WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  WT/REG198/5 
21 November 2008 
 
 (08-5698) 
Committee on Regional Trade Agreements Original:   English 
  
 
ECONOMIC PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT BETWEEN JAPAN AND MEXICO 
 
Questions and Replies
 
  
 The following communication, dated 18 and 21 November 2008, is being circulated at the 
request of the delegations of Japan and Mexico.   This document reproduces the questions addressed to the Parties and the responses submitted. 
 
_______________ 
 
 
Questions from the Delegation of Chinese Taipei
 
 Trade Environment 
 
1. According to paragraphs 1 and 4 of the WT O Secretariat’s Factual Presentation, we 
know that this Agreement is Japan’s first cross- regional EPA and Mexico’s first EPA with an 
Asian country, and that over the period surveyed  (1999-2006), Mexico has run a consistent and 
growing trade deficit with Japan.  Could the Part ies provide answers to the following questions: 
 (i) What significant meaning does this Agreement have for each Party’s trade? 
Japan's response  
 
 The trade amount between the Parties has incr eased by 85 % (Japan figures) between FY2004 
(the year preceding its entry into force) and FY 2007.  Therefore EPA has had positive effect on the 
promotion of the bilateral trade.  With respect to Japanese exports, strong growth has been observed 
particularly in exports of automobile and autom obile parts, as well as parts of television or other 
products.  
Mexico's response
 
 
 The EPA with Japan is the cornerstone of the strategy of Mexico in considering Asia as a 
fundamental part of its international trade policy,  and thus to contribute to its competitiveness, by 
means of four great action lines:  
 
 (i) Exports, to develop the presence of Mexican products in new markets; 
 (ii) Imports, to facilitate supplies at low cost , particularly of high technological content, 
and to strengthen the production in Mexico; 
 (iii) Attraction of investment, to suppor t the production in high added value sectors in 
Mexico; 
 (iv) Cooperation, to take advantage of th e liberalization benefits, and the opening of 
market of goods, services, and capital.  WT/REG198/5 
Page 2  
 
   (ii) Does Mexico intend to balance the above-mentioned trade status with Japan 
 through this EPA? 
Mexico's response
 
  Mexico’s deficit is explained due to the stru cture of the exports of each country towards the 
other.  Japan exports to Mexico mainly high a nd medium high technology products, whilst Mexico 
exports to Japan agricultural and medium high technology products.    On the other hand approximately 90% of the Mexican imports from Ja pan are intermediate 
and capital goods that are not produced in Mexico, such as, specialized semiconducting steel, panels 
for television sets of plasma and liquid crystal (LCD ), autoparts and equipment of precision.  Those 
products are incorporated into the production of  companies established in Mexico in sectors like 
autoparts-automotive and electrical-electronic, and later they are exported incorporated into final 
goods of greater added value.  
 Notwithstanding, Mexico should take actions to  sustain the exports growth tendency and to 
develop new markets in Japan, and take adva ntage of the benefits granted by the EPA. 
 Tariff-Rate Quotas (TRQs ) 
 
2. As regards TRQs, paragraph 31 of the WTO Secretariat’s Factual Presentation 
indicates that, as in the case of Japan, the futu re quota quantities and in-quota duties for the 
sixth year onwards are subject to further cons ultations.  Hence, we have the following 
questions: 
 (i) Do the Parties have any set plans for further consultations?  What sectors will be 
 involved? 
 
 The Parties do not have any set plan for further consultations yet.  
 
 (ii) By contrast, does Mexico also undertake  to further consult on its future quota 
quantities and in-quota duties? 
 
 Mexico is planning to hold consultations in the agricultural sector. 
 
Safeguard mechanisms 
 
3. Paragraph 51 of the WTO Secretariat’s Factual Presentation states that safeguard 
measures cannot be applied to imports within  the tariff-rate quota quantities granted under 
Annex 1 of the Agreement.  Can the Parties pl ease explain why safeguard measures cannot be 
applied to imports within the tariff-rate quota qu antities, which also constitute a part of the 
increased imports? 
 This is about a bilateral safeguard, which is different from the one established in the 
Safeguards Agreement.  In this EPA, each Party introduced schemes for tariff rate quota.  Such 
scheme has a function as a kind of a safeguard.  So it  would not be appropriate to apply the bilateral 
Safeguard measures to imports within the quota. 
 
