RESTRICTED  WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  G/LIC/M/24 
20 December 2006 
 (06-6108) 
Committee on Import Licensing  
  
 
MINUTES OF THE MEETING HELD ON 30 OCTOBER 2006 
 
Chairperson:  Mr. Evelio Alvarado (Guatemala
) 
  
 The Committee on Import Licensing held its twenty-fourth meeting on 30 October 2006.  The 
agenda proposed for the meeting, contained in  WTO/AIR/2920 and Addendum 1, was adopted as 
follows:    
 
Table of Contents
 
 
1. Members' compliance with notification ob ligations - Developments since the last 
meeting 
2. Notifications 
(i) Notifications under Articles 1.4(a) and/or 8.2( b) of the Agreement (publications and/or 
legislation) 
(ii) Notifications under Article 5 of the Agreement (new import licensing procedures, changes to 
existing licensing procedures and reverse notifications) 
(iii) Notifications under Article 7.3 of the Agreem ent (Replies to the Questionnaire on Import 
Licensing Procedures) 
3. Fifth Transitional Review Under Paragraph 18 of the Protocol on the Accession of the 
People's Republic of China (WT/L/432).   
4. Report (2006) of the Committee to the Council for Trade in Goods  
5. Sixth Biennial Review of the Implementation and Operation of the Agreement under 
Article 7.1 
6. Other Business 
 
1. Members' compliance with notification obligations – Developments since the last 
meeting 
 
1.1 The Chairperson  informed the Committee that since the last meeting 46 notifications had been 
received under various provisions of the Agre ement on Import Licensing Procedures (seven 
notifications under Articles 1.4(a) and/or 8.2(b), four under Article 5.1-5.4 and thirty-five under 
Article 7.3).  As of the date of the meeting, out of a total Membership of 149 (counting each of the EC G/LIC/M/24 
Page 2  
 
  Member States individually), there remained 20 Members
1 who had not submitted any notification 
under the Agreement since joining the WTO.  Only  a cumulative total of 94 Members, counting the 
European Communities as one, had submitted notif ications of laws and regulations (under 
Articles 1.4(a) and/or 8.2(b)); thus 57 Members had yet to submit their notifications.  Concerning notifications of new licensing procedures or chang es in existing procedures (under Paragraphs 1-4 of 
Article 5), only 26 Members, counting the Eur opean Communities as one, had notified new licensing 
procedures or changes in the existing procedures;  of this, one Member (Papua New Guinea) had 
notified changes to import licensing procedur es without submitting the initial notifications of 
legislation or replies to the Questionnaire.  In a ddition, the Chairperson in formed the Committee that, 
while Article 5.5 of the Agreement allowed Me mbers to submit counter-notifications where a 
Member considered that another Member had not notified the institution of a licensing procedure or 
changes in the procedures, no such counter-notifica tions had been received up to the date of this 
meeting.  As to the replies to the Questionnaire
2, notifications under Article 7.3, only a cumulative 
total of 90 Members, counting the European Comm unities as one, had submitted their replies since the 
entry into force of the WTO Agre ement and, for this year, the Committee had received notifications 
from only 38 Members.  For Article 7.3 notificatio ns, the annual deadline of 30 September was not 
often respected by many Members.  He also reminded the Committee that, at the end of each year, the Central  Registry of Notifications sent each Member a list of notifications that should be made under 
all WTO Agreements in the following year, and th at this was followed up with periodic reminders, 
twice a year, to those Members who had not fulfilled th eir notification obligations.  In spite of this, the 
compliance with the notification obligations under th is Agreement continued to remain low.  He 
therefore urged all those Members who had not yet pr ovided information of thei r laws and regulations 
relevant to import licensing, not replied to the annu al Questionnaire, or not notified the institution of 
new import licensing procedures or changes since their previous notifications, to  do so without further 
delay.  Members who did not apply import licensing pr ocedures or had no laws or  regulations relevant 
to the Agreement were also required to notify th e Committee of this fact, so that Members could 
obtain a complete overview of the licensing regime s of all Members.  Members who had questions 
about the notification requirements or who woul d like assistance were requested to consult the 
Secretariat.  In fact, after a reminder sent by the Chair in August 2006, many delegations had 
approached the Secretariat to request its assi stance in the notifying process.  Responses and 
explanations had been provided and most of these delegations had now submitte d notifications or had 
expressed that they are in the process of preparing their notifications and would submit them soon.  
 
