RESTRICTED  WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  G/VAL/M/47 
29 May 2009 
 (09-2583) 
Committee on Customs Valuation  
  
 
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF 7 MAY 2009 
 
Chairman:  Octavia Cerchez (Romania)
 
  
 The agenda proposed for the meeting, circul ated in WTO/AIR/3359/Rev.1 was adopted as 
follows:  
I.
 REPORT OF THE WORK OF THE TECHNICAL COMMITTEE ON 
CUSTOMS VALUATION .......................................................................................................2  
II. INFORMATION ON IMPLEMENTATION AND ADMINISTRATION OF THE AGREEMENT.................................................................................................................2
 
A. NOTIFICATION OF NATIONAL LEGISLATION ................................................................................2  
B. NOTIFICATIONS MADE BY DEVELOPING COUNTRY MEMBERS ....................................................7  
III. INFORMATION ON THE APPLICATION OF DECISIONS OF THE COMMITTEE ON CUSTOMS VALUATION.......................................................................8
 
IV. TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE ..................................................................................................8  
A. INFORMATION ON TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE ...............................................................................8  
B. ARTICLE 20.3  TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND TRADE -RELATED TECHNICAL 
ASSISTANCE ............................................................................................................................... .8 
V. FOURTH, FIFTH, SIXTH, SEVENTH, EIGHTH, NINTH, TENTH, 
ELEVENTH, TWELFTH, AND THIRTEENTH ANNUAL REVIEWS OF THE 
IMPLEMENTATION AND OPERATION OF THE CUSTOMS VALUATION AGREEMENT ...................................................................................................................... ....9
 
VI. PRESHIPMENT INSPECTION .............................................................................................9  
VII. PARAGRAPH 12 OF THE DOHA MINISTERIAL DECLARATION 
(WT/MIN(01)/DEC/1):  IMPLEMENTATION-RELATED ISSUES................................10  
VIII.  OTHER BUSINESS................................................................................................................1 2 
A. CHAIR 'S CONSULTATIONS ON WAYS TO IMPROVE THE TIMELINESS AND 
COMPLETENESS OF NOTIFICATIONS AND OT HER RELEVANT INFORMATION ON TRADE 
MEASURES FALLING WITHIN THE AMBIT OF THE AGREEMENT ON CUSTOMS 
VALUATION ............................................................................................................................... 12 
B. QUESTIONS FROM THE UNITED STATES TO INDIA AND INDONESIA ..........................................13  
C. DATE OF THE NEXT MEETING ....................................................................................................13  
IX. ELECTION OF OFFICERS..................................................................................................14  
ANNEX I........................................................................................................................ .......................15  
 G/VAL/M/47 
Page 2  
 
   
I. REPORT OF THE WORK OF THE TECHNICAL COMMITTEE ON CUSTOMS 
VALUATION 
1.1 The observer of the World Customs Organization
 reported on the activities of the Technical 
Committee at its 27th and 28th sessions, held on 20 – 24 October 2008 and 30 March to 3 April 2009 
respectively.  This report is contained in Annex I.  
 1.2 The Committee took note
 of the report. 
 
II. INFORMATION ON IMPLEMENTATION AND ADMINISTRATION OF THE 
AGREEMENT 
A. NOTIFICATION OF NATIONAL LEGISLATION  
2.1 The Chairman  recalled that Article 22 of the Agreem ent on Customs Valuation (hereafter, the 
Agreement) required each Member to inform th e Committee of any changes in its laws and 
regulations relevant to the Agreement, and of an y changes in the administration of such laws and 
regulations.  In addition, the Decision on Notifi cation and Circulation of National Legislation, 
adopted by the Tokyo Round Committee, required each Member to notify its legislation to the 
Committee.  She suggested that, under this sub- item, the Committee take up the legislations in 
sequence as listed in the agenda.  She further recal led that the notification of legislation by the 
Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu had been presented to the 
Committee.  However, the examination of this no tification remained suspended since the Committee's 
meeting on 4-5 November 2002 pending resolution of  the difference in views between the parties 
involved on notifications across the WTO.    
- Albania 
 2.2 The Chairman
 informed Members that Albania's re sponses to the Checklist of Issues were 
circulated in document G/VAL/N/2/ALB/1 and that Albania had notified its national legislation in 
document G/VAL/N/1/ALB/1 in September 2001.  Th e Committee had concluded its examination of 
this legislation at its meeting on 25 October 2001 .  At the May 2008 meeting Canada orally posed 
questions to Albania which were repeated at th e October 2008 meeting, and recently circulated in 
document G/VAL/W/176.  It was agreed to revert to this notification at this meeting.  Albania had 
sent responses to the Secretariat yesterday afternoon for circulation.     
 2.3 The representative of Albania
 provided her delegation's respon ses orally.  The first question 
was related to the Checklist question 1 a (ii) in wh ich Albania responded that the inter company prices 
were considered as grounds for regarding the respec tive prices as being influenced.  Canada asked if 
all inter-company prices were questioned and if th ere were any exceptions.  In determining whether 
the transactions were acceptable under Article 34 of the Customs Code, the fact that the seller and the 
buyer were related within the meaning of Article 34.1 and Article 34.2 of the Customs Code, shall not 
itself be grounds for regarding the transaction valu e as unacceptable.  In such cases, circumstances 
surrounding the sale shall be examined and the trans action value shall be accepted providing that the 
relationship did not influence the price.  The seco nd question related to ques tion 9(b) of Albania's 
notification.  When an appeal was rejected, the a ppellant must pay the rest of the fine, 60% of the 
total.  According to Article 289 of the Customs Code, a precursory compliant procedure and administrative inspection was foreseen, whic h had to be attended by the violation  subject under a 
decision taken by the custom authority.  The subj ect could appeal the decision taken by the custom 
branch, to the General Director, only after he or she paid the obligatory 100 per cent of the custom 
obligation, and 40% of the penalty.  The General Director had to take a decision on the violation 
within 30 days.  In the case when the appeal was not approved, the appellant had to pay 60% of the  G/VAL/M/47 
 Page 3 
 
 
  prepaid penalty and, only after this condition, he or she had the right to appeal to a judgment 
authority.  The right to appeal in the court coul d be practiced after these conditions were met.   
 2.4 The representative of Canada
 said that he would send these r esponses back to his capital and 
come back to the Committee if th ere were follow-up questions.   
 
