13
 
V. NOTIFICATIONS UNDER ARTICLE 5 AND PARAGRAPH 4 OF ANNEX II 
OF THE AGREEMENT ON RULES OF ORIGIN (G/RO/N/47-55) ................................13  
VI. ANNUAL REVIEW OF THE IMPLEMENTATION AND OPERATION OF 
THE AGREEMENT ON RULES OF ORIGIN (G/RO/W/109/REV.1) ............................13  
VII. ANNUAL REPORT (2007) TO THE COUNCIL FOR TRADE IN GOODS 
(G/RO/W/110) ................................................................................................................... ......14  
VIII.  OTHER BUSINESS................................................................................................................1 4 
 
 
I. ELECTION OF OFFICERS 
1.1 The CRO re-elected  Ms. Vera Thorstensen (Brazil) as Chairperson and Mr. Yoshitomo 
Kondo (Japan) as Vice-Chairman of the Comm ittee on Rules of Origin (CRO) for 2007. 
 
II. REPORT OF THE WORK OF THE TEC HNICAL COMMITTEE ON RULES OF 
ORIGIN 
 Non-preferential rules of origin  
 
2.1 The representative of the World Customs Or ganization (WCO) stated that the Technical 
Committee on Rules of Origin (TCRO) held its 25th Session on 5 and 6 February 2007 at WCO 
Headquarters in Brussels, chaired by Mrs. L. Ghrairi (Morocco).  2.2 As part of its permanent responsibilities, the TCRO adopted its Eighth Periodic Report and its 
Eighth Annual Review on technical aspects of th e implementation of the WTO Agreement for the 
period from 1 January to 31 December 2006. G/RO/M/49 
Page 2  
 
   
2.3 During this Session, the WTO representative re ported on the work carried out by the CRO in 
2006, especially the discussions focusing on agricultural  products, cement, chemicals, leather, textiles 
and footwear in June 2006.  He also referred to the CRO Chairperson’s proposals regarding the 
machinery sector.  The Technical Committee took careful  note of all this information, as the customs 
community was poised to prepare for the practical  implementation of the WTO Agreement on Rules 
of Origin and, when the time would come, to undert ake the technical work likely to be asked of it by 
the CRO.   Preferential rules of origin 
 
 
2.4 On the basis of a document drafted by a WCO Member, the TCRO had held initial discussions on the issue of the multiplication of Fr ee Trade Agreements comprising preferential rules 
of origin.  The private sector was encountering ev er more problems in using these rules and customs 
authorities in monitoring them, given that their nu mbers were increasing with every month that goes 
by.  In a Contracting Party where there were sever al preferential agreements and comprising different 
preferential rules, traders and customs officials of ten had difficulties applying these rules.  That was 
why the WCO had decided to launch an action plan to help its Members and users of rules of origin.  This plan can be summarized as follows:  
- The WCO should work to establish a database of preferential arrangements to support 
Customs services and the business community; 
- A study on existing preferential arrangements should be launched to examine the 
existing rules and administrative arrangeme nts with a view to identifying and 
establishing standards and best practices for WCO Members; 
- Common interpretations of technical rules should be prepared to improve their 
understanding and application; 
- Work should be undertaken to deepen the relationship between Customs services and 
the business community in the area of the ma nagement and application of rules of 
origin; 
- There should be greater use of risk manage ment to support controls and to ensure 
compliance with the rules; 
- Targeted technical assistance should be provided (in so far as resources allow) on a 
regional basis to those WCO Members who request it. 
 
This plan was approved by the WCO Council in Ju ne 2007 and is currently being implemented. 
 
