RESTRICTED  WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  G/VAL/M/48 
23 December 2009 
 (09-6692) 
Committee on Customs Valuation  
  
 
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF 26 OCTOBER 2009 
 
Chairman: Mohammed Saeed (Pakistan)
 
  
 The agenda proposed for the meeting, circul ated in WTO/AIR/3459/Rev.1 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  
A. NOTIFICATION OF NATIONAL LEGISLATION ................................................................................2  
III. INFORMATION ON THE APPLICATION OF DECISIONS OF THE COMMITTEE ON CUSTOMS  VALUATION......................................................................7
 
IV. TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE ..................................................................................................7  
A. INFORMATION ON TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE ...............................................................................7  
B. ARTICLE 20.3  TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND TRADE -RELATED TECHNICAL 
ASSISTANCE ............................................................................................................................... .7 
V. TRANSITIONAL REVIEW IN ACCORDANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 18 OF 
THE PROTOCOL OF ACCESSION OF THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF 
CHINA .......................................................................................................................... .............7  
VI. REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE TO THE COUNCIL FOR TRADE IN 
GOODS .......................................................................................................................... ............8  
VII. FOURTH, FIFTH, SIXTH, SEVENTH, EIGHTH, NINTH, TENTH, 
ELEVENTH, TWELFTH, AND THIRTEENTH ANNUAL REVIEWS OF THE 
IMPLEMENTATION AND OPERATION OF THE CUSTOMS VALUATION 
AGREEMENT ...................................................................................................................... ....9 
VIII.  PRESHIPMENT INSPECTION ...........................................................................................11  
IX. PARAGRAPH 12 OF THE DOHA MINISTERIAL DECLARATION 
(WT/MIN(01)/DEC/1):  IMPLEMENTATION-RELATED ISSUES................................12  
X. OTHER BUSINESS................................................................................................................1 2 
A. DATE OF THE NEXT MEETING ....................................................................................................12  
 
 
_______________ 
 G/VAL/M/48 
Page 2  
 
  I. REPORT OF THE WORK OF THE TECHNICAL COMMITTEE ON CUSTOMS 
VALUATION 
1.1 The observer of the World Customs Organization
 reported on the activities of the Technical 
Committee on Customs Valuation at its 29th session, held on 19 to 23 October 2009.  This report is 
contained in Annex I.  
 
1.2 The Committee took note  of the report. 
 
II. INFORMATION ON IMPLEMENTATION AND ADMINISTRATION OF THE 
AGREEMENT 
A. NOTIFICATION OF NATIONAL LEGISLATION  
2.1 The Chairman  recalled that Article 22 of the Agreem ent 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 Tokyo Round Committee, required each Member to notify its legislation to the 
Committee.  She suggested that, under this sub- item, the Committee take up the legislations in 
sequence as listed in the agenda.  She further recal led that the notification of legislation by the 
Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu had been presented to the 
Committee.  However, the examination of this no tification remained suspended since the Committee's 
meeting on 4-5 November 2002 pending resolution of  the difference in views between the parties 
involved on notifications across the WTO.   
 
- Albania 
 
2.2 The Chairman  recalled that at the May 2008 meeti ng Canada posed questions to Albania 
which were circulated in document G/VAL/W/176.  Albania circulated responses for the last meeting 
in document G/VAL/W/178.    2.3 The representative of Canada
 said that his delegation had reviewed the responses provided by 
Albania and had no further comments or questions.    
2.4 The Committee took note
 of the statement made and agreed  to conclude the examination of 
the legislation of Albania.    
 - Bahrain 
 2.5 The Chairman
 noted that at the last meeting the United States had posed questions to Bahrain 
on its notification.  These questions had been circulated in G/VAL/W/181.    2.6 The representative of the United States
 said that his delegation looked forward to receiving 
Bahrain's written response to its questions circulated in G/VAL/W/181.  
2.7 The Committee took note
 of the statement made and agreed  to revert to the notification of 
Bahrain at its next meeting.  
 - Belize 
 2.8 The Chairman
 recalled that the Committee had agreed to revert to this notification following 
questions posed to Belize by the United States an d Canada.  These questions were circulated in  G/VAL/M/48 
 Page 3 
 
 
  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.    2.9 The representative of Canada
 stated that his delegation had reviewed the response and had no 
further questions or comments.   
 
2.10 The representative of the United States  said that, although his delegation had not received 
responses to its questions, it noted that some qu estions, which were posed by Canada, had been 
answered.  His delegation had requested additional information regarding the incorporation of the 
interpretive notes into Belize's legislation.  In its response, Belize indicated that, although the notes 
were not currently included in its legislation, all appropriate explanati ons and definitions were 
provided for which made the valuation process transpar ent.  Unfortunately, his delegation did not find 
this explanation sufficient.  The interpretive notes fo rmed an integral part of the Agreement and his 
delegation would consider Belize's legislation to be incomplete without them.  He asked whether 
Belize had any intention of incor porating these provisions into its legislation.  Additionally, his 
delegation was concerned that Belize was not fully in corporating Article 16 of the Agreement into its 
legislation.  Belize indicated that although ther e was no reason why local customs administrations 
would not provide any explanation in writing, there was no provision in its legislation that actually required customs to provide an explanation in writi ng.  His delegation was therefore concerned that 
customs was not legally obligated to provide a writte n explanation when requested by importers, as is 
prescribed by the Agreement. 
 
