WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  RESTRICTED 
G/VAL/M/51 
4 July 2011 
 (11-3274) 
Committee on Customs Valuation  
 
 
 
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF 12 MAY 2011 
 
Chairman:  Tamás Vattai (Hungary) 
   The agenda proposed for the meeting, circ ulated in WTO/AIR/3746 was adopted as follows: 
 
 
I.  REPORT OF THE WORK OF THE TECHNICAL COMMITTEE ON 
CUSTOMS VALUATION ....................................................................................................... 2  
II.  INFORMATION ON IMPLEMENTATION AND ADMINISTRATION OF 
THE AGREEMENT .................................................................................................................  2 
III. INFORMATION ON THE APPLICATION OF DECISIONS OF THE 
COMMITTEE ON CUSTOMS VALUATION ...................................................................... 9  
IV.  TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE .................................................................................................. 9  
A.  I
NFORMATION ON TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE  ............................................................................... 9  
B.  ARTICLE 20.3  TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND TRADE -RELATED TECHNICAL 
ASSISTANCE  .............................................................................................................................. .. 9 
V.  PRESHIPMENT INSPECTION ........................................................................................... 10  
VI.  PARAGRAPH 12 OF THE DOHA MINISTERIAL DECLARATION 
(WT/MIN(01)/DEC/1):  IMPLEMENTATION-RELATED ISSUES ................................ 10  
VII. OTHER BUSINESS ................................................................................................................  11 
A.  WORKSHOP ON CUSTOMS VALUATION  ...................................................................................... 11  
B.  CAPE VERDE - GRANT OF A WAIVER RELATED TO  THE IMPLEMENTATION OF ARTICLE 
VII OF GATT  1994  AND THE AGREEMENT ON IMPLEMENTATION OF ARTICLE VII OF 
THE GATT  1994 ........................................................................................................................ 1 2 
C.  CHAIR 'S CONSULTATIONS ON WAYS TO IMPROVE THE TIMELINESS AND 
COMPLETENESS OF NOTIFICATIONS AND OT HER RELEVANT INFORMATION ON TRADE 
MEASURES FALLING WITHIN THE AMBI T OF THE AGREEMENT ON CUSTOMS 
VALUATION  .............................................................................................................................. . 12 
D.  DATE OF THE NEXT MEETING  .................................................................................................... 12  
VIII. ELECTION OF OFFICERS .................................................................................................. 12  
ANNEX I ....................................................................................................................... ........................ 14  
 
_______________ 
 
 G/VAL/M/51 
Page 2 
 
 
  I. REPORT OF THE WORK OF THE TECHNICAL COMMITTEE ON CUSTOMS 
VALUATION 
1.1 The representative of the World Customs Organization (WCO) reported on the activities of 
the Technical Committee on Customs Valuation at its 32th session, held on 11 to 15 April 2011.  This 
report is contained in Annex I.  
 
1.2 The representative of the United States noted th at his delegation remained interested in the 
questions posed on whether the WCO and the Tec hnical Committee could undertake more areas of 
work in order to further uniformity, interpretation a nd application of the Valuation Agreement such as 
those listed in Annex II, paragra ph 2 of the Valuation Agreement. 
 1.3 The Customs Valuation Committee (hereafter the Committee) took note of the statements 
made and of the report. 
 
II. INFORMATION ON IMPLEMENTATION AND ADMINISTRATION OF THE 
AGREEMENT 
2.1 The Chairman recalled that Article 22 of the Agreement on Customs Valuation (hereafter, the 
Agreement) required each Member to inform th e Committee of any changes in its laws and 
regulations relevant to the Agreement, and of an y changes in the administration of such laws and 
regulations.  In addition, the Decision on Notifi cation and Circulation of National Legislation, 
adopted by the Committee, required each Member to  notify its legislation to the Committee.  He 
suggested that, the Committee dealt with the legisl ations in sequence as listed in the agenda.  He 
further recalled that the notification of legislati on by the Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, 
Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu had been  presented to the Committee.  Ho wever, since the Committee's 
meeting on 4-5 November 2002, the examination of  this notification had remained suspended, 
pending resolution of the difference in views between  the parties involved on notifications across the 
WTO.   
 
- Kingdom of Bahrain 
 
2.2 The Chairman recalled that agreement had b een made to revert to the examination of 
Bahrain's legislation at this meeting, pending resp onses to questions posed at the last meeting by the 
United States.  These questions were circulated in document G/VAL/W/181.  Responses from Bahrain 
were circulated in document G/VAL/W/191.  Howe ver, the United States had more questions which 
were circulated in document G/VAL/W/201. 
 
2.3 The representative of the United States noted that his delegation had some additional follow-
up questions about several technical issues that we re submitted in February  2011 and looked forward 
to receiving written responses to these questions. 
 2.4 The representative of Kindom of Bahrain thanked the delegation of United States for the 
questions posed to Bahrain's legislation and said that  his delegation would need more time to reply to 
these questions. 
 
