WT/TPR/S/163 Trade Policy Review 
Page 92 
 
 
IV. TRADE POLICIES BY SECTOR 
(1) OVERVIEW  
1. In 2004, agriculture's share of GDP (including  livestock and forestry) was 11.3 per cent.  
Agriculture is still a key sector of the economy; the most important activities are livestock breeding, 
cereal production, dairy production and the production of wool.  Agricultural activities have been 
recovering since 2002, after having faced climate, sanitary and market problems. 
2. Tariff protection is slightly higher for agricultura l products than for non-agricultural products;  
the highest tariff protection applies to the manufact ure of foods, beverages and tobacco.  Minimum 
prices and anti-dumping have been used to protect sugar and oil production.  Furthermore, the sector 
in general receives certain subsidies and fiscal exem ptions or is subject to lower taxes.  Special 
support has also been given for the cultivation of fruit trees and vines, pasteurized milk and 
conversion of sugar production.  The export of certa in agricultural products such as hides and skins, 
wool and meat is subject to export taxes. 
3. If agro-industry is excluded, Uruguay's manufactu ring sector is small.  Since the previous 
review, real GDP in the sector has shadowed the general trends in the domestic economy (see 
Chapter I).  Uruguay has a number of schemes that provide fiscal incentives for manufacturing 
activities, including a special regime for the autom obile industry that makes benefits subject to a 
minimum national content of 20 per cent.  Uruguay h as notified this regime as a measure involving 
subsidies.  The textiles and clothing industry bene fited from the application of minimum prices on the 
import of textiles and clothing, but th ese were abolished on 1 January 2001. 
4. Uruguay does not produce hydrocarbons.  The Administración Nacional de Combustibles, 
Alcohol y Pórtland  - ANCAP (National Fuel, Alcohol and Portland Cement Authority) is the State-
owned enterprise given a monopoly to import and refi ne crude petroleum and its by-products (except 
lubricants and asphalt) and to export fuel.  A refe rendum in 2003 rejected termination of the ANCAP's 
monopoly.  In March 2005, Uruguay and Venezuela si gned an agreement allowing for the import of 
petroleum against payment in Uruguayan products. 
5. The electricity sector in Uruguay has been lib eralized since 1997 as far as the generation, 
import, export and marketing of electricity are concerned, but transmission and distribution are 
considered to be a public service.  In practice, the State-owned enterprise Administración Nacional de 
Usinas y Transmisiones Eléctricas  - UTE (National Electricity Plants and Transmission Authority) is 
still responsible for a large amount of generation and controls transmission and distribution of 
electricity.  There is no foreign investment in th is sector even though it is not excluded by law. 
6. The services sector is of considerable im portance to Uruguay's economy and in 2004 
accounted for some 62 per cent of the GDP.  Real estate services and business services are the most 
important subsectors, followed by communications a nd transport and financial services.  Even though 
private participation in the services sector has increased since the last review of Uruguay's trade 
policy, State-owned enterprises continue to play an important role in some areas, for example, 
telecommunications and banking. 
7. There have been a number of changes in the telecommunications market in Uruguay.  Since 
2001, an independent entity has been responsible fo r regulating the telecommunications sector.  Even 
though the State continues to exercise a de jure  monopoly of fixed urban te lephony and national long-
distance telephony, there is competition among seve ral operators in mobile telephony.  Foreign 
companies may engage in activities in any of the sectors that are not a State monopoly.  In 2002, 
international long-distance telephone services were opened up to competition, but subsequently the Uruguay WT/TPR/S/163 
 Page 93 
 
 
possibility of granting new licences for this activity was removed.  The growing competition in recent 
years has brought down the rates for international a nd mobile services, but in the market segment still 
subject to a monopoly, rates have remained stable or even increased. 
8. In the transport sector, domestic air services (cabotage) are restricted to Uruguayan 
companies, which may only operate Uruguayan-register ed aircraft.  In early 2006, consideration was 
being given to changing this require ment, together with other clauses in the Aviation Code.  The State 
owns the airports, but the law allows them to be managed under a concession.  The majority of 
international maritime transport of goods is on foreig n-registered ships, but the law confines cabotage 
navigation and trade to Uruguayan-registered vessels.  Preferences may be given based on the 
principle of reciprocity, but in practice Uruguay only applies cargo preferences with Brazil and 
passenger transport preferences with Argentina.  Po rt services are provided by private operators under 
concessions given by the State, which owns the ports. 
9. Uruguay's financial sector underwent a serious crisis in early 2002, which brought about a 
45 per cent decrease in deposits in the banking system between February and September that year.  In 
order to overcome the crisis, deposits in State ba nks were rescheduled, but deposits in intervened 
banks were covered and a depos it guarantee fund was established.  Although the banking system has 
recovered from the crisis to some extent, there has been a decrease in deposits and loans and in the 
number of banks; two State-owned ba nks controlled half of all assets in 2005.  Banks wishing to set 
up in Uruguay must be in the form of Uruguayan public limited companies or branches of foreign 
banks; the number of authorizations to operate  new banks may not exceed 10 per cent annually of 
those existing the previous year.  Although interest  rates have fallen, operating costs are still high and 
there is still a wide margin between the inte rest rate on deposits and the lending rate. 
10. The insurance market mainly consists of s ubsidiaries of foreign companies.  Insurance 
companies must be established as public limited co mpanies in Uruguay.  There are no limits on 
foreign participation in new or existing companies.   Insurance covering risks that may occur within 
Uruguay may be taken out only with companies esta blished in Uruguay.  The regime for purchasing 
outwards reinsurance is free and establis hment in Uruguay is not a requirement. 
11. Tourism is still one of the most important s ources of foreign currency for Uruguay, although 
it has felt the impact of economic problems in neighb ouring countries.  This sector is given special tax 
incentives.  As regards the exercise of professional services, Uruguay does not have any legal texts to regulate this in general terms.  In order to  engage in a profession in Uruguay, professional 
qualifications obtained abroad must be validated. 
12. Uruguay's GATS Schedule includes specific commitments in a limited number of sectors:  
business services, postal, financial, and tourism servi ces and travel services, recreational, cultural and 
sporting services, and transport.  Ur uguay took part in th e extended negotiations on financial services.  
It has not made any commitment under the GATS in the telecommunications sector. 
(2) A
GRICULTURE AND FOOD PROCESSING (INCLUDING FORESTRY AND FISHERIES ) 
(i) Agriculture and food processing 
(a) Special features and objectives 
13. Agriculture's share of GDP (including livestock and forestry) was 11.3 per cent in 2004 
(compared with 6.8 per cent in 1998)1;  agriculture and the agro-industrial sector accounted for some 
                                                      
1 BCU (2005a). WT/TPR/S/163 Trade Policy Review 
Page 94 
 
 
23 per cent of the GDP2, while primary agriculture (including forestry) employed 4.7 per cent of the 
labour force.3  The main agricultural products (according to the value of production in 2003) are the 
following:  bovine cattle (28.4 per cent);  cereals (19. 6 per cent, of which 12.7 per cent for rice alone);  
milk (9.5 per cent);  wool (9.3 per cent);  oil seeds (6.2 per cent);  and fresh fruit (3.8 per cent).4  Even 
though the agricultural sector has experienced many  problems caused by factors such as unfavourable 
climate conditions, foot-and-mouth disease, price fluctuations and macroeconomic difficulties5, it has 
recovered since 2002, inter alia , because of favourable prices, the devaluation of the Uruguayan peso 
and a reduction in the sector's tax burden.6 
14. The Ministry of Livestock, Agriculture and Fisheries (MGAP) is responsible for drafting and 
implementing agricultural policy, in coordination with the Ministry of the Economy and Finance 
(MEF).  It is also responsible for prior authorization procedures for the import of live animals and animal or plant products. 
15. According to the authorities, over the period 1999-2004, the chief economic policy strategy 
was a global one of opening up to the outside based  on markets as the main mechanism for allocating 
resources.  In line with the Government's objectiv e of intervening less in the economy, the MGAP's 
policy focused on monitoring and control, deregulatio n and the strengthening of certain services such 
as inspection and veterinary control, research a nd the farm conversion and development programme.
7  
In practice, the only subsectors to be given special  treatment have been fruit growing, horticulture, 
wine growing, sugar and the dairy industry (see below). 
16. In 2005, the present Government defined ne w strategic guidelines for agro-industrial 
development.  These, inter alia , give the Government an active role  to play in ensuring that market 
mechanisms operate, and provide for:  ongoing ac tion designed to keep standards and systems for 
prevention and control in animal and plant health  up to date;  quality certification and traceability of 
processes and products;  the adoption of tools to c over risks such as comprehensive insurance, price 
insurance or forecasts of emergency situations;  new forms of financing;  policies for household 
production;  and policies to support competitiv eness in agro-industrial production chains.8 
17. At the international level, Uruguay is seeking better access for its exports and the dismantling 
of protection mechanisms in order to increase its trade flows (see Chapter II(4)(i)).  Other concerns 
are the diversification of markets and products;  li miting as far as possible and clarifying criteria for 
the selection of sensitive products;  clarifying criteri a for selecting special products;  and effective and 
operational special and differential treatment.9 
(b) Policy instruments 
Measures at the border 
 
18. Tariff protection for agricultural (including livestock) products is some 6.6 per cent 
(Chapter 111 of the ISIC).  Nevertheless, accordi ng to the WTO's estimates, the processing of foods, 
                                                      
2 World Bank (2005). 
3 Data from the National Institute of Statistics (Ongoing Household Survey) provided by the 
authorities. 
4 BCU (2005a). 
5 OPYPA (2005). 
6 Ibid. 
7 OPYPA (2004). 
8 OPYPA (2006c). 
9 OPYPA (2006b). Uruguay WT/TPR/S/163 
 Page 95 
 
 
beverages and tobacco (Chapter 31 of the ISIC) re ceives relatively higher tariff protection (11.3 per 
cent) (see also Table AIV.1).  There are no tariff quotas;  there are, however, preferential tariff quotas for some agricultural products under agreemen ts on preferences (see Chapter III(2)(iv)(e)). 
19. Special customs procedures and/or documenta tion requirements apply to some food products 
(Table III.2) and licences are required to import oil;  furthermore, prior authorization is required for 
some products for sanitary or phytosanitary reasons  (see Chapter III(2)(ix)).  In 1999, minimum prices 
applied to imports (called "minimum export prices") in respect of sugar, but these were abolished in 
2001 (see below and Chapter III(2)(ii)).
10  Imports of capital goods to be used exclusively in the 
agricultural sector are exempt from certain tax es, for example, the BROU commission and the 
consular fee (see Chapter III(2)(v)(a)). 
20. During the period under review, Uruguay imposed its first anti-dumping measure against 
agro-industrial products (see Chapter III(2)(vii)(a)).   Uruguay notified the WTO that, during the 
period 1998-2003 it made no use of the special safeguard provision reserved in its schedule for the headings "other durum wheat" (HS1001.10.00.90) and "other wheat" (HS1001.90.10.90).
11 
21. Exports of raw, salted, pickled or  wet-blue hides are subject to a tax of 5 per cent.  Its purpose 
is to boost supplies to the domestic leather industr y, promoting activities with higher value added. 
22. In addition, exports of some agricultural products  are subject to taxes or levies in order to 
finance bodies such as the Uruguayan Wool Board (SUL), at a rate varying from 0.30 per cent to 3 per cent of the f.o.b. value of exports of wool and thei r content in terms of dirty wool, wool at different 
stages of processing
12, and the National Meat Institute (INAC), at a rate of 0.6 per cent of the net 
f.o.b. price of meat exports of bovine species, of sheep, pigs, poultry and horses, their offal, by-
products and products prepared with meat and meat products.13  In order to finance the National 
Agricultural Research Institute, there is a tax of up to 4 per mil on exports of unprocessed vegetables, 
fruit, flowers and seeds. 
23. Exports of meat of bovine species, sheep, pigs , horses, poultry and small game, in any form 
except preserved, are subject to the Sanitary Insp ection Fund (FIS) tax, which is 1 per cent of the 
f.o.b. value of the exports.14  The FIS also applies to some sal es on the domestic market, for example, 
beef and sheep meat for household consumption or industrial use.15 
Internal measures 
 
24. Agricultural products (domestically produced or  exported by producers, as well as imported 
products subject to the Tax on Indus trial and Commercial Income (IRIC)) are liable for the Tax on the 
                                                      
10 Law No. 17.379 04 of 26 July 2001, Decree No. 451/01 of 15 November 2001, and WTO documents 
G/VAL/W/55 of 22 December 1999 and G/VAL/W/55/Ad d.1/Rev.1 of 2 March 2005 respectively. Minimum 
prices were applied to products in the following Harmonized System headings and chapters: heading 1701 
(sugar, four tariff lines) and chapters 52, 54, 55 (textiles, 45  tariff lines) and 60 to 63 (made-up articles, 73 tariff 
lines). 
11 WTO documents G/AG/N/URY/17 of 6 July 1999, G/AG/N/URY/21 of 25 September 2000, 
G/AG/N/URY/23 of 12 June 2002, G/AG/N/URY/25 of 26 June 2003 and G/AG/N/URY/28 of 16 June 2004. 
12 Law No. 13.602 of 20 July 1967. 
13 Law No. 15.605 of 27 July 1984. 
14 Harmonized text of the Director ate-General of Taxation, Title 18 , Tax for the Sanitary Inspection 
Fund. 
15 Ibid. WT/TPR/S/163 Trade Policy Review 
Page 96 
 
 
Sale of Agricultural Goods (IMEBA), wh ich ranges from 1.5 to 2.5 per cent.16  P a y m e n t  o f  t h e  
IMEBA may be considered a definitive tax or an  advance on the Tax on Agricultural Income (IRA), 
which is 30 per cent on the net fiscal revenue for the financial year.  Enterprises earning income from 
agro-industrial activities that produce inputs for indust rial activity are liable for the IRIC but are not 
subject to the IRA.  Once these inputs are used for industrial activity, they are subject to the IMEBA 
as payment on account for the IRIC (see Chapter III(2)(v) and (3)(ii)).17 
25. According to the Agricultural Planning and Policy Office, since the economic crisis (see 
Chapter I), the agricultural sector ove rall has been subject to less fiscal pressure than other sectors18, 
mainly because of the fiscal exemp tions it has been given.  In 2001, the authorities alleviated the 
fiscal burden on the agricultural sector by abolishing  the employers' contributions to social security 
and making assets used in agricultural enterpri ses exempt from payment of the wealth tax.19  
Nevertheless, because of the sector's highe r profitability, in Decree No. 538/003 of 
24 December 2003, the authorities decided to increase the IMEBA as of 1 January 2004 up to the 
statutory maximum for all products, with the exception of cattle, which are subject to a tax of 2.15 per 
cent (instead of the statutory maximum of 2.5 per cent)  in order to offset the impact of the control tax 
on the slaughter of beef cattle (see below).20 
26. Agricultural products are liable for several domestic taxes.  The value-added tax (VAT) on 
agricultural products is less than that on the major ity of goods and services – agricultural products in 
their natural state (with the exception of fruit, flow ers and vegetables) are subject to a suspended tax 
(in other words, it is not included in the sales doc umentation until the product is processed or its state 
changes)21; agro-industrial products in the standard basket  (such as meat, flour, rice and oil) are liable 
for the minimum tax (14 per cent) and milk is exempt .  Fruit, flowers and vegetables are subject to the 
minimum rate (14 per cent) when they are sold to the final consumer and to the basic rate (23 per 
cent) when agricultural producers se ll them to persons liable for the IRIC and when they are imported 
(see Chapter III(2)(v)(b)).  For direct sales by the im porter to the final consumer, the importer pays a 
tax of 23 per cent on the imports and this is deducted from the tax on his operations levied at a rate of 
14 per cent, as is the case for intermediaries  purchasing goods from local producers.  Some 
agricultural products are subject to a special consum ption tax, the Specific Internal Tax (IMESI);  for 
some products, the rate of the IMESI depends on the domestic content or is levied on "notional 
values" (see Chapter III(2)(v)(c)). 
27. Agricultural machinery is eligible for the te mporary admission regime provided in Decree 
No. 232/991 of 2 May 1991.22  Some agricultural inputs are exempt from tariffs.  The agricultural 
sector is also eligible for the regime for the ref und of indirect taxes and export duties and for the free 
zone regime (see Chapter III(3)(iv)). 
28. A 2 per mil tax applies to wool, sheep and cattle  hides, sheep and cattle, cereals and oilseeds, 
in order to finance the Comisión Honoraria para la Erradicación de la Vivienda Rural Insalubre  
(Honorary Commission for the Eradication of Insalubri ous Rural Housing).  In order to finance the 
National Agricultural Research Institute, another tax,  of up to 4 per mil, applies to wool, cattle and 
sheep hides and cattle and sheep, cereals and oilseed s, milk, poultry and bee-keeping products (as 
                                                      