 Technical assistance activities
  
 2.5 The Secretariat undertook three technical assi stance activities relating to the harmonization of 
non-preferential rules of origin and the main charac teristics of the preferential rules.  A regional 
seminar was held in Malaysia in April 2007 and two national seminars we re organized, one in 
Ecuador in December 2006 and the other in Montenegro in January 2007.  
  G/RO/M/49 
 Page 3 
 
 
   Other information  
 2.6 The WCO now has 171 Members, with Mont enegro and the Lao People’s Democratic 
Republic recently becoming Members of the Organization.  
2.7 The CRO took note
 of the report and expressed appreciation for the TCROs continued 
valuable work.  
III. TECHNICAL ISSUES IN THE HARMONIZATION WORK PROGRAMME 
(JOB(07)/84/REV.1, G/RO/W/111) – REPORTING OF THE INFORMAL 
CONSULTATIONS 
3.1 Based on the informal consultations the Chai rperson had held with Members concerned, the 
Chairperson
 stated as follows: 
A. OVERALL ARCHITECTURE  
1. Scope of Application  
One delegation stated that the deletion of the or iginal General Rule 1 “S cope of Application” 
may lead  to  confusion  in  the scope of app lication of the harmonized rules  of  origin  in 
non-preferential commercial policy instruments. They  are of  the view  that  the original 
General Rule 1 should be retained until the Ge neral Council  has a decision on implications 
issue.  
2. General Rule 4
 
It was noted that General Rule 4 is applicable only for Appendix 1 as well as for the tariff-
shift rules or specific process rules provided in  the Appendix 2.  The meaning of the Rule 
should be interpreted in accordance with the HS  GIR5 and, therefore both "packing for retail 
sale" and "packaging for shipment are normally co vered by this Rule if they are classified 
with the good. 
3. General Rule 6  
(a) It was noted that the phrase "packaging or presenting goods for sale" should read 
"(iii) packaging or presenting goods for sale". 
(b) It was also noted that General Rule 6 would be applicable to the certain product-
specific rules of Appendix 2 which cont ain the term "wholly obtained in one 
country". 
(c) It was further noted that the value of minimal operations are not to be taken into 
account in the context of Appendix 1, nor of Appendix 2 product-specific rules which 
contain the term "wholly obtained in one country". 
(d) One Member welcomed General Rule 6 and agreed that it should also apply to non-
wholly obtained goods as well.  However, the wordings of the rule should be 
accordingly amended to reflect such a cha nge:  "Operations or processes undertaken, 
by themselves or in combination with each  other for the purposes listed below, are 
considered to be minimal and shall not be taken into account in determining the 
origin of a good." G/RO/M/49 
Page 4  
 
  4. Appendix 1 – Definition 1(b)
 
One Member questioned whether bacteria and viruses should be included therein. 
5. Appendix 1 – Definition 2  
(a) It was noted that definition 2 should be  renumbered in a consistent manner with 
definition 1. 
(b) Some Member expressed their concern over th e ambiguity of definition 2(i) and (ii) 
of the expression "the sea outside a country", whilst others stated that the expression seems only one possible solution at this stage. 
(c) One Member expressed concern over the e xpression "the country whose flag the 
vessel that carries out those operations is entitled to fly". 
(d) One Member stated that on the issue of “Fish taken from the Sea of the Exclusive 
Economic Zone” under Definition 2(i) in Appendix 1, they support  the "flag 
criterion" but maintain their reservation in  making explicit reference to the UNCLOS 
in the Definition.  They also noticed th at a footnote relating to UNCLOS has been 
added under definition 2(iii) on p. 6.  The Secretariat was requested to elaborate on 
the purpose and meaning of the footnote. 
6. Appendix 2, Rule 2(f)
 
(a) It was noted that Rule 2(f) could further be clarified. 
7. Appendix 2, Rule 3  
(a) It was noted that numbers "(g) – (l)" should read" (a) – (f)" 
(b) It was also noted that criteria to apply to Appendix 2, Rule 3(f) should be prepared for 
each chapter. 
(c) One Member found the "Primary Rules" unde r Rule 3 of Appendix 2 unhelpful in the 
determination of origin.  It does not address the situation where a specific stage of production has been designated as origin-conferring. 
8. Appendix 2, Rule 5
 
(a) One Member stated that a special customs pr ocedure is needed to implement Rule 5, 
whilst some other Member pointed out that  "an inventory management method" is a 
common practice employed by some governme nt agencies, like customs and an 
internal revenue agency. 
(b) It was noted that examples of interchangeable materials are bolts and nuts, side 
mirrors of cars, etc. 
9. Residual Rules for agricultural products resulting from mixing Chapters 2-24: 
(a) It was noted that the whole text should be in square brackets.  G/RO/M/49 
 Page 5 
 