   WT/REG198/5 
 Page 3 
 
 
  4. Paragraph 52 of the WTO Secretariat’s Factual Presentation states that the measures 
cannot be applied to goods which have already b een subject to a bilate ral safeguard measure, 
for a period of time equal to the duration of the previous measure or one year, whichever is 
longer.  We would like to know why the Parties wa nt to decrease the cooling period to one year, 
as oppose to two years stipulated in Articl e 7.5 of the WTO Agreement on Safeguards? 
 The intention is to maintain certain balan ce between the duration of the measure and the 
“cooling period.”  Investment 
 
5. Paragraph 2 of Article 70 of this EPA requires the Party that intends to deny the 
benefits of the Agreement to an enterprise invest or of the other Party to make prior notification 
and consultation.  We would like to know whet her the counterparts, with whom the denying 
Party consults, are limited to the other Party on ly.  And if the counterparts cannot come to an 
agreement on the subject raised by the denyin g Party, under what circumstances might the 
denying Party unilaterally deny the benefits of the Agreement to the enterprise investor? 
 Under Paragraph 2 of Article 70, the denying Pa rty is supposed to consult only with the other 
Party.  Although this paragraph does not require  the Parties to reach an agreement in the 
consultations, the provision on such consultations does not fit into the idea of “unilateral” denial of 
the benefits of the Chapter 7.  The denying Party is expected to take into account the other Party’s 
views during the consultations.  
6. One of the conditions that must be fulfille d before an investor submits a claim to 
arbitration is that the investor, according to pa ragraph 2(d) of Article 81 of the Agreement, has 
withdrawn any proceedings initiated before an ad ministrative tribunal or court.  We would 
appreciate it if the Parties could advise us whether there exists any proceedings that, under the domestic laws of Japan and Mexico, cannot be  withdrawn; and if there are indeed such 
proceedings, what those proceedings are?  
Japan's response
 
  Under the Code of Civil Procedure of Japan, a party is not allowed to withdraw an action 
without the consent of the other party after the othe r party has submitted a brief, made statements in 
preparatory proceedings or conducted oral arguments on the merits. 
 
Mexico's response
 
  Under the Mexican legal system and in par ticular its Federal Civil Code, any proceeding 
which an investor can trigger can be withdrawn. 
 
Questions from the Delegation of the European Communities
 
 Goods liberalization  7. The Factual Presentation indicates that by th e end of implementation in 2015, 94.1% of 
tariff lines and 98.9% of the value of Mexico im ports from Japan will be duty-free whilst only 
87% of tariff lines and 86.1% by value of Jap an imports from Mexico will be liberalized. 
 Could the Parties elaborate on the reaso ns for this asymmetrical liberalization? 
 WT/REG198/5 
Page 4  
 
   The figures concerning the liberalization commitm ents reflect the results of the negotiations 
between both Parties, taking into consideration each  Party’s specific interests or concerns.  Both 
Parties conducted the negotiations ai ming to achieve well-balanced co mmitments, and do not consider 
the outcome as « asymmetrical liberalization ».  
  Japan’s liberalization commitments are substa ntial and high-level e nough to be consistent 
with the WTO benchmark, i.e. liberalization of “substantially all the trade”.  On top of the 
liberalization ratio as indicated in the Factual Pres entation (which includes tariff elimination within 
10 years), taking into consideration Mexican inter ests, Japan also reduces du ties or establish special 
arrangements for tariff rate quotas, for certain sensitive products.  
 
8. Conversely, most of the liberalization by Jap an took place upon entry into force of the 
Agreement when 3,367 tariff lines became duty-f ree for imports from Mexico.  On the other 
hand, the largest share of Mexico's liberalizat ion will only be completed by 2014-2015 at the 
very end of the implementation period. 
 Could the Parties elaborate on the reasons of this difference? 
 
 The difference reflects the result of the nego tiation which considered the situation of both 
Parties. 
 
9. As regards Mexico's liberalization schedules, it is indicated that at the end of the 
implementation period, in 2015, Mexico will main tain tariffs in 29 tariff lines of Transport 
Equipment.  
 What are the reasons for this excepti on in their liberalization schedule? 
 
 It was the result of the negotiation taking into account interests of Mexico and Japan. 
 Sanitary and phytosanitary measures  10. Paragraph 42 of the Factual Presentation notes describes the objectives of the 
Sub-Committee on SPS measures.  
 Could the Parties describe in more deta il how cooperation on addressing SPS concerns 
works in practice?  
 The SPS Sub-Committee meetings have been held once a year since the entry into force of the 
EPA in April 2005, which aim to facilitate scien ce-based consultations on SPS issues between the 
Parties.  The significant improvements have been achieved in the following areas:  
 (i) exportation of Mexican oranges and grapefruits to Japan by cold treatment, 
fumigation or hot air treatment;  and 
 
 (ii) confirmation of formats of zoosanitary  export certificates for beef, pork and poultry 
meat products from Mexico to Japan. 
  Could the Parties explain on which basis can Japan export meat products to Mexico?  
Could the Parties indicate how sa nitary controls are undertaken?  
 
