RESTRICTED  WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  G/C/M/105 
15 March 2011 
 (11-1271) 
Council for Trade in Goods  
  
 
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE COUNCIL FOR TRADE IN GOODS 
31 JANUARY 2011 
 
Chairperson: H.E. Ambassador Mothae Anthony Maruping (Lesotho
) 
 
 
 The meeting of the Council for Trade in Goods was convened by airgram WTO/AIR/3688 and the proposed agenda for the meeting was c ontained in document G/C/W/644.  The meeting 
proceeded on the basis of the following agenda.  
I. ECUADOR MIXED TARIFFS – QUESTI ONS FROM THE UNITED STATES, 
EUROPEAN UNION, CANADA, JAPAN AND PANAMA (G/C/W/639) ..........................2  
II. EUROPEAN UNION – REQUEST FOR A WAIVER ON ADDITIONAL 
AUTONOMOUS TRADE PREFERENCE S GRANTED BY THE EUROPEAN 
UNION TO PAKISTAN (G/C/W/640)  - STATEMENT BY THE EUROPEAN 
UNION .......................................................................................................................... .............4  
III. CAPE VERDE – REQUEST FOR A WAIVER RELATED TO THE 
IMPLEMENTATION OF ARTICLE VII OF GATT 1994 AND THE AGREEMENT ON IMPLEMENTATION  OF ARTICLE VII OF THE GATT 
1994 (G/C/W/643)............................................................................................................... .......5  
IV. UKRAINE – IMPLEMENTATION OF CUSTOMS VALUATION 
LEGISLATION. – JOINT STATEMENT BY THE EUROPEAN UNION AND 
NORWAY......................................................................................................................... .........7  
V. OTHER BUSINESS................................................................................................................. .8 
A. E
CUADOR – INTERNAL TAXATION APPLIED TO ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES ...........................8  
B. WORKING PROCEDURES GOVERNING THE NOTIFICATION OF REGIONAL TRADE 
AGREEMENTS UNDER ARTICLE XXIV  OF GATT/94..............................................................9  
C. DATE OF THE NEXT MEETING ..................................................................................................9  
 G/C/M/105 
Page 2  
 
   
I. ECUADOR MIXED TARIFFS – QUESTIONS FROM THE UNITED STATES, 
EUROPEAN UNION, CANADA, JA PAN AND PANAMA (G/C/W/639) 
1.1 The Chairman
 drew Members' attention to documen t G/C/W/639 containing questions to 
Ecuador by the United States, European Union, Canada, Japan and Panama on Ecuador's mixed 
tariffs.  He reminded delegations that, at the last meeting, it was agreed that this issue would be 
included as one of the Agenda items of this meeting .   
 
1.2 The delegate of the United States  expressed her delegation's concerns that Ecuador's 
Presidential Decrees 367 and 372 chan ged Ecuador's tariff schedules for footwear, textiles and apparel 
products from an applied rate of 30 per cent ad valorem, which also re flected Ecuador's binding, to a 
mixed tariff of 10 per cent ad valorem  plus US$6  per pair of shoes, and from 10 per cent ad valorem  
plus US$5.50 per kilo of textiles or apparel, respec tively.  Upon review, a pair of shoes imported into 
Ecuador at a value equal to or less than US$29 woul d be charged a duty higher than 30 per cent of its 
value.  Likewise, a kilogram of textiles or appare l imported at a value equal to or less than US$27  
would be charged a duty higher than 30 per cent of their value.  According to the calculations made 
by her authorities, it was not clear how Ecuador was maintaining its WTO binding of 30 per cent on 
footwear, textiles and apparel produc ts under its new mixed tariff regime.  As outlined in the joint 
written questions (document G/C/W/63 9), her delegation requested Ecuador to provide in writing, the 
ad valorem  equivalent for each of the tariff lines covere d by Presidential Decrees 367 and 372, as well 
as the methodology and calculations it had used to determine the ad valorem  equivalents for these 
tariff lines.  She also requested Ecuador to provid e additional information on why it had modified its 
tariffs on these items as well as the specific duration of these decrees.  
1.3 The representative of the European Union
 recalled the Council that his delegation had also 
expressed certain concerns on Ecuador 's introduction of a mixed tariff system applied to a number of 
tariff lines related to footwear, textiles and clot hing.  The joint questions in document G/C/W/639 
requested Ecuador to clarify certain issues regardi ng the change in its tariff structure, such as the 
reasons behind this change, the expected duration of the mixed tariff system; and, the methodology 
used to calculate the ad valorem  equivalents.  The calculations made by the EU also showed that 
depending on how the calculation was made, there c ould be certain instances where Ecuador's tariff 
binding of 30 per cent was breached.  His de legation acknowledged th at Ecuador had shown 
transparency when publishing the executive decrees and was convinced that it would continue to 
show transparency on this issue when answering the questions posed to it.  
 
