RESTRICTED  WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  G/LIC/M/25 
14 May 2007 
 (07-1982) 
Committee on Import Licensing  
  
 
MINUTES OF THE MEETING HELD ON 2 April 2007 
 
Chairperson:  Mr. Evelio Alvarado (Guatemala
) 
  
 The Committee on Import Licensing held its twenty-fifth meeting on 2 April 2007.
1 The 
agenda proposed for the meeting, contained in  WTO/AIR/2985 which was circulated on 23 March 
2007, was adopted as follows:    
 
Table of Contents
 
 
1. Members' compliance with notification obligations – Developments since the 
last meeting................................................................................................................... ...........1  
2. Notifications .................................................................................................................. ..........5  
(i) Notifications under Articles 1.4(a) and/or 8.2(b) of the Agreement (publications 
and/or   legislation) .......................................................................................................... ........5  
(ii) Notifications under Article 5 of the Agreement (new import licensing procedures, 
changes to existing licensing procedures and reverse notifications) .......................................5  
(iii) Notifications under Article 7.3 of the Ag reement (Replies to the Questionnaire on 
Import Licensing Procedures)..................................................................................................5  
3. Other Bu siness ................................................................................................................. .......6  
 Information on technical assistance ac tivities related to the Agreement on Import 
Licensing Procedures ...............................................................................................................6  
4. Date of the ne xt meeting....................................................................................................... ..7 
5. Election of Officers ........................................................................................................... ......7  
 
1. Members' compliance with notification ob ligations – Developments since the last 
meeting 
1.1 The Chairperson  informed the Committee that sin ce the last meeting, a total of 
15 notifications had been received: 3 notificati ons under Articles 1.4(a) and/or 8.2(b) on 
legislation/publications; 2 under Article 5.1-5.4 on new licensing procedures or changes to the 
procedures in force; and 10 under Article 7.3 – repli es to the Questionnaire.  As of the day of the 
meeting, out of a total Membership of 150, counting the European Communities (EC 27) as one 
                                                      
1 Initially scheduled to take place on 30 March 2007. G/LIC/M/25 
Page 2  
 
  Member, there remained 21 Members
2, including Viet Nam the most recently acceded Member, who 
had not submitted any noti fication under any provision  of the Agreement since joining the WTO.  He 
urged all those Members who had not yet provided any information of their laws and regulations 
relevant to import licensing to submit their notifi cations before the Committee without further delay. 
   
1.2 As to notifications concerning Members' laws  and regulations (under Articles 1.4(a) and/or 
8.2(b)), only a cumulative total of 92 Me mbers, counting the EC-27 as one, had submitted 
notifications.  Thus, 31  Members had yet to submit their notifications under this provision.  Under 
paragraphs 1 to 4 of Article 5, only 26 Member s, the EC-27 counted as one, had notified new 
licensing procedures or changes in the existing ones.  Of these one Member (Papua New Guinea) had 
notified changes to import licensing procedures  without submitting the initial notification of 
legislation or its replies to the Questionnaire.  The Chairperson urged those Members who had not yet 
notified either their new licensing procedures or cha nges in existing procedures to do so.  He informed 
the Committee that, while Article 5.5 of the Ag reement allowed Members to submit counter-
notifications, up to the present no such counter-notifica tions had been received.  As to the replies to 
the Annual Questionnaire under Article 7.3, he info rmed the Committee that only a cumulative total 
of 89 Members, counting EC-27 as one, had submitted their replies to the Questionnaire since the entry into force of the WTO Agreement.  He also recalled that the annual deadline for the responses 
was 30 September, a deadline often not respected by many Members.  He urged those Members who had not yet responded to the Questionnaire to subm it their responses without further delay.  He 
highlighted that Members who did not apply im port licensing procedures or had no laws or 
regulations relevant to the Agreem ent were also required to notify the Committee of this fact in order 
to obtain a complete overview of the licensing regimes of all Members.  He asked the Secretariat to send reminders to Members in this regard before  30 September 2007 and stated that compliance with 
the notification obligations under the Agreement rema ined low.  Finally, he informed the Committee 
that the Secretariat had contacted the delegation or the capital of those Members who had sent 
incomplete draft notifications to the CRN.  Such  incomplete notifications included not attaching 
copies of the legislation, or not providing the summary in one of the three WTO official languages.  However, in most cases there had b een no feedback to these contacts. 
 1.3 The representative from the United States
 said that his delegation appreciated the submissions 
from Members, especially those that had notified for the first time, since notifying the licensing 
system, or lack of one, was central to the obligations of the Agreement on Import Licensing 
Procedures.  He thanked Congo, Israel, Rwanda , Saudi Arabia and Thailand for their initial 
submissions to the Import Licensing Questionnaire a nd urged countries that had never submitted any 
notifications under the Agreement to do so promptly.  He pointed out that import licensing, in and of itself, might constitute a serious source of non-tariff  restrictions on imports in many markets.  Thus, 
transparency in the Comm ittee was important to mitigate such ef fects.  Responses to questions posed 
by other Members was also an important issue and his delegation would raise some points in this regard.  The US appreciated the work of the Chai r and the Secretariat in encouraging compliance, 
such as sending reminders to Memb ers on notifications, and believed that the ongoing efforts in this 
regard had significantly improved the notification situation.   
1.4 The Committee took note
 of the statements made. 
 1.5 The Chairperson
 informed the Committee that, since the last meeting, the following questions 
and answers from delegations concerning licensing sy stems maintained by some Members had been 
circulated in the G/LIC/Q/- series: (i) questi ons from Australia to Malaysia, from Mexico to 
                                                      