1.2 The Committee took note
 of the statement made. 
 1.3 The Chairperson
 informed the Committee that, since the last meeting, three documents 
containing questions concerning licensing systems ma intained by Members or replies thereto had 
been circulated:  document G/LIC/Q/USA/1 containi ng questions from the People's Republic of China 
to the United States;  document G/LIC/Q/IDN/8 co ntaining the replies from Indonesia to the United 
States; and, document G/LIC/Q/GTM/1 containing  the responses from Guatemala to Mexico on the 
imports of eggs, which had been before the Committ ee in June 2006, but included once again in the 
Agenda at the request of Mexico at the last meetin g.  He also informed the Committee that after the 
issuance of the airgram convening this meeting,  Australia had submitted a set of questions to 
Malaysia3;  these questions would be considered at the next meeting of the Committee.    
 1.4 The representative of the People's Republic of China
 thanked the United States for the 
responses which it provided to his delegation immediately before the meeting and stated that these 
                                                      
1 Angola, Belize, Botswana, Central African Republic , Congo, Djibouti, Egypt, Guinea, Guinea Bissau,  
Kuwait, Lesotho, Mauritania, Mozambique, Myanmar, Ne pal, St. Vincent & the Grenadines, Sierra Leone, 
Solomon Islands, Tanzania and Thailand. 
2 The Questionnaire is annexed to document G/LIC/3. 
3 G/LIC/Q/MYS/4.  G/LIC/M/24 
 Page 3 
 
 
  responses would be conveyed to his capital for fu rther studies.  His delegation would maintain 
contacts with the US delegation if further clarification would be required.   1.5 The representative of the United States
 expressed her delegation's regret for the long time it 
took to respond to China.  She hoped all the answers had been provided in full and looked further to 
discussing the issue with China if necessary. 
 1.6 The delegate of Indonesia
  thanked the United States for its  questions concerning Indonesia's 
import licensing policy on textiles.  He also said that Indonesia's replies had been circulated in 
document G/LIC/Q/IDN/8 which he hoped would be satisfactory to the US and his delegation was 
ready to respond to any further questions.  He also informed the Comm ittee that Indonesia had 
submitted its notification under Article 7.3.  1.7 The representative of the United States
 thanked Indonesia for its responses on its import 
licensing requirements for certain textiles, an issue that  had been raised a number of times in the past 
years bilaterally, in this Committee, and at the April 2006 Trade and Investment Framework 
discussions of Indonesia.  In the view of her de legation Indonesia's responses had not fully addressed 
the main US concern which referred to the restri ctive and discriminatory aspects of the system, in 
violation of Articles XI and III of GATT 1994.  Th e US had also the concern that Indonesia had 
avoided fully resolving this issue in the past 3 year s.  She therefore repeated the request to Indonesia 
to either eliminate or modify its existing licen sing regime under decree 732/2002 and to remove the 
trade restricting or distorting provisions, so as to bring Indonesia's import licensing regime in 
conformity with WTO requirements.  She also a nnounced that some further questions would be 
submitted after this meeting.  1.8 The representative of Mexico
 thanked Guatemala for its rep lies to the questions posed;  
however these responses gave raise to the following additional questions that would be circulated in 
written form4:  (i) Article 1 of Guatemala's Minister ial Decision (Acuerdo Ministerial) 1090-2001 
referred to "the statutory import requirements laid down by the competent departments".  What were 
these requirements in the case of eggs (subheadi ng 040700) and could Gu atemala provide an 
exhaustive list of these requirements?  (ii) Acco rding to Mexican egg exporters, Guatemala had a 
National Poultry Farming Commission.   Could Guatemala confirm that this was the case?  (iii) If this 
was so, who were its members and what were its powers? and (iv) Could Guatemala confirm whether 
the Commission's powers included that of issuin g licences for the import of eggs and, more 
specifically, the power to issue "operating licences for the import of eggs" or licences of another class, the granting of which was governed not exclusively by sanitary criteria?  
1.9 The representative of Guatemala
 thanked Mexico for the additional questions that would be 
conveyed to the capital for a prompt reply.  
 
