RESTRICTED  
  
G/IT/M/73  
 
29 June 2021  
(21-5199) Page: 1/13 
Committee of Participants on the Expansion of Trade in 
Information Technology Products    
 
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF 15 APRIL  2021  
CHAIRPERSON: M S UMA MUNIANDY  
The Committee of Participants on the Expansion of Trade in Information Technology Product s held 
its 73rd formal meeting on 15 April 2021. The airgram of the meeting  was circulated in 
document  WTO/AIR/IT/1 2, and an annotated agenda for the meeting was circulated in 
document  JOB/IT/2 8. 
 
The Committee adopted  the agenda.  
 
1   REVIEW OF THE STATUS O F IMPLEMENTATION OF THE MINISTERIAL DECLARATION 
ON TRADE IN INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PRODUCTS: DEVELOPMENTS SINCE THE 
LAST COMMITTEE MEETING (G/IT/1/REV.58)  ................................ ................................  2 
1.1   Morocco's ITA  Schedule  ................................ ................................ ...............................  2 
1.2   United Kingdom's Participation in the ITA (G/IT/W/52)  ................................ ....................  2 
2   TRADE CONCERNS RAISED BY PARTICIPANTS  ................................ ...........................  4 
2.1   Request by the European Union, Japan, and Chinese Taipei Regarding an Implementation 
Issue Concerning China  ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 4 
2.2   Request by the European Union, Japan, and the United States Regarding an  
Implementation Issue Concerning Indonesia  ................................ ................................ .........  5 
2.3   Request by China Regarding an Implementation Issue Concerning India  ...........................  6 
3   REVIEW OF PRODUCT COVERAGE  ................................ ................................ ...............  8 
4   NON-TARIFF MEASURES WORK PROGRAMME  ................................ .............................  8 
5   EMC/EMI PILOT PROJECT – DRAFT LIST OF TYPES OF CONFORMITY ASSESSMENT 
PROCEDURES FOR EMC/EMI USED BY ITA  PARTICIPANTS (G/IT/W/1 7/REV.27)  ..........  9 
6   DIVERGENCES IN CLASSIFYING INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PRODUCTS 
(G/IT/14/REV.1/ADD.1, G/IT/W/6/REV.3, G/IT/W/33, G/IT/W/3 4, G/IT/27, 
JOB/IT/12, G/IT/29, G/IT/W/40/ADD.1 –G/IT/W/40/ADD.21, G/IT/W/40/SUPPL.4, 
AND JOB/IT/25)  ................................ ................................ ................................ .............  9 
6.1   Implementation of the De cision for the Classification of 18  "Attachment  B" Products 
(G/IT/27)  ................................ ................................ ................................ ..........................  9 
6.2   Implementation of the 2016  Decision for the Classification of 15  Additional  
"Attachment  B" Products (G/IT/29)  ................................ ................................ ....................  10 
6.3   Possib le HS2007  Classification for the Remaining "Attachment  B" Items: Note by the 
Secretariat (G/IT/W/40 and its Supplements and Addenda) ................................ ...................  10 
7   DATE AND PROGRAMME OF THE PROPOSED ITA  WORKSHOP  ................................ ... 11 
8   DATE OF NEXT COMMITTEE MEETING  ................................ ................................ ....... 13 
9   OTHER BUSINESS  ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 13 
10   ELECTION OF CHAIRPERSON  ................................ ................................ ..................  13 G/IT/M/73  
 
- 2 - 
 
   
1  REVIEW OF THE STATUS OF IMPLEMENTATION OF THE MINISTERIAL DECLARATION ON 
TRADE IN INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PRODUCTS : DEVELOPMENTS SINCE THE LAST 
COMMITTEE MEETING  (G/IT/1/REV.5 8) 
1.1.  The Chairperson  informed the Committee that there ha d been some adjustments in the layout 
of the agenda. "Trade concerns raised by Participants" was now listed separately, u nder Agenda 
Item 2. Agenda Item  1 would  focus on the overview of the Status of Implementation and the 
Committee w ould listen to any update or new developments since the Committee 's previous  
meeting.  
1.1  Morocco's ITA  Schedule  
1.2.  The Chairperson  first flagged an outstanding issue concerning Morocco and its missing 
submission under the 1980  Procedures for the rectification and modification of schedules. The 
Chairperson recalled that Morocco had become  a participant to the ITA on 14  November  2003. 
However, Morocco ha d not yet submitted its final ITA  schedule of commitments. Despite the 
outreach to Morocco on several occasions by her predecessors, including a letter that had been  sent 
to the Minister of Economy and Finance of Morocco in the autumn of 2017, no formal re sponse  had 
yet been received from Morocco . 
1.3.  The Chairperson  urged Morocco to submit its ITA  schedule of commitments for formal 
rectification and modification , as required by the 1980  Decision , as soon as possible . 
1.4.  The Committee took note  of the Chairperson's statement and agreed to discuss this issue again 
at the Committee's next meeting.  
1.2  United Kingdom's Participation in the ITA (G/IT/W/52)  
1.5.  The Chairperson  drew the Committee 's attention to document  G/IT/W/52, which had been  
circulated on 4 Janua ry 2021 at the request of the delegation of the United Kingdom. This document 
replicate d the letter to the Director -General from the United Kingdom's Permanent Representative , 
dated 17 December  2020, on which she and the Chairperson of the ITA  Expansion Group  had also 
been copied . 
1.6.  She noted that , in this communication, the United Kingdom had confirmed its intention to 
continue to respect the provisions of the 1996  ITA and the 2015  ITA Expansion  from the expiration 
of the transition period relati ng to its withdrawal from the European Union. In this communication, 
the UK had also indicated that it had replicated all tariff liberalization commitments with respect to 
the products listed in the Annexes to the 1996  ITA and the 2015  ITA Expansion, as pr eviously set 
out in the European Union's  Schedule CLXXV -European Union, and in Schedule  XIX-United Kingdom. 
The UK had undertaken  to continue implementing all tariff liberalization commitments with respect 
to products annexed to both the 1996  ITA and the 2 015 ITA Expansion, in its own right.  
1.7.  The Chairperson referred to document  G/IT/1 and its revisions , which had been prepared by 
the Secretariat to update the "Status of Implementation" of the 1996  ITA Agreement. The latest 
version  of this document , document  G/IT/1/Rev.58 , had been  circulated on 10  October  2018. This 
document need ed to be updated, taking into account the UK's withdrawal from the European Union  
and its continued participation  in the 1996  ITA and the 2015  ITA Expansion  in its own right.  
1.8.  In this context, she asked if any delegation wished  to take the floor.  
1.9.  The representative of the United Kingdom  thanked the Chairperson  for making reference to 
document  G/IT/W/52. She pointed out that , as set out in that document, the United Kingdom had 
ceased to be a member State of the European Union on 31  January  2020, and had entered into a 
time-limited transition period, which had come  to an end on 31  December  2020. In preparation for 
its departure f rom the European Union,  the United Kingdom had replicated all ITA and ITA  Expansion 
tariff liberali zation commitments in Schedule  XIX-United Kingdom, which could  be found in 
document  G/MA/TAR/RS/570. In the lead-up to the expiry of the transition period, the  UK had 
confirmed its continued acceptance and implementation of the 1996  ITA and the ITA Expansion.  G/IT/M/73  
 
