RESTRICTED  
  
WT/WGTDF/M/43  
 
 
10 December  2021 
(21-9269) Page: 1/6 
Working Group on Trade, Debt and Finance   
 
REPORT OF THE MEETING OF 1 NOVEMBER 2021  
1.1.  The forty -fifth meeting of the Working Group on Trade, Debt an d Finance (WGTDF) was held 
on 1 November  2021 and was chaired by H.E. Ambassado r Cheryl Spencer (Jamaica). The meeting 
had been convened under the cover of WTO/AIR/WGTDF/1 6. Under  point 2.A of the proposed 
agenda, it was suggested that the written submission by Jamaica, presented on behalf of the 
African, Caribbean and Pacific ( ACP) Group of States , and circulated under document 
WT/WGTDF/W/10 1, be discussed. It was proposed under  the proposed  agenda item 2.B to have a 
discussion on the draft report  of the Working Group to the General Council  (WT/WGTDF/W/100) . 
Agenda item 2.C was left for any other business.  The proposed agenda was adopted . 
1.2.  1.2 Due to a technical problem, it was not possible to proceed immediately with agenda 
item 2.A. It was therefore agreed to start  the meeting with the discussion of agenda item 2.B, 
before reverting to 2.A.  
1  AGENDA ITEM 2. B: DISCUSSION ON THE DRAFT ANNUAL REPORT TO THE GENERAL 
COUNCIL (WT/WGTDF/W /100 ) 
1.3.  The Chair provided  background remarks. She had prepared a draft report for Members,  based 
on the broad guidance provided at the previous meeting of the Working Group. The draft was 
circulated as document WT/WGTDF/W/100. Some M embers had suggested  to mention  the 
mandate of the Working Group in the draft report. Other Members had recommend ed that the 
draft repor t be short and factual, capturing the positions expressed during meetings of the 
Working Group in 2021. Summarizing positions was  a difficult  exercise , particularly when 
differences of views remained. The Chair tried to describe all positions as accurately as possible . 
The Secretariat had received one set of proposed modifications, transmitted by the delegation of 
the United States  of America . The proposed changes ha d been circulated for the consideration of 
other delegations.  She invited the delegation of the United States of America to present the 
proposed edits.  
1.4.  The Representative of the United States  of America  said that  some of the proposed changes 
were only factual, such as typos ; others were more  substantive , with a view to  clarify ing position s 
expressed  by his delegation  and to ensur ing that they were reflected accurately . He welcomed 
questions from other delegations or discussion s in case of disagreements on th e proposed 
changes.  
1.5.  The Representative of Fiji asked why had a meeting held on 21 June not been reported, as 
many comments had been made r egard ing the submission made by C ôte d'Ivoire . He noted that , 
at the meeting  of the Working Group  on 23 September, one Member did not s upport efforts to 
establish a roadmap work program on trade finance at WTO. He wished to clarify whether this was 
still the case. He noted that a number of delegations had shown flexibility and understanding on 
the issue of a  work program.  His sense was that there had not been a strong opposition to a work 
program in its entire ty. He wonder ed whether other Members had the same understandin g. If 
there was no firm opposition, a  program could provide a good basis for the Working Group to work 
on, bearing in mind that differences of views could  remain on its content. He requested a 
clarification o f paragraph 1.5. in the draft report, regarding potential contributors to a Member -to-
Member exchange of information.  
1.6.  The Chair clarifie d that the 21 June meeting was an open -ended, informal meeting, not 
subject to official reporting. The draft report to the General Council only mention ed formal 
meetings of the Working Group. Regarding the roadmap issue, it appear ed that the Representative  WT/WGTDF/M/43  
 