 
  (b) One Member suggested changing "85% in volume of alcohol content for spirits 
(heading 22.08)" to "85% in volume of alcohol content for spirits, liquors and other spirituous beverages (heading 22.08)".  Another Member reserved their position on the expression "alcohol content". 
(c) One Member suggested adding "vermouth" (heading 22.05) to the exception list 5(i) 
"85% in volume for wine (heading 22.04)". 
10. Appendix 2, Rule 6
 
(a) One Member expressed concern that if 10% De Minimis rule is applicable to the 
value-added rule, the 35% thres hold could be reduced to 25% 
 
B. DOCUMENT G /RO/W/111 
Ch 3  
 It was noted that the wording of the rules referring to "country in which they have been 
captured" should be clarified.    
 Value-added Rule  
 One Member preferred "FOB price" to "ex-wo rk price" as a calculation method of percentage 
of value-added. 
 Residual Rule for Ch. 59  
 One Member doubted that this residual rule is needed for Ch. 59.  Residual Rule for Ch. 61
 
 One Member requested the proponent of this rule to clarify the meaning of "the most 
significant assembly operation". 
 Note for Ch. 62  
 It was noted that the phrase "[or the knitting or crocheting]" should be deleted in Chapter 
Note (a). 
 Dyeing or Printing (Chs 50-63)  
 One delegation stated that they would consider and submit a list of preparatory and finishing 
operations for the dyeing or printing rule. 
 Chapter 63  
 It was noted that a rule "CTH, provided the starting a material is pre-bleached or unbleached 
fabric" should be in square brackets.   
 G/RO/M/49 
Page 6  
 
   Non-Origin Conferring Rules
 
  It was noted that Appendix 2, Rule 2(d) incl udes a list of non-origin conferring operations;  
therefore it was agreed that the Secretariat delete  all rules or notes which are equivalent to the 
non-origin conferring operations referre d to in Appendix 2, Rule 2(d). 
 
 Heading 70.19
 
  It was noted that product-specific rules of origin of subheading 7019.51 should read "CTSH, 
except from subheadings 7019.52 or 7019.59;  subheading 7019.52, "CTSH, except from 
subheadings 7019.51 or 7019.59;  and subhead ing 7019.59, "CTSH except from subheadings 
7019.51 or 7019.52". 
  Chs 82-83
 
 
 It was agreed that the title of Note "Assembly " should read "Blanks rule" for Chs. 82 and 83. 
  Heading 82.15
 
  One Member suggested, for the sake of cohere nce, changing sets rule for heading 82.15 to 
"CC, except when resulting only from putting up in sets" for subheadings 8215.10 and 
8515.20;  "CTH, except when resulting only from putting up in sets" for headings 8215.91 
and 8215.99. 
  Notes for Chs. 84-90 Applicable to Primary Rules contained in Column D
 
 
 It was noted that numbers "2 - 5" of Notes C(b) should read "1 - 4". 
  Primary Rules for Chs. 84-90 Applicable to Primary Rules contained in Column C
 
  - It was noted that further clarification for the meaning of "the major portion of that 
 material or component" in Rule A.2(b) from the proponent of the rule is needed. 
 
 - It was noted that further clarification for the meaning of Rule A.2(c)(3)(i) and (ii) 
 from the proponent of the rule is needed. 
  Ch 97
 
 
 It was noted that residuals rules in this Chapter should be in square brackets.  
C. 
DOCUMENT JOB (07)/84/ REV.1 
 No. 1 (Chs 1-24 ) 
 China supports Option B. 
 No. 4(iii) (Chs 1-24 ) 
 Thailand supports Option C.    No. 13 (Chs 1-24)
 