1.10 The representative of Australia,  referring to the written questions posed to Malaysia,5  said 
that Malaysia's import licensing requ irements applied to approximately 33% of its tariff lines and that 
Australia continued to monitor their impact.  In particular, his delegation was interested in the non-
automatic licensing regime described by the Mala ysian authorities "to promote selected strategic 
industries" with the aim of regulating import's fl ow for various products such as motor vehicles, 
agricultural products, cabbage and coffee products.    1.11 The delegate of Malaysia
 informed the Committee that the questions posed by Australia and 
circulated immediately after the issuance of the airgram would be conveyed to his capital to provide 
substantive answers. 
                                                      
4 Circulated in document G/LIC/Q/GTM/2. 
5 Circulated after the issuance of the airgram in document G/LIC/Q/MYS/4. G/LIC/M/24 
Page 4  
 
  1.12 The Committee took note
 of the statements made. 
 
2. Notifications  
 
(i) Notifications under Articles 1.4(a) and/or 8.2( b) of the Agreement (publications and/or   
legislation) 
2.1 The Chairperson  recalled that Articles 1.4(a) and 8.2(b) and notification procedures, as had 
been agreed by the Committee6, required all Members to publis h their laws, regulations and 
administrative procedures, and notify these to th e Committee upon becoming a Member of the WTO, 
together with copies of any relevant publications or  laws and regulations.  Any subsequent changes to 
these laws and regulations were also required to be  notified.  He informed  the Committee that there 
were six notifications that had been received sin ce the last meeting from the following Members:  
Brazil, the Democratic Republic of Congo, India, Israel, Mexico and Saint Lucia, contained in 
documents G/LIC/N/1/BRA/3; G/LIC/N/1/COD/1; G/LIC/N/1/IND/9; G/LIC/N/1/ISR/1; G/LIC/N/1/MEX/2; and G/LIC/N/1/LCA/2, respectivel y.  He also informed the Committee that after 
the issuance of the airgram convening this  meeting, Haiti had submitted a notification 
(G/LIC/N/1/HAI/2) that would be considered at th e next meeting.  The Chairperson also indicated 
that, given the amount of documents before the Committee, it had not  been possible to translate all the 
notifications into the three WTO official languages; this was the case of notification 
G/LIC/N/1/BRA/3 which would be considered at the next meeting.  However delegations were 
invited to raise questions and comments to be considered by Brazil at the next meeting. 
 
2.2 The Committee took note
 of the notifications submitted by the Democratic Republic of 
Congo, India, Israel, Mexico and Saint Lucia.  
(ii) Notifications under Article 5 of the Agreement (new import licensing procedures, changes to 
existing licensing procedures and reverse notifications)  
2.3 The Chairperson
 recalled that under paragraphs 1 to 4 of Article 5, Members who instituted 
licensing procedures or changes in these procedures,  were required to notify the Committee within 60 
days of the publication of these procedures.  Para graph 2 of Article 5 listed the information that 
should be included in such notifications.  Members also had to submit copies of the publications in 
which this information was publishe d.  Furthermore, paragraph 5 of  Article 5 provided the possibility 
of making counter-notifications, where a Member co nsidered that another Member had not notified a 
licensing procedure or changes therein, in accordance with paragraphs 1-3 of Ar ticle 5.  He informed 
the Committee that under this provision there were four  notifications submitted by:  Argentina, Brazil, 
India and Israel (G/LIC/N/2/BRA/3, G/LIC/N/2/ARG/10, G/LIC/N/2/IND/8 and G/LIC/N/2/ISR/1, respectively).  The notification from Brazil c ontained in document G/LIC/N/2/BRA/3 was only 
available in English and Spanish and would be consid ered at the next meeting, but delegations were 
invited to raise questions and comments to be considered by Brazil at the next meeting. 
 2.4  The representative of Argentina
, in response to the questions raised by the United States at 
the last Committee meeting regarding notifications  G/LIC/N/2/ARG/8 and 9, said that the import 
licensing system for footwear, as established by resolution MEYP/486 of 2005, was based on the 
significant increase of trade flows whose evolutio n was convenient to assess.  Thus, a monitoring 
mechanism, to be applied prior to the arriva l of these goods to the Argentinean market, was 
established with the aim of carrying out an appr opriate follow-up of imports.  A request for an 
extension for such certificates allowed to provide de tailed information, prior to the arrival of such 
goods to the Argentinean market, with regard to th e composition of the materials to be imported, as 
well as concerning the quantities, the value and the or igin.  This facilitated the accomplishment of the 
                                                      
