RESTRICTED  WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  G/STR/M/17 
12 December 2007 
 (07-5536) 
Working Party on State Trading Enterprises    
  
 
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE WORKING  
PARTY ON STATE TRADING ENTERPRISES 
HELD ON 8 OCTOBER 2007 
 
Chairperson:  Mr. Pornvit Sila-on (Thailand
) 
Page  
 
A. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA .........................................................................................................1  
B. REVIEW OF NEW AND FULL NOTIFICATI ONS SUBMITTED BY MEMBERS UNDER 
G/STR/N/10 AND G /STR/N/11 IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RECOMMENDATION 
CONTAINED IN G /STR/5................................................................................................................1  
C. REVIEW OF UPDATING AND NEW AND FULL NOT IFICATIONS SUBMITTED BY MEMBERS 
UNDER G /STR/N/5-G/STR/N/9 .......................................................................................................4  
D. ANNUAL REPORT (2007)  TO THE COUNCIL FOR TRADE IN GOODS ...............................................6  
E. OTHER BUSINESS .........................................................................................................................6  
 
A. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA  
1. The Chairman  referred to the proposed agenda contained in document WTO/AIR/3076 
circulated on 28 September 2007 and reiterated that me mbership in this Working Party is open to all 
Members of the WTO indicating their wish to serve on it.  
2. The Chairman  indicated that he would make an announcement under "Other Business" with 
respect to the date of the next regular meeting of the Working Party in the fall of 2007. 
3. The Working Party adopted  the agenda contained in WTO/AIR/3076, as amended. 
B. REVIEW OF NEW AND FULL NOTIFICATIONS  SUBMITTED BY MEMBERS UNDER G /STR/N/10 AND 
G/STR/N/11 IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RE COMMENDATION CONTAINED IN G /STR/5 
4. Before starting the substantive discussions  under this agenda item, the Chairman  made a 
statement regarding the review of notifications subm itted by Members at this meeting.  The Chairman 
recalled that, according to paragraph 5 of the Unde rstanding on the Interpretation of Article XVII of 
the GATT 1994, the Working Party is tasked w ith reviewing the notifications and counter-
notifications submitted by Members on their state tradi ng enterprises and, in light of this review, the 
Council for Trade in Goods may make recommendations with regard to the adequacy of notifications 
and the need for further information.  
5. The Chairman  suggested that the Working Party con duct this review in the same manner as 
that used for the review of notifications at prev ious meetings, that is, with a focus on two main 
elements:  (i) whether the notification responds ad equately to the information requested in the 
questionnaire contained in document G/STR/3, re vised on 14 November 2003 and contained in 
document G/STR/3/Rev.1;  and (ii) whether more info rmation is needed in order to permit – in the G/STR/M/17 
Page 2  
 
  language of paragraph 2 of the U nderstanding – "a clear appreciation of the manner of operation of 
the enterprises notified and the effect of  their operations on international trade". 
6. The Chairman
 also recalled that, at its meeting of 20 February 1995, the Council for Trade in 
Goods established a deadline of 30 June 1995 for ne w and full notifications by Members on their state 
trading enterprises, and that the Working Party sub sequently agreed to maintain 30 June of each 
respective year as the date for all further notifi cations.  On 11 November 2003, the Working Party 
adopted the recommendation contained in G/STR/5 re garding the frequency of notifications.  The said 
recommendation, approved by the Council for Trad e in Goods on 26 November 2003, modified the 
periodicity of state trading notifications so that ne w and full notifications on state trading became due 
every two years instead of every three years and that the requirement of updating notifications in the 
intervening years is eliminated. 
7. Accordingly, the Chairman  suggested that the review of Members' notifications be carried out 
under two separate agenda items.  Agenda item "B" which deals with  the new and full notifications 
submitted by Members under G/STR/N/10 dated 17 February 2004 and G/STR/N/11 dated 
27 January 2006 in accordance with the recommendati on contained in G/STR/5;  and agenda item "C" 
relating to the review of updating notifications submitted by Members under G/STR/N/5, G/STR/N/6,  
G/STR/N/7, G/STR/N/8 and G/STR/N/9 dated 10 March 1999, 1 March 2000, 26 February 2001, 
20 February 2002 and 21 February 2003 respectiv ely.  These notifications, required of all  
WTO Members, were due by 30 June of the respective years.  
8. The Chairman  reminded Members that as agreed at the Working Party's meeting in 
September 1996, notifications which were alread y reviewed and on which there might be written 
questions would not  be retained on the airgram for the Working Party's next regular meeting unless  a 
Member specifically so requested. 
9. The Chairman  drew Members' attention to the fact that the content of the Australian 
notification contained in G/STR/N/10/AUS was the same as that contained in document G/STR/N/11/AUS, dated 28 June 2006 and reviewed at the last meeting of the Working Party held on 
12 October 2006. 
10. The Working Party then proceeded
 with the review of the new and full notifications 
submitted by Members under G/STR/N/10 and G/STR/N/11. 
11. No questions were posed regarding the notification of Australia  (G/STR/N/10/AUS). 
12. No questions were posed regarding the notification of Canada  contained in document 
G/STR/N/10/CAN. On the notification of Canada  contained in document G/STR/N/11/CAN, the 
representative of the United States  posed oral questions1 concerning the Canadian Dairy Commission 
("CDC"). He inquired whether Canada believed that  the only products affected by the operations and 
activities of the CDC were butter, other fats and oils  derived from milk.  He also added that based on 
the description of the functions of the CDC, it would appear that the entire milk complex was affected 
by the structure and function of the CDC and he ask ed if Canada believed that this part of the 
notification would only apply to a product that was subject to exclusive requirements with respect to 
trade (imports or exports). 
13. The representative of Canada  indicated that she would refer the questions back to Ottawa for 
a complete answer. She also added that in prepar ing the notification, Cana da followed the guidelines 
in G/STR/3/Rev.1 with respect to the informa tion required in each portion of the notification. 
                                                      