- 2 - 
 
  of Fiji had detected a bit more consensus than had been reflected  in the draft report . She asked 
the floor whether any such  flexibility had been shown.  
1.7.  The Representative of Canada  welcome d the opportunity to reflect on the discussions of the 
Working Grou p over the course of the past year. Canada welcome d the edits proposed by the 
United States  of America , which reflect ed accurately the nature of the discussion during meetings . 
The report including the proposed edits also reflected the different views expressed in these 
discussions about preferences with respect to the work plan . As amended, the document would 
help the Working Group move forward with these discussions.  
1.8.  The Rep resentative of the European Union  recalled that her delegation  had expressed s upport 
for Member -to-Member activities in the form of information sharing . Such activities could start as 
soon as possible. The EU delegation was r eady to invite European partici pants  to make 
presentations , including on  technical assistance and capacity building offered. She was hesitant to 
go ahead and formalize a work program quite just yet. The re was s ufficient basis for  an exchange 
of information in the Working Group . Presenta tions and information exchange c ould be organized 
on various subjects, including the legal entity identi fier. The EU wished to  hear from developing 
and least developed countries  about this idea before moving forward.  
1.9.  The Chair pointed out that the report was based on the minutes. However, the discussion 
aimed pre cisely at hearing from Members about ways to reflect positions with a language  
acceptable to all delegations . She had noted the comments of the EU on  a roadmap . It seemed 
that there was no consensus on  adopting such a  road map  as of yet . She therefore  asked whether 
the Working Group could  proceed with t he proposed edits  in the draft report . 
1.10.   The Representative from the United States  of America  encouraged the Working Group  to 
proceed with the edit s that his delegation had proposed. He expressed concern s that the original 
drafting did not accurately reflect the U nited States of America's  position. The proposed e dits 
provided a more accurate summary of previous m eetings.  
1.11.   The Chair  enquired about the proper formulation regarding the question of Member -to-
Member exchange  of information .  
1.12.   The Secretariat  clarified that in paragraph 1.5. of the draft report, one sentence may have 
been compressi ng too many ideas. A  new formulation  was proposed . 
1.13.   After a short exchange  of views  on these points, the  Chair thanked all delegations for their 
engagement on the draft report, and generally, on the proposals regarding trade finance  during 
the year . She concluded that the edits proposed by the delegation of the United States  of America  
had been agreed , along with the proposed reformulation by the Secretariat of the sentence in 
paragraph 1.5.  
2  AGENDA ITEM 2. A: PRESENTATION OF THE SUBMISSION MADE BY JAMAI CA, ON 
BEHALF OF T HE ACP GROUP OF STATES (DOCUMENT WT/WGTDF/W/101)  
2.1.  The Chair said that in order to separate her role as the Chair of the Working Group and that 
of Head of delegation of Jamaica, she would of course not introduce this agenda item and not 
comment on it.  
2.2.  The R epresentative of Fiji said that he presented the submission on behalf of  the ACP Group 
of States (WT/WGTDF/W/101). The submission built on the discussion that the Working Group on 
Trade, Debt and Finance had thus far, with the aim of being constructive and  build convergence on 
issues critical not only for the ACP Group but for all Members who regarded trade, debt and 
finance as critical tools to enhance economic development, promoting employment and prosperity, 
all of which fitted with the 2030 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).  The issue of trade and 
debt and finance was not new, the  Sustainable Development Goals  had pointed to the issue as 
being fundamental , as it  remain ed a stumbling block for economic progress especially for 
developing and least developed Members. For these reasons, he drew  Member 's attention to 
SDG 17 titled "Partnerships to achieve the Goal".  Under this Goal, M embers were requested to 
assist developing countries in attaining long -term debt sustainability through coordinated policies 
aimed at fostering debt financing, debt relief , and debt restructuring , as appropriate , and to WT/WGTDF/M/43  
 