2.5 The Committee  took note of the statements made and agreed  to revert to this notification at its 
next meeting.  
 - Bahrain 
 
2.6 The Chairman
 recalled that it had been agreed to de fer examination of Bahrain's Checklist of 
Issues in document G/VAL/N/2/BHR/1 until receipt of the entire implementing legislation.  The implementing legislation had recently been circulated in G/VAL/N/1/BHR/1.  It consisted of the Common Customs Law of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), its Rules of Implementation and 
Explanatory Notes thereof, which was applied by  the Kingdom of Bahrain and other GCC Member 
States from 1 January 2003.  This had been circulated  in English.  The notification also consisted of 
the Decree Number 10 of 2002 ratifying the Common Customs Law of the Gulf Cooperation Council.  
As this was only available in Arabic, it had not been  circulated but could be consulted in the Market 
Access Division.    
2.7 The representative of the United States
 said that he understood that in 2008, the Gulf 
Cooperation Council and Bahrain either amende d their Common Customs Law or promulgated 
additional rules on the implementation of the Valuati on Agreement.  He asked Bahrain to confirm if 
this was accurate.  If so, he asked if Bahrain coul d provide a copy of the 2008 changes as soon as 
possible.  With respect to the 2003 version of th e GCC Common Customs Law, his delegation sought 
Bahrain's clarification on a few points related to  its implementation of the GCC Common Customs 
Law.  First, the appeals process, provided in Customs Law Article 61, appeared to establish a 
committee to review the customs official valuati on decisions.  Article 61 also provided that the 
committee may seek assistance of experts at its discr etion.  In Bahrain, how many officers were 
appointed to this Committee?  Were  they officers or customs officers?  What was the level of the 
officers?  What type of experts would the Committ ee consult?  How many times was this procedure 
actually being used?  He asked what the pro cess was under Article 62 where a dispute between a 
Customs officer and the owner of the good was referre d to the Director of Settlement.  What did the 
Director use to resolve the dispute?  Was the Dire ctor's decision provided to the owner of the good in 
writing?  Who decided and what processes were used to determine whether the referral for the matter 
went to the Director General or to the Committee?   Please clarify how review by the Committee was 
initiated. 
 2.8 He added that Article 61 said that the im porter may appeal before the Committee whereas 
Article 62 said the appeal must be referred by the Director General.  Which one was relevant?  Were 
there two separate methods to reach  the Committee?  Article 61 stat ed that the Committee decisions 
were effective once approved by the Director General.   He asked Bahrain to explain the steps in the 
appeal process under Articles 61 and 62.  Was it necessary to delay the final implementation of 
valuation?  Article 62 provided that the Director may release the goods in dispute if not prohibited.  
Under what circumstances would the release of goods  be prohibited in Bahrain?  Also, Article 66 
referenced rules and conditions prescribed by the Di rector General for a list of goods prior to the 
payment of customs, duties and taxes against the guara ntee.  He asked Bahrain to provide a copy of its 
rules and conditions and to explain the relationship between Article 66 and Article 1.1 of the rules of 
implementation providing that an importer could wit hdraw its goods after payment of a cash deposit.  
He also sought clarification regarding the four th method, the deductive value, and how Bahrain 
treated the deduction of the costs and charges referred to in Article 8 of the Agreement.  Finally, he asked Bahrain to indicate where Article 16 of the Ag reement, providing the importer with the right to G/VAL/M/47 
Page 4  
 
  a written explanation from the Customs administra tion as how the customs value of the good was 
determined, was located in its legislation.  2.9 The representative of Bahrain
 said that his delegation would send the questions to its capital 
and revert with written answers. 
 
2.10 The Committee  took note of the statements made and agreed  to revert to this notification at its 
next meeting.  
 - Belize 
 
2.11 The Chairman
 drew Members' attention to Belize's no tification of its legislation implementing 
the Agreement which had been circulated in  G/VAL/N/1/BLZ/1.  This document contained 
Chapter 48 of the Customs And Excise Duty Act, of 2000.  Belize also notified its responses to the 
Checklist of Issues in document G/VAL/N/2/BLZ/1.   At the last meeting the United States and 
Canada posed oral questions which had since been followed up in written form in documents 
G/VAL/W/175 and G/VAL/W/176 respectively.    2.12 The representative of the United States
 said that his delegation was looking forward to 
receiving written answers to the questions it had posed.  
2.13 The Committee
 took note of the statement made and agreed  to revert to this notification at its 
next meeting.   - China  
 
2.14 The Chairman
 recalled that, at the last meeting, it had been agreed to revert to China's 
notification in G/VAL/N/1/CHN/5 at this meeting.   The United States had posed questions to China 
at the May 2008 meeting and these were circulated in G/VAL/W/168 and Corr.1.  2.15 The representative of the United States
 appreciated China's oral responses to its questions 
presented at the last meeting.  His delegation was still waiting for written responses to each of  the 
questions contained in document G/VAL/W/168 and Co rr.1.  It, therefore, requested that this item 
remain on the agenda of the next meeting of the Committee.  2.16 The representative of China
 recalled that his delegation had an swered the US questions orally 
at the last meeting.  The customs experts in hi s capital were working to finalize these answers in 
writing, which should be ready for the next meeting of the Committee.  
 2.17 The Committee
 took note of the statements made and agreed  to revert to this notification at its 
next meeting.  
 - Egypt 
 