- 3 - 
 
  From 1  January  2021, the United Kingdom continue d to respect the provisions of the 1996  ITA and 
ITA Expansion  in its own right.  
1.10.   She confirmed that t here ha d been no change in the United Kingdom's  commitments – they 
remain ed exactly the same as when the UK had been  a member State of the European Union. The 
UK recogni zed the importance of transparency in ensuring t hat all ITA  participants properly 
implement ed their commitments under the Agreements, as well as providing certainty for traders. 
In this regard , the UK was involved in ongoing and productive technical conversations with  a number 
of ITA participants , and thanked these participants  for their interest. She indicated that the UK would  
continue to work constructively with ITA  Participants and look ed forward to contributing to ongoing 
work in this Committee and the Expansion Group to advance the liberali zation of global trade in 
ICT products.  The United Kingdom welcome d the update to document  G/IT/1 /Rev.58  to reflect this 
situation.  
1.11.   The representative  of China  thank ed the UK  delegation for its intervention and took note of 
the UK's communication  as contained in document  G/IT/W/52, circulated on 4  January  2021. He 
welcome d the UK's confirmation that it would  continue to implement all its tariff liberali zation 
commitments with respect to the products annexed to both the ITA 1996 and the 
2015 ITA Expansion.  
1.12.   He noted that China had  studied the UK's Goods schedule , as referred to in the UK's 
communication , in document  G/MA/TAR/RS/570. His delegation  understood that  it replicate d the 
EU's Goods schedule , as contained in document  G/MA/TAR/RS/506. In this process,  China was of 
the view that the UK's schedule for the ITA and ITA  Expansion seem ed incomplete. For example, his 
delegation  could not find the detailed H armonized System (HS)  codes regarding the products listed 
in Attachment  B, which was required by the ITA and ITA  Expansion Agreements. He pointed out 
that, as all ITA  Participants ha d their own ITA  schedules in line with the r equirements stipulated in 
the ITA and ITA  Expansion , China expect ed the UK to do the same in order to ensure the consistency 
and accuracy of its commitment s under the 1996 ITA and the 2 015 ITA Expansion . This might also 
help to avoid future trade disputes arising from a lack of clarity and differences in interpretation. To 
this end, China stood ready to participate in any informal consultations to be held by the Chairperson,  
or any bilateral discuss ions with the UK  delegation  on this issue . China  looked forward to receiving 
clarifications from the UK  delegation regarding its ITA  schedules under the ITA and ITA  Expansion. 
He concluded by noting that the Committee should revert  to this issue , as well as that of the updating 
of document  G/IT/1/Rev.58 , at its next meeting.  
1.13.   The representative of the Russian Federation  noted that the matter of the United Kingdom's 
participation in this Committee as an  individual Member had been raised for the first  time. The 
Russian Federation was of the vie w that , in order to  proceed with such a decision , the United 
Kingdom should provide Participant s, in due course , with its  schedule of commitments under the 
ITA, within the framework of this Committee. Thus, the Russian  Federation suggest ed to revert to 
this matter , as a separate agenda item, at the Committee's next meeting.  
1.14.   The representative of the United Kingdom  thank ed the delegations of China and Russia for 
their comments.  She noted that the European Union had become a participant in the ITA on 
13 December  1996, and the ITA  Expansion on 16  December  2015.  
1.15.   She pointed out that , at that time, the United Kingdom had been a member of the European 
Union,  and that the European Union 's participation had covered participation by the United Kingdom. 
This had been indicated in the footnote  to doc ument  G/IT/1/ Rev.58, indicating that the European 
Union had counted as 28  member States. Upon its withdrawal from the European U nion, and in the 
lead-up to the expiry of  the UK -EU transition period, the United Kingdom had taken the appropriate 
steps to confirm its continued acceptance of implementation of the ITA and the ITA  Expansion.  
1.16.   The United Kingdom had written to the Director -General of the WTO, copying the Chairpersons 
of the ITA  Committee and the ITA  Expansion Group, to confirm its continued implementation of the 
commitments and its intention to continue participating  in the Committee of Participants on the 
Expansion  of Trade in Information Technology Products and the ITA  Expansion Group. This 
communication had been circulated to Members on 4  January  2021,  in document  G/IT/W/52.  G/IT/M/73  
 
