COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Individual information sheets on implementation of EU Trade Agreements Accompanying the document REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS on Implementation and Enforcement of EU Trade Agreements
Date: 2021-10-27
Institutions: Directorate-General for Trade and Economic Security, European Commission
Subjects: common commercial policy, international trade, third country, trade agreement, trade agreement (EU), trade dispute, trade policy, trade restriction

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 27.10.2021  SWD(2021) 297 final  COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Individual information sheets on implementation of EU Trade Agreements        Accompanying the document REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS  on Implementation and Enforcement of EU Trade Agreements                  {COM(2021) 654 final}  
 
 
EU TRADE AGREEMENTS COVERED BY SECTION II of the Report .............................. 5 

PART I:  

ASIA ..................................................................................................................... 7 

ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE FREE 
TRADE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE EU AND VIETNAM ............................................. 8 

ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE FREE 
TRADE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE EU AND ITS MEMBER STATES AND 
SINGAPORE ........................................................................................................................... 10 

ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE ECONOMIC 
PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE EU AND JAPAN ................................... 12 

ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE EU-SOUTH 
KOREA FREE TRADE AGREEMENT ................................................................................. 15 

PART II:  

THE AMERICAS .............................................................................................. 18 

ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE EU-
CANADA COMPREHENSIVE ECONOMIC AND TRADE AGREEMENT (CETA) ........ 19 

ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE EU-
COLOMBIA/ECUADOR/PERU TRADE AGREEMENT ..................................................... 23 

ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF PART IV OF THE 
ASSOCIATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE EU AND ITS MEMBER STATES AND 
CENTRAL AMERICA ............................................................................................................ 30 

ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TRADE 
PILLAR OF THE ASSOCIATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE EU AND CHILE ...... 35 

ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TRADE 
PILLAR OF THE EU-MEXICO ASSOCIATION AGREEMENT ........................................ 38 

PART III.1: EU NEIGHBOURING COUNTRIES ................................................................. 41 

ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE ECONOMIC 
PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE EU AND ALGERIA .............................. 42 

ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE EU-EGYPT 
ASSOCIATION AGREEMENT .............................................................................................. 44 

ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE 
ASSOCIATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE EU AND LEBANON ............................. 46 

ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE ECONOMIC 
PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE EU AND JORDAN ................................ 48 

ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE ECONOMIC 
PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE EU AND MOROCCO ........................... 50 

ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE 
ASSOCIATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE EU AND TUNISIA ................................ 53 

ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE INTERIM 
ASSOCIATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE EU AND PALESTINE .......................... 55 

ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE ECONOMIC 
PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE EU AND ISRAEL ................................. 57 

PART III.2: EU NEIGHBOURING COUNTRIES ................................................................. 59 

1 

 
 
ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE DEEP AND 
COMPREHENSIVE FREE TRADE AREA BETWEEN THE EU AND UKRAINE ........... 60 

ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE DEEP AND 
COMPREHENSIVE FREE TRADE AREA BETWEEN THE EU AND GEORGIA ........... 65 

ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE DEEP AND 
COMPREHENSIVE FREE TRADE AREA BETWEEN THE EU AND MOLDOVA ......... 69 

PART III.3: EU NEIGHBOURING COUNTRIES ................................................................. 72 

ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TRADE 
PILLAR OF THE EU-KOSOVO* STABILISATION AND ASSOCIATION AGREEMENT
 .................................................................................................................................................. 73 

ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TRADE PILLAR 
OF THE EU-SERBIA STABILISATION AND ASSOCIATION AGREEMENT ................ 75 

ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TRADE 
PILLAR OF THE EU-BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA STABILISATION AND 
ASSOCIATION AGREEMENT .............................................................................................. 77 

ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON IMPLEMENTATION OF the trade pillar of the EU-
MONTENEGRO STABILISATION AND ASSOCIATION AGREEMENT ........................ 79 

ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TRADE 
PILLAR OF THE EU-ALBANIA STABILISATION AND ASSOCIATION AGREEMENT
 .................................................................................................................................................. 80 

ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TRADE 
PILLAR OF THE STABILISATION AND ASSOCIATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN 
THE EU AND NORTH MACEDONIA .................................................................................. 82 

PART III.4: EU NEIGHBOURING COUNTRIES ................................................................. 83 

ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE EU-
SWITZERLAND TRADE AGREEMENT ............................................................................. 84 

ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE EU-
NORWAY TRADE AGREEMENT ........................................................................................ 87 

ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE EU-TURKEY 
CUSTOMS UNION AND TRADE AGREEMENTS ............................................................. 89 

PART IV: AFRICAN, CARIBBEAN AND PACIFIC COUNTRIES .................................... 92 

ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE ECONOMIC 
PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT (EPA) BETWEEN THE EU AND GHANA ...................... 93 

ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE ECONOMIC 
PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT (EPA) BETWEEN THE EU AND THE SOUTHERN 
AFRICAN DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY (SADC) ......................................................... 95 

ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE ECONOMIC 
PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT (EPA) BETWEEN THE EU AND COTE D’IVOIRE ....... 97 

ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE ECONOMIC 
PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT (EPA) BETWEEN THE EU AND CAMEROON ........... 100 

ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE ECONOMIC 
PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT (EPA) BETWEEN THE EU AND THE EASTERN AND 
SOUTHERN AFRICAN REGION (ESA) ............................................................................. 102 

2 

 
 
ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE ECONOMIC 
PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT (EPA) BETWEEN THE EU AND CARIFORUM .......... 104 

ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE ECONOMIC 
PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT (EPA) BETWEEN THE EU AND PACIFIC STATES ... 108 

EU TRADE AGREEMENTS COVERED BY SECTION IV of the Report ......................... 111 

3 

 
 
 
 
 
This Staff Working Document (SWD) contains complementary information on 

- section II of the Report on Implementation and Enforcement of EU trade agreements1 (“the 
report”), called “Making full use of the opportunities provided by EU trade agreements”), 
adding additional information on each of the 37 trade agreements covered, notably the 
agreement’s scope and state of play, main progress on implementation and outstanding issues 
for market access and trade and sustainable development, as well as any matters of specific 
relevance, where appropriate; 

 -section IV of the report, called  “Addressing trade barriers and finding solutions”, 
providing a complete list of trade barriers (new barriers reported and barriers resolved in 
2020).  

For the following information please consult the website of the Commission /DG TRADE: 

-Agendas and reports of meetings of the institutional bodies (FTA committees and 
working groups, dialogues) as well as information on agenda and reports of civil society 
forum meetings  are available at the Commission’s Transparency in Action website2.  

-General statistics on trade in goods and services and on foreign direct investment for all EU 
trading partner countries can be found on the Commission/DG TRADE website3. These are 
regularly updated.  

-Statistics on trade in goods and services and on foreign direct investment between the EU 
and the 67 preferential trading partner countries covered by this Staff Working Document 
can be found on the Commission/DG TRADE’s website4. These are specifically produced for 
the annual report and they are based on Eurostat data for the EU27 as they stood in March 
2021 (no further updates). NB: The latest statistics for trade in goods are for 2020, for trade 
in services and investment for 2019, except where indicated otherwise.  

- Tariff Rate Quotas (TRQs) for the EU and preferential partner countries’ fill rates in 2020  
can be found on the Commission/DG TRADE’s website.5 

-Preference utilisation rates (PURs) on EU imports for all 67 partner countries covered by 
the report as well as PURs on EU exports to the preferential partners, who shared the 
information can be consulted on the Commission’s/DG TRADE’s website6, together with an 
explanation of the sources and methodology. They are updated once a year, in the fall.  NB. 
Figures for preference use on EU imports and EU exports are based on different datasets 
from distinct sources. Preference utilisation rates on imports use Eurostat figures and are 
harmonised. Preference utilisation rates on EU exports use data submitted by EU trading 
partners’ customs authorities, which apply different methods and practices: the data are 
therefore not harmonised and not comparable.  

1 https://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/html/159794.htm  
2 https://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/press/index.cfm?id=1395  
3 https://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/countries-and-regions/statistics/  
4 https://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/html/159796.htm 
5 https://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/html/159797.htm 
6 https://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/html/159798.htm 

4 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
EU TRADE AGREEMENTS COVERED BY SECTION II OF THE REPORT 

(Agreement/date of application)7 

PART I: ASIA 

EU-Vietnam Free Trade Agreement 
EU-Singapore Free Trade Agreement 
EU-Japan Economic Partnership 
Agreement 
EU-South Korea Free Trade Agreement 

1 August 2020 
21 September 2019 
1 February 2019 

1 July 2011 

PART II: THE AMERICAS 

EU-Canada Comprehensive Economic and 
Trade Agreement  
EU-Colombia-Peru-Ecuador Trade 
Agreement 
EU-Central America Association 
Agreement  

EU-Chile Association Agreement 
EU-Mexico Global Agreement 

21 September 2017 

1 March 2013 for Peru; 1 August 2013 for 
Colombia; 1 January 2017 for Ecuador. 
1 August 2013: trade pillar applies with 
Honduras, Nicaragua and Panama; 1 
October 2013: Costa Rica and El 
Salvador; 1 December 2013: Guatemala. 
1 February 2003 
Applied for goods since 1 July 2000; 
applied for services since 1 March 2001. 

PART III: EU NEIGHBOURING COUNTRIES 
Mediterranean and Middle East countries - Free Trade Areas 

EU-Algeria  
EU-Egypt  
EU-Lebanon  
EU-Jordan  
EU-Morocco  
EU-Tunisia  
EU-Palestine8  
EU-Israel  

1 September 2005 
21 December 2003 
1 March 2003 
1 May 2002 
18 March 2000 
1 March 1998 
1 July 1997 
1 January 1996 

Eastern countries – Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Areas 

EU-Ukraine  

EU-Georgia  

EU-Moldova 

1 January 2016, and entered into force on 
1 September 2017. 
1 September 2014, and entered into force 
on 1 July 2016. 
1 September 2014, and entered into force 
on 1 July 2016. 

7 For sake of consistency this report uses the short names for EU trading partners as listed in the inter-
institutional guide, available at https://publications.europa.eu/code/en/en-5000500.htm 
8 This designation shall not be construed as recognition of a State of Palestine and is without prejudice to the 
individual positions of Member States on this issue. 

5 

 
 
 
 
                                                           
EU TRADE AGREEMENTS COVERED BY SECTION II OF THE REPORT 

(Agreement /date of application) 

Western Balkans – Stabilisation and Association Agreements 

EU-Kosovo* 9 
EU-Serbia  

EU-Bosnia and Herzegovina  
EU-Montenegro 

EU-Albania  

EU-North Macedonia 

1 April 2016 
Interim Agreement on trade for Serbia: 1 
February 2009; for the EU: 8 December 
2009 
Interim Agreement on trade 1 July 2008  
Interim Agreement on trade1 January 
2008 
Interim Agreement on trade 1 December 
2006 
Interim Agreement on trade 1 June 2001 

Switzerland, Norway, Turkey 

EU-Switzerland Free Trade Agreement 
EU-Norway Free Trade Agreement 
EU-Turkey Customs Union  

1972 
1 July 1973 
Association Agreement signed in 1963; 
final phase of the customs union 
completed on 1 January 1996. 

PART IV: AFRICA, CARIBBEAN AND PACIFIC – Economic Partnership 
Agreements  

EU-Ghana (interim) 
EU-Southern African Development 
Community (SADC)  

EU-Cote d’Ivoire (interim) 
EU-Central Africa (Cameroon) 
EU-Eastern and Southern African States 
(interim) 

EU-Pacific countries (interim) 

EU-CARIFORUM 

15 December 2016 
10 October 2016 for Botswana, Eswatini, 
Lesotho, Namibia and South Africa; 4 
February 2018 for Mozambique. 
3 September 2016 
4 August 2014 for Cameroon 
14 May 2012 for Madagascar, Mauritius, 
Seychelles and Zimbabwe; for Comoros 
since 7 February 2019 
20 December 2009 for Papua New 
Guinea; 28 July 2014 for Fiji, 31 
December 2018 for Samoa and 17 May 
2020 for Solomon Islands.  
29 December 2008 for Antigua & 
Barbuda; Belize; Bahamas; Barbados; 
Dominica; Dominican Republic; Grenada; 
Guyana; Jamaica; St. Kitts & Nevis; Saint 
Lucia; St. Vincent & the Grenadines; 
Suriname; and Trinidad & Tobago. 

* This designation is without prejudice to positions on status, and is in line with UNSCR 1244/1999 and the ICJ Opinion on 
the Kosovo declaration of independence. 

6 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
PART I:  

ASIA 

7 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE FREE 
TRADE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE EU AND VIETNAM 

1. 

THE AGREEMENTS 

The economic partnership between the EU and Vietnam comprises two distinct agreements, 
namely a free trade agreement and an investment protection agreement. Negotiations began 
in 2012 and were finalized in December 2015 on a single text covering both agreements. In 
2018, the EU and Vietnam decided to split the initial single agreement into a trade agreement 
and an investment protection agreement, respectively.  

The EU-Vietnam Free Trade Agreement (EVFTA) was signed on 30 June 2019 and entered 
into force on 1 August 2020. It sets out the rules accompanying trade liberalization between the 
EU and Vietnam. The Agreement establishes a free trade area between the Union and Vietnam. 
Its objectives are to liberalize and facilitate trade and investment between the Parties under the 
Agreement,  in  a  manner  mindful  of  high  levels  of  environmental  and  labour  protection  and 
relevant internationally recognised standards and agreements. 

The  EU-Vietnam  Investment  Protection  Agreement  was  signed  on  30  June  2019.  The 
agreement, already ratified by Vietnam, will enter into force once ratified by all 27 EU Member 
States. The EU-Vietnam Investment Agreement sets out rules that give EU investors and their 
investments in Vietnam a high level of protection, while safeguarding EU governments' rights 
to  pass  new  laws  and  update  existing  ones.  It  will  replace  and  upgrade  bilateral  investment 
treaties that several Member States currently have in place with Vietnam. Once ratified, the 
Investment Protection Agreement will replace investor-to-state dispute settlement. 

There is an important presence of EU companies in Vietnam, which in 2020 was the EU’s 15th 
largest trade partner, overall, and 1st trade partner in ASEAN with a total trade of €43.2 billion, 
a  decrease  as  compared  to  €45.5  billion  in  2019.  The  trade  and  investment  agreements  are 
expected to contribute to solidify this situation by removing remaining obstacles and protecting 
EU investments. Vietnam is an important regional economic actor and is part of a number of 
bilateral and major regional trade agreements, including the Comprehensive and Progressive 
Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) and the Regional Comprehensive Economic 
Partnership (RCEP). Vietnam has a population of 96.5 million inhabitants. Though hit by the 
health pandemic, its GDP grew by 2.9 % in 2020, showing a remarkable resilience as compared 
to other countries. 

2. 

PREPARATORY WORK PRECEDING ENTRY INTO FORCE  

During the course of 2019 and 2020, the EU Delegation in Vietnam organised several outreach 
events to promote and raise awareness on the benefits of the EVFTA.  

The EU supports the implementation of the EVFTA with a Partnership Instrument (PI) project 
launched in 2019, providing technical and legal support. This project complements a series of 
varied targeted actions, including at regional level, which also aim at strengthening responsible 
supply chains, reducing plastic waste and fostering the circular economy and strengthening food 
safety in Asia. 

8 

 
 
 
 
 
 
The EU supports also the implementation of the EVFTA chapter Sanitary and Phytosanitary 
(SPS) with Better Training for safer Food project (BTSF) launched in 2019, providing technical 
support and capacity building. This  project  complements  a series of varied targeted actions, 
with the main aim for Vietnamese competent authorities to better understand the provisions of 
the SPS chapter, and in particular the preparation of written guidelines related to these specific 
provisions (the concept of “single entity”, the application of regionalisation principles, the pre-
listing procedures, etc.). 

3. 

FIRST STEPS IN IMPLEMENTATION 

During the first 8 months following the entry into force of the EVFTA, the EU and Vietnam 
have been setting up the necessary institutional  structures under the agreement:  The highest 
instance  of  the  dialogue  is  the  Trade  Committee,  which  meets  at  ministerial  level.  The 
agreement  also  establishes  5  Specialized  Committees  and  2  Working  Groups.  The  EU  and 
Vietnam  also  agreed  on  the  rules  of  procedure  of  the  Trade  Committee.  A  number  of 
committees and working groups met already in the first half of 2021 (including the Specialized 
Committee  on  Trade  in  Goods,  the  Specialized  Committee  on  Sanitary  and  Phyto-Sanitary 
measures,  the Specialized Committee on Trade and Sustainable Development  as well as the 
Working Group on intellectual property rights, including geographical indications). A meeting 
of the Trade Committee is envisaged for the second half of the year. 

Already  from  the  entry  into  force  of  the  agreement  and  pending  the  first  meeting  of  the 
specialized committees, the Commission and the Vietnamese authorities pursued an informal 
dialogue  on  the  implementation  of  the  agreement,  in  general,  as  well  as  online  meetings  in 
specific  areas,  including  SPS  measures,  Rules  of  Origin,  customs-related  issues,  trade  and 
sustainable development.  

The EU is working intensively with Vietnam to achieve a full implementation of the provisions 
under  the  SPS  chapter,  including  the  concept  of  “single  entity”,  the  application  of   
regionalisation principles and the pre-listing procedures. The EU is also focusing on solving 
the  differentiation  Vietnam  applies  among  regulatory  authorities  of  EU  member  states  with 
regard to pharmaceuticals. The EU is attaching particular importance to the implementation of 
Vietnam’s commitments in the area of Trade and Sustainable Development. The EU aims at 
seeing  an  acceleration  of  the  process  leading  to  the  completion  of  key  labour  reforms  that 
Vietnam has started to implement, as well as the establishment of Vietnam’s domestic advisory 
group, in accordance with the agreement.   

9 

 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE FREE 
TRADE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE EU AND ITS MEMBER STATES AND 
SINGAPORE 

 1.         THE AGREEMENTS 

The  economic  partnership  between  the  EU  and  Singapore  is  made  up  of  two  distinct 
agreements,  namely  a  free  trade  agreement  (EUSFTA)  and  an  investment  protection 
agreement.10 Negotiations began in 2009, with negotiations for the trade agreement and the 
investment protection agreement being completed in 2012 and 2017, respectively. The trade 
agreement entered into force on 21 November 2019, and the investment agreement will enter 
into force once ratified by the EU Member States.  These are the first agreements on trade and 
investment the EU ever concluded with an ASEAN Member State. 

Singapore is an important regional economic actor, and is part of a number of major regional 
trade agreements, including the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific 
Partnership (CPTPP), the ASEAN Free Trade Area (AFTA) and the Regional Comprehensive 
Economic  Partnership  (RCEP).  Singapore’s  membership  of  ASEAN  also  gives  it  notable 
political as well as economic influence in the South East Asia region.  

The  EU-Singapore  trade  and  investment  agreements,  therefore,  contribute  to  solidifying  the 
EU’s  presence  in  the  region.  The  agreements  offer  new  opportunities  for  EU  companies  to 
expand into other South East Asian markets, as they provide them with more opportunities and 
stronger protection to do business in Singapore, which is the central hub in South East Asia. 
The Agreements may offer inspiration for trade and investment agreements between the EU 
and other ASEAN Member States and as a pivot towards a region-to-region engagement. 

 2.         MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES 

 2.1       Market Access: Progress and outstanding issues   

With  entry  into  force  of  the  Agreement  progress  was  made  on  the  implementation  of  the 
provisions  on  geographical  indications  within  the  Chapter  on  Intellectual  Property  Rights 
(IPR), which introduced enhanced provisions on the registration and protection of geographical 
indications (GIs) in Singapore: in 2020, the Trade Committee adopted a decision modifying the 
list of protected GIs within the scope of the Free Trade Agreement and a second decision on 
the interpretation of certain provisions in relation to the protection of GIs in the EUSFTA. As 
part of its EUSFTA commitments, Singapore passed its enhanced GI legislation as of 1 April 
2019, introducing, inter alia, a proper GI registry system. To date, 140 EU GIs are successfully 
registered in Singapore.   

10 The decision to “split” the agreement into a free trade agreement and an investment protection agreement was 
made following the Opinion 2/15 of the European Court of Justice on the allocation of competences between the 
European Union and the Member States. 

10 

 
 
 
                                                           
 
Within  the  same  Chapter  Singapore  also  committed  to  introduce  border  measures  against 
counterfeit goods protected by geographical indications, no later than three years of the entry 
into force of the ESFTA. This legislative change is pending. 

The  governing  body  of  the  EUSFTA  is  the  Trade  Committee,  co-chaired  by  the  EU  Trade 
Commissioner and the Singapore Minster for Trade and Industry. The Trade Committee is set 
to meet in the second half of 2021. 

 2.2       Trade and sustainable development: Progress and outstanding issues 

The  1st  TSD  Board  meeting  bringing  together  the  representatives  of  the  Government  of 
Singapore and the EU took place on 17-18 November 2020, followed by a dynamic discussion 
on 20 November 2020 with Civil Society. The meeting of the TSD Board already in the first 
year of the Agreement is a direct result of the commitments Singapore took before the European 
Parliament (NB: EUSFTA says “within two years of entry into force”). The meeting covered 
the main areas of joint interest: energy, climate change, circular economy, as well as labour 
conditions.  Agreement was reached between EU and Singapore, among other things, that both 
sides should continue working together on the full and timely implementation of their respective 
commitments under the Paris Agreement. Singapore’s ratification of the remaining fundamental 
ILO Conventions: C105 (forced labour), ILO C87 (freedom of association) and ILO C111 (non-
discrimination) was also discussed and the EU continues to encourage Singapore to present a 
roadmap to this end.  