16 Harmonized text of the Directorate-General of Ta xation, Title 9, Tax on the Sale of Agricultural 
goods. 
17 Article 655 of Law No. 16.736 of 5 January 1996. 
18 OPYPA (2006a). 
19 Law No. 17.345 of 31 May 2001 and OPYPA (2004). 
20 OPYPA (2005). 
21 Law No. 15.851 of 24 December 1986 and Law No. 17.503 of 30 May 2002. 
22 DNA, O/D No. 125/2003 of 8 December 2003. Uruguay WT/TPR/S/163 
 Page 97 
 
 
well as the export of some products (see above )).  Decree No. 364/003 of 29 August 2003 introduced 
a control tax on the slaughter of each head of cattle  in order to cover the cost of importing anti-foot-
and-mouth disease vaccines;  the authorities have i ndicated that the tax amounted to US$2.50 in 
February 2006.  The revenue genera ted is transferred to the INAC. 
29. Uruguay notified the WTO that domestic s upport was given for research, extension and 
advisory services, pest and disease control, inspec tion services, marketing and promotion services and 
the Farm Conversion and Developm ent Programme (PREDEG), which are deemed to be "green box" 
measures.  There are also subsidies for investme nt in agriculture, which in 2003 amounted to 
US$683,486 (including those under the Rural Ur uguay Project), less than the US$11,556,446 
recorded in 1998.23  Uruguay notified the WTO that, in 1998-2003, its aggregate measurement of 
support for the agricultural sector was lower than the de minimis  level; there were no subsidized 
interest rates for agriculture over this period.24 
30. Product-specific support has been given under the PREDEG, for example, for deciduous fruit 
trees and citrus trees and for wine growing.  In  2003, the cost of the programme was US$912,00025;  
in 2006, the PREDEG ceased to operate.  The sugar subsector has been the subject of efforts to 
convert production in the north of Uruguay to other crops such as rice, fruit, vegetables and vines.  
Under Law No. 17.379 of 26 July 2001, a fund for th e conversion of the sugar sector was established.  
Since late 2005, financial assistance from this convers ion fund has been in the form of loans which 
the beneficiaries must reimburse at the next harvest.26 
31. Under the livestock project, subsidies are grante d in accordance with e fficiency objectives for 
vertical integration and for business plans with a view to opening up new markets abroad.  Up to 
2003, under the Programme for Natural Resources and Development of Irrigation (PRENADER), a 
certain percentage of the cost of supplying water and the irrigation infrastructure were reimbursed.27 
32. There is no State marketing organization in Urug uay.  Administrative pricing is applied to 
pasteurized milk for direct consumption and to gr apes for making wine.  As part of the mechanism 
regulating the production of dairy produc ts, the price of milk to be pasteurized is fixed twice yearly on 
the basis of the average for the preceding three years.  Pasteurized milk is also subject to 
administrative pricing, as are the retailer's margin and the retail selling price.  It is estimated that this 
measure concerns approximately 20 per cent of total milk production.28  The authorities have 
indicated that Uruguay is an efficient milk produ cer and domestic prices are lower than the global 
price;  in 2005, the average producer  price for milk was US$0.1732/litre. 
33. The price of traditional varieties of grapes fo r making wine is fixed annually provided that 
they have not been "converted".  Neverthele ss, because of the domestic support granted for 
conversion to export varieties, whos e effect is to lower the number of traditional varieties benefiting 
from price controls, this policy only affects some 5 per cent29 of total grape production.  In 
                                                      
23 WTO documents G/AG/N/URY/15 of 6 July 1999, G/AG/N/URY/19 of 25 September 2000, 
G/AG/N/URY/18 of 12 June 2002, G/AG/N/URY/26 of 29 August 2003, and G/AG/N/URY/27 of 16 June 2004. 
24 Ibid. 
25 WTO document G/AG/N/URY/27 of 16 June 2004. 
26 OPYPA (2006a). 
27 OPYPA (2004). 
28 Ibid. 
29 Ibid. WT/TPR/S/163 Trade Policy Review 
Page 98 
 
 
March 2005, minimum prices were fixed for the 2005 harvest for Hamburg Muscat grapes to be used 
in winemaking30, involving some 20 per cent of total production. 
34. Lending policy in the agricultural sector is gene ric (not by product), and according to the 
authorities interest rates are tho se of the market.  During the agricultural year 2002/2003, because of 
credit restrictions (see Chapter I), loans for cr ops were provided through a new mechanism involving 
suppliers of inputs, the ANCAP, producers, exporte rs and the BROU.  The authorities have pointed 
out, however, that this did not entail any subsidy or  transfer and the various operators financed the 
sale of their inputs, delivering them in kind and then recovering both the principal and the 
corresponding interest on market terms.  Moreover,  in order to facilitate writing off banking liabilities 
and to create new forms of financing, funds to bo ost activity in the milk and rice subsectors (FFAL 
and FFRAA) were created through debt for bond swaps.   At the end of 2002 and in early 2003, this 
mechanism became applicable to all other products, even though th e agricultural sector makes the 
most use of it.31 
35. Up to 2001, there was a programme to prom ote exports called the Non-Traditional Export 
Programme (PENTA), administered by the MGAP and intended specifically to promote the export of 
non-traditional agricultural products. 
36. Uruguay has reserved the right to give export s ubsidies for some agricultural products (rice, 
butter and oilseed cake (soybean pellets)), and unde rtook to lower the levels  between 1995 and 2004 
from US$1,460,000 to US$1,140,000 for rice, from US$210,000 to US$160,000 for butter and from US$79,000 to US$62,000 for oilseed cake.  Uruguay notified the WTO that, in practice, in the 
calendar years 1990-2004 no export subsid ies were granted for these products.
32 
(ii) Forestry 
37. Forestry is one of the most rapidly growing sectors in Uruguay and has entered the 
industrialization stage.  Until now, exports were mainly raw timber (chiefly eucalyptus logs), paper 
and paper products and, to a lesser extent, saw n timber, but the authorities hope that once the 
plantations of pine trees and eucalyptus reach th e stage where they can be cut, new processing 
industries will start to operate.33  In this connection, in 2003 and 2004, new plants started to produce 
wood chips for the pulp industry.  Between 1989 and 2003, some 600,000 hectares were planted34, 
45 per cent of them by foreign companies.35 
38. The industrial sector has started to develop as plantations mature.  There is growing 
investment in sawmills and in the plywood industry.  As far as the production of solid, veneered or 
sawn wood is concerned, it is expected that betw een five to 15 wood-processing plants will be set up 
with estimated investment of US$800 million and income generated by exports amounting to some 
US$300 million annually. 
39. With a vast potential impact, two wood pulp pl ants are being established with production 
capacity of 1.5 million tonnes of wood pulp a year and a third project has been announced, which will 
produce a further 1 million tonnes.  These initiatives require investment of around US$2,800 million, 
                                                      
30 Decree No. 108/005 of 10 March 2005. 
31 OPYPA (2004). 
32 WTO documents G/AG/N/URY/20 of 25 September 2000, G/AG/N/URY/22 of 12 June 2002, 
G/AG/N/URY/24 of 26 June 2003, and G/AG/N/URY/29 of 6 August 2004. 
33 OPYPA (2005). 
34 Ibid. 
35 OPYPA (2004). Uruguay WT/TPR/S/163 
 Page 99 
 
 
which is one of the highest inflows of foreign direct investment in Uruguay's history.  Once 
production has settled down, it is expected that the revenue generated by exports will exceed 
US$1,000 million per year. 
40. The Forestry Law (Law No. 15.939 of 28 December 1987) provides that forestry policy is 
drawn up and implemented by the MGAP and its implementing arm, the Directorate-General of 
Forestry.  The latter is responsible for forestry promotion and development.  The main aims are 
sustainable forest management through protection,  enhancement and creation of forestry resources 
and development of forestry industries.36 
41. In addition, the Forestry Law, Decree No . 457/989 of 27 Septem ber 1989 and Decree 
No. 931/88 of 30 December 1988 determined tax c oncessions for forestry during the period under 
review.37  Some tax incentives were granted for a period  of 15 years;  these included exemption from 
import duties and levies and from VAT for imports of inputs, machinery and equipment used by 
companies engaged in the forestation, exploitation or industrialization of wood of domestic origin.  
These incentives expired in December 2002. 
42. Other benefits under the Forestry Law are exem ption from all taxes on rural real estate and 
the rural property tax, as well as exemption for income derived from forestry exploitation when 
calculating the IRA.  In 2003, Uruguay notified the forestry incentives to  the WTO as subsidies.38 
43. Decree No. 931/88 provided for the partial refund of the costs of planting.  The amount of 
these refunds, in United States dollars per hectare, fell from US$165 during the period July 2000 to June 2001 to US$150 from January to Decembe r 2002.  Pursuant to Law No. 17.905 of 
7 October 2005, the subsidy was abolished and the headings concerned were eliminated.  According 
to the information provided by the authorities, the average subsidy per hectare in 2005 was US$125. 
44. The forestry sector is also eligible for the Fo restry Sector Credit Fund, administered by the 
BROU, which finances nurseries and the various stag es of production and offers loans on preferential 
terms.  According to the authorities, loans for forest  plantations are granted for a maximum area to be 
financed of up to 300 hectares a year for up to 10 years with a grace period of eight years for capital.  
In February 2006, the rate was 9.5 per cent plus the IMABA. 
(iii) Fisheries 
45. The fishing sector is relatively small:  in 2004, it accounted for 0.4 per cent of the GDP
39 and, 
according to figures provided by the authorities, it employed 0.2 per cent of the labour force.  
Uruguay exploits fisheries resources in the River Pl ate and the Atlantic Ocea n, particularly in the 
common fishing grounds with Argentina.  In 2004, catches amounted to 122,856 tonnes;  sustainable 
catches are estimated to be 150,000 tonnes annually.40  Industrial fishing is solely intended for export. 
46. Through its executive body, the Dirección Nacional de Recursos Acuáticos  - DINARA 
(National Directorate of Aquatic Resources), the MGAP draws up and implements fisheries policy.  The DINARA is responsible for promoting sustai nable utilization of fisheries resources through 
                                                     
 
36 MGAP information online, Directorate- General of Forestry.  Available at:  
http://www.mgap.gub.uy/Forestal/ DGF.htm. 
37 The laws and decrees relating to the forestry sector can be consulted online at:  
http://www.mgap.gub.uy/Forestal/ DGF.htm. 
38 WTO document G/SCM/N/95/URY of 6 August 2003. 
39 BCU (2005a). 
40 DINARA information online, Capturas e Introducción , available at:  http ://www.dinara.gub.uy/. WT/TPR/S/163 Trade Policy Review 
Page 100 
 
 
responsible fishing and processing on land that meets sanitary and quality standards.41  Another task 
of the DINARA is sanitary and quality certification of fisheries products, as well as guiding, advising, 
promoting, developing and supervis ing fishing and related industries.42  The main aim is to conserve 
and manage fisheries resources by imposing quotas for each species. 
47. Under Decree No. 149/997 of 7 May 1997, fish ing requires a permit granted by the DINARA. 
Permits for the industrial fishing fleet are valid for two years and for small-scale or inshore fishing, 
for four years. 
48. The fisheries sector is eligible for certain ta x incentives.  The Fisheries Law (Law No. 13.833 
of 29 December 1969) allows exemption from duty on machinery and equipment to be used to 
develop the sector.  Imports of capital goods for exclusive use in fishing are exempt from the BROU 
commission and the consular fee (see Chapter III(2)(v )(a)).  The Executive is empowered to exempt 
fisheries products from VAT where it deems necessary. 
(3) HYDROCARBONS  
(a) Special features and market trends 
49. Uruguay produces neither natural gas nor petrol eum. In 2004, petroleum accounted for 54 per 
cent of total energy consumption in Uruguay, while natural gas represented 3 per cent.43  During the 
period under review, Uruguay's energy supply was affected by factors such as the high price of petroleum on the world market and a reduction in the energy supplied by Argentina (see below).  This 
led Uruguay to seek other sources and it signed contracts for the supply of energy with Bolivia (for natural gas), Brazil (for electricity) (see section (5)) and Venezuela (for petroleum). 
50. The Dirección Nacional de Energía y Tecnología Nuclear  (National Directorate of Energy 
and Nuclear Technology in the Ministry of Industry, Energy and Mining (MIEM) is responsible for proposing and coordinating Uruguay's energy policy.  Its functions include the supply of energy under 
proper conditions at the lowest possible cost, coor dinating and guiding the activities of institutions 
involved in the energy sector, helping to develop the legal framework for the sector and ensuring 
compliance with it.
44 
51. Pursuant to Law No. 17.598 of 13 December 2002, the Unidad Reguladora de Servicios de 
Energía y Agua  - URSEA (Energy and Water Services Re gulatory Authority) was created and is 
responsible, inter alia , for consumer protection and for regula ting and controlling activities relating to 
petroleum and gas (for further information see section (5)). 
(b) Petroleum products 
52. Law No. 8.764 of 15 October 1931 establishe d the National Fuel, Alcohol and Portland 
Cement Authority (ANCAP), which has a monopoly of the import and refining of crude petroleum 
and its by-products (with the exception of lubrican ts and asphalt) and of fuel exports (see also 
Chapter III(4)(iv)).  It is a State-owned enterprise under the MIEM and is subject to control by the 
Planning and Budget Office (OPP).  In  2004, imports of crude petroleu m were 44,800 barrels a day on 
                                                      
41 DINARA, DINARA .  Available at:  http://www.dinara.gub.uy/. 
42 DINARA, Marco Jurídico .  Available at:  http://www.dinara.gub.uy/. 
43 MIEM information online, National Directorate of Energy and Nuclear Technology, Información 
Estadística .  Available at: http://www.dnetn.gub.uy/. 
44 MIEM information online, Institucionale .  Available at: http://www.miem.gub.uy/unidades.php?dne. Uruguay WT/TPR/S/163 
 Page 101 
 
 
average, of which 90 per cent were imported from Russia, Nigeria and the Islamic Republic of Iran45;  
in 2005, the volume coming from Venezuela increased sharply. 
53. Imported petroleum is refined in the La Teja re finery, which belongs to the ANCAP and is the 
only one in Uruguay.  In 2003, the refinery was re organized and its capacity increased from 37,000 to 
50,000 barrels a day.46  Under the agreements with Ven ezuela (see below), in December 2005 
discussions were taking place on establishing a joint enterprise valued at US$600 million by Petróleos de Venezuela S.A. and ANCAP so as to expand capacity  for refining heavy crude by 50,000 barrels a 
day.  In 2004, the refinery's average output was 2.5 million m
3 (around 15.7 million barrels). 
54. Law No. 17.448 of 4 January 2002 introduced an exception to the State monopoly 
administered by ANCAP for the import, export a nd refining of crude petroleum and the export of 
petroleum products.  Law No. 17.448 was, however , the subject of a referendum in December 2003, 
with the result that it has not been implemented.47 
55. Article 12 of Law No. 16.753 of 13 June 1996 provides that the ANCAP has the authority to 
determine the selling price of all products within its competence, but these must be approved by the 
Executive.  Between 2001 and 2005, several decre es were issued under which the Executive approved 
the maximum selling price recommended by the ANCAP for fuel, solvents, special products and fuel 
alcohol.  In December 2005, the latest pri ce update was issued in Decree No. 447/005 of 
17 November 2005.  In addition, petroleum products  are subject to domestic taxes (IMESI and VAT). 
56. The ANCAP has signed agreements with co mpanies (Uruguayan or foreign) for the 
distribution of refined fuel.  These agreements  should have expired in December 2003, but the 
Executive temporarily authorized the distributin g companies to pursue their activities until the 
corresponding regulations were issued.48 
57. The Economic Recovery Law (Law No. 17. 555 of 18 September 2002) authorizes the 
ANCAP to pay for imports of crude petroleum with products that are part of Uruguay's export offer. 
Decree No. 458/002 of 27 November 2002 gives a pref erence to suppliers who accept total or partial 
payment in Uruguayan exports (provided that the pri ce, quality and terms of sale are the same).  The 
authorities have indicated that there have been no such transactions. 
58. Uruguay has signed several international agre ements on petroleum.  These include the 
Protocol on Energy Cooperation of 10 November 1995 with Paraguay;  the Montevideo Declaration 
on PETROSUR of 2 March 2005 with Venezuela, which allows Uruguay to  join the existing 
agreement among Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil and Venezuela for the creation of a multilateral 
petroleum company, PETROSUR;  the Caracas En ergy Cooperation Agreemen t of 2 March 2005 with 
Venezuela;  the Comprehensive Energy Cooperatio n Convention of 2 March 2005 with Venezuela;  
and the Memorandum of Understanding of 1 Ap ril 2005 on the creation of a standing joint 
commission on energy and mining with Brazil.49  Uruguay joined the PETROSUR secretariat in 
August 2005. 
                                                      
45 MIEM information online, National Directorate of Energy and Nuclear Technology, Petróleo and 
Derivados Líquidos .  Available at:  http://www.dnetn.gub.uand/. 
46 Ibid. 
47 For further information on the ANCA P, see:  http://www.ancap.com.uand. 
48 Decree No. 514/003 of 3 December 2003, Decree No. 191/004 of 19 June 2004, Decree No. 183/005 
of 14 June 2005 and Decree No  507/005 of 19 December 2005. 
49 MIEM information online, National Direct orate of Energy and Nuclear Technology, Acuerdos 
bilaterales and multilaterales .  Available at:  http://www.dnetn.gub.uy/. WT/TPR/S/163 Trade Policy Review 
Page 102 
 