2 Angola, Belize, Botswana, Cambodia, Central African Republic, Congo, Djibouti, Egypt, Guinea, 
Guinea Bissau, Kuwait, Lesotho, Mauritania, Mozambique , Myanmar, Nepal, St. Vincent & the Grenadines, 
Sierra Leone, Solomon Islands, Tanzania and Vietnam 
  G/LIC/M/25 
 Page 3 
 
 
  Guatemala, and from the United States to Brazil and Indonesia (documents G/LIC/Q/MYS/4, 
G/LIC/Q/GTM/2, G/LIC/Q/BRA/3/Add.2 and G/LIC/Q/ IDN/7/Add.1, respectively);  and (ii) replies 
from the United States to questions posed by China (document G/LIC/Q/ USA/2).  He also stated that 
the Secretariat, following the notification proce dures agreed by the Committee on 6 November 2001, 
had reminded the delegations of Malaysia; Guatem ala; Brazil and Indonesia of pending replies to 
questions put to them regarding their licensing regim es.  He invited the delegations that were in a 
position to provide replies to the questions to do so, keeping in mind that, under the procedures adopted by the Committee (G/LIC/4), they were requi red to provide replies in writing, with copies to 
the Secretariat and to those delegations that had posed questions .  
 
1.6 The representative of Malaysia
 informed the Committee that th e questions posed by Australia 
(G/LIC/Q/MYS/4) had been sent to the capital but th at his delegation had not yet received responses 
since the details of import licensing system questioned by Australia involved the Ministry of International Trade and Industry as well as various depa rtments in the Ministry of Agriculture.  He 
believed that his capital would be answering these questions during the coming weeks.   
 