1.4 The delegate of Japan  echoed the concerns raised by the US and the EU on the introduction of 
the mixed tariff system by Ecuador;  he recalled th e Council that at the previous CTG meeting, his 
delegation had already expressed its systemic concern w ith regard to the use of a mixed tariff system 
for certain goods such as footwear, textiles and appare l.  Japan was of  the view that Ecuador had not 
clearly explained why it had modified its tariff on the above mentioned items, nor had it explained the 
methodology and calculation methods for the ad valorem  equivalent tariff.  Japan sought additional 
information from Ecuador, on its mixed tariff system.    1.5 The delegate of Panama
 shared the concerns voiced by Canada, Japan, EU and the US and 
reiterated what it had already stated at the previous  meeting regarding the ch ange in Ecuador's import 
tariffs through Presidential Decrees 367 and 372 of 2010.  His authorities had been following these 
changes bilaterally through several  channels and meetings with Ecuador, such as the ministerial 
meeting that took place in Quito on 30 August 2010.   According to calculations it had made, Panama 
was of the view that in amending its ad valorem  tariff and making it a mixed tariff, Ecuador could 
probably be in a situation of non- compliance with its binding commitments under the WTO.  Analysis 
of these changes indicated that hikes could acc ount and go up to an average of 172 per cent vis-à-vis   G/C/M/105 
 Page 3 
 
 
  Ecuador's binding commitments for footwear and up to 322 per cent for textiles.  Panama was 
concerned that Ecuador's concessions to Member s had deteriorated;  his authorities would be 
monitoring the situation closely, not only bilatera lly, but also before the Goods Council and other 
appropriate WTO bodies.  
1.6 The delegate of Ecuador
 referring to the questions  in document G/C/W/639, indicated that: 
Through Presidential Decrees 367  and 372, dated  21 and 28 May 2010 respectively, and in effect 
since 1 June  2010, Ecuador had refo rmed its domestic tariff structur e, a reform which was consistent 
with Ecuador's rights and obligations under GATT 1994.  Nothing in GATT or in any of the WTO 
agreements prevented or reduced Members' rights to revise, restructure, change or re-implement their 
tariff structure either through mixed tariffs, ad valorem  tariffs, compound tariffs or other mechanisms.  
Therefore, there were no restrictions as to Memb ers' ability to formulate their own tariff policies, 
provided that these measures were within their binding commitments and that its implementation 
ensured compliance;  this wa s the case with Ecuador.  Moreover, Ecuador had published and 
publicized the aforementioned regulations in lin e with its obligations under GATT Article X;  
accordingly,  the regulations could be found on th e Ecuadorian foreign trade and investment board 
website: www.comexi.gob.ec/resoluciones.shtml .  Ecuador would continue to comply with its 
commitments and obligations and to exercise all its rights under the multilateral trading system.  The 
mixed system had not affected imports of footwear, textiles or apparel.  Proof of this was the trade 
flows for 2009 and 2010 between his country and Me mbers who had raised concerns in document 
G/C/W/639.  
 