 
 
  WT/REG198/5 
 Page 5 
 
 
  Japan's response  
 
Meat products export from Japan to Mexico shoul d be discussed and implemented in respect 
of animal health and food safety.  
 Japan has only been requesting export of beef  to Mexico and consultations are under way. 
 
Mexico's response
 
 
 Japan could export meat to Mexico taking into  account the previous exchanged information of 
quarantine diseases for Mexico and also the execution of in site  inspection visits to the establishments 
with the objective to evaluate the plants and the veterinary and inspection systems. 
 
Further liberalization  
 
11. Could the Parties confirm whether they have  agreed to pursue further liberalization 
regarding current commitments in both trade in goods and trade in services? If so, could the Parties explain the scope and objectives of these new commitments? 
 With respect to services sector, the Agreement does not contain specific provisions for further 
liberalization.  Nonetheless it contains a “ratch et clause”, through which modifications to the 
measures of a Party reducing the level of restrictiveness for trade in services of a particular sector is 
automatically consolidated for the other Party.   The ratchet clause is a clause of automatic 
liberalization that introduces economies in th e negotiating process by replacing provision on 
successive rounds of negotiations.    
 With respect to trade in goods, the Parties agreed to consult i ssues such as improving market 
access, particularly for products which do not benef it from complete tariff elimination, as stated in 
Article 5 of the EPA.  
Questions from the Delegation of Turkey
 
 
Trade environment 
 12. Footnote to paragraph 4 reveals that the Parties use different accounting methods for 
calculating trade data.  Could the Parties detail what kind of accounting methods in calculating 
trade data they use? 
Japan's response
 
  We are not in a position to know the details of accounting methods adopted by UN Comtrade, but one possible explanation might be that sometimes,  the final destination of the goods is different 
from the reported country of export.  For exam ple some products may be reported to Mexican 
customs as export to the US, when the final destination is actually Japan.  In such a case, Japanese 
imports from Mexico include these products, but Mexican exports to Japan do not. 
 Mexico's response
 
  According to Mexico’s TPR (2007), using data  on imports from Mexico recorded by third 
countries, instead of those registered as exports by  Mexico, suggests that the value of Mexican sales 
to Canada, China, the European Communities, the Republic of Korea and Japan could each be 
underestimated by between 30 and 180%.  WT/REG198/5 
Page 6  
 
  Goods liberalization 
 
13. In paragraph 19, it has been stated that “The Parties agree not to institute or maintain 
any prohibitions or restrictions on imports from  each other, other than customs duties, which 
are inconsistent with their obligations und er Article XI of the GATT 1994 and relevant 
provisions under the WTO Agreement (Article 7.1).  Mexico has listed current restrictions and 
prohibitions on imports and exports in Annex;  under the Agreement these can be maintained, 
provided that they are consistent with Me xico's rights and obligations under the WTO 
Agreement (Article 7.2) and do not accord more favourable treatment to non-Parties, including 
with which Mexico has concluded an agreement under Article XXIV of the GATT 1994 and the 
Understanding on the Interpretation of Article XXIV of the GATT 1994.  The measures mainly 
concern HS Chapters 27 and 87.” 
 Could the Parties elaborate on why Mexico’s restrictions and prohibitions on imports 
and exports are listed in an Annex to the Agreement  if they are consistent with its rights and 
obligations under the WTO Agreement? 
 
Mexico's response
 
 
 In fact, Mexico´s restrictions and prohibitions on imports and exports are listed in Annex 2 of 
the Agreement and they are consistent with its ri ghts and obligations of the WTO Agreement.  The 
aim is to show the restrictions and prohibitions on  imports and exports that Mexico applies to Japan. 
 
14. Regarding liberalization of trade and tariff lines in Tables II.1-A and B, it is understood 
that Japan fully liberalizes 87% of tariff lines and 86.1% imports by value from Mexico 
(paragraph 21) while Mexico does liberalize 94.1% of tariff lines and 98.9% of the value of 
imports from Japan (paragraph 22) by the end of the implementation period in 2015. 
Paragraph 3 describes asymmetric trade and eco nomic potentials in favour of Japan, and 
paragraph 4 states that Mexico has run a consiste nt and growing trade deficit with Japan in the 
period of 1999-2006.  Could Jap an explain the reasons for pursuing less ambitious liberalization 
commitments? Does Japan think of providing Me xico with better market access conditions 
before or after the implementation period in 2015? 
Japan's response  
  Japan’s liberalization commitments are substa ntial and high-level e nough to be consistent 
with the WTO benchmark, i.e. liberalization of “substantially all the trade”.  On top of the 
liberalization ratio as indicated in the Factual Pres entation (which includes tariff elimination within 
10 years), taking into consideration Mexican inter ests, Japan also reduces du ties or establish special 
arrangements for tariff rate quotas, for certain sensitive products. 
  With regard to the improvement of market ac cess before or after 2015, the Parties will consult 
each other in relevant Sub-Comm ittees established under this EPA. 
 