6 G/LIC/3.  G/LIC/M/24 
 Page 5 
 
 
  objective already explained.  Additional informa tion could be found in document G/LIC/N/3/ARG/3 
which contained Argentina's r esponses to the questionnaire. 
 2.5 The representative of the United States
 thanked Argentina for its explanation and the 
notifications made under Articles 5 and 7.3 of the Agreement.  Her delega tion continued to have 
concerns regarding the new non-automatic procedures.   Document G/LIC/N/2/ARG/9 stated that the 
"import licensing procedures for goods classified  under certain tariff lines corresponding to the 
footwear sector aims to establish a pre-release ve rification mechanism to monitor and control imports 
of such goods and verify importer declarati ons with regard to product composition.";  
document G/LIC/N/2/ARG/8 stated that "the impor t licensing under certain tariff lines corresponding 
to the toy sector aims to establish a pre-release ve rification mechanism to monitor and control imports 
of such goods and verify compliance with toy safet y standards".  The United States was not aware of 
similar verification mechanisms for the Argentin e toys, nor why the verification of the import 
declaration for footwear should require a new licensing system.  Clarification on these points would be appreciated.  Her delegation was also not awar e of any safeguard nor of any other quantitative 
restriction applied in conformity with WTO rules, as mentioned by Argentina, to control imports on 
these products.  The US exporters continued to report that the licensing requirements acted as 
quantitative restrictions for their products.  Moreover,  even if the information provided by Argentina 
indicated that non-automatic licences were granted on  a first-come, first-served basis and that the 
processing time should be no more than 30 days, the exporters had reported that, in practice, the 
processing time-period was between 60 to 90 days .  Her delegation would appreciate further 
information on the latter to address the complaints and also full written info rmation on Argentina's 
systems for the Committee's review at the next meeting.  2.6 The Committee took note
 of the notifications and the statements made.   
 
2.7 The representative of the United States  thanked Brazil for its notifications under Articles 5, 
7.3, 1.4.(a) and 8.2.(b) of the Agreement.  In the view of her delegation these documents provided 
general information about Brazil's import licensing regime, but they did not answer the questions 
posed by the US concerning certain lithium pr oducts, including lithium hydroxide and lithium 
carbonate.  For almost three years the US had requested information on Brazil's import licensing requirements on lithium, a clearly commercially traded product around the world and important for 
manufacturing a number of ordinary commercial pr oducts.  Natural lithium products such as lithium 
carbonate and lithium hydroxide were widely availa ble on global markets, and the US was not aware 
of other countries, except Brazil, that restricted the  import of natural lithium compounds.  At the June 
meeting of this Committee, the US had asked for an update on the findings of the inter Ministerial 
Group that, according to the information provided by  the Brazilian delegate,  was studying the issue. 
The US had submitted additional written questions ci rculated in G/LIC/C/Q/BRA/3/Add.1, requesting 
Brazil to provide the Committee with the findings of the above-mentioned inter Ministerial Group.  
Furthermore, Brazil had not notified restrictions on these products, nor respon ded to the questions;  
her delegation would appreciate it if the inform ation could be provided as soon as possible. 
 
