WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  WT/REG170/9 
24 March 2009 
 
 (09-1460) 
Committee on Regional Trade Agreements Original:   English 
  
 
ENLARGEMENT OF THE EUROPEAN UN ION TO 25 MEMBER STATES  
(SERVICES) 
 
  The following communication, dated 5 March 2009, is being circulated at the request of the 
delegation of the European Communities. 
  This document reproduces the questions addressed to the Parties and the responses submitted.  
_______________ 
 
 
Question from the Delegation of Australia
 
 1. We call on/request the EC to nominate a sp ecific date for entry into force of the EC-25 
GATS Article XXI compensation package?  
 We welcome the WTO Secretariat's factua l presentation on services in respect of 
Enlargement of the European Union to 25 member States.   
 
 While we note the generally positive discussion on the General Agreement on Trade in 
Services Article XXI (Modification of Schedules)  in respect of this Enlargement, Australia 
disagrees with the characterization in paragraph 62 that the EC completed the certification 
procedure in accordance with paragraph 20 of the Procedures for Implementation of 
Article XXI (WTO document S/L/80). 
 In Australia’s view the certification procedure has not been properly concluded.  The 
Secretariat’s notification (S/L/286, December 2006)  does not conclude the certification process 
in accordance with paragraph 20 of S/L/80 as it does not indicate the date of entry into force
, as 
required by the terms of S/L/80.  Rather, the notification rehearses the EC’s early advice 
contained in paragraph 11 of S/C/273 of October 2006 that:  
 “[I]f no objections are communicated to the Secretariat within 45 days from the date of 
circulation of the draft consolidated schedule, th is certification procedure shall be considered as 
concluded, and this consolidated schedule shall enter into force on a date to be specified by the EC, 
following the completion of the internal decisi on-making procedures of the European Communities 
and its member States where appropriate.”     Some two years have lapsed since the c onclusion of the relevant GATS Article XXI 
negotiations.  However, the EC is still unable to fix a specific date of entry into force of the schedule 
in accordance with S/L/80.  We note EC advice th at to date only 11 EU member States have 
concluded their national procedures in relati on to undertakings contained in EC-25. 
    WT/REG170/9 
Page 2  
 
   This delay in ratification of unknown duration of the compensation packed negotiated 
by the EC with affected Members is unacceptabl e on both commercial and systemic grounds.  
With the delay of entry into force of the EC-25 schedules, the EC-12 and 13 EU member State schedules continue in effect.  The commercial  value of the compensation package, which was 
premised on early binding of elements of the EC’s Doha Round services offer, is also eroding 
over time. 
 
 The EC considers that the WTO Secretariat' s relevant document (S/L/286 of 18 December 
2006) appropriately clarified the status of the rele vant certification procedure. We also recall that 
Australia, being one of the affected WTO Members,  duly signed the relevant agreement with the EC, 
and thereby accepted that the entry into force of th e results of the negotiations can only take place 
after the completion of the EC's internal approval procedures.  
 
Question from the Delegation of Colombia
 
 
Re:  Factual Presentation - WT/REG170/8  
 
"62. As foreseen in GATS Article XXI:2(a) and the Procedures for the Implementation of 
Article XXI (S/L/80), the EC entered into negotia tions with the 18 WTO Members that had made a 
claim of interest, concerning compensatory adjustment s with a view to maintaining a "general level of 
mutually advantageous commitments not less favourable  to trade than provided for in the schedule of 
specific commits prior to such negotiations".  Further to the agreement of compensatory 
adjustments with seventeen Members1, the EC completed the certification procedure in accordance 
with paragraph 20 of the Procedures for the Implementation of Article XXI  
(WTO document S/L/80).2 
 
65. Following the conclusion of the GATS Article XXI procedure, the certification of the 
Consolidated Schedule was concluded on 18 December 2006.  Accordingly, it will enter into force on 
a date to be specified by the EC and its member States, further to the completion of the EC's 
internal procedures.3  The EC's Consolidated Schedule will then constitute the main binding of the 
EC's external trade relations with other WTO Members in the area of services, including the 
NMS10 .  There are, however, exceptions:  In particular, Chile and Mexico, whose trade in services 
with the EC is governed by FTAs (listed in Table II.1 – EC Agreements)." 
2. We would like to know the date of entry into force of the EC-25 GATS Schedule 
resulting from the extended GATS Article XXI  negotiations based on documents S/SECRET/8 
and S/SECRET/9, the certification of which was concluded on 18 December 2006 by means of document S/L/286, and which, more than two yea rs after the conclusion of those negotiations, 
has still not entered into force (this includes the new concessions granted by the EC as a result 
of the same negotiations). 
So far, the EC has reported that: 
 
(a) Following the signature of the relevan t agreements with the affected WTO 
Members and the completion of the WTO certification procedure in December 
2006, the Commission had formally proposed  a conclusion of the agreements to 
                                                     