15. In Table II.2, 1057 tariff lines for agricultura l products (HS Section I-IV) on Japan’s 
Side, in Table II.3, 573 tariff lines for agricul tural products on Mexi can Side will remain 
dutiable at the end of implementation period (2015).  Could the Parties analyse the reasons 
behind less liberalization in agricultural products? 
Japan's response
 
 
 The figures reflect the results of the negotia tions conducted by both Parties, taking into 
consideration each side’s specific interests and concerns.  WT/REG198/5 
 Page 7 
 
 
  Mexico's response  
  Both countries recognized sensitivities in some products, however these could be subject to 
consultation in accordance with the Article 5 of the Agreement.   
 
Standards 
 
16. According to paragraph 43 and 47, Dispute Settlement Provisions set out in Chapter 15 
do not apply to SPS and TBT measures.  Could th e Parties share with th e members the reasons 
for not including the settlement of issues ar ising from SPS and TBT measures in the dispute 
settlement provisions in Chapter 15? 
 The SPS and TBT Chapters of the EPA, while  establishing the framework of bilateral 
cooperation, only reaffirm existing rights and oblig ations of the Parties under the WTO Agreement. 
Regarding these Chapters, the procedures under Chapte r 15 which aim at settling disputes is not fit to 
the concept of SPS and TBT Chapters whose main  objectives are enhancing cooperation.    
 
 Therefore, it is not necessary nor adequate for the dispute settlement provisions of this EPA to 
apply to SPS and TBT Chapters.  If a dispute arises, the Parties could seek settlement under the WTO Understanding on Rules and Procedures G overning the Settlement of Disputes. 
 17. With respect to bilateral safeguards, par agraph 52 foresees that “Bilateral safeguards 
cannot be imposed for more than three years (c ompared to four years in the WTO Agreement 
on Safeguards), but can be extended up to a maximum period of four years in very exceptional circumstances subject to prior consultations.” Could the Parties share with the members what 
are these “very exceptional  circumstances” cover? 
 There are no special circumstances delimited.  It will be reviewed on a case by case basis and 
we will analyse the extension of the bilateral safeguard measure.  
Questions from the Delegation of the United States
 
 
Goods liberalization  
 18. According to paragraphs 21 and 22, and Annex 1 (Tables A.1 and A.2) of the Factual 
Presentation: 
 Japan
 will eliminate duties on 87% of all tariff lines and 86.1% of imports from Mexico 
under the agreement.  Though 97.5% of industria l goods tariffs are duty-free by the end of the 
implementation period, only 42.1% of agricul tural tariffs are duty-free under the agreement. 
  Mexico
 will eliminate duties on 94.1% of all ta riff lines covering 98.9% of imports from 
Japan under the agreement.  Though 98.6% of indu strial tariffs are duty-free by the end of the 
implementation period, only 53.1% of agr icultural tariff lines are duty-free under the 
agreement. 
 
 This disparity in tariff liberalization betw een the two Parties is striking.  For what 
reasons did Japan undertake lesser liberalization than Mexico?   
 
Japan's response  
  The figures concerning liberalization commitme nts reflect the results of the negotiations 
between both Parties, taking into  consideration each Party’s specific interests or concerns.  WT/REG198/5 
Page 8  
 
   Japan’s liberalization commitments are substa ntial and high-level e nough to be consistent 
with the WTO benchmark, i.e. liberalization of “substantially all the trade”.  On top of the 
liberalization ratio as indicated in the Factual Pres entation (which includes tariff elimination within 
10 years), taking into consideration Mexican interest s, Japan also reduces tari ffs or establish special 
arrangements for tariff quotas, for certain sensitive products. 
 