2.18 The Chairman  recalled that it had been agreed at th e last meeting to revert to Egypt's 
legislation and responses to the checklist of issues.  The United States and Canada had posed questions to Egypt at the October 2007 meeting wh ich were circulated in document G/VAL/W/166.  
Egypt circulated its responses in document G/VAL/W/ 169.  Further questions from the United States 
had recently been circulated in document G/VAL /W/175 to which Egypt circulated responses in 
document G/VAL/W/177.    2.19 The representative of Egypt
 confirmed that his delegation had provided the answers to the 
questions received from the US and Canada in document G/VAL/W/177.  He supplemented these  G/VAL/M/47 
 Page 5 
 
 
  responses with the following additional information.   In response to a question from the US on how 
customs officials take the interpretative notes into account, he explained that the Egyptian customs officials had copies of the interpretative notes along with the other provisions of the legislation.  
Regarding to two questions from Canada, he responded that deci sions regarding appeals were 
provided in writing to the importer, and that ther e were no penalties imposed on the importer for any 
appeal process. 
 2.20 The representative of Canada
 said that he would send the responses back to his capital and 
would revert to the matter if his delegation had follow-up questions.   
 
2.21 The representative of the United States  also said that he would send the responses to his 
capital and revert to the matter if hi s delegation had follow-up questions. 
 2.22 The Committee
 took note of the statements made and agreed  to revert to this notification at its 
next meeting. 
 
 - Nigeria 
 
2.23 The Chairman  drew Members' attention to the notif ication received from Nigeria in document 
G/VAL/N/1/NGA/1.  This notification contained the Act to Amend the Customs and Excise Management Act of 2003.  Nigeria also notified its  responses to the Checklist of Issues in document 
G/VAL/N/2/NGA/1.  At the last meeting, the United States and Canada posed questions, and the 
European Communities made some observations to th e Nigerian delegation.  The questions from the 
US and Canada were followed up in writing in documents G/VAL/W/175 and G/VAL/W/176 
respectively.    
2.24 In the absence of responses, the Committee
 agreed to revert to this notification at its next 
meeting.  
 - Saint Vincent and the Grenadines 
 
2.25 The Chairman
 drew Members' attention to document  G/VAL/N/1/CVT/1 wh ich contained the 
notification by Saint Vincent and the Grenadines of the relevant sections of the Customs Control and 
Management Act 1999.  Document  G/VAL/N/2/CVT/1 contained St . Vincent and the Grenadines' 
responses to the checklist of issues.    2.26 The representative of the United States
 had some questions that it would submit in writing.  It 
was seeking additional clarification on where in the legislation the confidentiality provisions provided 
for in Article 10 of the Agreement had been incorpor ated.  What was the intent of section 3 (6) which 
appeared to deal with the concep t of sale for export.  Could St Vincent and the Grenadines elaborate 
on the process by which laws, regulations, decisions and rules were published and made available to 
all traders and were they available on the internet .  Additionally, he asked for clarification on the 
operation of section 6.3 of the legislation regardi ng the deductive value and wh ere were the provisions 
related to Article 5.2 of the Agreement.   He added that Article 13 of the Agreement provided the 
importer with the right to withdraw its goods from Customs in the case of a delay in reaching a valuation decision.  Section 98 seemed to give the Controller discretion to require the provision of a  
bond, but there was no subsequent provision referring  to the release of imported goods from customs. 
Were there additional provisions fo r the release of goods and their bond ?  Finally, he asked St Vincent 
and the Grenadines to clarify if th e references in section 4(5) to similar goods should, in fact, be to 
identical goods?  2.27 The Committee
 took note of the statement made and agreed  to revert to this notification at its 
next meeting. G/VAL/M/47 
Page 6  
 
   - Tanzania 
 
2.28 The Chairman
 recalled that it was agreed to revert to Tanzania's notification at this meeting.  
The United States had indicated that it had concerns  with Tanzania's valuation methodology for used 
clothing and had sought clarifica tion on how this was determined and whether it conformed to the 
Agreement.    
 
2.29 The representative of the United States  said that his delegation had heard many complaints 
about Tanzania's valuation methodology for used clot hing and it remained interested in how such 
values were determined.  His delegation was also  aware that the East African Community was 
currently reviewing this issue and it looked forwar d to this study and the determination on the 
applicable tariff valuation of used clothing.  Hi s delegation could agree to  conclude this general 
examination but it reserved the right to raise the issue again upon review of the completed study. 
 
2.30 The Committee  took note of the statement made and agreed to conclude the examination of 
the Tanzanian notification.  
 - Thailand 
 
2.31 The Chairman
 recalled that at the last meeting, Members had agreed to revert to Thailand's 
notification in G/VAL/N/1/THA/1 and to the responses to the Checklist of Issues in 
G/VAL/N/2/THA/1.  The United States had circulat ed questions to Thailand in G/VAL/W/128, and 
Thailand’s replies were circulat ed in G/VAL/W/130.  Follow-up questions from the United States 
were circulated in document G/VAL/W/143 of November 2004.  Thailand's responses to these 
questions were circulated in document G/VAL/W /158.  Additional questions from the European 
Communities and the United States regarding Thaila nd's valuation of alcoho lic beverages imports 
were circulated in document G/VAL/W/160, and fro m the Philippines regarding Thailand's valuation 
of cigarettes in G/VAL/W/164.  Following this, the United States circulated additional questions on 
the legislation in G/VAL/W/165.  At the last meeting, Thailand submitted responses which were 
subsequently circulated in document G/VAL/W/174.    
 
