. /. RESTRICTED  WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  WT/REG133/M/3 
15 September 2005 
 (05-4053) 
Committee on Regional Trade Agreements 
Fortieth Session  
 
 
 
EXAMINATION OF THE FREE TRADE AGREEMENT 
BETWEEN THE EFTA STATES AND JORDAN 
 
Note on the Meeting of 26 July 2005  
 
Chairman:  Mr. R. Saborío (Costa Rica) 
  
1. The meeting was convened in document WTO/AIR/2624. 
2. Under Agenda Item C.IV of its Fortieth Session, the Committee on Regional Trade 
Agreements (hereinafter CRTA or the Committee)  took up the examination of the Free Trade 
Agreement (FTA) between the EFTA States and Jordan. 
3. The Chairman
 said that this was the third round of examination of the FTA between the 
EFTA States and Jordan.  The proceedings of th e first and second rounds, which had taken place in 
the 35th and 37th Sessions of the Committee in December 2003 and October 2004, could be found in 
documents WT/REG133/M/1-2.  Since then the Par ties had provided responses to written questions 
circulated as document WT/REG133/4. 
4. The representative of the United States  requested the Parties to provide data on the tariff lines 
covered by the Agreement;  the number of tariff li nes fully liberalized;  the number of agricultural 
tariff lines fully liberalized in each  agricultural Agreement;  the number of tariff lines with reduced 
tariffs;  the number of TRQs;  the number of ta riff lines not covered by the Agreement or the 
agricultural Agreements;  the number of tariff lines  liberalized at each phase; and the total number of 
tariff lines in each Party's schedule.  It would be help ful to have this information at the level at which 
negotiations had been conducted, so if tariff lines had been liberalized at six digits, then at six digits, 
or if at eight digits, then at eight.  For instance,  it appeared that liberalization under the agricultural 
Agreements had taken place at eight digits.  She rema rked that Article 1 of the Agricultural Protocol 
between Iceland and Jordan provided for tari ff reductions granted by Iceland on imports of 
agricultural goods from Jordan, but that she ha d detected no corresponding provision under which 
Jordan granted tariff reductions on imports of agri cultural goods from Iceland.  She asked the Parties 
to explain the justification for this complete excl usion of the agricultural sector in light of the 1994 
Understanding and the Interpretati on of Article XXIV which stated that the contribution to the 
expansion of world trade was diminished if any ma jor sector was excluded.  Regarding Section II.4, 
she asked if the TBT provisions of the Agreem ent provided preferential access for goods from the 
other Parties to the Agreement or if they raised the standard for all trading partners.  Regarding 
Section II.9, she asked if the Parties had used the evolutionary clause to extend tariff liberalization to 
additional products.   
5. The representative of Chinese Taipei  said that in his view requests for additional tariff-line 
information were reasonable for the sake of transp arency and should not unduly burden the Parties.  
Such requests had nothing to do with compliance w ith Article XXIV, but rather with transparency 
itself. WT/REG133/M/3 
Page 2  
 
 6. The representative of Switzerland
, speaking on behalf of the EFTA States and Jordan, said 
that the evolutionary clause was constantly applie d:   whenever there was a specific request from a 
partner country for increased coverage, it was discu ssed in the Joint Committe e and, if agreed, the 
coverage of the Agreement was ex tended.  As regards TBT, there was no specific Chapter in the 
Agreement that differed from the TBT provisions  in the WTO, so the WTO provisions were 
applicable.  The Parties had introduced the possibility  to increase co-operation, but so far this had not 
gone beyond what existed in the WTO.  He asked the representative of the United States to provide 
her question on trade in fish between Iceland and Jord an in writing.  Regarding the request for further 
information on tariff line coverage, he asked that the question be made in writing and the Parties 
would see what they could do.  The representative of Jordan  said that he had nothing to add, but that 
he would prefer to receive questions in writing so that a written response could be provided.   
7. The Chairman  said that the third round of examina tion of the FTA between the EFTA States 
and Jordan had allowed the Committee to clarify a number of questions, but some outstanding issues 
remained.  He invited delegations wishing to ask further questions to submit them in writing to the 
Secretariat by 23 September and for the Parties to pr ovide written replies by not later than 31 October 
2005.  Once the replies had been circulated, any request  for additional information could be dealt with 
without holding another round of formal examination.  At that point, the Secretariat could begin drafting the report for the examination. 
8. The Committee took note
 of the comments made. 
__________