WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  WT/REG261/2 
26 February 2010 
 
 (10-1100) 
Committee on Regional Trade Agreements Original:  English 
  
 
FREE TRADE AGREEMENT BETWEEN TURKEY AND GEORGIA 
(GOODS) 
 
Questions and Replies
 
 
 
 The following communication, dated 24 February 2010, is being circulated at the request of 
the delegations of Turkey and Georgia.   This document reproduces the questions addressed to the Parties and the responses submitted. 
 
_______________ 
 
 
Questions from the Delegation of Brazil
 
 
1. Brazil would like to have further inform ation about the “approved exporter”.  
Protocol II, Article 23, Paragraph 2 of the Ag reement sets forth that customs authorities or 
other competent authority may grant status of  approved exporter, subject to any conditions 
which they consider appropriate.  Is it possible to have more information on the conditions that 
both delegations are considering in order to gr ant such status?  Can the competent authorities 
of the importing country ask the authorities of the exporting country to withdraw the status 
granted to an approved exporter? 
 According to Article 23 of Protocol II, an a pproved exporter is an expor ter who is allowed to 
make out invoice declarations instead of issuing of movement certificate EUR.1 regardless of value limit for consignments on condition that they meet certain conditions imposed by the customs authorities or the relevant competent authorities of the exporting Party.  
 
 The customs authorities or other competent authorities may grant the status of approved 
exporter subject to any conditions wh ich they consider appropriate.  
  The authorities should give particular cons ideration when granting status of approved 
exporter to the following points: 
 
(a) whether the exporter exports regularly:  it is not important to focus on a given number 
of consignments or a particular sum. Th e authorities should look into how regularly 
the operator carries out such operations; 
(b) whether the exporter is at all times in a position to supply evidence of origin for the 
goods to be exported;  
(c) whether the exporter knows the current rules of origin and is in possession of all the 
documents proving origin;  WT/REG261/2 
Page 2  
 
  (d) whether the exporter may offer sufficient gua rantees concerning the originating status 
of the goods and the ability to meet all resulting obligations.  
 Notwithstanding the request of importing country ’s authority, the authority of the exporting 
Party may withdraw the authorization at any tim e when the approved exporter no longer offers the 
guarantees and does not fulfil the conditions referred to the relevant Articles of Protocol II or 
otherwise makes an incorrect use of the authorization.  
  "Turkey has adapted provisions of Article 23 of  the Protocol II to the FTA between Turkey 
and Georgia, to its national legislation and, provisions of the Agreement governing “approved 
exporter” are applicable in Turkey. 
 
 However, the Government of Georgia, and in pa rticular, the Ministry of Finance of Georgia, 
is currently working on the creation of internal rules regulating the status of “approved exporter”.  
Until now, the provisions of the Article 23 of the Prot ocol II to the FTA have not been used by the 
Parties.  
 
2. Protocol II, Article 34 sets forth that where di sputes arise in relation to the verification 
procedures they shall be submitted to the Joint  Committee.  Could more information about this 
Joint Committee be provided? Is there any pr ovision regarding the functioning of this 
Committee? 
 Articles 27 and 28 of the Agreement are th e provisions regarding the establishment and 
procedures of the Joint Committee. 
 
 
 According to Article 27, by the Agreement a Joint Committee is established in which each 
Party is represented. The Joint Committee is respons ible for the administration of the Agreement and 
to ensure its proper implementation. As indicated in the Article, for the proper implementation of the 
Agreement, the Parties shall exchange informatio n and, at the request of any Party, shall hold 
consultations within the Joint Committee. Th e Joint Committee shall keep under review the 
possibility of further removal of the obstacles to tr ade between the Parties.  The Joint Committee may 
take decisions in the cases provided for in the Ag reement, such as re-export and serious shortage 
problems, rules of competition concerning undertakin gs, fulfillment of obligations, dispute settlement, 
and protocols and annexes, in acco rdance with the provisions of paragraph 3 of Article 28 of the 
Agreement.  On other matters the Jo int Committee may make recommendations.  
 