2.32 The representative of the United States  said that his delegation was recently advised that 
Thailand was considering a draft am endment of its customs law.  It would appreciate an update on the 
status of that proposed draft amendment, including  when it might be sent to the Thai Cabinet for 
approval.  His delegation was seeking to bette r understand Thailand's objectives in amending its 
customs' law.  For example why did the amendment omit any reference to cust oms valuation methods.  
Additionally, his delegation sought an explanation of  the Thai penalty regime and how it operated in 
the customs valuation area.  Regarding the appeal process for customs valuation decisions, he asked 
Thailand to clarify whether penalties were increased in the case of an importer filing an appeal outside the customs department?  If so, what was the basis for this?  Did Thailand provide importers with the 
right to an explanation in writing from customs as  to how the customs valuation of their goods was 
determined?  Could Thailand provide a reference to th is provision in its law of regulation?  Finally, 
what was the status of the Thai legislation to e nd the use of references prices in determining customs 
value under section 11 bis of Thailand's Customs Act B.(e) 2469?  His delegation continued to 
encourage Thailand to repeal this provision as soon as possible.  2.33 The representative of the European Communities
 reiterated the concerns expressed by the 
United States.  Her delegation had exactly the same questions and requested that this item remain on 
the Committee's agenda for the next meeting.  
 2.34 The representative of Thailand
 asked that the questions posed orally be provided in writing.  
She would send them to her capital for thei r consultation and would respond in writing.  G/VAL/M/47 
 Page 7 
 
 
  2.35 The Committee  took note of the statements made and agreed  to revert to this notification at its 
next meeting.  
 - Tunisia 
 2.36 The Chairman
 drew Members' attention to docum ent G/VAL/N/1TUN/2 which contained 
Tunisia's updated notification of Section 5 of  its new Customs Code of 2 June 2008. 
 2.37 The representative of the United States
 requested that the notification be translated into 
English.  It would submit any questions to the Committee upon review of the translated document. 
 
2.38 The representative of Canada  said that his delegation was reviewing the submission and 
would provide questions at the next meeting, if necessary.  2.39 The Committee took note of the statements made a nd agreed to revert to this notification at its 
next meeting. 
 
 - Ukraine 
 
2.40 The Chairman
 drew Members' attention to the notification received from the Ukraine in 
documents G/VAL/N/1/UKR/1 and G/VAL/N/2/UKR/1.  At the last meeting the delegations of the 
European Communities and the Unite d States raised some points which they thought might be related 
to the translation of the texts.  2.41 The representative of the European Communities
 said that her delegation did have problems 
with the translation of the text.  It also had con cerns with the compatibility of the Customs Code, its 
2002 amendments, and the Decree 1766 to the Agreemen t, especially with regard to the method of 
defining customs valuation.  Her delegation had submitted written questions to Ukraine and was 
looking forward to receiving their written replies for the next meeting.  2.42 The representative of the United States
 expressed support for the intervention by the 
European Communities, requesting clarification fro m the Ukraine on its customs valuation regime. 
 
2.43 The representative of Ukraine  believed that the issues raised by the US and EC delegations 
related to translation could be clarified quite easily.  As regards more substantive issues, her 
delegation would consult the capital in particular the relevant agencies, customs people and other 
experts, and would provide the answers necessary in written form for the next Committee meeting. 
 
2.44 The Committee  took note of the statements made and agreed  to revert to this notification at its 
next meeting.  2.45 The Chairman
 concluded this sub-item by urging those Members who had not yet notified 
their implementing legislation to do so as soon as possible.   
 
B. NOTIFICATIONS MADE BY DEVELOPING COUNTRY MEMBERS  
2.46 The Chairman  drew Members' attention to document G/C/W/610 which contained the status 
report on the implementation of mi nimum values in Senegal.   
 
2.47 The Committee  took note of the document. G/VAL/M/47 
Page 8  
 
  III. INFORMATION ON THE APPLICATION OF DECISIONS OF THE COMMITTEE 
ON CUSTOMS VALUATION 
3.1 The Chairman
 informed Members that under this age nda item, the Committee noted any new 
notifications of application of the Decisions of th e Committee on Customs Valuation on, first,  the 
"Treatment of Interest Charges in  the Customs Value of Imported Goods” and, second, the “Valuation 
of Carrier Media Bearing Software for Data Processing Equipm ent", both adopted by the Committee 
and contained in document G/VAL/5.  Since the last meeting, Thailand has notified its application of the 
Decision on Interest Charge s since 8 September 2004.  This is  recorded in the updated document 
G/VAL/W/5/Rev.21.  She urged Members to notify the Committee, as necessary, on their practices 
regarding these two Decisions.   
 
3.2 The Committee  took note of the information. 
 
IV. TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE 
A. INFORMATION ON TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE  
4.1 The Chairman  recalled that, under this item, the Secret ariat informed Member s of the technical 
assistance activ ities carried out under the auspices of the WCO.  Document G/VAL/8/Add.20 contained 
the most recent information compiled by the Techni cal Committee on Customs Valuation of technical 
assistance activities carried out by Members as well as by the WCO Secretariat.   
 B. A
RTICLE 20.3  TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND TRADE -RELATED TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE  
4.2 The Chairman  recalled that the Committee’s Work Programme on Technical Assistance for 
Capacity Building as Regards the Implementation and Administration of the WTO Agreement on 
Customs Valuation was contained in document G/VAL/W/82/Rev.1.  The Customs Valuation 
technical assistance was now incorporated in the WTO-wide technical assistance program.  The 
2008-9 Plan did not contain any regional activities on customs valuation.  Requests for technical 
assistance on customs valuation could be made at any time by individual Members and would be met 
by a national activity designed to meet the needs of  the recipient.  One such national activity was 
carried out in Zimbabwe on 27-30 October 2008.  Another was carried out on 24-25 February 2009 
for an acceding Member, Laos, with the cooperation of a Valuation Technical Officer from the WCO.  Finally, a third national activity on customs valuati on was carried out from 4-5 May 2009 in Nigeria.   
 