2.5 The Committee took note of the statement made and agreed to revert to the notification of 
Bahrain at its next meeting. 
  G/VAL/M/51 
 Page 3 
 
 
   - Belize 
 
2.6 The Chairman recalled that the Committee had ag reed to revert to this notification following 
questions posed to Belize by the United States an d Canada.  These questions were circulated in 
documents G/VAL/W/175 and G/VAL/W/176, respectively.  Belize had responded to some of these 
questions in document G/VAL/W/183.  However, th e United States had more questions which were 
circulated in document G/VAL/W/188.   
 2.7 The representative of the United States said th at his delegation remained interested in 
receiving responses to the questions circulated in November 2009, regarding th e incorporation of the 
interpretative notes on Article 16 in Belize's legislation.  
2.8 The representative of Canada supported the Unite d States with respect to the inclusion of the 
interpretative notes in the code of law of the country.  
 
2.9 The Committee took note of the statements made an d agreed to revert to this matter at its next 
meeting. 
  - Cambodia  
2.10 The Chairman said that at the last meeting it was agreed to revert to Cambodia's legislation at 
this meeting.  The United States had posed ques tions on Cambodia which were circulated in 
document G/VAL/W/193.  Cambodia circulated its responses in document G/VAL/W/195.  However, in February 2011, the United States had more qu estions which were circulated in document 
G/VAL/W/201.    
 
2.11 The representative of the United States said th at his delegation continued to have questions 
concerning Cambodia's customs valuation legisla tion, as well as how long the transitional period 
would last.  His delegation expected written res ponses to these questions and also encouraged 
Cambodia to submit its responses to the check list of issues.  
 2.12 The representative of Cambodia thanked the de legations of the United States and Canada for 
their follow-up questions and responses.  The first question, as highlighted by the United States 
delegation, was regarding when Cambodia would end the transitional use of methods other than those 
contained in the Agreement for certain sensitive a nd high risks goods.  Cambodia's Praka 32 of the 
Prakas No. 387 on Customs Valuation on imported goods  of the Ministry of Economy and Finance, 
actually allowed the General Department of Cust oms and Excise to temporarily use the price list 
methods for the valuation of certain sensitive items and high risk goods, for example, used vehicles 
and other used items as well as petroleum products, taking into consideration the level of their 
economic development and limited capacity of their cu stoms.  These methods were transitional, which 
gave the Department just enough time to take appr opriate steps towards the full implementation of the 
WTO Customs Valuation Agreement.  His delegati on was pleased to confirm that on 31 December 
2010, the Royal Government of Cambodia terminated  the transitional use of the above methods.  
Secondly, in response to questions posed by the United States contained in document G/VAL/W/201 
regarding petroleum products and reference pricing, he confirmed that Cambodia did not use the 
reference pricing system anymore.  Thirdly, he informed the committee that  the check list of issues 
had been finalized by his capital and would be su bmitted to the WTO Secretariat as soon as their 
internal process had been completed,  perhaps at the end of this month.  Consequently, his delegation 
thought that Cambodia's customs valuation was now in full compliance with the WTO Customs 
Valuation Agreement.  Finally, he hoped that Cambod ia's answers had satisfied the delegations of the 
United States and Canada and requested the Committ ee to close this issue and remove Cambodia from 
the Agenda of the next meeting. 
 G/VAL/M/51 
Page 4 
 
 
  2.13 The representative of United States thanked Ca mbodia for his good replies.  His delegation, 
however, asked to see these particular responses in wr iting before taking the issue off the agenda.  He 
supposed that this issue was to be reviewed up until this year and once confirmed his delegation 
would be open to remove it from the agenda in due course.  
 
2.14 The representative of Canada supported th e United States and thanked Cambodia for the 
information provided.  She would report back to her capital on this matter, and stated that her 
delegation would have an open mind in removing this item from the agenda, but firstly, these matters 
would have to be checked.  
 
2.15 The Committee took note of the statements made and agreed to revert to this matter at its next 
meeting.   
 
 - China 
 2.16 The Chairman recalled that at the last meeti ng, it was agreed that at this meeting they would 
revert to China's notification in G/VAL/N/1/CHN/5.   The United States had posed questions to China 
which was contained in G/VAL/W/168 and Corr.1.   China had responded to these questions in 
document G/VAL/W/184.  The United States had more questions which were circulated in document 
G/VAL/W/192.  China's replies to the second questi ons were circulated in document G/VAL/W/198. 
 
2.17 The representative of the United States tha nked China for submitting the written response to 
their follow-up questions and said that his dele gation continued to have concerns about the 
incorporation of the Interpretativ e Notes to the Agreement, and whether China had fully notified all 
its customs laws and regulations.  He understood from China that these were contained in the official 
interpretative notes for implementing Decree 148, which was published in 2007.  His delegation 
requested China to notify these to th e Committee so that all Members could review them, as they were 
integral to full implementation of Agreement.   
2.18 The representative of Canada wanted to share its view with the Committee that the 
interpretative notes to the Agreement should be fully incorporated into domestic law.  
 
2.19 The representative of China thanked the United States and Canada for their remarks and 
stated that his delegation had provided two sets of replies to the questions put by the United States 
delegation, regarding the Chinese Valuation me thod.  Concerning the incorporation of the 
interpretative notes to China's customs legislation,  he said that he had taken note of the comments 
made by the United States and Canada, and would conve y this issue to his capital in order to revert to 
this matter in the future work of the Committee.  
 