- 4 - 
 
  1.17.   The United Kingdom had replicated all its tariff liberalization commitments , as set out in  
Schedule  CLXXV -European Union, in relation to ITA and ITA  Expansion products in its own 
independent Schedule of Concessions and Commitments, Schedule  XIX-United Kingdom.  
1.18.   The United Kingdom's ITA  commitments remain ed exactly the same as when it had been a 
member State of the European Union,  and this included the codes relating to Attachment  B. 
1.19.   In the interests of transparency, the United Kingdom indicated that it would be happy to hold 
bilateral discussion s with any participants that had made comments with respect to its 
ITA commitments in order to provide answers and clarification s regarding any technical question.  
The United Kingdom believe d that it ha d taken the appropriate steps to continue its separate 
participation in both committees.  
1.20.   The representativ e of Canada  thank ed the UK for its explanation . He pointed out that his 
delegation  support ed transparency and look ed forward to further discussions with the UK concerning 
the UK's commitments in relation to the original ITA  Agreement  in this Committee . He placed on 
record , from Canada's perspective, that the UK was a participant , and that it was a participant before 
and also continue d to be a participant in the ITA  Agreement  and in this Committee . Canada looked 
forward to working with  the UK in the future.  
1.21.   The Chairperson  welcomed the United Kingdom's statement reiterating that it would continue 
to implement the ITA. B ased on the discussion , she asked the UK to hold further bilateral discussions 
with interested parties . She also indic ated that she was willing to hold informal consultations, if 
necessary, to progress on this issue with interested parties . The Committee would  revert to this 
agenda item at its next meeting.  
1.22.   The Committee took note  of all the statements made and agreed  to the Chairperson's 
suggestions.  
1.23.   On a separate note, the Chairperson  drew the Committee's attention to  the following  
three  issues : (i) the three  pending cases regarding  ITA participation, as concerned the Republic of 
Azerbaijan, Belarus, and Bosnia and Herzegovina. She pointed out that a ll three  of the corresponding 
draft ITA  schedules had been electronically verified by the Secretariat and distributed to 
ITA Participants for their consideration and app roval. They ha d also been reviewed at previous 
meetings, in 2014 and 2019, respectively. She observed that the final participation to the ITA of 
these three  governments  was linked to their accession process to the WTO. For transparency 
purposes, these three pending cases were mentioned for the record ; (ii) the creation of a new 
document symbol. The Chairperson informed the Committee that  the Secretariat ha d recently 
created a new document symbol, namely "G/IT/Q", for circulating new submissions ( for example , 
written questions and replies) on trade concerns that a participant might  raise against any other 
participant ; (iii) contact information of delegations. On behalf of the Secretariat, the Chairperson 
thanked those participants that ha d submitted their updated contact information to the Secretariat. 
She encourage d other participants to provide the Secretariat with the contact information of their 
delegate responsible for the ITA as soon as possible so that information regarding this Comm ittee's 
activities c ould reach them in a timely and accurate manner.  
1.24.   The Committee took note of the statements made.  
2  TRADE CONCERNS RAISED BY PARTICIPANTS  
2.1  Request by the European Union, Japan, and Chinese Taipei  Regarding an 
Implementation Issue Concerning  China  
2.1.  The Chairperson  indicated that this issue had been  included in the agenda at the request of the 
European Union , Japan, and Chinese Taipei.  
2.2.  The representative of the European Union  indicated that the EU had raised its concern s over 
multi-component  semiconductor s (MCOs) in the ITA Committee several times, as well as in the 
Market Access Committees  and other WTO  bodies.  She argued that , despite those  request s and the 
EU's expressed concerns , China ha d not yet thoroughly addressed the issue a nd ha d not yet 
amended its classification methodology.  G/IT/M/73  
 
- 5 - 
 
  2.3.  The EU  continue d to urge China to reconsider its classification of certain MCO  products where 
duties should not apply, even if such duties were being gradually lowered as the implementation of 
the stag ed cuts progresse d. Her delegation would continue to monitor the implementation of China' s 
commitments in this respect . 
2.4.  The representative of Japan  echoed the EU 's comments  and expressed Japan's concerns about 
the increase in tariff level s of those items for which duty-free commitments had been  made.  He 
noted that Japan had already raised this issue on a number of occasions, including at the 
ITA Committee 's previous  meeting. Japan w ould watch closely to see if all of the tariffs concerned 
would be eliminated in July  2021 at the latest , in accordance with the staging that China ha d 
explained . 
2.5.  The representative of Chinese Taipei  support ed the statements made by the European Union 
and Japan. He recalled that his delegation had expressed its vi ews on numerous occasions since 
2018. Taking  note of the fact that all of the duties on the MCOs concerned would be eliminated by 
this July, he reiterate d the fundamental principle that the scope of  Members ' tariff concessions under 
their WTO commitment s should not be altered during their tariff transpositions. His delegation w ould 
continue to monitor the developments on this subject until the duties on the products concerned 
had been completely eliminated.  
2.6.  The representative of the United States  support ed the statements and questions raised by the 
European Union , Japan,  and Chinese Taipei , and reiterate d its concern with regard to a change in 
China' s applied duty rates for certain semiconductor products.  He pointed out that the issue had  
previously been raised in this Committee , as well as in the Committee on Market Access and the 
Council for Trade in Goods.  He noted that t hese semiconductor products ha d been duty -free for over 
a decade and yet were being char ged import duties at the border.  The US continue d to assert, in 
line with the General Council Decision on HS  transpositions, that the scope of China' s concessions 
had changed substantially, and that the value of its concession ha d been impaired.  
2.7.  In response, t he representative of China  took note of the concerns raised by the European 
Union , Japan, Chinese Taipei, and the United States on this issue.  He stated that China had provided 
detailed repl ies regarding  these concerns both in  various WTO  bodies and bilaterally.  His delegation 
reiterate d that the methodologies that China  had used were consistent with the WTO rules, and that 
all the tariffs on the relevant MCO  products w ould be eliminated by July this year, as scheduled.  
2.8.  The Com mittee took note of the statements made.  
2.2  Request by the European Union, Japan, and the United States Regarding an 
Implementation Issue Concerning Indonesia  
2.9.  The Chairperson  noted that this issue had been  included in the agenda  at the request of  the 
European Union, Japan, and the United States . 
2.10.   The representative of the United States  indicated that the US  concerns continue d over 
Indonesia's application of  tariffs at the border on a category of ICT  products that appear ed to excee d 
its WTO  bound tariff commitments.  
2.11.   The US had  raised this issue repeatedly with Indonesia over the past year, in the Council for 
Trade in Goods , the Market Access  Committee,  and the ITA Committee, as well as bilaterally. 
Unfortunately, Indonesia ha d yet to provide a substantive response to the US  concerns.  
2.12.   He indicated that the US had  even provided concrete examples of their concerns, specifically 
with regard to tariff subheading  8517.62. Unfortunately, his delegation  had identified additional 
examples of applied tariffs on ICT  products that appear ed to be inconsistent with Indonesia' s bound 
commitments.  
2.13.   In an effort to further engage with Indonesia on these concerns, the United States  had 
prepared several questions , which ha d been circulated as document  G/IT/Q/1 , and would expect to 
receive from Indonesia a detailed and substantive written response to these questions.  G/IT/M/73  
 