1.7  The representative from Australia
 thanked Malaysia for the information provided and 
reiterated his delegation's interest  in Malaysia's import licensing regime given that the products 
covered by the import measures, ranging from au tomobiles to various agricultural products, 
represented about a third of Malaysia's tariff lines.  
1.8 The representative from Guatemala
 informed the Committee that  the questions posed by 
Mexico (G/LIC/Q/GTM/2) had been conveyed to hi s capital and that his authorities continued to 
examine them and that the replies would be tr ansmitted to Mexico and the Committee as soon as 
possible.  
1.9 The representative from Mexico
 thanked Guatemala for the information provided and said 
that his delegation would await the replies as soon as possible.   1.10 The representative of the United States
 recalled Brazil's oral responses at the last meeting of 
the Committee and welcomed Brazil' s notifications under Articles 5; 7.3; 1.4(a) and 8.2(b), in 
documents G/LIC/N/2/BRA/3; G/LIC/N/3/BRA/5 and G/LIC/N/1/BRA/3, respectively.  He said that 
the notifications provided general information a bout Brazil's import licensing regime but did not 
answer the questions the US had submitted on cer tain lithium products, including lithium hydroxide 
and lithium carbonate on which the United States had been consistently requesting information for 
three years.  Natural lithium products such as lithium carbonate and lithiu m hydroxide were all 
commercially traded products, widely available on global markets and traded throughout the world as 
they were important components in the manufactur ing of a number of common commercial products.  
The US was not aware of other countries, except Br azil, that restricted the import of natural lithium 
compounds.  At the October 2006 Committee meeting, his delegation had asked again for an update 
on the findings of the Inter-Ministerial Group and al so had submitted written questions, circulated in 
G/LIC/Q/BRA/3/Add.2.  He requested Brazil to pr ovide the Committee with the findings of the Inter-
Ministerial Group and to respond to the written qu estions since Brazil had neither notified its 
restrictions on these products, nor responded to th e questions.  He also requested the Brazilian 
authorities to ensure that its import licensing regime  for these products was fully consistent with the 
WTO requirements.  1.11 In response, the representative from Brazil
 informed the Committee th at the US' concern had 
been discussed both at the Committee meetings and b ilaterally.  At the bilateral meeting, Brazil had 
provided some information and explanation about the ongoing consultation process.  Unfortunately 
his capital had not yet provided any final instructions nor replies since the issue was still being considered by his authorites.  G/LIC/M/25 
Page 4  
 
  1.12 The representative of Indonesia
, with regard to the questions posed by the United States in 
document G/LIC/Q/IDN/7/Add.1, informed the Committee that Indonesia had amended Decree 
No. 732/MPP/Kep/10/2002 concerning certain te xtile products, through Decree No. 19/M-
DAG/PER/9/2005 of the Ministry of Trade relating to the "Regulation on the Imports of Textiles and Textile Products."  In accordance with the latter and with Article 2.2 of the Agreement on Import 
Licensing Procedures, Indonesia applied automatic licensing procedures as follows: "[...] Director 
General shall issue an acknowledgement or refusal of acknowledgement as IP-Textile to a proposal as 
mentioned in Article 3 within the period at the la test 10 (ten) working days commencing from such 
proposal was accepted".  
1.13 The representative from the United States
 thanked Indonesia for its responses and reiterated 
the  request that the Government of Indonesia eith er eliminate or modify its existing import licensing 
regime under Decree No. 732/2002, remove the provisions  that restricted or distorted trade, and bring 
its import licensing regime into conformity with  WTO requirements.  His delegation remained 
concerned that importers were facing an undue bur den in attempting to obtain import licences for 
textiles.  Indonesia required all importers to submit a monthly report to the Minister of Trade to track 
all importation of applicable fabrics by date, destin ation, quantity, duty and country of origin and, 
further required, that all importers submit an annual Statement of Plan in order to receive an import 
licence.  These requirements might unduly deter leg itimate trade.  In the view of the US Decree 
732/2002 restricted and distorted trade while requi ring that only manufacturers might import fabric, 
and that the imported fabric might not be sold or otherwise transferred to ot her legitimate buyers.  
These restrictions unnecessarily limited the market for imported fabric, allowed domestic producers to 
limit import competition, and unfairly restricted ac cess to imported fabrics for retail customers and 
other distributors.  Meanwhile, domestic fabrics, id entical to those listed in Attachment 1 of the 
Decree, might be freely sold or otherwise transfer red, without any of the procedures and requirements 
imposed on purchasers of imported fabric.  Previous  responses by the Government of Indonesia in 
paragraph 6 (ii) of document G/LIC/Q/IDN/5 a nd, in its responses to Australia in document 
G/LIC/Q/IDN/6, specifically stated that the 10 day period required for licensing was “much less than provided for in Article 3.5(f) of the Agreement on Import Licensing procedures which requires 30 
working days to be approved.”  This statement indi cated that the licences were in fact non-automatic.  
However, in G/LIC/Q/IDN/8 Indonesia had stated that the licence was “automatic”.  He therefore 
requested Indonesia to clarify whether the Decree  constituted “automatic licensing”, as defined in 
Article 2 of the Agreement on Import Licensing Pro cedures or “non-automatic licensing”, as defined 
in Article 3 of that Agreement, and to report to the Committee. 
 
