WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION   
WT/REG289/M/1 
17 April 2012 
 (12-2010) 
Committee on Regional Trade Agreements 
Sixty-fourth Session   
 
 
  
CONSIDERATION OF THE FREE TRADE TREATY BETWEEN  
COLOMBIA AND MEXICO, GOODS AND SERVICES 
 
Note on the Meeting of 20 March 2012 
 
Chairman:  Mr. F. Riegert (France) 
 
 
1. The 64th Session of the Committee on Regional Trad e Agreements (hereinafter 'CRTA' or the 
'Committee') was convened in Airgram WTO/AIR/3888/Rev.1 dated 9 March 2012. 
2. Under Agenda Item D.IV of this session, the CRTA considered the Free Trade Treaty 
between Colombia and Mexico (hereinafter the 'Treaty'), goods and services.  
3. The Chairman said that the Treaty had entered into force on 1 January 1995.  It had been 
notified to the WTO by the Parties on 13 Septem ber 2010 under Article XXIV:7(a) of the GATT 1994 
and the Understanding on the Inte rpretation of Article XXIV of GATT 1994 as a Treaty establishing a 
free trade area (document WT/REG289/N/1) and under GATS Article V:7(a) as a Treaty providing 
for the liberalization of trade in services within  the meaning of Article V of the GATS (document 
S/C/N/563).  The text of the Treaty was available, t ogether with its Annexes, on the Parties' official 
websites.  The Factual Presentation on the goods and services aspects (document WT/REG289/1) had 
been prepared by the Secretariat on its own respons ibility in full consultation with the Parties, in 
accordance with paragraph 7(b) of the Transpar ency Mechanism for Regional Trade Agreements 
(document WT/L/671 dated 9 January 2012).  In ad dition, written questions and replies on the Treaty 
had been distributed in document WT/REG275/2, dated 15 March 2012.  He proposed to organize the 
consideration of the Treaty by first asking the Parties and then other Members forany general 
comments.  The Committee would then turn to the specifics of the Treaty, using the Factual 
Presentation, to guide the debate and then through the questions and replies document. 
4. The representative of Colombia welcomed the opp ortunity to present the Treaty and its latest 
Protocol, and thanked the Secretariat for its work as well as Japan and the U.S. for their questions.  
The Treaty, which covered goods, services and invest ments, had been signed by Mexico, Colombia 
and Venezuela on 13 June 1994 and had entered into  force on 1 January 1995.  Commitments in 
services subsequently included had come into force on 11 January 1997.  In 2006, Venezuela had 
withdrawn from the Treaty, but the commitments between Colombia and Mexico were not affected and the "G-3" Treaty, as it was called, became the "G-2".  In order to adapt it to the changing 
circumstances and deepen their co mmitments in trade in goods, Colombia and Mexico modified the 
Treaty through decisions adopted by the Admini strative Commission (Decisions No. 57-60, dated 
7 April 2010) which established a new Protocol , signed on 11 June 2010 and in force since 
2 August 2011 (Decrees 2676 and 2677, 2011).  For Co lombia, the Protocol was of great importance 
and Mexico, whose market represented many opportun ities, was an important trading partner.  In 
2010, Mexico's GDP was US$1,039 billion and it was ranked the 15
th and 16th largest world exporter 
(US$298,305 million) and importer (US$301,481 milli on).  Mexico had a dynamic services market WT/REG289/M/1 
Page 2  
 