- 6 - 
 
  2.14.   He argued that the costs of Indonesia' s policies in this regard were  significant when viewed 
in practical  terms . Indonesia' s tariffs not only impose d an unfair financial burden on foreign firms, 
but also limit ed access for Indonesian consumers and firms to important high -tech products.  
2.15.   The representative of the European Union  stated that , despite the EU's requests and calls for 
alignment of  the tariff treatment of certain ICT  products classified under subheading  8517.62 with 
Indonesia' s WTO  commitments, it appear ed that Indonesia continue d to charge a significant tariff 
(10%) on products classified under tariff line  8517.62.49.  
2.16.   In this parti cular category of products (tariff item  8517.62.49) , the EU ha d recorded a 
significant drop of exports to Indonesia. Her delegation  had observed a 60%  drop in value of 
EU exports in 2020 compared to 2019, and a 21%  drop in 2020 compared to 2018.  
2.17.   The EU  therefore reiterate d its calls for bringing the tariffs under subheading  8517.62 down 
to zero. Furthermore, she sought clarification from Indonesia as to why it continue d to apply tariffs 
that were not in line with its WTO bound commitments.  
2.18.   The representative of Japan  share d the concern s of the United States and the European Union.  
He noted that Indonesia was applying 10%  tariffs on some of the communication equipment 
products for which it had made duty-free commitments . He had taken note of Indonesia 's 
expla nation , given  at the June 2020 meeting of the Market Access Committee, that this issue had 
been caused by the integration of a number of items as a result of HS  conversion.  He further recalled 
that Indonesia had previously mentioned , in October  2020,  that the issue had been under 
examination to find out the best solution.  However, Japan's  concern s had not yet been resolved . 
Therefore, Japan request ed Indonesia to provide more detailed information and updates on the 
actions that it intended to take in this regard . 
2.19.   In response, the representative of Indonesia  took note of the concerns expressed by the 
European Union, Japan, and the United States,  and indicated that all of these concerns would be 
convey ed to Capital.  
2.20.   The Committee took note of the statements made.  
2.3  Request by China  Regarding an Implementation Issue Concerning India  
2.21.   The Chairperson  indicated that this item had been included in the agenda at the request of 
China.  
2.22.   The representative of China  regret ted to see that India ha d failed to resolve this matter , 
despite the issue having been raised by his delegation and other Members in various WTO  bodies.  
China continue d to have serious concerns over India's customs duties on telecommunication and 
relevant products, especially the mobile phone and other components.  
2.23.   He repeat ed China's position that these products fell within the scope of ITA -I, and that India's 
applied rates ha d exceeded its bound rates , whic h was inconsistent with the ITA -I and Article  II of 
the GATT.  In addition, his delegation expressed its increasing concern s over India's  further increase s 
in its customs duties on some ICT  products this year.  China once again urge d India to gradually 
eliminate its customs duties on the products in question and to bring them in to line with its 
WTO commitments.  
2.24.   The representative of Canada  recalled his delegation's  previous interventions in this 
Committee, the Council for Trade in Goods, and the Market Access  Committee , over the past several 
years . Canada view ed the continued application of tariffs above India' s bound rates on a broad range 
of ICT  products to be inconsistent with its WTO commitments. It was Canada' s understanding that 
India ha d made further increases to certain tariffs on ICT  products above its bound rate s in its 
2021-2022 national budget. He noted the ongoing dispute settlement processes on this issue 
brought by Japan, Chinese Taipei, and the EU , and indicated that Canada was  actively participating 
as a third  party in th ose proceedings.  
2.25.   The representative of the  European Union  stated that , in recent years , including this year , the 
EU had observed a worrying trend in India' s policies, whereby India aim ed to promote the G/IT/M/73  
 