 
1 Uruguay withdrew its claim of interest. 
2 For the purpose of certification of its consolidat ed schedule, the European Communities submitted its 
draft consolidated schedule (S/C/W/273, 9 October 2006, and Suppl.1) containing the modifications and 
withdrawals relating to both procedur es, as well as the compensation with regard to the procedure concerning 
S/SECRET/8/Add.1-17. 
3 WTO document S/L/286 of 18 December 2006.  WT/REG170/9 
 Page 3 
 
 
  the EC Council of Ministers on 27 March 2007 by means of a proposed Council 
decision. 
(b) Subsequently, by amending the original proposal of the Commission, the EC 
Council had decided to require the national ratification of the relevant agreements by the EC member States, and had also called for the consultation of 
the European Parliament. 
(c) By December 2008, only ten EC member States (Austria, Denmark, Germany, 
Lithuania, Malta, the Netherlands, Greece, Hungary, Spain and Sweden) had concluded their national procedures and ratified the relevant agreements. 
 To date, 13 EU member States out of the 25 c oncerned completed their national ratification 
procedures (Austria, Germany, Denm ark, Hungary, Greece, Latvia, L ithuania, Malta, the Netherlands, 
Poland, Slovakia, Spain and Sweden).  
Subject to their respective constitutional re quirements, those EU member States, whose 
national ratification procedures are not yet complete d, are doing their outmost to complete such 
procedures as soon as possible. Additionally, and also with a view to further accelerating national 
ratification procedures, the European Commission re quested an opinion from the European Court of 
Justice, aimed at clarifying, among other issues, wh ether such national ratification by the EU member 
States is really necessary.  The hearing before  the European Court of Justice took place on 
10 February 2009.   
All these extensive efforts by the EU member States and by the European Commission are in 
line with the relevant provisions of the agreemen ts signed with the affected WTO Members, under 
which the EC endeavored to accelerate the intern al approval procedures as much as possible. As 
stipulated in the relevant agreements, the entry into  force of the results of the negotiations will take 
place after the completion of the EC's internal approval procedures.   Question from the Delegation of Japan
 
 General Question
 
 
3. Japan would like to see the early entry into force of consolidated GATS schedule of the 
EU25 members which is contained in documents S/C/W/273 and S/C/W/273/Suppl.1.  In this regard, we would like to know the current situat ion and future prospects of the ratification 
procedures by each member of the EU25 respectively.  
 To date, 13 EU member States out of the 25 concerned completed their national ratification 
procedures (Austria, Germany, Denm ark, Hungary, Greece, Latvia, L ithuania, Malta, the Netherlands, 
Poland, Slovakia, Spain and Sweden). 
  Subject to their respective constitutional re quirements, those EU member States, whose 
national ratification procedures are not yet complete d, are doing their outmost to complete such 
procedures as soon as possible. Additionally, and also with a view to further accelerating national ratification procedures, the European Commission re quested an opinion from the European Court of 
Justice, aimed at clarifying, among other issues, wh ether such national ratification by the EU member 
States is really necessary.  The hearing before  the European Court of Justice took place on 
10 February 2009.   WT/REG170/9 
Page 4  
 
   All these extensive efforts by the EU member  States and by the European Commission are in 
line with the relevant provisions of the agreemen ts signed with the affected WTO Members, under 
which the EC endeavoured to accelerate the intern al approval procedures as much as possible.   
 
Questions from the Delegation of Thailand
 
 Derogations
 
 
4. With reference to paragraph 36 of the Fa ctual Presentation (WT/REG170/8), EC15 can 
derogate from their obligations in providing NMS8  nationals access to their labour markets for 
a maximum period of 7 years following the date of accession.  Furthermore, Austria and 
Germany do apply such restrictions on the free movement of NMS8 workers. 
 Currently, do Austria and Germany continue to apply this restriction to NMS8 
workers?  Have other members of EU15 applied or have plans to apply this restriction to 
NMS8?    
Currently 4 member States still restrict labour  market access by workers from NMS8 under 
national measures, namely Austria, Germany, Be lgium and Denmark.  Upon accession of NMS8 on 
1 May 2004, 12 out of 15 member States applied such restrictions (with the exception of the UK, 
Ireland, Sweden) for 2 years.  From 1 May 2006, 4 more member States opened their labour market 
(Spain, Portugal, Greece, Finland), which were gradua lly followed henceforth by more member States 
(Italy, Netherlands, Luxembourg, France).  Member States that apply labour market restrictions may 
only continue to do so for 2 more years after 1 May 2009 if they notify the European Commission of a serious disturbance of the labour market, or threat thereof. 
5. Does such a restriction apply to all NMS8, if not, which member(s) of NMS8 does it 
apply to?  What is the rationale for the applicatio n of this restriction to all or selected member 
of NMS8? 
 The restrictions that Austria, Belgium, Ge rmany and Denmark apply concern workers from 
all NMS8.  Generally, the Accession Treaty provid es for the transitional arrangements to allow the 
gradual introduction of EC law on free movement of  workers to avoid labour market disturbances. 
During 4 of the past 6 enlargements, such tr ansitional arrangements have been in force. 
 