 In Article 28, the functioning of the Joint Comm ittee is explained. According to Article 28, 
for the proper implementation of the Agreement, th e Joint Committee shall meet at an appropriate 
level whenever necessary upon request but at least on ce a year. Either Party may request a meeting to 
be held. The Joint Committee shall act  by consensus.  If a representa tive in the Joint Committee of a 
Party to the Agreement has accep ted a decision subject to reservation of the fulfillment of 
constitutional requirements, the decision shall enter into force, if no later date is contained therein, on 
the date of the receipt of the written notification st ating that such requirements have been fulfilled. 
The Joint Committee shall adopt its ru les of procedure, which shall, inter alia , contain provisions for 
convening meetings and for the designation of th e Chairperson and his/her term of office. 
Furthermore, the Joint Committee may decide to set  up such sub-committees and working groups as it 
considers necessary to assist it in accomplishing its tasks.   WT/REG261/2 
 Page 3 
 
 
  3. Regarding Protocol II, Article 9 of the Agreement, (Accessories, spare parts and tools),  
(a) What is the correct interpretation in those cases when the origin requirement implies 
changes in the heading of Harmonized System and a non-originating part of the product does not go through this change?  Is the final product going to be considered originating?   
 Accessories, spare parts and tools dispatched with a piece of equipment, machine, apparatus 
or vehicle, which are part of the normal equipment and included in the price thereof or which are not 
separately invoiced, are regarded as one with the piece of equipment, machine, apparatus or vehicle in 
question. In case that the origin requirement for e quipment, machine and apparatus or vehicle requires 
change of tariff classification (CTC), the product is considered originating on condition that all 
non-originating materials used in manufacture are classi fied within a heading other than that of final 
product.  However, non-originating accessories, spar e parts and tools which are dispatched to the 
product are not subject to that kind of requirement.   
(b) Would it be possible to give an example of an accessory, spare part or tool that does not 
go through heading change? 
(c) Moreover, for products subjected to value added requirement, shall the value of the 
non-originating accessories, spare parts and t ools be taken into account in calculating 
the percentage of non-originating materials in the final product? 
 For products subjected to value added requirement, the value of the non-originating 
accessories, spare parts and tools shall be taken in to account in calculating the percentage of non-
originating materials in the final product. 
  For example, television receivers originating in Turkey are sold to Georgia with remote 
controls made in Japan.  The remote controls ar e invoiced and packed with the television receivers 
and are of a kind customarily sold with television r eceivers.  Since the television receivers originate, 
the remote controls are considered originating for purposes of satisfying the required change in tariff 
classification.  The remote controls must, however, be counted as non-originating materials in the calculation of added value-content.  
4. In relation to other agreements concluded by the Parties, Article 12 does not prevent the 
Parties from maintaining or establishing custom s union, free trade areas or arrangements with 
third countries, provided that these do not have  a negative impact on bilateral trade, in 
particular on rules of origin under the Agree ment.  What could be considered a “negative 
impact on bilateral trade” and what kind of measure would be taken in such situations? 
 As a negative impact on bilateral trade can be  considered a request from the Party to this 
agreement, which has established customs union, free trade area or arrangement with third country, to 
use in bilateral trade the rules of origin other than  mutually agreed before and stipulated by the free 
trade agreement between the Parties.    These kind of decisions have to be negotia ted and discussed in th e Joint Committee and 
measures must be taken accordingly.    WT/REG261/2 
Page 4  
 
  5. Article 13 of the Agreement states that measures against dumping in bilateral trade 
must be taken in accordance with Article VI of the GATT.  Why is there no mention of the Agreement on Implementation of Article VI of  the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 
1994 (Antidumping Agreement)? 
 There is not an explicit reference to th e Antidumping Agreement in Article 13 of the 
Agreement.  However, in Article 13 it is indicated th at if a Party finds that dumping is taking place in 
trade relations governed by the Agreement, then it may take appropriate measures against that practice 
in accordance with Article VI of the GATT 1994 and the rules established by agreements related to 
that Article.  “The rules established by agreemen ts related to that Article” includes also the 
Agreement on Implementation of Article VI of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 
(Antidumping Agreement).  
 
6. The Agreement contains specific provision s on the implementation of bilateral 
safeguards and measures to safe guard the balance of payment.  Are there examples where such 
measures have been implemented before by the parties so as to provide members with an 
in-depth analysis of such safeguard measures? 
 Turkey and Georgia have not implemented any safeguard measures in the framework of this 
Agreement or their other free trade agreements (FTAs).    
__________