2.8 In response, the representative of Brazil
 said that his delegation ha d taken note of the renewed 
concerns of the US delegation which would be convey ed to the capital.  There was not much to add in 
relation to what was said in previous meetings of  the Committee, just to reiterate that Brazil had 
provided written answers to the US, circulated in document G/LIC/Q/BRA/2, as well as information 
on import statistics and number of licences granted regarding lithium compounds.  With respect to the latest US communication, his delegation was still aw aiting specific instructions and would consult the 
competent authorities to provide answers to those documents.  
2.9 The Committee took note
 of the statements made.  
 G/LIC/M/24 
Page 6  
 
  (iii) Notifications under Article 7.3 of the Agreem ent (Replies to the Questionnaire on Import 
Licensing Procedures) 
2.10 The Chairperson
 informed the Committee that there were thirty-two notifications listed in the 
airgram convening this meeting, received from Arge ntina; Armenia; Australia; Bangladesh; Barbados; 
Brazil;  Chile; China; Colombia ; the Democratic Republic of C ongo; the European Communities; 
Georgia; Grenada;  Guatemala; Hong Kong, China; India; Israel; Jamaica; Kyrgyz Republic; Macao, 
China; Malawi; Malaysia; Mexico; Morocco; Peru ; Qatar Romania; Rwanda; Saint Lucia; Saudi 
Arabia and Turkey.7  He also informed the Committee that, after the airgram was issued,  three more 
notifications under this provi sion had been received from Bulgaria; Canada; and Haiti.8  These will be 
before the Committee at its next meeting.  
 
2.11 The Chairperson  said that not all the notifications were available in the three WTO official 
languages.  Thus, at this meeting, the Committee woul d only consider the notifications received from:  
Argentina;  Armenia;  Bangladesh;  Barbados;  Chile;  the European Communities;  Georgia;  
Grenada;  Guatemala;  Hong Kong, China;  India;   Jamaica; Macao, China;  Malawi;  Mexico;  
Morocco; Peru;  Qatar;  Romania and Rwanda.9  The notifications received from Australia; Brazil; 
China; Colombia; the Democratic Republic of Co ngo; Israel; the Kyrgyz Republic; Malaysia; Saint 
Lucia; Saudi Arabia and Turkey,10 would be considered at the next meeting.  Nevertheless delegations 
were also invited to raise questions or comments to  be considered by the notifying Members at the 
next meeting.   
2.12 The delegate from the United States
 thanked India for its Article 7.3 notification circulated in 
document G/LIC/N/3/IND/8 and informed the Committ ee that her authorities were in the process of 
reviewing the responses to the Questionnaire; in the future the US might request  further information.  
After a preliminary review, her delegation had the following questions:  (i) according to the second 
question of the Questionnaire, Members were request ed to identify each licensing system maintained 
and to indicate what products, a ppropriately grouped, were cove red.  From India's reply her 
delegation had understood that I ndia's government regulated imports according to measures listed in 
the ITC (HS) Classification of Exports and Imports Items 2004-2009, the Foreign Trade Policy 2004-2009, and the Handbook of Import-Export Procedures.  Her delegation requested India to update its 
response to the Questionnaire to include identif ication of specific products subject to import 
restrictions.  (ii) Her delegation also requested Indi a to provide the corresponding replies to the rest of 
the Questionnaire for each of the products.  In par ticular, the US was interested in knowing if re-
manufactured goods were subject to import licensing requirements and, if so, to describe in detail the 
import licensing procedures. 
                                                     