4.3 The observer from the World Customs Organi zation informed the Committee that the WCO 
was undertaking a new initiative to assist developi ng countries termed the "revenue package".  A 
"revenue package" was a programme to assist developing countries which were facing pressure 
through revenue considerations.  Customs administrations were ofte n called upon to maintain at least 
a level of revenue, so they requested assistance fro m the WCO in helping them to maintain a certain 
level of customs revenue collection.  This was not a new programme or project, but consisted in trying 
to help these Members use all the tools and instrument s available at this time on customs valuation so 
as to maintain at least this level of revenues.  In  the future, it would be important, indeed essential, to 
focus on matters like risk assessment and post- clearance audit because a number of countries had 
difficulties trying to use these tools.    
4.4 The representative of Senegal
 was pleased at the number of  technical assistance activities  
concerning customs valuation carried out by the WT O in favour of developing countries.  Senegal had 
requested technical assistance from the WTO on customs valuation and a mission would be forthcoming in July.  Senegal was also interested  in the programme just explained by the observer 
from the WCO and would like to be able to pa rticipate when it is initiated by the WCO. 
  G/VAL/M/47 
 Page 9 
 
 
  4.5 The Committee  took note of the statements made and the information presented. 
 
V. FOURTH, FIFTH, SIXTH, SEVENTH, EIGHTH, NINTH, TENTH, ELEVENTH, 
TWELFTH, AND THIRTEENTH ANNUAL REVIEWS OF THE IMPLEMENTATION AND OPERATION OF THE CUSTOMS VALUATION 
AGREEMENT 
5.1 The Chairman
 recalled that, at its last meeting,  the Committee took note of the eleven 
documents containing the drafts of the Four th through Fourteenth Annual Reviews of the 
Implementation and Operation of the Customs Valuation Agreement.  These draft Reviews were 
contained in documents G/VAL/W/29, G/VAL/ W/43, G/VAL/W/77, G/VA L/W/89, G/VAL/W/109, 
G/VAL/W/124, G/VAL/W/136 G/VAL/W/150, G/ VAL/W/156 and Corr.1, G/VAL/W/162 and 
G/VAL/W/171.  She asked the Indian delegate to update the Committee on his delegation's reservation 
on the adoption of these Annual Reviews.  5.2 The representative of India
 was pleased to inform the Committee that his Government had 
decided to lift its reservation concerning minimu m values which was found on paragraph 3 of the 
Protocol to the GATT Agreement on Customs Valuati on and in paragraph 2 of the WTO Agreement.  
He would communicate his Government's decision in writing for circulation to Members.    5.3 The Committee
 took note of the statement made and agreed that, in light of the statement from 
India, it examine the eleven outstanding reviews with  a view to adopting them as final documents at its 
next meeting. 
 
VI. PRESHIPMENT INSPECTION 
6.1 The Chairman  recalled that Preshipment Inspection was a standing item on the agenda of the 
Committee on Customs Valuation.  She drew Member s' attention to the most recent update of the 
information received from the International Fede ration of Inspection Agencies on countries which 
used preshipment inspection services.  This w as contained in document G/VAL/W/63/Rev.11.   
 6.2 The representative of the United States
 raised some questions for Indonesia.  His delegation 
understood that Indonesia had established preshipment  inspection requirements for a broad range of 
goods.  Decree 56 took effect earlier this year and required goods to undergo a technical verification 
at the port of exportation prior to being imported in to Indonesia. However it did not appear that 
Indonesia had notified the WTO of this PSI requ irement as required by Article 5 of the WTO 
Agreement on PSI.  His delegation, therefore, reque sted that Indonesia submit its notification as soon 
as possible.  His delegation was concerned that Members were relying on a report prepared by the IFIA to meet their PSI notification requirements.  Rather, Members were required to notify the WTO 
and include copies of the laws and regulations rela ting to PSI.  He suggested that the Secretariat 
examine the status of PSI use to ensure th at the Members had notified the use of PSI. 
 6.3 The representative of the European Communities
 supported the comments from the 
delegation of the United States.  
6.4 The observer from the World Customs Organization
 noted that PSI was often a concern from 
customs administrations.  Often WCO customs officials were at a loss as to how to guide administrations with respect to the activities of PSI  companies.  Often, these companies did not apply 
the provisions of the WTO Agreement on Customs Valuation.    
6.5 The representative of Indonesia
 took note of the questions from the United States and the 
European Communities concerning Indonesia's PSI use and would come back to the Committee on 
this soon.   G/VAL/M/47 
Page 10  
 
  6.6 The Committee
 took note of the statements made. 
 
VII. PARAGRAPH 12 OF THE DOHA MINISTERIAL DECLARATION 
(WT/MIN(01)/DEC/1):  IMPLEMENTATION-RELATED ISSUES 
- Paragraph 8.3 of document WT/MIN/(01)/17  
 
7.1 The Chairman  recalled that the General Council, at its  meeting in December 2002, authorized 
the Committee to continue its work under the exis ting mandate in paragraph 8.3 of the Decision on 
Implementation-Related Issues and C oncerns, and to report back to the General Council once its work 
had been completed.  At its last meeting, the Committee continued an exchange of views on this 
matter, including the most recent proposal that was circulated by India in Job(07)153.  Although the 
exchange was inconclusive, several delegations co mmented on the fact that this matter was being 
discussed in two fora at the same time and some qu estioned the usefulness of this approach.  It was 
agreed, nevertheless, to revert to this matter at this meeting.    
7.2 The representative of India
 recalled the discussion of this issue at the last meeting.  There 
were some concerns expressed on his delegation' s proposal.  One delegation had stated that 
information exchange and sending documents should be  done on a bilateral basis. Four Members had 
suggested that the information exchanged be subject  to Members domestic laws and regulations. Five 
Members had suggested that the sending of doc uments and information should be on a non-binding 
basis.  Several Members suggested that this issu e was being discussed in another forum which could 
be the right forum and where it would be dealt w ith after the negotiations.  He drew Members' 
attention to the Ministerial Declaration containing th e Decision in paragraph 8.3.  He said that it spoke 
about basically four things.  First, Minister s agreed on the importance of cooperation between 
Members' customs administrations.  Second, Ministers decided that whenever a Member had a reasonable basis to doubt the truth or the accuracy of the importer's declaration, the exporting Member 
shall offer cooperation and assistan ce consistent with its domestic  laws and procedures including 
furnishing information on the export value of the good concerned.  Third, the information provided by 
the exporting member shall be treated as confidential in accordance with Article 10 of the Agreement.  
Fourth, the Committee on Customs Valuation had been  directed to identify and assess practical means 
to address Members' concerns where there was reason to doubt the truth or accuracy of the declared 
value.  In the light of this mandate, he sought to  clarify concerns raised at the last meeting.  
 