 
59. In August 2005, an agreement was signed between Uruguay and Venezuela under which 
Venezuela undertook to supply Uruguay with petroleum for 25 years.  It agreed to provide Uruguay with 43,600 barrels a day;  75 per cent of the sh ipments of crude petroleum will be paid within 
90 days and the remainder over 15 years with a two-year grace period as of the date of shipment.  Part 
of the final cost of Venezuelan crude was to be pa yable with Uruguayan goods and services;  in early 
2006, implementation of this provision was still bei ng considered.  The agreement entered into force 
in October 2005. 
(c) Natural gas 
60. In order to diversify its energy sources, in 19 98, Uruguay started to import natural gas when 
its first gas pipeline, built and operated by the ANCAP, came online.  In November 2002 a second 
pipeline started to operate built by a consortium wi th participation by private companies and the 
ANCAP as a minority shareholder (20 per cent);  th ere is a third pipeline which, however, was not 
operating at the beginning of 2006.  Two companies also hold concessions for the distribution of gas 
via networks. 
61. The two gas pipelines in operation link Uruguay and Argentina. Imports of natural gas 
increased from 23.6 million m
3  in 1999 to 113 million m3 in 2004.50  The major consumers of natural 
gas are the industrial sector, followed by the business and services sector and then households.51  
Imports of natural gas are subject to a special customs procedure (see Table III.2). 
62. Prices are fixed for each enterprise, but must be approved by the MIEM, after consideration 
by the URSEA and the National Directorate of Energy.  Pursuant to Law No. 17.292 (Emergency 
Law) and Decree No. 216/002, purchasers of natura l gas with minimum consumption of 5,000 m3 
daily or 1.5 million m3 annually (large users) are authorized to negotiate the purchase of natural gas 
with authorized sellers or to import it directly ;  in December 2005, there were 13 large users.52 
63. In September 2004, in order to offset the slow-down in imports from Argentina, Uruguay 
signed an agreement with Bolivia for the supply of natural gas.  This provides for 150,000 m3 daily 
from 2005 onwards and 2 million m3 daily as of 2007 through a gas pipeline which links Bolivia to 
Argentina and then to Uruguay.  Negotiations have started on an agreement with Argentina for this 
purpose. In early 2006, however, these two projects were pending. 
(4) OTHER MANUFACTURES  
(a) Special features and policy objectives 
64. Since the previous review of Uruguay's trade policy in 1998, the manufacturing sector's share 
of GDP (including the processing of foods and hydro carbons (see section (2) and (3)) increased from 
18.4 to 21.1 per cent in 2004, after a downturn duri ng the crisis period in 2001 when it reached the 
lowest level (16.3 per cent).  In real terms (at constant 1983 prices), the manufacturing sector's GDP 
steadily lost ground between 1998 and 2002 before star ting to recover in 2003;  in 2004, however, it 
had still not reached its 1998 level.53  Over the period 1999-2001, GDP in the majority of export-
                                                      
50 MIEM information online, National Directorate of Energy and Nuclear Technology, Información 
estadística .  Available at:  http://www.dnetn.gub.uy/. 
51 MIEM information online, National Directorate of Energy and Nuclear Technology, Gas Natural.  
Available at:  http://www.dnetn.gub.uy/. 
52 Ibid. 
53 BCU (2005). Uruguay WT/TPR/S/163 
 Page 103 
 
 
oriented sectors fell, for example, in foot wear, clothing and the wool textile industry.54  According to 
the information provided by the authorities, th e percentage of the labour force working in 
manufacturing fell from 16.8 per cent in 1998 to 14 per cent in 2004. 
65. The Uruguayan manufacturing sector is mainly made up of the following (in decreasing order 
of value of production):  food, beverages and tobacco ;  chemical industries;  textiles, clothing and 
leather;  paper and printing (see section (2)(ii ));  and metal products, machinery and equipment.55  In 
2004, Uruguay's exports of manufactures were domin ated by five industries (at the four-digit ISIC 
level):  chiefly, meat products;  tanning and dressing of leather;  textile spinning, weaving and 
finishing;  manufacture of bread products;  and dair y products (Table AIV.1) (see also section (2)). 
66. From 1991 onwards, MERCOSUR's regional integra tion initiatives have led to a lowering of 
tariffs for intra-regional trade.  Since 1998, how ever, the manufacturing sector does not appear to 
have taken advantage of the liberalization in re gional trade:  during the period under review, the 
proportion of Uruguayan manufactures exported to the MERCOSUR (Chapter 3 of the ISIC) has 
steadily decreased, from 55.4 per cent in 1998 to 28 pe r cent in 2004.  On the other hand, imports of 
manufactures have followed a reverse trend and ME RCOSUR's share of Uruguay's total imports of 
manufactures increased from 43.7 per cent in 1998 to 51.5 per cent in 2004.  According to the 
authorities, the sector has become less competitive because of the exchange rate and the shrinking of 
regional export markets (see also Chapter I). 
67. The MIEM's National Directorate of Industry has the task of identifying opportunities and 
barriers that affect Uruguay's industrial development, advising the Executive on the formulation of 
industrial policy and administering it.  Its res ponsibilities include promoting activities to enhance 
competitiveness and quality, administering regulated regimes and measures against unfair trade practices and applying them in cases affecting the industrial sector. 
68. The principal objectives of industrial policy incl ude an increase in national value added in 
sustainable industrial production with a view to  regular improvement in production efficiency;  
continuously raising the quality of  products and workers' performan ce;  enhancing national expertise 
through scientific, technological and innovative know- how; and increasing employment in industry so 
as to alleviate poverty and improve income distribution. 
(b) Policy instruments 
69. In 2005, applied MFN tariffs gave an average level of protection of 9.3 per cent in the 
manufacturing sector (ISIC 3 excluding 31 (food prep aration)), with tariffs ranging from 0 to 23 per 
cent.  Many sectors, however, are given a higher than  average level of protection, for example, textiles 
and clothing;  leather and footwear;  non-agricultural products;  sports articles;  watches and clocks;  
electrical appliances and accessories for household use;  and furniture and accessories (see also 
section (2)(ii) and Tables III.3 and AIV.1).  More over, during the period under review, special import 
duties applied to textile products and some other industrial products. 
70. Imports of various industrial products (for ex ample, chemicals, medicines and medical 
equipment) are subject to registration requirement s or special authorization (see Chapter III(2)(i)).  
There are special customs procedures and/or documentation requirements for a number of items, including textiles and motor vehicles (see Table III.2).  Minimum prices, called "minimum export 
                                                     
 
54 Catholic University (2003). 
55 BCU (2005a). WT/TPR/S/163 Trade Policy Review 
Page 104 
 
 
prices", applied until 2001 to imports of te xtiles and clothing (see Chapter III(2)(ii)).56  Some products 
are subject to import licences, for example, footwear , some textiles and some chemicals (Table III.9).  
Uruguay reserved the right to utilize the transiti onal safeguard mechanism allowed under the WTO 
Agreement on Textiles and Clothing57, but never invoked it. 
71. Industrial products (both Uruguayan and importe d) are subject to internal taxes (see 
Chapter III(2)(v)).  Fiscal incentives are given under a number of regimes.  Industrial products are 
eligible for the temporary admission and stock-re placement regimes, as well as for incentives granted 
under the Investment Law (see Chapters II(3) and III(2 )(iv)(c)).  Activities declared to be "promoted 
activities" under Law No. 16.906 of 7 January 1998 are also eligible for the fi scal incentives granted 
under Law No. 14.178 (see Chapter III(2)(iv)(c), (3)(i v) and (4)(iii)).  Small and medium-sized 
enterprises are given techni cal assistance and training by the MIEM through its Dirección Nacional 
de Artesanías, Pequeñas y Medianas Empresas  (DINAPYME) (National Directorate of Crafts and 
Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises).58 
72. Uruguay notified the WTO of its export promotion regime for the automotive industry as a 
measure that included subsidies (see  Chapter III(3)(iv)(a)).  This regime59 is intended to reorganize 
the automobile sector and is applied in orde r to prepare for the introduction of the common 
MERCOSUR regime.  Companies which export finish ed or semi-finished vehicles in Uruguay or 
automobile parts of Uruguayan origin are eligib le for the following customs concessions:  for each 
United States dollar of exports (on the basis of the f.o.b. values on the corresponding customs declarations), they may import at a tariff that is 13 percentage points lower than the tariff applicable to 
new vehicles assembled in the place of origin.  In or der to apply to this re gime the same ceiling on 
content of imported inputs as that applicable to schemes for the refund of indirect taxes and export duties, in 2004 it was decided to grant these con cessions only for exports that contained a maximum 
of 80 per cent of imported inputs.
60  In 2004, exports under the export promotion regime for the 
automotive industry amounted to a total of US$141.6 million.61 
(5) ELECTRICITY  
(a) Special features of the sector 
73. In 2004, the GDP share of the electricity, gas and water sector was 4.5 per cent, above the 
4.1 per cent in 2000.  Although the electricity sector  has been liberalized as regards the generation and 
wholesale marketing of electric power, the vast majority  of services in the electricity sector are still, in 
practice, being provided by the Administración Nacional de Usinas y Transmisiones Eléctricas  - UTE 
(National Electricity Plants and Transmission Authority ).  The UTE is responsible for a large part of 
electricity generation, together with the binati onal Argentine-Uruguayan st ation in Salto Grande, 
owned by the Argentine and Uruguayan Governments.  Private generation is marginal and usually for 
own consumption.  Recently, unde r Decree No. 389/005 of 7 October 2005, the Executive decided to 
                                                      
56 WTO documents G/VAL/W/55 of 22 Decembe r 1999 and G/VAL/W/5 5/Add.1/Rev.1 of 
2 March 2005 respectively.  Minimum prices applied to products in the following Harmonized System headings 
and chapters:  heading 1701 (sugar, four tariff lines) and ch apters 52, 54, 55 (textiles, 45 tariff lines) and 60 to 
63 (made-up articles, 73 tariff lines). 
57 WTO document G/TMB/N/11 of 2 March 1995. 
58 MIEM information online, Institucionales .  Available at:  
http://www.miem.gub.uy/unidades.php?dinapyme. 
59 Decree No. 316/92 of 7 July 1 992;  Decree No. 583/94 of 30 Decem ber 1994;  Decree No. 340/96 of 
23 August 1996;  Decree No. 60/99 of 3 March 1999;  and Decree No. 273/99 of 10 September 1999. 
60 Decree No. 253/004 of 21 June 2004. 
61 WTO document G/SCM/N/123/URY-G/ SCM/N/128/URY of 6 July 2005. Uruguay WT/TPR/S/163 
 Page 105 
 
 
encourage the UTE to conclude electricity supply contracts with small-scale generators in Uruguay. 
At present, there is no foreign investment in this sector. 
74. Uruguay's electricity is essentially hydroelectricity, with a backup of thermal stations if the 
hydroelectricity generated is not sufficient.  The to tal installed rated output was 2,100 MW in 2004, of 
which 1,538 MW was from hydraulic sources.  Ur uguay's total electricity consumption (domestic 
generation plus imports) amounted to 8.1 GWh in 2004.  Total sales were 6.3 GWh.  Demand fell 
between 2000 and 2003, but it recovered in 2004 with growth of 5 per cent and an estimate of 4-5 per 
cent for 2005.  Despite the rise in demand, in recent years there has been no investment in generating 
capacity in Uruguay;  the authorities estimate that, in  the short term, it will be necessary to invest in 
infrastructure in order to meet the increase in demand.62 
75. Uruguay is connected to the Argentine and Brazilia n grids and is a net importer of electricity 
from these countries, particularly Argentina.  The au thorities consider that integration of electricity 
has been an important element in the development of the electricity network and that an extremely 
large percentage of domestic cons umption could be met by internationally marketed electricity.63  In 
this connection, one of the objectives of Uruguay's po licy for the electricity sector is to move ahead 
with integrating Uruguay into the regional electric ity market so as to ensure domestic supplies. 
76. The electricity rates for users of the distribution service in Uruguay are fixed by the 
Executive.  As in other countries, there is a diffe rence in the amount of electricity charges depending 
on the type of consumption.  Those consuming over 250 Kw, supplied by the distributor, pay a rate that is slightly above one third of the rate paid by household users and half of the weighted average 
price.  The authorities have indicated that this re flects in part cost considerations.  A MIEM study 
shows that the historical trend in average electric ity rates in Uruguay over the past 15 years has been 
below the CPI.  By comparing Uruguay's electric ity charges with those of other Latin American 
countries, this study shows that Uruguay's rates are close to the average for household consumption;  
in the commercial sector, they are below those of other countries such as Brazil, Ecuador and Peru;  
the industrial rate is generally belo w that of Brazil, Chile and Ecuador.
64 
(b) Legal framework 
77. The legal framework for Uruguay's electricity sector comprises Decree-Law No. 14.694 of 
1 September 1977 (National Electricity Law) and Decree-Law No. 15.031 of 4 July 1980 (Basic Law 
on the National Electricity Plants and Transmission Authority), with the amendments introduced by 
Law No. 16.211 of 1°October 1991 (Law on Stat e-owned Enterprises), and Law No. 16.832 of 
17 June 1997 (Framework Law regulating the Electricity  Sector).  Also relevant is Law No. 17.598 of 
13 December 2002, which set up the URSEA.  The legal framework was implemented by Decrees 
No. 276/002 (General Regulations), No. 277/ 002 (Distribution Regulations), No. 278/002 
(Transmission Regulations) of 28 June 2002, D ecree No. 360/002 of 11 September 2002 (Regulations 
on the Wholesale Electricity Market) and also by subsequent regulations that contain partial 
amendments. 
78. Decree No. 276/002, in accordance with provi sions in Article 1 of Law No. 16.832, 
underlines the public service nature of the transmissi on, transformation and distribution of electricity 
on a regular and permanent basis and intended wholly or in part for third parties.  These activities may 
be carried out by the UTE or under a concession.  The generation, import, export and marketing of 
electricity are deemed to be activities that "do not constitute a public servi ce" and accordingly have 
                                                      
62 MIEM (2005). 
63 Ibid. 
64 Ibid. WT/TPR/S/163 Trade Policy Review 
Page 106 
 
 
been liberalized.  Decree No. 276/002 also defin es the separation between th e State's policy-making, 
regulatory and entrepreneurial roles.  It sets as an  objective reliable supplies at minimum cost, taking 
into account environmental feasibility and financial viability. 
79.  The UTE was created by Law No. 4.273 of 21 Oc tober 1912.  It is also governed by Law 
No. 14.235 of 25 July 1974 and the Basic Law on the UTE, No. 15.031 of 4 July 1980.  It is a State 
body under public law organized in the form of an autonomous entity. 
80. Law No. 17.598 of 13 December 2002 set up the URSEA to regulate and monitor activities 
relating to the generation of electricity within the framework of Law No. 16.832 of 17 June 1997.  
The URSEA also regulates hydrocarbons, water and sanitation and is responsible for preventing anti-
competitive conduct and abuse of a dominant position in the electricity sector, as provided in Laws 
No. 17.243 of 30 June 2000 and No. 17.296 of 21 February 2 001, dealing with competition 
(Chapter III(4)(ii)). 
81. The Framework Law regulating the Electricity S ector (Law No. 16.832 of 17 June 1997) led 
to a marked change in the sector by separating regulatory activities from business activities and by 
creating a Uruguayan electricity market: the Wholesale Electricity Market (MMEE).  This Law 
establishes freedom to generate electricity and allo ws wholesale marketing of electricity inasmuch as 
it is not considered to be a public service.  It also establishes a right of access to transmission and 
distribution grids, provided that certain technical requirements are met. 
82. As a result of the adoption of the Framework Law regulating the Electricity Sector, the UTE 
may conclude agreements with public and private Uruguayan or foreign companies for the purpose of 
generating, transforming, transmitting, distribut ing, exporting and importing electricity.  The 
Executive must authorize any new generation of elect ricity connected to the National Interconnected 
System (SIN) following a procedure conducted in th e MIEM.  A water concession is also required in 
order to utilize hydraulic resources in the public domain. Uruguay's legislation does not draw any 
distinction between types of investor (State, Uruguayan or foreign private investors) as far as generation is concerned. 
83. Regulation No. 360/002 of 11 September 2002 on the Wholesale Electricity Market came into 
force in March 2004.  The authorities have indicated that, in February 2006, implementation of this 
regulation was going ahead.  The MMEE will also ma rket electricity and fi rm power to ensure 
supplies.  The Framework Law regulati ng the Electricity Sector set up the Administración del 
Mercado Eléctrico  - ADME (Electricity Market Authority), a non-State public body given 
responsibility for technical dispatch in the SIN a nd the administration of the MMEE.  The ADME is 
also responsible for planning generation by enterpri ses authorized by the MIEM to engage in this 
activity. 
84. The Despacho Nacional de Cargas – DNC (National Load-Dispatching Office), established 
by Decree-Law No. 14.694 of 1 September 1977, whose operation and management are assigned by 
law to the ADME, has been given the task of en suring technical dispatch in the SIN and economic 
dispatch for energy and power transactions.  All generation and importa tion are programmed and 
dispatched by the DNC, except in the case of power stations with an installed capacity of 5 MW or 
less, for which dispatching is optional. 
85. Law No. 16.832 gives the Executive the power to  determine the charges to be paid by 
regulated consumers (customers of the distributo r) for the supply of electricity, following a proposal 
by the distributors.  This proposal must follow a specified methodology and be evaluated by the 
URSEA prior to fixing the new tariffs.  The Law al so gives the Executive the power to set maximum Uruguay WT/TPR/S/163 
 Page 107 
 