19. How do the Parties explain the highly di sproportionate liberalization between the 
industrial and agricultural sectors?  
Japan's response
 
 
 The figures concerning the liberalization commitm ents reflect the results of the negotiations 
conducted by both Parties, taking in to consideration each Party’s specific interests and concerns.  In 
the agricultural, forestry and fish ery sector, in addition to the tariff elimination commitments within 
10 years, Japan also reduce tariffs or establish special arrangements for tariff quotas, for certain 
sensitive products and as a result, approximately 97 % of  the total import of agricultural, forestry and 
fishery goods by value from Mexico to Japan in 2002 is subject to tariff elimination or reduction 
under this EPA.  In the case of the industrial produc ts, 99 % of the import by value from Mexico to 
Japan is subject to such elimination or reduction. 
 
Mexico's response  
  Approximately 99.54 % of imports by value to  Mexico from Japan (in 2007) are subject to 
tariff elimination or reduction under this EPA, 99.57 % correspond to the industrial sector.  Many 
agricultural products were negotia ted under TRQs.  These products ar e subject to consultations to 
further improve market access as established in Article 5 of Chapter 3 of the EPA. 
 
20. Could the Parties please explain how their tariff elimination commitments achieve the 
“substantially all trade” standard set out in GATT Article XXIV?  
 While GATT Article XXIV paragraph 8 do es not specify a quantitative benchmark of 
"substantially all the trade", Japan and Mexico ar e  of the view that many members have been 
involved in RTA negotiations under the general per ception that duty elimination needs to cover at 
least 90% of trade between the parties and that no ex clusion of a major sector is allowed in respect of 
RTA’s consistency with the said provision. 
  Under this EPA, 96.5% of the bilateral trad e in volume (2002 - 2004) is subject to tariff 
elimination, and there is no exclusion of a major sector.   
  This demonstrates that this EPA does fulfil the "substantially all the trade" requirement. 
 
21. Please provide the average duty rate by HS chapter and
 HS section for the lines that 
remain dutiable. 
 Calculations done by the WTO Secretariat – See Annex Tables A.1-A.4.  
 
22. See paragraph 24 of the Factual Presentation.  Please explain what the following means: 
“other products whose duty is to be reduced or remained equivalent to MFN”.  How is the tariff 
treatment for these 26 lines different from the 1,032 lines that are excluded from liberalization?  
 
 
  WT/REG198/5 
 Page 9 
 
 
  Japan's response  
  These 26 lines of goods belong to two categories, X (excluded) and other categories (A, B4, 
B8, Ca or Q), while Annex I of the EPA has divi sion of a tariff line of goods beyond 9-digit of 
domestic tariff classification.  23. See paragraph 26 of the Factual Presentation.  Please explain what “subject to 
consultations” means with regards to duty elimin ation.   Will these lines be subject to future 
duty elimination? Please explain the tariff trea tment for the lines “whose tariff rates are to 
remain unchanged until 2015”.   After 2015 will th e duty on these lines be renegotiated or 
eliminated?  
 For products subject to consultation, the Parti es shall enter into consultation for further trade 
liberalization (after the third year) on the re quest of either Party, in accordance with 
subparagraph 3(a) (i) of Article 5 of Chapter 3 “Trade in goods”. 
  The goods whose tariff rates are to remain unchanged until 2015 will be subject to a MFN 
treatment. 
  Finally the Agreement provides the conditions fo r the Lines whose tariff rates are to remain 
unchanged until 2015 in Article 5. 
 
SPS 
 24. Paragraph 41 of the Factual Presentation not es that the FTA calls for the establishment 
of an enquiry point in Article 13.  As envisioned  by the FTA, is this enquiry point the same as 
the one envisioned under the WTO SPS Agreement?   
 The enquiry point established under this EPA  is different from the one under the WTO SPS 
Agreement.   Services  25. Paragraph 66 of the Factual Presentation no tes that the cross-border services chapter of 
the EPA does not contain market access provision s along the lines of Article XVI of the GATS. 
 Are measures of the kind included in GATS Article XVI listed anywhere in the EPA or 
in Parties’ Annexes, such that service supp liers of one Party are able to determine 
whether markets access restrictions that may affect their operations exist in the 
territory of the other Party? 
 
 Article 100 (Local presence) in the Cross-Border  Trade in Services Chapter of the EPA would 
be interpreted as setting forth a commitment of th e kind included in subparagraph 2(e) of GATS 
Article XVI and the measures inconsistent with this  commitment are listed in Annexes 6&7.  Besides, 
the Parties reserve in Annexes 6 and 7 regarding th e national treatment of investment, measures of the 
kind referred to in subparagraph 2. (f) of GATS Artic le XVI that may affect the service supply of 
subparagraph 2(c) of GATS Article 1. 
 
