RESTRICTED  WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  G/MA/M/49 
3 September 2009 
 (09-4163) 
Committee on Market Access  
  
 
MINUTES OF THE MEETING HELD ON 13 JULY 2009 
 
Chairman: Mr. Barney RILEY (New Zealand)
 
 Subjects discussed
 Page  
 
1. Dissemination of the Integrated Data base (IDB) and the Consolidated Tariff 
schedules (CTS) Database (JOB(09)/51/Rev.1) ......................................................................1  
2. Improving the timeliness and completeness of notifications  - Framework to enhance IDB notifications compliance (JOB(09)/43/Rev.1) ..................................................3
 
  The Committee adopted
 the agenda as reproduced in WTO/AIR/33961.   
 
1. Dissemination of the Integrated Database (I DB) and the Consolidated Tariff schedules 
(CTS) Database (JOB(09)/51/Rev.1)  
1.1  The Chairman  recalled that the subject of public access to the IDB and CTS data base was 
first raised at this Committee's informal mee ting on 26 March. Under the current data base 
dissemination policy,  trade and tariff line data was accessible to the public at the 6-digit level, but 
access to this data at the national tariff line level wa s restricted. This basically meant that only WTO 
Members could access that data at the national tari ff line level and by using the passwords provided 
by the Secretariat.  Consultations were held on th e question of de-restricting this data on 16 April and 
again on 25 May.  At the later consultation, Me mbers present appeared comfortable about the 
de-restriction of national tariff line data, however, on the de-restriction of trade data, doubts were 
expressed by some Members.  As a result, he had requ ested the Secretariat to draft a revised data base 
dissemination policy which provided for the de-restric tion with respect to tariffs only, and left the 
policy relating to trade data unchanged. This document was circulated as JOB(09)/51 and was 
subsequently considered at a consultation on 11 June.  A few amendments were proposed at that 
consultation, and a new version of the document in corporating those suggestions had been circulated 
as JOB(09)/51/Rev.1.     1.2 The representative of Korea
 thanked the Secretariat for preparing the revised document 
JOB(09)/51/Rev.1.  At the last two small group meetings, Korea had made clear that it had no 
objections to making these data bases available to the public but his delegation had mentioned that a 
certain grace period was necessary in order to enhan ce the information in the data bases.  His capital 
had carefully examined the revised document, but the document remained unclear as to when the new 
dissemination policy would enter into force.  Korea wa s of the view that this new system should apply 
to Members from next year at the earliest and requested that the revised document indicate that the 
effective date of the new dissemination policy would start from January 2010.   
 
                                                      
1 The document reference under agenda item B was incorrect. It should have read JOB(09)/43/Rev.1 
and not JOB(09)/43.   G/MA/M/49 
Page 2  
 
  1.3 The representative of Japan
 stated that he could accept the release of tariff data to the public 
at more than a 6-digit tariff level. Actually the organisation from which Japan got the data had agreed 
to release the data to the public on condition that th e data should be processed by the Secretariat.  
Regarding, the import and export da ta, he wondered whether that da ta was supposed to be compiled 
into a HS 6-digit basis by the Secretariat. 
 
1.4 A member of the Secretariat (Mr. Jurgen Richtering) stated that the data submitted to the 
WTO as part of the IDB notification was processed by  the Secretariat.  As concerned the trade data, 
aggregation to 6-digits was done by the Secretaria t. The aggregation was straight forward and there 
was no problem aggregating values from 8-digits to 6-digits. 
 
1.5 The representative of the Philippines  had always understood IDB submissions as concerning 
import data not export data. She wished to have so me clarification from the Secretariat in light of 
Japan's question.   
1.6 A member of the Secretariat
 (Mr. Jurgen Richtering) clarified that only import data at the 
tariff line level was required as part of th e IDB notification and not export data.   
 1.7 The representative of Pakistan
 noted that he had raised an issue at the time of the consultation 
about the footnote 2 which provided for the recipro cal exchange of data with other international 
organisations. He realized that footnote 2 in the document under consideration was the reprint of the 
earlier version of the dissemination policy, but he wish ed to propose that footnote 2 be reformulated 
to provide that the WTO would give this data to ot her international organisations on the condition that 
they also provide their data to the WTO.    1.8 A member of the Secretariat
 (Mr. Jurgen Richtering) noted that Pakistan's comment during 
the informal consultation had been taken into accoun t and footnote 2 accordingly amended.  Footnote 
2 on page 2 had earlier read: " In the spirit of inter-o rganizational co-operation, it is expected that the 
organizations that have been granted access to the IDB and the CTS will give favourable 
consideration to granting similar access to their own respective tariff and trade-related databases and 
analytical facilities to the WTO."  The new foot note read: "In the spirit of inter-organizational 
co-operation, it is expected that the organizations that have been granted access to the IDB and the 
CTS will grant similar access to their own respective tariff and trade-related databases and analytical 
facilities to the WTO."  While the words "It is expect ed" did not make for an automatic data exchange 
and bilateral discussions would be required because of various issues, the formulation of the sentence 
had been strengthened in the revised document.  Th is  policy would also be  pursued actively because 
it would assist in improving the coverage of the IDB.  
 
1.9 The representative of Pakistan  appreciated the change which in his view improved the 
formulation of the footnote. However, he suggested  that after the comma, the words "it is expected 
that"  should be left out.  As a result, with his proposal the footnote would read: "In the spirit of 
inter-organizational co-operation, the organizations  that have been granted access to the IDB and the 
CTS will grant similar access to their own respective tariff and trade-related databases and analytical 
facilities to the WTO."   
 1.10 The representative of the Philippines
 supported Pakistan's proposed amendment to footnote 2 
of the document.    G/MA/M/49 
 Page 3 
 
 
  1.11 The Committee adopted  document JOB(09)/51/Rev.12 with the changes proposed by Korea 
and Pakistan as follows: (1) inclusion of a sen tence which provided that the dissemination policy 
would become effective on 1 January 2010; and (2) am endment of footnote 2 to read: "In the spirit of 
inter-organizational co-operation, the organizations  that have been granted access to the IDB and the 
CTS will grant similar access to their own respective tariff and trade-related databases and analytical 
facilities to the WTO".  
 
2. Improving the timeliness and completeness of  notifications  - Framework to enhance 
IDB notifications compliance (JOB(09)/43/Rev.1) 
2.1 The Chairman  noted that this agenda item on improvement of compliance of IDB 
notifications was taken up in the context of  improving the timeliness and completeness of 
notifications.  At the formal discussions which ha d taken place on 16 April, the Secretariat was 
requested to put down on paper how the options that were outlined in paragraph 15 of document 
JOB(09)/34, would work in practice. In response, the Secretariat had issued a note called "Framework 
to Enhance IDB Notification Compliance" (JOB(09) /43 and Corr.1).  This document was the subject 
of a consultation on 25 May and in light of the co mments made at those consultations, the Secretariat 
had revised the document which it circulated as JOB(09)/43/Rev.1.  This revised document was 
considered by Members at anot her consultation held on 11 June at which time no comments were 
made.  The document was now before th e Committee for its consideration.  
 2.2 The Committee adopted
 document JOB(09)/43/Rev.13.  
 
__________  
 
                                                      
2 The document was re-issued as G/MA/238. Please note that footnote 2 became footnote 3 in 
G/MA/238.   
3 The document was re-issued as G/MA/239.