7.3 With respect to sharing information and doc uments on a bilateral basis, he raised the 
impracticability of entering into bilateral arrangements with 152 Me mbers.  In addition, a Member 
could always refused the request, so this was not a practical solution.  Secondly, bilateral agreements 
could not replace the multilateral framework which ha d its own merits.  Even it there were over 300 
regional trade agreements, some reports say that nearly two-thirds of trade was being conducted 
through regional trade agreements.  Similarly, th ere were hundreds of bilateral agreements between 
administrations.  But the multilateral framework had its own importance and it was the merits of this 
framework that was being discussed  in the NAMA negotiations.  Ministers recognized the need for 
cooperation among customs administrations to preven t customs fraud.  Indeed, the Agreement starts 
with the objective of, "Desiring to further th e objectives of GATT 1994 and to secure additional 
benefits for the international trade of developi ng countries.".  So, his delegation believed that a 
multilateral framework for exchange of informati on and documents was a right step in the right 
direction to help prevent custom valuation fraud and achieve the objectives of the Agreement.   
 7.4 With respect to the point raised that this Ministerial mandate did not envisage a binding 
mechanism, he emphasized that there were ma ny non-binding instruments for the exchange of 
information.  However, the distinctive feature of  the WTO was that it was the only organisation which 
could enforce its provisions.  His delegation brought  this matter to the WTO so that it could have a 
binding mechanism.  He could not imagine that Ministers would let Members decide whether they  G/VAL/M/47 
 Page 11 
 
 
  would wish to enter and follow the framework wh en all WTO instruments were legally binding.  
Another issue that had been raised was that of  domestic regulations.  Again, he recalled the 
Ministerial Declaration which stated that expor ting Members shall offer cooperation and assistance, 
consistent with domestic laws a nd procedures, including furnishing information on the export value.  
Members had already decided that the coopera tion and assistance would include furnishing 
information on the export value of the goods concerne d.  Negotiations were precisely for ensuring that 
provisions of multilateral agreements were met wi th equal provisions in  the domestic laws and 
procedures.  There was no escape from this.  His dele gation's reading of the Ministerial mandate was 
that it had already provided the direction, and these directions had to be institutionalised through a 
multilateral agreement for exchange of information, and in this case, information on the export value 
of the goods.  Finally, the Ministerial mandate said that the exchange of information shall be treated 
as confidential and his delegation's proposal also clea rly stated that this would be in accordance with 
Article 10 of the Agreement.  He concluded th at while this matter was being discussed in the 
Negotiating Group on Trade Facilitation where Indi a and other Members were pursuing the matter 
actively,  this Committee had a Ministerial mandate.  Therefore, the discussions in one forum did not 
preclude discussions in another.  His delegation was confident that the Members would find a solution 
to this matter.  7.5 The representative of the United States
 continued to believe that a more appropriate venue for 
continuing this discussion was in the Trade Fac ilitation negotiations where a number of proposals 
were currently being examined including ones cont aining elements very similar to those in   
JOB(07)/153.  The reason for this would be for e fficiency and so as not to duplicate discussions in 
two different fora.  7.6 The representative of Canada
 said that Canada continued to  have concerns regarding the 
provision of confidential information.  These con cerns were well-known and well-documented and he 
pointed to the report of the last meeting in G/ VAL/M/46/Rev.1 as evidence of those concerns.  He 
reiterated those concerns and woul d continue to do so in the other forum where these issues were 
being discussed.  He closed by saying that his dele gation would continue to work with other Members 
in search of an acceptable solution.  7.7 The representative of the European Communities
 reiterated her delegati on's reservation on the 
Indian proposal.  This position remained unchange d but her delegation was prepared to continue 
discussions particularly in the Trade Facilitation Negotiating Group. 
 7.8 The representative of Japan
 also said that his delegation's view on this issue was well-known 
and his delegation was not in a position to change it.   Like others, his delegation was open to further 
discussion of this issue to find a r ealistic solution.  On the matter of different fora, his delegation 
echoed what the US said in terms of efficiency.  7.9 The representative of Hong-Kong
 said that his delegation's positi on also remained unchanged.  
He understood that under the Trade Facilitation Negotiations, Canada w as considering further 
discussions with India on this proposal.  His delega tion welcomed these further discussions in that 
forum.   
 7.10 The observer from the World Customs Organization
 noted that the WCO had made 
contributions to the discussions on this issue in the Trade Facilitation Negotiations.  This was an 
important matter for developing countries which we re often requesting that information on customs 
valuation be shared.   
 7.11 The Committee
 took note of the statements made and agreed to revert to this matter at its next 
meeting.    G/VAL/M/47 
Page 12  
 