- 3 - 
 
  address the external debt of highly indebted poor countries to reduce debt dist ress including 
investment promotion regimes for least developed countries.  
2.3.  In the same Goal under the Trade "target", by 2020 the objective was to double the share of 
the least developed countries as a share of global exports. The question he asked was whe ther this 
had been realized, asides from the COVID -19 pandemic; the answer was obvious. Under the 
multi-stakeholder partnership goal in Goal 17, Members also had committed to enhance the global 
partnership for sustainable development, complemented by multi -stakeholder partnerships t o 
mobilize and share knowledge, expertise, technology and financial resources, with a view to 
support ing the achievement of Sustainable Development Goals in all countries.  
2.4.  The ACP Group was particularly concerned that , now that 2020 has passed,  not much 
progress had been made. The Group believed, however, that multilateralism had a role to play, 
especially in the field of trade, which was why the ACP Group was engaging constructively in the 
WTO. Now with the economic uncertainty posed by the COVID -19 pandemic, much of the 
ACP Group's economies had been worsened off and left far behind.  
2.5.  The ACP Group believe d in view of the above and the background as indicated in the written 
submission (WT/WGTDF/W/101 ) that one could arrive at an outcome for the Ministerial Conference 
that could lay the platform for future work for the Working Group, in particular the WTO's 
collaborative role with multilateral development banks and private sectors and its intended supp ort 
for access to finance for Micro , Small and Medium -sized Enterprises (MSMEs).  Proposed outcomes 
would be premised on the initial submission by Côte d'Ivoire on trade finance, as well as on other 
submissions and comments by Members which were meant to co mplement the existing work of 
the WTO.  
2.6.  On debt servicing, the first element of the submission was a standard requirement for 
international development bank institutions for flexible lending and repayment facilities. 
Discussions should not be constrained o nly to the pandemic and its effects on trade, as there were 
issues such as climate change and natural disasters and post -disaster reconstruction presenting a 
huge financial burden on Members. Natural disasters over the years had increased in intensity and 
frequency, posing serious threats, and making more economies highly vulnerable. According to the 
International Monetary Fund (IMF), the average estimated disaster damage as a ratio to Gross 
domestic product ( GDP) was 4.5 times greater for small states than  larger ones, as small states 
had fewer resources to cope with the aftermath. Research had shown that about 9% of natural 
disasters in small countries involved damage of more than 30% of GDP, often well above 
100%  GDP for smaller islands, making post recov ery challenging and longer, and eventually 
reducing growth potential. This was the reason why external support was critical.  
2.7.   The Secretary -General of the United Nations mentioned these facts whilst opening the 
UNCTAD's 15th quadrennial conference. UNCTAD had warned that the situation in many 
ACP countries was unsustainable and required urgent global attention, especially on their ability to 
access trade finance and financial support for recovery and reconstruction. Access to the IMF's new 
allocation of Spe cial Drawing Rights (SDRs) was challenging, as existing quotas were not 
proportionate to the gravity of the circumstance Members were faced with. Only a small margin of 
these new SDRs was afforded to those that needed the most. A proportionate lending and 
repayment facility was critical. Since such financial access was a conduit for trade enhancement, it 
was important that the WTO supported the call by UNCTAD.  
2.8.  Finally, the submission by the ACP Group was geared towards improving knowledge and 
strengthening the efforts of the Working Group and Secretariat to continue with its work, as called 
for by WTO Ministers. In this regard, and in view of the outcomes of the last meeting, the 
ACP Group was working towards a draft Ministerial outcome, in liaison with Côte d'Ivoire.  It was 
therefore the hope of the ACP Group that the Working Group reflected on these, as one built 
outcomes for MC12 and beyond, with the overall intention of assisting Members to realize their 
SDG targets despite current unprecedented circumsta nces. 
2.9.  The Chair thanked the Representative of Fiji. She  opened the floor to other participants.  
2.10.   The Representative of Canada  said that in recent meetings of the Working Group, her 
delegation had appreciated the opportunity to engage with Members on options for a trade finance WT/WGTDF/M/43  
 
- 4 - 
 
  workplan as set out in the documents produced by Côte d'Ivoire.  Given issues raised in previous 
discussions regarding to need to avoid duplicating efforts of other bodies and  focusing on 
value -added for the WTO, Canada continued to support this body focusing on Member -driven 
exchange of information about trade finance market developments and facilities, surveying and 
sharing information about existing technical assistance opti ons, and engaging with international 
organizations including multilateral development banks, as bringing forward further work was 
being discussed.   
2.11.    She understood that the ACP Group of States  had submitted a paper setting out new 
options for a workplan on  trade finance and added additional work on the issue of debt servicing, 
which had not previously or at least recently discussed in the context of workplan discussions. 
With respect to these new options, she  welcomed the following clarifications which would be 
brought back to her capital for further consideration ; in item (a)(i), she wondered what was meant 
by efforts to carry out advocacy  on trade finance, and what role was envisioned for th e Working 
Group  in this respect?  Was this consistent with the role  played by other WTO Committees?   
2.12.   She also wondered what was  being proposed in respect of exchanging views on how 
regulatory authorities could help mitigate constraints hindering the deployment of essential trade 
finance and promoting risk -sharin g in support of trade finance?  Which regulatory authorities were  
being referred to?  What was  meant by the outcome relating to having a call for support for trade 
finance similar to the response to the economic recession in 2008 -09? What substantive options 
were being proposed regarding work on debt servicing?  How did  this align or avoid duplicating the 
work of other international organizations on these issues?  
2.13.   Given the very limited time before MC12, the delegation of Canada was of the view that the 
Working Grou p should consider focusing on seeking endorsement of workplan items at MC12 on 
issues where there was convergence . One could return to discussion of other issues 
post-MC12.  She welcome d Members views on the way forward.  
2.14.    The Representative of the United St ates of America  thanked Jamaica, the ACP Group for 
their submission, and also the delegation of Fiji for introducing it. He has read with interest the 
background section of the document that highlighted short -term trade financing challenges 
affecting globa l trade. As said previously, he recognized the seriousness of the gap in trade finance 
to MSMEs in developing countries, including during the pandemic. While exacerbated by the 
current crisis, the gap in trade finance to small business in developing countr ies was not a new 
problem. For example, an International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) survey from seven years ago 
(2014) found these business to lack access to trade finance. The trade finance gap was a product 
of deeper structural issues, such as market risk  and the transaction costs associated with lending 
to very small borrowers.  
2.15.   In response to the pandemic, developed country Export Credit Agencies (ECAs) instituted 
programs to help manage short -term liquidity issues, such as EXIM's Bridge Financing Program. 
However, the multilateral development banks (MDBs) were best suited to target programs 
specifically to the needs of developing country small and medium enterprises. MDBs have 
short-term trade finance facilities and were addressing some o f the issues in the ACP Group paper. 
In particular, he noted work taking place at the International Finance Corporation (IFC) and 
MIGA  (Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency). There was no "Covid -specific" fix for trade 
finance liquidity that would not replicate what was being done in these programs.  
2.16.   He also noted that two important facets of the problem that were not addressed in the 
ACP Group submission were reducing market risk and dealing with high transaction costs 
associated with lending to very sm all borrowers. Perhaps in the future, this Working Group could 
examine these issues by inviting Members to share national experiences on how they have 
reduced market risk and mitigated related transactions costs to present their lenders as more 
attractive candidates for trade financing loans.  
2.17.   With respect to the ACP Group proposal for an MC12 outcome on trade finance and debt 
servicing, his delegation had doubts about the options presented. His delegation found none of the 
seven specific proposals in the su bmission as falling within the WTO's mandate or the Working 
Group's competence. He could not support these proposals for an outcome at MC12 or as the basis 
for future work in the Working Group. As the ACP Group noted in its submission, "the WTO is not a WT/WGTDF/M/43  
 