1.7 Statistics demonstrated that there had been a steady rise in the imports of footwear, textiles 
and apparel from the US, the EU, Canada, Japan and Panama toward Ecuador.  In this regard he 
mentioned that exports of footwear and textiles to Ecuador had increased significantly in 2009 and 
2010 and referred to the following statistics:  (i)   exports from the US had increased by 46 per cent, 
which corresponded to US$5.4million in 2009 and, to US$7.8million in 2010.  (ii)  Exports from Italy 
had increased by 18 per cent and corresponded to US $800.000 in 2009, and to US$1 million in 2010.  
(iii)  Exports from Spain had increased by 4 per cent and corresponded to US$700 000 in 2009 and 
2010.   (iv)  Exports from the UK had increased by 2 per cent and corresponded to US$1million in 
2009, and to US$1.1million, in 2010.  (v)  Exports from China to Ecuador had increased by over 50 
per cent and corresponded to US$62 m illion in 2009, and to US$ 94 m illion in 2010.  (vi)  Exports 
from Japan had increased by 90 per cent and corr esponded to US$81.000 in 2009, and to US$155.663 
in 2010.  (vii)  Exports from Canada had incr eased by 47 per cent and represented US$114. 900 in 
2009, and US$169.500 in 2010;  and, (viii)  expo rts from Panama in the same period had increased by 
85 per cent representing US$339.489 in 2009, and US$626.727 in  2010.  He also stated that overall 
imports of footwear and textiles to Ecuador, wh ich corresponded to the 349 lines that had been 
restructured, had increased by 45 per cent from 2009 to 2010.  There was also an increase in weight of 
12.895 metric tons between 2009 and 2010;  and, the total of imports from the entire world to Ecuador 
had increased from US$153 million in 2009 to US$222. 1 million in 2010 which reflected an overall 
increase of US$68.601.000.  All these points, statistics and facts led to the conclusion that, as a result 
of the implementation of the mixed tariff system, there was no real or potential problem in terms of trade between Ecuador and its trade partne rs concerning the aforementioned goods.  
 
1.8 According to his authorities' assessment the ad valorem  equivalent for each one of the 349 
tariff lines subject to the Presidential Decree s at issue, corresponded to Ecuador's binding 
commitments when it joined the WTO.  In light of  the above, Ecuador felt it had complied with its 
WTO obligations and had provided the necessary inform ation regarding the new tariff structure.  His 
delegation did not feel that there was a binding obligation to notify the methodology used to establish 
certain modalities to implement the mixed tariff system, nor to provide an ad valorem  equivalent for 
each and every one of the 349 tariff lines in quest ion.  He invited those Members who had raised 
questions to inform his delegation on the specific products where they had genuine trade problems so 
as to undertake consultations that would clarify their concerns. G/C/M/105 
Page 4  
 
  1.9 The delegate of the European Union
 thanked Ecuador for the explanations provided which he 
hoped to receive in writing.  His delegation had take n note that according to the statistics, imports on 
textiles and footwear to Ecuador had increased.  Nevertheless, the issue related to one of the 
fundamental obligations under the GATT that bound a ll Members in terms of tariff concessions.  He 
sought from Ecuador, either bilaterally or at  the Goods Council, more clarity on how the ad valorem  
equivalents had been calculated.  
 1.10 The delegate of the United States
 also thanked Ecuador for the information provided and 
looked forward to the responses in  writing.  She ec hoed the EU's statement that this issue related to 
Members' obligation to keep their tariff rates at th e bound rates.  According to the calculations made 
by the US experts, it was unclear whether or not th e mixed tariff system currently applied by Ecuador 
was consistent with its obligation to keep its tariff rate at 30 per cent.  Her authorities were interested 
in knowing how Ecuador had actually made its cal culation and the methodology used; she also asked 
Ecuador to indicate the specific duration of the decrees.   
1.11 The delegate of Venezuela
 thanked Ecuador for its respons es.  From the explanations 
provided, his delegation believed that there was no negative impact on the tariffs it was applying 
which could affect other WTO Members.  1.12 The delegate of Ecuador
, in response to the question posed by the US on the duration of the 
decrees, indicated  that Executive Decrees 367 and 372 had been in place since 1 June 2010. 
 
1.13 The Council took note  of the statements made. 
 
II. EUROPEAN UNION – REQUEST FOR A WAIVER ON ADDITIONAL 
AUTONOMOUS TRADE PREFERENCES GRANTED BY THE EUROPEAN UNION 
TO PAKISTAN (G/C/W/640)  - ST ATEMENT BY THE EUROPEAN UNION 
2.1 The Chairman  recalled that at the last meeting, the EU had introduced document G/C/W/640 
containing a request for a waiver for the applicat ion of additional autonomous trade preferences 
granted by the European Union to Pakistan.  At that meeting some of the delegations who took the floor, while highlighting the importance of the initia tive, had also indicated that they had some 
concerns regarding the possible collateral systemic and commercial effects of the EU proposal on 
their economies.  In this regard they expressed th eir will to further consult on the issue with the 
European Union.  He had been informed that since the last meeting, the EU held some consultations 
with various Members.  2.2 The representative from the European Union
 informed the Council that in light of the request 
for consultations raised by some Members at the last meeting, the EU had started a consultation 
process which was underway.  There was not too much  to report and proposed the discussion continue 
at the next meeting where his delegation would be in  a better position to report on those consultations.  
 2.3 The Chairman
 thanked the EU representative for his report and invited the Council to 
continue the discussion on this agenda item at the next meeting. 
 