  2.3       Sanitary and phytosanitary matters: Progress and outstanding issues 

The First meeting of the Committee on SPS between the Singapore and the EU took place on 
16th November 2020. Both sides appreciated that the exchanges could take place despite the 
difficult circumstances caused by the pandemic and agreed to follow-up on the issues discussed. 
In the light of the EU harmonised legislation, the EU questioned the need for maintaining the 
“born  and  raised  and  slaughtered  in  the  country  of  origin”  clause  in  health  certificates  for 
imports of animal products from EU Member States to Singapore. It was agreed to deepen the 
discussion in further exchanges. The EU informed on the state-of-play and next steps of the 
Singaporean request  to  export  meat  and fishery products  to  the EU through Singapore  from 
third countries or from EU through Singapore to third countries. Questions related to export 
inspections  and  health  certifications  of  ornamental  fish  were  also  discussed.  Singapore 
informed  the  EU  about  the  latest  developments  related  to  several  Member  States  pending 
applications to export animal products. Despite travel restrictions due to Covid 19, which made 
on-site verification inspections impossible, the export of several commodities from Member 
States  were  approved.  Both  sides  exchanged  views  on  the  application  of  regionalisation 
principles in trade and committed to continue the dialogue on this matter. 

11 

 
 
 
 
ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE 
ECONOMIC PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE EU AND JAPAN 

1. 

THE AGREEMENT 

The EU-Japan Economic Partnership Agreement (“the EU-Japan EPA”) entered into force 
on 1 February 2019. It is one of the most ambitious trade agreements concluded by the EU so 
far, providing for broad-based trade liberalisation coupled with rules and disciplines on 
aspects such as labour rights, environmental protection, antitrust, corporate governance and 
the commercial activities of state-owned enterprises, among other topics. The agreement thus 
pursues and develops the EU’s strive towards comprehensive trade agreements, and it 
provides a sound basis for the development of economic relations between the Parties.  

The agreement is particularly important for the EU agri-food sector, offering huge potential 
for increasing EU exports of a large number of products, such as wine, pork, beef, cheeses 
and processed agricultural products. One noticeable achievement is the step by step approval 
and recognition of oenological practices of the other Party as well as the provisions on the 
protection of geographical indications –two areas in which there was very significant progress 
during the reporting period.  

2. 

MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES 

2.1   Market Access: Progress and outstanding issues  

The EU and Japan amended the EU-Japan EPA in two important areas, namely geographical 
indications and UN regulations on motor vehicles. For both areas, the lists in the annexes 
were expanded in order to reflect additional GIs benefitting from protection, and additional UN 
regulations for motor vehicles that both Parties implement: 

  The Joint Committee in January 2021 adopted Decision no. 1 on the enlargement of 

the list of geographical indications protected under the Agreement and  

  Decision no. 2 on the listing of additional UNECE regulations, in respect of motor 

vehicles, that both Parties apply.  

Furthermore, Japan informed the EU about the oenological practices for use in wine that had 
been authorised in line with the EPA calendar and about those that would be authorised in 
January 2021.  

The Committee on Customs and Rules of Origin has successfully implemented its work 
plan11, and the Parties thus undertook to pursue discussions on other additional areas 
regarding certificates of origin with a view to offering further guidance to economic operators 
as regards the obligation to disclose as part of their “statements on origin” the specific 

11 https://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2019/july/tradoc_157973.pdf  

12 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
criterion that confers preferential origin (e.g. if the product concerned is “wholly obtained” in 
the EU or the partner country or the element leading to a change of tariff heading; etc.).  

The Parties discussed quota management procedures for the import into Japan of certain 
agricultural commodities and processed agricultural products, notably further adjustments of 
quota management procedures in particular for cheeses, as a first step. New rules introduced by 
Japan following those discussions aim at the reallocation of unused quota volumes to efficient 
operators earlier during the fiscal year, and the discouragement of applications from companies 
that do not have the capacity to effectively utilise quota import licences in full. Discussions on 
other quotas, including malt, are or will be pursued in the months to come. 

The  SPS  specialised  committee  met  in  November  2020  where  the  main  outstanding  issues 
were deeply discussed, in particular: the need for expediting the finalisation of the EU pending 
applications for exporting beef, poultry and pig products, the application of the “EU as single 
entity” and the adherence to the international standards on animal health (mutual recognition 
of the animal health project-regionalisation). 

However,  in  some  other  sectors,  there  are  still  difficulties  for  EU  companies  to  access  the 
Japanese  market.  For  example,  when  it  comes  to  procurement  of  rail  equipment,  suppliers 
from  the  EU  are  experiencing  obstacles  to  access  the  Japanese  market  due  to  the  lack  of 
transparency on the standards required and the lack of an independent third-party certification 
of compliance with technical requirements for products, leaving Japanese individual railway 
operators free to define their own requirements. The Commission is engaging with Japan on 
these issues in the Technical Expert Group (set up in the context of the EPA negotiations) and 
in the EU-Japan High Level Dialogues. 

2.2 

Trade and sustainable development: Progress and outstanding issues  

The  Committee  on  Trade  and  Sustainable  Development  met  virtually  on  26-27  January 
202112. The Committee pursued its activities regarding the broad areas identified in 2020: 

  As  regards  climate-related  issues,  the  Parties  provided  an  update  on  their  Nationally 
Determined  Contribution  (NDC)  in  the  context  of  the  Paris  Agreement,  with  Japan 
referring to its work to revise its NDC to reflect the new domestic measures. The Parties 
also took stock of the activities on responsible supply chains, including the high-level 
event  on  the  role  of  responsible  business  conduct  in  building  resilience,  which  took 
place  on  21  January  2021.  In  this  context,  Japan  reported  on  the  adoption  of  the 
National Action Plan on Business and Human Rights in October 2020, and indicated 
the on-going efforts towards implementation. 

  The Committee on Trade and Sustainable also considered the issue of illegal logging 
and related trade, in view of the planned review in 2022 of Japan’s Clean Wood Act; 
and  Japan’s  efforts  on  the  ratification  of  the  ILO  C10513  and  C11114,  including  the 

12  Minutes available at https://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2020/march/tradoc_158664.pdf 
13  On abolition of forced labour 
14  On professional discrimination 

13 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
holding of a tripartite discussion in June 2020, and debates in December 2020 within 
All-Party Parliamentary Group for ILO activities. 

EU  and  Japan  held  the  first  Joint  Dialogue  with  Civil  Society  on  29  January  202115. 
Representatives from governments and civil society organizations discussed crosscutting issues 
relating  to  Trade  and  Sustainable  Development,  trade  and  environment  (including  climate 
action) and trade and labour.   

Japan and the EU continued discussions on rules of procedure for dispute settlement and the 
establishment of list of individuals willing to serve as panel experts.16 Formal decisions should 
be taken in the course of 2021, pending agreement by the Japanese authorities. 

15  Report available at https://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2020/june/tradoc_158782.pdf 
16 While the Committee on Trade and Sustainable Developments is to adopt decisions on dispute settlement rules, 
in  accordance  with  the  EPA,  the  dispute  settlement  mechanism  is  able  to  operate  pending  those  decisions  by 
relying, if need be, on the rules of procedure adopted under the general EPA chapter on dispute settlement. 

14 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE EU-
SOUTH KOREA FREE TRADE AGREEMENT 

1. 

THE AGREEMENT  

The Free Trade Agreement between the EU and its Member States and the Republic of South 
Korea (in this report referred to as “the EU-Korea FTA”) has been provisionally applied since 
July 2011. On 13 December 2015 it entered formally into force after ratification by EU Member 
States. The Additional Protocol to the FTA, to take into account the accession of Croatia to the 
EU, has been provisionally applied since 26 May 2014 and it entered into force on 1 January 
2016. 

The EU-South Korea FTA is the first of a new generation of comprehensive trade agreements 
which, apart from market opening commitments also offers a basis for regulatory co-operation 
in  key  sectors  as  well  as  a  substantial  chapter  on  sustainable  development  with  binding 
provisions upholding and promoting social and environmental standards.  

2. 

MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES   

2.1   Market Access: Progress and outstanding issues 

Despite the difficulties brought by the pandemic, both sides continued working constructively 
on the implementation of the agreement and a number of FTA working groups and committees 
took place in 2020.  

Encouraging developments related to the extension of the geographical indications’ (GI) list 
protected in the Annexes of the FTA took place in 2020 and early 2021. Following the adoption 
in 2019 of the Rules of Procedure of the GI Working Group established under the FTA,  the 
EU and Korea reached agreement in principle at the April 2021 Trade Committee to include 
additional 84 EU and Korean names in the list of 226 GIs already protected. Further work is 
necessary regarding one German Geographical Indication and the consequences of the removal 
of UK Geographical Indications. 

The 2021 Trade Committee also adopted an administrative amendment to the car sector annex 
that  reflects  technological  and  regulatory  developments  in  the  automotive  sector.  This 
amendment will bring more clarity as to the terms of application of the rules and will enable 
businesses to save costs for testing and certification. 

Regarding customs issues, the EU and Korea reached mutual understanding under Article 27 
of the Origin Protocol concerning the verification procedure; the Customs Committee adopted 
a recommendation17 to that effect. 

17 Recommendation No 1/2020 of the Customs Committee established under the Free Trade Agreement between 
the European Union and its Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of Korea, of the other part of 8 

15 

 
 
 
 
                                                           
However, some long-standing issues remain unresolved, including:  

  The black of access of EU beef to the South Korean market, which has been closed to 
EU imports since early 2000s remains a concern. In 2019, South Korea approved the 
application of two Member States (Denmark and The Netherlands), who can now export 
beef to Korea, however other Member States are still waiting for the finalisation of their 
approval process.  

  The lack of recognition by Korea of the regionalisation principle for animal diseases 

(African swine fever and avian influenza) as implemented in the EU.  

2.2  

Trade and sustainable development: Progress and outstanding issues  

The Committee on Trade and Sustainable Development (CTSD) did not meet in 2020. During 
the reporting period, the main advances relate to the unfolding of the legal proceedings linked 
to the bilateral dispute under the TSD (TSD) Chapter of the FTA. The dispute, launched on 
17 December 2018 when the Commission formally requested government consultations under 
Article 13.14 of the FTA, concerns Korea’s obligation to: i) ratify all fundamental International 
Labour Organization (ILO) Conventions, and ii) respect in law and practice the core principles 
of  the  ILO,  in  particular  the  principle  of  freedom  of  association  and  right  to  collective 
bargaining.  

As the government consultations did not solve all the issues, the EU requested on 4 July 2019 
the establishment of a Panel of Experts to examine the matters and to solve the dispute. On 30 
December 2019, the Panel of Experts was formally established.  

During the reporting period the legal proceedings continued: a virtual panel hearing took place 
on 8 and 9 October 2020 and the Panel of Experts’ issued its report on 20 January 2021.18  

The Panel of Experts agreed with the EU that a number of provisions of the Korean trade union 
legislation were not  consistent with  the principles concerning freedom of association rights. 
The Panel also found that Korea has made continued and sustained efforts over the last years to 
ratify three of the four outstanding fundamental ILO Conventions. It nevertheless recognised 
that Korea’s efforts were not optimal and clarified that there is an ongoing obligation in this 
regard, stating that it expected Korea to ratify expeditiously all outstanding fundamental ILO 
Conventions. 

In the meantime, there have been important developments in Korea to promote labour rights. 
On 9 December 2020, Korea’s National Assembly passed a number of legislative amendments 
to the Korean Trade Union Act aiming to bring it in compliance with the principle concerning 
freedom of association. On 26 February 2021, the Korean National Assembly completed the 
ratification  process  of  three  fundamental  ILO  Conventions:  No  87  on  the  Freedom  of 

December 2020 on the application of Article 27 of the Protocol concerning the definition of ‘originating 
products’ and methods of administrative cooperation (OJ L 434, 23.12.2020, p. 67). 

18 This report as well as other relevant documents are available on the Commission’s webpage at 
https://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/accessing-markets/dispute-settlement/bilateral-disputes/ (Korea labour). 

16 

 
 
 
 
                                                           
 
Association  and  Protection  of  the  Right  to  Organise,  No  98  on  the  Right  to  Organise  and 
Collective Bargaining and No 29 on Forced Labour.  

According to Article 13.15 of the FTA, the parties shall make their best efforts to accommodate 
the views and recommendations of the Panel of Experts. The CTSD is the institutional body 
established under the EU-Korea FTA with the responsibility to monitor this process. To this 
effect,  the  CTSD  met  on  13  and  14  April  2021.  The  discussions  continued  in  a  follow  up 
technical exchange. As a result, the EU and Korea agreed to continue to engage on this, under 
the institutional framework of the agreement. They decided to meet to review the application 
of the amended Trade Union Act, shortly after it enters into force in July 2021, in an ad hoc 
interim meeting of the CTSD. They also agreed to review jointly the preparatory work taken 
forward by Korea for the ratification of the outstanding fundamental ILO Convention No 105 
on the Abolition of Forced Labour in  a technical meeting towards the end of 2021, or early 
2022.     

3. 

ACTIVITIES SUBJECT TO SPECIFIC MONITORING   

In line with Article 14 of the FTA Protocol on Rules of Origin, South Korea’s imports of key 
car  parts  and  electronics  from  the  most  important  suppliers  (outside  the  EU)  have  been 
monitored.  Like in previous years, China and Japan remain the largest car parts suppliers. Japan 
and China pay full duty (8%) on most of the car parts (within the RCEP, Korea excludes from 
liberalisation the key car parts such as engines, Lithium-ion batteries, a large number of car 
parts of 8708 for both Japan and China).  

The import pattern has not fundamentally changed since the EU-South Korea FTA has been 
signed. Korea’s imports of combustion (gasoline and diesel) engines and parts for engines (HS 
8407, 8408 and 8409) showed a downward trend in 2020 compared to 2019 (-19%), while the 
imports of core car parts (HS 8708) slightly increased (+5%). EU imports of vehicles (HS 87) 
from Korea decreased by 18% in 2020 compared to 2019. EU imports of cars (HS 8703) from 
Korea decreased by 16% in 2020 compared to 2019.  

17 

2020 total import    (1,000 $) 1st 201920202nd20192020Electronic sectorHS 8522Parts and accessories for pictures and sound reproducing and recording apparatus21.350China17.81015.911Japan2.2011.796HS 8527Reception apparatus118.356China105.99449.905Vietnam22.54223.618HS 8529Parts for reception apparatus3.722.255China2.734.9001.887.365Vietnam1.416.8571.135.058Core car partsHS 8407Spark-ignition reciprocating or rotary internal combustion piston engine460.378Mexico84.473187.335Japan165.81957.541HS 8408Diesel or semi-diesel engines518.785Japan136.315122.591China 49.03332.143HS 8409Parts for engines of 8407 or 84081.035.704China 237.877218.943Japan191.392153.756HS 8708Parts and accessories for motor vehicles of headings 8701 to 87054.048.337China 1.203.6161.397.347Japan729.595596.515HS 8705Electric accumlators, including separators therefo2.003.851China 1.338.7401.732.817Vietnam44,49645,367Source : Kita.org2020 main import sourcing (outside the EU) and evolution of imports (1,000 $) 
 
 
 
 
PART II:  

THE AMERICAS 

18 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE EU-
CANADA COMPREHENSIVE ECONOMIC AND TRADE AGREEMENT (CETA) 

1. 

THE AGREEMENT 

The  EU-Canada  Comprehensive  Economic  and  Trade  Agreement  (“CETA”)  has  been 
provisionally applied since 21 September 2017. At the time of writing, 15 Member States had 
notified  the  completion  of  their  ratification  process  (Austria,  Czech  Republic,  Denmark, 
Estonia, Spain,  Croatia, Latvia,  Lithuania,  Luxembourg, Malta, Portugal,  Romania,  Finland, 
Slovakia and Sweden). The ratification process is still ongoing in the remaining Member States.  

In 2020-2021,  significant  progress  was made in  building  the foundations of the  Investment 
Court  System  (ICS)  already  established  in  CETA.  Although  the  ICS  provisions  are  not 
provisionally applied, the contours of the further work on the ICS were agreed between EU and 
Canada  in  the  Joint  Interpretative  Instrument  on  CETA19.  On  29  January  2021,  the  EU  and 
Canada adopted four decisions putting in place CETA’s ICS provisions. The decisions – and 
all  investment  protection  provisions  in  the  agreement  –  will  apply  only  once  the  elected 
lawmakers of all the 27 EU Member States will have approved CETA. 

On  11  October  2019,  the  Commission  had  presented  the  proposals  for  the  decisions  to  the 
Council  and  EU  Member  States  in  the  Council  unanimously  approved  the  adoption  of  the 
decisions  on  18  May  2020.  The  Commission  has  also  kept  the  European  Parliament  fully 
informed about these decisions. 

The four decisions adopted in January 2021 by the EU and Canada concern: 

  Rules setting out the functioning of the Appellate Tribunal: these rules will ensure an 
effective  appeal  function,  the  first  such  appeal  function  to  become  operational  in 
international investment agreements; 

  A  code  of  conduct  for  the  judges  of  the  Investment  Court  System:  this  will  further 
bolster the assurances of the highest ethics standards already contained in the agreement; 

  Rules for mediation: mediation is an area which traditional investment agreements have 

largely overlooked and; 

  Rules for binding interpretations to be adopted by the CETA Joint Committee: these 
rules will facilitate the EU and Canada to maintain control of the interpretation of the 
agreement. 

The decisions were adopted in all 23 authentic languages of CETA and are published in the EU 
Official Journal20. 

19 Para. 6 (“Investment Protection”) of the Joint Interpretative Instrument on the Comprehensive Economic and 
Trade Agreement (CETA) between Canada and the European Union and its Member States (OJ L 11, 14 January 
2017, pp. 3–8). 
20 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=OJ:L:2021:059:TOC.  

19 

 
 
 
 
                                                           
2. 

MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES 

2.1   Market Access: Progress and outstanding issues  

In 2020, the EU obtained Canada’s commitment to apply the outcome of the settlement reached 
with Australia in WTO dispute DS537 also to alcoholic products imported from the EU. As a 
result of this  settlement, Canada will remove the discriminatory aspect  of  the federal  excise 
duty  by  mid-2022  and  three  Canadian  provinces  (Ontario,  Quebec  and  Nova  Scotia)  will 
remove discriminatory measures on wines (by mid-2023, end 2023 and mid-2024 respectively). 
The  EU  will  continue  to  monitor  the  implementation  of  CETA  Declaration  on  Wines  and 
Spirits. Despite remaining barriers, in 2020, Canada has become the EU’s 4th largest export 
market for wines. 

The EU made a detailed submission on the management of the  CETA cheese TRQs in  the 
framework  of  the  comprehensive  TRQ  review  launched  by  Canada.  Although  the  EU  has 
certain concerns on how the quotas are managed, the fill rate is high.21 Moreover, CETA also 
increased duty-free access for EU cheese under Canada’s WTO quota. As Canadian MFN tariffs 
on cheese are 245.5% or higher, duty-free exports to Canada under CETA preferences are a 
great opportunity for EU cheese makers. 

CETA’s tariff-free quotas are  
being phased-in over 5 years 
2017 

2018 

2019 

2020 

2021 

2022 

824 tonnes 

5.900 tonnes 

8.850 tonnes 

11.800 tonnes 

14.750 tonnes 

17.000 tonnes 

In  2020,  5  additional  EU  GIs  were  registered  directly  in  Canada,  namely  Sobrasada  de 
Mallorca,  Alicante,  Tokaj/Tokaji,  Stelvio/Stilfser  and  Finocchiona.  The  EU  continues  to 
exchange with Canada on how to best assist European stakeholders to ensure the effective GI 
protection in Canada.  

In September 2019, the Commission carried out an audit in Canada on the production of pig 
and  bovine  meat  intended  for  export  to  the  European  Union.  Constructive  exchanges  took 
place  between  the  Canadian  authorities  and  the  European  Commission  and  resulted  that 
Canada demonstrated to have addressed all recommendations satisfactorily. Nevertheless, 
the Commission will continue to monitor closely the situation and will plan a follow-up audit 
in Canada.  

21 In 2020, 11.800 tonnes were available under the CETA quotas and 11.109 tonnes were used which constitutes 
a fill rate of 94%. 

20 

 
 
 
                                                           
2.2 

Trade and sustainable development: Progress and outstanding issues  

In 2020, the EU and Canada continued to advance joint actions to promote the objectives of the 
CETA  Joint  Committee  Recommendation  on  Trade,  Climate  Action  and  the  Paris 
Agreement.  