26. Paragraph 84 notes that both Parties to th e EPA maintain reservations on any future 
measures in new services. 
 Have the Parties agreed on a set of criteria that would establish what constitutes a “new 
 service”? WT/REG198/5 
Page 10  
 
   The Parties’ non-conforming measures Annexes note that the reservations for new 
services do not apply for services that are recogni zed or that should have been recognized by 
reference to the United Nations Central Product Classification. 
 
 Paragraph 20 of the Introduction to the Central Product Classification  (Principles used in 
constructing the CPC) notes that “the CPC, covering all goods and services, is a system 
of categories that are both exhaustive and mutually exclusive.”  On this basis, can 
Parties explain how any service could be constr ued as not being classified in the CPC for 
the purposes of determining whether that service should have been recognized? 
 
 The Parties have agreed on the set of criteri a of a “New Service”.  Annex 7 of the EPA 
stipulates that any (but solely) services "classified positively and explicitly" in the CPC at the time of 
entry into force of the EPA should have been recogni zed by the Parties.  There may be a case in which 
new services emerge in the future as a consequen ce of technological advances, which could not be 
foreseen at the time of entry into force of the CP C.  The CPC is only exhaustive as to the services that 
had been recognized by the time the CPC was dr awn up and adopted.  Para graph 59.B.2. of the 
Introduction to the Provisional Central Product Cl assification admits certain services may not be 
classified under the categories specified in the CPC.  27. Tables II.8 and II.10 of the Secretariat’s Repo rt note that both Parties to the EPA 
reserve the right to adopt any measure relating to  the supply of services in any mode of supply 
in which those services were not technically feas ible at the entry into force of the Agreement. 
 Technological advances have significantly increased the range and quantity of goods and 
services that can be traded across borders in  recent years.  The exclusion from EPA 
coverage of services that may be provided through new modes of supply is a regrettable 
feature in light of the enormous benefits to the global economy of trade in high-value products and services developed by industri es characterized by rapid technological 
innovation. 
 
 Could the Parties comment on why they envision a need to impose discriminatory 
measures on services that become technically feasible?  How is this consistent with the objectives of an agreement designed to liberalize and facilitate  trade between the Parties?  How is broadly reserving the ca pacity to impose future discriminatory 
measures consistent with the GATS Art. V ob ligation to provide for the elimination of 
substantially all discrimination? 
 This EPA takes the “negative list” approach to  specify the reservations made by each Party, 
which means that the Parties are bound by the obliga tions stipulated in the EPA, such as National 
Treatment, unless reservations are made in Annexes 6 and 7.  However, when a new, that is, unknown 
services established due to the innovation of tec hnology or other means, it is obvious that 
considerations to establish a new regulation regarding this new servi ce are to be made.  Considering 
the particularity of regulation of services and th e structure of this EPA mentioned above, it is 
necessary for the Parties to reserve the right to  impose appropriate measures in respect of new 
services that would be created after entry into force of the EPA.  
 In respect of the provision on “elimination of substantially all discrimination” 
(sub-paragraph 1.(b) of GATS Article  5), both Parties have eliminated the discriminatory measures in 
sectors broader than committed in their respective Schedules of Specific Commitments of the GATS. 
The Parties are also committed to National Treatment  in all the sectors except for a limited number of 
sectors stated in Annexes 6 and 7.  For these reasons , this EPA is consistent with GATS Article V. 
  WT/REG198/5 
 Page 11 
 
 
  28. Paragraph 91 notes that, where a Party rec ognizes the education, experiences, licenses 
or certifications obtained in a non-Party, it is  not required to accord such recognition to the 
other Party. 
 Why did Parties choose not to incorporate into the EPA the GATS Article VII principle 
that where recognition is accorded unilatera lly, an adequate opportunity should be 
afforded to demonstrate that education, exp erience, licenses, or certifications obtained 
in one Party should be recognized in the other? 
 
 Article 104 of the agreement (licensing and certif ication) is not inconsistent with the GATS, 
because the mentioned provision of the Agreement is  included in the preferential treatment between 
Mexico and Japan which is permitted under GATS Article V. 
 
 Therefore, the Parties are bound by Article V II of the GATS, and do not find it necessary to 
incorporate deliberately the GATS Article VII prin ciple in this Agreement.  Paragraph 2 of 
Article 104 of the Agreement does not deny the GATS Ar ticle VII principle, but reaffirm the principle 
of non-application of the MFN provisions, whic h is implied by Article VII of the GATS. 
 WT/REG198/5 
Page 12  
 