1 Now circulated as G/STR/Q1/CAN/7.  G/STR/M/17 
 Page 3 
 
 
  14. No questions were posed regarding the notifications of Chile  (G/STR/N/10/CHL & Corr.1) –  
(G/STR/N/11/CHL & Corr.1). 
15. No questions were posed regarding the notifications of Colombia  (G/STR/N/10/COL) –  
(G/STR/N/11/COL). 
16. No questions were posed regarding the no tifications of the European Communities  
(G/STR/N/10/EEC) - (G/STR/N/11/EEC). The repre sentative of the European Communities made a 
comment concerning the tables attached to the draft Annual Report (2007) describing the state of play of the different notifications, in particular the notifications made by some of the ten Members
2 which 
became Member States of the Eu ropean Communities on 1 May 2004 and which appear in this table 
with blanks concerning the year 2004.  He referred  to the new and full notifications made by the 
European communities in October 2006 as not only covering the European Communities' then 
15 Member States for 2004-2006, but also the ten Me mbers States as of 1 May 2004.  He requested 
the Chairman to suggest the necessary steps to be take n in order to comply full y with the notifications 
requirement.   
17. The Chairman  indicated that the ten Members which became European Communities' 
Member States as of 1 May 2004 and have not ye t provided a 2004 new and full notification in 
response to the request contained in  G/STR/N/10 dated 17 February 20043, could inform the European 
Communities of the details regarding their state trad ing enterprises with respect to that period, and 
that the European Communities could in turn ma ke the necessary notification on behalf of these 
Member States.   
18. The representative of the European Communities  thanked the Chairman for his suggestion 
and indicated that he would contact the Secret ariat to find the appropriate way to do that.  
19. On the notification of Japan  contained in document G/STR/N/11/JPN, the representative of 
Australia  posed oral questions4. Australia noted that, in 1997, the Sugar Price Stabilization Agency 
was merged into the Agriculture and Livestock Indus tries Corporation ("ALIC") and that, at the time, 
Australia submitted questions regarding th e administrative arrangements for ALIC 
(G/STR/Q1/JPN/2).  He stated that as Japan continues to notify ALIC as an STE, he inquired whether 
Japan could provide details on th e administrative arrangements for the Agriculture and Livestock 
Industries Corporation (ALIC) as outlined in G/STR/Q1/JPN/2.  He  also questioned whether Japan 
could advise if ALIC con tinues to administer the do mestic distribution of suga r imports, and if so, if 
Japan could explain the administrative arrangements, including importing and on-selling rights, together with any pricing arrangements.   
20. The representative of Japan
 explained that he did not have the information to answer 
Australia's questions at the meeting and that he would refer such questions back to Capital for 
answers. 
21. No questions were posed regarding the notification of Macao, China  
(G/STR/N/11/MAC/Suppl.1). 
22. No questions were posed regarding the notification of Qatar  (G/STR/N/11/QAT&Rev.1). 
23. No questions were posed regarding the notification of Saudi Arabia  (G/STR/N/11/SAU). 
                                                      