  with exports and imports at US $15,400 million and US$21,400 million, respectively, in 2009.  The 
Treaty had improved market access for Colombian pr oducts with respect to other Latin American 
countries, which already enjoyed preferential access to the Mexican market.  At the same time, it 
promoted geographic diversification for agricultural and industrial products whose exports had been 
concentrated in neighbouring countries.  With r espect to its coverage, the Treaty ensured a greater 
supply of products at better prices as well as clear a nd stable rules for bilateral trade with disciplines 
such as market access, rules of origin, trade facilita tion, safeguards, sanitary and technical standards, 
services, investment, government procurement and te mporary entry of business persons.  It included 
provisions to ensure national treatment for goods and to prohibit the adoption and increase of new 
tariffs and non-tariff barriers.  The tariff elimina tion program for all products  was to be implemented 
gradually over ten years.  Tariff reductions had begun in 11 January  1995 and further liberalization 
had taken place in nine equal and yearly stages star ting on 10 July 1996, and completed by 2004.  The 
Parties could also accelerate the liberalization pr ocess for products they considered necessary.   
5. Special treatment had been granted to agri cultural and automotive goods.  In agriculture, 
liberalization had taken place over ten years, with a li st of exceptions for each Party.  Products such as 
coffee, sugar, pork, poultry, dairy products, and vegetables had been excluded from the Treaty.  For 
automotive goods, the Treaty provided for full liberalization by 2007.  However, the Parties had renegotiated the access conditions and liberalized these goods through quotas which were to be 
gradually eliminated by 2011.  In investments, the Treaty guaranteed safe and predictable conditions 
for investors and their investments, and incl uded a broad definition of investments covering 
intellectual property issues, loans, and reinvestment s.  It contained legal guarantees for national and 
MFN treatment, freedom of transfers, and expropr iation.  Performance requirements that distorted 
trade and investment such as conditions for the est ablishment of investments had been prohibited.  
The Parties also committed not to reduce standards to promote investments, as well as to guarantee 
the free flows of transfers.  A dispute settlement m echanism was foreseen in this regard.  In services, 
disciplines and rules to ensure free trade in servi ces and facilitate trade had been established.  The 
basic principles were: national and MFN treatment, and no local presence requirements.  It covered all 
services, except for government services, commercial ai r services and financial services.  In addition, 
the Treaty described in an annex the procedur es for the conclusion of negotiations aiming at 
recognizing degrees and professional licenses.  Re garding financial services, it allowed the 
establishment of financial institutions of a Party in the territory of the other Party, subject to the 
principles of national and MFN treatment, and ensuring the free transfer of resources abroad.  It also 
set out principles that facilitate the temporary entry of business people without requiring any change 
in labour and migration laws.  It covered business vi sitors, investors and intra-companies staff.  In 
government procurement, in order to undertake its  activities the Mexican public sector required a 
considerable amount of raw materials, finish ed products, services and the execution of large 
infrastructure projects, which provided major opportunities for Colombia.   
6. With regard to bilateral trade, in the last four  years, Colombia had a trade deficit with Mexico, 
which amounted to US$5,144 million in 2011.  In the same year, Colombian exports to Mexico grew 
by 10% from US$638 million to US$705 million.  Imports from Mexico increased by 58% from US$3,694 million to US$5,849 million.  Mexican FDI in Colombia totalled US$830 million, while FDI from Colombia in Mexico was at US$396 million in 2011. 
7. Following Venezuela's withdrawal from the G3, an d to boost bilateral trade, in 2007 Mexico 
and Colombia begun a process to adapt and strengthe n the Treaty.  This process had led to five 
decisions by the Administrative Commission, which were contained in the Protocol amending the 
Treaty between Mexico and Colombia, which had come  into force on 2 August 2010.  With regard to 
market access, the Parties had included some agri cultural and industrial pr oducts, initially excluded 
from liberalization.  In agriculture, the Parties agreed on preferential quotas which would grow by 
10% during 10 years for products such as bovine meat  and powdered milk.  In industrial goods, access 
was improved for textiles, apparel and trucks.  There were also changes in the rules of origin.  He  WT/REG289/M/1 
 Page 3 
 