2.11 The Committee took note
 of the statements made and agreed  to revert to this matter at its next 
meeting.  
 - China 
 
2.12 The Chairman
 recalled that at the last meeting, it was agreed to revert to China's notification 
in G/VAL/N/1/CHN/5 at this meeting.  The United States had posed questions to China at the last 
meeting and these were circulated in G/VAL/W/ 168 and Corr.1.  China had responded to these 
questions in document G/VAL/W/184.   
2.13 The representative of the United States
 said that his delegation was still reviewing the 
responses from China and requested that the item re main on the agenda in case his delegation would 
need to follow with additional comments or questions.  2.14 The Committee took note
 of the statement made and agreed  to revert to this matter at its next 
meeting. 
 
 - Egypt 
 
2.15 The Chairman  recalled that at the previous meetin g it was agreed to revert to Egypt's 
legislation and responses to the checklist of issues.  The United States and Canada had posed 
questions to Egypt at the October 2007 meeting wh ich were circulated in document G/VAL/W/166.  
Egypt circulated its responses in document G/VAL/W/ 169.  Further questions from the United States 
had been circulated in document G/VAL/W/175 to which Egypt had circulated responses in document 
G/VAL/W/177.    
2.16 The representative of the United States
 understood from Egypt's response that the legislation 
did not specifically incorporate the interpretive not es of the Agreement.  Customs administrations 
were committed to apply the notes.  He asked Egyp t to clarify how the interpretive notes were made 
available to customs officials;  what documents ser ved as references for officials in order to apply the 
interpretive notes? G/VAL/M/48 
Page 4  
 
  2.17 The representative of Canada
 requested a further clarification.  With respect to the right to 
appeal, Egypt had indicated that there was a cust oms review mechanism in place.  His delegation 
wished to have more clarification on the last para graph of its response in which it was indicated that 
"the importer can resort to higher arbitration, followed by  the right to resort to judicial arbitration".  It 
was not clear if this was meant to refer to a judge or  to a court of law and he asked Egypt to clarify. 
 
2.18 The representative of Egypt  took note of the questions and would refer them to his capital for 
a response.  He would inform the Committee of this response before the next meeting.  He also asked 
for the questions and comments in writing.   
2.19 The Committee took note
 of the statements made and agreed  to revert to this matter at its next 
meeting.  
 - Nigeria 
 
2.20 The Chairman
 recalled that it had been agreed to reve rt to Nigeria's notification at the last 
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.    2.21 The representative of the United States
 said that his delegation was looking forward to 
receiving Nigeria's responses to its questions. 
 
2.22 The representative of the European Communities1 said that her delegation also had some 
concerns with the Nigerian notification and reserved th e right to come back to this notification at the 
next meeting.  
2.23 The Committee took note
 of the statements made and agreed  to revert to this matter at its next 
meeting.  
 - Norway 
 
2.24 The Chairman
 drew Members' attention to Norway's recent notification circulated in 
document G/VAL/N/1/NOR/2.  This contained the unoffi cial translation of the relevant elements of 
Norway's new Act on Customs Duties and Movement  of Goods (Customs Act of 21 December 2007 
No. 119) which entered into force as from 1 January 2009.  2.25 The representative of the United States
 said that after reviewing this notification, his 
delegation had identified a couple of areas where it sought additional information from Norway.  It 
was concerned that the legislation might be missing some provisions required by the WTO Agreement.  For example the legislation did not app ear to contain Articles 1.2(a) (b) and (c) of the 
Agreement.  Additionally, Articles 2.1, 2.2 and 2.3 did not appear to be included.  He also asked Norway to explain if the additional provisions of the Agreement could be foun d elsewhere in its laws 
or regulations.  If they did not exist elsewhere, di d Norway intend to implement them?  His delegation 
was also concerned that section 7-17(1)(c), as written, would make all royalty payments to the 
licensor related to the seller automatically dutiabl e without examining whether such payment was a 
condition of sale and related to the goods, as  required by Article 8.1(c) of the Agreement.  Section    
7-20 of Norway's legislation stated that, in special cases, goods maybe released to the importer if 
                                                     
 
1 On 1 December 2009, the Treaty of Lisbon amendi ng the Treaty on Europe an Union and the Treaty 
establishing the European Community (done at Lisb on, 13 December 2007) en tered into force.  On 
29 November 2009, the WTO received a Verbal Note (WT/L/779) from the Council of the Eu ropean Union and 
the Commission of the European Communi ties stating that, by virtue of the Treaty of Lisbon, as of 1 December 
2009, the European Union replaces an d succeeds the European Community.  G/VAL/M/48 
 Page 5 
 
 
  sufficient guarantee was provided.  He asked Norway  to explain what constituted a special case and 
how often had this provision been utilized.  His de legation would submit these questions in writing to 
the Committee and looked forward to Norway's written responses.  2.26 The Committee took note
 of the statement made and agreed  to revert to this matter at its next 
meeting. 
 