- 5 - 
 
  financial institution". The WTO did not have the tools to bring liquidity to underserved markets or 
address these structural issues. More importantly, adding these items to the WTO's agenda risked 
distracting from or undermining the work being done in the in ternational institutions that were 
currently working to address the very issues of concern to the ACP Group. The delegation of the 
United States of America continued to think that the Côte d'Ivoire proposal remained a viable basis 
for discussion and recomm ended that one returned to that document in future meetings.  
2.18.   His delegation felt that in the last discussion, Members had focused more on the areas of 
difference than the areas his delegation expressed potential interest on. In particular, his 
delegation had expressed positive views towards focusing more attention o n information  sharing 
among WTO delegates on a voluntary basis. If the Working Group was able to arrive at a balanced 
set of topics that appealed to all Members, there was no reason future meeting could not carry out 
such work . His delegation also expresse d interest in requesting the Secretariat to identify for 
Members all forms of technical support that it currently provided to Members concerning trade 
finance, and any such assistance it has provided since 2016. This would provide all Members with 
an enhan ced understanding of the state of play, while helping Members make use of the 
Secretariat resources and better direct its efforts in the future.  
2.19.   His delegation had also expressed an openness to invite other international organizations to 
the meetings of th e Working Group on Trade, Debt and Finance, to present to Members on their 
programs and initiatives. Finally, although the WTO was not a development finance institution, his 
delegation would support work proposed by Côte d'Ivoire to invite institutions inv olved with the 
Legal Entity Identifier (LEI) to the Working Group, to share information on this system with 
WTO Members. As one could see, in each of the four sections of Côte d'Ivoire's proposal, his 
delegation found possible areas of convergence. His del egation  continued to think further 
discussions to flesh out these items would be a valuable use of Members' time and help achieve 
the goals of the Members' mandate in the Working Group.  
2.20.   The Representative of the European Union  emphasized that, in general,  the EU was 
supportive of initiatives aiming at reducing trade finance gaps and of efforts deployed to advance 
the cause of MSMEs in international trade. However, the EU wished to  stress the importance of 
sticking to the mandates of formal committees and W TO areas of competencies. In particular, the 
disciplines around export credits were monitored in the OECD context . Every state set its facilities 
and the mandate of its agencies through its own national law.  Regarding the submission of the 
ACP Group of  States, the EU could  again express support for information sharing , and was open to 
exploring contributions aiming at reducing the trade finance gap for MSMEs. However, the EU 
could not  be supportive of a declaration by MC12, given current timing and resource s. The EU was 
interested by other Members ' thoughts , but the EU's tended to think that  the ideas proposed by 
the ACP Group went beyond the mandate of the Working Grou p and that of the WTO, especially  
regarding paragraph 2.15, sections  1(a)(iii) and (iv) of the submission . The EU welcomed the 
opportunity to continue the discussion on the basis of the areas laid out by her delegation.  
2.21.   The Representative of Fiji welcomed the comments provided by other delegations. He 
wished to provide clarifications an d additional elements for the discussion. Regarding the 
observation  not to duplicate efforts of other institutions, he wished to reassure  Members  that there 
had been  no intention to  go this way . He recalled the intervention by the Director -General at the 
Working Group  Meeting  in May , highlighting the relationship between trade and finance, on the 
one hand, and the relationship between trade and debt , on the other . The WTO had a role to play 
in clarify ing these relationships . Working with multilateral develo pment banks was not new. There 
was no desire to duplicate  their mandate,  rather  to understand better  their programs , 
requirements and procedures,  for WTO Members to access their existing facilities.  There  were also 
linkages between the WTO and these organizations ; collaboration between  these organizations  and 
the WTO in a number of areas  support ed WTO Members.  
2.22.   He also highlighted that support to trade finance provided during times of economic 
hardship in the p ast had proved useful for recipients . He wished to learn  more about  how such 
support could assist ACP countries in their recoveries . He did not disagree with the fact that some 
difficulties existed prior to the pandemic ; however, there  were things that cou ld be done to assist  
such Members, rather than simpl y pointing to problems , and leaving them unsolved . This was why 
ACP countries demanded more consultation s between the WTO and other organizations, with a 
view to address ing issues of access to trade finance in current circumstances . The seven ite ms 
highlighted by ACP members were not new. The first three or four had been subject or were  WT/WGTDF/M/43  
 