 Thailand supports Option A.  G/RO/M/49 
 Page 7 
 
 
   No. 30 (Chs 1-24 ) 
 Japan supports Option B.  No. 46 (Chs 1-24
) 
 Japan supports Option A.  No. 51 (Chs 1-24
) 
 The EC supports the Chair's compromise proposal (CC) 
 No. 82 (Chs 1-24 ) 
 Korea supports Option A.  No. 83 (Chs 1-24
) 
 Japan supports Option B. 
No. 108 (Chs 1-24 ) 
- The EC strongly supports the option "CTH, except from heading 22.04" - Korea and Japan support CTH, but can join consensus. No. 115 (Chs 1-24
) 
It was noted that either (i) the rule of headi ng 15.18 should be "CTH, or change by chemical 
reaction";  or (ii) the definition of chemic al reaction should be changed to an origin-
conferring rule. 
Nos. 3, 7, 24 (Chs 28-40 ) 
 The EC reserves its position on these issues.  Japan reserves its position on issue No. 7. 
 No. 30 (Chs 28-40 ) 
 Japan reserves its position on this issue. 
 No. 5 (Chs 50-63 ) 
 Hong Kong, China supports Option A.  No. 36 (Chs 50-63
) 
 Korea supports Option A.  No. 60 (Chs 50-63
) 
 Hong Kong, China has an open mind to further discuss this issue. G/RO/M/49 
Page 8  
 
   No. 74 (Chs 50-63
) 
 Korea supports Option B for Ch 43 (fur), and accepts Option A for Ch 42 (leather).  Hong 
Kong, China has an open mind to further discuss th is issue.  Japan reserves its position on this 
issue. 
 No. 81 (Chs 50-63 ) 
 Japan;  Hong Kong, China;  and Korea support Op tion A;  but Korea can be flexible.   The 
EC questions the coherence between this rule  and other agreed rules in these chapters. 
 Nos. 9, 10 and 11 (Chs 68-70 ) 
 The EC strongly supports Option A.  Japan reserves its position on this issue.  No. 10 (Chs 74-81
) 
 Japan reserves its position on this issue. 
 No. 1 (Ch 92 ) 
 China supports Option A.  Japan reserves its position on this issue.  No. 6 (Chs 93-97
) 
 Thailand supports Option A. 
 
 Egypt's Position  
 
1. Issue No. 2 (Chs 1-24) 
  Option B  
2. Issue No. 17 (Chs 1-24) 
Option A  
3. Issue No. 3 (Chs 1-24) 
Option A  
4. Issue No. 79 (Chs 1-24) 
Option A  
5. Issue No. 15 (Chs 1-24) 
Option A  
6. Issue Nos. 58, 59 and 60 (Chs 1-24) 
CTH "Chair's Proposal"   G/RO/M/49 
 Page 9 
 
 
  7. Issue No. 64 (Chs 1-24) 
  CTH Option B  
8. Issue No. 77 (Chs 1-24) 
  Option A - CTH  
9. Issue No. 78 (Chs 1-24) 
  Option A - CC  
10. Issue No. 98 (Chs 1-24) 
  Option A – CTH/CTSH  
11. Issue No. 99 (Chs 1-24) 
  Option B  
12. Issue No. 1 (Chs 25-27) 
  CTH, No Residual Rule  
13. Issue No. 8 (Chs 28-40) 
  Option A  
14. Issue No. 7 (Chs 41-43) 
  Option C – CTHS Exception from  
15. Issue No. 46 (Chs 50-63) 
  Option B  
16. Issue No. 50 (Chs 50-63) 
  Option B  
17. Issue Nos. 48, 55, 59, 61, 62 and 69 (Chs 50-63) 
  Option C – Origin of the Country of Fabric  
18. Issue Nos. 63-67 and 71 (Chs 50-63) 
  Option C  
  Issue No. 9 (Chs 64-67)   Option A
 G/RO/M/49 
Page 10  
 