 -  Saint Vincent and the Grenadines 
 
2.27 The Chairman  recalled that, at the last meeting, it had b een agreed to revert to this notification 
at this meeting.  The United States had posed ques tions to the delegation of Saint Vincent and the 
Grenadines which had been circulated in document G/VAL/W/181.  2.28 The representative of the United States
 said that his delegation continued to look forward to 
receiving responses to its questions. 
 
2.29 The Committee took note  of the statement made and agreed  to revert to this notification at its 
next meeting.  
 - Thailand 
 2.30 The Chairman
 recalled that, at the last meeting, it had b een agreed to revert to this notification 
at this meeting.  The United States had circulated 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 
Communities and the United States regarding Thaila nd's valuation of alcoho lic beverages imports 
were circulated in document G/VAL/W/160, and fro m the Philippines regarding Thailand's valuation 
of cigarettes in G/VAL/W/164.  Following this, the United States circulated additional questions on 
the legislation in G/VAL/W/165.  Thailand submitte d responses which were subsequently circulated 
in document G/VAL/W/174.  Lastly, the United Stat es posed additional questions to Thailand which 
were circulated in document G/VAL/W/181.  
 
2.31 The representative of Thailand
 informed the Committee that sh e had received responses to the 
latest questions from the United States.  They were  in the process of translation so she could only 
provide preliminary oral responses.  With regard to the first question, she said that the amendments to 
the Customs Act were intended to compile various cu stoms laws and regulations into one law and to 
update customs law as appropriate, in accordance with  the Agreement.  The Customs Act contained 
principals with more detail custom s valuation methods to be provided  in the Ministerial Regulations.  
The valuation methods to be provided would be in accordance with Article VII of the GATT 1994 and 
the Customs Valuation Agreement.  As for the second question about Thailand's customs penalty 
regime, her delegation would provide detailed answers in writing.  On the third question regarding the 
appeals process for customs valuation decisions, she explained that the appeal process could be found 
under Sections 112(6) and 112(18) in the Customs Act B.E. 2469.  In order to appeal the Board of 
Appeal's decision to an external body, an importe r must file a complaint under section 112(18) of the 
Customs Act B.E. 2469.  Such a compliant was cons idered to be a civil action.  Any applicable 
penalty could not be increased in such a proceeding.   Regarding the fourth question, whether Thailand 
provided importers with the right to an explanati on in writing from customs as to how the customs 
value was determined, she replied in the affirmative.   This provision could be found in the Ministerial 
Regulation No. 145 (B.E.2547) in accordance with th e Customs Act B.E. 2469.  On the last question 
regarding the use of reference prices in determining customs value under Section 11 bis of Thailand's 
Customs Act B.E. 2469, she replied that the cust oms department has already abolished the use of 
reference prices in determining customs value in the draft amendment of the Customs Act.  At G/VAL/M/48 
Page 6  
 
  present, the Secretariat of the Cabinet was in the process of obtaining the Cabinet's approval of this 
draft amendment and proceeding with other necessar y steps in the legislation amendment process.  
Her delegation would provide full responses in wr iting once the translation was completed.   
 2.32 The representative of the United States
 appreciated the prelim inary responses and looked 
forward to receiving them in writing. 
 2.33 The Committee took note
 of the statements made and agreed  to revert to this notification at its 
next meeting.   - Tunisia 
 
2.34 The Chairman
 recalled that, following a request, this notification had been translated from 
French into English.  The translation had been  circulated in document G/VAL/N/1/TUN/2/Rev.2. 
 
2.35 The representative of the United States  requested additional information on a couple of points 
in the legislation.  First, Article 28 of the Tunisi a Customs Code appeared to be missing the provisions 
contained in Article 6.2 of the Agreement concerni ng computed value.  His delegation was therefore 
interested in hearing how Tunisia implemented Articl e 6.2 of the Agreement.  Second, it appeared that 
Article 13 and 16 were not incorporated in the new Customs Code of Tunisia.  His delegation would 
like to know whether and when Tunisia was planning to  incorporate these Articles into the legislation.  
Finally, his delegation was concerned that Tunisia was not fully incorporating all of the interpretive 
notes of the Agreement in its legislation.  He asked whether and when Tunisia was planning to do so.   
 2.36 The Committee took note
 of the statement and agreed  to revert to this notification at its next 
meeting. 
 
 - Ukraine 
 
2.37 The Chairman  recalled that at the last meeting it had b een agreed to revert to this notification 
at this meeting.  The European Communities, supported by the United States, had posed some 
questions to Ukraine which had now been circ ulated in document G/VAL/W/179.  Ukraine had 
provided response to these questions which had been circulated in document G/VAL/W/182. 
 2.38 The representative of  the European Communities
 said that her delegation had a few follow-up 
questions to Ukraine's response to the first ques tion her delegation had posed.  In its response, 
Ukraine stated that the provisions of Article 264 of  the Customs Act conformed to the provisions of 
Article 13 of the Agreement, and offered the im porter, in cases where additional information was 
requested, the possibility of claiming the merchandise w ith "warrenty obligations".  She asked if this 
response referred to the freeing of the merchandise by the customs authorities which were obliged to 
obtain a guarantee.  Furthermore, her delegation w ould like to know where it could obtain information 
concerning the amount of guarantees requested.  Was this information available and where?  With 
regard to Ukraine's responses to questions 4 and 8,  could Ukraine confirm that the implementation of 
Article 1.2(b) of the Agreement, which authorized  the importer to prove that a declared value was 
very close to a "test value", took place only at th e initiative or upon the demand of the importer.  Her 
delegation would submit these follow-up questions in  writing to the delegation of Ukraine.   
 2.39 The representative of the United States
 said that in reviewing Ukraine's response to the 
European Communities' questions, hi s delegation had a further question.  Ukraine explained that the 
phrase 'cost of operation' was used to describe tran saction value.  His delegation was not persuaded 
that 'cost of operation' could be used interchang eably with transaction value as provided for in the 
Agreement.  His delegation would appreciate an e xplanation as to why Ukraine did not use the term 
'transaction value' in this legislation.  G/VAL/M/48 
 Page 7 
 