  VIII.  OTHER BUSINESS 
A. C
HAIR 'S CONSULTATIONS ON WAYS TO IMPROVE THE TIMELINESS AND COMPLETENESS OF 
NOTIFICATIONS AND OTHER RELEVANT INFORM ATION ON TRADE MEASURES FALLING WITHIN 
THE AMBIT OF THE AGREEMENT ON CUSTOMS VALUATION  
8.1 The Chairman  recalled that, in response to the letter she had received from Ambassador 
Matus, Chair of the General Council, dated 26 Fe bruary 2009, she held an informal, open-ended 
meeting of the Committee on Customs Valuation on 17 March 2009 to consult with Members on 
ways to improve the timeliness and completeness of notifications and other information flows on 
trade measures falling within the areas under th e Agreement on Customs Valuation and the 
Agreement on Preshipment Inspection, a standing item on the agenda of the Committee on Customs 
Valuation. 
 8.2 At this informal meeting, she summarized the notification obligations contained in Article 22 
of the Agreement on Customs Valuation, and the Decisions of the Committee on Notification 
Obligations, and on the Checklist of Issues.  She al so explained the notification obligations in the 
Decision on the Treatment of In terest Charges in the Customs Value of Imported Goods, and the 
Decision on the Valuation of Carrier  Media Bearing Software for Da ta Processing Equipment.  On 
compliance, she summarized that, to date, 80 Member s had notified their national legislation on customs 
valuation (not counting sepa rately the 27 EU Member states) and 46 Members had not yet notified their 
national implementing legislation.  In addition, 56 Members had not yet notifie d their responses to the 
Checklist of Issues, even though th is was a requirement under the Ag reement.  With respect to the 
Decisions on Interest Charges and Valuation of Ca rrier Media Bearing Softwa re, only 36 Members had 
notified the date from which they  were applying the Decision.  
 8.3 She expressed her belief that there was some work to do on improving the notification record in 
the Committee and suggested that Members which had not notified could explain their difficulties and 
inform the Committee about any problems they were having in fulfilling these requirements.  In this 
way, the Committee could reflect on ways in which it could help these Members, including directing the 
appropriate technical assistance, where necessary.  With respect to the Agreement on Preshipment 
Inspection, she explained that Article 5 required Members to submit to the Secretariat copies of any laws and regulations by which they put the Agreement in to force, or which were  related to Preshipment 
Inspection.    
 
8.4 At the meeting, statements were received by four Members.  Canada suggested that the Committee on Customs Valuation might explore the pos sibility of expanding the role of the Technical 
Committee on Customs Valuation (TCCV) which was administered by the World Customs 
Organization.  The TCCV could perhaps carry out preliminary reviews or offer assistance to WTO 
Members who have difficulties in notifying.  Consistent  with its mandate or an y procedural issues, her 
delegation proposed asking the TCCV what kind of as sistance it could provi de to streamline the 
notification process.  The European Communities t hought that Canada's suggestion was a useful 
avenue to explore and asked the Chair to contact th e TCCV to see whether it would be able to assist 
countries that had not yet notified.  The United States said that it supported the effort to bring renewed 
energy to the institutional side of the WTO by assuring that the Committee's structure was functioning 
as robustly as possible and in light of the fact that over 40 countries had not made the required 
notifications.  His delegation was interested in th e Canadian suggestion and would consult further on 
it.  The US also suggested that the Chair and th e Secretariat coordinate with those recently acceded 
Members which might have submitted their legislation as part of the accession process.   Pakistan considered that the dearth in notif ications in this area could be caused  by the low priority accorded to 
this subject rendering feedback from capitals not tim ely.  He thought the suggestion by Canada was 
useful and his delegation was ready to discuss it.  It would be a good idea to identify whether there 
were capacity gaps and how technical assistance could help.  He suggested that the status of  G/VAL/M/47 
 Page 13 
 
 
  notifications be made a regular part of the Committee' s agenda and, that before every regular meeting, 
the Secretariat issue a status report on the notifi cations.  This might work as a reminder to Members 
and provide encouragement from other Me mbers and an institutional arrangement. 
 8.5 Finally, she had requested those Members w ho had suggestions to follow them up in written 
format before the next formal meeting of th e Committee.  However, she had not received any 
submissions in this regard.  Therefore, she sugg ested that if Members would like to pursue any of 
these suggestions, that they submit their proposals in  writing so that the matter could be inscribed on 
the agenda of the next formal meeting.    
8.6 The Committee took note
 of this statement. 
 B. Q
UESTIONS FROM THE UNITED STATES TO INDIA AND INDONESIA  
8.7 The representative of the United States  continued to be interested in the questions he had 
submitted for Indonesia contained in document G/ VAL/W/167.  He asked Indonesia when it would 
submit a written response to his delegation's quest ions.  His delegation appreciated the responses 
provided by India to questions contained in that same document.  However, it had some concerns 
based upon the responses provided in document G/VA L/W/173 as well the statement by India at the 
last meeting.  India stated that customs official s had the discretion to decide whether a guarantee was 
sufficient or not.  Simply because an importer or exporter provided a guarantee did not mean it was sufficient.  Article 13 specifically provided the importer with the right to withdraw goods.  His 
delegation would therefore appreciate an explan ation from India about how to understand its 
statement in light of this commitment under the Agreement.   8.8 The representative of India
 could not provide a detailed reply in the absence of his customs 
officials.  But if the US would provide the questi ons in writing, he would send them to his capital for 
a detailed response.  As a preliminary comment, he noted that developing countries were mainly 
concerned with collection of customs duties.  Sometimes there could be difficulty in determining the value of the goods, or there could be other nationa l laws or requirements which may render the good 
prohibited for import.  Some examples included sanitary or phytosanitary requirements, animal 
quarantine requirements, or other administrative re quirements.  So goods were not freely importable 
in all cases.  So, if the importer wanted to wit hdraw the goods from customs, if the goods were freely 
importable, customs would only request the guarant ee.  If there were other import requirements, 
clearing the goods would also necessitate satisfacti on of the other requirements.  This was the 
standard in all countries.  Also, he asked how th e "sufficient guarantee" mentioned in the Agreement 
would be determined.  Obviously, the customs admi nistrations would determine this.  That was why 
in discussions on this matter, it had to be clearly stated that goods would be released only when 
Member's import requirements were complied with.  So, it was not a simple case of clearing goods 
with a guarantee equivalent to the duty.  It invol ved other aspects that were dealt with by customs 
administrations.    8.9 The Committee took note of the statements made.  
C. D
ATE OF THE NEXT MEETING  
8.10 Under this agenda item, the Chairman  informed Members that the Committee's next meeting 
was scheduled for Monday, 26 October 2009.     
 G/VAL/M/47 
Page 14  
 
  IX. ELECTION OF OFFICERS 
9.1 The Chairman
 informed Members that the Chairman of the Council for Trade in Goods had 
carried out informal consultations on a slate of na mes for appointment of Chairpersons of standing 
bodies in accordance with the established Guidelines fo r Appointment of Officers.  On the basis of 
consultations, he had proposed that the Co mmittee elect Dr. Mohammed Saeed (Pakistan) as 
Chairperson, for 2009. 
 9.2 The Committee
 elected Dr. Mohammed Saeed by acclamation. 
 9.3 The meeting was adjourned. 
  G/VAL/M/47 
 Page 15 
 