  19. Issue Nos. 11-14 (Chs 64-67) 
 - 11:  Option C 
 - 12:  Option C/2  - 13:  Option A  - 14:  CTH 
20. Issue Nos 3a, 3c and 5 (Chs 72-73 
ex72.10(b):   CTH 
ex72.10(d):   CTH ex72.12(b):    CTH ex72.16(d):    CTH 
72.17:     CTH 
ex72.19(d):    CTHS ex72.20(d):    CTHS ex72.22(e):   CTH ex72.22(f):    CTHS 
ex72.25(d):    CTHS 
ex72.26(d):    CTHS  ex72.28(e):    CTH ex72.28(f):    CTHS 72.29:     CTH 7303;  ex7304.10(a):  CTH 
7305, 7306:   CTH 
 
3.2 The Chairperson
 also proposed the following timelines  for Members' comments on document 
G/RO/W/111: 
 30 November 2007: Agricultural products and fish (Chs 1-24) 
 31 January 2008: Other goods of Chs 28-83, 91-97. 
 15 February 2008: Machinery  28 February 2008 Overall architecture  3.3 The representative of New Zealand
 stated that they had particip ated in part of the informal 
consultations.  But he admitted that the time set asi de for these consultations came to a surprise to 
them, given the pressures on delegations, which migh t account for a somewhat sparse attendance at 
the consultations.  They had expected that these discussions would be folded into the regular session 
of the CRO.  They were certainly ready to support technical work in the CRO, as provided for by the 
decision of the General Council.  They also recalle d that the Chair of the General Council would be 
consulting with Members on specific aspects of the Harmonized Work Programme (HWP) and was 
looking forward to that.  It was not clear to them wh at the difference, in terms of approach, was at this 
point from what the delegations were doing befo re the General Council had considered the CRO 
Chair's report in July.  They would not stand in the way of this work but their views on the utility of this exercise and their concerns had not changed ab out respecting the original purpose of the mandate 
for this work.  G/RO/M/49 
 Page 11 
 
 
  3.4 The representative of Australia  agreed with the statement the representative of New Zealand 
made and emphasized a couple of points.  They were certainly, as he had said in the informal 
consultations, grateful for the enormous amount of  work that had gone into the preparation of 
documents by the Secretariat.  Lo oking back as to where these meetings  sat within the context of the 
HWP, the CRO took from the General Council the understanding that a couple of issues, particularly 
the implications issue and machinery issue, were to be carved out or put aside for the consideration in 
the General Council.  The second part of what was decided was that the technical work would 
continue on the regular work of the CRO.  Austra lia would hold a similar resource and time concerns 
as raised by New Zealand.  That should not be seen in  isolation because part of this work in the CRO 
should be based on Members' drive and Members' input s and also be seen in the context of the big 
outstanding issue that is with the General Council.  They sensed that there was a great amount of time 
put aside for the technical discussion but that there was a lack of engagement;  that might have had something to do with the big document circulated ju st before the meeting.  They held concerns over 
any extensive meetings scheduled outside of the re gular work of the CRO and believed that it should 
be brought back to the CRO. 
3.5 The representative of the Philippines
 recollected that the decision taken by the General 
Council carved out the issues on the implications and on the dual-rule approach.  At the same time 
there was a sense, from the technical experts in the CRO, that there was room to work out the 
technical issues which were still pending.  The meeting scheduled for this week was for that particular 
purpose.  She understood very well why a good num ber of delegations could not participate as 
actively as they would wish:  for example, timing of the issuance of the document, although it was 
fully understood that the delay was caused by the volume of the document which put all things 
together.  It was important for the CRO to ask its elf what the delegations wanted to do about the 
technical issues.  In the end it was the delegations ' responsibility to decide where the CRO wanted to 
move with regard to the work. 
3.6 The representative of the United States  stated that the timelines set for comments on 
documents containing technical issues would help th e delegations, particularly in capital, look at the 
extensive amount of documents and comment by e-ma il which could be circulated to other Members, 
thereby getting the technical underbru sh cleared away.  The resource c onstraints were real and this 
was a good way for the delegations to get things do ne without having to call frequent meetings.  He 
also thought that the way the CRO was  proceeding was within the mandate given to the CRO by the 
General Council.  The discussion on the technical as pect of the overall architecture was to tie up the 
loose ends of the current texts as far as possibl e without considering the implications issue which 
were in the hands of the General Council. 
3.7 The representative of the European Communities  agreed with the statement made by the 
representative of the United States.  She also in terpreted the decisions of the General Council as 
putting aside the implications issue and the double-rule  approach for the assembly  issue.  But, in the 
meantime, the CRO had to continue working on technical issues.  The Secretariat had done a 
marvellous job in producing the document G/RO/W/ 111 which was a solid base for future work but 
which was also only a draft document.  The CRO ha s to go through the document to check whether 
the document reflects correctly the decisions take n by the CRO.  Setting a timeline for the work 
would be useful for all delegations to work t ogether.  Responding to the observations by some 
delegations that the work should be done in the re gular session of the CRO, she pointed out that the 
formal meetings of CRO were always preceded by informal consultations and that the meetings 
organized in this week were in accordance with  the practice of the CRO.  She supported the 
continuation of the practice of the CRO. 
3.8 The representative of Japan  echoes the views expressed by the US and the EC.  Those 
technical matters, particularly how the general rules should relate to the rules in the chapter level or 
product-specific rules of origin, should be carefully  considered.  All rules are now placed in the G/RO/M/49 
Page 12  
 