2.20 The Committee took note of the statement made an d agreed to revert to this matter at its next 
meeting. 
 
 - Nigeria 
 2.21 The Chairman recalled that as Nigeria had not  been present at the last meeting, the Committee 
agreed to revert to Nigeria's notification at this  meeting.  The United States and Canada had posed 
some questions to the Nigerian delegation which had been circulated in documents G/VAL/W/175 
and G/VAL/W/176, respectively.    
2.22 The representative of the United States said that  his delegation continued to be interested in 
the questions put forth to Nigeria and requested that this agenda item re mained open until those 
questions had been addressed. 
  G/VAL/M/51 
 Page 5 
 
 
  2.23 The representative of Canada asked for an expected time when her delegation would receive 
answers from Nigeria. 
 2.24 The Chairman suggested that as Nigeria was not present in the room, the Secretariat should 
contact the Nigerian delegation and ask them to provide some answers to these concerns. 
 
2.25 The Committee took note of the statements made and agreed to revert to this matter at its next 
meeting. 
  -  Saint Vincent and the Grenadines 
 
2.26 The Chairman recalled that as Saint Vincen t and the Grenadines had not been present in the 
room at the last meeting, it had been agreed to reve rt to this notification at this meeting.  The United 
States had posed questions to the delegation of Saint Vincent and the Grenadines which had been 
circulated in document G/VAL/W/181. 
 
2.27 The representative of United States said that  although the representative of Saint Vincent and 
the Grenadines had responded verbally  to their questions in May of last year, his delegation requested 
that responses to these questions be formally circul ated in writing.  In addition, during that meeting 
the representatives of Saint Vincent and the Gren adines had mentioned that the draft harmonized 
legislation was being examined by its government  for being implemented in July of 2010. His 
delegation continued to seek an upda te on the status of Saint Vincent and the Grenadines' legislation. 
 2.28 The Committee took note of the statement made an d agreed to revert to this notification at its 
next meeting. 
  - Thailand 
 
2.29 The Chairman recalled that, at the last meeting,  it had been agreed to revert to this notification 
at this meeting.  The United States had circul ated questions to Thailand in G/VAL/W/128 and 
Thailand's replies were circulated in G/VAL/W/ 130.  Follow-up questions from the United States 
were circulated in document G/VAL/W/143 of November 2004.  Thailand's responses to these 
questions were circulated in document G/VAL/W /158.  Additional questions from the European 
Union and the United States regarding Thailand's va luation of alcoholic beverages imports were 
circulated in document G/VAL/W/160, and from th e Philippines regarding Thailand's valuation of 
cigarettes in G/VAL/W/164.  Following this, the Un ited States circulated additional questions on the 
legislation in G/VAL/W/165.  Thailand submitted re sponses which were subsequently circulated in 
document G/VAL/W/174.  Finally, the United States  posed additional questions to Thailand which 
was circulated in document G/VAL/W/181.  At the last meeting, Thailand responded to these 
questions which were circulated in document G/VAL/W/190.    
2.30 The representative of the United States followe d up with some of the questions raised in the 
last meeting.  Thailand had indicated that the use of reference prices had been abolished in the draft 
amendment which was pending approval.  In this sense, his delegation wanted to clarify whether 
preference prices were still being used, since th e amendment was still in draft form and was not 
officially approved through the legislative ame ndment process.  Thus, his delegation requested 
clarification on the status of this amendment give n the upcoming elections in Thailand.  He also 
remained interested in the draft customs regula tion that would amend Thailand's previous notified 
customs valuation legislation.  Therefore, he appr eciated it if Thailand could share the most current 
version of the draft customs regulation.  Finally, he informed the Committee that his delegation would 
submit these as well as other questions in writing following the meeting.   G/VAL/M/51 
Page 6 
 
 
  2.31 The representative of the Canada said that  her delegation was also concerned with the 
reference pricing practice. 
 2. 32 The representative of Thailand had been in formed by his customs department that Thailand 
had not used any reference pricings in the cust oms regime.  As the delegation of United States 
indicated, his delegation had answered these questions  in their previous responses saying that sections 
11 bis had been abolished.  The current status was th at this amendment had received cabinet approval 
and was pending parliament approval.  He also in formed the Committee that, as of 10 May 2011, his 
government had enacted the Decree on Resolutions of the House of Representatives and Thailand's 
general elections would be held on the 3 July, however,  this did not mean that either the work of the 
parliament or the work of the government would not  be done.  Also, it did not mean that the draft 
legislations in parliament that were in the pipe line had to start from scratch, it simply meant that it 
would have to wait until the general election was over and that members of the parliament had 
resumed their duties.  As always indicated in previous Committee meetings, his delegation were 
certainly happy to answer any additional questi ons and would kindly request Members to provide 
these questions in writing.     
 2.33 The Committee took note of the statements made a nd agreed to revert to this notification at its 
next meeting. 
 
 - Tunisia 
 
2.34 The Chairman recalled that, the United States had posed some questions to Tunisia 
concerning Tunisia's legislation on its notification.  These had been circulated in document 
G/VAL/W/188.  The Secretariat had received Tunisia' s replies to these questions the previous day and 
the replies were available in th e room as document G/VAL/W/202. 
 