- 7 - 
 
  developmen t of its domestic industry at the expense of its WTO  commitments. The EU  recall ed that, 
under the ITA , India had undertaken a commitment to remove duties on printed board assemblies 
as well as other items of telecommunications apparatus.  
2.26.   The EU  regret ted that India ha d chosen to increase tariff protection s in an attempt to curb 
imports. In light of this development , her delegation  wonder ed how India intend ed to ensure that 
its policy choice s remained aligned with its ITA  commitments.  Thus, the EU urged India to rectify 
the situation and reinstate the duty -free status of items for which India had undertaken 
ITA commitments.  
2.27.   The representative of Singapore  thank ed China for placing this item on the agenda. Singapore 
share d the concerns expressed by previous speakers, and he reiterate d Singapore's  systemic and 
commercial interest in this issue.  
2.28.   The representative of the United States  expressed regret  at having to raise again the apparent 
inconsistencies between India' s WTO  commitments to provide duty -free access on a range of 
information and communication technology products and the non -zero import duties – of up to 20 % 
– that India continue d to charge on imported products , including  commercially significant products 
from the United States . The US looked forward to participating as a third  party in the proceedings 
for the disputes brought by the European Union, Japan, and Chinese Taipei , as they progress ed. 
Even as these disputes got under way , he noticed new concerns over possible further tariff increases 
in products identified in India' s 2021 -2022 budget proposal.  The US called upon India to provide 
duty-free access for the ICT and telecommunications equipment products for which India ha d a 
WTO commitment to do so.  
2.29.   The representative of  the United Kingdom  share d the same concerns as China, Canada, the 
EU, Singapore, the United States, and other Members,  regarding India' s continued application of 
tariffs above its bound rate s. The UK w ould continue to follow this matter w ith interest.  
2.30.   The representative of Japan  indicated that  India had announced a tariff increase on a variety 
of products, including electronics  goods , in its draft budget on 1  February . These tariff increases had 
subsequently been implemented , although his  delegation was  still examining the details. Japan was 
significantly concern ed by  the fact that ICT  products had also been included among those  products 
on which tariffs were to be increased, and emphasized that India's measures must comply with its 
ITA as well as GATT  obligations.  
2.31.   In response, the representative of India thank ed delegations for their continued interest in 
India's customs duty regime on certain telecommunication s products.  
2.32.   On the issue of customs duties imposed on certain products alleged to be ITA -I products by 
some Members, he argued that India ha d already made statement s in various WTO  bodies, namely 
the Council for Trade in Goods, the Committee on Market Access, and in this Committee. To save 
time, he would  not repeat those stat ements.  
2.33.   However, he reiterate d that India ha d been fully abiding by its obligations and commitments 
under the ITA -I, as contained in document  WT/Let/181. Moreover, India d id not intend to provide 
any concession beyond the scope of its ITA -I commitments , as described in document  WT/Let/181. 
India ha d also stated in its previous interventions that Members ha d a right to revisit any error or 
mistake committed while transposing their Schedules of concessions to the newer versions of the 
HS, and to place a recti fication request , if considered necessary , before the WTO  body concerned . 
Accordingly, India ha d filed a rectification request for its HS2007  transposition schedule. This 
rectification request had been in accordance with the Procedure for Modification and Rectification of 
Schedules of Tariff Concessions contained in the Decision of 26  March  1980, under the category, 
"Other Rectification". India urge d Members to walk through India's rectification request. In any 
event, if any Member ha d any other views on technical aspects of these products, as well as their 
classification, India would be happy to discuss the se with the Member concerned.  
2.34.   The Committee took note of the statements made . G/IT/M/73  
 
- 8 - 
 
  3  REVIEW OF PRODUCT COVERAGE  
3.1.  The Chairperson  recalled that , since the Committee's meeting of 15  May 2012, and as 
requested by some delegations, the "review of product coverage" had been included as a regular 
item on the Committee's agenda . This agenda item provide d an opportunity for the Committee t o 
receive reports and updates from those participants that were engaged in bilateral and plurilateral 
consultations relating to the review of product coverage pursuant to paragraph  3 of the Annex to 
the ITA.  
3.2.  The representative of Canada , in his capacity as Chairperson of the Participants to the 
ITA Expansion Agreement , reported on the work of the participants to the ITA  Expansion Agreement.  
He informed the Committee  that almost  all participants to that Agreement had implemented, on an 
MFN basis, their tariff reduction s and elimination  commitments under their national ITA  Expansion 
schedules.  He reiterated that  the ITA  Expansion Agreement was open to all WTO  Members, and that 
all WTO  Members were strongly encouraged t o consider  participation in this important initiative.  In 
that regard, the Group of ITA  Expansion participants  would continue to reach out to other Members 
and provide them with  information on the ITA  Expansion Agreement and its benefits. The members 
of the Group s tood ready to provide more information to any WTO  Member that might  be interested 
in joining.  
3.3.  The Committee took note  of the statement made and agreed  to revert  to this matter, as 
appropriate, at the ITA  Committee 's next meeting.  
4  NON-TARIFF MEASURES WORK PROGRAMME  
4.1.  The Chairperson  referred to paragraph  3 of the Annex to the 1996  Ministerial Declaration , 
which  require d that "Participants […] meet periodically … to consult on non -tariff barriers to trade in 
information technology products."  She reiterated that the Committee had attached great importance 
to Non -Tariff Barriers (NTBs) and that, since 2000, NTBs had become an essential part of the regular 
work of the Committee.  
4.2.  On 7 May 2015, an industry -driven workshop dedicated to NTBs affecting t rade in ICT  products 
had been  organized. The main issues that had been raised at that workshop by industry 
representatives were: (i)  transparency; (ii)  standards for recognition of test results; (iii)  e-labelling; 
and (iv)  energy efficiency. A factual repo rt by the Chair person  had been circulated in 
document  G/IT/28. At subsequent meetings of the Committee, the Chairperson  had been tasked to 
continue consultations on the follow -up to the ITA  NTB Workshop. She recalled that NTBs had also 
been extensively discussed at the 20th Anniversary ITA  Symposium , which had been  held in 
June 2017.  
4.3.  She recalled that , at the Committee 's previous meeting , Switzerland, as coordinator of the 
informal consultations on NTBs among a small group of participants , consisting of 15  Members, had 
reported to the Committee on the work that the group had carried out . The main purpose of the 
group was to advance the work on NTM -related issues within the context of the ITA  Agreement.  
4.4.  The representative of Switzerland , at the  request of the Chairperson, provided an update of 
the Group's activities since the Committee's previous meeting. He stated that there was no further 
development to report . However, if any delegation  was interested and willing to further advance the 
work, be it in the small group , or any other format, his delegation remain ed available to discuss  
such interest . He also  welcome d the session dedicated to NTBs at the upcoming ITA  Workshop in 
the autumn.  
4.5.  The representative of the European Union  stated that  the ITA and its expansion had brought 
considerable benefits in eliminating tariffs. It was crucial to follow  up on these benefits  with progress 
on remov ing non-tariff barriers to trade in IT  products.  The EU remain ed committed to that objective , 
even if t hey were aware of the challenges involved in moving towards commitments in regulatory 
areas under the umbrella of the ITA.  Her delegation r emain ed convinced that making progress in 
the work on non -tariff measures would bring tangible benefits to companies.  In this context, the EU  
looked forward to engaging in any further work that might be undertaken in this area.  G/IT/M/73  
 