  columns in Appendix 2 matrix of document G/RO/W /111;  but delegations would have to check 
whether those rules correctly refl ected the decisions taken by the CRO.  The timelines suggested by 
the CRO Chair appeared to be useful for the delega tions to carry out their work in a timely manner. 
3.9 The representative of Switzerland
 agreed with the statements made by the previous three 
speakers on the mandate given by the General Council.   He thought that the CRO were on the right 
track.  The suggested timelines see med useful in carrying out consultations with industries. 
3.10 The representative of Korea  shared the views expressed by previous four speakers, and stated 
that the new documents clearly showed what would be  technical issues to be carried out by the CRO.  
The timelines were necessary for the CRO to move forward. 
3.11 The representative of Hong Kong, China  stated that it was necessary and useful to continue 
the technical discussions.  The CRO should be able to  better prepare and organize its work, especially 
now that a good and big document was available.  An organizational arrange ment, titled "a timeline 
for Members to submit their comments to the Secret ariat for future consideration/discussion" would 
be useful for delegations to plan ahead. 
3.12 The representative of India  stated that the technical work should be continued and completed.  
He also stated that a consideration might be s hown in scheduling for future informal meetings, 
because they had found it difficult to devote su fficient time for these meetings due to the 
intensification of negotiations. 
3.13 The representative of China  echoed the comments made by the previous seven delegations.  
He supported an early completion of the technical work  which had been going on for the last 12 years. 
3.14 The representative of Chinese, Taipei  stated that the technical work was mandated by the 
General Council.  On the other hand, he shared the concern with Australia and New Zealand over the 
bigger framework, but he thought the CRO would be ab le to make a final judgement of the usefulness 
of the whole package after the Genera l Council would provide its guidance. 
3.15 The representative of Malaysia  thanked the Secretariat for the tremendous amount of work for 
the new document.  The timelines suggested by the Ch air could facilitate CRO's technical work, but it 
was uncertain that capital would be able to meet the timelines. 
3.16 The representative of Turkey  stated that given the complexity of the issue, they fully 
supported the understanding that the technical work would continue, and that setting some timelines 
was useful in order to keep momentum. 
3.17 The representative of Mexico  stated that there was a lot of technical work to be done and that 
the CRO should proceed as it had been doing.  She also stated that the Harmonized System with 
which the CRO had worked was the 1996 version, a nd questioned whether there was a plan to rectify 
the results of the HWP on the basis of the future version of the HS. 
3.18 The Chairperson  stated that the rectification of the results of the HWP on the basis of the 
HS 2007 would be carried out as soon as the HWP based on the HS 1996 would be completed. 
3.19 The CRO took note  of the statements made.  G/RO/M/49 
 Page 13 
 