At the third annual meeting of the CETA Trade and Sustainable Development Committee22 
the EU and Canada discussed a number of implementation issues, notably:  

  the CETA Trade and Gender Recommendation, noting good progress, in line with 
the  Trade  and  Gender  work  plan23,  on  exchanges  and  events  aimed  at  sharing 
information  on  policies,  laws  and  best  practices  on  a  range  of  issues,  including 
supporting women’s entrepreneurship and conducting impact assessments of free trade 
agreements; 

  Trade and labour issues and future cooperation on a number of policy areas, including 
combatting  forced  and  child  labour.  Both  sides  highlighted  their  support  to  the 
International Labour Organization (ILO), their close collaboration in the ILO work and 
support to ILO’s technical assistance projects, including in promoting global ratification 
of the ILO conventions;  

  The  EU  and  Canada  updated  each  other  on  the  developments  in  their  respective 
domestic environment and climate policies, and reviewed their bilateral cooperation 
activities on these areas in 2020, which focused on climate change, clean technologies, 
biodiversity  and  circular  economy.  Planning  forward,  the  Parties  noted  potential 
synergies on the World Circular Economy Forum, which Canada will host in 2021, and 
confirmed  continued  close  cooperation  under  the  Paris  Agreement  in  the  lead-up  to 
COP26  as  well  as  under  the  Convention  on  Biological  Diversity  in  the  lead  up  to 
COP15; 

  Finally, the EU and Canada recalled their commitment to undertake an early review 
of  the  TSD  chapter  in  CETA,  with  a  view  to  the  effective  enforceability  of  CETA 
provisions on trade and labour, and trade and environment, as set out in Article 10 (a) 
of  the  CETA  Joint  Interpretative  Instrument,  and  took  stock  of  the  process.  In  this 
framework, the Parties held, virtually, a second dedicated session on 23 October 2020, 
and had several interactions with the CETA DAGs as well as a broad discussion with 
civil society representatives during the 3rd CETA Civil Society Forum. 

22 Report available at: https://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2021/april/tradoc_159554.pdf.  
23 Work Plan available at: https://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2020/september/tradoc_158945.pdf.  

21 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
In line with previous CETA TSD Committee meetings, the Committee was joined by the Chairs 
of the Canadian and the EU Domestic Advisory Groups (DAGs) under CETA and welcomed 
their feedback and suggestions for collaboration under the CETA TSD chapters.  

The EU and Canada DAGs at their 3rd joint discussed the TSD review and enforcement, the 
impact of COVID-19 on trade (and more specifically on supply chains), as well as the impact 
of EU-Canada trade on climate change. They also identified joint priorities for 2020-2023. 

The 3rd CETA Civil Society Forum met before the CETA TSD Committee, with more than 
150 registered participants and 120 joining the sessions from across the EU and Canada from 
business, social partners, environmental organizations and other civil society representatives24. 
Four thematic sessions explored the following topics: (i) the update on the CETA Trade and 
Gender  Recommendation,  SME  Recommendation  and  Recommendation  on  Trade,  Climate 
Action and the Paris Agreement; (ii) the update on Early Review of the CETA TSD Chapters; 
(iii)  EU-Canada  Cooperation  on  Labour;  and  (iv)  EU-Canada  Cooperation  towards  a 
Sustainable COVID-19 Recovery. 

24 Report available at: https://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2021/march/tradoc_159494.pdf 

22 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE EU-
COLOMBIA/ECUADOR/PERU TRADE AGREEMENT 

1.  THE AGREEMENT 

The  Trade  Agreement  with  Colombia  and  Peru  (hereinafter  the  ‘Agreement’)  has  been 
provisionally applied with Peru since 1 March 2013 and with Colombia since 1 August 2013. 
Negotiations on a Protocol of Accession of Ecuador to the Agreement were concluded in July 
2014 and the Protocol  is being provisionally  applied since 1 January 2017. Ratifications by 
Member States of both the Trade Agreement and the Ecuador Protocol are ongoing.  

The Trade Agreement was also amended through the Protocol of Accession of Croatia to the 
EU. The Protocol  entered into force with  Peru on 1 May 2017. Ratification by Colombia is 
ongoing. 

The Agreement has helped to stabilitise trade despite fluctuations in commodity prices and a 
contributing factor supporting the diversifation of the economy of the three EU trading partners, 
and a good basis for cooperation.  

The supervision and facilitation of the operation and further development of the Agreement – 
including the evaluation of results obtained from the application of the Agreement – is under 
the direct responsibility of the Trade Committee, which comprises representatives of the EU 
and representatives of each signatory Andean Country. The Committee also supervises the work 
of  all  specialised  bodies  (e.g.  the  Sub-committees)  established  under  the  Agreement.  The 
decisions  adopted  by  the  Committee  are  binding  upon  the  Parties,  which  are  to  take  all 
necessary  measures  to  implement  them.  The  Trade  Committee  is  scheduled  to  meet  at  least 
once a year. 

The  annual  meetings  of  the  implementation  bodies  under  the  Trade  Agreement  (Trade 
Committee and eight specialised Sub-committees) took place in virtual format during the month 
of November 2020. The minutes of all meetings are publicly available.25  

2. MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES  

2.1  Market Access: Progress and outstanding issues 

In  2020,  the  EU  and  the  Andean  partner  countries  continued  their  work  to  improve  the 
implementation  of  the  Agreement,  including  through  a  number  of  cooperation  activities. 
Examples of such activities are the IP Key Latin America26 project in  the area of intellectual 
property, the RBCLAC project27 implemented in partnership between the OECD, ILO and 
UN  OHCHR,  a  number  of  seminars  targeting  specific  concerns  in  the  area  of  SPS  and 
respective  projects  (funded  by  the  Partnership  Instrument)  to  assist  more  globally  in  the 
implementation of the Agreement. 

25 https://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/press/index.cfm?id=2100  
26 https://ipkey.eu/en/latin-america 
27 Responsible Business Conduct in Latin America and the Caribbean: https://mneguidelines.oecd.org/rbclac.htm 

23 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
Colombia 

In 2020,  discussion in  the area of SPS continued,  Colombia  and the EU made significant 
progress on a harmonised certificate to allow the prelisting for EU establishments producing 
meat products and advanced on the approval requirements for the harmonised certificate for 
dairy products. However, such progress still needs to be translated in practice, with tangible 
improvement  of  access  of  EU  Member  States.  Follow  up  and  continued  discussions  with 
Colombia remain necessary. Progress was also made in the area of public procurement: the 
Trade  Committee  adopted  a  decision  extending  coverage  under  the  Agreement  to  six  new 
Colombian agencies at the central level of government. On the sub-central level, the EU and 
Colombia  continued  discussions  in  order  to  find  a  solution  to  the  problems  faced  by  EU 
companies when procuring in the Colombian market. The EU also discussed with Colombia 
the upcoming reform of Law 80/1993 on Public Procurement.   

At the same time, there remain a number of outstanding issues, notably in the area of SPS: 
Colombia still does not recognise the regionalisation principle enshrined in the Agreement and 
still has in place restrictions on exports of live pigs and pig meat from two EU Member States, 
due to African Swine Fever. Colombia also needs to conclude its investigation on the usurpation 
of Geographical Indications (GIs) of EU´s cheeses. In addition, the EU and Colombia continued 
discussing the certification requirements for good manufacturing practices for alcoholic 
drinks and the burdensome importation and taxation processes that apply to these products. In 
this  regard,  the  EU  monitored  the  implementation  Decree  2106/2019  (Decreto  antitrámites) 
which addresses some of these concerns, but whose implementation has been delayed.  

Through its cooperation projects, the EU supported the reduction of red tape and other trade 
related objectives in Colombia. During 2020, the EU continued supporting the improvement 
of the business environment in Colombia, building on the three position papers developed 
with  EU  industry  on  public  procurement,  alcoholic  drinks  and  the  health  sector.  The  EU 
presented these papers to the relevant Colombian authorities. Furthermore, Colombia took part 
in  the  EU´s  regional  programmes  on  the  fight  against  Antimicrobial  Resistance28  and  the 
promotion of Responsible Business Conduct29. 

Peru 

The Trade Agreement continues to promote the diversification of Peruvian exports to the EU, 
i.e. promoting a gradual shift away from reliance on mineral products towards a range of higher 
value agricultural products. An example of this trend is that of fresh fruits, which accounted for 
6% of Peru’s exports to the EU in 2012. Exports of fresh fruits have since increased 300% and 
account now for 27% of Peru’s exports to the EU.30  

28 https://ec.europa.eu/fpi/sites/fpi/files/annexes_aap_2018_phase_ii_3.pdf 
29 https://ec.europa.eu/fpi/sites/fpi/files/ann_8_-
_action_fiche_for_responsible_business_conduct_in_latin_america_and_caribbean.pdf 
30 In fact, where the exports of more traditional products decreased, those of agricultural products continued to grow despite 
the pandemic and were thus responsible for easing up the fall in overall Peruvian exports during the year of the pandemic. 

24 

 
 
                                                           
Progress was made in the area of Technical Barriers to Trade: Peru, through its Supreme 
Decree 021-2020-AS of 12 June 2020, extended until June 2021 the permission to use stickers 
to display health warnings on food products.31 Peru also made efforts to address barriers in 
the area of public procurement during 2020, including by providing training to entities carrying 
out public procurements, although more efforts are necessary to fully remove these barriers.  

A number of challenges persist. Among others, Peru continues to grant a more favourable tax 
treatment to local Pisco to the detriment of EU alcoholic beverages. Furthermore, Peru has yet 
to approve harmonised certificates to allow prelisting for EU establishments of processed meat 
products  and  deboned  bovine  meat.  Similar  to  Colombia,  Peru’s  lack  of  recognition  of  the 
regionalisation  principle  enshrined  in  the  Agreement  is  of  strong  concern.  Since  early  2020 
Peru has in place a ban of all exports of live pigs and pig meat from 12 Member States due to 
ASF (African swine flu). In the field of public procurement there are also concerns regarding 
technical specifications in public tenders. 

Ecuador 

Progress was made in 2020 in the field of SPS: On November 12, 2020 (NB: date of the SPS 
trade subcommittee), the Ecuadorian sanitary authorities approved the single import procedure 
for  pig  meat  from  Spain,  thus  becoming  the  first  Member  State  enjoying  prelisting  of 
establishments.  Furthermore,  Ecuador  authorized  imports  of  boneless  cooked  and  matured 
hams  from  Italian  establishments  that  enjoyed  the  pre-listing  system  for  products  already 
authorised  in  Ecuador  provided  the  Italian  authorities  submit  the  CUES2  form  (unique 
questionnaire for exports) within a three-month period. The approval of a list of Spanish and 
Italian  establishments  producing  pig  meat  products  was  a  step  forward  towards  the 
implementation  of  the  prelisting  system.  However,  again,  such  progress  still  needs  to  be 
translated in practice, with tangible improvement of access of EU Member States. 

In the area of industrial goods, the imposition of safeguard duties on imports of ceramics 
could be averted: In November 2019, the Trade Defence Department of MPCEIP admitted a 
request  from domestic ceramic producers to apply a safeguard on imports but evidence was 
shown to be insufficient and measures were finally not imposed. The EU also continued raising 
its  concerns  with  Ecuador  on  the  draft  technical  norm  that  will  require  to  include  in  the 
packaging  or  shipping  document  of  each  item  of  tableware  detailed  information  on  the 
manufacturer or importer (i.e. name, tax identification number, etc.).  

In addition, the management by Ecuador of tariff-rate quotas under the Agreement remains 
problematic as Ecuador does not apply the first-come first-served system as prescribed under 
the Agreement. The EU in 2020 continued to address this issue with Ecuador with a view to 
finding a workable solution. 

In relation to EU Geographical Indications (GIs), the Ecuadorian government confirmed it 
had issued the respective certificates to protect 114 EU Geographical Indications (GIs), while 
issues remain to be solved, including in relation to the usurpation of the EU GI “Feta” and the 
other is the re-submission of a request to protect the EU GI for Czech beer. 

31 Albeit this positive development, the EU continues to advocate for the indefinite use of stickers. 

25 

 
 
                                                           
2.2  

Trade and sustainable development: Progress and outstanding issues   

The implementation of the Trade and Sustainable Development (TSD) Chapter of the Trade 
Agreement  continued  in  2020  in  line  with  the  priority  issues  established  per  partner,  which 
include labour inspection, freedom of association and collective bargaining, child labour, social 
dialogue, labour informality, implementation of environmental protection legislation, as well 
as consultation with civil society. During the meeting of the TSD Sub-committee in November 
2020, all parties reported on the progress achieved on labour, environmental and cross-cutting 
issues like consultation of civil society, even if challenges remain.  

The measures to mitigate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic were an important part of this 
year’s labour discussions, as was the progress made on the strengthening of labour inspection. 
The EU also reiterated and discussed with partners its key issues of concern; notably restrictions 
to freedom of association and the situation in the banana sector in Ecuador; and the violence 
against trade unions and social leaders in Colombia. With Peru, the discussions focused 
on the progress made with implementation of the understanding on labour rights reached 
in  Quito  in  2018.  Peru highlighted  the  implementation  of  initiatives  to  address  informality, 
child and forced labour, ensure freedom of association and strengthen labour inspection. 

While issues related to labour commitments continued to dominate the discussions at the TSD 
Sub-committee, the exchanges on environmental and climate issues are becoming increasingly 
detailed. The EU presented the developments on the European Green Deal and other EU climate 
policies.  There  is  shared  interest  by  all  parties  on  issues  like  circular  economy, 
deforestation and biodiversity. Peru also referred to the efforts to continue to strengthen the 
institutional  setting  for  environmental  monitoring  and  the  enforcement  of  environmental 
legislation. Peru also reported on advances in the area of air quality.  

The EU and Ecuador exchanged information related to the fight against illegal, unreported and 
unregulated (IUU) fishing. The consultations of civil society on TSD implementation made by 
each partner were also discussed. Colombia and Ecuador asked for follow-up discussions on 
possible  technical  assistance  to  improve  the  work  of  their  Domestic  Advisory  Group 
(DAG). 

The parties identified a number of areas for follow-up and agreed to engage on a continuous 
basis via intersessional technical meetings. 

With  the  three  partners,  the  Commission  continued  to  fund  a  number  of  cooperation 
activities during the year. In Colombia, the Commission continued to fund an ILO technical 
assistance project  to  strengthen labour inspection capacity in  rural  areas  and an UNIDO-led 
project  to  support  sustainable  mining  and  empowerment  of  local  communities.  In  Peru, 
workshops were held on labour inspection (with the ILO) and on social dialogue and conflict 
resolution (with the support of TAIEX).  The Commission and Ecuador agreed to set up with 
the ILO a pilot project to improve labour inspection tools for the agricultural sector. Several 
activities were carried out in the three partners under the project that is in place since January 
2019 to support corporate social responsibility uptake in the Latin American region.  

26 

 
 
Despite the circumstances of the COVID-19 pandemic, the EU DAG held two meetings in 
2020.  The  Commission  attended  the  two  meetings  and  debriefed  DAG  members.  The  latter 
expressed concerns about the implementation of the TSD commitments, including the violence 
against trade union leaders and environmental activists in Colombia, the situation of the banana 
sector in Ecuador, the monitoring of labour and environmental issues in Peru, and the socio-
economic impact of COVID-19 on the EU and the Andean partners. 

The  parties  held  an  Open  Session  with  Civil  Society  on  13  November  2020  via 
videoconference. An issue that was insistently raised by civil society representatives was the 
impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on labour markets and the impact of the policy responses 
on labour rights. 

3.  ACTIVITIES SUBJECT TO SPECIFIC MONITORING AND SPECIFIC AREAS OF 

IMPORTANCE   

3.1 

Banana imports from Colombia, Ecuador and Peru 

The  Trade  Agreement  provides  for  a  preferential  customs  duty  on  bananas  under  heading 
0803.00.19 (fresh bananas), progressively reduced since the date of provisional application of 
the Agreement until the year 2020 (following a schedule indicated in a tariff reduction table). 
Customs Tariffs have stabilised to 75 euros/ton since 1 January 2020. This treatment is linked 
to a ‘stabilisation clause’ that sets out an annual trigger volume for imports from each Andean 
country during the transition period.  
Article 15 of Regulation (EU) No 19/201332 provides for the stabilisation mechanism. When 
the  annual  trigger  volume  of  imports  per  country  as  set  in  the  Agreement  is  met,  the 
Commission  examines  the impact  of these imports on the situation of the Union market  for 
bananas  and  take  a  decision  to  either  temporarily  suspend  the  preferential  customs  duty  or 
determine that such suspension is not appropriate. The stabilisation mechanism ended on 31 
December 2019. In this context and in accordance with Articles 3 and 13 of Regulation 19/2013, 
the  Commission  has  monitored  the  evolution  of  imports  of  fresh  bananas  from  Colombia, 
Ecuador and Peru. 

2019/2020 imports of fresh bananas33 

Country 

2019 Total 
imports  

2020 Total 
imports  

Variation 

(tonnes) 

(tonnes) 

2020/2019 

Colombia  

1.127.604  

1.182.394  

Ecuador  

1.364.116  

1.512.543  

4,9% 

10,9% 

32 Regulation (EU) No 19/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 January 2013 implementing the bilateral 
safeguard clause and the stabilisation mechanism for bananas of the Trade Agreement between the European Union and its 
Member States, of the one part, and Colombia and Peru, of the other part as amended by Regulation (EU) 2017/540 of the 
European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2017. 
33 Statistics are based on EU27 

27 

 
 
  
                                                           
Peru  

Total 

108.438  

100.365  

-7,4% 

2.600.158  

2.795.302  

In 2020, EU imports of fresh bananas from Colombia amounted to 1.182.394 metric tons, a 
4.9% higher than previous year. Ecuador exported 1 512 543 metric tons of fresh bananas to 
the EU a 10.9% higher than previous year. Peru exported 100 365 metric tons of fresh bananas 
to the EU a 7% below previous year.  
In line with the commitment undertaken in the Joint declaration to Regulation (EU) 2017/54034, 
the Commission will continue to carry out regular analysis of the state of the market and the 
Union banana producers and, if need be, examine the situation together with Member States 
and the stakeholders. 

3.2 

Colombian anti-dumping duties on frozen fries 

In November 2018, Colombia imposed definitive anti-dumping (AD) measures on imports of 
frozen fries from  Belgium,  Germany and the  Netherlands, with  duties  ranging from  ~3% to 
~8%, imposed for 2 years and affecting 75% of EU exports to the country. The investigation 
showed serious shortcomings, notably with regard to dumping, injury and causality links. On 
15  November  2019,  the  EU  initiated  a  WTO  dispute  settlement  procedure  and  requested 
consultations35.  Consultations  failed  to  settle  the  dispute.  The  EU  requested  the  Dispute 
Settlement Body (DSB) to establish a panel to rule on the legality of Colombia’s anti-dumping 
measures. The Panel was established by the DSB on 29 June 2020.36. The EU has sent its first 
written submission to the panel on 8 March 2021. On October 2020, Colombia initiated the 
review of the measures to assess whether the conditions are met to  extend the anti-dumping 
measures.  

3.3  

Ex post evaluation of the implementation of the Trade Agreement 

In 2 April 2020, the Commission hired a contractor to carry out an ex post evaluation of the 
implementation of the Trade Agreement between the EU and Colombia, Peru and Ecuador37.  

The  evaluation  is  undertaken  over  the  period  April  2020  to  July  2021  covering  the  whole 
implementation period from the start of it provisional application (2013 for the EU, Colombia 
and Peru, 2017 for Ecuador) to May 2020 (pre-Covid). The report will analyse the economic, 
social  and  environmental,  and  human  rights  (including  labour  rights)  effects  which  the 
Agreement has had since its application in the various Parties. In terms of evaluation criteria, it 
will review the effectiveness, impact, efficiency, coherence and impact of the Agreement and 
its implementation. It will also comprise a number of case studies to illustrate or add detail to 
broader findings.  

In 2020, the consultant submitted the inception report presenting the evaluation methodology 
as well as a descriptive summary of the Agreement and its implementation so far, and a brief 

34 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32017R0540&qid=1579189798344&from=EN 
35  https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_19_6221  
36 https://trade.ec.europa.eu/wtodispute/show.cfm?id=792&code=1 
37 https://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/policy-making/analysis/policy-evaluation/ex-post-evaluations/ 

28 

 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
review of relevant studies on the Agreement. The inception report incorporated comments made 
by stakeholders 

The next report will be the draft interim report, scheduled for April 2021, that will provide the 
preliminary  findings  of  the  evaluation  after  research  and  data  analysis  will  be  completed, 
including feedback from stakeholders. 

The  final  step  will  be  the  preparation  of  the  final  report  that  will  include  an  update  of  the 
findings  based  on  additional  information  and  data,  a  systematic  summary  of  stakeholder 
consultations, as well as some elements of the overall analysis and case studies, along with the 
responses to the evaluation questions. 

29 

 
 
 
 
ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF PART IV OF 
THE ASSOCIATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE EU AND ITS MEMBER 
STATES AND CENTRAL AMERICA 

1.  THE AGREEMENT 

The  Association  Agreement  between  the  EU  and  its  Member  States,  on  the  one  hand,  and 
Central America, on the other (hereinafter referred to as the "Association Agreement") was 
signed  on  29  June  2012.  The  trade  pillar  (Part  IV)  of  the  Association  Agreement  has  been 
provisionally applied for seven years, i.e. since 1 August 2013 with Honduras, Nicaragua and 
Panama, since 1 October 2013 with Costa Rica and El Salvador, and since 1 December 2013 
with Guatemala. Ratification by Member States of the Association Agreement is ongoing. 

The  Trade  Agreement  is  in  a  process  of  amendment  through  the  signature  of  a  Protocol  of 
Croatia’s Accession to the Association Agreement. The Protocol was signed on 26 November 
2020 opening the way for a process of ratification by the parties. 

During the seven years of its application, the Agreement has worked well, it has contributed to 
diversify the economy of our trading partners, while providing the basis for a good cooperation 
between both sides. The Association Agreement with Central America is a regional agreement, 
characterised by its comprehensive nature and a high level of ambition.  

The Association Committee and its six specialised Sub-committees oversee the implementation 
of the Agreement38. The last annual meeting took place in a virtual format during the month of 
November 2020. The minutes the meetings are publicly available39.  

2. 

MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES 

2.1   Market Access: Progress and outstanding issues 

The  Association  Committee  met  on  26  November  2020  at  senior  official  level.  A  key 
deliverable of this Committee was the signature of the Protocol for Croatia’s accession to 
the Association Agreement, after several years of discussions and the signature of two Joint 
Committee Decisions on Rules of Origin in December 2021. 

Substantial progress was made on trade in services in Panama, where the EU airline KLM 
company was not granted license to operate ground handling and aircraft maintenance services 
since  Panama's  Civil  Aviation  regulation  required  60%  local  ownership  for  companies 

38 The Agreement establishes six specialised Sub-committees on: Market Access; Agriculture; Customs, Trade Facilitation and 
Rules of Origin; Technical Obstacles to Trade; Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures; Government Procurement; Intellectual 
Property; and Trade and Sustainable Development.  

39 https://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/press/index.cfm?id=2230 

30 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
 
operating in this sector. This requirement contravened the provisions in the Agreement. The 
requirement  was  removed  and  the  company  was  finally  granted  the  license  to  continue 
operating these services in Panama.40 (see more in the below box). 

KLM case in Panama: a success of EU economic diplomacy 

Since 1966, KLM has been providing groundhandling and maintenance services to EU carriers 
and other international airline companies in Panama. In 2014, a specific maintenance permit 
as required under the Civil Aviation Regulation and from that date onwards, KLM was only 
granted temporary permits.  

In 2020, the authorities communicated KLM that the temporary permits would no longer be 
issued, as the company did not comply with the requirmene that 60% of  the property of the 
compay operating the services should be detained by Panaminian capital. Following a number 
of  demarches  by  the  European  Commission,  in  cooperation  with  the  company  and  MS 
authorities,  the  Civil  Aviation  Regulation  was  amended  and  KLM  was  issued  a  permanent 
license.    

In the area of SPS, several challenges persist in Central American countries for EU exports. 
In Panama, several Member States’ export applications for meat products are pending since 
2016.  Delays  are  also  reported  in  export  applications  of  several  Member  States  and  in  the 
publication  of  prelisting  of  EU  establishments  habilitated  to  export  animal  products  in 
Panama, Honduras, Guatemala and Nicaragua. The regionalisation principle is still not yet 
applied  in  Nicaragua  and  Panama  affecting  notably  pig  exporters  of  two  Member  States. 
Dicussions with competent authorities continued in 2020. On a positive note, Costa Rica ceased 
to impose in its health certificates for some imported products of animal origin the clause “born 
and raised” in the same exporting party. This clause goes against the recognition of EU as a 
single entity constituting a trade barrier now solved in Costa Rica. The EU invites other Central 
America countries to consider the elimination of the clause.  

On  Geographical  indications,  increasing  interest  in  Central  American  countries  to  seek 
protection  for  GIs  through  the  existing  Association  Agreement  was  noticed.  This  allows  to 
make progress  in  considering to  include a number of new GI, which were in  the process  of 
application  in  Central  American  countries  at  the  time  of  concluding  the  agreement  and  are 
mentioned in the joint declaration annexed to the agreement. In this respect, a number of new 
GIs  have  been  applied  for  protection,  notably  from  Costa  Rica  and  El  Salvador,  and  the 
applications  are  currently  assessed.  As  regards  enforcement,  the  Commission  continues  to 
monitor the full implementation of the commitments made under the Association Agreement, 
whereby, not all issues could be entirely solved, notably as regards the protection of the term 
“Parmiggiano” in Guatemala and of “Queso Manchego” in Costa Rica. Discussions on these 
matters are continuing. 

40 On March 6, 2021, the airline was issued the permanent permit to operate at the Panama Tocumen Airport. 

31 

 
 
 
 
                                                           
On Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT), issues persist notably with Costa Rican  fire safety 
regulations in that do not recognise the EU standard on fire safety equipment; discussions on 
this trade barrier continuerd in 2020. Costa Rica provided information on the procedure for the 
recognition of equivalence of fire safety standards. Costa Rican tax legislation also remains a 
key issue of concern as it imposes a higher tax on imported beer than on locally produced one 
and the parties continued in 2020 to engage to find a workable way forward that would bring 
Costa  Rican  legislation  into  compliance  with  the  non-discrimination  obligations  under  the 
Agreement.  

2.2 

Trade and sustainable development: Progress and outstanding issues 

The  implementation  of  the  Trade  and  Sustainable  Development  (TSD)  Chapter  of  the 
Association Agreement continued in 2020 in line with the priority issues established for each 
partner  country.  In  2020,  the  EU  also  attached  particular  attention  to  the  policy  response  to 
mitigate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, including the protection of vulnerable groups 
and social dialogue. 

The discussion at the TSD Board meeting41 continued to focus on the labour dimension of the 
TSD Chapter, where particular challenges exist in Central America. Priority issues discussed 
with  all  six  partners  included  freedom  of  association  and  collective  bargaining,  social 
dialogue, child labour and forced labour. The EU welcomed the progress made by partners 
in tackling various labour and social challenges. It reiterated its concerns, notably regarding 
violence against trade unionists. The EU suggested organising an event to exchange experiences 
with other Latin American countries. The EU also suggested further bilateral or regional follow 
up exchanges on key labour issues like COVID-19 response measures, child labour, informality 
and labour inspection.  

On the environment, the EU informed the Central America partners about the European Green 
Deal, the EU Biodiversity Strategy, the Circular Economy Package and the 2030 Climate Goals 
Plan. With Guatemala, the EU discussed the country’s opposition to the listing of the hazardous 
pesticide “Paraquat” under the Rotterdam Convention on the Prior Informed Consent Procedure 
for Certain Hazardous Chemicals and Pesticides in International Trade. With Panama, the EU 
discussed illegal, unreported and unregulated fisheries issues.   

As regards cooperation, the EU committed to actively involve the Central American partners in 
consultations for the programming of projects  to  be implemented under the EU multiannual 
financial framework 2021-2027. The EU stressed its willingness to strengthen cooperation with 
the Central American partners notably on labour matters and invited the partners to formulate 
needs for possible EU interventions, both at national level and from a regional integration point 
of  view,  in  line  with  the  SDGs  and  the  main  focus  areas  of  the  Commission’s  work  on 
International Partnerships. Gender equality, climate change and democracy and human rights 
should continue to be mainstreamed in all projects. 

41 Committee on Trade and Sustainable Development 

32 

 
 
 
 
                                                           
Despite  the  circumstances  of  the  COVID-19  pandemic,  the  Commission  continued  frequent 
interactions  with  the  EU  Domestic  Advisory  Group  (DAG).  Its  membership  was  renewed 
during the year, continuing to ensure a balanced representation of employers’ associations, trade 
unions, and NGOs.  

A  joint  declaration  was  submitted  by  the  EU  and  Central  American  DAGs  with 
recommendations about future TSD work under the Agreement. The Parties welcomed the joint 
work  conducted  by  the  DAGs  and  encouraged  them  to  continue  in  this  vein.  Costa  Rica’s 
suggestion to start briefing the Civil Society Forum in more detail about relevant cooperation 
projects was welcomed by all Parties. 

3  ACTIVITIES SUBJECT TO SPECIFIC MONITORING AND SPECIFIC AREAS OF 

IMPORTANCE 

3.1 

Banana imports from Central America 

Article 15 of Regulation (EU) No 20/201342 (the ‘Regulation’) provides for the stabilisation 
mechanism for fresh bananas (HS code 08 03 90 10). This stabilisation mechanism ended by 
the end of 2019. Customs  Tariffs have stabilised to  75 euros/ton since 1 January 2020. The 
Commission continues to monitor with particular attention trade volume between the EU and 
CA. Despite the Covid  pandemic, CA export volume to the EU remained steady with 1,467 
million tons in 2020 representing an increase of 6%. However in value, volume reached EUR 
1,613  million  that  constituted  a  3.4%  decrease  compared  to  2019.  No  issues  on  price 
fluctuations were reported in the EU market. 

2019/2020 imports of fresh bananas43 

Country 

2019 Total 
imports (tons) 

2020 Total imports 
(tons) 

Variation 2020/2019 

Costa Rica 

           940.542  

        1.034.172  

Panama 

           254.613  

           261.120  

Guatemala 

           183.490  

           172.161  

Total 

         1.378.645  

        1.467.453  

10% 

3% 

-6% 

6% 

42 Regulation (EU) No 20/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 January 2013 implementing the bilateral 
safeguard  clause  and  the  stabilisation  mechanism  for  bananas  of  the  Agreement  establishing  an  Association  between  the 
European Union and its Member States, on the one hand, and Central America on the other, of the other part as amended by 
Regulation (EU) 2017/540 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2017.  

43 Statistics are based on EU 27   

33 

 
 
 
                                                           
 
3.2 

Ex-post evaluation of the trade pillar of the EU-Central America Association Agreement 

In December 2020, the Commission hired a contractor to carry out an ex post evaluation of the 
implementation of the Trade Agreement between the EU and Central America The project will 
analyse the impact of the implementation of the Agreement on sustainable development in its 
economic, social and environmental dimensions, as well as on human rights including labour 
rights. Stakeholder consultations are an important element of this evaluation and will include a 
number  of  activities,  such  as  civil  society  dialogue  in  Brussels,  online  public  consultation, 
targeted surveys/interviews/roundtables and workshops in the six Central American countries 
and in the EU. The project has a duration of 15 months. 

34 

 
 
 
 
 
ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TRADE 
PILLAR OF THE ASSOCIATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE EU AND CHILE 

1.  THE AGREEMENT 

Trade  between  the  EU  and  Chile  currently  operates  under  the  framework  of  the  EU-Chile 
Association Agreement (hereinafter ‘the Agreement’) which includes a comprehensive Free 
Trade  Agreement  along  with  a  political  and  cooperation  pillar.  The  Agreement  entered  into 
force on 1 February 2003 and all ratifications were completed on 1 March 2005. During the 
following 18 years the Agreement has worked well as shown by the doubling of bilateral trade 
and  provided  the  basis  for  a  good  cooperation  between  both  sides,  which  have  continously 
worked to implement it so that its benefits can be reaped to the maximum extent possible. The 
Agreement with Chile was considered highly ambitious at the time of its conclusion. It was the 
first trade agreement subject to an ex-post evaluation, that was completed in 2016.44 In 2017, 
the  European  Commission  conducted  an  impact  assessment  that  showed  the  need  for 
modernising the agreement, to lift it to the level of the more modern agreements that both the 
EU and Chile have concluded in the Americas and beyond. 

In 2013, the EU and Chile agreed to explore options for a comprehensive modernisation of 
the Agreement to bring it up to date to recent trade policy developments, to address important 
trade and investment issues that are relevant today and to avoid the risk of losing ground to 
other partners such as China and the US. A scoping exercise was successfully concluded with 
Chile  in  January  2017.  Negotiations  for  modernising  the  Agreement  were  launched  on  16 
November 2017 in Brussels, following the adoption of the negotiating directives by the Council. 
The  EU  and  Chile  are  now  negotiating  an  ambitious,  comprehensive  and  progressive 
modernised agreement. The most important areas include (1) further liberalisation in agriculture 
and food products, (2) rules of origin, customs and trade facilitation provisions, (3) non-tariff 
barriers for industrial and agri-food products, (4) market access for services sectors of key EU 
and Chilean interest, (5) comprehensive investment liberalisation and protection disciplines, (6) 
improved public procurement rules, (7) improved rules on intellectual property rights, including 
the  protection  of  geographical  indications  (GIs)  on  foodstuffs,  (8)  Trade  and  Sustainable 
Development, (9) competition and subsidies disciplines, (10) a chapter on Trade and SMEs, 
(11) provisions on anticorruption and (12) trade and gender dedicated provisions with the aim 
of identifying and addressing those barriers faced by women to benefit from trade opportunities, 
building  on  sustainable  development  goals  and  reaffirming  commitments  of  international 
conventions.  

In addition, a specific chapter on sustainable food systems (SFS) will be introduced and is being 
negotiated. This represents one of the first practical implementations of the commitment set in 

44 https://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2012/august/tradoc_149881.pdf 

35 

 
 
 
 
                                                           
the Farm to Fork Strategy that the EU will seek to ensure that there is an ambitious sustainability 
chapter in all EU bilateral trade agreements. 

In  2019,  a  Sustainability  Impact  Assessment  was  published.  The  study  concludes  that  the 
Agreement  is  unlikely  to  raise  sustainability  concerns  across  the  four  sustainability  pillars 
(economic, social, environment and human rights). The modernised Agreement builds on the 
already substantial existing liberalisation and thus the expected economin effects are relatively 
small.  

2.  Main implementation issues 

Economic and trade relations with Chile continued to develop in a positive manner during 2020. 
The Commission in 2020 continued to address oustanding market access barriers through 
the  appropriate  meetings  of  the  institutional  bodies  and  EU  demarches  delivered  by  the  EU 
Delegation in Chile: 

 

In the field of Intellectual Property Rights’ enforcement for pharmaceuticals and 
agro-chemicals products there remains a lack of certainty on test data protection: Even 
if,  according  to  Chilean  law,  data  protection  is  granted  with  the  application  for 
marketing  authorisation  upon  request,  agrochemical  companies  do  not  receive  a 
document stating that such protection has been required together with the application 
and  the  document  providing  marketing  authorization  does  not  confirm  that the 
protection  has  been  granted.   This  leaves  the  company  that  first  generated  the  data 
without legal documentation to defend itself against third parties’ registration. Chile has 
introduced  a  new  marketing  application  form  for  pharmaceutical  products.  The  EU 
delegation  is  monitoring  the  application  to  assess  whether  the  issue  is  solved  and  it 
proposed the same solution to the Chilean Ministry of Agriculture for agro-chemicals 
products.  The  second  concern  regards  the  requirement  to  apply  for  marketing 
authorisation  for  a  product  within  12  months  following  the  marketing  authorisation 
obtained for the same product in any other country. This is a particularly short deadline 
for EU companies which may render practically impossible registration and entry on 
the Chilean market. Chile does not contemplate to extend this deadline in the short or 
medium term. 

  Since 2014, Chile applies cumbersome administrative procedures related to export 
hygiene products and cosmetics. The main issues identified by EU industry have to 
do with the cost and delay for the registration of a product. For certain products, the 
procedure  for  registration  is  particularly  cumbersome.  For  example,  products  with 
different  shades  (e.g.  lipsticks,  eyeshadows…)  cannot  be  registered  under  the  same 
dossier, if the formula is not exactly the same (e.g. due to different mineral ingredients). 
For each imported cosmetic product, a certificate of analysis for each shipment and each 
batch is required and the analysis must be carried out by a Chilean laboratory. 

36 

 
 
 
 
  Chile has recently prohibited the use of potato starch in processed meat products, 
which does not seem in line with the CODEX Alimentarius that allows for the utilisation 
of a certain percentage of potato starch in processed meat products. The barrier affects 
cold cut products such as mortadella. The barrier has been discussed in meetings of the 
TBT subcommittee as it is considered both by the EU and Chile as a technical regulation 
and not as a sanitary issue. The EU delegation raised again the issue in March 2021 with 
the Chilean Ministry of Health and will soon present the case to the expert group that is 
assisting with a review of the Chilean legislation on food additives. 

Some of the existing barriers are also being addressed through the ongoing negotiations on a 
modernised agreement: 

  For example, in the area of public procurement (mostly for tenders run by the Ministry 
for Public Works), Chile imposes requirements on local presence (i.e. the need to have 
a local ID but also a local representative) as well as requirements on local experience 
(i.e.  tenders  attributing  more  weight  to  local  experience  compared  to  foreign 
experience). Chile also applies excessively short deadlines for the submission of offers 
considering  the  documentation  required  and  complex  technical  specifications.  The 
Commission in 2020 continued engaging with the Chilean authorities on these issues. 
The  modernisation  of  the  agreement  currently  under  negotiation  is  supposed  to 
establish  modernised  rules  aiming  at  more  transparency,  non-discrimination and 
fairness  in  public  procurement  procedures,  and  an  increased  use  of  electronic 
procurement.  Modernised  texts  on  rules  should introduce  further  disciplines,  notably 
with regard to the use of objective and non-discriminatory criteria in determining the 
conditions for participation to tender procedures (including in relation to the criteria of 
experience in previous projects). The negotiations for a modernised agreement aims at 
covering a wide range of public tenders including for goods, services, works and works 
constructions. 

  Long-standing concerns that regard the enforcement of the copyright legislation on 
the  internet  (digital  piracy)  are  being  addressed  in  the  context  of  the  ongoing 
negotiation  for  the  modernisation  of  the  Agreement.  The  modernised  texts  should 
increase the standards of the enforcement measures available for right holders in Chile, 
approximating them to those available in the European Union. These standards include 
the rules on the legal protection of technological measures and of rights management 
information, as well as the provisions on enforcement, including on the possibility of 
issue  injunctions  against  third  parties  (intermediaries)  whose  services  are  used  to 
infringe  an  intellectual  property  right,  aimed  at  prohibiting  the  continuation  of  the 
infringement. 

37 

 
 
 
 
 
ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TRADE 
PILLAR OF THE EU-MEXICO ASSOCIATION AGREEMENT 

1. 

THE AGREEMENT 

Mexico is the biggest trading partner of the EU in Latin America today, and was the first country 
in  Latin  America  to  sign  an  Economic  Partnership,  Political  Coordination  and  Cooperation 
Agreement with the EU (‘Global Agreement’). The Global Agreement was signed in 1997 and 
its  trade  provisions  were  later  developed  into  a  comprehensive  Free  Trade  Agreement  that 
entered into force in March 2000 for goods and in February 2001 for services (hereinafter called 
‘the FTA’)45. The 20th anniverary of the Global Agreement was marked by a joint communique 
at the 14th meeting of the EU-Mexico Joint Committee on trade in October 2020. 

In order to  adapt  the Global  Agreement to  the new realities of  global trade and investment, 
negotiations on its modernisation were launched in 2016. On 21 April 2018, after nine rounds 
of  negotiations,  an  ‘agreement  in  principle’  was  reached  on  the  trade  part  outlining  the 
numerous improvements to the legal framework of EU-Mexico bilateral trade relations. On 28 
April  2020  the  European  Union  and  Mexico  concluded  the  last  outstanding  element  of  the 
negotiation  -  agreeing  on  the  exact  scope  of  the  reciprocal  opening  of  public  procurement 
markets at subcentral level and ensuring a high level of predictability and transparency in public 
procurement  processes.  This  modernisation  will  set  a  new  and  modern  framework  for  EU-
Mexico bilateral trade and investment relations on the basis of reciprocity and will promote 
new  opportunities  for  business,  while  including  strong  and  clear  commitments  on  trade  and 
sustainable development (TSD) which are missing in the current Global Agreement.  

2.  MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES 

The  Global  Agreement  is  a  well-functioning  agreement  that  has  created  opportunities  for 
companies  from  both  parties.  Despite  that,  the  Parties  continue  to  work  on  a  number  of 
implementation issues. Some of these issues are addressed in the negotiations of the modernised 
trade pillar. For example regarding access to public procurement, Mexico and the EU agreed in 
the modernisation to a significant expansion of market access opportunities removing some of 
the existing barriers at sub-central level. For the first time, Mexico will open up procurement 
in  its economically most important  States, thus  providing EU suppliers  with access  to  more 
procurement  than  it  does  offer  to  any  trading  partner.  The  modernised  agreement  will  give 
access for EU bidders to the procurement markets of fourteen Mexican States and an additional 
two Mexican States in two years from entry into force of the agreement. 

In 2020, progress was recorded in the area of sanitary and phytosanitary measures (SPS), 
with Mexico setting import requirements for apples from France. In May 2021 Mexico lifted 

45 The trade pillar was expanded by two decisions of the Joint Council: Decision No 2/2000 of the EC-Mexico Joint Council 
of 23 March 2000 related to trade in goods and Decision No 2/2001 of the EU-Mexico Joint Council of 27 February 2001 on 
trade in services. 

38 

 
 
 
 
 
 
  
                                                           
the  embargo  on  Belgium  over  African  Swine  Fever  (ASF),  accepting  that  ASF  has  been 
eliminated from Belgium in all species, including wild boar. 

The Special Committee on SPS Measures contributed to exchange technical information and 
advance  on  matters  of  mutual  interest.  During  2020,  both  Parties  engaged  in  technical 
discussions on the following outstanding issues affecting EU exports: 

  No application of prelisting for EU exports, which focuses on the evaluation of official 
inspection  and  certification  systems  rather  than  on  inspection  of  individual 
establishments, 

  No recognition of the EU policy on animal disease regionalization, 
  No progress with market access applications for fruits and vegetables, and 
  Failure  to  complete  the  pending  applications  from  EU  Member  States  to  export  pig 

meat and poultry meat. 

Furthermore,  in  the  realm  of  technical  barriers  to  trade,  discussions  over  the  new  Mexican 
nutritional labelling legislation of foodstuff  (NOM 51) helped to iron out difficulties faced 
by EU imports with its implementation, which entered in  application on 1 October 2020. 
Mexico issued interpretative instructions shortly after the Special Committee on Standards 
and Technical Regulations, where the EU also raised concerns over import delays of EU parts 
and components resulting from cumbersome procedures to attest compliance with (renewed) 
certification  requirements.  As  a  result  of  this  Committee,  the  discriminatory  treatment 
between national and imported conformity assessment procedures for cheese was scrapped.  