 
tariffs for each type of activity in the electricity in dustry, for example, fees to be paid for using the 
transmission grid and the standard distribution va lue added (VADE) levied by the distributor for 
supplying the service.  In the latter case, the Execu tive seeks the prior opinion of the UTE and may 
request advice from the URSEA. 
86. Decree No. 277/002, approving the Regulation on the Distribution of Electricity, and Decree 
No. 278/002, approving the Regulation on the Transm ission of Electricity, laid down new charging 
criteria based on the principles set in the new regulatory framework for the sector.  These provisions will enter into force once the Executive has approved the remuneration to be paid for distribution and 
the corresponding tariff structure, as well as the re muneration payable for transmission services and 
the various rates. 
87. Decree No. 278/002 of 28 June 2002 approve d the Regulation on the Transmission of 
Electricity.  It provides that the ADME, through th e DNC, is responsible for all operational decisions 
or decisions on use of the transmission capacity it adop ts.  For each connection, an agent in the market 
must have an agreement on use of the transmission system in order to be connected. 
88. In February 2006, and since 1979, electricity ch arges have been fixed in accordance with the 
criteria laid down in Decree No. 339/979, namely, to give the UTE sufficient income to allow it to 
cover its costs and earn a profit of between 6 and 10 per cent on net assets.  In practice, budgetary 
considerations have been added to this objective, for example, the State's financial balance.
65  
Consequently, the charges reflect the accounting costs of the UTE, which engages in all the activities 
involved in the electricity industry, for two of which (transmission and distribution) it has a 
monopoly.  Cross subsidies are not allowed and separ ate balance sheets for each of the activities must 
be submitted to the URSEA. 
(6) SERVICES  
(i) Main features and multilateral commitments 
89. The services sector is extremely important for Uruguay's economy and in 2004 it accounted 
for approximately 62 per cent of GDP at current 2004 prices.  This percentage increases to around 
70 per cent if the supply of electricity, wa ter and gas and construction are included.66  Real estate 
services and business services are the largest subsector ;  their share of GDP in 2004 was 12.2 per cent, 
followed by transport and communications and financial services, with 9.6 and 9.4 per cent 
respectively. 
90. Article 12 of Law No. 14.335 of 23 December 1974 gives the Executive the power to 
determine and regulate services activities. 
91. Uruguay's schedule of specific commitments under the GATS negotiated in the Uruguay 
Round and the subsequent sectoral negotiations incl udes both horizontal commitments affecting all 
services, as well as commitments on specific sectors (Table AIV.2).  The horizontal commitments 
concern both market access and national treatment  and include the presence of natural persons 
working in Uruguay in the following categor ies: managers, executives and specialists. 
                                                      
65 URSEA information online.  Available at:  http://www.ursea.gub.uy/carga.php?l=22&p= 
electricidad/info_consumidor/tarifas/tarifas.htm. 
66 Information online from the National Institute of Statistics, Data Bank, Economy, National 
Accounts.  Available at:  http://www.ine.gub.uy/banco%20de%20datos/econ_cuentas/190300_PBI$corr.xls. WT/TPR/S/163 Trade Policy Review 
Page 108 
 
 
92. Uruguay accepted commitments in six of the 12 sectors specified in the GATS.  
Commitments on specific sectors include business services, communications services, financial services, tourism and travel-related services, recreatio nal, cultural and sporting services and transport 
services.
67 
93. Uruguay did not take part in the extended ne gotiations on telecommunications within the 
GATS framework, but it did participate in the ex tended negotiations on fina ncial services and as a 
result broadened its commitments in this area (see below).68  Uruguay ratified the Fifth Protocol on 
Financial Services annexed to the General Agreem ent on Trade in Services by Law No. 17.618 of 
10 January 2003 and deposited the corresponding instru ment of ratification with the WTO Secretariat 
on 6 June 2003. 
94. Uruguay has listed its exemptions from the principle of most-favoured-nation (MFN) 
treatment in the GATS Annex on Article II Exempti ons.  These include horizontal measures regarding 
freedom to transfer and invest capital and non-co mmercial risk guarantees in bilateral investment 
promotion and protection agreements, as well as specific measures on land transport.69 
95. In the Doha Round negotiations on services, Uruguay made an offer in March 2005 and a 
revised offer in June the same year. 
96. By means of Law No. 17.855 of 20 December 2004, Uruguay ratified the Montevideo 
Protocol on trade in services within MERCOSUR.  Th e Montevideo Protocol, signed in 1997, aims to 
liberalize services over a period of 10 years.  It entered into force on 7 December 2005 after having 
been ratified by Argentina, Brazil and Uruguay.  Purs uant to the Protocol, while regulation of services 
sectors is in progress, services and service suppliers of other States parties will not be subject to 
market access and national treatment restrictions provided that they ha ve been liberalized and listed in 
the schedules of concessions. 
(ii) Telecommunications 
(a) Main features and GATS commitments 
97. In 2004, the telecommunications sector accounted for 3.6 per cent of GDP, compared with 
3 per cent in 1998.  At the end of 2004, ther e were around one million fixed telephone lines in 
Uruguay, while the number of users of mobile telephones reached 600,000.70  The number of mobile 
lines grew at an annual rate of 15 per cent over the period 2003-2005.  Total teledensity (fixed and 
mobile telephones) was 47 per cent in 2004. 
98. The main feature of the telecommunications market in Uruguay is the presence of segments 
that are subject to differing degrees of competition.  In international long-distance telephony and 
mobile telephony, a number of operators compete.71  In the case of urban fixed telephony and national 
long-distance telephony, however, the State continues to exercise a monopoly through the National Telecommunications Authority (ANTEL). 
99. Although Resolution No. 1.122 of 27 September 1991  allowed the privatization of 51 per cent 
of ANTEL, this did not occur.  The plan to priva tize ANTEL was rejected in a referendum in 1992.  It 
                                                     
 
67 WTO document GATS/SC/91 of 15 April 1994. 
68 WTO document GATS/SC/91/Suppl.1 of 26 February 1998. 
69 WTO document GATS/EL/91 of 15 April 1994. 
70 ANTEL (2005). 
71 URSEC (2005). Uruguay WT/TPR/S/163 
 Page 109 
 
 
is a profitable enterprise;  its net profits in 2004 amounted to US$72 million, while its operating 
profits that year before tax and depreciation were US$206.2 million.  ANTEL made a profit every 
year during the period 2000-2004;  in 2001, however, its profits started to fall.  The lower profits 
coincided with the appearance of new operators in the market and are mainly attributable to lower 
operating revenue. 
100. Since the previous review in 1998, competition in some segments of the telecommunications 
market has increased. In addition to competition in  mobile telephony, in Fe bruary 2001, companies 
other than ANTEL were authorized to provide commercial international long-distance telephone 
services.  Previously, these services were an  ANTEL monopoly. In November 2001, the access of 
new private suppliers was authorized and these started operating in 2 002.  Since August 2002, 
however, no new authorizations for international long-distance telephone services have been granted 
and altogether 14 authorizations ha ve been granted to date.  The authorities have indicated that the 
current authorizations may be transferred.  In 2 005, ten companies offered in ternational long-distance 
telephone services, but ANTEL still controlled two thirds of the market. 
101. Foreign companies may operate in any of the sectors open to private participation.  In 
November 2005, three companies were operating in the mobile telephone market;  ANCEL, a 
subsidiary of ANTEL, has more than half the market. 
102. A report prepared by the URSEC shows that the rates for international communications have 
fallen sharply since private operators started to provi de this service in 2002, with a reduction of up to 
80 per cent.  The price of a one-minute call to the United States (excluding tax) in nominal terms fell 
to Ur$0.04 in January 2005 (US$0.17), a decrease of 76 per cent since July 2001.  The price of a one-
minute call to Argentina and Brazil fell by 62 per cent over the same period.72  This decrease in rates 
was accompanied by an increase in telephone traffi c abroad of almost 50 per cent between 2002 and 
2005.  Increased competition has also led to a substa ntial reduction in telephone charges for mobile 
services and an increase in traffic.  The price of mobile communications in early 2005 was 28 per cent less, on average, than the cost in July 2001.
73 
103. The situation is very different in the monopo list fixed telephone market.  Local telephone call 
charges have remained stable in  real terms throughout the period 2001-2005, while the fixed monthly 
subscription charge increased by over 35 per cent and the cost of calls from fixed to mobile telephones showed a steady increase.
74  The cost of national long-distance calls, however, fell 
noticeably over the same period, mainly from January  2003 onwards, attributable in part to indirect 
competition from mobile telephony. 
104. Uruguay has no commitments on telecommunications services under the GATS and did not 
include concessions in its schedule of specific commitme nts (Table AIV.2).  Nor did it take part in the 
extended negotiations on telecommunications. 
(b) Regulatory and legal framework 
105. The Executive is responsible for drafting and implementing telecommunications policies.  
The URSEC, established by Law No. 17.296 of 21 February 2001, regulates and controls 
telecommunications activities and activities relati ng to the receipt, processing, transport and 
                                                      
72 URSEC (2005). 
73 Ibid. 
74 Nevertheless, the URSEC points out that, since October 2004, with the imminent entry of a third 
mobile telephone operator, the cost of this service fell sharply by some 40 per cent (URSEC, 2005). WT/TPR/S/163 Trade Policy Review 
Page 110 
 
 
distribution of mail by postal operators.75  Until 2001, ANTEL had regulatory responsibilities;  it is 
now subject to regulation and control by the URSEC. 
106. The Executive has special responsibility for appr oving agreements with foreign entities on the 
establishment of telecommunications;  authorizing th e operation of broadcasting stations;  generally 
authorizing the allocation of frequencies by the UR SEC to various broadcasting services by means of 
auctions or any other competitive procedure;  generally authorizing the supply of specified 
telecommunications services by individuals;  fixing the prices to be paid by concessionaires for using or benefiting from radioelectric frequencies. 
107. The URSEC is responsible for advising the Ex ecutive on the drafting and implementation of 
communications policy and for ensuring compliance with the specific sectoral rules.  Its functions also 
include administering, protecting and controlling Uruguay's radioelectric spectrum, granting authorizations for the use of radioelectric spectru m frequencies;  overseeing th e installation, operation 
and quality, frequency and scope of telecommunications services;   drawing up regulations for 
technical control and management of telecommunica tions and for monitoring their implementation;  
determining rules and industria l models to ensure the compatibility, interconnection and 
interoperability of networks;  protecting the rights of users and consumers;  determining technically 
the rates and prices;  and promoting arbitration in disputes among agents in the market.
76 
108. There is no general telecommunications law in Uruguay.  The main legal instruments 
regulating the sector include the following:  Law No. 17.296 of 21 Februa ry 2001 appointing the 
URSEC as the decentralized body of the Executive;   Law N°16.303 of 14 September 1992 approving 
the Constitution, Convention and Protocol of the ITU;  Law No. 15.262 of 20 April 1982 (INTELSAT 
Agreement);  Law No. 14.235 of 23 July 1 974 establishing the ANTEL;  Law No. 14.670 of 
23 June 1977 on broadcasting;  Law No. 13.56 9 of 26 October 1966 on radio amateurs;  Law 
No. 17.524 of 5 August 2002 on the terrestrial mobi le telephony service:  repeal of Articles 612 and 
613 of Law No. 17.296;  Law No. 17.909 of 15 October 2005 (restricting the granting of authorizations for the use of radioelectric freque ncies for broadcasting during national elections);  
Decree No. 115/05 of 9 May 2005 (responsibilities of the Executive in relation to communications 
and telecommunications);  Decree No. 206/002 of 11 June 2002 (Code of ethics for the regulator);  Decree No. 442/001 of 13 November 2001 (Regulation on interconnection and the international long 
distance multisupplier system);  Decree No. 114/003 of 25 March 2003 (Regulation on the 
administration and control of the radioelectric spectrum);  Decree No. 115/003 of 25 March 2003 
(Regulation on telecommunications licences);  D ecree No. 393/002 (Amendments to the Regulation 
on interconnection approved by Decree No. 442/001);  and Decree No. 423/001 (general authorization 
for use of radioelectric frequencies through competitive procedures). 
109. The principles regulating telecommunications activities in Uruguay are to be found in 
Law No. 17.296 (Articles 70-97).  This Law lays down the basic principles for Uruguay's 
communications policy, namely, the extension of access to services and making them universal, 
promotion of competition and the control of monopo list activities, publication of rates that reflect 
economic costs, promotion of investment, and protecting users' rights. 
110. The supply of telecommunications services is s ubject to the control fee determined in the 
Regulatory Framework for Communications, establis hed by Law No. 17.820 of 7 September 2004, 
and must be paid by anyone providing commercia l communications services with the exception of 
broadcasting companies.  The fee corresponds to 0. 3 per cent of the total gross income derived from 
the activity to be controlled.  In addition, Law No. 17.453 of 28 February 2002 temporarily 
                                                     
 
75 URSEC information online.  Available a t:  http://www.ursec.gub.uy/Q_es/q_es.htm. 
76 Ibid. Uruguay WT/TPR/S/163 
 Page 111 
 
 
established a telecommunications tax (ITEL) on ou tgoing calls using mobile telephone lines;  
outgoing international long-distance calls;  and calls from fixed telephones to mobile telephones.  This 
special tax, which was calculated according to the number of minutes of the call and the type of operation, applied up to 31 October 2004.  The IT EL on outgoing international long-distance calls 
was abolished on 1 November 2004,;  but the I TEL on calls to mobile telephones remains. 
111. The supply of telecommunications services to third parties where these are open to 
competition requires the granting of a licence by the Executive or, where applicable, the URSEC, 
depending on the service in question.  No permit or licence is required to install the infrastructure.  
The granting of licences for telecommunicati ons activities is governed by the Regulation on 
Telecommunications Licences of 25 March 2003.  Hold ers of a licence are prohibited from restricting 
the right of users to choose freely and from distorti ng competition.  There are four general types of 
licence:  (a) telecommunications licences to operate  a public network and provi de any type of service 
except subscriber television services;  (b) telecommuni cations using their own network or that of third 
parties;  (c) leasing of telecommunications links, media and telecommunications systems;  and (d) subscriber television services.  No distinction is drawn between Uruguayans and foreigners when 
granting licences. 
112. The requirements for obtaining a licence, except in cases where a licence is awarded 
following a competitive procedure, consist of s ubmitting personal and compa ny documents, technical 
information on the service to be provided and an i nvestment plan.  Where a licence is granted through 
competitive procedures, the requirements will be t hose specified in the tender and the respective 
terms.  There are no universal service requirements or any specific prohibition on using call-back 
systems. 
113. Applications for licences must be made to the URSEC.  The application must specify the 
specific services to be provided and the equipment to be utilized and, where applicable, the links, 
media or systems required from other operators.  Th e application must also be accompanied by a 
technical plan and a calendar for the first two years,  as well as an indication of the area to be covered 
and the corresponding services, together with an i nvestment programme and schedule for the first two 
years.  Licences may be transferred or assigned s ubject to authorization by the Executive or the 
URSEC, whichever is relevant.  The URSEC is authorized to cancel licences and impose penalties. 
114. Article 613 of Law No. 17.296 of 21  February 2001 is the basis in law for authorization of the 
supply of international long-distance services.  Th e article provides the following:  "The commercial 
supply of international long-distance telephone servi ces by third parties shall require authorization 
from the Executive, which shall grant it through procedures that ensure equality among interested 
parties".  This allowed the granting of the 14 au thorizations mentioned above, of which 10 were 
operating at the beginning of 2006.  Articles 612 and 613 of Law No. 17.296 were, however, 
subsequently repealed, pursuant to Law No. 17.524 of  5 August 2002, thus negating the possibility of 
granting new authorizations to supply in ternational long-distance telephone services. 
115. Telecommunications services may be resold only af ter registration in the Register of Resellers 
of Telecommunications Services kept by the URSEC .  Resellers do not have interconnection rights 
and are treated as final users of public telecommuni cations networks.  Any operator who is given a 
Class A telecommunications licence is obliged to allow other operators access to his network.  
Interconnection costs are freely determined through  interconnection agreements between operators.  
These agreements must comply with Decree No. 442/001 of 13 November  2001 (Regulation on 
interconnection and the international long-dist ance multisupplier system), amended by Decree 
No. 393/002 of 16 October 2002.  In addition, the URSEC publishes reference values which represent 
the maximum cost of the interconnection services listed in the publication.  If there is disagreement WT/TPR/S/163 Trade Policy Review 
Page 112 
 
 
between the parties, the URSEC intervenes and has th e authority to determine interconnection costs if 
the disagreement is not resolved.  In Februa ry 2006, no cases of disagreement in which the 
intervention of the URSEC had been requested had occurred. 
116. Rates for telecommunications services are fr eely determined by operators, without 
intervention by the URSEC, with the exception of  basic telephone rates (local and national long-
distance calls), which must be approved by the Execu tive.  The Law only provides that the rates must 
be determined on the basis of the cost of the services.  The URSEC makes a technical determination of the monthly rates for use of radioelectric freque ncies, which are approved by the Executive, and of 
the fees for licences and certificates for all teleco mmunications services.  The last update was in 
December 2005.
77 
(iii) Financial services 
(a) Main features and GATS commitments 
117. Despite the impact of the 2002 crisis, the financial services sector continues to be one of the 
main contributors to the GDP:  in 2004, it accoun ted for 9.4 per cent of total GDP, compared with 
10.2 per cent in 2000. 
118. Uruguay's financial services sector includes fina ncial intermediation companies, insurance 
companies and dealers on the securities market.  Financial intermediation companies include the 
following:  banks, financial intermediation coopera tives, private financial banks, offshore financial 
institutions, consortium managers and investment banks.  Offshore financ ial institutions (offshore 
banks) operate only outside Uruguay and w ith persons not resident in Uruguay. 
119. Uruguay took part in the extended negotia tions on financial services within the 
GATS framework and made an offer that included the insurance and banking subsectors.  In its 
schedule of GATS commitments, Uruguay included the condition that an application for authorization 
to operate in the sector may be rejected on precautio nary grounds, including the current state of the 
market (see also sections (iii)(b) and (iii)(d) below). 
(b) Banks and other financial intermediation institutions 
Main features 
 