1.14 The representative of China , thanked the United States for its responses to its questions in 
documents G/LIC/Q/USA/1 and 2.   
1.15 The representative of Australia
 recalled his delegation's questions to China about the import 
licensing procedures on iron ore and copper ore, an i ssue that had been rai sed three times in the 
Committee.  His authorities were monitoring those re gimes and had concerns about their consistency 
with the WTO Agreement on Import Licensing Proce dures.  Given the latter and the substantial 
commercial interests of Australia in those regimes,  his delegation had circulated some questions in 
document G/LIC/Q/CHN/19, after the Fifth Transiti onal Review of China.  He urged China to 
respond since it was an important issue for a number of Members.   1.16 The representative of China
 replied that at the last mee ting his delegation had provided an 
oral reply and that the written responses were in the process of translation.3  
 
1.17 The Committee took note  of the statements made. 
 
                                                      
3 Circulated after the meeting in document G/LIC/Q/CHN/20  G/LIC/M/25 
 Page 5 
 
 
  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 Committee4, 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 under 
these provisions there were three notifications be fore the Committee submitted by three Members: 
Armenia (G/LIC/N/1/ARM/2);  Costa Rica (G/L IC/N/1/CRI/2) and Tunisia (G/LIC/N/1/TUN/2 and 
Corr. 1).  He recalled that at the last meeting and given the amount of no tifications received, the 
notification submitted by Brazil (G/LIC/N/1/BRA/3) w ould be considered at the current meeting and, 
that after the issuance of the airgram convening the previous meeting, a notification from Haiti 
(G/LIC/N/1/HTI/2) had also been received and that th is notification would also be considered at this 
meeting. 
 
2.2 The Committee took note  of the notifications.  
 
(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 procedur es, 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 we re two notifications submitted by Costa Rica 
(G/LIC/N/2/CRI/1) and Korea (G/LIC/N/2/KOR/1).  He also recalled that, at the last meeting, he had 
informed the Committee that the notificati on received from Brazil under this agenda item 
(G/LIC/N/2/BRA/3) was not translated into the three WTO official languages and would also be 
considered at the present meeting.  
 
2.4 The Committee took note  of the notifications.   
 
(iii) Notifications under Article 7.3 of the Agreem ent (Replies to the Questionnaire on Import 
Licensing Procedures) 
2.5 The Chairperson  informed the Committee that there were ten notifications from nine 
Members before the Committee, received from Cost a Rica, Dominica, the European Communities, 
Indonesia, Korea, Thailand, Tunisia, Trinidad and Tobago and Singapore.5  He recalled that, at the 
last meeting, he had announced that notifications from Canada and Haiti,6 received after the issuance 
of the airgram convening that meeting, would be cons idered at the present meeting.  He also recalled 
that the notifications listed in the airgram convening the previous meeting and received from 
Australia; Brazil; China; Colombia; the Democratic  Republic of Congo; Israel; the Kyrgyz Republic; 
                                                      
4 G/LIC/3. 
5 G/LIC/N/3/CRI/4; G/LIC/ N/3/DMA/2; G/LIC/N/3/EEC/9 and Add.1;  G/LIC/N/3/IDN/3;  G/LIC/N/3/KOR/5; 
G/LIC/N/3/THA/1; G/LIC/N/ 3/TTO/5; G/LIC/N/3/TUN/ 4 and G/LIC/N/3/SGP/5. 
6 G/LIC/N/3/CAN/5 and Corr .1, and G/LIC/N/3/HTI/3. G/LIC/M/25 
Page 6  
 
  Malaysia; Saint Lucia; Saudi Arabia and Turkey,
7 would also be considered at the present meeting.  
With regard to the notifications received from Th ailand and Trinidad and Tobago (G/LIC/N/3/THA/1 
and G/LIC/N/3/TTO/5), which were not available in the three WTO official languages, he announced that they would be considered at the next mee ting and invited delegations  to raise questions and 
comments to be considered by Thailand and Tr inidad and Tobago at the next meeting.  
 