 
   
2.40 The representative of Ukraine  said that she would appreciate receiving the questions in 
writing so that she could forward them to her customs authorities for detailed responses. 
 2.41 The Committee took note
 of the statements made and agreed  to revert to this matter at its next 
meeting. 
 
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 any 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 Imported Goods” and, second, the “Valuation of Carrier 
Media Bearing Software for Da ta Processing Equipment", both adopted by the Committee and 
contained in document G/VAL/5.  Since the last m eeting, 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 Secret ariat informed Member s of the technical 
assistance activ ities carried out under the auspices of the WCO.  Document G/VAL/8/Add.21 contained 
the most recent information compiled by the Techni cal 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 contained in document G/VAL/W/82/Rev.1.  The Customs Valuation 
technical assistance was now inco rporated in the WTO-wide technical assistance program. The 2008-
9 Plan was being completed, and the 2010 – 2011 Plan was to be adopted by the Committee on Trade 
and Development on 3 November 2009.  In the 2010- 2011 Plan, there were five regional activities on 
Market Access Issues pr ogrammed.  These regional workshops would include customs valuation 
training as one of the areas covered.  Four such activities were scheduled for 2010 and three were 
scheduled for 2011.    4.3. In addition, requests for technical assistan ce on customs valuation could be made at any time 
by individual Members and would be met by a nati onal activity designed to meet the needs of the 
recipient.  This year, two national activities were ca rried out:  on 24-25 February 2009, at the request 
of the WTO, a Valuation Technical Officer from the WCO provided technical assistance on customs 
valuation to an acceding Member, Laos;  and on 4-5 May 2009 a national activity on customs 
valuation was carried out in Nigeria.  4.4 The Committee
 took note of the statements made and the information presented. 
 
V. TRANSITIONAL REVIEW IN ACCORDANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 18 OF THE 
PROTOCOL OF ACCESSION OF THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA 
5.1 The Chairman  informed Members that, in accordance with paragraph 18 of the Protocol of 
Accession of the People's Republic of China, the Co mmittee was to report to the Council for Trade in G/VAL/M/48 
Page 8  
 
  Goods on the outcome of this Review, which w ould then report to the General Council.  The 
Committee conducted its seventh Transitional Review  in 2008.  She noted that China had recently 
submitted an informational document for this Revi ew.  This had been circulated in document 
G/VAL/W/185.   
 
5.2 The representative of the United States 
continued to believe that  the Transitional Review 
Mechanism was a useful mechanism.  His delegatio n believed that the TRM helped to provide the 
additional transparency for China's trade regime , so Members could better understand and access the 
progress China had made in adapting and complying with WTO disciplines.  His delegation did not 
submit any written questions for this year's Transi tional Review.  However, it wished to make a 
statement regarding serious concerns that continued to be raised by US industry on China's adherence 
to WTO customs valuation rules.  The US conti nued to receive reports from its industry about the 
inconsistent implementation of Chin a's regulatory measures in areas of customs valuation, particularly 
the rules regarding determination of customs valu ation of imported and exported goods, the rules and 
regulations contained in document G/VAL/N/1/CHN /1, issued by the General Administration of 
Customs in December 2001, and the determination of customs value royalties in license fees related to 
imported goods issued by the General Administration of Customs in May 2003.  All these regulatory 
measures restated the relevant rules of the Ag reement;  the problem was that Chinese customs 
officials did not always follow them.  For example,  some Chinese customs officials were reportedly 
assessing duties on digital products based on the comput ed value of the content, such as the data 
recorded on the floppy disc or on a CD-rom, rather  than on the basis of the value of the underlying 
career medium, meaning a floppy disc or the CD- rom it self, as China's own regulations required.  In 
addition, some Chinese customs officials were reportedly not applying the regulatory provisions on 
conditions of sale, as related to software.  Th ese officials were still following China's pre-WTO 
accession practices, automatically adding royalty and so ftware fees to the duty of all value, even 
though Chinese new regulations directed them to add those fees only if they were paid to the exporter 
as a condition of the particular sale in question.  Unfortunately, these problems were not new.  His 
delegation had raised these concerns throughout China's first seven years as a WTO Member.  His 
delegation urged China to act assertively and to est ablish without further delay uniformity in the 
administration of its customs valuation regime a nd in its adherence to the WTO customs valuation 
rules.  
5.3 The representative of China
 took note of the statement from the US.  According to Paragraph 
18 of the Protocol of Accession of the People's Re public of China to the WTO, his delegation had 
provided the information required in Annex 1(a) to  the Protocol, and the use of valuation methods 
other than the transaction value.  He added that there had been no change regarding the customs 
valuation regime in China in the period since the last transitional period.  The Agreement had been 
implemented across the country in 2009.  From January to August 2009, 99 per cent of the customs 
valuation regarding the importation and exportati on were determined by applying the declared 
transaction value.  In the cases wh ere the declared value could not be accepted as a custom value, an 
officer from China's customs authority determined th e customs value strictly in accordance with the 
principles and the provisions set forth in the Agre ement.  His delegation continued to honor its 
commitment to the Agreement. 
 