120. In November 2005, Uruguay's financial interm ediation system consisted of 15 banks (two 
State-owned and 13 private, including one whose shares were owned by the State and was being 
privatized), four financial intermediation c ooperatives (of which one operated under the same 
conditions as commercial banks), six private bank s and six offshore financial institutions.  The 
number of banks has fallen significantly as a result of the 2002 financial crisis. 
121. The major part of the financial system in te rms of the number of institutions is privately-
owned;  this is not true of their share of assets:   in June 2005, State-ow ned banks controlled 53 per 
cent of assets.78  Of the 13 banks operating in June 2005 , only the NBC's capital was Uruguayan.  
                                                      
77 URSEC Resolution No. 342, Act 037, November 2005. 
78 If the Nuevo Banco Comercial  (NBC) is included in the calculatio ns, as its sole shareholder is the 
Uruguayan State, the share of  State-owned institutions in the system's total assets amounted to 60 per cent at the 
end of June 2005 (BCU, 2005). Uruguay WT/TPR/S/163 
 Page 113 
 
 
Banks established in the form of subsidiaries of fore ign banks held 45 per cent of the assets in private 
institutions in June 2005 (correspondi ng to 21 per cent of total assets).79 
122. The State banking sector comprises the Bank of the Eastern Republic of Uruguay (BROU) 
and the Uruguayan Mortgage Bank (BHU).  The BROU, Uruguay's major State-owned bank, acts as 
the State's commercial bank and also as a commercial and development bank for industrial and 
agricultural activities;  in June 2005, its assets am ounted to 41 per cent of total assets in the banking 
system.  The Uruguayan Mortgage Bank (BHU) is the State bank for mortgages and grants loans for 
building and buying homes, even though it does not have a monopoly of such loans. 
123. After a period of rapid growth in loans and de posits, a crisis in Uruguay's financial sector 
started to be felt at the end of 2001, exacerba ted by the measures taken to freeze deposits in 
Argentina.  This affected the Uruguayan bankin g system because of "fear of contagion" and 
contributed to the massive withdrawals from Urugua yan banks in January 2002.  There were other 
runs on banks between March and J une and these unleashed a financial crisis, leading to intervention 
by the Central Bank in a number of banks including the Banco Galicia , the Banco Montevideo  and the 
Caja Obrera , which were subsequently liquidated (see al so Chapter I).  In August 2002, Parliament 
approved the Law to strengthen the banking system , rescheduled deposits in the BROU and the BHU 
and adopted a policy to cover tran sactional deposits in State-owned a nd suspended banks.  In total, it 
is estimated that the financial crisis caused a decrease of 45 per cent (some US$6,245 million) in 
deposits in the Uruguayan banking system  between February and September 2002.80 
124. By mid-2005, the banking system had recovere d somewhat from the crisis, but in June 2005 
both deposits in United States dollar terms and loans we re lower than their 1998 levels.  The level of 
default (the proportion of loans due in the total of  gross loans) has fallen and in June 2005 was 7 per 
cent.  The banking system as a whole re ported earnings of US$81 million in 2004 and 
US$101 million for the first six months of 2005.  In  June 2005, Uruguay's Stat e-owned banks showed 
a wealth-assets ratio of 8 per cent, whereas for pr ivately-owned banks as a whole the ratio was close 
to 10 per cent.81  The decrease in loans due has led to an in crease in the coverage indicator for these.  
One feature of Uruguay's financial system that has not changed since the 2002 crisis is the high level 
of dollarization of deposits:  in June 2005, some 90 per cent of deposits were still in foreign currency, 
of which 70 per cent were deposits by resi dents and 20 per cent by non-residents. 
125. As the banking system continues to strengthen, in terest rates have fallen.  The average rate 
paid on fixed-term deposits in dollars by the banking system during the second quarter of 2005 was 
1.3 per cent, lower than similar international rat es such as the six-month LIBOR (3.8 per cent).  The 
average active rate in dollars charged by the ba nking system during the second quarter of 2005 was 
7 per cent.  The passive and active rates in pesos have  also fallen significantly, but the real rates have 
remained at a high level (almost 27 per cent in Ju ne 2005).  The high operating costs and the still 
relatively fragile nature of the banking system are reflected in the wide gap that exists between the 
interest rates for deposits and for loans, esp ecially for transactions in Uruguayan currency. 
Regulatory framework 
 
126. Uruguay's financial activities are governed by Law No. 15.322 of 17 September 1982 
(Financial Intermediation Law) and amendments thereto.  The Central Bank of Uruguay (BCU), 
established in 1967, regulates the financial inte rmediation system and the securities and shares 
market, and advises the Executive on approval or suspension of banking licences.  The financial 
                                                      
79 BCU (2005h). 
80 Association of Uruguayan Banks (2005). 
81 BCU (2005h). WT/TPR/S/163 Trade Policy Review 
Page 114 
 
 
intermediation system is supervised by the BCU through the Superintendencia de Instituciones de 
Intermediación Financiera  – SIIF (Superintendency of Financia l Intermediation Institutions).  The 
SIIF has adopted the basic rules on capital adequa cy laid down by the Basel Committee on Banking 
Supervision and requires that the ratio between to tal capital and weighted assets according to risk 
should correspond to 8 per cent. 
127. Traditionally, Uruguay has had a liberal financia l system in which transactions can be in 
Uruguayan or foreign currency and this situation has not changed;  there are no restrictions on capital 
movements and banking secrecy is strictly observe d, although it may be lifted by decision of the 
criminal or family courts.  Nevertheless, since th e previous review of Uruguay in 1998, the SIIF's 
supervisory powers have increased and the implementa tion rules have been adapted in the light of the 
experience gained during the 2002 financial crisis.  Fo r example, limits have been laid down for loan 
exposure by country and by type of debtor. 
128. Prior authorization from the Executive, followi ng advice from the BCU, is required in order 
to supply financial services.  In order to become established, an authorization from the BCU is also 
required.  In both cases, criteria of legality, time liness and necessity are taken into account, "paying 
particular attention to the solvency, rectit ude and aptitude of the applicant company".82  Banks 
wishing to become established in Uruguay must be organized as Uruguayan public limited companies 
with registered shares or as branches of foreign ba nks, provided that their articles of incorporation do 
not prohibit Uruguayan citizens from being members of their management board or from holding any other senior post within the territory of Uruguay.  The commercial presence of banks is subject to a 
quantitative limit:  in any one year, the number of authorizations for new banks to operate may not 
exceed 10 per cent of the banks existing in the year  immediately preceding.  This provision does not 
affect other financial intermediation companies.
83 
129. The legal framework for financial intermed iation institutions was amended following the 
2002 financial crisis.  Law No. 17.523 of 6 Augus t 2002 (Law on strengthening the banking system) 
includes regulations for rescheduling payment of fixe d-term deposits by specified State-owned banks.  
The Law established a Stability Fund for the Banking System with US$1,500 million in order to make 
available the resources needed to guarantee covera ge of foreign currency deposits by savers in the 
non-financial sector as at 30 July 2002 in the BROU and the BHU, both in current accounts and in savings accounts.  The amounts were made available to the banks in the form of loans.  The Law also 
provided for the legal extension of expiry dates fo r fixed-term deposits in foreign currency in these 
banks for a year for 25 per cent of the amounts deposite d, two years for 35 per cent and three years for 
the remaining 40 per cent, as of their respective due dates. 
130. The Law on strengthening the banking system also authorized the BCU to pay depositors with 
current accounts and savings accounts in foreign cu rrency in intervened private banks on the account 
of the Stability Fund for the Banking System up to a maximum amount of US$420 million. 
131. Law No. 17.513 of 30 June 2002 authorized th e Executive to capitali ze the BHU for up to 
US$550 million by subrogation of its debt with  the BCU.  Law No. 17.596 of 13 December 2002 
(Law on Regulation of the Uruguayan Mortgage Ba nk) redefined the BHU's functions and provided 
that it could only take deposits from the public th rough the advance savings scheme.  The Law also 
set a limit on new direct and contingent mortgage loan  operations of the BHU.  It also provided that, 
within a maximum period of 15 years from the date of entry into force of Law No. 17.596, the BHU 
should pay off all the commitments undertaken wh en issuing titles, credit bonds, or transferable 
securities.  The Law authorized the Executive to establish a National Housing Fund with 1 per cent of 
                                                     
 
82 BCU (2006a). 
83 WTO document GATS/SC/91/Suppl.1 of 26 February 1998. Uruguay WT/TPR/S/163 
 Page 115 
 
 
the resources generated by the Personal Remune ration Tax (IRP) in order to guarantee the loans 
granted by the BHU to low- and middle-income socio-economic sectors of the population.  The total insured may not exceed 20 per cent of the loan portfolio. 
132. Law No. 17.613 of 27 December 2002 (Law on th e Reorganization of the Financial System) 
introduced regulations on improved monitoring of  the financial system.  The Law extended the 
regulatory and supervisory powers of the BCU, for ex ample, by regulating a nd supervising financial 
intermediation entities which are part of an econo mic group with other companies.  The Law also 
extended BCU supervision to companies providing  services to entities controlled by the BCU.  The 
Banking Law gave the BCU broader powers to requ est financial intermediation entities to make 
changes in the structure and composition of th eir share capital and laid down more stringent 
conditions on keeping a compulsory minimum reserve for deposits so as to protect the liquidity of 
financial institutions.
84 
133. This Law also created a Superintendencia de Protección del Ahorro Bancario  (Bank Savings 
Protection Superintendency) as a decentralized unit w ithin the BCU.  Its objective is to guarantee the 
refund of deposits in banks and financial intermediation cooperatives through the management of the 
Deposit Guarantee Fund, also set up under this Law.   The Fund guarantees deposits of any type by 
natural or legal persons in the non-financial sector in financial intermediation enterprises and is 
mainly funded by contributions from banks  and financial intermediation cooperatives.85  Decree 
No. 103/005 of 7 March 2005 regulated the Deposit Gu arantee Fund and laid down the bases for the 
Superintendency's operation, deciding that this should be the responsibility of the technical entity 
called the "Bank Savings Protection Commission", ma de up of three members appointed by the BCU.  
The Fund guarantees an amount of up to US$5,000 fo r deposits in foreign cu rrency and up to 250,000 
indexed units (IU, US$15,000)  per person or institution.86  In order to facilitate the initial 
establishment of the Fund, it was decided that th e State should advance preferred capital to the 
Superintendency amounting to US $20 million and US$40 million as a loan.  In August 2005, the 
BCU joined the Bank Savings Protection Commission as a first step towards the establishment of the 
Superintendency.  Contributions by banks  came into effect on 1 September 2005.87  Both the 
Superintendency and the Fund started to  operate in the second half of 2005. 
134. Activities by offshore financial institutions (IFEs ) or offshore banks are governed by Decree 
No. 381/989 of 16 August 1989, or Decree implemen ting Article 4 of Decree-Law No. 15.322 and the 
amendments thereto, contained in Decrees No. 189/994 of 3 May 1994, No. 246/994 of 31 May 1994, 
and No. 227/2002 of 18 June 2002.  The IFEs must  be established as public limited companies and 
may conduct financial intermediation or mediati on transactions, and real estate or commercial 
operations on their own behalf or for third parties,  provided that this is done outside Uruguay.  The 
head office of offshore financial intermediation ente rprises must be in Uruguay.  The IFEs may offer 
demand deposits and current account de posits, in foreign currency, but only  to non-residents;  they are 
subject to control by the BCU in accordance w ith the provisions in Article 4 of Decree-Law 
No. 15.322 and are tax exempt. 
                                                      
84 This Law was notified to the WTO in document S/C/N/307 of 17 November 2004. 
85 This contribution was determined in Decree No. 103/005 of 7 March 2005 at 2 per mil annually of 
the average of total amounts of deposits in foreign currency corresponding to each institution in the preceding 
calendar year and 1 per mil annually for deposits in Uruguayan currency. 
86 On 30 November 2005, one IU was worth Ur$1.50.  Updated information on the value of the IU can 
be found online at:  http://www.ine.gub.uy/banco%20de%20datos/ui/Unidad%20Indexada.xls. 
87 Decree No. 354/005 of 3 October 2005.  Ava ilable at:  http://www.bcu.gub.uy/autoriza/sgoioi/ 
spab/dec354-05.pdf. WT/TPR/S/163 Trade Policy Review 
Page 116 
 
 
135. As regards banking services and other financ ial services, in its GATS commitments Uruguay 
bound wholesale deposit services, other bank de posit services, financial leasing services with 
purchase option, personal instalment loan services and credit card services, without limitations as to modes of supply 1 and 2 for market access but subject to the requirement to establish a public limited 
company with registered shares or a branch of a foreign bank in respect of mode 3.  Quantitative 
limitations were also included regarding the number of banks. 
(c) Securities market 
136. In November 2005, Uruguay's securities market was composed of two stock exchanges (the 
Electronic Securities Exchange of Uruguay S.A. and the Stock Exchange of Montevideo);  
74 stockbrokers;  17 securities dealers;  six financial trusts;  eight general tr usts;  14 pension fund 
administrators (of which six were being liquidated) ;  and seven risk assessors (four local and three 
international).  Other participants in the securities market include 13 issuers of shares, 27 issuers of 
marketable bonds, 16 issuers of deposit  certificates, banks for the major part, and five issuers of other 
securities.
88  The instruments negotiated are shares, deposit certificates, government debt trusts, 
negotiable bonds and government securities. 
137. The amount traded on the Uruguayan stock exchanges during the first nine months of 2005 
was US$1,671.5 million.89  The majority of trade is in deposit certificates and government securities.  
Trade in shares accounts for less than 1 per cent of to tal activity on the stock exchanges.  The majority 
of investment funds are being liquidated or are not operating. 
138. The BCU, through the Securities Market and AFAP (retirement savings fund administrators) 
Division is responsible for regula ting and supervising the local secu rities market.  In Uruguay, this 
market is governed by Law No. 16.749 of 12 June 1996 (Law on the Securities Market and 
Negotiable Bonds), Decrees No. 344/96 and No . 146/997, Law No. 16.774 of 7 October 1996 
(Investment Fund Law);  Law No. 17.202 of 1 October 1999 (Securitization Law);  and Law 
No. 17.703 of 27 October 2003 (Trust Law).90  In addition to the laws and decrees, the rules 
governing regulation of the securities market are resolutions by the BCU, which are published by 
means of circulars and numbered communications.  The circulars are compiled in the Compilation of 
Rules on the Securities Market (RNMV). 
139. Law No. 16.749 provides that public offers of s ecurities can only be made when these and the 
issuer have been registered in the BCU's Register of Securities.  The Law also has provisions on stock 
exchanges, which must be in the legal form of a civil partnership or public limited company with 
registered shares and must be authorized to ope rate by the BCU.  The Law specifically provides, 
however, that authorization is not required at the Montevideo Stock Exchange or the Uruguayan Electronic Securities Exchange and registration su ffices in such cases.  The Law provides that the 
stock exchanges should be self-regulating and sh ould adopt the measures necessary for stock 
exchange transactions and activities by stockbrokers. 
140. Decree No. 344/96 regulates the public offer, th e characteristics of the Securities Register, 
aspects relating to advertising and the operation of stock exchanges and securities intermediaries.  
Decree No. 146/997 regulates the functioning of risk assessors.  Communication BCU No. 93/61 of 31 May 1993, as amended by Communication BCU No . 95/15 of 20 February 1995, contains the 
regulations on controlling the operations of the stock exchanges. 
                                                     