Regarding  government  procurement,  the  Mexican  Government  signed  in  July  2020  an 
agreement  with  UNOPS  (United  Nations  Office  for  Project  Services)  with  the  aim  of 
undertaking international public tenders for medicines and medical devices. The procurement 
through UNOPS was raised in the Special Committee on Government Procurement, which 
also provided the opportunity for experts to exchange information on recent developments in 
the  EU  and  Mexico  in  the  field  of  public  procurement  policies,  including  the  respective 
legislative  and  institutional  responses  in  this  field  to  face  the  COVID-19  crisis.  Work  with 
UNOPS also helped clarifying the tenders’ modalities and ensure that protected patents were 
removed from the list of generics procurement.  

The  EU  and  Mexico  continue  to  shape  a  positive  agenda  through  the  implementation  of  a 
number of cooperation activities in the area of intellectual property (IP) through the IP Key 
Latin America46 a project which supports EU interests by helping countries in Latin America 
(LA) address selected emerging challenges in the area of intellectual property. During 2020, 
amid  the  pandemic,  IP  Key  organised  seminars  on  IP  and  and  Green  Technologies,  and  a 
seminar  on  enforcement  of  Geographical  Indications  Rights.  The  Special  Committee  on 
Intellectual Property Matters, addressed various IPR matters. This included a discussion on 
the developments in the Mexican IP framework, with the improvements brought about by the 
recently updated Federal Law for the Protection of Industrial Property. EU brought up concerns 
about certain aspects of IP rights enforcement in Mexico, such as the effectiveness of border 
measures and preliminary injunctions, and the availability of pirated and counterfeit goods in 
physical markets. 

46 https://ipkey.eu/en/latin-america 

39 

 
 
                                                           
In the area of customs matters, both parties continued dialogue on Rules of Origin, Customs 
Cooperation and Trade Facilitation and Mutual Administrative Assistance. During the Special 
Committee on Customs Cooperation, both Parties exchanged information on their COVID-
19 responses to facilitate border crossings and clearance at Customs and explored flexibilities 
for the issuance of Mexican Certificates of Origin (movement certificate EUR.1).  

In the framework of the EU project on responsible business conduct47, Mexican Authorities, 
private business and stakeholders started cooperation activities aimed at sustainability in the 
private sector including conduct at the workplace and contractual obligations of employers and 
employees.  The  project  aims  at  promoting  smart,  sustainable  and  inclusive  growth,  by 
supporting responsible business conduct practices in line with international instruments (OECD 
guidelines). This project will feed into the implementation of the future Trade and Sustainable 
Development (TSD) Chapter under the modernised EU-Mexico Agreement, once it enters into 
force. 

47 The  project is implemented together  with the International Labour Organization (ILO), the Organization for 
Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), and the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for 
Human Rights (OHCHR). 

40 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
 
PART III.1: EU NEIGHBOURING COUNTRIES 

Mediterranean and Middle East countries - Free Trade 
Areas 

41 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE 
ECONOMIC PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE EU AND ALGERIA 

1. 

THE AGREEMENT 

The EU and Algeria established a Free Trade Area (FTA) under the EU-Algeria Association 
Agreement, signed in 2002, which entered into force on 1 September 2005 (hereinafter called 
‘the Agreement’). The Agreement provides for a reciprocal liberalisation of trade in goods, with 
elements  of  asymmetry  in  favour  of  Algeria,  such  as  a  12  years  transitional  period  for 
dismantling tariffs for industrial goods and a selective liberalisation on agriculture. In 2012, the 
EU and Algeria agreed to review the timetable of tariff dismantling set forth in the Association 
Agreement  for  certain  products  (steel,  textile,  electronics,  and  automobiles),  extending  the 
transitional period from 12 to 15 years. Complete dismantling of tariffs and thus completion of 
the EU-Algeria free trade area was foreseen for September 2020 and was only implemented 
partially. Market opening for agricultural products so far only concerns a limited number of 
tariff  lines  subject  to  full  liberalisation,  Tariff  Rate  Quotas  (TRQ)  or  a  reduction  of  Most 
Favoured Nation (MFN) rates respectively, for both Parties. The agreement contains general 
provisions  on  dispute  settlement  but  so  far,  no  additional  negotiations  were  initiated  on  a 
specific Dispute Settlement Protocol.  

Algeria is a member of the Regional Convention on pan-Euro-Mediterranean preferential 
rules of origin, which it signed in 2012 and notified the EU of ratification in January 2017.  

Algeria  started  negotiating  its  accession  to  the  WTO  in  1987.  The  EU  continues  to  support 
Algeria’s efforts but the negotiation process with the Accession Working Party remains stalled 
since 2014.  

2.  MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES  

A significant number of market access issues remain in place in Algeria and new ones appeared 
in  2020.  Although  these  measures  are  not  specifically  targeted  at  the  EU,  they  affect  EU 
companies disproportionally as the EU is Algeria’s most important trading partner, accounting 
for a large portion of the country’s total trade.  

As of 2015 Algeria started to adopt a series of trade restrictive measures in various forms. 
2018 saw the introduction of the so called DAPS48, a tax having an effect equivalent to a custom 
duty, ranging from 30% to 200% of the value of the goods, which was levied on 1.095 tariff 
lines, covering industrial and agri-food products. This measure broadly replaces a formal import 
ban which, in 2017, had affected 877 products. A custom duty hike imposed in 2017 on another 
goup of 129 products still applies. In 2020 a decision was taken to phase out the ban on import 
on vehicles - which were, until 2017, subject to an import licence scheme effectively resulting 
in a zero import quota for cars for three years but the secondary legislation to implement the 
elimination of these measures is still pending. In practical terms this implies that the  EU car 
exports to the country remain banned since 2015.  

48  Droit additionnel provisoire de sauvegarde 

42 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
In  the  recent  past  Algeria  took  a  panoply  of  additional  measures  and  applied  practices 
restricting  trade  and  investment,  affecting  the  conditions  of  maritime  transport  such  as  the 
obligatory use of FOB incoterms and utilization of the national carrier, delaying payments for 
imported  goods,  withdrawing  the  licenses  from  EU  companies  operating  dry  docks  in  the 
country, a ban on imports of medicines for which there exists a locally-produced equivalent, 
particularly  stringent  mandatory  security  devices  for  vehicles,  coupled  with  obligatory 
inspections as well as restrictions on frozen meat imports.  

On 24 June 2020 the EU referred to the EU-Algeria Association Council a dispute concerning 
a number of trade barriers put in place by Algeria, including a car import ban, a safeguard duty 
on several hundreds of products, additional duty hikes on other types of products as well as an 
import licensing scheme. These barriers led to significant decrease in EU exports, amounting 
to an estimated € 1.5 billion since 2015. Following the initiation of the  Dispute Settlement 
procedure in accordance with Article 100 of the Association Agreement the EU and Algeria 
held technical consultations with a view to resolve the dispute in a mutually agreeable way by 
means of a joint decision of the EU-Algeria Association Council, including at the EU-Algeria 
subcommittee  on  trade  in  October  2020  and  at  the  informal  Association  council  meeting  of 
December  2020.  Given  that  despite  efforts  it  has  not  been  possible  to  resolve  the  dispute 
amicably,  in  March  2021  the  European  Union  initiated  arbitration  by  notifying  to  the 
Algerian side its appointed arbitrator and inviting Algeria to appoint their own arbitrator and 
agree on the chairperson of the arbitration tribunal within two months. Since then, technical 
consultations for agreeing on an amicable solution have been intensified. If Algeria commits to 
abolishing the contested measures in accordance with an agreed timetable, implementation of 
that commitment would bring Algeria into compliance with  the  Association Agreement  and 
thus remove the grounds on which the dispute is based49.  

49 The key steps in the procedure will be published on DG Trade’s website. 
(https://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/accessing-markets/dispute-settlement/bilateraldisputes/ ). 

43 

 
 
 
 
                                                           
ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE EU-
EGYPT ASSOCIATION AGREEMENT 

1. 

THE AGREEMENT 

The EU and Egypt established a free trade area (FTA) as part of the EU-Egypt Association 
Agreement, signed in 2001 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Agreement’). The Agreement was 
provisionally applied from 21 December 2003 and officially entered into force on 1 June 2004. 
It provides for reciprocal liberalisation of trade in goods, with elements of asymmetry in favour 
of Egypt: Egypt was able to export to the EU all industrial products covered by the Agreement 
tariff-free  from  the  day  of  entry  into  force  of  the  Agreement,  while  it  benefited  from  a 
transitional  period  of  3  to  15  years,  depending  on  the  product,  to  dismantle  tariffs  on  EU 
imports. Egypt finalized the process of fully dismantling tariffs applied to industrial goods 
on 1 January 2019.  

In  October  2008,  the  EU  and  Egypt  signed  an  Agreement  providing  for  liberalisation  in 
agricultural, processed agricultural and fisheries goods; the latter entered into force on 1 
June 2010 and extended the list of agricultural products covered by the original Agreement. 
Today, 80% of trade in agricultural goods is covered by duty-free treatment.  

In  November  2010,  the  EU  and  Egypt  signed  a  Protocol  establishing  a  Dispute  Settlement 
Mechanism (DSM), for which the ratification process is still pending.  

Egypt also signed the Regional Convention on pan-Euro-Mediterranean preferential rules 
of  origin  on  9  October  2013  and  notified  it  on  1  June  2014.  The  main  objective  of  the 
Convention is to provide a more unified framework for origin protocols.  

In November 2011, the Commission received a Council mandate authorising it to negotiate a 
Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area (DCFTA) with Egypt. Egypt, while interested in 
exploring the possibilities to modernise the Free Trade Agreement, has shown limited interest 
in a full-fledged DCFTA so far.   

In  2020,  Egypt  suspended  the  bilateral  exchanges  on  potential  ways  to  enhance  trade  and 
investment relations with the EU but engaged in a regular trade dialogue on market access 
challenges, focusing on enhacing the implemenation of FTA comittments, elimination of trade 
irritants as well as improving transparency of business legislation. 

2. 

MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES  

Dialogue on the implementation of the trade related provisions of the Agreement is pursued 
within the Association Council, the Association Committee, and the various sub-committees, 
including the Sub-Committee on Industry, Trade, Services, and Investment (hereinafter referred 
to as ‘the Trade Sub-Committee’).  

In 2020, the bilateral trade dialogue, in the form of regular technical trade consultations, focused 
on  market  access  barriers  remaining  and  new  measures  introduced  by  Egypt  in  2020, 
affecting bilateral trade.  

44 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  Partial progress could be made in 2020 on Egypt’s registration scheme50 imposed on 
entities exporting certain goods to Egypt. As a result of coordinated efforts of the EU 
and EU Member States, as well as the cooperation of the Egyptian authorities, a certain 
degree of trade facilitation was achieved in 2020, which allowed for advancing the 
registration of some EU exporters, while efforts are continuing to resolve all pending 
application  requests  and  the  structural  problems  related  to  the  scheme.  The  EU  is 
insisting on removing this barrier or at least introducing more transparency, rapidity, 
and streamlining of the administrative processes, in order to facilitate the registration 
from a practical point of view. 

  Progress was also made on import restrictions on sugar introduced by Egypt in June 
2020,  which  blocked  EU  sugar  exports  for  several  months.  Following  the  dialogue 
between the EU and Egypt under the FTA, supported by EU interventions in the relevant 
WTO  committees  (including  the  WTO  Council  for  trade  in  goods)  and  high  level 
correspondence with Egypt’s authorities. The restrictions on sugar were eliminated in 
June 2021. 

The bilateral trade dialogue also covered the following issues: 

  Egypt’s regulations increasing customs fees and imposing new development fees on 
a  number  of  goods,  including  imported  steel  products  representing  an  additional 
financial burden for EU exports; 

  Egypt’s measures affecting EU agri-food exports, including import conditions for live 
animals and meat, the new risk-based import control system on food products, the food 
import licensing scheme, checks of pesticide residues in fruit and the seed potato import 
mechanism. 

In November 2020, in the framework of the 11th Trade Ministerial Conference of the Union 
for the Mediterranean, the EU and Egypt intensified their trade dialogue, at the political and 
technical level, to further remove barriers to trade affecting businesses and investors, building 
on  the  progress  achieved  already  in  2019.  The  EU  and  Egypt,  together  with  other  partner 
countries in  the region,  agreed to  jointly  work to avoid  the resurgence of protectionism and 
trade  restrictions,  and  to  refrain  from  adopting  trade  restrictive  measures,  which  could  be 
incompatible with existing rules. Moreover, all partners emphasized the importance of creating 
a  favourable  business  environment  and  encouraged  the  development  and  implementation  of 
measures  that  would  help  strengthening  regional  trade  and  investment,  advancing  regional 
value chains in the context of a post Covid-19 sustainable recovery. 

50 This measure applies to 29 categories of manufactured goods since the beginning of 2016. 

45 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE 
ASSOCIATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE EU AND LEBANON  

1.  THE AGREEMENT 

The EU and  Lebanon signed on 17 June 2002 an  Association Agreement51 creating a Free 
Trade Area (FTA). Its economic and trade provisions were provisionally applied as from 2003, 
based on an Interim Agreement which entered into force on 1 March 2003. The Association 
Agreement (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Agreement’) fully entered into force on 1 April 2006. 
The Agreement liberalised two-way trade in industrial goods with an asymmetrical transition 
period of 12 years in favour of Lebanon. The phased-in liberalisation of industrial products by 
Lebanon started in 2008 and was completed in 2015.  

In regard to agri-food trade, the Agreement as of its provisional application,  granted tariff-
free  access  to  the  EU  market  to  most  Lebanese  agricultural  and  processed  agricultural 
products (i.e. 89% of products enter tariff and quota free), with only 27 agricultural products 
facing  a  specific  tariff  treatment,  mostly  Tariff  Rate  Quotas  (TRQs).  On  the  other  hand, 
agricultural liberalisation by Lebanon has been more limited.  

In  2010,  the  EU  and  Lebanon  signed  an  additional  protocol  on  a  Dispute  Settlement 
Mechanism, which entered into force on 1 September 2018.  

In  2014,  Lebanon  signed 
the  Regional  Convention  on  Pan-Euro-Mediterranean 
preferential rules of origin (PEM Convention). The country notified its ratification in October 
2017 and formally joined on 1 December 201752.  

Lebanon joined the Agadir Agreement in March 2020.  

Lebanon is still in the process of applying to join the WTO, which the EU continue to support, 
including by technical assistance if requested by the Goverment.  

2.  MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES 

New trade barriers were raised in 2019, notably the temporary additional duty of 3% on most 
imports  and  the  additional  duties  on  imports  of  some  selected  products.  These  issues  were 
discussed in the Joint Working Group and raised several times at the highets level vis-à-vis the 
Lebanese  authorities,  as  they  appear  not  to  be  in  line  with  the  Association  Agreement,  and 
require  formal  process  and  consultations.  Some  trade  barriers  introduced  in  2019  were 
discussed and subsequently solved: the mandatory requirement of registration of factories for 
certain  products,  which  is  not  being  implemented  by  Lebanon,  and  the  double  certification 
requirement for imports, which was removed. However, the list of additional duties on imports 

51  https://ec.europa.eu/world/agreements/downloadFile.do?fullText=yes&treatyTransId=3121 
52 For more information see https://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/business/calculation-customs-duties/rules-
origin/general-aspects-preferential-origin/arrangements-list/paneuromediterranean-cumulation-pem-
convention_en  

46 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
of some selected products still remains, and was last updated in October 2020. The Lebanese 
caretaker government has justified this decision as a way to protect certain national products. 
The additional duties affecting the EU range from 7% to 20%. They do not appear to be in line 
with the Association Agreement, as they affect selected goods and they differentiate between 
trade partners.   

Neither  the  Sub-Committee  on  “Industry,  Trade  and  Services,  Customs”  nor  the  EU-
Lebanon Joint Working Group on Trade and Investment met in 2020. The Joint Working 
Group scheduled in March 2020 was cancelled at the request of Lebanon, and no other meeting 
has  taken  place  since  then,  mainly  due  to  the  current  political  situation,  as  massive 
demonstrations in October 2019 brought the country to a halt and provoked the government to 
stand  down.  A  new  government  which  presented  itself  as  technocratic  was  appointed  in 
February 2020 but resigned on 10 August, after the explosion at the Port of Beirut. 

47 

 
 
 
 
 
ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE 
ECONOMIC PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE EU AND JORDAN 

1.  THE AGREEMENT 

The Association Agreement (hereinafter called ‘the Agreement’) creating a Free Trade Area 
between the EU and Jordan was signed in 1997 and entered into force in 2002. It liberalised 
two-way  trade  in  goods,  with  asymmetrical  transition  periods  in  favour  of  Jordan,  whereby 
Jordan phased in tariff reductions over a 12 year period. Tariff dismantling has been completed.  

The EU and Jordan upgraded the Agreement in 2006 concluding an additional Agreement on 
trade in agricultural and processed agricultural products. Today all Jordanian agricultural 
products can enter the EU duty free with the exception of virgin olive oil and cut flowers, which 
are under tariff rate quotas (TRQs), while agricultural liberalisation on the Jordanian side is 
substantial, but not complete. A Protocol establishing a bilateral Dispute Settlement Mechanism 
was added to the Agreement in 2011 but is not operational pending the establishment of the list 
of individuals to serve as arbitrators.  

Jordan is a member of the Regional Convention on pan-Euro-Mediterranean preferential 
rules of origin (PEM Convention), which it signed in 2011 and ratified in 2013. In 2016 the 
EU  and  Jordan  agreed  on  a  simplified  Rules  of  Origin  scheme,  modified  in  2018,  granting 
Jordanians  further  flexibilities  in  regard  to  rules  of  origin  linked  to  employment  of  Syrian 
refugees and implementation of decent work standards. In 2020 Jordan joined in the majority 
agreement on the revised rules of origin of the Pan Euromed Convention.  

2.  MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES  

A  potential  new  trade  barrier  was  averted  in  2020.  In  spring  2020  Jordan  consulted  the 
European Commission on its intention to introduce a 5% “service fee” for customs processing 
on imported goods from the EU. In official correspondence and subsequent exchanges, the EU 
expressed serious concerns about the compatibility of the proposed measure with both the WTO 
Agreement  and  the  EU-Jordan  Association  Agreement.  While  recognising  the  budgetary 
challenges that Jordan was facing, the European Commission recalled that the EU is providing 
Macro Financial Assistance to support Jordan’s macro-economic stability. Notably, the third 
MFA programme was approved in January 2020 for EUR 500 million and reinforced in April 
2020 by additional EUR 200 million, as part of EU global response to COVID-19. Following 
these exchanges, the Jordanian authorities put on hold plans to introduce the "service fee". The 
European Commission continues to monitor the situation closely. 

On 14 May 2020 Jordan notified to the WTO Committee on Safeguards its decision, following 
the  completion  of  an  investigation,  not  to  impose  safeguard  measures  on  the  imports  of 
prepared or preserved potatoes and of potato chips. 

During the EU-Jordan Subcommittee on Industry, Trade and Services that took place on 
30 November 2020, the EU raised concerns regarding the conditions applied in Jordan to the 

48 

 
 
 
 
 
 
import of dairy products, notably some types of cheese such as labneh cheese and grilled cheese. 
EU concerns were also raised in official correspondence and contacts continue with a view to 
clarifying the Jordanian system of erga omnes licences for agricultural products, ensuring its 
full transparency and solving obstacles related to the granting of licences to EU exporters. 

The Subcommittee also discussed the implementation of simplified Rules of Origin initiative. 
Under the initiative, Jordanian exporters of 52 product groups can benefit from the same rules 
of origin as those applied by the EU on the Least Developed Countries, provided that certain 
conditions are met as regards to employment of Syrian refugees. Between 2017 and 2019, the 
Preference  Utilisation  Rate  (PUR)  for  Jordanian  exports  of  textiles  and  clothing  to  the  EU 
increased significantly, from 15% to 65%, indicating the positive impact of the simplified Rules 
of origin scheme. A joint EU-EBRD information session was organised in December 2020 to 
promote further participation by the private sector in the rules of origin initiative. The EU is 
also working with the ILO and the Jordanian Government to ensure decent working conditions 
in companies exporting to the EU. 

49 

 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE 
ECONOMIC PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE EU AND MOROCCO 

1.  THE AGREEMENT 

The  EU  and  Morocco  established  a  Free  Trade  Area  (FTA)  as  part  of  the  EU-Morocco 
Association  Agreement  (the  “Agreement”),  signed  in  1996,  which  entered  into  force  on  1 
March 2000. Trade for industrial products is now entirely liberalised, while market opening for 
agricultural products is also substantial. The Agreement provides for a reciprocal liberalisation 
of trade in goods, with elements of asymmetry in favour of Morocco: since the day of entry into 
force of the Agreement, all industrial products covered could be exported by Morocco to the 
EU tariff-free, while Morocco benefited from a transitional period of 12 years. The transitional 
period for Morocco to reduce its tariffs on industrial products to zero ended in March 2012.  

The  EU  and  Morocco  also  signed  an  agreement  on  additional  liberalisation  of  trade  in 
agricultural  products,  processed  agricultural  products,  fish  and  fisheries  products,  which 
entered into force in October 2012. A number of EU products remain subject to tariff rate quotas 
when exported to Morocco while for the other products the full liberalisation was completed on 
1st  October  2020.  Only  a  few  Moroccan  products  are  still  subject  to  tariff  rate  quotas  when 
imported into the EU. 

A  protocol  establishing  a  Dispute  Settlement  Mechanism  was  agreed  upon  by  the  EU  and 
Morocco and entered into force in 2012 but is not operational pending the establishment of the 
list of individuals to serve as arbitrators.  