5.4 The Committee took note  of the information provided by China and agreed  that the 
Secretariat would prepare a sort factual report on this Transitional Review as had been done in 
previous years.  The Chairman would then submit this report to the Council for Trade in Goods under 
his own responsibility.   
 
VI. REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE TO THE COUNCIL FOR TRADE IN GOODS 
6.1 The Chairman  drew Members' attention to document  G/VAL/W/187 which contained the draft 
report of the Committee to the Coun cil for Trade in Goods. He asked for any comments on the text.    G/VAL/M/48 
 Page 9 
 
 
  6.2 The representative of India  raised a concern regarding Paragraph 7 of the draft report.  He 
asked that the third bullet be revised  to reflect his statement at the last meeting that the Government of 
India had decided to lift the reservation on minimum values, that had been entered under Paragraph 3 
of the Protocol of the Agreement on Implementation of Article 7 of the GATT 1994.  This statement 
was reproduced in the minutes of that meeting circ ulated in document G/VAL/M/47.  The specific 
language suggested was, "at the meeting of 7 Ma y 2009, the Committee welcomed India's statement 
that it had decided to lift the reservation on minimu m values under Paragraph 3 of the Protocol to the 
Agreement on implementation of Article 7 of 1994."    
6.3 Secondly he asked that the language in the fift h bullet be revised to read, "took note of these 
questions posed to India by the US  and the replies provided India".  This would reflect that the US 
had posed certain questions, circulated in writing,  to which his delegation had responded.  These 
responses were included in the minutes of the last meeting in document G/VAL/M/47.    
 
6.4 The Committee took note  of the statement made and agreed  that the Secretariat would revise 
the document to include the changes, and update it to include the present meeting.  This revised 
document would then be forwarded to the Council for Trade in Goods.   
 
VII. FOURTH, FIFTH, SIXTH, SEVENTH, EIGHTH, NINTH, TENTH, ELEVENTH, 
TWELFTH, AND THIRTEENTH ANNUAL REVIEWS OF THE IMPLEMENTATION AND OPERATION OF THE CUSTOMS VALUATION AGREEMENT 
7.1 The Chairman
 recalled that at the last meeting th e delegation of India had informed the 
Committee that his delegation had decided to lif t the reservation on minimum values entered under 
paragraph 3 of the Protocol  to the Agreement on Implementation of Article VI of the GATT, 1994, 
and in paragraph 2 of the WTO Agreement.  In light  of this statement, the Committee agreed that the 
Secretariat would update the eleven outstanding Annu al Reviews for examination at this meeting with 
a view towards adopting them as final documents. 
 7.2 Accordingly, the Secretariat had updated  the original draft Annual Reviews and had 
circulated them in documents G/VAL/W/29/Rev.1;  G/VAL/W/43/Rev.1;  G/VAL/W/77/Rev.1;  G/VAL/W/89/Rev.1;  G/VAL/W/108/Rev.1;  G/VAL/W/124/Rev.1;  G/VAL/W/136/Rev.1;  G/VAL/W/150/Rev.1;  G/VAL/W/156/Rev.1;  G/ AVL/W/162/Rev.1;  and G/VAL/W/171/Rev.1 for 
consideration at this meeting.  In addition, the Committee was to examine the 2009 Annual Review 
contained in document G/VAL/W/186.  As was the usual practice, once adopted, the Annual Reviews 
would be revised to take into account comments fro m Members and the activity of this meeting, and 
then circulated as a final document in the G/VAL/ - series.  
7.3 The representative of India
 was concerned that his delegation was not listed in a specific area 
of the document.  Also, there was a mismatch am ong the documents in th e number of delegations 
listed in the paragraph on minimum values.  For example, in the fourth review, 35 Members were 
shown to be applying minimum values, in the fifth re view this was increased to 40, in the sixth review 
this figure was 18, in the seventh and eighth review  there were 11 Members, in the ninth review there 
were 5 Members, in the tenth review there were 4, in  the eleventh review there were 3, in the twelfth 
review there were 2, and in the thirteenth and f ourteenth review there was only Member applying 
minimum values.  He also found that Members were  listed in some documents  and not others.  He 
sought clarification on this because his delegation maintained that his delegation retained the 
reservation on minimum values.  However, he ackno wledged that there was a difference of views on 
this matter in the Committee.  That was why at th e last meeting, he noted that his Government had 
lifted its reservation on minimum values.   
 G/VAL/M/48 
Page 10  
 