2.4 The Council took note  of the statements made and agreed  to revert to this issue at the next 
meeting.   
  G/C/M/105 
 Page 5 
 
 
  III. CAPE VERDE – REQUEST FOR A WAIVER RELATED TO THE 
IMPLEMENTATION OF ARTICLE VII OF GATT 1994 AND THE AGREEMENT 
ON IMPLEMENTATION OF ARTICLE V II OF THE GATT 1994 (G/C/W/643) 
3.1 The Chairman  drew the Council's attention to document G/C/W/643, containing a request for 
a waiver from Cape Verde, related to an extens ion on the implementation period of Article VII of 
GATT/94 and on the Agreement on the Implementati on of Article VII of GATT 1994 (Agreement on 
Customs Valuation).    3.2 The delegate of Cape Verde
 indicated that document G/C/W/643 contained the reasons for the 
waiver request on the implementation of Article  VII of GATT 1994 and the Agreement on Customs 
Valuation.  The implementation of Article VII of GATT 1994 required from Cape Verde, the 
introduction of a customs valuation system for the va luation of imported goods different to the one it 
had been applying.  This new system involve d the design, approval and implementation of a 
considerable series of connected measures and vari ous legislative, technical and training tools;  
therefore it deserved full consideration.  The new sy stem was technically complex and involved risks, 
particularly in terms of what was collected in custom s tariffs and fees;  this also required a careful and 
responsible implementation.  The main element, which had a primary role in the process, was the 
adoption of a new customs code;  the drafting and ad option of this code had experienced some delays, 
which had impacted the rest of the operation and led his authorities to request an extension of the date 
initially committed for the implementation of the ne w system.  The code had only been adopted in 
June 2010 and entered into force in Septembe r 2010; this had delayed the implementation of 
downstream related activities of its adoption which were still under way, such as training of customs 
officials, implementation of related regulations and a database on the valuation of goods, as well as a 
risk analysis database.  An updated Action Plan for the implementation of the new system would 
indicate that the additional time required would be  twelve months, which was the extension period 
that Cape Verde was asking for in its waiver request .  His authorities were confident that the Council 
would consider their request favourably.  
 3.3 The delegate of Switzerland
 indicated the willingness of her de legation to consider favourably 
Cape Verde's request.  However, Switzerland would like to have a  draft decision drawn up between 
Members and Cape Verde.    
3.4 The delegate of Angola
 stated that her authorities, aware of the need to achieve the goals of 
GATT 1994 and providing additional guarantees for tr ade in developing countries, recognized the 
importance of the provisions of GATT Article V II which ensured greater uniformity, security and 
fairness to the international trading system, through th e use of neutral valuation of goods rather than 
arbitrary or fictitious ones at the customs.  Angola was convinced that the basis to determine customs 
valuation of goods should, as much as possible, be  the transaction value based on simple and fair 
criteria consistent with trading practices and without any distinctions.  She indicated that according to 
Article 20 of the Customs Valuation Agreement on special and differential treatment developing 
country Members were allowed to postpone or de fer the implementation of the provisions of GATT 
Article VII for a period not exceeding five years, or fo r a period of three years.    Considering all the 
aforementioned reasons, Angola believed that Cape Verde's request to defer the implementation of 
Article VII of GATT 1994 was a valid and fully justified request. 
 3.5 The delegate of Mozambique
 highlighted the efforts Cape Verde had been making to carry 
out the Agreements, rules and WTO obligations.  His delegation recognized the difficulties for Cape 
Verde to implement some of the WTO Agreements , namely because of institutional problems or 
different constraints, commonly faced by developi ng countries.  His delegation fully supported the 
request of Cape Verde and appealed to the WTO membership to consider  positively this waiver 
request   G/C/M/105 
Page 6  
 