 
7G/LIC/N/3/ARG/3; G/LIC/ N/3/ARM/3; G/LIC/N/3/AU S/3; G/LIC/N/3/BGD/3; 
G/LIC/N/3/BRB/3/Add.1; G/LIC/N/3/BRA/5; G/LIC/N/ 3/CHL/2; G/LIC/N/3/CHN/5; G/LIC/N/3/COL/4; 
G/LIC/N/3/COD/1; G/LIC/N/3/EEC/7/Add.1 and 8/Add.1 (and Corr. 1 in English only); G/LIC/N/3/GEO/3; G/LIC/N/3/GRD/1; G/LIC/ N/3/GTM/3; G/LIC/N/3/HKG/10; G/LI C/N/3/IND/8; G/ LIC/N/3/ISR/1; 
G/LIC/N/3/JAM/2; G/LIC/N/3/KG Z/2; G/LIC/N/3/MAC/9; G/LIC/N/3/MWI/2; G/LIC/N/3/MYS/2; 
G/LIC/N/3/MEX/2; G/LI C/N/3/MAR/5; G/LIC/N/3/PER/4; G/ LIC/N/3/QAT/3; G/LIC/N/3/ROU/3; 
G/LIC/N/3/RWA/1; G/LIC/ N/3/LCA/4; G/LIC/N/3/ SAU/1; and G/LIC/N/3/TUR/6, respectively. 
8 Documents G/LIC/N/3/BGR/3; G/LIC/N/3/C AN/5 and G/LIC/N/3/HTI/3, respectively. 
9G/LIC/N/3/ARG/3; G/LIC/N/ 3/ARM/3; G/LIC/N/3/BGD/3; G/LIC/N/3/BRB/3/Add.1; 
G/LIC/N/3/CHL/2; G/LIC/N/3/EEC/7/Add.1 and 8/Add.1 (and Corr. 1 in English only); G/LIC/N/3/GEO/3; 
G/LIC/N/3/GRD/1; G/LIC/ N/3/GTM/3; G/LIC/N/3/HKG/10; G/LI C/N/3/IND/8; G/ LIC/N/3/JAM/2; 
G/LIC/N/3/MAC/9; G/LIC/N/3/MW I/2; G/LIC/N/3/MEX/2; G/LIC/N/3/MAR/5; G/LIC/N/3/PER/4; 
G/LIC/N/3/QAT/3; G/LIC/N/ 3/ROU/3; and, G/LIC/N/ 3/RWA/1, respectively. 
10 G/LIC/N/3/AUS/3; G/LI C/N/3/BRA/5; G/LIC/N/3/CHN/5; G/LI C/N/3/COL/4; G/ LIC/N/3/COD/1; 
G/LIC/N/3/ISR/1; G/LIC/N/3/KGZ/ 2; G/LIC/N/3/MYS/2; G/LIC/N/3/LCA/4; G/ LIC/N/3/SAU/1; and 
G/LIC/N/3/TUR/6, respectively. 
  G/LIC/M/24 
 Page 7 
 
 
   
2.13 The representative of India  said that the questions posed w ould be conveyed to the capital and 
that his delegation would refer to them at the next meeting.   2.14 The Committee took note
 of the notifications, statements and questions. 
 
3. Fifth Transitional Review under Paragraph 18 of the Protocol on the Accession of the 
People's Republic of China (WT/L/432). 
 
