WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  TN/MA/W/132 
22 January 2010 
 (10-0334) 
Negotiating Group on Market Access Original:   English 
 
 
 
MARKET ACCESS FOR NON-AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS 
 
Responses to Brazil and India’s questions on Trade in Remanufactured Goods  
 
Communication from Japan, Switzerland and the United States 
  
 The following communication, dated 20 January 2 010, is being circulated at the request of the 
delegations of Japan, Switzerland and the Unite d States, co-sponsors of the NTB proposal on 
Remanufacturing. 
 
_______________ 
 
 1. A variety of views, most of them expressi ng difficulties in accepting the suggested definition 
of "remanufactured goods", has been heard in the discussions thus far.  Should not the 
discussion of the definition in itself be on e of the items of the work program?   
 
Co-sponsors’ answer:   The proposed definition describes the industrial process of remanufacturing.  
We welcome specific suggestions on it.   Some Members have offered text suggestions which we 
have taken into account.   Others have not yet speci fied what their exact concerns are.  We believe 
that the current NAMA negotiations offer the best opportunity for Members to agree to a non-binding 
definition, to help frame the discussion in work program .   It is not our intent to create an obligation 
that Members adopt this definition in thei r domestic legislation or regulations.   
 2. The proponents state that the suggested definition for remanufactured goods is non-binding 
and that there are no requirements for Members to implement it.  If that is so, how do 
proponents envisage the implementation of di spositions no. 2 and 3? How would Members 
discuss reducing or eliminating NTBs in resp ect of remanufactured goods if they have 
different views on what is a remanufactured good?  
 Co-sponsors’ answer: As stated in the answer to question 1, Members  would not have to adopt the 
definition in paragraph 5 into their domestic legisl ation or regulation.  Re garding paragraph 2, the 
expectation would be for Members to review th eir non-tariff measures on their own and determine 
whether they are imposing prohibitions or restric tions on the importation of remanufactured goods.   
The definition of a remanufactured good in para graph 5 serves as a lens through which Members can 
determine how their non-tariff measures may apply to remanufactured goods.  Similarly regarding 
paragraph 2, the definition in pa ragraph 5 would serve as a lens through which Members can examine 
particular non-tariff barriers raised in the context of the work program in the Council for Trade in 
Goods.  Presumably, Members would have a discuss ion of the characteristics of the good in question 
and how the non-tariff barriers raised impact trade in those goods.    
 3. The concepts of "reasonable manufacturing ac tivity" and "minimum value addition" do not 
figure in the definition of remanufacturing.  How do the proponents evaluate the possible use 
of such criteria as part of the definition itself?  TN/MA/W/132 
Page 2 
 
 
   
Co-sponsors’ answer:   [Note: We are consulting with these delegations on these terms.] We 
would appreciate clarification about how Brazil and India define these terms in order to provide an 
appropriate answer to this question.    
 
4. How do the proponents propose that remanufacturing be distinguished from other 
terminologies such as refurbished, recycled , re-used, repaired, second hand, overhauled? 
 Co-sponsors’ answer: The definition of a remanufactured good in paragraph 5 focuses on the 
industrial process of remanufacturing.  We recognize that some industries use other terminologies, but 
their processes may be exactly the same as the process the definition in paragraph 5 describes.  If 
those processes do not meet the rigor and criteria of the definition in paragraph 5, then we would not 
expect Members to raise concerns about barriers to trade in those goods in the work program 
suggested in paragraph 3.  With respect to how  we distinguish remanufactured goods from other 
goods in practice, in the United States, customers know that they are buying remanufactured goods (or 
any other good that is not new) by reading labels that indicate that such goods are remanufactured.  
We describe how the United States regulates in this area in JOB(07)/60, but th e general requirement is 
for suppliers to label the products they se ll in a truthful, non-deceiving manner.   
 
5. Members have expressed concerns about the possible environmental impact of trade in 
remanufactured products.  How do the proponent s propose that these concerns be taken into 
consideration in the assessment of exis ting NTBs related to these products?   
 Co-sponsors’ answer:  Remanufacturing is an environm entally friendly process.  The 
remanufacturing business model uses goods at the end of their life-cycles as inputs into the 
remanufacturing process.  Presentations by the auto s parts and earthmoving equipment industries at 
our recent workshop highlighted that remanufacturi ng saves them 85% of energy use; 86% of water 
use; and 85% of the materials used in the manufacturing of parts as compared to manufacturing a new good.  They noted that their industrial process avoids the emissions caused by re-smelting metal 
castings.  Further, the re-use of end-of-life goods prevents them from ending up in landfills.  Since 
remanufacturers often recollect the cores, the re manufacturing process also determines what can be 
saved and what can be recycled more efficiently than  the simple disposal of the goods by consumers.  
Facilitating trade in remanufactured goods would help stimulate demand in both remanufactured 
goods and the end-of-life goods used as inputs in the remanufacturing process.  We understand that 
there are some concerns and possible misconceptions  that remain about what the remanufacturing 
industry does and does not do.  We envision that the work program would have an environmental 
element where Members in a workshop format would exchange views on the environmental impact of 
trade in remanufactured goods.   
 