2 Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latv ia, Lithuania, Malta, Pola nd, the Slovak Republic 
and Slovenia 
3 Cyprus, Estonia, Hungary, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Slovak Republic and Slovenia 
4 Now circulated as G/STR/Q1/JPN/6. G/STR/M/17 
Page 4  
 
  24. No questions were posed regarding the notification of Singapore
 (G/STR/N/11/SGP). 
25. No questions were posed regardi ng the notification of Chinese Taipei  (G/STR/N/11/TPKM).  
26. No questions were posed regarding the notification of Turkey  (G/STR/N/11/TUR).  
27. On the notification of the United States  contained in document G/STR/N/11/USA, the 
representative of Australia  posed oral questions5. He stated that Australia understood from the United 
States' notification that the Unite d States' exporters could apply for certain legal protection from 
antitrust laws.  In this respect, he inquired  about  the United States' reasoning for allowing scope for 
agricultural entities to enjoy a lesser standard of  antitrust compliance than other companies doing 
business, and requested the United States to provid e details on the names and number of entities 
granted certificates of exemption under the Export Trading Company Act 1982 and on the number and 
names of entities which have entered into marketing arrangements under the Agricultural Marketing 
Agreement Act.    
28. The representative of Australia added th at Australia also understood that the Agricultural 
Marketing Agreement Act  provided antitrust immunity to mark eting agreements formed under the 
direction of the Secretary of Agriculture. He request ed the United States to provide details on this Act   
including in particular with respect to the objectiv e and operation of orderly marketing in international 
trade.  He also requested the United States to expl ain whether consideration was given to limiting the 
scope for creation of cartels which can result in ra ised prices and provide further information on how 
surplus commodities are disposed an d reserve pools are established under this Act. He also inquired 
whether this Act could confer privileges to en tities which enable them to purchase commodities under 
favourable circumstances for later export.  
29. The representative of Australia noted that th e United States has recently finalised a 
comprehensive review of its antitrust laws to dete rmine whether such laws should be modernised and 
that the Antitrust Modernisation Commission's report of April this year recommended that statutory immunities should be disfavoured. He requested the United States to provide further information on 
the extent to which the report's recommendations ha ve been adopted as it relates to agricultural 
entities, including those granted immunities from anti-trust laws under the Capper Volstead Act , the 
Export Trading Company Act  and the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act .   
30. The representative of the United States
 indicated that he would refer these questions back to 
Capital for answers. 
31. No questions were posed regarding the notifications of Zambia  (G/STR/N/10/ZMB) – 
(G/STR/N/11/ZMB).  
32. No questions were posed regarding the notification of Zimbabwe  (G/STR/N/11/ZWE).  
C. REVIEW OF UPDATING AND NEW AND FULL NOTIF ICATIONS SUBMITTED BY MEMBERS UNDER 
G/STR/N/5-G/STR/N/9    
33. No questions were posed regard ing the notifications of Canada  (G/STR/N/5/CAN) –
(G/STR/N/6/CAN) – (G/STR/N/7/CAN) – (G/STR/N/8/CAN) – (G/STR/N/9/CAN). 
34. No questions were posed regarding the notifications of Chile  (G/STR/N/8/CHL/Corr.1) –    
(G/STR/N/9/CHL/Corr.1). 
                                                      
5 Now circulated as G/STR/Q1/USA/12.  G/STR/M/17 
 Page 5 
 
 
  35. No questions were posed regarding the no tifications of the European Communities  
(G/STR/N/8/EEC) – (G/STR/N/9/EEC). 
36. In light of the fact that some delegations were  not able to respond fully to the oral questions 
raised on their respective notificati ons at the meeting, the Chairman  invited the delegations that raised 
the oral questions, and wished to have written an swers, to submit these in writing directly to the 
Member concerned, with a copy to the Secretariat for circulation.  The Chairman  noted that written 
responses to all written questions s hould be submitted directly to the inquiring country, also with a 
copy to the Secretariat for circulation, as soon as possible. 
37. Before closing this item, the Chairman  touched upon the status of notifications made to the 
Working Party.  He noted that for the period 1999-2004, the European Communities and its then 
15 Member States were counted as one.  He noted th at as Cyprus;  the Czech Republic;  Estonia;  
Hungary;  Latvia;  Lithuania;  Malta;  Poland;  the Slovak Republic and Slovenia became European 
Communities' Member States on 1 May 2004, they we re counted separately and not as part of the 
European Communities, for the period 1999-2004 in order to reflect their previous notification 
obligation.  With respect to the year 2006, the Eu ropean Communities and its then 25 Member States 
were counted as one. With respect to Bulgaria a nd Romania, which became European Communities' 
Member States as of 1 January 2007, they were also counted separately and not as part of the European Communities in order to reflect  their previous notification obligation.
   