2.35 The representative of Tunisia apologized for ha ving to provide this document so late.  These 
were replies from capital to questions put by the Un ited States, and also the Decree of the Ministry of 
Finance of January 2009 with respect to Article 6 of the Customs Code.  His delegation remained 
disposed to give further clarification and additiona l replies to the delegation of the United States and 
other delegations that had certifie d and indicated their requests.  
 
2.36 The representative of United States thanked the delegation of Tunisia for providing responses 
to its questions.  Obviously his delegation would review them caref ully and would provide in writing 
any further questions. 
 2.37 The Committee agreed to revert to this notification at its next meeting. 
 
 - Ukraine 
 2.38 The Chairman recalled that at the last meeting it had been agreed to revert to this notification 
at this meeting.  The European Union, supported by the United States, had posed some questions to 
Ukraine which had now been circulated in document G/VAL/W/179.  Ukraine had provided 
responses to these questions which had been circ ulated in document G/VAL/W/182.  Both the 
European Union and the United States had further questions for Ukraine on its notification.  The 
European Union posed its questions orally and the United States circulated them in document 
G/VAL/W/188.  Ukraine had provided responses to the questions from the United States which had 
been circulated in document G/VAL/W/200.  Moreove r, Norway had circulated some questions to 
Ukraine which had been circulated in document G/VAL/W/199. 
 2.39 The representative of Norway thanked Ukrain e for its response dated 1 February 2011 and to 
the questions that were posed by her delegation in this Committee in November 2010.  Norway  G/VAL/M/51 
 Page 7 
 
 
  appreciated that the Ukrainian legislation on cust oms valuation appeared to give precedence to the 
transaction value as the customs value also reflecte d the general rule of the Agreement.  In the 
Ukrainian answers to its questions, the Ukrainian aut horities referred to the relevant provisions of the 
customs legislation and stated that a system of cal culation of reference prices did not exist. However, 
they had received reports from economic operators about serious difficulties related to the customs 
valuation of goods exported to the Ukraine.  Accord ing to this information, the customs authorities 
had routinely questioned the declared customs values,  that is to say, the transaction prices and had 
applied the so called reference prices instead.  Th is practice had led to customs value that was far 
above the actual transaction prices.  According to  the customs valuation agreement any departure 
from the general rule of valuation to the subsidiary valuation methods must be substantiated.  It was 
unclear to her delegation on which justification the Ukraine had based its use of reference prices, and 
therefore, Norway was not entirely satisfied with the Ukrainian answers and considered that this 
dialogue needed to be continued. 
 2.40 The representative of the European Union sai d that her delegation had continued to keep the 
Ukrainian legislation under active review , and did the same for its application.   Regarding the 
implementation of the Ukrainian legislation, she recalled that in the technical meeting on customs 
valuation held with the State Customs Serv ice of Ukraine on 16 March 2011, the European 
Commission proposed a concrete action plan aimed at  a swift and sustainable solution of what it 
perceived as a problem with customs valuation.  The proposal consisted of a number of short-term 
action points that would help bring valuation contro l fully in line with the WTO standards.  The 
European Union believed that im plementation of these ac tions would bring positive effects in the 
short term and lead to a reduction in the number of complaints by traders.  Furthermore, her 
delegation continued to review the trade effects aris ing with respect to the application by the customs 
service of Ukraine of the legislation in question.  Moreover, as already stated on past occasions, in her 
view, the content and scope of this legislation still re quired further clarification, notably in the light of 
the on-going monitoring of real trade operations.  A persistent issue was whether valuation indicators 
or schedules were being applied in practice, and this concern was a question which applied to the 
notified legislation as a whole.   
 
2.41 The representative of the European Union con tinued her statement that there were, of course, 
a number of other outstanding matters arising as regards to this legislation.  A key point was that the 
drafting of the legislation indicated numerous examples where there was a lack of clarity as to the 
scope and content of the rules.  For instance,  Article 267 was the equivalent provision in the 
Ukrainian law of a fundamental provision of the Agre ement (i.e., Article 1, which sets out the primary 
method of customs value i.e., the transaction value me thod).  However, here in the Ukrainian law, the 
European Commission had several examples of terminology which varied, sometimes quite 
considerably, from Article 1 of the Agreement. (See fo r example, the references to the "correction" of 
the price, the addition of "further expenses", the taki ng into account of payments made "proxy", etc.).  
In addition, this problem could therefore, be e xpressed as a second question of a general nature, which 
was:  "In all of the many examples in the notified legislation, did the Ukrainian legislation intend to 
use language different from the WTO Agreement, and if so, for what purpose?"  Finally, her 
delegation had also heard that the relevant Ukra inian authorities were currently working on a new 
codification of customs law, including customs valua tion law.  Her delegation requested to hear more 
about this, as it might affect the progress on the work of this Committee with respect to this 
notification.  
 