3.1 The Chairperson  recalled that the fourth transitional review of the implementation by China 
of the WTO Agreement and of the related provisi ons of the Protocol, under paragraph 18 of the 
Protocol of Accession of China (WT/L/432), had been  carried out in 2005 by the subsidiary bodies of 
the WTO, including the Committee on Import Licens ing, which had a mandate covering China's 
commitments under the WTO Agreement or China's Pr otocol of Accession.  The Committee's report 
to the Council for Trade in Goods on that review had been circulated in document G/LIC/14.  The 
Committee would conduct the fifth transitional review at the present meeting.  He also informed the 
Committee that since the last meeting, the Secr etariat had received two submissions containing 
questions and comments on China's import licen sing procedures:  from the United States 
(G/LIC/Q/CHN/18) and from Australia (G/LIC/Q/CHN/19).  The Secretariat had also received, after 
the airgram convening this meeting was issued, a communication from China containing information 
required by paragraph IV:3 of Annex 1A of the Pr otocol of Accession which has been circulated in 
document G/LIC/W/28.  
3.2 The representative of the United States
 highlighted the written questions posed to China 
which referred to: (i) China's steel and iron industry  development policy and practice,  her delegation 
sought more information on the policy encouraging th e use of domestic technology and equipment; 
(ii) China’s attempt to regulate imports of iron ore by granting import licences only to enterprises 
satisfying certain criteria, an issu e raised by her delegation in 2004, in connection with China's policy 
review, when the US noted that it would be asking follow-up questions.  The US was seeking for 
further information in this regard; and, (iii) th e extent to which China applied import requirements 
similar to those on iron ore to other steel-making i nputs, such as ferrous alloys, ferrous scrap, zinc, 
nickel, aluminium or titanium.  3.3 The representative from Australia
 recalled his delegation's interest, as already expressed in the 
two previous meetings, on the import licensing pro cedures for iron and copper ore.  Australia had 
been monitoring those regimes and had concerns ab out their consistency with the WTO Agreement on 
Import Licensing Procedures.  At the last meeting, his delegation posed a series of oral questions to China, followed by written questions posed bilate rally.  Since Australia had not yet received any 
response and given the important commercial priority  for Australia, his delegation had not only posed 
some of those questions again but also a broader set of questions on iron and copper ore.   
 3.4 The representative of the People's Republic of China
 thanked the United States and Australia 
for their questions and comments and, in response to  both delegations, said that: (i)  the steel industry 
development policy outlined opinions of the government towards the de velopment of the steel sector.  
It was aimed at encouraging innovation and en ergy conservation and stre ngthening environmental 
protection.  The policy per se  was not compulsory;  thus no specific rules related to import licensing 
procedures have been enacted.  (ii)  the automati c import licensing regime for iron and copper ore was 
implemented in accordance with the measures ad ministering automatic import licensing for goods, 
already notified to the Committee.  There was no par ticular rule setting out qualification criteria for 
enterprises which apply for a licence.  In this regard , China's Steel Industry Association together with 
the Commercial Chamber for Metals, Minerals and Chemicals Importers and Exporters which include 
Chinese enterprises dealing with import and export of iron and copper ore, had self co-ordination G/LIC/M/24 
Page 8  
 
  within the industry itself.  The Chinese authorities have not received any complaints since it was not a 
government requirement;  in China's opinion, this me chanism should not be subject to the WTO rules.  
(iii) the automatic import licensing regime which a pplied to ferrous alloys, ferrous scraps, zinc, 
nickel, aluminium and titanium, was part of the automatic import licensing procedures already notified by China.  With regard to the specific questions from Australia on China's notification on the 
import licensing regime, the Chinese authorities were  currently in the process of finalising the 
notification, i.e. its translation and the related work , in order to submit it before the end of 2006.  The 
overall import licensing regime in China had alr eady been included in Ch ina's responses to the 
questionnaire which was notified to the Committee.  (iv) with regard to the questions concerning 
MOFCOM's Decree 26, the temporary measures mentioned in it, aimed at seizing automatic import 
licensing, referred to the governmental measure s for implementing decisions from relevant 
international organizations such as UN Resolutions  or some urgent SPS measures; and, (v) the 
procedures for returning unused automatic import li cences were used for data collection, fiscal trade 
statistics purposes as well as for fighting against ille gal conduct, such as forgery of automatic import 
licences for bound imports which disrupt the market. 
 