- 9 - 
 
  4.6.  The Committee took note  of the statements made and agreed  to revert to this matter, as 
appropriate, at the Committee 's next  meeting.  
5  EMC/EMI PILOT PROJECT – DRAFT LIST OF TYPES OF CONFORMITY ASSESSMENT 
PROCEDURES FOR EMC/EMI USED BY ITA  PARTICIPANTS (G/IT/W/17/REV.27)  
5.1.  The Chairperson  recalled that one of the outcomes of the NTM  Work Programme had been  the 
completion of a pilot project t hat had led to the adoption of the "Guidelines for Electromagnetic 
Compatibility (EMC) and Electromagnetic Interference (EMI) Conformity Assessment Procedures". 
Upon adoption of these "Guidelines", the Secretariat had prepared a note on the "Draft List of Types 
of Conformity Assessment Procedures for EMC/EMI used by ITA  Participants", as contained in 
document  G/IT/W/17 and its revisions. The note contain ed the responses to the survey and other 
notifications received from Participants on the type of assessme nt procedures for EMC  and EMI that 
they use d. ITA Participants had indicated on several occasions that they had found the information 
contained in this document very useful and wished to have it completed.  
5.2.  She noted that, at the request of several particip ants, the Secretariat had made a presentation 
on the background to the survey at the Committee's previous  meeting.  
5.3.  The latest update of the Secretariat 's note had been circulated on 10  January  2020, as 
document  G/IT/W/17/Rev.27. This updated Secretariat note show ed that, at present, among the 
53 ITA Participants, 43 had provided information on their conformity assessment procedures for 
EMC/EMI. However, there were still 10  participants that ha d not yet provided any information on 
their conform ity assessment procedures . The Chairperson encourage d these 10  delegations to 
provide th eir information to the Secretariat as soon as possible so as to enable the Committee to 
complete this work.  The Chairperson informed the Committee that the United Kingd om had just 
submitted its response to the survey , and that a new update to the Secretariat's note would be 
circulated  accordingly .1 
5.4.  In addition, the Chairperson asked Participants to reflect upon how to maximize the usefulness 
of the information on the EMC/EMI  conformity assessment procedures that ha d been provided  so 
far. Participants were invited to share their insights in this regard with the Chairperson, and with t he 
Secretariat, at any time, or with the full Committee.  
5.5.  The representative of the United Kingdom  stated that , at the Committee 's previous  meeting , 
in October  2020, the United Kingdom had expressed its interest in the EMC/EMI  Pilot Project as a 
positive ex ercise in transparency, and had shared its intention to submit the UK 's own response to 
the survey following the end of the transition period between the UK and the EU.  Her delegation  was 
pleased to inform the Committee  that the UK ha d submitted the survey  response to the Secretariat, 
and look ed forward to its circulation . 
5.6.  The representative of Switzerland  stated that  Switzerland s aw a value in the EMC/EMI  Pilot 
Project and believe d that the transparency exercise was  of benefit to all the Participants to th e ITA 
and ITA  Expansion Agreements . Therefore , his delegation  encourage d those participants that had 
not yet done so to respond to the survey.  
5.7.  The Committee took note of the statements  made . 
6  DIVERGENCES IN CLASSIFYING INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PRODUCTS 
(G/IT/14/REV.1/ADD.1, G/IT/W/6/REV.3, G/IT/W/33, G/IT/W/34, G/IT/27, 
JOB/IT/12, G/IT/29, G/IT/W/40/ADD.1 –G/IT/W/40/ADD.21, G/IT/W/40/SUPPL.4, 
AND JOB/IT/25)  
6.1  Implementation of the Decision for the Classification of 18 "Attachment  B" Products 
(G/I T/27) 
6.1.  The Chairperson  recalled that, on 20 July 2013, the Committee had adopted a Decision for the 
HS 1996 classification of 18  Attachment  B items, which had been circulated in document  G/IT/27. 
As required by that Decision, each participant must reflect the agreed classifications in its 
 
1 Document  G/IT/W/17/Rev.28 . G/IT/M/73  
 
- 10 - 
 
  WTO Schedule of concessions, as appropriate, following the 1980  Decision on the Procedures for 
Modification and Rectification of Schedules  of Tariff Concessions (BISD  27S/25) . 
6.2.  So far , the Secretariat ha d been approached by five  ITA participants, namely: Guatemala; the 
Philippines; Japan; El Salvador; and Macao, China, to assist them with the modification of their 
schedules . In this regard, the Secretariat ha d completed its work on the  requests of the delegations 
of Macao, China and the Philippines.  
6.3.  Since the Committee's previous meeting, no additional participant had approached the 
Secretariat for technical assistance  with the modification of their schedules . She reminded the 
Committee  that the technical work involved in this exercise  was time-consuming and thus c ould only 
be undertaken on a gradual basis.  Therefore, she encourage d developing -country participants to 
contact the Secretariat if they require d technical assistance in this a rea. 
6.2  Implementation of the 2016  Decision for the Classification of 15  Additional 
"Attachment  B" Products (G/ IT/29)  
6.4.  The Chairperson  recalled that , on 18 April 2016, the Committee had adopted the "Decision for 
HS2007  Classification of 15  Additional 'Attachment  B' Products", which had been circulated in 
document  G/IT/29. Most of the items covered by this Decision relate d to HS2007  heading  8486 
(Machines and apparatus for the manufacture of semiconductor boules or wafers) and one  item 
related to headin g 8471 (automatic data processing machines and units thereof).  
6.5.  Regarding the implementation of th is 2016 Decision, only one  participant (Macao, China) ha d 
asked for the Secretariat's support to conduct a review of its Schedule. No new Member ha d 
approached  the Secretariat for assistance since the Committee's previous meeting.  
6.3  Possible H S2007  Classification for the Remaining "Attachment  B" Items: Note by the 
Secretariat (G/I T/W/40 and its Supplements and Addenda)  
6.6.  The Chairperson  indicated that the Note by the Secretariat on "Divergence of Classification: 
Possible HS2007  Classification for the Remaining 37  'Attachment  B' Items" had been originally 
circulated as document  G/IT/W/40, based on the Swiss proposal for a three -step proce dure 
(document  JOB/IT/12).  
6.7.  She recalled that, at the Committee 's meeting of 31 October  2014, it had been agreed that: 
"Participants are expected to submit a communication to the Secretariat no later than 30  June 2015, 
indicating: (a)  the items that, in the  participant's opinion, should be classified differently from the 
HS2007  codes listed in column  8 of the Annex to this document; and (b)  the HS2007  subheading(s) 
that, in the participant's opinion, are relevant for the classification of the item in questio n." It was 
also agreed that "The Secretariat will compile communications received in a separate document. On 
that basis, participants would then be expected to assess the next steps that could be taken to 
reduce any remaining divergence in classification."  
6.8.  She reported that, so far, the Secretariat had received comments from 21  participants. These 
had been circulated as addenda to document  G/IT/W/40. Comments had been received from the 
following participants: Norway (G/IT/W/40/Add.1); Chinese Taipei (G/IT/W /40/Add.2); Switzerland 
(G/IT/W/40/Add.3); the European Union (G/IT/W/40/Add.4); Hong Kong, China 
(G/IT/W/40/Add.5); China (G/IT/W/40/Add.6); Japan (G/IT/W/40/Add.7); Canada 
(G/IT/W/40/Add.8); the United States (G/IT/W/40/Add.9); India (G/IT/W/40/Add.10); Macao, 
China (G/IT/W/40/Add.11); El Salvador (G/IT/W/40/Add.12); the Republic of Korea 
(G/IT/W/40/Add.13); Panama (G/IT/W/40/Add.14); Thailand (G/IT/W/40/Add.15); Guatemala 
(G/IT/W/40/Add.16); Mauritius (G/IT/W/40/Add.17); Montenegro (G/IT/W/40/Add.18); th e Russian 
Federation (G/IT/W/40/Add.19); Seychelles (G/IT/W/40/Add.20); and New Zealand 
(G/IT/W/40/Add.21).  
6.9.  All these comments ha d been consolidated in to document  G/IT/W/40/Suppl .4, which also t ook 
into account the 2016  Decision on the classification of th e additional 15  items. Therefore, there 
remained 22 Attachment  B items for which Participants should provide their comments in order to 
arrive at a common HS  classification.  G/IT/M/73  
 
