RESTRICTED  
  
G/STR/M/39  
 
5 November 2021  
(21-8414) Page: 1/5 
Working Party on State Trading Enterprise    
 
MINUTES OF THE MEETING  
HELD ON 5 OCTOBER 2021  
CHAIR: SULTAN ALSHARIF  (KINGDOM OF SAUDI ARABIA ) 
1   ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA  ................................ ................................ .......................  1 
2   ELECTION OF THE VICE -CHAIRPERSON  ................................ ................................ ...... 1 
3   REVIEW OF NEW AND FULL NOTIFICATIONS SUBMITTED BY MEMBERS  ....................  1 
4   REVIEW OF NOTIFICATIONS PREVIOUSLY REVIEWED  
BY THE WORKING PARTY  ................................ ................................ ................................  3 
5   CONTINUED NON -NOTIFICATION OF STATE TRADING ENTERPRISES  
BY THE RUSSIAN  FEDERATION  ................................ ................................ .......................  4 
6   OTHER BUSINESS  ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 5 
7   ANNUAL REPORT (2021) TO THE COUNCIL FOR TRADE IN GOODS  .............................  5 
8   DATE OF FOLLOWING MEETING  ................................ ................................ .................  5 
The Chair recalled that the meeting was being held both in person and remotely via Interprefy . The 
Chair recalled the technical arrangements that therefore applied to the meeting, which were 
described in the Organizational and Technical Arrangements Note. A link to this Note appeared in 
the Airgram sent to Members on 24 September  2021. 
1  ADOPTION OF  THE AGENDA  
1.  The Chair  referred to the proposed agenda contained in WTO/AIR/STR/15 , circulated on 
24 September 2021 . Nothing was raised under Other Business . 
2.  The Working Party on State Trading Enterprises (the Working Party) adopted  the agenda.  
2  ELECTION OF THE VICE -CHAIRPERSON  
3.  The Chair  indicated that he had conducted some initial consultations on a possible 
Vice-Chairperson, recognizing that it was not possibl e to speak with all Members in advance. Bearing 
that in mind, the Chair proposed the election of Ms Bin g Lou of New Zealand as the new 
Vice-Chairperson of the Working Party.  
4.  The Working Party elected  Ms Bing Lou of New Zealand as Vice -Chairperson . 
3  REVIEW O F NEW AND FULL NOTIFICATIONS SUBMITTED BY MEMBERS  
5.  The Chair  recalled that, according to paragraph 5 of the Understanding on the Interpretation of 
Article XVII of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 (the Understanding), the 
Working  Party was tas ked with reviewing the notifications and counter -notifications submitted by 
Members on their state trading enterprises (STEs).  
6.  The Chair suggested that the Working Party review the notifications in the same way as at 
previous meetings, focusing on: (i) whe ther the notification responded adequately to the information 
requested in the Questionnaire (G/STR/3/Rev.1 ); and (ii) whether more information was required in 
order to permit, in  the language of paragraph 2 of the Understanding, "a clear appreciation of the G/STR/M/39  
 