3.5 With regard to Australia's enquiry about  written responses, the representative of China
 
reiterated his delegation' s position in this regard and said th at, after having consulted the import 
licensing authorities in Beijing, his delegation would contact Australia directly.  3.6 The delegate from Australia
 sought clarification from China on two points.  The Chinese 
delegation had said that, in rela tion to iron and copper ores, the government licensing agencies had 
not received complaints concerning the operation of  the regime that had been described as an 
"industry-self regulation" regime.  Given the con cerns of the Australian government and of the 
Australian industry on this matter, his authorities had in fact made a number of representations to MOFCOM and other Chinese agencies. He also request ed clarification on the full name of  the second 
industry association mentioned;  the minerals and metals, apart from iron and copper ores, that had 
been described in the Chinese intervention; and finally, the exact number of the MOFCOM decree 
mentioned by China.  3.7 In response, the delegate of China
 clarified that the name of the other business association 
was "The Commercial Chamber for Me tals, Minerals and Chemicals Im porters and Exporters";  that 
the other products included ferrous  alloys, ferrous scrap, zinc, nickel, aluminium and titanium which 
were subject to automatic import licensing procedur es and whose details had already been notified to 
the Committee; and, finally, that the MOFCOM's  decree was Decree N°26 on measures administering 
automatic import licensing for goods, the current regulation in place in China, which basically 
described the functioning of the automatic import li censing scheme.  With regard to the European 
Communities request to take part in the discussions between Australia, the US and China,  which the 
EC would prefer to be a multilateral discussion, th e Chinese delegate said that the idea was only to 
clarify bilaterally the specific queries from Australia,  that his delegation was not in a position to have 
a multilateral discussion on the issue and that in or der to avoid misunderstandings he had clarified 
what Australia had asked China.  
3.8 The Committee took note
 of the statements made. 
 3.9 The Chairperson
 suggested that, to conclude the  Fifth Transitional Review under 
Paragraph 18 of the Protocol of Accession of th e People's Republic of China, a factual report on 
China's transitional review be submitted to the Coun cil for Trade in Goods (CTG).  As had been done 
previously, this factual report would refer to the rele vant paragraphs of the minutes of this meeting as 
well as the oral and written comments and questions submitted to China, and the information received 
from China.  The relevant paragraphs of the minut es which reflected the di scussion would be annexed 
to this report.     G/LIC/M/24 
 Page 9 
 
 
  3.10 The Committee so agreed .  The report to the CTG on the fifth transitional review was 
circulated in document G/LIC/15.  
4. Report (2006) of the Committee to the Council for Trade in Goods  
4.1 The Chairperson
 said that the Committee was required to submit an annual report on its 
activities to the Council for Trade in Goods, (CTG).  A draft report to the CTG, covering the activities 
of the Committee in 2006, had been circulat ed in document G/LIC/W/26 for the Committee's 
consideration.  The information covered in the draf t report, including its Anne x, would be updated to 
reflect the notifications received up to the present m eeting, as well as the discussion at this meeting.  
The latest notifications submitted by Bulgaria, Cana da and Haiti would be reflected in the relevant 
paragraphs and in the Annex. 
 4.2 There were no comments on the draft report.  The Committee agreed
 to adopt the report, 
subject to the updating.  The report as revised and adopted was circulated as document G/L/800. 
 5. Sixth Biennial Review of the Implementation and Operation of the Agreement under 
Article 7.1 
 
5.1 The Chairperson
 recalled that Article 7.1 of the Agreement provided that "the Committee shall 
review as necessary, but at least once every tw o years, the implementation and operation of this 
Agreement, taking into account the objectives thereof,  and the rights and obliga tions contained therein" 
and that the Fifth Biennial Review  of the Implementation and Operati on of the Agreement took place in 
September 2004.  He referred to the background document prepared by the  Secretariat, on its own 
responsibility and for the Committee's consideration,  circulated as G/LIC/W/27, which covered the 
period from 1 October 2004 to 30 October 2006.  He said that the document, as well as the annexes, 
would be updated to take into account the discussi on at the present meeting and the notifications 
received by the Secretariat before the issuance of the final version.  This report would be circulated in 
the G/LIC/- series.     5.2 The Committee agreed to adopt
 the report as updated.11 
 
6. Other Business 
 Date of the next meeting 6.1 The Chairperson
 informed Members that the Secretariat had tentatively reserved Thursday, 
29 March 200712 and Tuesday, 9 October 2007 for the next meetings of the Committee, on the 
understanding that additional meetings would be convened if necessary.    
6.2 The Committee took note
 of the information. 
 
__________ 
                                                      
11 The final report was circulated as document G/LIC/16, 30 November 2006. 
12 The proposed date for the March meeting has been changed.  The first meeting of the Committee will 
now take place on Friday, 30 March 2007.