38. With respect to new and full notifications, the Ch airman stated that the situation had slightly 
improved.  As of 8 October 2007,  54 out of 128 Members had responded to the 2001 request; which is 
42% of Members, 34 out of 133 Members have r esponded to the 2004 request, which is 25% of  
Members, and finally 22 out of 124 Members have  responded to the 2006 request, which is  17% of 
Members. In the area of updating notifications, however , the figures were almost stagnant if compared 
to last year's figures.  Only 47 out of 121 Member s have submitted notifications for 1999; 44 out of 
125 for 2000; 42 out of 129 for 2002; and 33 out of 131 for 2003, which is 38%;  35%;  32% and 25% of  Members respectively.  
39. Although he welcomed this improvement, however slight it may be in the area of new and full 
notifications especially for the period 2004-2006, the Chairman urged Members to promptly comply with the notification obligation which became far less burdensome after the modification of the periodicity of state trading notifications. He sin cerely believed that a more tangible improvement and 
a higher degree of compliance with the notification obligation could be achieved.  
40. The Working Party took note
 of the Chairman's statement. 
41. The Chairman also made a brief statement pertaining to the issue of the "Frequency of 
Notifications". He recalled that, on 11 November 2003, the Working Party adopted the 
recommendation contained in document G/STR/5 re garding the frequency of notifications. This 
recommendation, approved by the Council for Trad e in Goods on 26 November 2003, modified the 
periodicity of state trading notifications so that new & full notifications on state trading are due every 
two years instead of every three years and the requi rement of updating notifications in the intervening 
years is eliminated. The Chairman explained that pu rsuant to paragraph 4 of this recommendation, the 
Working Party should, after a trial period of four  years which commenced on 30 June 2004, review 
the situation with regard to compliance with the notification obligation and the frequency of 
notifications, with a view to determining whether to extend the application of this recommendation, 
whether as presently drafted or in a modified form for a further period. Accordingly, the Chairman  
proposed to hold informal consultations with Memb ers during the first semester of 2008 in order to 
explore whether the application of this recomme ndation should be extended, either as presently 
drafted or in a modified form for a further period.  It was agreed that such consultations take place on G/STR/M/17 
Page 6  
 
  Monday, 31 March 2008. The Chairman indicated that a fax convening such meeting along with a 
number of questions to help stimulate the discussion on this matter would be sent to Members prior to 
these consultations.  He added that the outcome of  such consultations should be conveyed to the 
regular meeting of the Working Party in October 200 8 for a decision to be referred to the Council for 
Trade in Goods for approval.   
D. 
ANNUAL REPORT (2007)  TO THE COUNCIL FOR TRADE IN GOODS  
42. The Working Party adopted  the Annual Report (2007) to the Council for Trade in Goods 
which was circulated as document G/L/829. 
E. OTHER BUSINESS  
43. The Chairman proposed that the next regular m eeting of the Working Party would be held on 
Friday, 3 October 2008.  The airgram convening the meeting will be circulated to all Members on 
Tuesday, 23 September 2008.  The last date for inscr iption of items on the agenda of the meeting will 
be Friday, 19 September 2008 by close of busines s. Finally, the Chairman urged all Members to 
respect the deadline of 30 June for submitting their notifications. He strongly emphasized the significance of this deadline for the smooth operati on of the notifications review process, for giving 
Members an ample opportunity to study the notificati ons ahead of the meeting in their preferred WTO 
working language, and for allowing the Secretariat to carry on with the transl ation and circulation of 
documents in a timely and efficient manner.  He indicated that in case of delays, Members should 
endeavour to submit their notifications at least 10 w eeks prior to the date of the meeting at which the 
notifications are to be reviewed. He also requested  that written questions be provided 6 weeks before 
the date of the meeting, and that written answer s to written questions should be provided well in 
advance of the meeting.        
44. The meeting was adjourned
. 
__________