 
  Annex 1  
 
Report to the Committee on Customs Valuatio n on the work of the Technical Committee on 
Customs Valuation and Technical Assistance 
 
(May 2009) 
 
  Since the last meeting of the Committee on Cu stoms Valuation, the Technical Committee on 
Customs Valuation (Technical Committee) held its 27
th Session from 20 to 24 October 2008, and its 
28th Session from 30 March to 3 April 2009, at the WCO Head quarters in Brussels.  The meetings 
were well attended as of 53 Member countri es and 4 International Organizations (27th Session) and 62 
Member countries and 5 International Organizations (28th Session) were represented.  The reports of 
its 26th and 27th Sessions, which have been adopted by the Technical Committee, are contained in 
documents VT0626E1c and VT0663E1c respectively. 
 
Intercessional developments  
  The Director gave a brief update on the Policy Commission meeting in December 2008, in Buenos Aires (Argentina), which included, inter alia , the global financial crisis and Customs in the 
21
st Century.  The new elected Secretary General, Mr . Kunio Mikuriya, outlined the strategic vision of 
the WCO in the 21st Century and the changes required to meet the needs and demands of Customs 
Administrations.  In the field of Customs Valuati on, the development of a Revenue Package, Risk 
Assessment and Post Clearance Tools were considered as essential.   The Observer from the WTO in her oral report informed the Technical Committee that there 
was no meeting of the Committee on Customs Valua tion during the intersession, and apprised the 
Technical Committee of the WTO’s e fforts to respond to the global economic downturn.  She also 
stated in response to a query that 43 WTO Member s had not yet notified about  the implementation of 
the Agreement under Article 22.  Technical Assistance and Capacity Building.
 
 
 Since our last report to the Committee on Cu stoms Valuation, the WCO and WTO had jointly 
conducted a National Seminar on im plementation of the WTO Agreem ent on 26-27 February 2009, in 
Laos.  A regional seminar was or ganized by the WCO under the CCF/Japan Fund in Seoul, Korea 
(Rep. of) for the Asia Pacific Region in March 2009.  A National Seminar on Customs Valuation and 
post clearance audit was conducted by the WCO from 22 to 30 April for officers of Bhutan and Thai 
Customs in Bangkok.  A Regional Valuation Works hop for the East & Southern Africa Region is 
being conducted by the WCO at J ohannesburg from 1 to 5 June 2009. 
 Fellowship Programme
 
 
 Two Fellowship Programmes were organized at the WCO Headquarters.  The 48th Fellowship 
Programme for English-speaking officers was held  from 29 September to 24 October 2008.  The 49th 
Fellowship Programme for French-speaking officers w as organized from 23 February to 3 April 2009.  
A total of six officers chose Customs Valuation as their field of study.  
 G/VAL/M/47 
Page 16  
 
  27
th Session of the Technical Committee  
  At its 27
th Session in October 2008, the Technical Co mmittee continued to consider technical 
questions on Royalties and License Fees submitted by  Brazil, Canada, Colombia and Japan.  The 
Technical Committee decided to deal with the ex pressions "conditions of sale of the goods" and 
related to the goods used within the context of Ar ticle 8.1 (c) covering royalties and licence fees by 
way of a draft commentary.  
 THE TECHNICAL COMMITTEE ALSO DISCUSSED THE FOLLOWING 
TECHNICAL ISSUES : 
 
• Customs Valuation of imported electricity (Brazil) 
 
• Customs Valuation treatment of busin ess design documentation (Kazakhstan) 
  However it concluded discussion on the following two issues raised by Mauritius and decided 
to put them in Part III of the Valuation Conspectus of Technical Questions : 
 
• Valuation of perfume testers (Mauritius) 
 
• Valuation of cinematographic films (Mauritius) 
 28
th Session of the Technical Committee  
 
 The Technical Committee at its 28th Session in March-April 2009, continued to deliberate 
upon the technical issues on Royalties and License F ees, Customs Valuation of imported electricity 
and Customs Valuation treatment of busi ness design documentation discussed at the 27th Session, 
besides other routine matters.   The draft Commentary prepared by the Secretariat was examined and comments made by 
Delegates would be incorporated in a new doc ument to be drafted by the Secretariat. 
  The Technical Committee also deliberated upon the issue of related party transactions and 
Transfer Pricing within the context of a draft case study.  
 Mr. Guzman Mañes from Uruguay was elected as the Chairperson, and Mrs. Didem Yilmaz 
from Turkey and Mr. Nobuyuki Shokai from Japan we re elected as the two Vi ce-Chairpersons for a 
period of one year.  Instrument approved by the Technical Committee on Customs Valuation
 
 
 The Technical Committee concluded the discu ssion on Customs Valuation treatment of 
business design documentation (Kazakhstan) by appr oving draft Advisory Opinion No. 22.1 on 
“Valuation of imported technical documents relating to design a nd development of an industrial 
plant”.  The Council at its 113/114th Sessions  in June 2009, is likely to adopt the draft Advisory 
Opinion. 
 
  G/VAL/M/47 
 Page 17 
 
 
  Private Sector Workshops on Customs Valuation and Transfer Pricing  
  The Third Workshop on Customs Valuation and Transfer Pricing for the Private Sector was organized on 14-15 Nov 2008, at the WCO Headquart ers.  The Fourth such Workshop is being 
organized on 12
-13 May 2009, at the WCO with resource persons from the WCO, EU and 
OECD/Belgian Tax administration. 
 International Co-operation
 
  The Director of Tariff and Trade Affairs, Mr. Antoine Manga, represented the WCO at the 
40
th Session of the United Nations Statistical Commission in New York from 23 to 27 February 2009.  
He also participated in the Inte r Agency Consultation Meeting devoted to the future of international 
trade statistics.  
 
__________