RESTRICTEDWORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONG/IT/M/7
1 December 1998
(98-4821)
Committee of Participants on the Expansion of Trade
in Information Technology ProductsOriginal:  English
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF 23 APRIL 1998
Chairman:  Mr. M. Harvey (New Zealand)
The Committee of Participants on the Expansion of Trade in Information Technology
Products held its seventh meeting on 23 April 1998.  The agenda proposed for the meeting, contained
in WTO/AIR/826, was adopted as follows:
Agenda of the Meeting
Page
1. Review of the status of implementation of the Ministerial Declaration
on Trade in Information Technol ogy Products (G/IT/1/Rev.5)........................................1
2. Future work programme of the Committee
2.1 Divergences in classifying information technology products
(G/IT/2, G/IT/2/Corr.1 and G/IT/2/Add.1)..........................................................2
2.2 Review of product coverage ................................................................................2
2.3 Consultations on non-tari ff barriers (G/IT/4) ......................................................2
3. New part icipan ts ............................................................................................................. ..3
4. Other business
4.1 Request for observer status from OECD..............................................................4
4.2 Date of the ne xt meeting......................................................................................4
_________________
1. Review of the status of implementation of the Ministerial Declaration on Trade in Information
Technology Products (G/IT/1/Rev.5)
1.1 The Chairman drew participants' attention to document G/IT/1/Rev.5 which updated the
status of implementation.
1.2 The Committee took note of the information contained in the above document.G/IT/M/7
Page 2
2. Future work programme of the Committee
2.1 Divergences in classifying information technology products (G/IT/2, G/IT/2/Corr.1 and
G/IT/2/Add.1)
2.1.1 The Chairman recalled the meeting held in March 1998 to specifically discuss the issue of
classification divergences;  in the course of that meeting issues specifically relating to semiconductor
manufacturing and testing equipment had been addressed in an informal session.  He noted that afurther informal exchange was scheduled to take place directly after the conclusion of the present
meeting in order to continue work on this matter.
2.1.2 The Committee noted the statement made by the Chairman.
2.2 Review of product coverage
2.2.1. The Chairman recalled that the Annex to the Ministerial Declaration provided that no later than
30 June 1998, the Committee should meet to decide whether to revise Attachment A or B to the Annex
to the Ministerial Declaration.  He further pointed out that as a basis for the review, individualsubmissions had been received from 14 participants and a consolidated list of all the proposals had beencirculated in document G/IT/SPEC/15.  He noted in this respect that there had been a number ofinformal meetings held during the course of the week to discuss the various proposals, specifically asthey related to Attachment A-Sections 1 and 2, and Attachment B items.  These informal sessions hadbeen a technical exercise whereby clarification had been sought and provided, overlapping items hadbeen consolidated, HS classifications had been discussed and proposed, and new or revised descriptionshad been proposed to more adequately describe the products concerned.  Noting that a substantialamount of the work with respect to the review had thus occurred in bilateral and plurilateral meetingsduring the course of the week, he believed that the Committee was well on its way to making thenecessary decisions by the 30 June 1998 deadline.  He asked if any delegation wished to share anyinformation with the Committee on this process, in particular with respect to specific product areas,procedural aspects, or any other matter.
2.2.2 The Committee noted the statement made by the Chairman.
2.3 Consultations on non-tariff barriers
2.3.1 The Chairman recalled there were a number of proposals put forth at previous meetings with
respect to non-tariff barriers.  These concerned standards-related matters and import licensing
practices, specifically as they related to information technology products.  In particular, the
Committee had decided to conduct a survey on standards-related matters which was formallycirculated on 19 February 1998 in document G/IT/4.  He recalled that the deadline for submissions
was 15 April 1998.  He informed the Committee that, as of the date of the present meeting, the
Secretariat had received formal responses to the survey from the following 12 participants:  Australia;
Canada; Czech Republic;  European Communities;  Estonia;  Hong Kong, China;  Japan;  Macau;
New Zealand;  Singapore;  Switzerland;  and the United States.  He encouraged those participants thathad not made submissions to do so as soon as possible.  The responses to the survey had been
circulated as document G/IT/SPEC/Q1 so that the information provided by the participants on their
particular practices could be of benefit to the other participants.
2.3.2 The delegates of the Korea, Norway
, Poland  and Thailand  informed the Committee that the
responses to the survey would be submitted to the Secretariat shortly.G/IT/M/7
Page 3
2.3.4 The delegate of the European Communities stated that his delegation looked forward to
having an exchange of views on the outcome of this survey at a future meeting of the Committee.
However, they did not at the present moment have a proposal for the date of such a meeting or as to
how such a meeting should be structured.
2.3.5 The delegate of Switzerland, speaking on behalf of Liechtenstein, informed the Committee
that the response to the survey provided by Switzerland was also valid for the principality of
Liechtenstein.
2.3.6 The delegate of Chinese Taipei stated that his authorities fully supported the survey on
standards-related matters on information technology products.  They had been actively cooperating
with the agencies concerned to submit the necessary responses. Owing to some technical problems,
their responses could not be ready by the deadline set by the Secretariat.  He assured participants that
their submission would be submitted shortly.
2.3.7 The Chairman said that he was encouraged to hear that a number of submissions were near
completion.  He urged delegations that had not yet provided responses to the survey to submit them to
the Secretariat as soon as possible to enable an evaluation of the results of the survey.
2.3.8 The Committee took note of the above statements.
3. New Participants
3.1 The Chairman noted that four new schedules - from Latvia, Panama, China and the Kyrgyz
Republic - were before the Committee for consideration.
3.2 With respect to the schedule of Latvia, he recalled from previous meetings that participants
did not have problems with the concessions contained in the ITA schedule.  For domestic procedural
reasons, Latvia would implement the ITA commitments at the time of the implementation of its other
accession commitments, hence it was agreed that the Committee would await notification from thedelegation of Latvia on when implementation would take affect.
3.3 With respect to the schedule of Panama, he recalled that the Secretariat had performed an
electronic verification of the revised schedule and that the resulting discrepancies had been conveyed
to the delegation of Panama.  At the present time, those discrepancies were being addressed by
Panama and it was expected that the schedule would be circulated to participants in the near future.
3.4 With respect to the schedule of China, an informal meeting between ITA participants and
China had been convened on 8 April 1998 after China indicated its intention to join the ITA by
submitting a schedule of commitments on 7 April 1998.  The draft schedule along with the Secretariat
"verification sheet" of the schedule had been circulated to ITA participants.  Many ITA participants
had taken the floor to welcome China's intention to join the ITA and had noted that additional timewas necessary to fully examine the commitments in the draft schedule.
3.5 The schedule of the Kyrgyz Republic had also been recently received and circulated to ITA
participants on 17 April 1998 together with the Secretariat "verification sheet" which indicated that no
discrepancies had been found.
3.6 The Committee took note of the statement made by the Chairman.G/IT/M/7
Page 4
4. Other Business
Request for observer status from OECD
4.1 The Chairman informed the Committee that a request for observer status had been received
from the OECD and proposed that it be considered at the next meeting.  It was so agreed.
Date of the next meeting
4.2 The Committee agreed to hold its next meeting on 4 June 1998.
__________