Morocco  also  signed  the  Regional  Convention  on  pan-Euro-Mediterranean  preferential 
rules of origin (PEM Convention) on 18 April 2012 and ratified it in May 2019. Negotiations 
in view of an Agreement for the Protection of Geographical Indications (GIs) were concluded 
in 2015. Ratification is still pending.  

Negotiations for a Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Agreement started in 2013 and were 
put on hold at the request of Morocco. The Joint Statement of the EU–Morocco Association 
Council  of  June  2019  referred  to  the  aim  of  creating  an  area  of  economic  convergence  and 
social cohesion. The EU Trade Policy Review communication of 18 February 2021 specifically 
highlighted Morocco and Tunisia as priority countries for modernising trade and investment 
relations with in the Southern Neighbourhood region. The modernisation of the EU-Morocco 
trade  and  investment  relationship  could  support  economic  recovery  and  meet  our  common 
challenges in the field of resilient value chains, climate change and the digital agenda. 

 2.   MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES  

The meeting of the Subcommittee on trade, industry and services took place on 1 July 2020, 
after a long break between 2014 and 2019. It provided the opportunity to review developments 
in  trade and industrial  policies on both  sides, discuss  the implementation of the Association 
Agreement  (notably  the  operationalisation  of  the  dispute  settlement  mechanism),  and  share 
market  access  concerns.  The  Subcommittee  was  followed  by  the  Committee  on  Customs 

50 

 
 
 
 
 
Cooperation on 8 July 2020 and the Subcommittee on Agriculture  and Fisheries on 16 July 
2020.  

In 2020 Morocco pursued a more  mercantilist stance in its  trade and industrial policies, 
focused on reducing the trade deficit by actively pursuing the emergence of domestic companies 
in  sectors  with  high  import  prevalence,  and  by  granting  domestic  preferences  in  public 
procurement:  

 

In  February  2020  Morocco  introduced  a  new  system  of  externalised  conformity 
checks for a wide range of industrial products submitted to technical regulations. Under 
the  system,  only  three  companies  (Applus  Formento,  Bureau  Veritas  and  TUV 
Rheinland) are designated to do the checks. For the majority of the products submitted 
to this regime, conformity assessments need to be undertaken in the country of origin, 
and for the rest upon entry in Morocco. While the technical regulations against which 
conformity is checked have not changed, operators have reported difficulties with the 
new system mainly related to additional costs and delays and different interpretations 
of the applicable requirements by the three conformity assessment companies.  

  This new system comes on top of the Moroccan Cmim marking which was introduced 
in February 2019 and identified as a trade barrier. The Cmim mark needs to be affixed 
on  products  subject  to  specific  technical  regulation  (initially  electrical  products  and 
toys, but the system was extended to further families of products). Although the Cmim 
marking is  largely equivalent to  the European CE marking, the latter does no longer 
suffice for exports of products to Morocco.  

  The requirement to localise the production of pharmaceutical products in order to 
obtain marketing authorisation is an additional trade barrier and it was not possible to 
organise technical consultations on the matter in 2020. 

 

In  September  2020,  the  Moroccan  Government  issued  guidelines  encouraging 
domestic  preference  and  the  use  of  goods  of  Moroccan  origin  in  public 
procurement. During tendering procedures, bids presented by foreign companies are 
increased  by  a  percentage  not  exceeding  15%.  The  new  guidelines  provide  that 
companies that implement contracts as part of a public procurement scheme must certify 
that imported products are only used in case there is no Moroccan product that satisfies 
required standards. Public procurement contracts above 100 million dirhams (around € 
9  million)  are  subject  to  prior  authorisation  by  a  special  commission  chaired  by  the 
Ministry of Finance (for public administrations) or the  Ministry of  Interior (for local 
authorities) and subject to a lower rate of domestic preference of 7,5%.  

 

In July Morocco unilaterally reduced tariff rate quota for imports of coated wood 
boards  exempted  from  safeguard  duties,  from  29,106  tonnes  (as  foreseen  in  the 
conclusion of the safeguard investigation in 2019) to 19,845 tons, of which 80% to be 
reserved  to  imports  from  the  EU,  for  the  period  August  2020-July  2021.  Morocco 
invoked "force majeure" justifications linked to the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic 

51 

 
 
 
 
 
 
for the sector, and indicated it would reassess the situation in the beginning of 2021. A 
specific quota of 4,920 tonnes was allocated to the EU in February 2021.  

Morocco renegotiated its Free Trade Area with Turkey, which once in force, will result in 
an increase of tariffs applicable on a wide range of products, and increased MFN tariffs of up 
to 40% in the 2021 Finance Bill. These tariff hikes do not apply to EU products but nonetheless 
affect  the  supply  lines  of  EU  companies  based  in  Morocco  insofar  they  source  from  third 
countries. 

On 23 December 2020 the European Commission issued a  staff working document on the 
benefits for the people of Western Sahara of extending tariff preferences provided under the 
EU-Morocco Association Agreement to products from Western Sahara. The report finds that 
export and employment figures have increased, which to a large extent can be considered as 
due to the granting of the tariff preferences under the Agreement amending Protocols 1 and 4 
of the EU-Morocco Association  Agreement, which entered into force on 19 July 2019. The 
Agreement  is  thus  resulting  in  benefits  for  Western  Sahara  and  its  population  in  terms  of 
exports, economic activity and employment. It is to be noted that there are some Court cases 
pending  in  the  EU  on  this  Agreement,  as  well  as  on  the  Sustainable  Fisheries  Partnership 
Agreement with Morocco, which also covers the waters of Western Sahara.  

52 

 
 
 
ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE 
ASSOCIATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE EU AND TUNISIA 

1.  THE AGREEMENT 

A Free Trade Area (FTA), as part of the EU-Tunisia Association Agreement, was signed on 
17 July 1995 and entered into force on 1 March 1998. This provided for reciprocal liberalisation 
of trade in goods. Since the day of entry into force of the Agreement, Tunisia can export to the 
EU  all  industrial  products  covered  by  the  Agreement  tariff-free,  while  it  benefited  from  a 
transitional  period  of  12  years,  which  ended  in  2010.  This  Free  Trade  Area  establishes  the 
principle of two-way trade free of any trade tariffs for industrial goods.  

As regards agricultural, agri-food and fisheries products, the FTA foresees liberalisation 
for  selected  products,  with  the  EU  granting  tariff-free  quotas  for  a  number  of  products. 
Contrary to other countries in the region (e.g. Morocco or Egypt), the EU and Tunisia have not 
yet negotiated an agricultural top-up and hence market access on both sides is more limited that 
what is the case with most other Southern Mediterranean partners.  

The  EU  and  Tunisia  signed  a  Bilateral  Protocol  in  2009  on  the  establishment  of  a  Dispute 
Settlement  Mechanism  (which  entered  into  force  in  September  2011),  however  it  is  not  yet 
operational. 

Tunisia  also  signed  the  Regional  Convention  on  pan-Euro-Mediterranean  preferential 
rules of origin on 16 January 2013. Tunisia gave in early 2021 its agreement in principle to 
join the outcome of the revised rules of the Pan euro med Convention on rules of origin, based 
on the exchanges with the EU notably with respect to bilateral derogations, mainly on textile. 
Tunisia is now waiting for a formal political mandate to be able to sign the modification of the 
original protocol with the EU. 

Negotiations on a Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Agreement (DCFTA or “Accord de 
libre échange complet et approfondi” ALECA in French) started in 2015. The objective is to 
extend  agricultural  liberalisation,  include  services  and  investments,  as  well  as  a  number  of 
modern trade rules and regulatory convergence commitments, with a view to better integrate 
Tunisia into the EU market. Four rounds have taken place thus far, the most recent one in May 
2019.  

2.  MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES 

Several long-standing market access issues remained unresolved in 2020, and were raised 
by the EU at the Trade Sub-Committee meeting in March 2021:  

  Systematic  technical  controls  on  imports  without  risk  analysis  and  technical 
specifications that can impose restrictive conditions on the product and/or the importer; 
  Burdensome customs measures (such as the request for an export declaration or a free 

sale certificate by EU operators); 

53 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  Sectorial market access limitations on pharmaceuticals, cosmetics, cars, tyres, ceramic 

tiles; 

 

(New) de facto non-automatic licences on cheese, chocolate and chocolate products, 
introduced in spring 2020.   

54 

 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE 
INTERIM ASSOCIATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE EU AND PALESTINE  

1. 

THE AGREEMENT 

The Interim Association Agreement creating a Free Trade Area (FTA) between the EU and 
Palestine53 (hereinafter called ‘the Interim Agreement’) was signed in 1997 and entered into 
force on 1 July 1997. The Interim Agreement liberalised two-way trade in industrial goods 
by providing duty-free and quota-free access for industrial goods traded in both directions, with 
some  limited  liberalisation  of  agricultural  products  by  both  parties.  This  was  an 
asymmetrical liberalisation to the extent that the EU dismantled its tariffs on the first day of the 
agreement while Palestine had a phased reduction of tariffs.  

The Agreement was first updated in 2005 and a more significant update was signed in 2011 
to further liberalise trade in agricultural, processed agricultural products (PAPs), fish and 
fishery products. The EU removed all tariffs and quotas on agricultural products and PAPs 
imported into the EU for a period of ten years, which is renewable. Palestine continues to 
maintain a number of tariffs and quotas on selected agricultural and PAP imports from the EU.  

Products from  Israeli settlements in Palestinian territory do not benefit from the preferential 
tariff preferences under the EU-Palestine or EU-Israel Association Agreements.  

Palestine is a member of the Regional Convention on pan-Euro-Mediterranean preferential 
rules of origin (PEM Convention), which it signed in 2013 and notified the EU of its ratification 
in 2014.  

2. 

MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES  

The  Joint  Economy  Committee  in  charge  of  follow-up  of  the  Paris  Protocol  (agreement 
dealing with trade related issues under the Oslo Accord) has not met since 2009. The Palestinian 
Authority  undertook  efforts  with  limited  results  to  re-activate  the  committee,  pending 
positive response from the Israeli side.  

The last meeting of the EU-Palestinian Subcommittee on Trade was held on 17 November 
2020  where  trade  relations  were  discussed  both  in  bilateral  and  regional  context,  notably 
focussing on possible follow up actions in the trilateral (EU-Israeli-Palestinian) process. 

The  Interim  Association  Agreement  is  far  from  reaching  its  full  potential,  hindered  by 
restrictions  imposed  by  the  Israeli  authorities.  Morever,  Palestinian  trade  also  faces 
competitiveness issues and has often difficulties in meeting the standards required on the EU 
market. 

53 This designation shall not be construed as recognition of a State of Palestine and is without prejudice to the 
individual positions of the Member States on this issue. 

55 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
The  EU  continues  to  support  the  expansion  of  Palestinian  trade  within  the  broader  Euro-
Mediterrenean region and remains committed to engage with both the Israeli and the Palestinian 
sides to improve the conditions of Palestinian trade. 

To this end, at the UfM Trade Ministerial meeting of 3 November 2020 the Commission has 
presented its most recent update of the Technical progress Report on the implementation of 
the  "Package  of  Measures  to  facilitate  trade  of  Palestinian  products  with  other  Euro-
Mediterrenean Partners", initially adopted at the UfM Trade Ministerial Meeting of 2010.  

56 

 
 
 
 
ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE 
ECONOMIC PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE EU AND ISRAEL 

1.  THE AGREEMENT 

EU-Israel relations are governed by an Association Agreement (hereafter named “Agreement” 
or "AA") that has been provisionally applied since 1996 and fully entered into force in 2000. 
The  terms  of  the  Agreement  provided  for  full  elimination  of  customs  duties  applicable  to 
industrial products and partial one for agricultural products creating a Free Trade Area (FTA). 
The EU and Israel had already had an FTA from 1975, eliminating duties on industrial products 
and over 80% of agricultural tariff lines. The AA improved the provisions on rules of origin 
and included a series of further reciprocal agricultural concessions. However the FTA does not 
include  commitments  on  services  and  investments,  regulatory  convergence  or  modern  trade 
rules. 

The EU and Israel subsequently upgraded the FTA by signing agreements, which further 
liberalised trade in agricultural products, notably in processed agricultural products and 
fish and fishery products. The first was signed in 2003 and the second is in force since 2010. 
The latter further increased reciprocal market access in agro-food products and is based on the 
“negative list approach” (i.e. all agro-food trade is liberalised on both sides apart from a limited 
number of sensitive lines on either side). For the sensitive agricultural products such as fruit 
and vegetables, sugar, etc., market access on both sides is provided in the form of duty free 
quotas. Moreover, the EU maintains its entry price system, but with ad valorem duty component 
set at 0%.  

Discussions for a Dispute settlement protocol under the FTA took place in December 2016 
on the occasion of the EU-Israel trade-subcommittee, but have not been finalised. 

Israel is a member of the Regional Convention on Pan-Euro-Mediterranean preferential 
rules of origin (PEM Convention) which it signed in 2013 and notified the EU its ratification 
and entry into force in 2014.  

The EU and Israel signed in 1999 a "Good Laboratory Practice" (GLP) agreement, ensuring 
the high quality, validity and reliability of health and environmental data generated during the 
testing  of  cosmetics,  industrial  chemicals,  pharmaceuticals,  food  additives,  animal  feed 
additives, pesticides by means of mutual recognition of OECD principles of good laboratory 
practice  (GLP)  and  compliance  monitoring  programmes.  The  EU  and  Israel  also  have  an 
Agreement on Conformity Assessment and Acceptance of industrial products (ACAA) on 
pharmaceuticals,  in  force  since  January  2013,  which  facilitates  trade  on  both  sides,  as  it 
recognises each partner’s certification of conformity of pharmaceutical  products without the 
need for re-testing at import.  

57 

 
 
 
 
  
In  June  2013,  the  EU  and  Israel  signed  an  EU-Israeli  Aviation  Agreement  (Open  Skies 
Agreement), which entered into force in August 2020.54 It gradually allowed over a five-year 
period all EU airlines to operate direct flights to Israel from anywhere in the EU and Israeli 
carriers to operate flights to all airports throughout the EU.  

 In June 2016, Israel joined EUROCONTROL, the European body for the coordination and 
security of civil aviation, in order to better integrate into the European aviation system and to 
ensure  the  efficient  management  of  this  increased  traffic.  In  preparation  for  the  end  of  the 
BREXIT transition period on 31 December 2020, Israel and the U.K. signed a bilateral version 
of the EU-Israel Open Skies agreement, which entered into force on 1 January 2021.  

2.  MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES  

No significant roll back of commitments in the Agreement has been recorded; however there 
are a number of persistent trade irritants. These include the discriminatory treatment of EU 
Member States, who have joined since 2004 and of Luxembourg, on import authorization of 
medical devices, the lack of data protection on biological medicines and the rigid regime of 
kosher  certification  of  meat.  Israel  continues  imposing  local  content  requirements  in 
government  procurement  contracts.  In  line  with  its  commitments  under  the  Government 
Procurement Agreement in the WTO, as of 2020 Israel started phasing out from the exceptions 
regarding local content. Following an EIB refusal to fund the Green and the Purple Lines of Tel 
Aviv's Light Train under the current local content conditionality, the government withdrew this 
request from that tender. In a meeting with the EU Delegation in January 2021, the government 
confirmed its strict adherence to its commitments under the GPA, with no deviation. 

54 As of spring 2018, the EU-Israeli air transport market is fully open with no restrictions on the number of 
flights. Over the last five years the average annual growth was a staggering 11.5%. 

58 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
PART III.2: EU NEIGHBOURING COUNTRIES 

Eastern countries – Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade 
Areas 

59 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE DEEP 
AND COMPREHENSIVE FREE TRADE AREA BETWEEN THE EU AND 
UKRAINE 

1. 

THE AGREEMENT 

The Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area (DCFTA), the trade part of the Association 
Agreement55,  provisionally  entered  into  force  on  1  January  2016  while  the  full  Association 
Agreement formally entered into force on 1 September 2017.  

2. 

MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES  

2.1   Market access: Progress and outstanding issues  

Ukraine’s regulatory approximation to the EU acquis is progressing rather well in most areas. 
The pace of adoption of legislative acts has sometimes been impressive. Such approximation 
needs to be accompanied by effective enforcement by independent and transparent institutions, 
which  is  challenging  in  some  areas.  Overall  implementation  of  the  DCFTA  was  discussed 
during the 5th EU-Ukraine Association Committee in Trade Configuration (ACTC), held on 
8-9 December 2020 online. In view of progress with legal approximation Ukraine requested to 
activate the review of the scope of liberalisation of customs duties on imports, as foreseen in 
Article 29 of the Agreement five years after the entry into force of the DCFTA. The DCFTA 
also  foresees  the  possibility  of  negotiating  an  Agreement  on  Conformity  Assessment  and 
Acceptance  of  Industrial  Products  (ACAA)  once  Ukrainian  sectoral  and  horizontal 
legislation, institutions and standards have been fully aligned with those of the EU. In 2020, a 
pre-assessment mission was launched to examine progress in relation to the work done on the 
pre-conditions  for  the  ACAA  negotiations.  Discussions  on  these  two  issues  will  take  place 
during 2021.  

Some progress was made in 2020, notably in the area of SPS56:  

  As  regards  sanitary  and  phytosanitary  measures  (SPS),  Ukraine  has  advanced  in 
implementing the SPS Strategy adopted in November 2019, and some important acts in 
the area of animal welfare were adopted early 2021. However, work is only starting in 
the phytosanitary area, and almost no legislation has been approximated yet.  

  Ukraine recognizes regionalization measures in EU Member States for animal diseases 
such  as  Avian  Flu,  but  fails  to  recognize  regionalization  measures  of  African  Swine 
Fever (ASF).  

55 The EU-Ukraine Association Agreement was published in OJ L 161, 29.5.2014, p. 3–2137. https://eur-
lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX%3A22014A0529%2801%29  
56 The 5th SPS Sub-committee took place on 19 November 2020. 

60 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
  The recognition of equivalence of Ukrainian provisions on certification of cereal seed 

with those of the EU, was granted in 2020 upon Ukrainian request.  

Progress  was  also  made  on  a  number  of  customs  related57  issues  as  Ukraine  advanced 
legislation to  comply  with  the requirements under the Common Transit Convention  and  the 
Convention  on  the  Simplification  of  Formalities  in  Trade  in  Goods.  Work  progressed  on 
Authorised  Economic  Operators  (AEOs).  The  update  of  Annex  XV  on  approximation  of 
customs legislation should be finalised in 2021.  

In regard to public procurement, Ukraine’s alignment to EU’s public procurement legislation 
continued in 2020 and the completion of Phase 1 could be finalised and formalised through a 
decision of the EU-Ukraine Association Committee in Trade Configuration (ACTC) in 2021. 
Legislative alignment is also moving forward in relation to the fulfilment of Phases 2 and 3 
(Ukraine adopted a new Public Procurement Law on 19 September 2019, which entered into 
force on 20 April 2020).  

Outstanding issues in 2020 in trade in goods included the following: 

  The  wood  export  ban  is  a  long-standing  trade  irritant  which  violates  Ukraine’s 
commitments  under  the  Association  Agreement  and  led  the  EU  to  initiate  dispute 
settlement in 2019. A panel was formallly established on 28 January 2020. The panel 
published its final ruling58 on 11 December 2020 and found Ukraine’s 2015 temporary 
export incompatible with Article 35 of the Association Agreement.59 Ukraine informed 
the EU in writing on 29 June 2021 of its progress to comply with the arbitration panel 
ruling’ but was not in a position to notify any measure that it has taken to comply with 
the panel ruling. 

  In  the  field  of  customs  and  trade  facilitation,  Ukraine  will  have  to  effectively 
implement the agreed provisions from the EU Customs Code in its national legislation. 
There are three kinds of provisions: provisions that should not be implemented if not 
relevant,  provisions  that  should  be  implemented  according  to  the  principle  of  best 
endeavour and provisions that should be effectively implemented. It is important that 
Ukraine agrees with the concerned Commission services which provisions should be 
implemented and to what extent in the first place (this is an outstanding issue). 

    Ukraine has recently introduced a draft amendment to its public procurement law that, 
if adopted, would introduce local content requirements that would potentially be in 
breach of Ukraine’s DCFTA and WTO GPA obligations. 

  As  regards  EU  exports  to  Ukraine  of  mechanically  separated  poultry  meat  (MSM), 
Ukraine  agreed  to  extend  the  use  of  bilateral  certificates  until  mid-October  2021, 
pending the adoption of further hygiene legislation by Ukraine allowing EU requested 
technical amendments to the Ukrainian poultry MSM import certificate.  

57 The 4th Customs Sub-committee took place on 23 September 2020.  
58 https://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2020/december/tradoc_159181.pdf  
59 More detailed information on the case can be found at 
https://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2021/february/tradoc_159429.pdf  

61 

 
 
 
                                                           
In  the  rules  areas,  there  remained  systemic  problems  with  the  enforcement  of  IPR  as 
confirmed  by  the  report  on  the  protection  and  enforcement  of  intellectual  property  rights 
published  by  the  Commission  in  April  202160. The  issues  were  raised  with  in  the  18th    IPR 
Dialogue,  which  took  place  on  18  November  2020.  As  regards  Geographical  Indications 
(GIs), Ukraine adopted the framework law laying the foundation of a GI system in Ukraine 
according to EU norms and standards. In the field of competition, remaining issues relate to 
the independence of the anti-monopoly committee, how it applies competition law to individual 
cases  and  the  quality  of  decisions  of  the  competition  authority.  The  EU  remains  actively 
involved  in  the  ongoing  discussion  in  Ukraine  to  revise  and  review  the  existing  legislative 
framework on competition. 

