. /.   WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  G/VAL/W/175 
27 January 2009 
 (09-0368) 
Committee on Customs Valuation Original:   English 
  
 
NOTIFICATIONS UNDER ARTICLE 22 OF THE CUSTOMS  
VALUATION AGREEMENT 
 
Questions from the United States Regarding the Legislation of  Belize, 
 
Egypt, and Nigeria  
 
Communication from the United States 
 
  The following communication, dated 16 January 2009, is circulated at the request of the 
delegation of the United States. 
 
_______________ 
 
 
Questions from the United States regarding Belize’s Legislation
 
 
 The following question was raised durin g the meeting of the Committee on Customs 
Valuation on 17 October 2008.     The United States has reviewed Belize’s Cust oms and Excise Duties Act, as well as Belize’s 
responses to the Checklist of Issues.  Based upon this  review, we would like to inquire as to whether 
Belize has incorporated the Interpretative Notes,  contained in Annex 1 of the Customs Valuation 
Agreement, into their laws or regulations?   
• If so, where can these provisions be found?   
• If not, does Belize intend to do so?   
 
_______________ 
 
 
Questions from the United States regarding Egypt’s Legislation
 
  The United States would like to thank Egypt for its response, provided in document 
G/VAL/W/169.  However, in reviewing the response, we continue to have questions and hope to try 
to clarify a few remaining issues.  Specifically, we  still have several concerns about Articles 22 and 
23 of Law no. 95 for year 2005, and the executive regulations thereto.   We would appreciate if Egypt could provide an  explanation on what is meant by the term 
"actual value," as referenced in their Law and regulations.   
  Additionally, taking into consideration the response provided in G/VAL/W/169, we are still concerned about the implementation of the Interpretative Notes.   G/VAL/W/175 
Page 2  
 
   Page 5 of G/VAL/W/169 references the fact that customs officials take into consideration the 
Interpretative Notes of the Agreement.  Could Egypt elaborate on what is meant by this statement?  
How do customs officials have access to  the Interpretative Notes in order to take them into account?   
 
_______________ 
 
 
Questions from the United States regarding Nigeria’s Legislation
 
  
 We have reviewed the provisions of Nigeria’ s Customs and Excise Management (Amendment 
Act) of 2003, as well as Nigeria’s responses to th e Checklist of Issues.  Based upon this review, we 
have the following comments and questions regarding Nigeria’s implementation of certain provisions 
of the WTO Customs Valuation Agreement.    
 Does Nigeria provide a provision that implemen ts the language from Article 1.2(a) of the 
Agreement?  It appears that Article 1(d) of the Customs and Excise Management Act omits the 
language from Article 1.2(a) that states, "the fact  that the buyer and seller are related within the 
meaning of Article 15 shall not in itself be grounds  for regarding transaction value as unacceptable." 
  The United States is also concerned that Articl es 2.3 and 3.3 of the Agreement have not been 
fully implemented in Nigeria’s legislation.  Do es Nigeria require that, where more than one 
transaction value of identical or similar goods is found,  the lowest value shall be used to determine the 
customs value?  Where can these provisions be found in Nigeria’s legislation?  
  We have noticed that according to Article 8 of Nigeria’s legislation, importers are only 
allowed the option to reverse the order of applicat ion of Article 5 and 6 of the Agreement if it is 
approved by the Board.  Based upon our research, it does not appear that Nigeria has made a reservation under Annex III.3 concerning the reversal of sequential order of Articles 5 and 6.  As a 
result, we were surprised to see this requirement .  We would therefore like to hear from Nigeria 
regarding the basis of this provision.   
 In respect of Article 13(5) of the Act, which court or courts in Nigeria have jurisdiction of 
matters involving customs valuation?   It appears that the Interpreta tive Notes of the CVA have not b een incorporated into Nigeria’s 
legislation, except by reference in Article 14 of the Act.  In view of the fact that the Interpretative 
Notes are integral to the proper implementation of  the Agreement, does Nigeria have any plans to 
incorporate them in greater detail?     Could Nigeria provide an explanation on how  Article 14 of their legislation should be 
interpreted and implemented?   
 
 
__________