 
88 Information available at:  http://www.bcu.gub.uy/autoriza/ggmvrf/registronuevo/indice.htm. 
89 BCU (2005b,c,d). 
90 The Securitization Law was notified to the WTO in document S/C/N/308 of 17 November 2004. Uruguay WT/TPR/S/163 
 Page 117 
 
 
141. Law No. 16.774 of 7 October 1996 governs the activities of companies that administer 
investment funds.  These must be established as  public limited companies with registered or book 
entry shares and their sole object must be to admini ster the funds.  They must be authorized by the 
BCU.  The Securitization Law amended some provi sions of Law No. 16.774 in order to allow the 
constitution of closed investment funds whose special purpose is to invest in like or similar packages 
of credit rights, secured by mortgages, whose owners hip can be transferred to the fund.  Companies 
administering investment funds are exempt from the Tax on the Assets of Banking Enterprises and the Commission Tax.  The Securitization Law also regulates factoring contracts. 
142. The BCU participates in organizations that promot e greater transparency in markets;  it is a 
full member of the International Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO) and the Council of 
Securities Regulators of the Americas (COSRA). 
(d) Insurance 
Main features 
 
143. In December 2005, the Uruguayan insurance market consisted of a State-owned company, the 
Banco de Seguros del Estado  (State Insurance Bank) and 14 privat e companies, operating in different 
areas, the majority of which were branches of foreign companies.  Three companies supplying insurance in Uruguay specialized in life insurance, four in vehicle a nd transport insurance, while the 
remainder offered a wider range of insurance; th ree companies proposed life and general insurance. 
144. The volume of operations in the insurance ma rket in 2004 amounted to Ur$7,023 million 
(around US$292 million), 3.2 per cent above  the level for 2003 in real terms.
91  General insurance 
accounted for 65.8 per cent of the total of dir ect insurance, while 13.4 per cent was non-social-
security-related life insurance;  and 4.5 per cent w as social-security-related life insurance;  with 
16.3 per cent corresponding to occupational accidents.  In the general insurance category, the largest 
proportion is automobile and haulage insurance with  50 per cent of the total (32.9 per cent of total 
direct insurance in 2004). 
145. Direct insurance premiums as a percentage of GDP accounted for 2 per cent in 2004.  Direct 
per capita premiums in 2004 amounted to US$81.  The total net worth of the market at 31 December 2004 was Ur$3,540 million (US$147.5 million), while the value of assets was Ur$14,131 million (US$589 million), of which 68 per cent corresponded to financial activities, 
essentially securities issued by the Uruguayan Stat e and placements in financial intermediation 
institutions.  Technical reserves represented 2.25 times the net worth.
92 
Regulatory framework 
 
146. The Executive, advised by the BCU and by an honorary commission, lays down the overall 
regulatory framework and policy for insurance.   The honorary commission, composed of 
representatives of the MEF, the BCU, the State Insurance Bank and the private sector, is also 
responsible for proposing to the Executive legal or  regulatory texts on the legal regime for State 
control of the State Insurance Bank, private in surance and reinsurance companies and persons 
engaged in intermediation in this area and also on the legal regime for in surance and reinsurance 
contracts. 
                                                      
91 At the exchange rate of November 2005;  at the exchange rate at th e close of the 2004 financial year 
(US$1 = Ur$26.35) this corresponded to US$266.5 million. 
92 BCU (2005i). WT/TPR/S/163 Trade Policy Review 
Page 118 
 
 
147. The Superintendencia de Seguros y Reaseguros  - SSR (Insurance and Reinsurance 
Superintendency), created in 1994 under Law No. 16.426 of 14 October 1993, is the regulatory and 
supervisory body for insurance.  The SSR, wh ich comes under the BCU but is technically 
autonomous, deals, inter alia , with supervising public and privat e insurance companies.  Under the 
Law, it is responsible for issuing regulations an d defining procedures relating to the following:  
authorization for companies by the Executive;  authorization to open subsidiaries of private 
companies already established;  th e prudential rules needed to preser ve and maintain the companies' 
solvency;  technical regulations regarding minimu m capital, margin of solvency, technical reserves 
and investments;  accounting rules, inspection procedures, information procedures and periodic 
publication of information;  rules on the merger, absorption or conversion of insurance entities;  
control of intermediation;  and th e procedural regime for penalties.93 
148. The insurance market in Uruguay is governed  by several laws, among which the most 
important are the following:  Law No. 16.426 of 14 October 1993 (Law on Ending the Insurance and Reinsurance Monopoly);  Law No. 16.851 of 15 July 1997; and Decree No. 530/93 of 
25 November 1993 and amendments thereto in Decree No. 354/94 of 17 August 1994, which 
constitute the regulations for the Law on Endi ng the Insurance and Reinsurance Monopoly. 
149. Law No. 16.426 of 14 October 1993 (Law on Ending the Insurance and Reinsurance 
Monopoly) ended the State's monopoly of insura nce, exercised through  the State Insurance 
Bank (BSE), covered by Law No. 3.935 of 27 D ecember 1911.  Law No. 16.426 and its subsequent 
amendments, especially Law No. 17.296 of 23 Februa ry 2001, declared that insurance companies 
were free to conclude insurance contracts for a ll risks, with the exception of work accidents and 
occupational diseases, which are covered by Law No . 16.074 of 10 October 1989, and may only be 
concluded with the BSE. 
150. All types of insurance policy must be register ed with the SSR before they are marketed.  
Premiums may be freely determined for all insura nce, except in the case of social-security-related 
annuities, for which there are maximum premiums.  
151. The regulations for the Law on Ending the Insurance and Reinsurance Monopoly provided 
that insurance and reinsurance co mpanies must be established in Uruguay as public limited companies 
with registered shares.  Nevertheless, all insuran ce and reinsurance activities require prior approval by 
the Executive, following advice from the SSR, and a pe rmit to engage in insurance and reinsurance 
from the Superintendency.  They may offer both ge neral and life insurance.  There are no limits on 
foreign participation in new or existing compani es, provided that they are set up as public limited 
companies;  it is not permitted to establish bran ches or agencies of forei gn insurance companies for 
the purpose of carrying out insurance activities in Uruguay. 
152. Insurance covering risks that might occur in Uruguay may only be taken out with companies 
established in Uruguay.  Law No. 16.426 and Law No. 16.851 of 15 July 1997 provide exemption 
from the requirement to take out insurance with companies established in Uruguay for international 
transport and trade insurance for the goods transpor ted.  Moreover, the final paragraph of the Law on 
Ending the Monopoly, in the version given in Article No. 269 of Law No. 17.296 of 21 February 2001, states that, except for merchant vessels and any floating construction, whether self-
propelled or not, used for civilian purposes and flying the Uruguayan flag, all other vehicles or media used to transport persons or goods and register ed in Uruguay may only be insured with companies 
established and authorized in Uruguay.  The excep tion does not cover the units making up the fishing 
fleet. 
                                                     
 
93 BCU information online, Responsibilities of the Insurance and Reinsurance Superintendency.  
Available at:  http://www.bcu.gub. uy/autoriza/sssrer/ssrig007.htm. Uruguay WT/TPR/S/163 
 Page 119 
 
 
153. As regards outwards reinsurance by Uruguayan insu rers, this regime is free, in other words, 
establishment in Uruguay is not a requirement;  in  order to calculate reinsurance for technical 
purposes, reinsurers must be registered subject to certain requirements. 
154. Offshore insurance companies may be set up but their activities may only concern risks or 
persons not established in Uruguay;  these compan ies receive the same fiscal treatment as offshore 
financial institutions.  In practice, th ere are no offshore insurance companies. 
155. Insurance premiums are exempt from VAT when they cover death, retirement, invalidity, 
illness and personal injury.  Nevertheless, in order to  finance the National Blood Service, a tax of up 
to 2 per cent is imposed on insurance or capitalization premiums in transactions in Uruguay.94 
156. Article 558 of Law No. 17.296 of 21 February  2001 amended the tax on the income of 
insurance companies, which is imposed on the gross income that public or private companies engaged 
in insurance earn on their operations in Uruguay or with persons resident in Uruguay.  The taxable 
amount is the remuneration from insurance coverage , with the exception of the VAT and the tax for 
the National Blood Service (see belo w), except for air or maritime tr ansport vehicle insurance, where 
it is 10 per cent of this amount, and reinsurance, wh ere it is up to 40 per cent.  The tax rates for 
insurance or reinsurance range from 0.5 per cent for life insurance to 15 per cent for fire insurance.  
Agricultural insurance or reinsuran ce is exempt from this tax, as are insurance for work accidents, 
occupational diseases and export credit, as well as income from inwards reinsurance by insurance 
companies authorized and permitted to operate in Uruguay and premiums for social-security-related insurance.  The BSE was given a temporary reducti on of 66 per cent of the amount in 2001 and 33 per 
cent in 2002. 
157. The SSR verifies the solvency of  insurance companies.  Proof of a basic amount of capital is 
required in order to operate.  The amount de pends on the number of branches involved and is 
readjusted quarterly on the basis of variations in  the consumer price index.  For example, for a 
company offering all branches, on 30 Septembe r 2005 the amount was approximately Ur$53 million 
(US$2.2 million), whereas the minimum for operating in a single branch was Ur$14.6 million 
(US$610,000).  The SSR has also implemented a solvency margin scheme.
95 
158. The SSR also regulates the constitution of tec hnical reserves and the investment allowed, 
which must meet profitability, liquidity and security  criteria, and for this purpose has established asset 
valuation and diversification standards for the i nvestment portfolio, and these are contained in the 
BCU's Compilation of Insurance and Reinsurance Regulations.  General insurance and non-social-
security-related life insurance companies may invest in securities issued by the Uruguayan State, by 
the BHU, or by State-owned or private enterprises q uoted on the official market, maintain deposits in 
financial intermediary institutions  established in Uruguay, acquire shares in investment funds, 
insurance credits, real estate securities in Ur uguay or foreign securities classified at least as 
international investment grade by internationally-  recognized risk assessors.  Social-security-related 
life insurance companies may not invest in fore ign securities nor in real estate; the limits on 
                                                      
94 This tax, originally amounting to 1 per cent, was subsequently raised to up to 2 per cent in 
accordance with the second paragraph of Article No. 361 of Law No. 17.296 of 21 February 2001, amending 
Article No. 403 of Law No. 16.736 of 5 January 1996.  The revenue generated by this tax is paid to the Ministry 
of Public Health, and currently finances the aforementioned Service, the National Organ and Tissue Bank and 
the National Fund to Combat AIDS. 
95 BCU information online, Seguros, Acerca de la SSR, Creación y Marco Regulatorio .  Available at:  
http://www.bcu.g ub.uy/autoriza/ sssrer/ssrig008.htm. WT/TPR/S/163 Trade Policy Review 
Page 120 
 
 
investment are, in general, lower.96  The assets allowed and the diversification limits for social-
security-related life insurance are the same as those for the rest of the social-security-related system. 
159. Regarding reinsurance companies, the rules di ffer only as far as the basic capital is concerned 
and at 30 September 2005 this was Ur$145.7 million (US$6.1 million), irrespective of the quantity 
and type of insurance that they reinsure.  There is a series of rules on taking out reinsurance with 
companies not established in Uruguay or through insurance brokers.  For both these forms, a number of criteria must be met and there is prior verifi cation by the SSR regarding the minimum solvency 
requirements in order to be included in the SSR's Register.  Reinsurance companies not established in 
Uruguay must show that, during the last financial year, their assets exceeded US$30 million. 
160. In its GATS commitments, Uruguay included limitati ons on motor vehicle insurance;  marine, 
aviation and other transport insurance;  and freight insurance.  It did not bind commitments on other 
types of insurance, for example, life insurance.  In general, the supply of insurance services through 
modes 1 (cross-border supply), 2 (consumption abroad ) and 4 (presence of natural persons) were not 
bound as regards market access, whereas commerc ial presence was bound but subject to the 
requirement to be established as a Uruguayan pub lic limited company.  National treatment for 
insurance suppliers was bound for modes of supply  1, 2 and 3 (commercial presence).  Actuarial 
services and insurance and pension consultancy ser vices were bound without limits, except as regards 
the presence of natural persons. 
(iv) Air transport and airports 
(a) Main features 
161. There are 64 airports in Uruguay, of which 15 have sealed runways.  Three of these are 
commercial airports, namely, Carrasco, Canelones a nd Punta del Este.  The main airport is the 
Carrasco International Airport in Montevideo.  In 2005, this was used by a total of 
1.1 million passengers, on internati onal or domestic flights, corresponding to 80 per cent of the total 
passengers using Uruguayan airports in 2005, with  approximately half the passengers using the 
Montevideo Buenos Aires air bridge. 
162. In November 2005, 15 domestic and internati onal airlines operated regularly in Uruguay;  
there were also five Uruguayan or foreign air fre ight companies operating from Carrasco International 
Airport and 42 companies provided air transport-rela ted services in one or other of the country's 
airports.
97  PLUNA is the national airline. 
(b) Air transport services 
163. Government policy in the air transport sector  is determined by the Executive through the 
Ministry of National Defence.  Together with the Ministry of Transport and Public Works and other 
government bodies, the Ministry of National Defence belongs to the Air Transport Policy Commission, which is responsible for advising th e Executive on the formulation and implementation 
of national air transport policy.  Decree No. 21/999 of 26 January 1999 established the Dirección 
Nacional de Aviación Civil e Infraestructura Aeronáutica  - DINACIA (National Directorate of Civil 
Aviation and Aeronautical Infrastructure), which is th e authority referred to in the Aeronautical Code 
(see below), and regulates its structure and operati on.  The DINACIA is part of the Ministry of 
National Defence and supervises all regulatory aspects  in the civil aviation sector.  In particular, it 
                                                     
 
96 BCU (2006b). 
97 Information available at: http://www.dinacia.gub.uy/. Uruguay WT/TPR/S/163 
 Page 121 
 
 
examines and proposes policies for the sector, manages and maintains air transport services (including 
air safety systems) and coordinates national and in ternational plans with other government bodies. 
164. There have not been any major changes in legislation governing air transport since 1998.  The 
main provisions relating to air transport and services di rectly or indirectly related to the use of public 
and private aircraft in Uruguay are to be found in  the Aeronautical Code (Decree Law No. 14.305 of 
20 November 1974).98  The Aeronautical Code declares air traffic and passenger transport to be of 
national interest. 
165. Registration of an aircraft in the National Register of Aircraft (General Register of the 
National Aeronautical Fleet) means that the aircraft becomes Uruguayan and may operate as such.  To 
apply for registration of their aircraft, owners mu st be domiciled in Uruguay;  in cases of joint 
ownership, 51 per cent of the co-owners with rights exceeding 51 per cent of the value of the aircraft 
must meet the domicile requirement. 
166. Domestic air services (cabotage) are reserved for national companies.  National companies, 
defined as companies established in Uruguay with at  least 51 per cent of their capital belonging to 
Uruguayan citizens, may only operate Uruguayan-registered aircraft, with some exceptions.  Only 
Uruguayan citizens are authorized to work on Uruguayan aircraft, unless the competent authority 
specifically provides otherwise.  If the State does no t operate them directly, domestic scheduled air 
transport of passengers, mail and freight must be operated through a concession and unscheduled 
services under an authorization.  The term of the concession is determined according to the economic 
importance of the service, the amount of the original investment and subsequent investment needed to 
develop and improve the service, account being take n of the benefits of the service for the national 
interest.  The authorities have indicated that reform  of the Aeronautical Code is under consideration, 
particularly as regards cabotage and domestic passe nger transport, and this could lead to these markets 
being opened up to suppliers from abroad. 
167. Companies providing international transport services are subject to the concession or 
authorization regime, as determined case by ca se by the Executive.  For foreign companies, 
authorization is covered by international agreemen ts concluded by Uruguay.  They must have an 
agent in Uruguay, establish a domicile for all legal purposes in Uruguay, and be specifically subject to 
Uruguayan jurisdiction.  In the case of public intern ational transport services, the authorization given 
to foreign companies must contain at least the same obligations as those imposed on domestic companies providing similar services. 
168. All agreements on collaboration, association, c onsolidation or merger of services among 
companies must be approved by the DINACIA.  If the latter does not raise any objections within 
90 days, the agreement is deemed to be approved. 
169. The Aeronautical Code allows the leasing of aircraft, both equipped and crewed, or without 
crews. Chartering is also permitted.  The leasing or ch arter contract must be registered in the National 
Register of Aircraft. 
170. Uruguay participates in several international agreements and conven tions on air transport 
services, including the 1944 Chicago Convention.  The Protocol amending Article 56 of the 
International Civil Aviation Convention, signed in  Montreal on 6 October 1989, was ratified by 
Uruguay in 1992 and entered into force in 2005 . Law No. 17.093 of 28 May 1999 ratified the 
Agreement on Subregional Air Services (Forta leza Agreement) among the MERCOSUR member 
                                                     