- 2 - 
 
  manner of operation of the enterprises notified and the effect of their operations on international 
trade".  
7.  The Chair recalled that new and full notifications were now presented every two years. The most 
recent call for new and full notifications was contained in document G/STR/N/18 , and called for 
Members to submit n otifications for the years 2018 and 2019 by 30  June 2020. The  Working  Party 
would take up notifications from three Members circulated since the previous meeting on 
3 May 2021. 
8.  The Chair recalled that, as provided in the Working Party's 1995 Report (G/L/35 ), Members 
wishing to raise questions on a no tification under review were to present them in writing to the 
notifying delegation and to the Secretariat at the latest three weeks before the meeting. The Chair 
also reminded Members asking questions not already sent in writing that, if they wished to re ceive 
a written response, they would have to follow up by submitting their questions in writing to the 
Member concerned, with a copy to the Secretariat for circulation.  
9.  No questions were posed and no comments were made regarding the notifications  of El Salvador 
(G/STR/N/18/SLV ) and Iceland  (G/STR/N/18/ISL ). 
10.  Regarding the notifications of Thailand  (G/STR/N/17/THA  – G/STR/N/18/THA ), the 
European  Union  thanked Thailand for its notifications . The European Union noted the statement in 
those notifications that the Public Warehouse Organization (PWO) " allocates quantities of imports 
within in -quota of certain agricultural products " and asked Thailand to provide information on this 
privilege. The European Union asked whether t he PWO was also an importer, or the sole importer, 
of palm oil, garlic and maize. If so, the European Union requested that Thailand update its 
notifications to provide corresponding statistical information. Thailand  thanked the European Union 
for the quest ion and indicated that, given the timing of the question, it had not had enough time to 
prepare and would respond later.  
11.  The Chair drew the attention of delegations to the document containing the Status of 
Notifications (G/STR/27 ). The Chair noted that the Status of Notifications showed that many 
Members were not fulfilling their notification obligations and that this prevented Members from 
enjoying the full benefit of transparency. The Chair , therefore , urged Members that had not yet 
notified to do so, and to consult the Secretariat if they had any question s. The Chair also thanked 
Members that had notified.  
12.  The European Union  and the United  States  jointly expressed appreciation for the Chair's 
statement encouraging Members to make the required notifications. The European Union and the 
United  States noted that numerous  Members had either failed to make any notification or had not 
notified for some t ime. Referring to data circulated by the Secretariat, the European Union and the 
United  States noted that 53 Members had not made a notification in the last ten years, and only 
41 out of 136  Members had made the requisite notification for the most recent notification cycle. 
That was the lowest level of compliance the Working  Party had ever seen, the previous being 
45 notifications in 1996. The European Union and the United  States stressed that transparency was 
an important requirement for all WTO Members an d notifications and counter -notifications were 
sometimes the only way that other Members could be properly informed of certain Members' 
activities in a given area. Low levels of compliance undermined the transparency function of the 
Working Party. Therefor e, the European Union and the United  States  called on other Members to 
submit their regular STE notifications within the deadlines and to respond to other Members' 
questions in a substantive and timely manner. The European Union and the United  States also noted 
that much of the information to be provided in the context of STE notifications had been provided 
and discussed in the Trade Policy Review process,  and in the context of  the WTO  Committee on 
Agriculture,  in particular the yearly Export Competition Qu estionnaire . Thus, Members could benefit 
from synergie s in respect of information submitted through  STE notifications and the Committee on 
Agriculture reportin g, which could contribute to greater transparency and reduce burdens for 
Members. The European Un ion and the United  States  would fully support  any initiative that the Chair 
or the Secretariat  might take regarding compliance with notification requirements . 
13.  The United Kingdom  expressed support for the joint statement of the European Union and the 
United  States. The United Kingdom noted that transparency is integral to the proper functioning of G/STR/M/39  
 