2.42 The representative of Switzerland supported No rway and the European Union.  As already 
indicated at the last meeting of the CTG in Marc h, Swiss companies had faced the same problems as 
the European Union and Norwegian companies con cerning customs valuation.  The problem faced 
seemed to be an implementation issue as Ukrainia n customs authorities did not seem to follow the 
WTO methodology in defining the customs value.  It  appeared that there had been no change of 
practice since the last meeting.  His delegation wa nted to recall that it had raised the issue with G/VAL/M/51 
Page 8 
 
 
  Ukraine several times and would continue to do so.  Moreover, they remained ready to work 
constructively to find a satisfactory solution and expected to see concrete and real results on the 
ground very soon.  Switzerland invited Ukraine to bring the implementation of its customs valuation 
legislation into full  conformity with its WTO commitment, and to instruct local customs authorities to 
apply the rules in a transparent, uniform and consis tent manner.  Finally, at the last CTG meeting, 
Ukraine indicated that it would undertake a major administrative reform, which would also include 
customs.  He therefore, asked Uk raine to provide more details about the progress of this reform and 
how it would address the current problems with customs valuation.  
 
2.43 The representative of the United States said that his delegation had similar concerns as those 
raised by the European Union, Norway and Switzerla nd.  He said that the United States was interested 
in receiving written responses to the questions posed.  In one issue raised by the European Union that 
dealt with the language in the legislation, he stated that the United States would appreciate an 
explanation on why Ukraine did not use the term transaction value in its legislation.  Additionally, his delegation wanted to hear how Ukraine determin ed alternative customs value in cases where the 
customs authority questioned the declared value of  the goods.  Specifically, he was interested in 
hearing what sources Ukraine used to obtain prices fo r identical or substantial goods for the value of 
materials.  After this meeting, his delegation w as going to submit more detailed questions in writing 
on these issues.  Finally, he also wanted to info rm the Committee that his delegation was engaged in 
bilateral discussions with Ukraine and looked forwar d to resolving this issue and receiving responses 
to the questions contained in document G/VAL/W/188.  
 
2.44 The representative of Ukraine
 thanked delegations from the European Union, Norway and 
Switzerland for the consultations held in Geneva  and in capital.  The representatives from the 
European Union, Norway and the United States had had a series of constructive meetings with the 
customs administration in capital, where many issues had been clarified.  She considered this as a 
positive sign and appreciated understanding of its partners of the steps taken by the customs 
authorities to fight fraud and corruptive practices, to streamline the customs control and make it more efficient.  She informed the Comm ittee that the Ukrainian Customs was working to ensure proper risk 
management by various instruments, first and fore most the legislation which Ukraine had brought into 
conformity with the requirements of the Agreement.  Moreover, the Ukrainian legislation ensured that 
the main valuation method was based on the tran saction value.  GATT Article VII and the Customs 
Valuation Agreement provided for the order of custom s valuation;  however, the issue of accuracy of 
valuation was not laid out in them.  Neither Members’  rights could be restricted, nor the rights of its 
customs administrations to satisfy themselves as to  the truth or accuracy of any statement, document 
or declaration presented for valuation purposes which could be called into question.  Procedures in 
Ukraine were therefore, only those that were us ed widely with WTO Members, which envisaged 
checks of submitted documents, comp ared declared values with valu es of identical or similar goods 
and conducted verification of auth enticity of documents submitted to customs by making enquiries to 
the customs administrations of exporting countries.   Ukraine also used and relied upon an automated 
system of risk management in line with the Kyot o Convention.  Its recommendation was a basis for 
customs officers to use additional methods of cust oms controls, such as verification of documents and 
information submitted for clearance.   
 
2.45 Furthermore, Ukraine also had the right to  request additional documentation as envisaged by 
the Decision Regarding Cases Where Customs Administ rations Have Reasons to Doubt the Truth or 
Accuracy of the Declared Value.  In cases where there was a delay in final determination of value, an 
importer had the right to have the goods released upon provision of a guarantee.  Ukrainian customs administration was constantly improving its contro ls and works to insta ll more trade-facilitating 
systems.  The customs administration had establis hed a working dialogue with all operators and 
business associations representing different businesses in  Ukraine.  In additio n, there was a Working 
Group recently created in the Department of Cu stoms Control and Clearance, where the leading 
experts provided assistance and clar ifications upon request.  The customs administration was taking  G/VAL/M/51 
 Page 9 
 
 
  further practical steps to facilitate trade by wa y of establishing a special monitoring center which 
would very soon be operational, to respond to uncer tain situations which might arise, and answer 
enquiries from both national companies and foreign tr ade operators.  Additionally, Ukraine was also 
working on a new Customs Code.  Finally, she believe d this additional clarification/information was 
helpful and remained open for further contacts, and was willing to provide information and answers to 
Members questions and provide them in writing.  
 
2.46 The representative of the European Union th anked the Ukrainian delegation for replying and 
was grateful if the Ukraine could circulate or submit the statements to Members. 
 
2.47  The representative of Ukraine informed the Committee that her delegation would circulate the 
statements. 
 
2.48 The Committee took note of the statements made and agreed to revert to this matter at its next 
meeting. 
 
2.49 The Chairman recalled that he had been in formed by the Secretariat that there were  
41 Members who had not yet notified their implementing legislation in accordance with Article 22 of 
the Agreement.  As this was an important transpar ency obligation, he urged Members who had not yet 
notified to do so as early as possible.  He also in formed delegations that a table summarizing the main 
notification requirements on customs valuation could be used as reference and was available in the 
room.  
 