  ANNEX 
 
 
Table A.1 
Japan:  Average tariff for lines rem aining dutiable, by HS chapter 
HS chapter Description No of lines 
with duty Average final tariff 
(on dutiable lines) 
01 Live animals 8a 8.5 
02 Meat and edible meat offal 79a 16.7 
03 Fish and crustaceans, molluscs and other aquatic invertebrates 93 7.0 
04 Dairy produce; birds' eggs; natural honey;  edible products of animal origin, not 
elsewhere specified or included 67a 26.1 
05 Products of animal origin not el sewhere specified or included 2 2.3 
07 Edible vegetables and cer tain roots and tubers 43a 8.4 
08 Edible fruit and nuts; peel of citrus fruits or melons 41 10.7 
09 Coffee, tea, mate and spices 33 6.3 
10 Cereals 19a 13.3 
11 Products of the milling industry; ma lt; starches; inulin; wheat gluten 77a 19.5 
12 Oil seeds and oleaginous fruits; miscellane ous grains, seeds and fruit; industrial or 
medicinal plants; straw and fodder 26a 7.6 
13 Lacs; gums, resins and other vegetable saps and extracts 6a 11.1 
14 Vegetable plaiting materials; vegetabl e products not elsewhere specified or 
included 9 5.6 
15 Animal or vegetable fats and oils and th eir cleavage products; prepared edible fats; 
animal or vegetable waxes 53a 6.1 
16 Preparations of meat, of fish or of  crustaceans, molluscs or other aquatic 
invertebrates 48a 19.9 
17 Sugars and sugar confectionery 44a 34.2 
18 Cocoa and cocoa preparations 23a 21.6 
19 Preparations of cereals, flour, starch or milk; pastrycooks' products 132a 20.3 
20 Preparations of vegetables, fruit,  nuts or other parts of plants 163a 17.0 
21 Miscellaneous edible preparations 71a 21.9 
22 Beverages, spirits and vinegar 10a 17.7 
23 Residues and waste from the food i ndustries; prepared animal fodder 6a 6.3 
24 Tobacco and manufactured tobacco substitutes 4 10.0 
29 Organic chemicals 5 7.6 
33 Essential oils and resinoids; perfumery,  cosmetic or toilet preparations 7 3.6 
35 Albuminoidal substances; modified starches; glues; enzymes 13a 8.8 
38 Miscellaneous chemical products 7a 5.2 
42 Articles of leather; saddlery and harn ess; travel goods, handbags and similar 
containers; articles of animal gut (other than silk-worm gut) 4 11.9 
43 Furskins and artificial fur; manufactures thereof 26 17.0 
44 Wood and articles of wood; wood charcoal 37 6.6 
50 Silk 6b - 
64 Footwear, gaiters and the like;  parts of such articles 18 27.4 
Total 1,180 16.0 
 
a Combination of ad valorem  and specific duties (for tariff lines with non ad valorem  components, only the ad valorem  part 
of the rate was included in the cal culation of the tariff averages). 
b Specific duty. 
 
Note: Based on the HS 2002 nomenclature;  for  tariff lines subject  to TRQs only the out-of-quota duty is included in the tarif f-related 
calculations. 
 
Source : WTO estimates based on da ta provided by Japan. 
 
   
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
  WT/REG198/5 
 Page 13 
 
 
  Table A.2 
Japan:  Average tariff for lines rem aining dutiable, by HS section  
HS section and description  No of lines with duty  Average final tariff  
(on dutiable lines)  
I    Live animals and animal products 249a 15.0 
II   Vegetable products 254a 11.2 
III  Animal or vegetable fats and oils 53a 6.1 
IV  Prepared food etc. 501a 20.2 
VI  Chemicals and chemical products 32a 6.7 
VIII  Hides and skins 30 16.3 
IX  Wood and articles 37 6.6 
XI  Textiles and textiles articles 6b - 
XII  Footwear, headgear 18 27.4 
Total 1,180 16.0 
 
a Combination of ad valorem  and specific duties (for tariff lines with non ad valorem  components, only the ad valorem  part 
of the rate was included in the cal culation of the tariff averages). 
b Specific duty.  
Note: Based on the HS 2002 nomenclature;  for tariff lines subj ect to TRQs only the out-of-quota duty is included in the tariff -related 
calculations. 
 
Source :   WTO estimates based on data provided by Japan. 
 