 
  IV. TRANSITIONAL REVIEW UNDER PARAGRAPH 18 OF THE PROTOCOL OF 
ACCESSION OF THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA (WT/L/432, WT/ACC/CHN/49, PARA S 97-102, G/RO/W/108) 
4.1 The Chairperson
 noted that in accordance with paragraph 18 of the Protocol of Accession of 
the People's Republic of China, the CRO was to report to the Council for Trade in Goods on the 
outcome of the Review which would then repor t to the General Council.  The Chairperson  drew 
attention to a document, G/RO/W/108 containing questions from Japan.  4.2 The representative of Japan
 stated that they had two questions, as follows:  (1)  Japan would 
like China to explain what kind of rules of origin , such as change in tariff classification, value-added 
criterion or other rules, apply for trade remedy pur poses;  and (2) Japan woul d like China to explain 
whether same rules of origin apply for trad e remedy purposes and general trade purposes. 
4.3 The representative of China  replied that he would read out a prepared statement by the head 
of the Chinese delegation on the transitional re view of China by the CRO and thanked the 
Chairperson for allowing him to address the CR O to respond to the questions and comments from 
Japan, which they received prior to the meeting.  With  regard to the rules of origin applied for trade 
remedy purposes, pursuant to the regulations of the People's Republic of China on the origin of import 
and export goods, where more than one country or region is concerned in the production of the goods, 
the country or region where the last substantia l transformation has been carried out should be 
determined as the origin of these goods.  And,  the basic criterion to determine substantial 
transformation, as provided in Article 3 of these regul ations, shall be change in tariff classification.  If 
the change in tariff classification is not applicable to  the determination of the origin of the goods such 
criteria as ad valorem  percentages and/or manufacturing or processing operations should be the 
supplementary criteria.  To answer the second ques tion posed by Japan, he co nfirmed that the same 
rules of origin apply to importation of general trade purposes.  
4.4 The CRO took note
 of the statements made and agreed  that the Secretariat prepare a short 
factual report under the Chairperson's responsibility, together with the minutes of the meeting for 
further detail, to be sent to the Council for Trade in Goods.  
V. NOTIFICATIONS UNDER ARTICLE 5 AND PARAGRAPH 4 OF ANNEX II OF THE 
AGREEMENT ON RULES OF ORIGIN (G/RO/N/47-55) 
5.1 The Chairperson
 recalled that since the last review on notifications by the CRO the 
Secretariat had circulated nine documents info rming delegations of not ifications submitted by 
Albania;  Saudi Arabia;  the De mocratic Republic of Congo;  Peru;  Australia and New Zealand, 
Trinidad and Tobago, and Zimbabwe.  To da te, 77 Members had made  notifications of non-
preferential rules of origin and 84 Members had made  notifications of preferential rules of origin. 
 
5.2 The Chairperson  expressed concern that a number of Members had not yet complied with the 
notification requirements.  She urged Members who had not yet notified to do so as early as possible.  5.3 The CRO took note
 of the statement. 
 VI. ANNUAL REVIEW OF THE IMPLEMENTATION AND OPERATION OF THE 
AGREEMENT ON RULES OF OR IGIN (G/RO/W/109/REV.1) 
6.1 The Chairperson
 noted that the Secretariat had circ ulated, in document G/RO/W/109/Rev.1, 
the draft Review of the Implementation and Opera tion of the Agreement, and that this would be 
revised in light of the discussion at this meeting of the CRO. 
 G/RO/M/49 
Page 14  
 
  6.2 The Committee adopted
 the Annual Review of the Impl ementation and Operation of the 
Agreement on Rules of Origin.  
VII. ANNUAL REPORT (2007) TO THE COUNCIL FOR TRADE IN GOODS 
(G/RO/W/110) 
7.1 The Chairperson
 noted that the Secretariat had circulated a draft of the CRO's report to the 
Council for Trade in Goods, as required by Article 6.1 of the Agreement (G/RO/W/110), and that this 
would be revised in light of the discussion at this meeting of the CRO.    7.2 The CRO adopted
 its annual report to the CTG (G/L/831). 
 
VIII.  OTHER BUSINESS 
A. DATES AND AGENDA FOR THE NEXT MEETING  
8.1 The Chairperson  suggested that the dates and agenda  for the next meeting be set in 
consultation with delegations. 
 
 
__________