- 11 - 
 
  6.10.   In this regard, the Chairperson invite d delegations that ha d not yet provided thei r comments 
on the possible HS2007  classification of these remaining 22 items to do so as soon as possible in 
order to arrive at a common classification for these products within existing HS  nomenclature and 
thereby also to fulfil the mandate of paragraph  5 of the Annex to the Ministerial Declaration  on Trade 
in Information Technology Products . 
6.11.   The representative of India thanked the Secretariat for the compilation. He indicated that his 
delegation had  shared both these documents with New Delhi an d that they were awaiting comments.  
6.12.   The Committee took note of the statements made an d agreed  to discuss the matter , as 
appropriate, at the ITA  Committee 's next  meeting.  
7  DATE AND PROGRAMME OF THE PROPOSED ITA  WORKSHOP  
7.1.  The Chairperson  recalled the backgroun d to the workshop. The idea of organizing another 
ITA workshop had originally been proposed in 2017. In December  2019, the budget for this event 
had been approved in the WTO  Biennial Technical Assistance and Training Plan for 2020-2021. Since 
then, the former Chairperson had undertaken consultations with interested delegations regarding 
the date and programme of the workshop . The first  draft programme had been proposed on 
5 May 2020.  
7.2.  As a follow -up, she had been consulting with Participants  in the past few months in the hope 
of finalizing the programme as well as the timing of the workshop as soon as possible. Due to various 
factors, in particular the outbreak of the COVID -19 pandemic and related travel restrictions, the 
workshop had , of necessity,  been postponed.  
7.3.  She informed the Committee that , based on Members' feedback received so far, the 
second  draft programme  had been prepared and circulated in document  JOB/IT/272, on 
7 April 2021.  
7.4.  Regarding  the date of the workshop, and taking into account  MC12 , as well as the dates fixed 
for other major WTO  events, such as the Public Forum, the Secretariat ha d reserved Thursday, 
16 September  2021 for the ITA  Workshop, back-to-back with the Committee's formal meeting on 
17 September.  
7.5.  The Chairperson  understood that it would be most feasible and convenient for most delegations  
to hold the workshop in September of this year . In this regard, she hoped that the Committee would  
take a de cision on the date and programme of the workshop as soon as possible, simply because 
the time left for preparation s was limited.  
7.6.  The representative of the United States  appreciate d the ongoing efforts concerning the 
proposed ITA  workshop and the opportunity to discuss the updated draft workshop agenda. He 
reiterated that t he unprecedented events of the past year had disrupted the Committee's  discussions 
on this topic, and his delegation  welcome d the efforts to get the workshop bac k on track.  
7.7.  He believed that t he updated agenda better reflect ed the current situation, for example, by 
incorporating discussions on the important role the ICT  sector ha d played in the response to the 
global pandemic.  US stakeholders look ed forward to cont ributing to the workshop in the fall , 
including highlighting strides in technology and connectivity that the sector ha d made since the 
2015 workshop , including the many positive contributions that ha d been made to combatting the 
pandemic.  
7.8.  He believed that the workshop was also an opportunity to highlight the benefits that 
ITA membership c ould bring across many sectors of the economy , from agriculture to health, and 
including to small and medium -sized businesses.  
7.9.  The representative of the European Union  thanked the Chair person  and the Secretariat for all 
the work that ha d gone into the preparation of the  workshop  so far . On the timing, the EU believed 
that scheduling the workshop in the second  half of September was a good option, as was scheduling 
 