  7.4 The Secretariat
 explained that there were a number of countries that invoked the reservation 
under paragraph 2, Annex III of the Agreement when  they became Members of the WTO.  This 
special and differential treatment provision gave  these Members the possibility to apply this 
reservation once they began applying the Agreement after their five-year delay expired.  Members 
wishing to make use of this reservation, presente d a request containing terms and conditions for the 
reservation to the Committee for its consideration.  This request had to be presented before the 
Member began to apply the Agreement.  Once the Committee completed its consideration, it adopted 
a formal decision granting the reservation.  Member s who were granted such a reservation were listed 
in the paragraph of the Annual Re view cited by India.  One of the terms of these decisions was the 
time period for the reservation.  Once the time period expired for the Member in question, they were 
removed from this list in the Annual Review.  Th at explained the difference in the number of 
Members listed from year to year.  This situation wa s also the same for the invocation of paragraph 1, 
Annex III which contained the special and treatme nt provision for extending the five-year delay 
period.  Some Members invoked this extension, and so me did not.  But, in all cases, a request had to 
be presented before the five-year delay period expire d.  Once the extension expired, Members were 
taken off the list in the Annual Review for this S&D treatment provision.  The same applied for 
Members whose five-year delay period expired.  Th e Annual Reviews were an attempt to reflect the 
situation of application of special and differentia l treatment provisions for the year covered by each 
Review.    7.5 The representative of India
 asked what was the status of each  annual review after discussion?  
 
7.6 The Chairman  stated that if there were no comments, the annual review would be adopted.  If 
there were comments, and the Committee agreed to these comments, the annual review would be 
adopted and revised to incorporate these comments.  They would no longer be working documents but 
would be circulated as final documents in the G/VAL/- series. 
 
7.7 The representative of India  said that his concern was that India did not figure in the document.  
The Secretariat did not explain why a Member was ci ted in, for example, the fourth annual review, the 
fifth annual review, but not in the sixth annual review.  He stressed that this was an academic exercise 
but, nevertheless, his concern was primarily that India was missing from the document.   
 
7.8 The Chairman  proposed that India's name be included in  those reviews that reflect the years in 
which India had a reservation to apply minimum va lues.  As there was a difference of opinion 
regarding whether India's claim was legitimate, he suggested two possibilities for consideration by the 
Committee.  One possibility would be to include Indi a's name with a footnote stating that that this 
inclusion was not necessarily agreed by other Memb ers.  The second possibility would be to put an 
asterix next to each section where India considered it  should find its name.  The asterix would contain 
a note stating India's claim that it should be part  of this section.  He proposed these two options 
because India's view was not shared by other Memb ers.  This was precisely why the last eleven 
reviews were outstanding.    7.9 The representative of India
 said that his delegation wished that India appear in all the reviews 
until the year in which it lifted its reservation.  Ho wever, he could go along with the consensus since  
there were differences of view.   7.10 The Chairman
 asked the Committee if it could agree to  include India in the Annual Reviews 
with an asterix and note stating India's claim and that this claim was not agreed by other Members. 
 
7.11 The representative of India  stated again his preference for including India's name in the 
reviews but wished to hear the views of other Members.   G/VAL/M/48 
 Page 11 
 
 
  7.12 The representative of the European Communities  expressed her surprise that the Committee 
was having this discussion today because this had been an on-going issue for the past twelve years.  
Her delegation had made its position clear that it woul d not accept India's name to figure in the Fourth 
to latest annual review because India never re quested a reservation for the implementation of 
minimum values.  On the other hand, the proposal to include a footnote was not satisfactory either.    
Again, she stressed that this discussion had alread y been held and there had been no consensus to 
include India's name in the reviews.    7.13 The Committee took note
 of the statements made and agreed  to suspend this item.  The 
Chairman  stated that he would consult informally w ith India and other interested delegations and 
report back to the Committee at its next meeting. 
 
VIII.  PRESHIPMENT INSPECTION 
8.1 The Chairman  recalled that Preshipment Inspection was a standing item on the agenda of the 
Committee on Customs Valuation.  She drew Member s' attention to the most recent update of the 
information received from the International Fede ration of Inspection Agencies on countries which 
used preshipment inspection services.  This was contained in document G/VAL/W/63/Rev.12.  She 
recalled that at the last meeting, the United Stat es had posed some questions to Indonesia about its 
new PSI system.  These were circulated in documents G/VAL/W/167 and G/VAL/W/180.  8.2 The representative of the United States
, recalling the questions it had posed to Indonesia, 
expressed his delegation's disappointment with the la ck of response from Indonesia.  In addition, his 
delegation had concerns regarding the accuracy of the information contained in the document 
G/VAL/W/63/Rev.12.  For example, Indonesia was no t included among the list of countries with PSI 
requirements.  His delegation understood that In donesia had established PSI requirements for a broad 
range of goods.  Decree 36, adopted earlier this y ear, required goods to be inspected at the port of 
exportation prior to be imported into Indonesia.  He , therefore, requested the Secretariat to examine 
the status of the use of preshipment inspection to insure that the Committee was fully aware of those 
Members' contracts in force, requiring the use of pr eshipment inspection.  Article 5 of the Agreement 
on PSI required that the changes in laws and regula tions be notified to the Secretariat immediately 
after publication.  His delegation considered th is notification provision to be an important 
transparency requirement in the Agreement, and continued to be  concerned about the lack of 
notification from Indonesia of its PSI programme.  He urged Indonesia to submit its notification as 
soon as possible.  8.3 The representative of the European Communities
 expressed support for the US statement.  
Her delegation had the same concerns and wished to see Indonesia notify, as soon as possible, its PSI 
programme, in accordance with Article 5 of the PSI Agreement.   
 8.4 The Chairman
 urged Indonesia to respond to the questions posed by the United States.  He 
added that the document, G/VAL/W/63/Rev.12, cont ained information that the Secretariat received 
from the International Federation of Inspection Agenci es.  This information was reproduced exactly in 
the same format and content as it was received.  He was available to discuss with Members, if 
necessary, as to how the document could be improved.   
 8.5 The Committee took note
 of the statements made.   
  