- 3 - 
 
  the WTO and encouraged Members to continue to take the necessary steps to complete their 
notifications in a timely manner and to seek Secretariat support as needed . 
14.  Japan  also expressed support for the joint statement made by the European Union and the 
United States, calling particular attention to Japan's support as a co -sponsor of a proposal for a 
Ministerial Decision on Transparency Improvements in Agriculture, c ontained in document 
JOB/AG/213 . 
15.  The Working Party took note  of the notifications, questions and answers and statements made.  
4  REVIEW OF NOTIFICATIONS PREVIOUSLY REVIEWED BY THE WORKING PARTY  
16.  The Chair  recalled that delegations had requested that the Working Party revert to notifications 
from three  Members. First, Australia had  asked the Working Party to revert to the notifications of 
China  contained in document G/STR/N/16/CHN – G/STR/N/17/CHN . On 29  April 2021, Australia had 
submitted written questions, circulated as document G/STR/Q1/CHN/10 . 
17.  Australia  indicated that it was seeking fu rther information from China regarding the activities of 
its STEs with respect to the importation of key agricultural commodities, with a particular focus on 
cotton, and of coal. Concerning agricultural commodities, Australia wished to learn more about the  
requirements and conditions that enterprises other than STEs (non -STEs) must meet to obtain 
trading rights; how tariff rate quotas (TRQs) are apportioned among STEs and non -STEs; whether 
China had a reallocation mechanism to avoid underfill of the portion  of a TRQ allocated to STEs; and 
whether China had reviewed the involvement of STEs in its TRQs. Australia also sought an 
explanation from China on the involvement of STEs in the importation of coal into China, noting that 
no STEs for coal had been notifie d. Australia wished to know whether formal or informal quota 
administration was being used to allocate imports to state -owned enterprises in China. For both 
cotton and coal, Australia sought clarification as to whether any Chinese authority had, directly o r 
indirectly, officially or unofficially, instructed any Chinese STEs or other businesses to stop or limit 
purchases from Australia or from any other WTO Member. Finally, Australia indicated that it had 
requested some additional statistical information, wh ich was not included in China's notifications, 
and requested China to update the Working Party on the status of its overdue notifications.  
18.  China  thanked Australia for its questions and interest in China's notifications. China noted that 
several questions c oncerning coal, and cotton and other agricultural commodities had already been 
raised before other committees, including questions related to STEs and China's allocation of TRQs 
which were recently addressed in the Committee on Agriculture. China informed the Working Party 
that it was in the process of finalizing its STE notifications for the 2017 -2020 period and would 
provide further details related to Australia's questions when those new notifications would be 
submitted later that month.  
19.  Regarding the not ifications of India  contained in documents G/STR/N/15/IND  and 
G/STR/N/16/IND  – G/STR /N/17/IND , the Chair recalled that on 28 October 2019 t he United  States  
had posed written questions to India on these notifications, which had been circulated as document 
G/STR/Q1/IND/21 . On 9 June 2021, India had submitted  written responses to the United States' 
questions, which w ere circulated as document G/STR/Q1/IND/22 . On 14  September  2021, Australia 
had also posed questions regarding document G/STR/N/16/IND  – G/STR/N/17/IND , which were 
circulated as G/STR/Q1/IND/23 .  
20.  The United States  thanked India for the responses provided on 9 June 2021, while noting that 
responses to several questions were incomplete. The United States asked India to indicate when it 
would submit complete responses, and whether and when India would provide updated notifications.  
21.  Australia  welcomed India's notifications in document G/STR/N/16/IND  – G/STR/N/17/IND  
containing trade data for 2014 -2018. Australia noted that India's notifications did not list any STEs 
with import or export privileges for pulses, but Australia understood that several STEs listed in  the 
notification had been granted exclusive or special rights or privileges for pulses and that other 
enterprises not listed in the notification also appeared to have similar special rights or privileges for 
pulses. Australia indicated that it looked forw ard to India's responses in due course, recalling that G/STR/M/39  
 
- 4 - 
 
  the questions contained in document G/STR/Q1/IND/23  had previously been posed to India at the 
meeting of the Working Party of 3 May 20211. 
22.  The European Union  stated that the state -owned Vijaya Dairy, located in the Indian state of 
Telangana, was supporting dairy farmers, and asked whether Vijaya Dairy also engaged in exports 
of agricultural products. If so, the European Union asked India to indic ate when it would notify Vijaya 
Dairy as an STE to the Working Party and to the Committee on Agriculture and whether Vijaya Dairy 
had benefited from any federal or state export subsidy programmes during the past three years for 
skimmed milk powder or any o ther dairy product.  
23.  India thanked  Australia, the European Union and the United States for their enquiries and 
interest in India's notifications. India indicated that it was continuing to finalize its responses to the 
United States' and Australia's question s and would submit responses to the Working Party in due 
course. India took note of the European Union's questions and asked the European Union to submit 
them in writing.  
24.  Regarding the notifications of Viet Nam  (G/STR/N/15/VNM – G/STR/N/16/VN M), the Chair 
recalled that the United  States  had made a counter -notification, G/STR/Q1/VNM/4 , and that 
Viet Nam had responded in documents G/STR/Q1/VNM/5  and G/STR/Q1/VNM/5/Corr.1 . 
The United  States  had asked  follow -up questions to Viet Nam in document  G/STR/Q1/VNM/6 , and 
Viet Nam had responded to th ose questions in document G/STR/Q1/VNM/7 . In November 2020 t he 
United States had posed further follow -up questions to Viet Nam in documents G/STR/Q1/VNM/8  
and G/STR/Q1/VNM/8/C orr.1. 
25.  The United  States  requested Viet  Nam to indicate when it would submit written responses to its 
most recent questions.  
26.  Viet Nam  responded that since the last meeting Viet Nam ha d worked with relevant agencies to 
review certain documents mentioned in the United States' follow -up questions  (G/STR/Q1/VNM/8  
and G/STR/Q1/VNM/8/C orr.1). Viet Nam explained that th ose documents do not constitute an 
affirmation of privileges or exclusive rights of the enterprises in question. Viet  Nam further explained  
that delays had arisen due to the on -going COVID situation but that written replies were curr ently 
being finalized in accordance with domestic procedures and would be submitted to the Working Party 
in due course.  
27.  The Working Party took note  of the questions and answers and statements made.  
5  CONTINUED NON -NOTIFICATION OF STATE TRADING ENTERPRISES BY  THE 
RUSSIAN  FEDERATION  
28.  The European Union  and the United  States  jointly expressed regret that this was the thirteenth  
consecutive meeting at which the continued non -notification of STEs by the  Russian  Federation was 
on the agenda, and the ninth year that this issue had been raised in the Working  Party. The  
European  Union and the  United States underst ood that the Russia n Federation had made an effort 
to meet its transparency commitments in other WTO bodies, but regretted that this effort was being 
resisted in this Working Party. The Russian  Federation  had missed five consecutive notification 
cycles, or ten years, as indicated in the most recent Status of Notifications, and had not fulfilled a 
single STE notification obligation since joining the WTO. The  European Union and the  United States 
explained that transparency was an important WTO requirement, which the Russian Federation  had 
agreed to abide by when it joined the WTO, and which serve d an important function for all 
WTO Members to better understand and evaluate Members' STE operations and compliance with 
relevant WTO obligations. The European Union and the United States recalled that at the 3  May 2021 
meeting of the Working  Party, the Russian Federation had stated that it needed additional time to 
complete its notifications, and that the Russian Federation ha d made this representation since 
October 2012, when the Russian Federation attended its first meeting of the Working Party as a 
WTO Member. The European Union and the United States expressed regre t that 
the Russian  Federation  had not yet fulfilled its notification obligations and urged 
the Russian  Federation  to turn its statements about finalizing its notifications into concrete action. 
Given these and other past indications by the Russian Federati on that a notification was coming, the 
 