6. The concept of "remanufacturing" relates to several WTO disciplines such as TBT, SPS, 
Customs valuation, IPR, tariff commitments; rul es of origin; etc.  Do the proponents believe 
that discussing these relations is relevant in th e assessment of the existing NTBs related to 
remanufactured goods?  
 
Co-sponsors’ answer:  If Members would like to raise any NTBs affecting trade in remanufactured 
goods and related to the above issues, they can do so in the work program that our negotiating text 
proposes.  In that case, as the last sentence of paragraph 4 notes, such consultations shall not prejudice 
Member’s rights and obligations under the WTO Ag reement,   including the TBT, SPS, and TRIPS 
agreements, etc.  Also, we noted in footnote 1 in our negotiating text that pa ragraph 1 does not require 
a Member reduce or eliminate tariffs on remanufactu red goods. Thus, tariff commitments will not be a 
part of the work program.     TN/MA/W/132 
 Page 3 
 
 
  7. How do the proponents intend to address deve lopmental issues deriving from this proposal, 
given that remanufacturing will adversely affect the process of manufacturing in poorer 
developing countries, including through compe tition of imported remanufactured goods with 
new domestically manufactured goods in such markets at low prices?   
 
Co-sponsors’ answer: It is true that remanufactured products can be lower priced, but the effect of 
that on development is not as one-sided as the question suggests.  Remanufacturing offers numerous 
development opportunities.  In terms of employme nt, remanufacturing is a labor intensive industry 
since it involves hands-on disassembly, repair and reass embly, perhaps even more so than original 
production, which is more easily mechanized.   Skills required by remanufacturing are diverse, ranging 
from low-skilled disassembly to high-skilled engineering.   It can enable the transfer of technology and 
technical knowledge, both of which can aid developm ent.    Many globalized companies already are 
employing these practices in developing countri es where they operate.   As well, domestic 
manufacturers in developing countries are increasingly  adopting practices such as using low cost used 
cores as inputs, to remain globally competitive.    Remanufacturing also necessitates growth of other 
businesses, for example transportation, salvage, parts s upply, and recycling.  With respect to use of 
remanufactured goods, business purchasing low-cost , high quality remanufactured goods can extend 
the lives of equipment vital to their operations, allocate resources more efficiently, grow their 
companies, employ more staff, and offer more and better services to their customers.   
Remanufactured products also can be afford able, high quality options for consumers. 
 
8. Monitoring and enforcement mechanisms are cr itical to prevent the misuse of the policy of 
imports of remanufactured goods.  How do the pro ponents propose to take this concern into 
consideration in the discussion of reducing the NTBs to remanufactured goods, " vis-à-vis " the 
capacity constraints of developing countr ies to put in place such mechanisms? 
 
Co-sponsors’ answer:  Making a policy distinction between used and remanufactured goods, which 
we have demonstrated are different than used goods  is effective to promote trade liberalization of 
remanufactured goods.   For some Members, labeling is a sufficient means to prevent deceptive 
practices by compelling suppliers to  be honest about what they are selling.  Other Members may have 
different, but equally effective practices.   We envision discussing monitoring and enforcement 
practices in a workshop as a part of the post-Doha work program in order to help Members understand 
their options in this regard.   
 9. How do the proponents propose to deal with the issue of conformity assessment to identify 
and certify the goods as remanufactured for the pur pose of consumer information?  Have the 
proponents deliberated on the issues relate d to operational mechanism for obtaining the 
certification, the criteria of selection of these agencies, etc.? 
 
Co-sponsors’ answer:  This proposal does not dictate to Members what conformity assessment 
procedures (e.g. testing, certification, or accreditati on) they should use.  Generally, the technical 
regulations or standards (either original or current ) to which new goods must conform also apply to 
remanufactured goods.  In that regard remanufactured goods should also be subject to the same 
conformity assessment procedures as new goods.  We  envision discussing regulation and conformity 
assessment practices in a workshop as a part of the post-Doha work program in order to help 
Members understand their options in this regard. 
 
10. The current practices by OEMs on remanufactur ed goods could be a good gauge of how they 
compare with "new goods"?  How do the propone nts evaluate the possibility of incorporating 
discussions on these practices in the Work Program?  
 Co-sponsors’ answer:  We agree.   Remanufacturing done by OEMs should be discussed in the work 
program.  It is important to note that original equipment manufacturers  
(OEMs)  are not always TN/MA/W/132 
Page 4 
 
 
  remanufacturers, as demonstrated by the in dustry presentations in the 4 November 2009, 
remanufacturing workshops at the WTO.   I ndependent companies can remanufacture goods for 
OEMs, and OEMs can remanufacture goods fo r other OEMs.  No matter who produces the 
remanufactured goods, those goods should meet the same  technical regulations or standards (either 
original or current) that apply to new goods.  Al so, in instances where a product is obsolete and OEMs 
no longer produce new replacement parts, remanufactu red parts may become the only viable options.  
 