 
 G/VAL/M/48 
Page 12  
 
  IX. PARAGRAPH 12 OF THE DOHA MINISTERIAL DECLARATION 
(WT/MIN(01)/DEC/1):  IMPLEMENTATION-RELATED ISSUES 
- Paragraph 8.3 of document WT/MIN/(01)/17  
 
9.1 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.  At its last meeting, the Committee continued an exchange of views on this 
matter, including the most recent proposal that was circulated by India in Job(07)153.  Although the 
exchange was inconclusive, several delegations co mmented on the fact that this matter was being 
discussed in two fora at the same time and some qu estioned the usefulness of this approach.  It was 
agreed, nevertheless, to revert to this matter at this meeting.    9.2 The representative of the United States
 said that his delegation continued to believe that the 
appropriate venue to continue these discussions was in the Negotiating Group on Trade Facilitation.  
This Negotiating Group had been examining a num ber of proposals including one which contained 
elements very similar to those in India's paper (JOB(07)/153.    9.3 The representative of India
 recalled that, at the last meeti ng, he had explained in detail the 
elements of the mandate contained in paragraph 8.3 of the Doha Declaration.  He had mentioned that 
this mandate needed to be operationalized, and his delegation had provided detailed replies to 
questions posed by Members, all reflected in para graph 7 of document G/VAL/M/47.  In response to 
the comment from the United States, he explained th at the trade facilitation negotiations were being 
conducted in accordance with the three pillars of the mandate in the July 2004 framework.  One of the 
pillars was customs cooperation and, in that conn ection, his delegation had made a proposal which 
covered customs classification, quantity, description, va luation, and also rules of origin.  This was a 
broader mandate.  The Committee on Customs Valu ation had a specific mandate under Paragraph 8.3 
regarding not only customs valuation but several  other aspects, including to identify and assess 
practical means to address Members concerns wher e there was reason to doubt the truth or accuracy 
of the declared value.  This was the mandate contained in the four pillars of Paragraph 8.3 which his 
delegation sincerely believed needed to be opera tionalized by this Committee and not by the 
Negotiating Group on Trade Facilitation. 
 
9.4 The Committee took note  of the statements made and agreed  to revert to this matter at its next 
meeting.  In the meantime, the Chairman indicated  that he was available to carry out informal 
consultations on this matter, if Members deemed it necessary.  X. OTHER BUSINESS 
A. D
ATE OF THE NEXT MEETING  
10.1 The Chairman  informed Members that the next mee ting of the Committee was scheduled for 
Thursday, 6 May 2010.    10.2 The meeting was adjourned. 
  G/VAL/M/48 
 Page 13 
 
 
  ANNEX I 
 
Report to the Committee on Customs Valuati on on the work of the Technical Committee  
on Customs Valuation and Technical Assistance  
 
 
 Since the last meeting of the Committee on Cu stoms Valuation, the Technical Committee on 
Customs Valuation (Technical Committee) held its 29th Session from 19th to 23rd October 2009 at the 
WCO Headquarters in Brussels.  
 The report of the 26
th Session and the WCO Secretariat’s programme of technical assistance 
in the field of Customs valuation were presented to the Committee in Geneva in May 2009.  The 
report of its 27th Session and the WCO Secretariat’s programme of technical assistance in the field of 
Customs valuation contained in documen t VT0663E1b, which was adopted at the 28th Session, are 
annexed.  The draft report of the 29th Session would be presented to the Council in June 2010, after 
the same is approved by the Technical Committee at its next session in April 2010. 
 Administrative Matters Related to the Application of the Agreement
 
  The Council at its 113/114
th Sessions  in June 2009 adopted the Advisory Opinion No. 22 1 on 
“Valuation of imported documents relating to design  and development of an industrial plant” which 
was approved by the Technical Committee at its 28th Session in April 2009.  A copy of the same is 
annexed.  Inter session developments
 
 
 A brief update on inter session developments besides other routine issues of technical 
assistance and capacity building was presented to  the Council sessions in June 2009 by the 
Chairperson of the Technical Committee.  Under the Agenda item "Customs in the 21st Century, the 
Council agreed to the establishment of an Ad Hoc Group for steering a globally networked Customs 
feasibility study.  
Technical Assistance and Capacity Building.
 