2 The second  draft programme was subsequently issued as document  G/IT/30, for wider circulation.  G/IT/M/73  
 
- 12 - 
 
  it back -to-back with the ITA  Committee. She caution ed against any further postponement as 
attention  would  then shift to the preparation s for MC12.  She asked if the Secretariat ha d any further 
thought s about the format of the workshop , including if it would be a hybrid meeting . 
7.10.   On the proposed programme, the EU  found it quite balanced. It highlighted the role of the 
ITA as an economic development tool, and its prospects, as well as giving attention to non -tariff 
barriers  and the role of the  ITA in the context of the current COVID -19 pandemic.  She therefore 
hoped that the workshop w ould generate substantial interest, in particular among those Members 
that were not yet participants to the ITA or ITA  Expansion  Agreements . 
7.11.   The representative of Japan  strongly support ed holding the ITA workshop. He recalled that it  
had been six  years since the ITA Expansion A greement  had been concluded, and almost four  years 
since the ITA  20th Anniversary Symposium , which had been held in 2017. To advocate for the 
significance of the ITA, it was important to continue the groundwork and to maintain a regular update 
from the stakeholders.  He also highlighted the significance of hearing voices and presentations from 
industri es regarding  the latest deve lopments in ITA products and sharing renewed interest on the 
importance of the ITA. He pointed out that people's  daily lives ha d been drastically changed by the 
COVID -19 pandemic , and that it had been ICT technology and products that had compensated for 
lost opportunities in communication. It was thanks to IT technology, for example, that it had still 
been possible to hold that day's ITA Committee meeting . 
7.12.   He thanked the Chairperson and the Secretariat for revising the draft program me. As for the 
timing  of the workshop , Japan found early to mid-September to be appropriate . Regarding the 
format  of the workshop , Japan shared the EU 's opinion  that an in -person event would be optimal ; 
nevertheless , Japan recognized that it would be more realist ic to hold the workshop in a hybrid 
format . Furthermore, he proposed that the workshop be held across  two consecutive days, with 
two sessions per day. 
7.13.   The representative of Chinese Taipei  welcomed the latest ITA Workshop draft programme , 
contained in document  JOB/IT/27. He believed that Participants ' contribution s on various topics 
would be relevant and critical in addressing the opportunities and challenges that the ICT  sectors 
were facing today. In particular, his delegation  was great ly interest ed in how ICT c ould contribute 
to the SDG  goals and non-tariff barriers in relation to the energy efficiency of ICT  products. Chinese 
Taipei would propose a speaker and share its experiences in these areas.  
7.14.   The representative of  Guatemala  thanked the Chairperson and Secr etariat for the work 
already carried out  in preparing for this workshop . She supported the programme as well as the 
proposal to hold the workshop in  September , which she considered  an appropriate date. She 
supported the suggestion made by Japan to take a hybrid approach to the workshop, where by some 
of the presenters would participate virtually due to travel restrictions. She also highlight ed the 
importance of balance in the selection of speakers and indicated that Guatemala  itself might propose 
a speaker.  
7.15.   The representative of Switzerland  joined the delegation of Guatemala in thanking the 
Chair person  and the Secretariat for pulling together this agenda. Switzerland  joined previous 
speakers in suggesting that this work shop take place in hybrid format . Switzerland would wish to 
welcome everyone back to Geneva, of course; however, this might be premature.  In contrast, a 
hybrid format would allow broader participation. In terms of timing , his delegation believed that 
mid-September was an appropriate date for this workshop.  
7.16.   The representative of the United Kingdom  welcome d the revised programme and, in 
particular , the opportunity to share experiences on how trade in ICT  products ha d contributed to  
combatting  the effects of the COVID -19 pandemic. The UK  underst ood the reasons for postponing 
the workshop and saw the new  dates as appropriate , back -to-back with the Com mittee 's next  
meeting . Her delegation  looked forward to engaging in the upcoming workshop.  
7.17.   Regarding the format of the workshop, the Secretariat  (Dr Xiaodong Wang ) explained that , 
for the moment, all options were on the table, either in-person , hybrid , or online.  It was too early 
to decide on this issue as there were different factors that might still affect the eventual format of 
the workshop.  The Secretariat would closely  follow  the evolution of the COVID -19 pandemic, as well G/IT/M/73  
 
- 13 - 
 
  as Switzerland's  policies and regulations in this regard.  The Secretariat would also keep in close 
touch with Members with a view to taking a decision on this issue at a later stage.  
7.18.   The Committee agree d on 16 September  as the date of the workshop . Regarding the 
programme of the ITA Workshop, the Chairperson proposed that t he Committee endorse the revised 
draft programme circulated in document  JOB/IT/27.  It was so agreed . 
7.19.   The Chairperson  encourage d all Participants to consult with their stakeholders , to propos e 
speakers , and to reach out to each other, bearing in mind the need for a good mix and balance of 
representatives from government, industry, and  other institutions . 
8  DATE OF NEXT COMMITTEE MEETING  
8.1.  The Chairperson  informed the Committee that the Secretariat ha d tentatively reserved Friday, 
17 September  2021 as the date of the Committee's next formal meeting , on the understanding that 
this date would be confirmed in an email well before the meeting itself, and that any additional 
meetings might  also be convened , as required.  
8.2.  The Committee so agreed . 
9  OTHER BUSINESS  
10  ELECTION OF CHAIRPERSON  
10.1.   The Chairperson  recalled that , as standard practice, the Committee elect ed a new chairperson 
from among the representatives of Participants on an annual basis , and that the  election took place 
at the first  meeting of the year and took effect at the end of the meeting.  
10.2.   She informed the Committee that the Chairperson of the Council for Trade in Goods ( CTG) 
had been consulting with Members regarding chairpersons for th e CTG's subsidiary bodies , and that 
the slate of names of proposed chairpersons was still under consideration . 
10.3.   As a result, she propose d that, as soon as the CTG had adopt ed the proposed  list of  
chairpersons for its subsidiary bodies, the Secretariat w ould send an email to All Participants 
indicating the name of the person nominated to be chairperson of the ITA  Committee. If no objection 
had been received within the time -frame indicated in the email, the candidate w ould be deemed to 
have be en elected by the Committee by acclamation.  
10.4.   The Committee so agreed . 
10.5.   Before closing the meeting, the Chairperso n thanked all Participants for the ir support during 
her chairpersonship. She had enjoyed working with all delegations and expressed her particula r 
appreciation concerning the final ITA Workshop P rogramme . 
__________