11. The presentation by the US industry on 4.11.2 009 did not throw light on whether there are 
standards for remanufactured products " per se " rather than quality management standards 
which are process-related.  Could the proponents indicate whether there are standards set by 
ISO, IEC, ITU or other relevant standa rd setting bodies on remanufactured products? 
 
Co-sponsors’ answer:  Generally, applicable standards or tec hnical specifications  for new products 
also apply to remanufactured products.  Any standards that exist solely with respect to remanufactured 
products are usually process-oriented.  We are exam ining ongoing efforts by standards development 
organizations to develop a remanufacturing process st andard and view that topic as one for discussion 
in the work program, as well.     
 
12. What are the specific set of information on labels put on remanuf actured goods which are 
recommended by the relevant international standa rds? Apart from indicating that the products 
is remanufactured, is there any difference in  the information to be set on labels " vis-à-vis " 
new goods? 
 Co-sponsors’ answer:  There is no international standard on labeling for remanufacturing. Generally, 
remanufactured goods should bear on their labels th e information that governments require on labels 
for new goods.  If a Member determines that other pieces of information should be included on labels, 
such as whether a good is remanufactured, in or der to meet a legitimate objective under TBT 
Agreement  Article 2.2., it can do so, so long as such a requirement is not more trade-restrictive than 
necessary.   
 
13. The presentation by the US industry on 4.11.2 009 revealed that there are differences in life 
cycles in which a product could be remanufactur ed.  Since metal fatigue is an important 
parameter for remanufactured goods, should not the number of cycles through which a 
product has been subject to remanufacturing be an important information to be set on labels of 
remanufactured goods? 
 
Co-sponsors’ answer: The question of metal’s lifespan is more  related to engineering and technical 
specifications than labeling.  Fundamentally, the soundness of a core determines its 
remanufacturability.  It seems like the question ma kes an artificial distinction in relation to 
remanufactured goods, when many "new" products, are in  fact, made of recycled metals that have 
been processed multiple times and may have undergon e more re-processing than the simple reuse of a 
core.  An example of the latter could be a car door made from processed aluminum cans or multiple 
scrap sources.  Moreover, many consumer electronics products are increasingly made from recycled 
materials.    TN/MA/W/132 
 Page 5 
 
 
  14. How would Members, especially developing co untries, ensure that import regulations on 
remanufactured goods are not misused? What is  the cost of post-market surveillance for 
remanufactured goods? How can it be assured that  developing countries take on this burden 
only to the extent they can manage to do so? 
 
Co-sponsors’ answer: The focus of the work program in th e Council for Trade in Goods, as proposed 
by the co-sponsors, is to discuss non-tariff barriers impacting trade in remanufactured goods.  This 
would include the misuse of import regulations.  Ov er time, Members would gain experience with the 
concept of remanufacturing and trade in remanufac tured goods and would ensure that their trade 
regimes evolve in a manner that enhances ma rket access opportunities for remanufactured goods.  
Fundamentally, Members would refine their non-tari ff measures so as to treat remanufactured goods 
as they would new goods to the greatest extent possi ble.  Regarding post-market surveillance, the 
additional costs of Members’ extending their regime s for new goods to remanufactured goods should 
be marginal.  Members would not need to mainta in separate post-market surveillance regimes for 
remanufactured goods, since the standards and/or tec hnical regulations (original and/or current) and 
conformity assessment procedures that apply to new goods would also apply to remanufactured 
goods.    
15. Should not the proponents include, in the discussions proposed in the Work Program, the 
issue of risk assessment and how to refer to it in the label of a remanufactured good " vis-à-
vis" a new good? 
 
Co-sponsors’ answer: The co-sponsors appreciate the suggestion offered by Brazil and India to 
include an element on "risk assessment" in the proposed work program.  Could Brazil and India 
provide more clarity on what they mean by this te rm in the context of trade in remanufactured goods?  
The question seems to infer either that Members should discuss how to assess the risks of purchasing 
a remanufactured good versus a new good, or how  the risks associated with a particular 
remanufactured good should be conve yed on a label.  Any further clarity on this question would be 
helpful in considering the suggestion.   
 
16. How do proponents suggest that Members address issues relating to "safety" of 
remanufactured goods, especially in developi ng countries who might have limitation in 
enforcing surveillance and control mechanisms? 
 Co-sponsors’ answer: Remanufactured goods should meet any technical regulation a Member 
maintains related to the safety of a new good.  Members could apply the same "surveillance and 
control mechanisms" they apply to new goods to remanufactured goods, considering the underlying technical regulations (or standards) would be the sa me as the ones that they apply to new goods.   
 
 
__________