  Since our last report to the Committee on Customs Valuation in May 2009, the WCO and SADC Secretariat jointly organized a Regional Valuation Workshop on Customs Valuation and PCA 
for the East & Southern Africa Region at Johannesburg in South Africa from 1
st to 5th June 2009 
which was funded by the CCF/Japan Fund & SADC S ecretariat (For SADC Members).  Two resource 
persons, one each from the WCO and Japan conducted the said Workshop. 
  A 5 days’ Valuation Refresher National Workshop was jointly organized by the WCO, COMESA and the Zambian Customs from 31
st August to 4th September 2009 in Lusaka, Zambia and 
was funded by the Commonwealth Secretariat.  One Technical Officer from the WCO conducted the 
said Workshop to provide technical assistance fo r valuation methodology, controls, PCA and risk-
based approach to 24 trainees from Zambian Customs.  G/VAL/M/48 
Page 14  
 
  WCO Internship Programme
 
  Under the new WCO Internship Programme f unded by Japan, two inte rns from Burkina Faso 
and Egypt have joined the Valuation Sub directorate for a period of one year to study valuation related 
matters at the WCO.  
Advisory services
 
 
 The Secretariat continued to provide techni cal advice to Members on an ongoing basis in 
order to improve the application of the WTO Valuation Agreement and strengthen Members’ 
knowledge on practical Cu stoms valuation matters. 
 Fellowship Programme
 
 
 The WCO is organizing the 50th Fellowship Programme for 14 English speaking Customs 
officers from developing and least developed countries from 12th October to 20th November 2009 at 
the WCO Headquarters.  Two officers from the Cust oms administrations of Mexico and Nepal, who 
chose Customs valuation as their field of study have  been attached to the Valuation Sub directorate 
and are undergoing training in Customs valuation matters. 
 
Master of Customs Administration Programme at Munster University  
  A Technical Officer from the Valuation Sub directorate of the WCO delivered lectures on Customs valuation to 17 students from various deve loping countries in Africa, undergoing a course in 
Master of Customs Administration, Law and Policy Programme at the Munster University in Munster, 
Germany on 12
th and 13th October 2009. 
 29
th Session of the Technical Committee  
  At its 29
th Session from 19th to 23rd October 2009 the Technical Committee continued to 
consider technical questions on Royalties and Licen se Fees submitted by Brazil, Canada, Colombia 
and Japan, besides other routine issues pertaini ng to technical assistance, Index of Reference 
Materials, Contact Points on Valuation matters and exchange of information, reports on the use of the 
Guidelines on National Valuation Database and use of the Guide to the Exchange of Customs 
Valuation information. 
 
The Technical Committee also discussed the following other technical issues : 
 
• Customs Valuation of imported electricity (Brazil). 
 
• The issue of related party transactions and Tran sfer Pricing with a draft case study developed 
by the US.  A presentation was given by the OECD on the Transactionnal Net Margin Method 
in an attempt to demonstrate the acceptability of the price determined under this method. 
  Under the item of “questions raised during the intersession,” the proposal from Japan on 
Assists under Article 8.1 (b) of the Agreement was taken up for discussion.  The Technical 
Committee decided to include this issue in its Agenda.  
 It continued to discuss the “Customs in 21
st Century” and the “Revenue Package” under the 
agenda item of “Other business.”  G/VAL/M/48 
 Page 15 
 
 
  Customs in 21st Century  
  Technical Committee continued to discuss the topic of ‘Customs in 21
st Century’ with ten 
building blocks, as a vision document for enhancing the role of the WCO and Customs administrations in the 21
st Century.  The Council at its Sessions in June 2008 had tasked the 
Secretariat to develop a strategy and an Action Plan by aligning it with the WCO Strategic Plan.  
Further the Policy Commission had tasked the Tec hnical Committee to establish linkages between the 
10 building blocks and the existing WCO Valuation in struments.  The Techni cal Committee agreed to 
continue to deliberate upon this important matter in its next session.  
Celebration of the 30
th Anniversary of the WTO Valuation Agreement  
  On the occasion of the 30
th Anniversary of the WTO Valuation Agreement, the Technical 
Committee decided to organize a one day discussion on the experience derived by Member Administrations in the application of the Agreement at its next session April 2010. 
 
Private Sector Workshops on Customs Valuation and Transfer Pricing
 
  The Fourth Workshop on Customs Valuation and Transfer Pricing for the Private Sector was 
organized on 12
th-13th May 2009 the at the WCO Headquarters.  The Fifth such Workshop is being 
organized on at the WCO on 24th and 25th November 2009 with resource persons from the WCO, EU 
and OECD/the Belgian Tax administration. 
 International Cooperation
 
  The Director, Tariff and Trade Affairs, Mr. Antoine Manga represented the WCO at the 
meeting of the French speaking Directors General of Customs in Paris on  29
th and 30th June 2009 in 
which various issues pertaining to Customs matters were discussed.  He apprised the meeting about 
the work carried out by the WCO, especially in the field of capacity building in response to the needs 
and requirements of the Member administrations.  OECD Conference on Transfer Pricing in Paris
 
 
 Two officers from the Valuation Sub directorate, WCO attended the OECD Conference on “Transfer Pricing and Treaties in  the Changing World” on the 21
st and 22nd September 2009 in Paris.  
In the session on “Transfer Pricing and Customs” the Technical Officer from the WCO Valuation Sub directorate participated as a Speaker and panelist.  
 
  
__________