WRITTEN QUESTION E-1289/03 by Elly Plooij-van Gorsel (ELDR) to the Commission. Disruption of market access to the People's Republic of China for photographic products: specific import tariffs not complying with WTO agreements.
Date: 2003-04-04
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: China, European Union, World Trade Organisation, bilateral agreement, customs duties, market access, photographic industry, trade restriction

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 78 E/27

Answer given by Mr Nielson on behalf of the Commission

(8 May 2003)

The Commission is indeed aware of the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) Report on the current
food crisis in Ethiopia, even if it does not share its claims in terms of the numbers of people affected
(which were revised down to EUR 11,3 million for Ethiopia in December 2002) and, by extension, the
percentage of needs met. The assertion that more than 28 % of children under five are suffering from
severe malnutrition in Eritrea is also extremely doubtful, and is unfortunately an illustration of the
tendency amongst certain involved partners to present an exaggerated picture of emergency situations.

This being said, the food crisis in the Horn of Africa is of course very real, even if (cid:1) through greatly
improved early warning systems and generous donor response (cid:1) it has not developed into a catastrophic
famine such as has been known in the past.

The Commission itself has made an unprecedented response to the crisis in Ethiopia and Eritrea, and,
together with Member States, has covered some 35-40 % of the assessed food needs to end-2003. A table
is sent direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament’s Secretariat.

However, a high priority for the Commission in terms of policy objectives, for Ethiopia in particular, is to
support efforts to achieve food security, since some four to five million Ethiopians are predictably food
insecure, for structural reasons, every year (cid:1) including years of good harvests. For this reason, the
Commission has set aside in its 9th European Development Fund allocation for Ethiopia a sum of EUR 54
million for programmes in support of food security. The programmes to be funded under this allocation
are now being identified and appraised, but are likely to include the improvement of livestock health
services, improved access to water points and support for an improved grain marketing system.

The Commission is cooperating and will undoubtedly continue to cooperate with charity organisations
operating in the food insecure countries of Africa to support food security, as well as of course in
humanitarian aid activities.

(2004/C 78 E/0029)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1289/03

by Elly Plooij-van Gorsel (ELDR) to the Commission

(4 April 2003)

Subject: Disruption of market access to the People’s Republic of China for photographic products: specific

import tariffs not complying with WTO agreements

Since 1997 the People’s Republic of China has imposed an import tariff on photographic products, in the
form of a specific duty calculated in renminbi per product unit (measured in square metres).

In connection with its accession to the World Trade Organisation China has undertaken to phase out this
specific tariff and replace it with an ad valorem tariff. These commitments are set out in the bilateral
agreement between the European Union and China and in the protocol on China’s accession to the WTO.
In January 2002, however, China announced that it would maintain the specific import tariffs on
photographic products. This is not compatible with the WTO agreements.

As an illustration, in 2002 China committed itself to a 42 % ad valorem import tariff on rolls of 35mm
film. However, in practice China has imposed a specific tariff of 155 renminbi per square metre. This has
resulted in an effective ad valorem tariff of 89 %. This specific tariff thus exceeds the authorised limit.

1.

Is the Commission aware of these specific levies per product unit on various photographic products?

Does it consider that this constitutes an illegal tariff barrier under China’s obligations within the

2.
World Trade Organisation?

C 78 E/28

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

27.3.2004

3.

Has the Commission already made a complaint to the authorities responsible in China?

If so, what has been their reaction? If not, why not, and does the Commission intend to take action

4.
in the near future?

Answer given by Mr Lamy on behalf of the Commission

(8 May 2003)

1.
The Commission is aware that China chose to opt for specific duties rather than ad valorem rates for
a number of products, including photographic products. It should be noted that China’s use of specific
duties rather than ad valorem rates is not per se a violation of China’s World Trade Organisation (WTO)
obligations (even if China’s commitments (cid:1) the bound rates (cid:1) are expressed using ad valorem values).

2.
There would be a breach of China’s WTO commitments when the use of specific duties leads in
practice to rates higher than the bound ad valorem rates. Following contacts with some companies, this
seemed to be the case for a few specific rates concerning photographic products in 2002.

3.
At the end of 2002 and following contacts with some companies on this issue, the Commission has
raised the problem both bilaterally with the Chinese authorities and in the context of the Transitional
Review Mechanism. This is a WTO mechanism established in the context of China’s accession, the
objective of which is to review annually China’s implementation of her WTO obligations.

It has to be noted that this issue has also been raised by Japan, which appears to be China’s trade partner
with by far the main trade interest at stake regarding this issue.

The Chinese authorities undertook to seriously consider the request made by the Union and Japan,

4.
and we are thus awaiting the results of these official contacts.

(2004/C 78 E/0030)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1309/03

by Bill Newton Dunn (ELDR) to the Commission

(7 April 2003)

Subject: Human rights abuses in Laos

The Commission will be aware of the human rights abuses, notably the treatment of Christians, which
continue in Laos.

Has the Commission:

1. made representations to the Laotian Government?

2. other plans, to try to improve the situation?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(8 May 2003)

The Commission is aware of reports that freedom of religious expression remains restricted in Laos,
including reports of members of Christian groups being persecuted and/or detained on grounds of their
religious affiliation.