6. Does such a restriction apply to all services se ctors, if not, which sector(s) does it apply 
to?  What is the rationale for the application of this restriction to all or selected services sectors? 
 We understand that this question refers to r estrictions on the free movement of services 
involving posted workers.  A cross-border provisi on of services involving posted workers does not 
entail access to the labour market of  the State where the services are provided by the posted workers. 
Our response to Thailand's questi ons is based on this assumption. 
 The possibility to derogate from the free pr ovision of services involving posted workers from 
NMS8 is foreseen only for Austria and Germany.  The derogation may only apply to the sectors listed 
below. 
 The reason for these restrictions was to provide  the possibility to address serious disturbances 
or the threat thereof in specific sensitive sectors on their labour markets which could arise in certain 
regions from the transnational provision of services further to the accession of new member States. 
 The list of service sectors which may be covered by this derogation is as follows:  WT/REG170/9 
 Page 5 
 
 
  - in Germany: 
Sector NACE* code, unless otherwise specified 
Construction, including related branches 45.1 to 4; 
Activities listed in the Annex to Directive 96/71/EC 
Industrial cleaning 74.7 0 Industrial cleaning 
Other Services 74.87 Only activities of interior decorators 
* "Nomenclature Générale des Activités Économiques dans l'Union Européenne". 
 - in Austria: 
Sector NACE * code, unless otherwise specified 
Horticultural service activities 01.41 
Cutting, shaping and finishing of stone 26.7 
Manufacturing of metal structures and parts of 
structures 28.11 
Construction including related branches 45.1 to 4; 
Activities listed in the Annex to Directive 96/71/EC 
Security activities 74.60 
Industrial cleaning 74.70 
Home nursing 85.14 
Social work and activities without accommodation 85.32 
* "Nomenclature Générale des Activités Économiques dans l'Union Européenne". 
 
Questions from the Delegation of the United States  
 7. Paragraph 29 of the Secretariat’s Report notes that, as part of their accession 
obligations, the new member States “renounced  or amended international agreements with 
third countries that were incompatible with the EC acquis ”, and that more than 60 such existing 
agreements were accordingly superseded or term inated.  However, Annex Table AII.1 of the 
report lists only 40 free trade agreements between new member States and third parties that 
have been so terminated. 
(a) What other “international agreements” of the new member States (with third 
parties) were required to be amended or renounced as a result of accession beyond the 40 free trade agreements listed in Annex Table AII.1? 
 The WTO Secretariat has confirmed that the "more than 60" term covers both agreements 
listed in Table AII.1 and in Table AII.2, bot h tables included in Annex II (pages 37-38).  We 
understand that a revision of the factual report will be  prepared, with a view to duly clarifying this 
issue.    
(b) Have the new member States completed the process of amendment or 
renunciation of all bilateral agreements with third countries that contain trade or investment provisions inconsistent with the EC acquis ? 
 Yes.  The European Commission is not awar e of any information that would suggest the 
contrary.  WT/REG170/9 
Page 6  
 
  8. Paragraph 65 of the Secretariat’s Report no tes that the EC’s certified Consolidated 
Schedule will enter in force “on a date to be specified by the EC and its member States, further to the completion of the EC’s internal procedures”. 
(a) Certification of the EC’s Consolidated  Schedule was concluded in December 
2006.  Why have the EC’s “internal procedures” not yet resulted in entry into 
force of the Consolidated Schedule? 
 The reason is that the national ratification pro cedures have not yet been completed in certain 
EU member States.   
(b) What steps are being taken to effect a rapid completion of the EC’s internal 
procedures, given the significant amount of time that has elapsed since the 
Consolidated Schedule was certified, and the resulting uncertainty regarding the status of new member States’ GATS commitments? 
 Subject to their respective constitutional require ments, the EU member States, whose national 
ratification procedures are not yet completed, are doing their outmost to complete such procedures as 
soon as possible. Additionally, and also with a vi ew to further accelerating national ratification 
procedures, the European Commission requested an  opinion from the European Court of Justice, 
aimed at clarifying, among other issues, whether such national ratification by the EU member States is really necessary. The hearing befo re the European Court of Justice took place on 10 February 2009.  
  All these extensive efforts by the EU member  States and by the European Commission are in 
line with the relevant provisions of the agreemen ts signed with the affected WTO Members, under 
which the EC endeavoured to accelerate the intern al approval procedures as much as possible.   
 
__________