WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  G/VAL/W/181 
10 June 2009 
 (09-2809) 
Committee on Customs Valuation Original:   English 
  
 
NOTIFICATIONS UNDER ARTICLE 22 OF THE CUSTOMS  
VALUATION AGREEMENT 
 
Questions from the United States Regarding the Legislation of Bahrain, St. Vincent and the 
Grenadines and Thailand  
 
  The following communication, dated 26 May 200 9, is circulated at the request of the 
delegation of the United States.  
_______________ 
 
 
Questions for Bahrain
 
 The United States is pleased by Bahrain’s recent subm ission of its customs valuation legislation.  In 
response to the information contained in Ba hrain’s notifications (G/VAL/N/2/BHR/1 and 
G/VAL/N/1/BHR/1), we would greatly appreciat e clarification on the following points:  
 
1. We have heard that in 2008, the GCC and/or  Bahrain either amended the Common Customs 
Law or provided additional rules impacting the implementation of the Valuation Agreement.  
Could Bahrain please confirm if this is accurate?  If so, we request that Bahrain provide a 
copy of the 2008 changes as soon as possible.   
 
2. With respect to the 2003 version of the GCC Common Customs Law, we would appreciate 
Bahrain’s clarification on a few points relate d to its implementation of the GCC Common 
Customs Law.  First, regarding the appeals pr ocess provided for in the Customs law, Article 
61 appears to establish a committee to review th e customs officials’ valuation decisions.  
Article 61 also provides that the committee “may seek assistance of experts at its discretion.”  
In Bahrain: 
 
a. How many officers are appointed to the committee? 
b. Are the officers Customs officers?  
c. What is the level of the officers? 
d. What type of experts would the committee consult? 
e. How many times has this procedure been used?   
f. Once the committee issues its decision, can the importer appeal the decision to a 
judicial authority? 
 
3. Under Article 62, a dispute between the cust oms officer and the owner of the goods is 
referred to the director for settlement. 
 
a. What process does the director use to resolve the dispute?  
 
b. Is the director’s decision provided to the owner of the goods in writing? G/VAL/W/181 
Page 2  
 
   
c. Who decides and what process is used to determine whether a referral of the matter 
goes to the Director Gene ral or to the committee? 
 d. Article 61 states that the committee decisi ons are effective once approved by the 
Director General, please explain the steps in the appeal process under Articles 61 and 
62.  
 
4. Should it become necessary to delay the final de termination of valuati on, Article 62 provides 
that the director “may release the goods in dispute, if not prohibited.”  Under what 
circumstances would the release of th e goods be prohibited in Bahrain?   
 
5. Article 66 references rules and conditions prescribed by the Director General for release of 
goods prior to payment of customs duties and taxes against a guarantee.  Can you please provide a copy of Bahrain’s rules and cond itions.  Please explain the relationship between 
Article 66 and Article (1)1 of the Rules of Implementation providing that an importer can 
withdraw its goods after payment of a “cash deposit.”  
 
6. We would also like to seek clarification regarding the Fourth Method, or the Deductive 
Value.  In applying this method, how does Bahrain treat the deduction of  the costs and 
charges referred to in Article 8.2 of the Agreement?   
 
7. Finally, please indicate where Bahrain, in its le gislation, has incorporated Article 16 of the 
Agreement, providing the importer with the right to a written explanation from the customs administration as to how the customs value of the goods was determined?   
 
 
Questions to St. Vincent and the Grenadines
 
 
The United States would like to thank St. Vincent and the Grenadines for its notifications.  In 
response to the information provided in documen ts G/VAL/N/1/VCT/1 and G/VAL/N/2/VCT/1, we 
have a few questions that we would appreciate clar ification on.  These questions were also raised 
during the meeting of the Committee on Customs Valuation on 7 May 2009.   
 
1. We would appreciate if St. Vincent and the Gren adines could indicate where in the legislation 
the confidentiality provisions prescribed by Article 10 have been incorporated. 
 
2. What is the intent of Section 3(6), which a ppears to deal with th e concept of “sold for 
export.”?  
 
3. Please elaborate on the process by which laws , regulations, decisions and rulings are 
published and made available to all persons ?  Are they available via the internet? 
 
4. Additionally, we are concerned that a couple of  the existing provisions may not be consistent 
with the Customs Valuation Agreement.  
  
a. Specifically, section 6(3) states that “if the comptroller so decides” then the deductive 
method shall be used.  However, Article 5.2 of the Agreement indicates that this 
method shall be used “if the importer so requests.”  Could you please clarify the 
operation of this provision. 
 b. We are also concerned that Section 98 of the Management Act may not fully 
implement Article 13 of the Agreement, whic h provides the importer with the right to  G/VAL/W/181 
 Page 3 
 
 
  withdraw its goods from customs in the cas e of a delay in reaching a valuation 
decision.  Section 98 seems to give the Comp troller control to require the provision of 
a bond “if he sees fit,” but there is no subsequent provision referring to the release of imported goods from customs custody.  Are there additional provisions on the release 
of goods under bond? 
 
5. Finally, could St. Vincent and the Grenadines cl arify that the reference in Section 4(5) to 
“similar goods” should in fact be “identical goods”? 
  
Questions to Thailand
 
 The United States was recently advised that Thailand is considering a draft amendment of its Customs 
Law.  We would appreciate if Thailand could provid e an update on the status of that proposed draft 
amendment to the Customs Law, including when it might  be sent to the Thai Cabinet for its approval.  
Additionally, we would also appreciate written responses to the following questions:  
 
1. We would like to better unders tand Thailand's objectives in the amendment of its Customs 
Law.  For example, why does the amendmen t omit any reference to customs valuation 
methods? 
 
2. Additionally, we are concerned about Thailand’ s current customs penalty regime and how it 
operates in the customs valuation area.  We request  an explanation of the Thai penalty regime.   
 
3. We are also concerned about the appeal pr ocess for customs valuation decisions.  Could 
Thailand please clarify whether penalties are increa sed in the case of an importer filing an 
appeal outside the Customs Department?  If so, what is the basis for this? 
 
4. Does Thailand provide importers with the right to an explanation in writing from Customs as 
to how the customs value of their goods was determined?  Can Thaila nd provide a reference 
to this provision in its law or regulation?  
 
5. Finally, what is the status of the Thai legi slation to end the use of reference prices in 
determining customs value under Section 11 bi s of Thailand’s Customs Act BE 2469?  We 
continue to encourage that this provision be repealed as soon as possible.  
  
__________