- 6 - 
 
  currently  subject to collaborative efforts with other agencies . The collaboration between some of 
these agencies had  a critical role, for example on the support to trade finance. The model looked 
at by ACP countries was actually  one of collaboration and complementarity between international 
agencies, in areas in which they have or should cooperate.  He tried to convey that the model he 
had in mind was the one used d uring previous global recession (the global financial crisis) , in 
which Members and various international agencies cooperated.  He thought that Members could 
come up with a framework of this kind . 
2.23.   He certainly understood  that the WTO was not a financial organization, in which Members 
came and apply for loans. Still , he wished to explore what t he WTO could actually do in 
complement ing the work of other organizati ons, either in the areas of debt servicing or trade 
finance, from the point of view of trade. The question raised was what the WTO could  contribut e to 
assist trade financing. In this regard, the ACP submission identified some elements, where  the 
WTO could play a role. The WTO ha d a role to work with other organizations , to assist Members to 
address trade finance, access finance, debt servicing . The WTO had also a role in identifying the  
mechanisms and actions that the institution could come up with to assist Members to address the ir 
needs . 
2.24.   The Chair summed up the discussion on this item. She thanked the Representative of the 
ACP Group of States for the submission. In the presentation of such a submission, s he had heard 
the ACP Group mentioning  the impact of the pandemic, challenges relating to climate change and 
natural disasters, the importance of recovery  and of debt servicing, and of access to trade finance . 
Views had been expressed about the role the  WTO could play in those areas , and about  how the 
WTO could complement the work of other international organizations. She also heard that  the 
submission was geared towards improving the knowledge  of Members . While the submission by 
the ACP Group embodied the proposals by the Côte d'Ivoire, it ext ended to other areas of 
cooperative work on trade finance , and covered other dimensions  as well  (such as trade and debt). 
In the comments  from other Members , there had been views about reverting to the proposal by 
Côte d'Ivoire as a workable proposal, as w ell as views on specific areas of work to be considered  in 
the future . There had been views expressed on the way forward.  Once again, the Member -driven 
exchange of information had been  emphasized. Engaging with international organizations, 
especially multilateral development banks  and other suitable organization s, was mentioned. There 
were requests for clarification s on some aspects of the submission , including on  the time left for 
further work  before MC12. Only limited work could be done by then. There was a recognition of the 
seriousness of gaps in trade finance, but also on the impact of higher transaction costs  and market 
risks in low -income countries as underlying  causes of  these ga ps. There were concerns expressed 
regarding  issues raised in the proposal, whether they f ell within the mandate of the WTO , and 
question s regarding technical support provided by the  Secretariat since 2016. There were 
invitations to contin ue, after MC12, Me mber-driven  discussions on elements of the proposals 
submitted during the year, with a view to finding a consensus , and moving forward on elements of 
the proposals that could be agreed upon . With this, the Chair thanked all Members for their 
engagement.  
3  AGENDA ITEM 2. C: ANY OTHER BUSINESS  
3.1.  The Chair asked whether Members wished to raise any other business.  
3.2.  Since this was not the case, she closed  the meeting.  
__________