  3.6 The delegate of the United States
 indicated that her delegation shared the goal with Cape 
Verde that implementation should be both, respon sible and reliable.  Nevertheless, the US was 
surprised that additional time was necessary for Cape Verde to fully implement the Customs 
Valuation Agreement.  Her delega tion would like to discuss the request with Cape Verde and others 
before moving to a decision.  This did not mean that her delegation was unfavourably disposed, but 
just that it required additional information, in par ticular, on the current status of implementation of the 
Customs Valuation Agreement under Cape Verde' s Action Plan contained in WT/ACC/CPV/30.  
Since the timetable had slipped, her authorities woul d like to have evidence that no further waivers in 
this area would be necessary if the current request w as to be granted.  Cape Verde should be working 
with the World Customs Organization on the use of  evaluation database and her delegation would like 
to discuss the use of the valuation database as part of Cape Verde's larger risk assessment programme.  
The US would like Cape Verde to clarify these i ssues prior to taking a decision on Cape Verde's 
request and also to get responses to a set of ques tions it intended to pose in order to facilitate the 
discussions.   
3.7 The delegate of Nigeria
 expressed his delegation's support to the request by Cape Verde in 
respect of its obligations under Article VII of GA TT 1994.  Her authorities were of the opinion that 
the integrity and overall interest of the multilateral trading system would be best served, if Cape 
Verde were allowed enough time to formalize its new customs valua tion system, particularly in a 
consistent manner with the country 's development needs and capacities.  Moreover, the period Cape 
Verde requested to put in place the custom valuation framework, was highly reasonable.  As a 
recently acceded Member to the WTO, as well as a country that had just graduated from LDC to 
developing country status, Nigeria urged Members to show understanding and assist Cape Verde to 
successfully implement, in a structured and benefici al manner, those reforms it had undertaken in the 
context of the Protocol of Accession to the WTO, in December 2007.  Nigeria also recognized the 
challenges Cape Verde had been facing in implem enting its commitments under Article VII of GATT 
1994, including the need to, inter alia, (i) acquire a number of tools that would enable its customs 
authorities to confront the risk of under-invoicing ; (ii) maintain contro l over goods and related 
declarations without slowing down the clearance process; and (iii) address any possible adverse effects on customs revenue collections.  All these ci rcumstances led Nigeria to support Cape Verde's 
request for a waiver as contained in document G/ C/W/643 and to invite the entire WTO membership 
to support this request. 
 
3.8 The delegate of the European Union
 indicated that his delegation fully understood the 
challenges Cape Verde was facing;  in fact, the Customs Valuation Agreement was one of the most 
technically and complex WTO Agreements.  The EU acknowledged the efforts and steps taken by 
Cape Verde to implement the Agreement under th e Action Plan it had presented when acceding to the 
WTO.  His authorities could positively consider the waiver request for the extension of the 
implementation period but as the US had expressed, we re also interested in getting more information 
and clarification on the reasons why the previous Ac tion Plan had not delivered the expected results; 
and, in learning how Cape Verde envisaged a revised  Action Plan that would ensure that the necessary 
steps and the remaining necessary actions could be ac hieved during the one year extension requested.   
 
3.9 The delegate of Brazil  expressed his delegation's support to the waiver requested by Cape 
Verde; it was a reasonable and justifiable request  which reflected exceptional circumstances.  He 
invited the WTO membership to take note of the specific difficulties and situation of Cape Verde 
concerning the implementation of GATT Article  VII and consider favourably the request. 
 
3.10 The delegate of Senegal  supported Cape Verde in its request for a waiver on the 
implementation of GATT Article VII.  Cape Verd e was a recently acceded Member who had been 
facing the difficulties that implementation of GATT Article VII imply on developing countries.  His 
authorities also had considerable difficulties in im plementing the Customs Valuation Agreement and, 
at that time, had also requested a waiver from the WTO membership.  Cape Verde's request was  G/C/M/105 
 Page 7 
 
 
  reasonable, thus he invited the WTO membership to  consider it favourably, particularly because Cape 
Verde was only requesting a one-year extension.    3.11 The delegate of China
 expressed his delegation's support to th e request from Cape Verde;  this 
would help Cape Verde's customs mode rnization and customs valuation.  
 