 
98 The full text of the Aeronautical Code can be found at:  http://www.parlamento.gub.uy/leyes/ 
ley14305.htm. WT/TPR/S/163 Trade Policy Review 
Page 122 
 
 
countries, Bolivia, Chile and Peru.  Its purpose is to allow the opening up of new scheduled 
subregional air services on routes not bei ng operated under bilateral agreements. 
171. Uruguay has bilateral air transport agreements with the following:  Argentina, Austria, 
Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Cuba, Denmark,  France, Germany, Israel, Jordan, Morocco, 
Netherlands Antilles, the Netherlands, Norway, Pana ma, Paraguay, Peru, Portugal, Romania, Spain, 
Sweden, Switzerland, the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom, the United States of America and 
Venezuela.  In October 2004, Uruguay signed an  open skies agreement with the United States of 
America;  it also has an open skies agreement with Panama. 
(c) Airports and auxiliary services 
172. Airports in Uruguay belong to the State.  The management of airfields and airports, except for 
military airfields, and their superv ision is the responsibility of the Unidad de Control de Gestión 
Integral de Aeropuertos y Concesiones Aeroportuarias  (Control Unit for the Integral Management of 
Airports and Airport Concessions) of the DINACIA.  The law, however, allows the management of airports to be the subject of a concession, as has been the case with the airports at Montevideo and 
Punta del Este. 
173. A concession or authorization is required to  engage in any commercial air operations, 
including the establishment of a commercial agency  or office for the sale of tickets.  Technical 
personnel must have professional qualifications a nd a permit to engage in their profession.  
Professional qualifications and permits granted abroad  are valid in Uruguay after being revalidated.  
There are no restrictions on national or foreign privat e participation in the supply of auxiliary services 
such as maintenance, which may be contracted abroad.  Market access without restrictions and 
national treatment apply to all auxiliary services, except navigation services, which are the State's prerogative. 
174. Prices of services related to use of public air ports are approved by the Executive on advice 
from the DINACIA's Control Unit for the Integral Management of Airports and Airport Concessions.  The pricing regimes are contained in Annex "F" "P rice Table" of the Integral Management Regime, 
approved by Decree No. 376/002 of 28 Septembe r 2002, as amended by Decree No. 317/003 of 
4 August 2003. 
175. Carrasco International Airport (Montevideo) was given as a concession to the Puerta del Sur 
Consortium in November 2003.  Puerta del Sur is a consortium led by Aeropuertos Argentinos 2000, 
with Argentine, Italian and United States cap ital and it has engaged the company SEA SpA ( Società 
per Azioni Esercizi Aeroportuali ) as the operator of Carrasco Interna tional Airport.  Puerta del Sur 
won the auction to manage Carrasco Airport by  offering US$34 million plus the payment of a 
minimum annual fee of US$2.5 million for operating Carrasco Airport services.  Puerta del Sur also undertook to invest in infrastructure amounting to  around US$80 million and to rehabilitate Carrasco 
Airport over five years with the aim of making it in to one of the major entry points into MERCOSUR. 
176. Uruguay undertook commitments within the GA TS regarding auxiliary storage and deposit 
services for all types of transport; it did not make any commitment on air transport.  Its commitments 
on auxiliary services have been bound as regards mark et access and national treatment for the first 
three modes of supply, but movement  of natural persons was not bound.
99 
                                                      
99 WTO document GATS/SC/91 of 15 April 1994. Uruguay WT/TPR/S/163 
 Page 123 
 
 
(v) Maritime transport 
(a) Main features 
177. Uruguay has 10 ports managed by the State and two ports privately managed and operated.  
The major public ports in Montevideo (on the Ri ver Plate), Colonia (on the River Plate), Nueva 
Palmira (on the River Uruguay), Fray Bentos (on th e River Uruguay) and Puerto Sauce (on the River 
Plata) are managed by the Administración Nacional de Puertos  - ANP (National Ports Authority), 
whereas the other ports are managed directly by th e Ministry of Transport and Public Works (MTOP) 
through the Dirección Nacional de Hidrografía  - DNH (National Directorate of Hydrography).  The 
two ports that are privately managed and operate d are in Nueva Palmira (within the free zone 
supervised by the MEF) and Fray Bentos (M'Bopicua por t).  The port in Montevideo is the largest in 
the country; river and maritime transport of goods through this port amounted to 6 million tonnes in 
2004 and 90 per cent of these went through the commercial wharves. 
178. A large part of international goods traffic is  on vessels flying foreign flags.  In 2004, 
Uruguay's merchant fleet comprised 13 private vesse ls and one State-owned vessel, of which five 
were oil tankers with registered gross tonnage  of 19,700 tonnes.  There are also 12 Uruguayan-
registered vessels for the international transport of passengers and vehicles. 
179. The emergence of trade competition in port operations seems to have stimulated an 
improvement in the quality of the services supplied and in attracting new traffic.100  The Montevideo 
port appears to have enhanced its productivity in comparison with other ports in the region. 
(b) Regulatory framework 
180. The MTOP is responsible for policies, regula ting and controlling river and maritime transport 
and for port activities at the national level. 
181. In Uruguay, international maritime transport rules are generally based on the principle of 
freedom of navigation, but there are restrictions  on cabotage.  Cargo preferences may be applied 
based on the principle of reciprocity, but at the e nd of 2005, Uruguay was a pplying no preferences 
except to bilateral traffic with Argentina (passengers) and Brazil (cargo).  The law allows cargo 
reserves to be applied to offset restrictive measure s in another country, but in practice this has not 
been used. 
182. Law No. 12.091 on Navigation and Cabotage Trade of 25 January 1954 provides that 
navigation and cabotage trade are reserved to Uruguayan-registered vessels.101  Vessels providing 
cabotage services in Uruguay must meet the following re quirements:  (a) if they are owned by natural 
persons, they must be owned by Uruguayan nationals  domiciled in Uruguay;  and (b) if they are 
owned by a company:  (i) 51 per cent of the owners of the company must be Uruguayan citizens;  (ii) 51 per cent of the shares with voting rights must be owned by Uruguayan citizens;  and (iii) the company must be controlled and managed by Uruguayan citizens.  The Executive may allow exceptions so that vessels flying other flags can  provide cabotage services when Uruguayan vessels 
are not available. 
                                                     
 
100 Business Information and Documentation Ce ntre for Iberoamerica (CIDEIBER) (2006). 
101 Cabotage trade includes domestic transport services by boat, between ports and coastal zones in 
Uruguay, including salvage, lightering and towing operati ons and other maritime operations by vessels in waters 
within Uruguayan jurisdiction. WT/TPR/S/163 Trade Policy Review 
Page 124 
 
 
183. Law No. 16.387 of 27 June 1993 (Law on the Flag State) provides that in order to fly the 
Uruguayan flag merchant vessels must be definitively registered in the National Register of Vessels.  The Law sets out the requirements for registration.  There are restrictions on the nationality of the 
crews of Uruguayan merchant vessels.  If the vessels ar e engaged in traffic that requires authorization, 
at least 50 per cent of the crew must be Uruguayan citizens either by birth or naturalized, including 
the captain, in accordance with Article 320 of La w No. 16.736 of 9 February 1996.  When no 
authorization is required, only the captain, the chief engineer and the radio operator or chief steward 
must be Uruguayan citizens. 
184. Uruguayan merchant vessels are given a numbe r of tax incentives. Decree Law No. 14.650 of 
12 May 1977 (Law on the Merchant  Marine) provides that the import of vessels of a tonnage 
exceeding 1,000 tonnes, as well as the import of v essels of lesser tonnage that cannot be built in 
Uruguay under proper technical or economic conditi ons, are exempt from tax.  Likewise, Uruguay-
registered vessels are exempt from tax on the import of spare parts, equipment, fuel and lubricants necessary for their operation.  Fuel and solid or liq uid lubricants used in Uruguayan-registered vessels 
are exempt from the IMESI.  Shipping compani es with Uruguayan-registered merchant vessels are 
exempt from the IRIC, VAT and the Wealth Tax (PAT). 
185. The Law on Navigation and Cabotage Trade states that when a government authority issues a 
tender for a transport service a preference margin  of 10 per cent applies to the freight.  Law 
No. 17.930 of 19 December 2005 authorizes the Executive to lower by up to 100 per cent all navigation taxes and charges for pure cabotage operations. 
186. Law No. 14.100 of 29 December 1972 provides for the establishment of a Merchant Marine 
Promotion Fund and Decree-Law No. 14.650 regulates th is.  The Fund is used to grant loans to build 
vessels and for major repairs;  renovation, conver sion and modernization of vessels;  as well as the 
purchase of new vessels built less than 15 years prior to the date of requesting the loan.  During the 
period under review, three loans were granted by this Fund, amounting to US$500,000. 
187. Uruguay belongs to a number of international agreements on maritime navigation.  During the 
period under review, it ratified the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea 
(SOLAS) 1974 and incorporated it into its do mestic legislation under Law No. 17.504 of 
25 June 2002.  Uruguay is on the "White List" of  the International Maritime Organization.  The 
Uruguayan Navy is responsible for implementing inte rnational conventions on navigation, safety at 
sea, prevention of pollution and safety of human life at sea.  The MTOP is responsible for 
international transport agreements. 
188. Uruguay has also signed the Inter-American C onvention on Facilitation of International 
Waterborne Transportation (Mar del Plata Conventi on) of 7 June 1963 and th e Paraguay-Paraná River 
Waterway Treaty, including the six additional Protocols.  Uruguay and Argentina have incorporated part of the Uruguay River into the Waterway regime  through an exchange of  letters between the two 
countries in February 1997.  In addition, Urugua y takes part in MERCOSUR's Sub-Working Group 5 
on transport. 
(c) Port services 
189. In 1992, a new regulatory framework was laid down for the supply of port services:  Law 
No. 16.246 of 8 April 1992 (Ports Law).  This pr ovides that the supply of efficient and competitive 
port services is a priority objective for Uruguay's development and allows the supply of port services 
by private companies, which may obtain concessions and permits to undertake operations such as Uruguay WT/TPR/S/163 
 Page 125 
 
 
loading and unloading, movement of goods within ports, other dock services and the use of container 
zones.  The ports themselves are still State-owned. 
190. The regulations on port services are to be foun d in the following:  Decree No. 412/992 of 
1 September 1992 or the Ports Law Regulation No. 16 .246 of 8 April 1992;  Decree No. 413/992 of 
1 September 1992 or Regulation on Authorizing Companies Providing Port Services;  Decree 
No. 105/993 of 2 March 1993 or Extended Regulat ion on Authorizing Companies Providing Port 
Services;  Decree No. 57/994 of 8 February 1994 or General Regime for Port Services;  and Decree 
No. 183/994 of 22 April 1994 or Regulation on Port Operations and the Harbourmasters' Services. 
191. The ANP is the port authority responsible for regulating, administering, controlling, 
monitoring, maintaining and devel oping ports under its jurisdiction.102  The ANP also gives 
authorizations to operate terminals in its ports, but these must be approved by the Executive pursuant 
to Law No. 16.246 of 8 April 1992.  Authorizations  to provide services are granted following a public 
invitation to tender.  If these services are needed urgently, a concession may be granted directly for a 
non-renewable period of six months until the public  bidding procedure can take place.  Foreign 
suppliers may also operate in Uruguayan ports provided that they are established in Uruguay. 
192. The Executive lays down the maximum limits for the fees paid to suppliers of port services 
and the ANP, upon recommendation by the ANP but, w ithin these limits, the fees are determined by 
the market.  In November 2005, the Montevideo Po rt applied the following fees:  US$0.14 per gross 
registered tonne (GRT) for use of the port by containe r ships, Ro-Ros, reefers a nd general cargo ships;  
US$0.12 for oil tankers, bulk carriers, cabotage v essels, cruise ships and other categories;  and 
US$0.10 for fishing vessels and warships.103 
(vi) Tourism 
(a) Main features 
193. Uruguay has a positive trade balance in tourism.   In 2005, gross revenue from tourism was 
US$540 million, the equivalent of 12 per cent of  exports of goods and services that year, while 
outgoings were US$240 million.  In 2005, 1.92 million tourists visited Uruguay. 
194. The main feature of tourism in Uruguay contin ues to be its seasonal nature, especially the 
summer months in Punta del Este and Montevideo, although the authorities have noted that, as a result 
of the strong boost to ecotourism and rural tourism, this seasonal character has diminished.  Tourism 
in Uruguay is also marked by scant diversification in terms of the origin of the tourists:  almost 75 per 
cent of them come from Argentina, followed by Br azil, with 12 per cent, Ch ile and Paraguay.  This 
explains to a large extent the decrease in tour ism in Uruguay following the crisis in Argentina in 
2001. 
(b) Regulatory framework 
195. The authority responsible for drafting and im plementing tourism policy in Uruguay is the 
Ministry of Tourism and Sports.104  Nevertheless, incentives are the responsibility of the MEF. 
                                                      
102 The ANP is part of the MTDP and is governed by the Ports Law. 
103 Details concerning all these fees applied by the port in Montevideo can be found at:  
http://www.anp.com.uy/ montevideo/tarifas/default.asp. 
104 Further information on this Ministry’s activitie s can be found at:  http://www.mintur.gub.uy/. WT/TPR/S/163 Trade Policy Review 
Page 126 
 
 
196. Decree No. 210/001 of 6 June 2001 provides th at all hotels, guesthouses, motels, apartment 
hotels and similar accommodation must be authorized  and registered with the Ministry of Tourism 
before starting to operate and must be in possession of a municipal authorization.  The Decree also specifies the documentation required for registration. 
197. Decrees No. 385/2003 of 14 May 2003 and No. 3/ 997 of 3 January 1997 deal with the 
registration of travel agencies and organize and update  the regulations on travel agencies contained in 
Executive Decree No. 386/994 of 24 August 1994, providing that travel agencies mu st be listed in the 
Register of Suppliers of Tourist Services.  All trav el agencies must be registered in the Register of 
Tourism Operators.  Travel and tourism agencies a nd wholesalers must be domiciled in Uruguay.  For 
travel agencies selling tickets and excursions, domicile  is not a requirement.  Foreign travel agencies 
may supply services in Uruguay but must meet the requirements laid down for Uruguayan agencies and also prove that they have a valid authorization to  operate in their country of origin.  There are no 
differences in treatment between foreign and Uruguay an operators for other services such as tourist 
guides. 
198. The tourism sector is eligible for the gene ral incentives provided in Law No. 16.906 of 
7 January 1998 (Investment Law) (Chapter III(4)(iii)).  In addition, the tourism sector is given special 
incentives contained in the Executiv e Decree No. 175/003 of 7 May 2003 and amendments thereto, to 
be found in Decree No. 350/004 of 29 Septembe r 2004 and Decree No. 262/005 of 5 September 2005.  
Foreign operators are given national treatment as far as the incentives are concerned.  The Investment 
Law provides that, in order to declare a tourism activ ity to be a "promoted activity", its contribution to 
the following is taken into account: the geographical and tourism development of the infrastructure in 
the zone in which the project is to be situated; fulfilment of specific needs in the tourist facilities 
offered in this zone;  genera ting and attracting tourism demand;  and creating innovative tourist 
services. 
199. Pursuant to Decree No. 175/003, projects declar ed to be promoted activities pursuant to the 
Investment Law are eligible for the following in  ascending order, according to the progress made in 
carrying out the work and in accord ance with the approved timetable:  (a)  credit for the VAT paid for 
on-the-spot purchases of goods and services to be used in the construction, improvement or 
expansion, as well as fixed assets to equip or renovate th e construction;  (b) exemption from VAT and 
50 per cent exemption from all other taxes on impor ts of goods for the aforementioned purpose;  
(c) when paying the IRIC, investment in construc tion, improvements or expa nsion may be written off 
over 15 years, while investment in equipment can be written off over five years;  and (d) exemption 
from the PAT for investment in infrastructure and civil engineering works for construction, 
improvement or expansion at the end of the financ ial year in which the works were initiated and for 
the following 10 years.  Exemption from the PAT is also given for fixed assets to be used for 
equipment at the close of the financial year in  which the assets were incorporated and for the 
following four years. 
200. In order to be eligible for these incentives,  the potential beneficiaries must request a 
declaration of such status from the Ministry of Tour ism.  In order to obtain this, the company must be 
registered in the Register of Tourism Operators kept by the Ministry of Tourism.  The taxable amount for receiving these incentives, solely for fixed asset s in equipment or its renovation, may not exceed 
99,400 IU (some US$6,200) per room or unit. 
201. Under the GATS, Uruguay made commitments in tourism in the areas of hotels and 
restaurants, travel agency services and tour opera tor services, and tourist guide services, which were 
bound without limitations for mode s of supply 1, 2 and 3, as regards both market access and national 
treatment. Uruguay WT/TPR/S/163 
 Page 127 
 