III. INFORMATION ON THE APPLICATION OF DECISIONS OF THE COMMITTEE 
ON CUSTOMS VALUATION 
3.1 The Chairman recalled that under this agenda item, the Committee noted new notifications of 
application of the Decisions of the Committee on Customs Valuation on, first, the "Treatment of 
Interest Charges in the Customs Value of Impor ted Goods" and, second, the "Valuation of Carrier 
Media Bearing Software for Data Processing E quipment", both adopted by the Committee and 
contained in document G/VAL/5.  Since the last mee ting, there had not been any new notifications.   
 3.2 The Committee took note of this information. 
 
IV. TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE 
A. INFORMATION ON TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE  
4.1 The Chairman recalled that, under this item,  the Secretariat informed Members of the 
technical assistance activities carried out un der the auspices of the WCO.  Document 
G/VAL/8/Add.24 contained the most recent information compiled by the Technical Committee on 
Customs Valuation of technical assistance activities carried out by Members as well as by the WCO 
Secretariat.    
B. A
RTICLE 20.3  TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND TRADE -RELATED TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE  
4.2 The Chairman recalled that the Committee’s Work Programme on Technical Assistance for 
capacity building as regards the implementation and administration of the WTO Agreement on 
Customs Valuation was now incorporated in the WTO-wide Technical Assistance Program.  The 2010–2011 TA Plan was presently being implemente d.  This plan foresaw regional activities on 
Market Access issues which would include customs valuation training as one of the areas covered.  
Three such activities were scheduled for 2010;  the fi rst and second activities were carried out in July 
in Laos and in October in Qatar, respectively.  Four more activities were scheduled for 2011.  The G/VAL/M/51 
Page 10 
 
 
  first activity was carried out in March in Barba dos.  The second, third and fourth activities were 
planned for Africa in July (French speaking c ountries), South Africa in August (English speaking 
countries) and Austria in October for Central E astern Europe, Central Asia and the CAUCUSES 
Countries (CEECAC).  In addition, requests for te chnical assistance on customs valuation could be 
made at any time by individual Members and would be met by a national activity designed to meet the 
needs of the recipient.  In November 2010, the WT O held a national activity on customs valuation in 
The Bahamas. 
 4.3 The Committee took note of the statemen ts made and the information presented. 
 
V. PRESHIPMENT INSPECTION 
5.1 The Chairman recalled that Preshipment Insp ection was a standing item on the agenda of the 
Committee on Customs Valuation.  He drew attenti on to the most recent update of the notifications 
received from Members under Article 5 of the Ag reement on Preshipment Inspection.  It was 
contained in document G/PSI/N/1/Add.14.  At the last  meeting, the United States said that it still had 
not received responses to the questions that it had posed to Indonesia on its new Preshipment 
Inspection programme.  These were circulated in documents G/VAL/W/167 and G/VAL/W/180.    
5.2 The representative of Indonesia said that his delegation would take note of the concerns and 
would consult further with capital. 
 
5.3 The representative of the United States thanke d the delegation of Indonesia.  It had been 
almost two years since his delegation had requested  information to their questions and they looked 
forward to a response.  He continued to be concer ned about the fact that Indonesia had not notified to 
the Committee of the PSI requirements which were implemented as part of the regulation known as 
Decree 56 and believed were extended by the Ministry  of Trade with Regulations 57 in December 
2010.  His delegation asked Indonesia to confir m whether the inspection requirements had been 
renewed in Decree 57 and to clarify whether there were any changes made to the Preshipment Inspection regime.  Finally, he continued to ur ge Indonesia to submit its notification on this 
requirement as soon as possible and then his delegati on could also submit these questions directly to 
Indonesia.  
5.4 The representative of Canada supported the Unite d States regarding the lack of notification on 
the issue of Preshipment Inspection requirement. 
 
5.5 The Committee took note of the information presented. 
 
VI. PARAGRAPH 12 OF THE DOHA MINISTERIAL DECLARATION 
(WT/MIN(01)/DEC/1):  IMPLEMENTATION-RELATED ISSUES 
 - Paragraph 8.3 of document WT/MIN/(01)/17  
 6.1 The Chairman recalled that the General Council,  at its meeting in December 2002, authorized 
the Committee to continue its work under the exis ting mandate in paragraph 8.3 of the Decision on 
Implementation-Related Issues and C oncerns, and to report back to the General Council once its work 
had been completed.  Under this item India had ar gued that recognizing the legitimate concerns of 
importing Members on the accuracy of the declared va lue, Ministers had directed this Committee to 
identify and assess practical means to address these c oncerns including exchange of information on 
export values, thus this was a separate mandate  and India urged Members that these should be 
addressed by this Committee.  However, some ot her Members had reiterated that the Negotiating 
Group on Trade Facilitation was the appropriate venue  to continue these discussions, given that the  G/VAL/M/51 
 Page 11 
 
 
  Negotiating Group on Trade Facilitation was currently  examining proposals that contained elements 
very similar to India's proposal.   
 6.2 The representative of India said that it wa s not necessary to repeat the arguments as the 
Chairman had already stated what he had wanted  to say.  Nevertheless, after listening to the 
representative from the WCO, who had clearly stated  in his report that many developing countries 
were facing the practical problems regarding the implementation of the Agreement, particularly, 
widespread under-invoicing, and that it was a major cha llenge to fair and efficient revenue collection.  
His delegation, in this sense, requested that its pr oposal should be discussed.  The argument that this 
objective was being handled by a Negotiating Group was pointless.  Therefore, as there already was a 
mandate, he strongly insisted to Members that there was a job to be completed and Members should fulfil the mandate and start to discuss this issue. 
 