3.12 The delegate of Cape Verde  thanked the delegations who had taken a favourable view of the 
request, particularly those who had expressed an immediate support and understanding of the situation 
and the bulk of the work that had been accomplished by his authorities.  His delegation was ready to 
provide any additional informati on and engage in discussions with  the delegations who had so 
requested.  A draft decision was required and  hi s delegation was ready to work on it and requested 
the Secretariat's support in this regard.   3.13 The Council took note
 of the statements and agreed  to revert to this agenda item at the next 
meeting. 
 
IV. UKRAINE – IMPLEMENTATION OF CUS TOMS VALUATION LEGISLATION – 
JOINT STATEMENT BY THE EUROPEAN UNION AND NORWAY 
4.1 The Chairman  informed the Council that in a communication dated 20 January 2010, the 
European Union requested the Secretariat to include in the agenda of this meeting, an item concerning 
the "Implementation of Customs Valuation Legislatio n by Ukraine".  He invited the representative of 
the EU to take the floor on this issue.  
 4.2 The delegate of the European Union
, on behalf of his own delega tion and on behalf of the 
delegation of Norway, indicated that the way in which Ukrainian customs authorities were 
implementing the customs valuation provisions of th e Customs Code of Ukraine (CCU) raised serious 
concerns.  Over the last six months, an increasing number of reports had been received from 
economic operators about serious difficulties they were facing when clearing goods exported to 
Ukraine, particularly on customs valuation.  These concerns had been raised several times with Ukrainian authorities in the past;  the legal and techni cal aspects of the relevant customs laws and the  
CCU had also been recently discussed in the WT O Customs Valuation Committee, where Members 
had sought clarification and explanation.  Accord ing to the reports, Ukrainian customs authorities 
routinely questioned the declared customs valu es and did not follow the WTO methodology in 
defining the customs value.  On many occasions, customs authorities had not applied the primary 
method of customs valuation -the transaction value me thod- even when the suitability of this method 
had not been in doubt and could even had been used in conformity with the CCU.  Additionally, these 
authorities regularly used minimum prices to dete rmine the value of goods  and relied frequently on 
wholesale and retail prices in foreign markets.  Ther efore, importers had to accept a drastically higher 
value for their goods being released.  This practice led to an unpredictable ca lculation of import duties 
and other fees and charges as well as delays of co mmercial operations;  this caused significant losses 
and made it difficult to export to Ukraine.  In re sponse to the complaints of trade operators and 
foreign embassies, the State Customs Service of Ukra ine routinely referred to the relevant provisions 
of the customs legislation without providing explanations or proposing a solution.  The fight against 
customs fraud seemed to be a real and important c oncern in Ukraine;  however, customs services in 
general recognised that fraud could be fought efficientl y with targeted controls based on risk analysis 
and ex-post controls, and not with general tighteni ng of controls.  The very strict requirements, 
applied indiscriminately to a large share of economic  operators, were penalizing the vast majority of 
legitimate trade operations.  The EU believed ther e was a real, objective and systemic problem in 
place and intended to continue addressing it with th e Ukrainian authorities in a constructive way, 
using all possible fora.  The EU and Norway inv ited Ukraine to bring the implementation of its 
customs valuation legislation in compliance with its  WTO obligations as soon as possible, to instruct 
local customs authorities to apply the rules in a unifo rm and transparent manner, and to ensure that the G/C/M/105 
Page 8  
 
  actual practice of customs authorities were not disruptiv e or costly to trade.  He finally urged Ukraine 
to work constructively and in conformity w ith the WTO Agreement on Customs Valuation.  
 4.3 The delegate of Norway
 when echoing the EU statement, indicated that his authorities 
perceived a systemic problem;  he expected real and concrete progress on these matters from Ukraine.   
 
4.4 The delegate of the United States   thanked the EU and Norway for the joint statement.  Her 
authorities had also received reports from some exporters and agreed that WTO Members should 
follow the requirements set in the Customs Valuation Agreement.  Applying such methods in a clear 
and transparent manner disrupted trade as little as po ssible.  She hoped the issue would be resolved 
quickly. 
 4.5 The delegate of Ukraine
 indicated that he would refer the information received to the 
attention of the relevant governmental bodies in his capital.  The issue had already been raised in the 
Customs Valuation Committee where Ukraine had encouraged Members who had concerns to 
forward all their questions to his delegation so as to be able to provide the answers;  but questions had 
only been received from Norway.  Ukraine had al ready prepared the answ ers to the Norwegian 
questions,  these would be shortly forwarded to the Secretariat.  Ukraine had not received any written 
questions from the EU nor from the US specifying the problems.  He therefore invited the EU, the US 
and the Norwegian delegations to express their concerns in writing.  His authorities were open to hold 
bilateral consultations to discuss the issue in substance.  
 