 
(vii) Professional services 
(a) Main features 
202. Uruguay has no general regulations on the exercise of professions.  In Uruguay, the 
professions are regulated through approval of th e study programmes followed in order to obtain a 
qualification and compliance with a number of legal sta ndards that to a greater or lesser extent control 
the exercise of specific professions.  The revalida tion of professional qualifications from abroad is 
governed by the Regulation on the Revalidation and Recognition of Qualifications, Academic Grades 
and Foreign Study Certificates, approved on 3 Ap ril 1963, and amendments thereto.  Academic 
grades, professional qualifications and study certif icates issued by foreign institutions may be 
revalidated or recognized by the Central Administra tive Council of the University of the Republic.  In 
order to be revalidated, the qualifications must be accompanied by the specific documentation on the 
curriculum followed (study plan, degree, certificate of qualifications).  Citizens of foreign countries may be required to take a revalidation examin ation;  Uruguayan citizens who have obtained 
qualifications from foreign universities are exempt from the revalidation examination provided that 
the qualifications obtained are approved by the university authorities.
105  Foreign qualifications or 
certificates must be legalized by the respective Urugua yan Consul and must also be translated into 
Spanish by an official translator. 
203. The Convention on the Exercise of Liberal Profe ssions, an integral part of the Montevideo 
Treaties of 1888-1889, signed by Argentina, Bolivia , Paraguay, Peru and Uruguay, is in force in 
Uruguay.  Under this Convention, persons who have obtained a qualification or diploma in the liberal 
professions in any of the signatory countries ar e entitled to exercise the profession concerned in 
another signatory provided that they le galize their qualifications or diploma.106  Under the Montevideo 
Protocol, there are special provisions on trad e in professional services within the MERCOSUR 
framework.  Article 11.2 of the Protocol provides that each State Party shall undertake to encourage 
the competent authorities in their respective coun tries to develop mutually acceptable rules and 
criteria for the exercise of the relevant activities and professions in the services sphere by granting 
licences, registration and certificates.  The authori ties have indicated that work is going on to 
implement the rules provided in this article. 
204. Uruguay did not make any specific commitments in the professional services sector under the 
GATS.  The supply of services through the presence of natural persons was unbound as far as market 
access or national treatment are concerned for all the sectors included in the GATS schedule, except 
for measures concerning the entry and temporary r esidence of managers, executives and specialists.107 
(b) Legal services 
205. Law No. 15.750 of 24 June 1985 (Basic Law on the Judiciary) regulates the exercise of the 
profession of law in Uruguay.  In order to act as a lawyer in Uruguay, the relevant qualification from 
the University of the Republic is required, the person must be at least 21 years old, and registered with 
and sworn in by the Supreme Court of Justice.  Only  those with valid qualifications allowing them to 
exercise the legal profession in Uruguay may offe r legal services there; access to the Uruguayan 
market by foreign lawyers requires recognition of their professional qualifications and registration in 
                                                      
105 Available at:  
http://www.universia.edu.uy/contenidos/unive rsidades/marco%20legal/revalidacion.htm. 
106 Parliament of the Eastern Republic of Uruguay , International Private Law, Convention on the 
Exercise of Liberal Professions.  Available at:  h ttp://www.parlamento.gub.uy/html stat/pl/tratados/ trat02207-
6.htm. 
107 WTO document GATS/SC/91 of 15 April 1994. WT/TPR/S/163 Trade Policy Review 
Page 128 
 
 
Uruguay.  Qualifications may be revalidated.  Forei gn lawyers authorized to exercise their profession 
in their country of origin but whose qualifications  have not been revalidated in Uruguay may set up a 
consultancy or an association of consultants in fo reign law in Uruguay.  A foreign enterprise wishing 
to open a legal services office in Uruguay does not need to be associated with a local company. 
206. Membership of a relevant professional association is not compulsory for exercising the 
profession of lawyer or for exercising any other profession in Uruguay.  There is, however, an Association of Uruguayan Lawyers (CAU), with  a head office in Montevideo, as well as 
23 departmental lawyers' associations. 
207. Law No. 1.451 of 1878 regulates the profession of notary and Uruguayan citizenship or 
naturalization of at least two years, standing is required in order to exercise this profession.  The 
Supreme Court has disciplinary authority over lawyers and notaries. 
(c) Accounting and auditing services 
208. Only accountants with a valid qualification from a Uruguayan university or a revalidated 
qualification are entitled to exercise in Uruguay.  Access to the Uruguayan market for accountants 
trained abroad requires professional accreditation, re validation of their professional qualifications and 
registration in Uruguay.  Foreign accounting firms may become established and offer services in 
Uruguay.  Law No. 12.802 of 1960 provides that bala nces must be certified by a chartered accountant 
and must be in accordance with international accounting rules. 
209. Uruguay does not have any mutual recognition ag reements on accounting.  Nevertheless, it 
considers that it is important to harmonize acc ounting procedures and rec ognizes the international 
rules laid down by the International Federati on of Accountants (IFAC).  The CCEAU represents 
Uruguay at the Interamerican Accounting Associ ation (IAAC), an America-wide organization 
belonging to the IFAC.  Since 2004, the rules of  the International Accounting Standards Committee 
(IASC) must be applied, as required by Decree No. 162/04 of 12 May 2004. 
210. Through the CCEAU, Uruguay participates in the MERCOSUR Integration Group on 
Accounting, the Economy and Administration (GIMCE A), set up in 1993.  The GIMCEA's main aims 
are to compile an inventory of, analyse, compare and harmonize rules on professional standards 
within the MERCOSUR and to advise governments in  MERCOSUR member countries so as to make 
professional standards consistent and achie ve the region's integration objectives. 
 
 Uruguay WT/TPR/S/163 
 Page 129 
 
 
REFERENCES 
 
Aboal, D., Lorenzo, F. and Noya, N. (2003), "La inflación como objetivo en Uruguay:  Consideraciones sobre los mecanismos de transmisi ón de la política monetaria y cambiaria" (Inflation 
as an objective in Uruguay:  Considerations regard ing monetary and exchange policy transmission 
mechanisms), BCU Revista de Economía  (Central Bank of Uruguay Economics Journal), Segunda 
Epoca, Vol. X, No. 1, May. 
Administración Nacional de Telecomunicaci ones, ANTEL (National Telecommunications 
Administration) (2005), Memoria y Balance Anual 2004  (Annual Report and Balance Sheet 2004), 
Montevideo.  Available in Spanish at thttp://www.antel.com.uy/portal/agxppdwn.aspx? 
2,371,575,O,S,0,8880%3bS%3b1%3b180. 
Asociación de Bancarios del Uruguay (Uruguaya n Bankers Associati on) (2005), Seminar:   ' A  t r e s  
años de la crisis, en un nuevo Uruguay, el sist ema financiero sigue siendo un asunto de Estado' 
(Three years after the crisis, the financial system  in the new Uruguay remains a State affair).  
Available in Spanish at http://www.aeb u. org.uy/documen tos/DocAebu_05_04.pdf. 
Central Bank of Uruguay (2005a), Cuentas Nacionales 1988-2004 (National Accounts 1988-2004).  
Available in Spanish at http://www.bc u.gub.uy/autoriza/peeecn/eecn06d1204.pdf. 
Central Bank of Uruguay (2005b), División Mercado de Valores y Control de AFAP (Stock Market 
and Pension Fund Administrator Control Division), Informe Trimestral del Mercado de Valores Nº 6 
(Quarterly Stock Market Report No. 6), Ja nuary-March.  Available in Spanish at 
http://www.bcu.gub.uy/a29075.html. 
Central Bank of Uruguay (2005c), Di visión Mercado de Valores y Control de AFAP (Stock Market 
and Pension Fund Administrator Control Division), Informe Trimestral del Mercado de Valores Nº 7 
(Quarterly Stock Market Report No. 7), April-June.  Available in Spanish at 
http://www.bcu.gub.uy/a29075.html. 
Central Bank of Uruguay (2005d), División Mercado de Valores y Control de AFAP (Stock Market 
and Pension Fund Administrator Control Division), Informe Trimestral del Mercado de Valores Nº 8 
(Quarterly Stock Market Report No. 8), July-September. 
Central Bank of Uruguay (2005e), Informe de Balanza de Pagos (Balance of Payments Report), 
Second Quarter of 2005.  Available in Span ish at http://www.bcu.gub.uy/autoriza/pepmpf/ 
balanzadepagos /informe.pdf. 
Central Bank of Uruguay (2005f), Informe de Política Monetaria  (Monetary Policy Report) , Second 
Quarter of 2005.  Available in Spanish at http://www.bcu.gub.uy/autoriza/pepmam/ 
pmam04i0605.pdf. 
Central Bank of Uruguay (2005g), Informe de Política Monetaria  (Monetary Policy Report) , Third 
Quarter of 2005.  Available in Spanish at http://www.bcu.gub.uy/autoriza/pepmam/ 
pmam04i0905.pdf. 
Central Bank of Uruguay (2005h), Superintendencia de Institucion es de Intermediación Financiera 
(Superintendency of Financial Intermediary Institutions), Reporte de Estabilidad Financiera, 
Evolución reciente y situación ac tual del sistema bancario uruguayo  (Financial Stability Report: 
Recent developments and current situation within  the Uruguayan banking system), Second Quarter of 
2005, 30 August. WT/TPR/S/163 Trade Policy Review 
Page 130 
 
 
Central Bank of Uruguay (2005i), S uperintendencia de Seguros y Reaseguros (Superintendency of 
Insurance and Reinsurance), Información Técnica y Financiera del mercado asegurador 
correspondiente al período finalizado el 31/12/2004  (Technical and financial information for the 
insurance market for the period ending 31 December 2004), Communication No. 05/37, 
14 November.  Available in Spanish at h ttp://www.bcu.gub.uy/autoriza/sssrer/srerco05037.htm. 
Central Bank of Uruguay (2006a), Requisitos para la Instalación de Bancos y Casas Financieras en 
el Uruguay  (Requirements for setting up banks and financ ial institutions in Uruguay).  Available in 
Spanish at http://www.bcu.gub.uy/autoriza/siernp/ requisitos_instalacion/bancos_casas_financieras. 
doc. 
Central Bank of Uruguay (2006b), S uperintendencia de Seguros y Reaseguros (Superintendency of 
Insurance and Reinsurance), Recopilación de Normas de Seguros y Reaseguros, Libro I:  Requisitos 
de Funcionamiento de las Emp resas de Seguros y Reaseguros  (Insurance and Reinsurance 
Regulations, Book I:  Operating Requirements for In surance and Reinsurance Companies).  Available 
in Spanish at http://www.bcu.gub.uy/a utoriza/sssrer/recssyr/recssyr.htm. 
World Bank (2005), Republic of Uruguay, Policy Notes , 31 March.  Available in English at 
http://wwwwds.worldbank.org/servlet/WDSCont entServer/WDSP/IB/2005/ 04/21/00001 2009_200504
21101326/Rendered/PDF/313380UY.pdf. 
World Bank (2004), Uruguay, Poverty Update 2003 , Report No. 26223, June.  Available at 
http://wbln0018.worldbank.org/lac/lacinfoclie nt.nsf/d29684951174975c 85256735007fef12/3e1c1920
aba8121585256ee60048b2ec/ $FILE/Uruguay%20Poverty%20Assessment.pdf. 
Banco de Previsión Social (Social Insurance Bank) (2005), El Subregistro y la Subdeclaración de las 
Obligaciones Previsionales  (The Under-registration and Under-declaration of Social Insurance 
Obligations).  Available in Spanish at http://www.issa.int/pdf/montevideo05/1. 
Cámara de Industrias del Uruguay, CIU (Uruguayan Chamber of Industry) (2001), Economic Studies 
Department, El combate al contrabando y sus efectos en la producción industrial  (The fight against 
smuggling and its effect on industrial produc tion), March.  Available in Spanish at 
http://www.ciu.com.uy/informe/contrabando.doc. 
Centro de Información y Documentación Empresarial sobre Iberoamérica, CIDEIBER (Centre for  
Business Information and Documentation on Latin America) (2006), Uruguay, Actividades del sector 
servicios, Transporte marítimo  (Uruguay, Service Sector Activities,  Maritime Transport).  Available 
in Spanish at http://www.cideiber.com/infopaises/Uruguay/uru0606.html. 
Comisión de Aplicación de la Ley de Inversiones,  COMAP (Committee for the Implementation of the 
Investment Law) (2003), Criterios Básicos Genera les en los que se fundamentan las actuaciones de 
la Comisión a efectos de su asesoramiento al pod er ejecutivo para los proyectos contemplados en la 
Ley, (General basic criteria upon which the Committe e's proceedings are based for the purpose of 
advising the Executive in respect of project s provided for in the Law), Montevideo. 
International Monetary Fund, IMF (2000), IMF Approves Stand-By Credit for Uruguay , Press Release 
No. 00/35, 31 May.  Available at http://www.imf.org/external/np/sec/pr/2000/pr0035.htm. 
IMF (2005a), Uruguay:  Letter of Intent, Memorandum of Economic and Financial Policies and 
Technical Memorandum of Understanding , 24 May.  Available in English at 
http://www.imf.org/external/ np/loi/2005/ury/ 052405.pdf. Uruguay WT/TPR/S/163 
 Page 131 
 
 
IMF (2005b), Uruguay:  Letter of Intent, Memorandum of Economic and Financial Policies and 
Technical Memorandum of Understanding , 14 September.  Available in English at 
http://www.imf.org/external/ np/loi/2005/ury/ 091405.pdf. 
IMF (2005c), Uruguay:   Request for Stand-By Arrangement - Staff Report , Washington D.C., IMF 
Country Report No. 05/235, July.  Available in English at 
http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/scr/2005/ cr05235.pdf. 
MERCOSUR (2002), CMC/DEC/30/02. Transformación de la Secretaría Administrativa del 
MERCOSUR en Secretaría Técnica  (Transformation of the MERCOSUR Administrative Secretariat 
into a Technical Secretariat).  Available in Span ish at http://www.sice.oas.org/trade/mrcsrs/decisions/ 
dec3002s.asp. 
Ministerio de Economía y Finanzas (Ministry of Economy and Finance) (2005), Presupuesto 
Nacional de Recursos, Contaduría General de la Nación 2005-2009  (National Resource Budget, 
National General Accounting Office 2005- 2009).  Available in Spanish at 
http://www.cgn.gub.uy/presupuestos/Presupuest o2005/02PPE/Cuadros/tomo_II/cuadro_01.pdf. 
Ministerio de Industria, Energía y Minería, MIEM (Ministry of Industry, Energy and Mining) (2005), 
Dirección Nacional de Energía y Tecnología Nuclear (National Directorate of Energy and Nuclear 
Technology), Sector Energético en Uruguay, Diagnóstico y Perspectivas  (The Energy Sector in 
Uruguay: Evaluation and Outlook), Montevideo. 
Ministerio de Salud Pública (Ministry of Public Health) (2003), Memoria Anual 2002  (Annual Report 
2002).  Available in Spanish at www.presidencia.gub.uy/mem2002/msp.pdf. 
Oficina de Programación y Política Agropecuaria, OPYPA (Agricultural Programming and Policy 
Office) (2004), Anuario 2003  (Annual Report 2003).  Available in Spanish at 
http://www.mgap.gub.uy/opypa/ANUARIOS/Anuario03/OpypaAnuario03.zip. 
OPYPA (2005), Anuario 2004  (Annual Report 2004).  Available in Spanish at 
http://www.mgap.gub.uy/opypa/ANUARIOS/Anuario04/INDICE.htm. 
OPYPA (2006a), Anuario 2005  (Annual Report 2005).  Available in Spanish at 
http://www.mgap.gub.uy/opypa/ANUARIOS/Anuario05/INDICE.htm. 
OPYPA (2006b), Estrategia de la Unidad de Asuntos In ternacionales del MGAP y Declaración del 
Consejo Agropecuario del Sur (CAS) (Strategy of the Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Fisheries 
International Affairs Unit and Declaration by  the Southern Agricultural Council), in Anuario 2005  
(Annual Report 2005).  Available in Spanish at http://www.mgap.gub.uy/opypa/ANUARIOS/ 
Anuario05/ INDICE.htm. 
OPYPA (2006c), Lineamientos estratégicos de la ins titucionalidad pública agropecuaria para el 
período 2006–2011  (Strategic Guidelines for the Public Agricultural Institutional Framework for 
2006-2011) in Anuario 2005 (Annual Report 2005).  Available in Spanish at 
http://www.mgap.gub.uy/opypa/ANUARIOS/Anuari o05/TemasdePolítica/lineam%20estrat%20instit.
pdf. 
WTO (1998), Trade Policy Review - Uruguay , Geneva. 
Universidad Católica (Catholic University) (2003), Revista Electrónica de la Facultad de Ciencias 
Empresariales (FCE)  (Electronic Journal of the Faculty of Business Studies), June.  Available in WT/TPR/S/163 Trade Policy Review 
Page 132 
 
 
Spanish at http://www.ucu.edu.uy/Facultades/Ci enciasEmpresariales/RevistaFCE/articulos/ 
Junio2003/Nealporciento20Horta por ciento20Jung.pdf. 
Unidad Reguladora de Servicios de Comunicaci ones, URSEC (Communications Services Regulatory 
Unit) (2005), Asesoría Económica (Economic Advisory Service), Evolución de los mercados de 
servicios telefónicos en Uruguay en los últimos años  (Developments in telephone services markets in 
Uruguay in recent years), February.