6.3 The representative of the United States disagr eed with India and reiterated his delegation's 
position that the appropriate venue to continue th is discussion was in the Negotiating Group on Trade 
Facilitation, given that trade facilitation was current ly being examined in proposals that contained 
elements similar to the one that was contained in India's paper.  
6.4 The representative of Canada continued to have  the position that the proposal was contrary to 
the mandate given to this Committee, partly because  of its monitoring nature and the need for any 
outcome to be consistent with  domestic laws and procedures. 
 
6.5 The representative of Eur opean Union said that her position remained unchanged on this 
issue. 
 
6.6 The representative of the WCO clarified a poi nt made by India by stating that the WCO 
secretariat was looking into an issue of widespread  suspected under-invoicing and that therefore it 
would not be said that this issue was the responsibili ty of the Technical Committee.  There were also 
several crosscutting issues that the Secretaria t was working on;  sometimes with other WCO 
committees on commercial fraud and enforcement wh ere the Technical Committee had certainly a 
part to play in terms of application of the valua tion rules.  Therefore, the particular issue on under-
invoicing was not an issue that the Technical Committee, would be responsible for. 
 
6.7 The Committee took note of the statements and recorded these views in the minutes. 
 
VII. OTHER BUSINESS 
 
A. WORKSHOP ON CUSTOMS VALUATION  
 
7.1 The Chairman recalled that the delegation of Jap an had suggested that the Secretariat organize 
a workshop on customs valuation.  
7.2 The representative of Japan suggested that the Secretariat organize a workshop on customs 
valuation mainly in technical aspects of the agre ement immediately after the next meeting of the 
Committee.  He thought that this could benefit all Members and hoped that other Members would 
agree with the idea. 
7.3 The representative of the United States would cons ult with its capital on whether or not this 
was a useful workshop to conduct.  However, he tha nked the delegation of Japan for raising this issue. 
7.4 The representative of the European Union said that as this was the first time she had heard 
this proposal, her delegation requested more inform ation on the type of workshop that Japan wanted G/VAL/M/51 
Page 12 
 
 
  to have.  For instance, what would be the agenda of such a workshop, if it were to be held? She 
considered that a very general workshop on custom s valuation would not be useful;  therefore, she 
requested to have more information on th at before she could give an opinion.  
7.5 The representative of Japan said that this workshop would be purely technical and conducted 
by the Secretariat. 7.6 The Committee took note of the statements made. 
B. CAPE VERDE - GRANT OF A WAIVER RELATED TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF ARTICLE VII OF 
GATT  1994  AND THE AGREEMENT ON IMPLEMENTATION OF ARTICLE VII OF THE GATT  1994 
7.7 The Chairman informed th e Committee that the General Council, at its meeting on  
3 May 2011, had decided to waive the obligation for Cape Verde concerning the implementation of 
Article VII of GATT 1994 and the Agreement on Customs Valuation until 1 January 2012, as 
recommended by the CTG at its meeting on 21 Marc h 2011. Pursuant to this waiver, contained in 
document WT/L/812, Cape Verde would have to re port to the Committee on Customs Valuation, by 
30 September 2011 on its progress on fulfilling the Action Plan and the status of its implementation of 
the WTO Agreement on Customs Valuation.  
C. CHAIR 'S CONSULTATIONS ON WAYS TO IMPROVE  THE TIMELINESS AND COMPLETENESS OF 
NOTIFICATIONS AND OTHER RELE VANT INFORMATION ON TRADE MEASURES FALLING WITHIN 
THE AMBIT OF THE AGREEMENT ON CUSTOMS VALUATION  
7.8 The Chairman recalled that on 7 May 2009 th e former Chair of the Committee reported on an 
informal open-ended meeting of the Committee he ld on 17 March 2009 to consult with Members on 
ways to improve the timeliness and completeness of notifications and other information flows on 
trade measures falling within areas under the Agreement.   At the time, suggestions on how to increase 
transparency through complying with notification obligations were made by four Members (Canada, 
the European Union, the United States and Pakistan).   It was also agreed, as suggested by the former 
Chair, that Members would put them in writing if th ey wanted to pursue any of these suggestions. Up 
to now, no written suggestions had been received. 
7.9 The Committee agreed to revert to this issu e only when Members express their suggestions in 
writing. 
D. DATE OF THE NEXT MEETING  
7.10 The Chairman informed the Committee that the next meeting was scheduled for 31 October 
2011. 
 
VIII.  ELECTION OF OFFICERS 
8.1 The Chairman informed the Committee that th e Chairman of the Council for Trade in Goods 
had carried out informal consultations on a slate of names for appointment of Chairpersons of 
standing bodies in accordance with the established Gu idelines for Appointment of Officers.  On the 
basis of consultations, he had proposed that the Committee elect Masafumi KOBAYASHI (Japan) as Chairperson, for 2011.  He therefore, proposed that the Committee elect Mr  Masafumi Kobayashi by 
acclamation. 
  