4.6 The delegate of the European Union  in response to the delegate of Ukraine, clarified that his 
authorities had raised this issue on several occasions  to the Ukrainian authorities and had also written 
on a number of occasions to Ukrainian authorities provi ding concrete examples of the problems that 
European economic operators were facing.  Thus, the explanation of the problems was sufficiently 
clear. 
 4.7 The Chairperson
 encouraged delegations that took the fl oor to continue with the consultation 
process and invited them to inform the Council of the outcome.   4.8 The Council took note
 of the statements made. 
 
V. OTHER BUSINESS  
A. ECUADOR – INTERNAL TAXATION APPLIED TO ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES  
5.1 The delegate of Chile  expressed the concern of his delegation over Resolutions 712 and 713 
of Ecuador's internal revenue service, published in December 2010 which came into effect in January 
2011.  These resolutions had change d the reference prices in order to establish the tax base in excise 
taxes for a whole variety of alcoholic beverages.  Th e text of the two resolutions indicated that there 
could be a differential treatment with regard to th e tax basis applied to alc oholic beverages, depending 
on whether these were locally produced in Ecuador or imported.  It also seemed that there was a particular treatment for imported wines, an issue of particular interest to Chile.  He sought from 
Ecuador further explanation on these Resoluti ons and on the way in which these were being 
implemented with respect to Ecuador's commitment to  comply with the national treatment principle.  
 5.2 The delegate of Ecuador
 when responding to Chile's concern indicated that his country did 
not produce wines, that there had not been any ch anges in Ecuador's regula tions regarding taxes or 
excise taxes on alcoholic beverages; and, that Ecua dor's internal revenue ser vice law had been into 
effect since 2008.  The implementation of this law,  as correctly pointed out by Chile, was under the 
responsibility of Ecuador's internal  revenue services.  This servi ce audited and carried out regular 
controls of the importers of alcoholic  beverages;  it   had realized th at they were not applying the rules  G/C/M/105 
 Page 9 
 
 
  properly.  Had they been doing so, there would no t have been any incidences of non-compliance or 
breaches which had led to the introduction of such Resolutions.  These Resolutions had not 
established any discrimination between  domestic and foreign products regarding the determination of 
the tax base for alcoholic beverages which were subj ect to excise taxes in Ecuador.  His delegation 
regretted the lack of progress during the bilateral talks which would have a voided bringing the issue 
before a multilateral body.  
 5.3 The Council took note
 of the statements made.  
 B. W
ORKING PROCEDURES GOVERNING THE NOTIFICATION OF REGIONAL TRADE AGREEMENTS 
UNDER ARTICLE XXIV  OF GATT/94 
5.4 The Chairman  recalled that at the last meeting the Indian delegation had requested illustration 
on the working procedures concerning the notification of regional trade agreem ents under Article XXIV 
of GATT 1994.  In this regard he informed the Counc il that these working procedures were contained in 
documents WT/L/671, WT/REG16, and G/C/M/88.  Document WT/L/671, the Transparency 
Mechanism for Regional Trade Agreements containe d the decision adopted by the General Council on 
14 December 2006;  document WT/REG/16 contained the notification format for regional trade 
agreements agreed by the Committee on Regional Trade Agreements (CRTA) at its 44th Session on 13 
October 2006;  and, document G/C/M/88 contained the minutes of the  Goods Council meeting where 
the above mentioned notification format under Article XXIV of GATT 1994 had been adopted. 
 
5.5 The Council took note  of the statement made.  
 C. D
ATE OF THE NEXT MEETING  
5.6 The Chairman  informed the Council that the next m eeting was scheduled to take place on 
Monday, 21 March 2011.  The agenda woul d close on Thursday, 10 March 2011. 
 
5.7 The meeting was adjourned . 
 
__________