2.6 The Committee took note
 of the statements and of the notifications. 
 2.7 The representative of the United States,
 regarding Argentina’s response to the Annual 
Questionnaire in document G/LIC/N/3/ARG/3, made several comments and questions.  Argentina had 
stated that “footwear import licences are allocated to both foreign and domestic producers.”  Could 
Argentina describe how these licences were allocated?  Argentina had also stated that “certificates are 
issued and must be presented together with the r est of the documentation required for inward customs 
clearance.”  Could Argentina explain how these certif icates were issued?  In response to question 4 of 
the Questionnaire, which referred to whether import li censing was “intended to restrict the quantity or 
value of imports,” Argentina had answered  that “ licensing does not restrict either the quantity or the 
value of imports.”  However, in its reply to ques tion 6.IV of the same Questionnaire, Argentina had 
stated that “the current footwear quotas stem from the application of a safeguard measure.”  Did Argentina currently have a quota in place for footw ear?  Was this quota enforced through restricting 
the quantity of import licences granted for footwear?  Could Argentina identify the safeguards or any 
other quantitative restrictions applied in conform ity with WTO rules that would justify Argentina’s 
efforts to control these imports?  Question 6.V of the Questionnaire required Argentina to describe the 
length of time Argentina required for processing a pplications; Argentina had responded that import 
certificates for products including footwear and toys took “a maximum of 30 calendar days.”  However, US exporters had reported that in prac tice, the processing time period was between 60 to 
90 days.  Could Argentina describe how it proces sed non-automatic import licences to ensure its 
system's compliance with the WTO?  He requested Argentina to inform the US on the issues raised 
and to ensure that its import licensing regime for these products was fully consistent with WTO 
requirements.  2.8 In response, the representative from Argentina
 said that she would convey the questions to her 
capital and recalled that, at the last Committee meetin g, her delegation had responded to the questions 
put by the US at an earlier meeting, some of  which had been raised once again by the US. 
 2.9 The Committee took note
 of the statements and questions. 
 
3. Other Business 
 Information on technical assistance activities rel ated to the Agreement on Import Licensing 
Procedures  
3.1 The Chairperson  informed the Committee that, since the last meeting, two countries in the 
process of accession had requested technical assistan ce to the Secretariat on the Agreement on Import 
Licensing Procedures:  Montenegro and Tajikistan.  In this regard a National Seminar with the 
participation of representatives from various mini stries and governmental institutions took place in 
Podgoridza, Montenegro, from 14-15 November 2006 .  Another National Seminar took place in 
Dushanbe, Tajikistan, from 5-7 March 2007.  The ob jective of these two activ ities was to enhance the 
administrative capability of the different authorities to clearly understand the aim, purposes and 
                                                      
7 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/25 
 Page 7 
 
 
  particularities of the Agreement.  Training was also provided to enable the authorities to differentiate 
between the two types of import licences and other trade barriers whose legitimate objectives could be 
better obtained through less trade-restrictive and less trade-distorting measures such as technical 
regulations, sanitary and phyto-sanitary measures, et c.  These areas were covered as suggested by the 
local authorities to better deal and respond to the concerns and questions raised by Members on 
import licensing procedures in the accession processes of  Montenegro and Tajikis tan.  Two additional 
requests for technical assistance from Serbia and Belize had been received by the Secretariat.  3.2 The Committee took note
 of the information. 
 4. Date of the next meeting 
4.1 The Chairperson
 informed Members that the Secretariat had tentatively reserved Monday, 
8 October 2007 for the next meeting of the Committ ee, on the understanding th at additional meetings 
would be convened if necessary.  He also reminde d Members that the Sixth Transitional Review of 
China would be carried out at that meeting.  He encouraged Members to send their questions to China 
as soon as possible so as to allow China to pr epare its responses well in advance.   
 4.2 The Committee took note
 of the information. 
 
5. Election of Officers 
5.1 The Committee elected by acclamation Mr. Marco J. KASSAJA (Tanzania) as Chairperson of 
the Committee, to hold office until the end of th e first meeting of 2008, under Rule 12 of the 
Committee's Rules of Procedure (G/L/147).  It also  elected by acclamation Mrs. Anna ASHIKALI 
(Cyprus) as Vice-Chairperson.   
__________