 
  hoped that the recent changes to the Treaty would pr omote and invigorate trade between the Parties.  
He thanked Members for the opportunity to introd uce the Treaty and remained ready to answer any 
questions. 
8. The representative of Mexico thanked the Co mmittee for the opportunity to present the 
Protocol Amending the Treaty.  He also thanked th e Secretariat for its work and Japan and the U.S. 
for their questions.  The trade relationship between  the Parties was governed by the Free Trade Treaty 
signed by Mexico, Colombia and Venezuela on 13 J une 1994, and in force since 1 January 1995.  
Following Venezuela's withdrawal from the Treaty, the commitments between Mexico and Venezuela 
ceased on 19 November 2006.  Trade between Mexi co and Colombia had grown steadily since the 
Treaty's entry into force in 1995.  Between 1994 and 2011, bilateral trade increased 14-fold, to 
US$6,457 million.  Exports and imports had in creased 18 and 7 fold respectively, reaching 
US$5,633 and US$825 million in 2011.  Following the withdrawal of Venezuela from the G3 and to 
promote bilateral relations, in 200 7 Mexico and Colombia began a process to adapt and deepen the 
Treaty as reflected in five decisions by the Treat y's Administrative Commission and contained in the 
Protocol Amending the Treaty, which had co me into force on 2 August 2011.  Among the 
modifications, it was agreed to change some of the functions of the Administrative Commission in 
order to accelerate and make more efficient the a doption of certain decisions to improve the operation 
of the Treaty.  Among other things, the Administrative Commission could take decisions to accelerate tariff liberalization for one or more goods or change  the rules of origin.  The Parties had sought to 
improve access conditions for agricultural and industr ial products.  In agriculture, 42 tariff lines such 
as tomatoes, beans, oils had been included, and concessions through quotas with a preferential rate 
were agreed for 28 additional tariff lines, such as boneless beef, butter, powder milk, cheese and flour.  
Of the 42 tariff lines, 29 had become duty free immedi ately for Colombia, and 34 for Mexico.  For the 
remaining products, tariffs would be eliminated in  stages between 5 and 10 years.  Regarding the 
industrial sector, the Parties added 28 new tariff lines to their schedule, including trailers, citric acid, 
calcium citrate, that became duty free immediately, and polystyrenes for which tariffs would be 
eliminated within 5 and 6 years.  Other products  such as tanks and cisterns for cargo were also 
included.   
9. With regard to rules of origin, the changes agr eed under the Protocol allowed, in general, for 
greater use of inputs from third countries in the produ ction of final goods traded between the Parties.  
With this purpose, 165 rules of origin had been amended, affecting 708 tariff lines.  Following Venezuela's withdrawal, it was also agreed to ame nd the certificate of origin applied by the three 
countries and to adapt it bilaterally.  In addition, the Parties had sought to improve the functioning of 
the Committee of Regional Integration of inputs, wh ich allowed the temporary import, and subject to 
quota, of some textile inputs in short supply, fro m third countries to produce a good in Mexico or 
Colombia.   The recent adjustments and deepening of the Treaty was the result of the interest both 
Parties shared to continue working together and pr omoting the potential of trade in Latin America for 
the benefit of their societies.  Undoubtedly, th e negotiations concluded with Colombia not only 
offered an opportunity to promote bilateral trade,  but also endorsed the friendship and cooperation 
that had always characterized their people and al so showed the privileged relationship that both 
countries had among Latin American nations.  Mexico was ready to provide further details on any of 
its aspects. 
10. The representative of the United States thanked the Parties for their extensive presentations.  
Since new provisions expanding the Treaty had been included, she asked whether the factual 
presentation already included all the new changes to  the Treaty or whether there was a mechanism to 
update the factual presentation.  
11. The representative of the European Union thanke d the Parties for their detailed explanations.  
She asked whether the initial liber alization commitments had been fully achieved in accordance with 
the agreed timeframe (2010 for Mexico and 2011 Colombia ).  She also asked the Parties to clarify the WT/REG289/M/1 
Page 4  
 
  liberalization in the automotive sector, in particular  to confirm the information on the level of quotas 
for products in HS 8703 and HS 8704. 
12. The representative of Colombia said, with respect  to the EU's first question that the schedule 
had been followed by both Parties and that the lib eralization process had been completed within the 
agreed transition periods.  With respect to the second question, he would provide a written answer.  
13. The representative of Mexico thanked the U.S. and the EU for their questions.  He wondered 
if the information provided in paragraph 89 (b) of  the factual presentation on the tariff lines HS 8703 
and HS 8704 could answer the question by the EU.  With respect to the first question, he joined 
Colombia in saying that the Treat y had been very satisfactory for both Parties and that trade had 
grown by 14 times since its entry into force.  With regard to the question by the US, the Protocol was 
presented in Section F of the factual presentation and therefore the amendments had already been 
included.    
14. The Chairman said that the consideration of the goods aspects of the Free Trade Treaty 
between Colombia and Mexico had allowed the Comm ittee to clarify a number of questions and that 
oral discussion of the Treaty could be concluded in  accordance with paragraph 11 of the TM.  If any 
delegations wished to ask follow-up questions they were invited to forward submissions in writing to 
the Secretariat by 27 March 2012 and the Parties were asked to submit replies  in writing by no later 
than 10 April 2012.  In accordance with paragraph 13 of the TM all written submissions, as well as 
minutes of the meeting would be circulated prompt ly, in all WTO official languages, and would be 
made available on the WTO website. 
15. The Committee took note of the comments made. 
__________