1 See G/STR/M/38, para. 25.  G/STR/M/39  
 
- 5 - 
 
  European Union and the  United States asked the Russian  Federation to update the Working Party on 
when its notification would be submitted for review, and on whether the upcoming notification would 
provide all the requ ired information for the missing years, as well as the most recent period . 
29.  The United Kingdom  expressed support for the joint statement of the European Union and 
the United States, noting that transparency is essential to the proper functioning of the WTO and 
that all Members should take all steps necessary to fulfil their obligations across all agreements and 
in a timely manner.  
30.  The European Union  also noted that during previous meetings of the Working Party, as well as 
in the framework of the Russian Fede ration's Trade Policy Review, the European  Union understood 
that the Russian  Federation granted exclusive rights to several companies, pursuant to the Order  of 
the Government of the Russian Federation of 14 July 2014 No. 1277 -r and Government  Regulation 
No. 2001-r of 9 October 2014. The European Union reiterated its request that  the Russian Federation 
turn its repeated statements  into concrete action.  
31.  The Russian Federation  thanked the European  Union , the United Kingdom and the United  States 
for their inter est and informed Members that it continued to work with the relevant ministries and 
the respective enterprises to move forward with its notifications . However, d espite its efforts, the 
Russian  Federation indicated that more time was required , explaining th at a full notification  would 
be submitted  to Members once work was concluded . The Russian Federation also offered  to engage 
bilaterally with all interested delegations to provide answers to any remaining questions.  
32.  The Working Party took note  of the statements made.  
6  OTHER BUSINESS  
33.  No issue was raised under other business.  
7  ANNUAL REPORT (2021) TO THE COUNCIL FOR TRADE  IN GOODS  
34.  The Chair noted that paragraph 5 of the Understanding instructed the Working Party to report 
annually to the Council for Trade in Goods. At its meeting of 30 October 2012, the Working Party 
had agreed to separate the draft annual report and the s tatus of notifications into two separate 
documents. The draft annual report had been circulated as room document RD/STR/35  and the 
status of notifications as document  G/STR/2 7, both on 28  September  2021. 
35.  The Chair observed that there were no comments and proposed that the  Working Party adopt  
its 202 1 annual report, accompanied by the status of notifications.  
36.  The Working Party so agreed . 
8  DATE OF THE FOLLOWING MEETING  
37.  The Chair recalled the Working Party's practi ce of holding its regular meetings either 
immediately before or immediately after the week during which the Committees on 
Anti-Dumping  Practices, on Safeguards and on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures hold their 
regular meetings. Given that, the Chair proposed to schedule the following meeting of the 
Working  Party for 2 May  2022. 
38.  No objections were raised.  
39.  The meeting was adjourned . 
 
__________