 
  G/VAL/M/51 
 Page 13 
 
 
  8.2 The Committee elected Mr Kobayashi by acclamation.   
 
8.3 Mr Kobayashi thanked Mr Vattai for his hard  work during his tenure and also thanked all 
Members for their support on his election as a Chair of this Committee next year.  He was looking 
forward to working with all delegations and the S ecretariat in order to advance the work of this 
committee.  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
 
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
 
 
  
 
  
 
 G/VAL/M/51 
Page 14 
 
 
   
ANNEX I 
 
Report to the Committee on Customs Valuatio n on the work of the Technical Committee on 
Customs Valuation and related activities of the WCO Secretariat 
 
The 32nd Session of the TCCV took place from 11 to 15 April 2011.   
 
Technical Questions 
 
After long-running discussions, the Technical Committee finalized a new instrument which 
will be incorporated into the WCO Valuation Co mpendium; Commentary 25.1, "Third Party Royalty 
and Licence Fees – General Commentary".  This do cument will be presented to the Council for 
approval next month.   
It sets out some important points to be taken into consideration when determining whether a 
royalty or licence fee should be included in the customs value.  Two case studies, from Brazil and 
Colombia, on this same issue, are still unde r discussion by the Technical Committee.  
 
Discussions continued on the links between transf er pricing and customs valuation.  This 
topic is a high priority for the Technical Comm ittee and the WCO.  Many trade representatives 
(consultancies, multi-national companies etc.), have  raised this issue in view of the additional 
administrative burden placed on commercial operators who must satisfy customs administrations on one hand and tax administrations on the other in  regard to related party transactions.   
The WTO Agreement sets out conditions for examining prices where the parties to a sale are related 
in order to establish whether or not the relationship h as influenced the price.  If it has, the price cannot 
be accepted.  Similarly, the OECD has produced guidelin es to verify whether a transfer price is "arm's 
length".  Customs administrations are often being asked to accept a transfer pricing study as evidence 
to demonstrate that price influence has not taken pl ace.  However, although these concepts are similar, 
there are many differences.  The task for the Techni cal Committee, therefore, is to consider to what 
extent the text of the WTO Agreement, and its In terpretative Notes, permits the use of information 
taken from transfer pricing studies in relation to these cases.    
 
In relation to both the third party royalty and transfer pricing issues, challenges are being 
faced by the Technical Committee in reaching clea r conclusions given that the WTO Agreement 
provides limited guidance in respect of these in creasingly common modern and complex commercial 
arrangements.  This factor was recognised at a sp ecial event held by the Technical Committee last 
year to recognise the 30
th anniversary of the WTO Agreement.   
 
The Technical Committee also discussed a questio n from Belarus concerning the valuation of 
industrial waste.  New technical questions were also raised by Singapore which the Technical 
Committee agreed to examine at the next Session. 
 Technical Assistance/Capacity Building 
 
At each Technical Committee, reports are made of both Secretariat and Members activities in 
valuation-related technical assistance and capacity building. At the 32
nd Session, the delegate of Japan 
reported a number of activities conducted by hi s administration.  The Secretariat conducted a 
Valuation trainer accreditation workshop for the E ast and Southern Africa Region in Harare in 
January 2011.  A regional Customs Valuation works hop is being held this we ek in Beirut, Lebanon 
for the Middle East and North Africa Region and a national workshop was help in Timor Leste, 
earlier this year.   G/VAL/M/51 
 Page 15 
 
 
   
Other issues  
 
Review of Technical Comm ittee Processes and Procedures  
 
As mentioned at the last CVC, the Technical Committee has now launched a review of its 
processes and procedures.  This has the following objectives: 
 
- to ensure Members needs are being met 
- to become more effective and efficient 
- to ensure the Technical Committee continues to  fulfil its mandate, as laid down in the WTO 
Valuation Agreement.  
 
At the 32nd Session, the Technical Committee had some c onstructive discussions on this issue.  It 
was agreed to reformat the agenda to ensure more ti me was spent on practical issues, such as technical 
questions, and reduce time spent on administrative i ssues, which can be adequately covered in written 
reports.  Other proposals will be discussed at the next Session.  
 
Revenue Package 
 
The Technical Committee was updated on the lat est developments of the Revenue Package 
programme currently being conducted by the Secret ariat.  The Revenue Package is a response to 
WCO Members’ concerns of falling revenue returns, particularly in the wake of the global financial 
crisis of 2008.  Many developing country Custom s administrations still face significant practical 
problems in the application of the WTO Agreemen t and dealing with widespread under-invoicing has 
been identified as the major challenge to fair and efficient revenue collection.  The Secretariat is 
currently studying the valuation control programmes of a number of Customs administrations in order 
to identify good practices which can  be shared and encouraged.  
 
Elections/ Date of next meeting 
 
- The Technical Committee reelected Mr. Guzm án MAÑES (Uruguay) as Chairperson and  
Mr N Shokai (Japan) and Mr O Aoufi (Morocco) as Vice Chairpersons for a one year period.  
 
- The 33rd Session of the Technical Committee will be held at WCO Headquarters in Brussels 
from 17 to 21 October 2011 (dates provisional). 
 
 
__________