 
Table A.3 
Mexico:  Average tariff for lines remaining dutiable, by HS chapter 
HS chapter Description No. of lines 
with duty  Average final tariff 
(on dutiable lines)  
01 Live animals 11 17.1 
02 Meat and edible meat offal 46 82.0 
03 Fish and crustaceans, molluscs and other aquatic invertebrates 49a 15.0 
04 Dairy produce; birds' eggs; natural honey;  edible products of animal origin, 
not elsewhere specified or included 41b 39.2 
05 Products of animal origin not el sewhere specified or included 3 8.3 
07 Edible vegetables and certa in roots and tubers 31 30.3 
08 Edible fruit and nuts; peel of citrus fruits or melons 29b 17.2 
09 Coffee, tea, mate and spices 24 17.3 
10 Cereals 18 64.2 
11 Products of the milling industry; malt;  starches; inulin; wheat gluten 36 20.7 
12 Oil seeds and oleaginous fruits; misc ellaneous grains, seeds and fruit; 
industrial or medicinal plants; straw and fodder 18a 10.7 
13 Lacs; gums, resins and othe r vegetable saps and extracts 18a 11.0 
14 Vegetable plaiting materials; vegetabl e products not elsewhere specified or 
included 3 10.0 
15 Animal or vegetable fats and oils and their cleavage products; prepared edible 
fats; animal or vegetable waxes 50 23.7 
16 Preparations of meat, of fish or of  crustaceans, molluscs or other aquatic 
invertebrates 19 17.2 
17 Sugars and sugar confectionery 28b 68.3 
18 Cocoa and cocoa preparations 11b 18.0 
19 Preparations of cereals, flour, starch or milk; pastrycooks' products 28b 13.9 
20 Preparations of vegetables, fru it, nuts or other parts of plants 57b 16.1 
21 Miscellaneous edible preparations 30b 22.4 
22 Beverages, spirits and vinegar 9b 14.3 
23 Residues and waste from the food indus tries; prepared animal fodder 9 11.1 
24 Tobacco and manufactured tobacco substitutes 5 48.7 
28 Inorganic chemicals: organic or inor ganic compounds of precious metals, of 
rare-earth metals, of radioactive elements or of isotopes 1c - 
29 Organic chemicals 9a 11.3 
30 Pharmaceutical products 6c - 
33 Essential oils and resinoids; perfumery,  cosmetic or toilet preparations 5 8.0 WT/REG198/5 
Page 14  
 
  HS chapter Description No. of lines 
with duty  Average final tariff 
(on dutiable lines)  
35 Albuminoidal substances; modified starches; glues; enzymes 17 13.5 
38 Miscellaneous chemical products 10 12.5 
41 Raw hides and skins (other than furskins) and leather 1c - 
42 Articles of leather; saddlery and harn ess; travel goods, handbags and similar 
containers; articles of animal gut (other than silk-worm gut) 5 19.5 
43 Furskins and artificial fur; manufactures thereof 13 13.5 
44 Wood and articles of wood; wood charcoal 18 11.7 
49 Printed books, newspapers, pictures and other products of the printing 
industry; manuscripts, typescripts and plans 2c - 
50 Silk 2 7.5 
64 Footwear, gaiters and the like;  parts of such articles 17 22.0 
87 Vehicles other than railway or tr amway rolling-stock, and parts and 
accessories thereof 29b 28.0 
Total 708 26.5 
 
a Combination of ad valorem, specific duties and  prohibited lines.  
b Combination of ad valorem and specific duties (for tariff lines with non ad valorem components, only the ad valorem part of t he 
 rate was included in the calcu lation of the tariff averages). 
c Prohibited tariff lines.  
Note:   Based on the HS 2002 nomenclature;  for tariff lines subj ect to TRQs only the out-of-quota duty is included in the tari ff-related 
 calculations. 
Source:  WTO Secretariat estimates based on data provided by Mexico. 
 
Table A.4 
Mexico:  Average tariff for lines remaining dutiable, by HS section  
HS section and description  No. of lines with duty  Average final tariff (on dutiable lines)  
I  Live animals and animal products 150a 42.4 
II  Vegetable products 177a 24.0 
III  Animal or vegetable fats and oils 50 23.7 
IV  Prepared food etc. 196b 22.4 
VI  Chemicals and chemical products 48a 12.2 
VIII  Hides and skins 19a 15.1 
IX  Wood and articles 18 11.7 
X  Pulp, paper etc. 2c - 
XI  Textiles and textiles articles 2 7.5 
XII  Footwear, headgear 17 22.0 
XVII  Transport equipment 29 28.0 
Total 708 26.5 
 
a  Combination of ad valorem, specific duties and  prohibited lines  
b  Combination of ad valorem  and specific duties (for tariff lines with non ad valorem  components, only the ad valorem  part 
of the rate was included in the cal culation of the tariff averages). 
c  Prohibited tariff lines. 
 
Note:   Based on the HS 2002 nomenclature;  for tariff lines su bject to TRQs only the out-of-quota duty is included in the tari ff-related 
 calculations. 
Source: WTO Secretariat estimates based on data provided by Mexico. 
 
__________