In relation to services, joint work continued on updating the appendices of Annex XVII on the 
list  of  EU  acquis  in  three  services  sectors:  postal  and  courier  services;  telecommunication 
services; and international maritime transport services. This update should be finalised in 2021. 
To support Ukraine’s aspirations to further approximate its national legislation in the area of 
the digital economy, the EU  concluded in  2020  an on-site assessment of Ukraine’s policy 
framework,  institutional  capacity  and  the  current  state  of  play  of  implementation  of  its 
commitments listed in the telecommunications Annex. The findings of this assessment will be 
used to formulate recommendations for adjusting or improving Ukraine’s telecommunications 
policy framework.  

60 https://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2021/april/tradoc_159553.pdf  

62 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
2.2 

Trade and sustainable development: Progress and outstanding issues  

The  4th  Sub-Committee  on  Trade  and  Sustainable  Develomment  (TSD)  was  held  on  27 
October 2020.  

The TSD Sub-Committee discussed the establishment of the TSD Group of Experts, with the 
EU expressing concerns that several years after the entry into force of the Agreement, Ukraine 
still  had  not  selected  the  fourth  and  fifth  Ukrainian  TSD  experts  in  accordance  with  the 
provisions of the Agreement. Ukraine and the EU agreed a  timetable of steps so that a full 
group of experts would be in place by the end of 2021.  

With respect to trade and labour, at the Sub-Committee meeting the Parties noted the need to 
bring the Ukrainian legal framework and practice in line with ILO standards; including ILO 
conventions 81 and 129 on labour inspection as a cross-cutting issue for all labour standards. 
The EU welcomed action taken to tackle undeclared work but deeply regretted that the Action 
Plan developed by the Ministry of Economy with EU/ILO support was side-lined. The EU also 
took note of efforts made to address wage arrears. Ukraine clarified that following the shift in 
government (March 2020), the work on the modernization of labour legislation - the labour 
code and other laws (trade unions, dismissals, etc.) had stalled. The EU stressed the need to 
consult with social partners, and to respect ILO fundamental Conventions including 87 and 98 
on freedom of association and collective bargaining, when launching the reform programme.  

Parties also discussed sustainable and legal forest management. Ukraine presented the main 
developments  towards  ensuring  the  legality  of  harvested  wood  in  2020  (draft  law  on  the 
domestic  wood  market).  A  core  issue  is  the  organization  and  distribution  of  responsibilities 
between control and inspection on the one hand, and wood harvesting and trade on the other. 
Both parties agreed that a system securing robust forest control and inspection body/ies61 
should be independent from the State Forest Resources Agency. Such a system is not in place 
at present.  

Finally, in relation to cooperation foreseen under the DCFTA on climate change goals (Paris 
Agreement) and the prudent and rational management of natural resources, the sub-committee 
discussed  the  contribution  of  the  energy  sector  reform  to  sustainable  economic  growth  in 
Ukraine.  Ukraine  informed  about  the  measures  taken  in  the  field  of  energy  efficiency  and 
renewable energy sources, including eco-design and energy-labelling measures. 

The meeting of the TSD Sub-Committee was followed by an open Joint Civil Society Forum, 
during which members of the EU Domestic Advisory Group (DAG) were able to meet the 
Ukrainian DAG. The two DAGs produced a joint statement62, welcoming the joint statement 
adopted by the Parties following the EU-Ukraine Summit held on 6 October 2020 and taking 
note of the willingness to start reviewing market access liberalisation under the commitments 
of the DCFTA, while deploring the fact that the Group of Experts has still not been established 

61 Article 294 of the DCFTA states “In order to promote the sustainable management of forest resources, Parties 
commit to work together to improve forest law enforcement and governance and promote trade in legal and 
sustainable forest products”. 
62  https://www.eesc.europa.eu/sites/default/files/files/4th_joint_statement_eu_ukraine_dag.pdf  

63 

 
 
 
                                                           
on  the  Ukrainian  side  and  reiterating  that  Ukraine  continues  to  disregard  a  number  of  core 
labour obligations under the Association Agreement and DCFTA. 

64 

 
 
 
 
 ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE DEEP 
AND COMPREHENSIVE FREE TRADE AREA BETWEEN THE EU AND 
GEORGIA 

1.  THE AGREEMENT 

The  Deep  and  Comprehensive  Free  Trade  Area  (DCFTA)  of  the  EU-Georgia 
Association Agreement63 (AA) entered into force on 1 July 2016 after being applied on a 
provisional  basis  since  1  September  2014.64  This  information  sheet  constitutes  the  fifth 
report  on  the  implementation  of  the  EU-Georgia  DCFTA,  in  line  with  the  reporting 
requirements of the Regulation implementing the anti-circumvention mechanism provided 
for in the EU-Georgia Association Agreement.65  

The  Government  of  Georgia  adopted  in  December  2020  its  third  Action  Plan  for  the 
implementation  of  the  DCFTA  2021-202366.  This  report  outlines  the  priorities  of  the 
Association Agenda in different sectors (including for example Technical Barriers to Trade, 
SPS  measures,  customs  or  IPR)  and  the  planned  activities  related  to  each  priority  with 
indicators, responsible implementing institutions and timeframe for implementation.   

On 1 July 2017 Georgia joined the Convention on pan-Euro-Mediterranean preferential 
rules of origin (“PEM Convention”)67. The joint Decision of the Customs sub-committee 
on the linkage of the rules of origin in bilateral trade to the Protocol of PEM Convention68 
entered into force on 1 June 2018. This allows Georgia to benefit from diagonal cumulation 
of origin with the EU and Turkey as of 1 June 2018, and to be better integrated in regional 
trade flows.  

Georgia officially became a Contracting Party to the Energy Community Treaty on 1 July 
2017. 

63 The EU-Georgia Association Agreement was published in OJ L 261, 30.08.2014. http://eur-
lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ:L:2014:261:FULL&from=EN  
64 When it comes to DCFTA application to breakaway regions Abkhazia and South-Ossetia, the EU gives its full 
support to Georgia's territorial integrity. However, in accordance with Article 429 (Territorial application) of the 
Association Agreement, conditions enabling effective implementation of the DCFTA, and notably de facto 
government control over those territories, would need to be created in either Abkhazia or South Ossetia for the 
DCFTA to apply to those regions, which is not the case at present. 
65 Regulation (EU) 2016/401 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 2016 implementing the 
anti-circumvention mechanism provided for in the Association Agreement between the European Union and the 
European Atomic Energy Community and their Member States, of the one part, and Georgia, of the other part 
(OJ L 77/2016). According to its Article 4, the Commission shall submit an annual report on implementation of 
this Regulation and Title IV (DCFTA) of the Association Agreement. The report shall, inter alia, include 
information about the application of the anti-circumvention mechanism and set out a summary of the statistics 
and the evolution of trade with Georgia. 
66 DCFTA AP 2021-2023 ENG.pdf 
 67 The Decision of the Joint Committee of the PEM Convention on Georgia accession was published in OJ 
L 329, 3.12.2016 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:22016D2126 
68 Council Decision (EU) 2017/2433 of 18 December 2017 on the position to be adopted on behalf of the 
European Union within the Customs Sub-Committee; OJ L 344, 23.12.2017, p. 21. 

65 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
2.  MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES 

2.1   Market Access: Progress and outstanding issues 

The 7th Association Committee in Trade Configuration was held by video conference in 
February 2021. 

The  approximation  commitments  for  2015-2020  are  mostly  on  track,  but  have  not  been 
entirely implemented to date. This concerns in particular the final adoption of draft laws 
approximating  to  EU  telecommunication  and  postal  directives.  The  timeline  for 
approximation of Georgian legislation was back-loaded in the negotiation process until, e.g. 
2022  in  the  TBT  area  or  even  2027  with  regard  to  certain  veterinary  measures,  plant 
protection and food safety.  

Progress was made in 2020 in several areas of legal approximation: 

  In the area of SPS Georgia was added to the list of countries authorised to export 
processed pet food, other than canned pet food, to the EU. A number of Georgian 
establishments are already authorised to export fruit, vegetables, honey and fishery 
products  (from  the  Black  Sea)  to  the  EU.  Georgia  also  submitted  a  residue 
monitoring plan for aquaculture, and work is underway on the EU questionnaire on 
queen bees. 

  In the  area of  technical barriers  to trade, Georgia established the  new Market 
Surveillance  Agency  (MSA)  functioning  under  the  Ministry  of  Economy  and 
Sustainable  Development.  This  agency  has  set  up  a  new  electronic  platform 
established  with  the  customs  services,  which  facilitates  market  surveillance 
procedures by sending conformity documentation prior to importation. In January 
2021, the Georgian Centre Accreditation become an associate member of the 
international  organization  for  accreditation  bodies  (ILAC),  and  it  continues 
digitalisation  of  its  accreditation  services.  Georgia  is  on  schedule  with  the 
approximation of EU legislation on market surveillance of industrial and consumer 
products in accordance with Annex III-A of the DCFTA as amended in 2019. 

  In the area of public procurement, the State Procurement Agency (SPA) of Georgia 
handed in evidence to the European Commission that it had completed the necessary 
legislative  approximation  in  order  to  complete  the  first  phase  of  the  Public 
Procurement strategy in accordance with Annex XVI-B of the DCFTA69. One of 
the main achievements is the set-up of an impartial and independent review body, 
the  “Dispute  Resolution  Council”,  which  is  tasked  with  the  review  of  decisions 
taken by contracting authorities or entities during the award of contracts. Once the 
Association Committee in Trade configuration has given its positive assessment, the 
Association Council may decide to grant reciprocal market access for supplies for 
central  government  authorities in  Georgia and in  the EU. This  would be genuine 
new  market  access  given  that  Georgia  is  not  a  party  to  the  WTO  Agreement  on 
Public Procurement. This process is expected to be completed in the 2021. Georgia 
also advanced on the draft law aiming to approximate to basic elements of EU 

69 Annex XVI-B of the DCFTA foresees Georgia’s approximation to EU public procurement acquis in five 
phases. The completion of each phase will result in mutual market access to public tendering procedures. 

66 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
Public Procurement Directive70 and to the EU Directive on the coordination of the 
laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to the application of review 
procedures to the award of public supply and public works contracts71, which will 
complete phase 2 of Annex XVI-B.  

  In  the  area  of  IPR,  the  Validation  Agreement  between  Georgia  and  the 
European Patent Organization  signed in October 2019 is  considered a positive 
and decisive step guaranteeing that the quality of patents delivered in Georgia 
will  be  at  the  highest  standard.  The  implementation  of  the  IPR  Chapter  of  the 
DCFTA  is  advancing  well  and  Georgia  has  brought  the  majority  of  its  laws  in 
compliance with the DCFTA.  

  In the area of energy policy, the Protocol of Accession to the Energy Community 
Treaty commits Georgia to approximate its legislation to key energy and energy-
related  EU  acquis.  Georgia’s  legislation  approximating  to  the  EU  electricity  and 
natural gas market directives and the law on renewables entered into force in 2019, 
whereas  the  law  on  energy  efficiency  was  adopted  in  Parliament  in  May  2020. 
Georgia continues to develop energy related legal acts, and has been working on a 
natural  gas  emergency  plan  and  natural  gas market  concept  design  in  2020. 
Rules on security of supply in electricity has been adopted, along with market rules 
and several bylaws. 

  In the area of customs and trade facilitation, Georgia is in the process of adopting 
the secondary implementing legislation, as a follow-up to the adoption of the new 
customs code in 2019, approximating to the Union customs code. Georgia has raised 
strong  interest  in  a  mutual  recognition  agreement  with  the  EU  on  Authorised 
Economic Operator programmes (AEO). Georgia is  equally  preparing to  join the 
Common Transit Convention with the assistance of a twinning project as well as the 
start of the development of the New Computerised Transit System 5, which is the 
next step before the accession to the convention.  

There remained a number of outstanding issues in 2020:  

 

 

In  regard  to  public  procurement,  institutional  capacity  needs  to  be  further  built 
both  within  the  Georgian  State  Procurement  Agency  and  within  the  contracting 
authorities.  
In the area of IPR, the exhaustion regime of Georgia is still not line with its DCFTA 
commitments, as it provides for a regime of international exhaustion as opposed to 
domestic exhaustion as foreseen in the agreement. 

2.2  

Trade and sustainable development: Progress and outstanding issues 

The 5th TSD Sub-Committee under the DCFTA was held in July 2020 by video conference. 
It included dynamic discussions with the Civil Society Forum.  

70 Directive 2014/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 
71 Council Directive 89/665/EEC of 21 December 1989 

67 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
Progress was made by Georgia in implementing the TSD chapter commitments in 2020, 
finalising its revised TSD implementation work plan for 2021-2023:  

 

In regard to environment protection related commitments, Georgia continued to 
advance legislative work on the implementation of the Convention on International 
Trade  in  Endangered  Species  of  Wild  Fauna  and  Flora  (CITES)  and  obtained 
Category  1  status  under  the  Convention.  Georgia  equally  established  a  climate 
change  council  in  2020  and  its  government  drafted  a  new  and  more  ambitious 
“National Determined Contributions”, which were approved in April 2021. There 
has also been progress with regard to the adoption of a forest code in May 2020 and 
current works on its bylaws.  

  With regard to labour conditions, Georgia in September 2020 adopted a Law on 
the  Labour  Inspectorate,  which  will  ensure  further  improvements  in  terms  of 
occupational  health  and  safety,  labour/employee  rights,  collective  redundancies, 
anti-discrimination and gender equality. Georgia also in September 2020 amended 
its  Labour  Code,  bringing  Georgian  legislation  closer  to  EU  and  international 
standards.  

3.  MONITORING IN SPECIFIC AREAS  

An anti-circumvention mechanism applies to several agricultural goods i.e. beef, pork, sheep 
and poultry meat, dairy products, eggs and albumins, mushrooms, cereals, malt, starches and 
sugars as well as to processed agricultural products such as: sweetcorn, processed sugars and 
cereals and cigarettes. For none of the products under the anti-circumvention mechanism the 
respective trigger levels were exceeded in 2020, due to the low trade levels for those products 
in the analysed period. 

68 

 
 
 
 
 
ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE DEEP 
AND COMPREHENSIVE FREE TRADE AREA BETWEEN THE EU AND 
MOLDOVA 

1.  THE AGREEMENT 

The Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area (DCFTA) between the EU and Moldova is 
the  main  economic  pillar  of  the  Association  Agreement  (AA)  and  has  been  provisionally 
applied  since  1  September  2014  (it  fully  entered  into  force  on  1  July  2016).  The  DCFTA 
comprises two main components: trade liberalisation (in the form of a Free Trade Agreement) 
and regulatory approximation to the EU acquis.  

The  DCFTA  applies  to  the  entire  territory  of  the  Republic  of  Moldova  (i.e.  including 
Transnistria) since 1 January 2016, as per Decision No 1/2015 of the EU-Republic of Moldova 
Association Council. The EU is monitoring the implementation of these arrangements and its 
adherence  by  both  Chisinau  and  Tiraspol  on  a  yearly  basis,  and  progress  is  assessed  in  the 
framework of the annual ACTC.  

Third-year  review  clause  of  the  Association  Agreement  (review  of  the  duty  free  tariff-rate 
quotas or “TRQs”): Since 23 January 2020, parties apply the results of the negotiation on tariff 
rate quotas, formalised through a Decision of the EU-Moldova Association Committee in Trade 
Configuration. In October 2017, Moldova activated the review clause foreseen in the DCFTA 
(Article 147(5)). As a result of the negotiations, which were concluded in July 2019, the EU 
had agreed to increase TRQs for two products (grapes and plums), to introduce a new TRQ for 
cherries,  and  to  raise  the  levels  of  imports  triggering  the  anti-circumvention  mechanism  for 
wheat, barley, maize and processed cereals, taking into account the trade patterns over the last 
years. In return, Moldova agreed to raise the TRQs for EU exports of pork and poultry meat, 
dairy and sugar.  

2.  

MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES 

2.1.   Market Access: Progress and outstanding issues  

Moldova’s regulatory approximation to the EU acquis is progressing rather well in most areas. 
Such approximation needs to  be accompanied by  effective enforcement  by independent  and 
transparent  institutions,  which  is  challenging  in  some  areas.  Overall  implementation  of  the 
DCFTA  was  discussed  during  the  7th  EU-Moldova  Association  Committee  in  Trade 
Configuration (ACTC), which was held on 20-21 October 2020.  

In  2020,  Moldova  took  further  steps  to  approximate  its  legislation  to  the  EU  acquis  and 
comply with the commitments under the DCFTA: 

  As  regards  technical  barriers  to  trade  (TBT),  Moldova  is  advancing  in  the 
implementation  of  EU  technical  standards.  Both  sides  have  agreed  to  proceed  to  the 
formal update of Annex XVI of the Association Agreement to reflect the new EU acquis 

69 

 
 
 
 
in  this area, including the new EU Regulation on market  surveillance. Moldova also 
submitted a list of potential priority sectors to negotiate an Agreement on Conformity 
Assessment and Acceptance of Industrial Products (ACAA), which is foreseen in the 
Association Agreement. 

  In  the  area  of  sanitary  and  phytosanitary  measures  (SPS),  Moldova  continued  its 
approximation  to  the  EU  acquis.  There  was  some  progress  in  Moldova’s  request  to 
export poultry and category B eggs to the EU, with audits scheduled to take place in 
2021. It remains important to ensure that the Moldovan National Food Safety Agency 
(ANSA) has enough capacity to implement the new provisions, in an independent and 
transparent manner.  

  As  regards  public  procurement,  Moldova  is  moving  forward  with  the  legal  and 
institutional  alignment  in  the  field  of  public  procurement.  Moldova  has  almost 
completed the approximation under phases 1 and 2 of the indicative time schedule for 
institutional reform, approximation and market access (Annex XXIX-B). The level of 
completion will have to be reviewed. Moldova was granted access to publish tenders in 
the EU “Tenders Electronic Daily” (TED) portal.  

At the same time, a number of issues remained in 2020, which will need to be resolved:  

  On 4 December 2020, Moldova amended its Domestic Trade Law. The amendments 
should enter into force on 1 July 2021. The EU has reiterated on several occasions that 
these amendments are a clear systemic breach of Moldova’s international commitments, 
and  is  closely  following  the  evolution  of  this  file  in  light  of  the  domestic  political 
situation. 

  In the field of customs and trade facilitation, the adoption of the new provisions in the 
Customs Code experienced delays. There was good progress on the implementation of 
the Authorised Economic Operators (AEOs) programme, but there remains work on the 
data exchange mechanisms. Moldova needs to particularly enforce anti-fraud measures 
at customs.  

2.2  

Trade and sustainable development: Progress and outstanding issues  

The  5th  TSD  Sub-Committee  between  the  EU  and  Moldova  was  held  on  19  October  2020 
online, followed by an open Joint Civil Society Forum on the same day, during which members 
of the EU Advisory Group were able to meet the Moldovan Advisory Group. The meeting of 
the Sub-Committee enabled a substantial exchange on labour, forestry and energy provisions. 

There were in general no significant improvements in Moldova on labour rights issues since 
the previous meeting of the Sub-Committee (July 2019), notably as regards labour inspection, 
occupational health and safety and review of the Labour Code. Progress was more evident on 

70 

 
 
 
 
 
 
environmental  matters,  in  particular  through  the  transmission  by  Moldova  of  the  Moldova 
Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) under the UNFCCC. 

71 

 
 
 
 
 
PART III.3: EU NEIGHBOURING COUNTRIES 

Western Balkans – Stabilisation and Association 
Agreements 

72 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TRADE 
PILLAR OF THE EU-KOSOVO* STABILISATION AND ASSOCIATION 
AGREEMENT 

1. 

THE AGREEMENT 

The EU and Kosovo signed a Stabilisation and Association Agreement (SAA) on 27 October 
2015. The SAA is the prime instrument of the EU’s overall policy towards the Western Balkan 
countries’  Stabilisation  and  Association  process.  Under  this  process,  all  Western  Balkans 
partners have a clear European perspective.  

The SAA - including the trade-related part - entered into force on 1 April 2016 and foresees:  

  Upgrading the existing trade relations by gradual establishment of a free trade area over 

a period lasting a maximum of 10 years.  

  Almost unrestricted market access to the EU for goods produced in Kosovo: upon entry 
into  force  of  the  SAA,  the  EU  has  abolished  all  customs  duties  that  had  applied  to 
Kosovo, with the exception of a few product lines in the agricultural sector, which are 
subject to specific duties or tariff-quotas. NB: Kosovo has abolished the customs duties 
on a number of tariff lines (industrial, agricultural and fishery products), while for the 
rest it will reduce the duties progressively over 10 years.  

  Kosovo’s commitment to ensure the gradual approximation of its laws with the EU 
acquis  in  a  number  of  important  areas,  such  as  public  procurement,  standardisation, 
consumer  protection,  working  conditions  and  equal  opportunities.  The  SAA  also 
provides for a gradual liberalisation in the areas of rights of establishment, supply of 
services and movement of capital; and it includes provisions on competition matters, 
state aid, and intellectual property rights. 

The Commission was informed in November 2019 of Kosovo’s plans to submit an application 
for WTO observer status. 

2. 

MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES  

Kosovo has been relatively slow in implementing the SAA and has yet to reap its benefits. This 
is partly because Kosovo suffers from problems of administrative capacity in the trade field. 
There is a need to enhance the capacity of the Trade Department to undertake trade defence 
related  investigations  in  line  with  EU  procedures  and  to  determine  protective  measures  for 
imports,  if  necessary.  There  is  also  a  weak  level  of  cooperation  and  coordination  among 
institutions involved in trade development. 

Nevertheless, progress can be noted in 2020 in the implementation of the SAA’s trade related 
commitments: 

73 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

In April 2020, Kosovo decided to lift the 100% import tariffs for goods originating 
in Serbia and Bosnia and Herzegovina, which it had imposed since November 2018. 
The tariffs were introduced for political reasons and were against the spirit of the SAA, 
and indirectly affected EU businesses established in the region.  Furthermore they were 
a  violation  of  the  Central  European  Free  Trade  Agreement  (CEFTA)  and  thereby 
undermined regional cooperation. In addition to increasing political tensions, they led 
to a halt of imports from Serbia and Bosnia and Herzegovina. The measure was also 
detrimental to the investment environment. Therefore it was extremely positive that they 
were removed, and an important signal for cooperation in the region. 

  Kosovo annulled a decision on fiscal policies for tobacco production and abolished 
the excise tax on local tobacco producers, which was in breach of Art. 39 of the SAA. 

  Kosovo  cancelled  the  mandatory  first  technical  inspection  for  new  vehicles 
produced for the EU market, which has simplified the procedures for homologation of 
new vehicles. 

At the same time, a number of implementation deficits remained in 2020:  

  Kosovo still needs to adopt legislation on losses of petroleum (through evaporation) 
during transportation, which has been a longstanding concern of EU investors, as such 
losses are not recognized by officials and are therefore subject to customs duties and 
taxes. The EU has urged Kosovo to remedy this as well as the adoption of a law on trade 
in petroleum products. 

  Kosovo lacks adequate legislation on trade in arms, military equipment and dual-

use goods, which the EU side has criticised.  

 

In the car sector, Kosovo still requires homologisation for imported used vehicles, 
which  represent  the  majority  of  vehicle  imports.  The  non-recognition  of  EU  and/or 
UNECE  homologations  for  vehicles  and  components  and  the  systematic  retesting  of 
vehicles or components constitutes a non-tariff barrier to trade and a restriction to the 
free movement of goods between the EU and Kosovo, and as such is a breach of the 
SAA.  

74 

 
 
 
 
 
 
   
 
 
 
 
 
ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TRADE 
PILLAR OF THE EU-SERBIA STABILISATION AND ASSOCIATION 
AGREEMENT 

1.  THE AGREEMENT 

The EU  and Serbia signed a  Stabilisation and Association Agreement (SAA) on 29 April 
2008. The SAA is the prime instrument of the EU’s overall policy towards the Western Balkan 
countries’  Stabilisation  and  Association  process.  Under  this  process,  all  Western  Balkan 
countries are granted a clear perspective to become EU Member States.   

The SAA entered into force on 1 September 2013, although the trade-related part of the SAA 
already entered into force, through an Interim Agreement from 1 February 2009 for Serbia, and 
from  8  December  2009  for  the  EU.  This  Agreement  established  a  free-trade  area  over  a 
transitional period of six years.  

The SAA covers products in all Chapters of the Harmonised System. Only a few exceptions, 
concerning a limited number of agricultural and fishery products were not fully liberalised and 
are still subject to preferential quantitative concessions (Tariff Rate Quotas).   

The SAA also includes provisions concerning competition and state aid, investment and related 
payments,  a  high  level  of  protection  of  intellectual  property  rights  and  strengthened  co-
operation in customs matters. Since the entry into force of the full SAA in 2013, a number of 
additional disciplines have been implemented concerning, notably, government procurement, 
legislative  approximation  in  many  areas  including  standardisation,  as  well  as  provisions 
regarding services and establishment. 

Serbia began EU accession negotiations in January 2014. 

Serbia  started  negotiating  its  accession  to  the  WTO  in  2004.  The  EU  continues  to  support 
Serbia’s efforts but the negotiation process has been stalled for several years. 

2.  MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES 

Serbia has generally made good progress in implementing the SAA since its entry into force. 

However, the measure concerning the management of wine quotas proposed by Serbia causes 
concern : 

  The new system governing wine quotas72 adopted by Serbia in January 2021 changes 
the current allocation principle (i.e. first come/first served system) that has worked well 
in the past, into a system where the import quota is allocated over 4 quarters and the 
allocation per trader is restricted to 15% of the available quota in each of the first three 
quarters. This risks harming market  access by  EU exporters and imposing additional 
costs. Serbia’s claim that the current system causes disturbance on the domestic wine 
market appears unfounded as increase of wine imports from the EU were rather modest 

72 Under the SAA, the EU grants Serbia access to the EU market for a quota of 67,300hl of wine and Serbia has 
granted a quota of 25,000hl for EU wines. 

75 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
and have not given rise to any problem, apart from the fact that the EU wine quota only 
represents 3% of Serbia’s wine production and 10% of Serbia’s wine imports.   

The  EU  reacted  swiftly  and  expressed  concerns  about  the  measure,  which  represents  a  step 
backwards in the state of alignment with the EU approach, at a time when Serbia should be 
adjusting to the realities of an open market as part of its accession process. 

Serbia has repeatedly raised its strong concerns regarding the impact of the EU’s steel 
safeguard measures at the highest political levels. The EU has organised bilateral 
consultations with Serbia on this issue, and has ensured that the safeguard measures are 
applied fairly, that traditional trade flows are maintained and the measures will not have 
detrimental effects on Serbia’s stabilisation and economic development. 

76 

 
 
 
ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TRADE 
PILLAR OF THE EU-BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA STABILISATION AND 
ASSOCIATION AGREEMENT 

1. 

THE AGREEMENT 

The  EU  and  Bosnia  and  Herzegovina  signed  a  Stabilisation  and  Association  Agreement 
(SAA) on 16 June 2008. The SAA is the prime instrument of the EU’s overall policy towards 
the Western Balkan  countries’ Stabilisation and Association  process.  Under this  process,  all 
Western Balkan countries are granted a clear perspective to become EU Member States.  

The SAA entered into force on 1 June 2015, although the trade-related part of the SAA already 
entered into force through an Interim Agreement on 1 July 2008. This Agreement established a 
free-trade area over a transitional period of five years. The Agreement covers products in all 
Chapters of the Harmonised System. Regarding agricultural products, the agreement is largely 
asymmetrical.  EU  agricultural  imports  from  Bosnia  and  Herzegovina  are  almost  completely 
liberalised (with very few exceptions). On the other hand, EU agricultural exports to Bosnia 
and Herzegovina remain subject to tariffs and tariff rate quotas (TRQs).  

The Agreement also includes provisions concerning competition and state aid, investment and 
related payments, a high level of protection of intellectual property rights and strengthened co-
operation  in  customs  matters.  Since  the  entry  into  force  of  the  full  SAA  on  1  June  2015,  a 
number  of  additional  disciplines  have  been  implemented  concerning,  notably,  government 
procurement,  legislative  approximation  in  many  areas  including  standardisation,  as  well  as 
provisions regarding services and establishment. 

Bosnia  and  Herzegovina  started  negotiating  its  accession  to  the  WTO  in  1999.  The  EU 
continues  to  support  Bosnia  and  Herzegovina’s  efforts  but  the  negotiation  process  has  been 
stalled for several years. 

2. 

MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES 

Bosnia and Herzegovina has made good progress in implementing the SAA provisions since 
their  entry  into  force.  A  long-standing  trade  irritant  relates  to  BiH’s  excise  duties  on  beer, 
which imposes different conditions for importers and domestic producers. In May 2020, BiH 
promised to prepare a new Law on Excise Duties and a Rulebook in line with EU acquis. The 
Commission continues to monitor the situation. 

Two measures announced/adopted in 2020 by BiH cause concern, notably in the area of public 
procurement and import tariffs for EU beef and pork: 

Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH) in May 2020 introduced a (temporary) 30% preferential 
rate73 for domestic businesses in public procurement with effect from 1 June 2020 to 

73 This means that all bids for public procurement in BiH from domestic companies will be reduced by a factor 
of 30%. 

77 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
31 May 2021. The  government  has argued that this measure is  necessary in  order to 
support  economic  recovery  following  the  COVID-19  pandemic,  but  no  economic  or 
legal assessment of the measure and its expected impact has been undertaken, as far as 
the EU is aware. The measure is a clear breach of article 74 of the EU-BiH Stabilisation 
and Association Agreement (SAA). The European Commission already raised concerns 
ahead  of  the  adoption  of  the  measure  at  the  meeting  of  the  SAA  Trade,  Industry, 
Customs and Taxation Subcommittee held virtually on 14 May 2020. Letters were sent 
to the relevant authorities by the EU Ambassador to BiH, and by the Director General 
of  DG  NEAR,  stressing  concerns  and  urging  the  BiH  authorities  to  reconsider  their 
decision. The issue was raised again during the meeting of the EU-BiH Stabilisation and 
Association Committee held virtually on 26 November 2020, the meeting of the EU-
BiH  Internal  Market  and  Competition  Subcommittee  held  on  28  January  2021,  and 
again at the EU–BiH Subcommittee on Trade, Industry, Customs and Taxation on 22 
April 2021. Despite indications by the BiH side that the measure will be not prolonged 
beyond 31 May 2021, a proposal was made to prolong the measure in May 2021 but 
voted down by the BiH Council of Ministers.  

  BiH proposed to introduce import tariffs on EU beef and pork. BiH argued that this 
was necessary as a temporary safeguard measure to protect domestic producers, but no 
clear justification has been presented. The European Commission clearly expressed its 
concerns that such a measure would constitute a breach of the SAA. As in the public 
procurement case, the decision to proceed with the introduction of tariffs seems to be a 
political move in disregard of BiH’s commitments under the SAA. Therefore, several 
letters were sent to the relevant authorities by the Director General of DG NEAR, the 
EU Ambassador to BiH and the European Commission officials stressing concerns and 
urging the BiH authorities to fully respect the provisions of the SAA and its international 
commitments. The European Commission also recalled BiH the need to comply with 
the  provisions  of  the  recently  extended  Autonomous  Trade  Measures  (ATMs)  for 
certain agricultural products for the Western Balkans for five more years, allowing BiH 
exporters  of  fruits,  vegetables  and  wine  to  benefit  from  enhanced  access  to  the  EU 
market. Moreover, a dedicated technical meeting on imports of beef and pork from the 
EU and preferential  treatment of domestic bidders (public procurement) between the 
European Commission and BiH authorities took place on 15 April 2021. For the time 
being, as in the case of public procurement, the proposal to introduce safeguard measure 
on imports of EU beef and pork meat was voted down by the BiH Council of Ministers. 
However, this  subject  was raised again  at  the  EU-BiH Subcommittee on  Agriculture 
and  Fisheries  on  17  June  2021.  For  both  cases  the  European  Commission  and  the 
Delegation of the EU in BiH continues to closely monitor the developments. 

Like Serbia and North Macedonia, Bosnia and Herzegovina has raised concerns regarding the 
EU’s steel safeguard measures.  

78 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TRADE 
PILLAR OF THE EU-MONTENEGRO STABILISATION AND ASSOCIATION 
AGREEMENT 

1.  THE AGREEMENT 

The  EU  and  Montenegro  signed  a  Stabilisation  and  Association  Agreement  (SAA) on  15 
October 2007. The SAA is the prime instrument of the EU’s overall policy towards the Western 
Balkans’  Stabilisation  and  Association  process.  Under  this  process,  all  Western  Balkan 
countries are granted a clear perspective to become EU Member States.   

The SAA entered into force on 1 May 2010, although the trade-related part of the SAA already 
entered into force through an Interim Agreement on 1 January 2008. The SAA established a 
free-trade area over a transitional period of five years. From the date of the Interim Agreement, 
the EU granted permanent liberalisation of 97.3% of tariff lines, representing almost duty free 
treatment  to  all imports  from  Montenegro. By  2013, Montenegro had liberalised 95% of its 
tariff lines,  representing  99% of EU imports during the three  years preceding the entry into 
force of the agreement. The SAA covers products in all Chapters of the Harmonised System. 
Only a few agricultural and fishery products are not fully liberalised and subject to preferential 
quantitative concessions (TRQs).   

The  SAA  also  includes  provisions  concerning  competition  matters,  investment  and  related 
payments,  a  high  level  of  protection  of  intellectual  property  rights  and  strengthened  co-
operation  in  customs  matters.  Since  the  entry  into  force  of  the  full  SAA  on  1  May  2010,  a 
number  of  additional  disciplines  have  been  implemented  concerning,  notably,  government 
procurement,  legislative  approximation  in  many  areas  including  standardisation,  as  well  as 
provisions regarding services and establishment.  

Montenegro began EU accession negotiations in June 2012. 

Montenegro has been a member of the WTO since 29 April 2012. 

2.  MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES 

Montenegro continues to make  good progress in  implementing the SAA since its entry into 
force. There are no significant trade barriers.  

Montenegro has made progress in adapting its legislation to the EU acquis in the field of dual 
use goods. A new draft Law on Dual Use presented in 2020 will ensure alignment with the 
EU acquis, and will be submitted to the European Commission for opinion before its adoption 
by  the  Montenegrin  parliament.  The  List  of  dual  use  goods  and  technologies  is  regularly 
updated and aligned with the EU List.  

79 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TRADE 
PILLAR OF THE EU-ALBANIA STABILISATION AND ASSOCIATION 
AGREEMENT 

1.  THE AGREEMENT 

The EU and Albania signed a Stabilisation and Association Agreement (SAA) on 12 June 2006. 
The  SAA  is  the  prime  instrument  of  the  EU’s  overall  policy  towards  the  Western  Balkan 
countries’  Stabilisation  and  Association  process.  Under  this  process,  all  Western  Balkan 
countries are granted a clear perspective to become EU Member States.   

The full SAA entered into force on 1 April 2009, although the trade-related part of the SAA 
already  entered  into  force  through  an  Interim  Agreement  on  1  December  2006.  The  SAA 
established a free-trade area over a transitional period of ten years. As regards the EU, in 2006, 
98.7% of its tariff lines were already duty-free, representing 100% of the value of imports from 
Albania. By 2010, Albania had liberalised 92.7% of its tariff lines for imports from the EU.  

The SAA covers products in all Chapters of the Harmonised System. Regarding agricultural 
products,  the  agreement  is  largely  asymmetrical.  EU  agricultural  imports  from  Albania  are 
almost completely liberalised (with very few exceptions). On the other hand, EU agricultural 
exports to Albania remain subject to tariffs and tariff rate quotas (TRQs).  In this regard, Albania 
expressed during the last Subcommittee meetings on Agriculture and Fisheries their wish to 
improve existing market access under the SAA notably for certain fish and fishery products 
TRQs, including basic agricultural and processed agricultural products.   

The  SAA  also  includes  provisions  concerning  competition  matters,  investment  and  related 
payments,  a  high  level  of  protection  of  intellectual  property  rights  and  strengthened  co-
operation in  customs matters. Since the entry into force of the full SAA  on 1 April 2009, a 
number  of  additional  disciplines  have  been  implemented  concerning,  notably,  government 
procurement,  legislative  approximation  in  many  areas  including  standardisation,  as  well  as 
provisions regarding services and establishment. 

In  March  2020  the  Member  States  decided  to  open  EU  accession  negotiations  with  North 
Macedonia. 

Albania has been a member of the WTO since 8 September 2000. 

2. 

MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES 

Albania continues to make good progress in implementing the SAA provisions since their entry 
into force. There are no significant trade barriers. The only major concern that has arisen during 
2020 is an economic cooperation agreement concluded between Albania and the United Arab 
Emirates, which seems  to  exempt certain  strategic projects  from  all public procurement and 
public competition rules, including a project to develop the Durres port. This would put into 
question  ongoing  technical  EU  assistance  to  the  port  as  well  as  future  planned  investments 
under  the  EU’s  Economic  and  Investment  Plan  for  the  Western  Balkan  countries.  More 

80 

 
 
 
 
 
 
generally, the exemption clause in the Albania-UAE economic cooperation agreement needs to 
be assessed as regards to its compatibility with the SAA.  

81 

 
 
ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TRADE 
PILLAR OF THE STABILISATION AND ASSOCIATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN 
THE EU AND NORTH MACEDONIA 

1. 

THE AGREEMENT 

The EU and North Macedonia signed a Stabilisation and Association Agreement (SAA) on 
9 April 2001. The SAA is the prime instrument of the EU’s overall policy towards the Western 
Balkan  countries’  Stabilisation  and  Association  process.  Under  this  process,  all  Western 
Balkans countries are granted a clear perspective to become EU Member States.   

The SAA entered into force on 1 April 2004, although the trade-related part of the SAA already 
entered into force through an Interim Agreement on 1 June 2001. Trade liberalisation between 
the  EU  and  North  Macedonia  was  completed  over  a  period  of  ten  years.  The  SAA  covers 
products in all Chapters of the Harmonised System.   

Regarding  agricultural  products,  the  agreement  is  largely  asymmetrical.  EU  agricultural 
imports from North Macedonia are almost completely liberalized (with very few exceptions). 
On the other hand, EU agricultural exports to North Macedonia remain subject to tariffs and 
Tariff Rate Quotas (TRQs).  

The  SAA  also  includes  provisions  concerning  competition  matters,  investment  and  related 
payments,  a  high  level  of  protection  of  intellectual  property  rights  and  strengthened  co-
operation in customs matters. Since the full entry into force of the SAA, a number of additional 
disciplines have been implemented concerning, notably, government procurement, legislative 
approximation in many areas including standardisation, as well as provisions regarding services 
and establishment. 

On  25  March  2020,  the  Council  agreed  to  open  EU  accession  negotiations  with  North 
Macedonia, although the actual negotiations have not yet begun. 

North Macedonia has been a member of the WTO since 4 April 2003. 

2. 

MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES 

North Macedonia has made good progress in implementing the SAA since its entry into force, 
including in adapting its legislation to the EU acquis in the field of dual use goods. The Law 
on dual use goods is expected to be adopted by the parliament by the end of the second quarter 
of 2021. The List of dual use goods and technologies is regularly updated and aligned with the 
EU List. 

Like Serbia and Bosnia and Herzegovina, North Macedonia has raised concerns regarding the 
EU’s steel safeguard measures.  

82 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
PART III.4: EU NEIGHBOURING COUNTRIES 

Switzerland, Norway, Turkey 

83 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE EU-
SWITZERLAND TRADE AGREEMENT 

1. 

THE AGREEMENTS  

The EU-Swiss trade relations are among the deepest worldwide outside the context of a customs 
union/internal market. For Switzerland, the EU is by far the most important trading partner. For 
the EU, Switzerland is the fourth overall trading partner, number three for services.  

The cornerstone of EU-Swiss trade relations is the EU-Switzerland Free Trade Agreement of 
197274 (hereinafter, the “FTA”), one of the oldest agreements signed by the EU. It concerns 
goods only. It does not contain provisions on services, investment, intellectual property rights 
(IPR),  government  procurement  or  social  and  environmental  values.  No  dispute  settlement 
mechanism is foreseen beyond the regular annual dialogue in Joint Committee meetings. As a 
consequence of the rejection of European Economic Area membership by the Swiss people in 
1992, Switzerland and the EU agreed on a package of seven sectoral agreements signed in 
1999  (known  in  Switzerland  as  ‘Bilaterals  I’).  Some  of  them  are  relevant  from  a  trade 
perspective:  

 

 

 

 

 

The  Free  Movement  of  Persons  Agreement75  allows  for  the  provision  of  services, 
limited in time.  
The  Mutual  Recognition  Agreement  in  relation  to  conformity  assessment76  ensures 
that, in twenty regulated sectors, the conformity assessment provided by one party is 
recognised by the other, which facilitates trade between the parties.   
The  Public  Procurement  Agreement77,  that  builds  on  the  WTO  Government 
Procurement Agreement. 
The  Agreement  on  trade  in  agricultural  products78,  which  includes  sanitary  and 
phytosanitary  rules,  as  well  as  tariffs  and  tariff  rate  quotas  for  agricultural  products, 
except for cheese that is fully liberalised.  
A protocol on processed agricultural products (protocol 2), which was added to the 
Free  Trade  Agreement  in  2004.  It  includes  a  mechanism  whereby  in  practice 
Switzerland receives compensation for the very  significant  price differential  of basic 
agricultural  products  -  which  serve  as  inputs  to  processed  agricultural  products  - 
between the EU and Switzerland. 

In the last two decades, there was no major evolution to this rather complex setting. The gap 
is growing between the current legal arrangements governing trade relations between the EU 

74 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/en/ALL/?uri=OJ:L:1972:300:TOC  
75 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A22002A0430%2801%29  
76 http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2013/december/tradoc_152006.pdf  
77 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX:22002A0430(06)  
78 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=uriserv:OJ.L_.2002.114.01.0132.01.ENG 

84 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
and Switzerland and the standards of modern and comprehensive trade agreements concluded 
by  the  EU  and  Switzerland/EFTA,  respectively.  A  modernisation  of  the  FTA  is  therefore 
needed to unlock the potential for further bilateral trade. 

Between 2014 and 2018, both parties negotiated an Institutional Framework Agreement to 
streamline the operation of 5 of the 7 existing bilateral agreements between Switzerland and 
the  EU,  covering:  the  Agreement  on  the  Free  Movement  of  Persons;  the  Agreement  on  Air 
Transport;  the  Overland  Transport  Agreement;  the  Agreement  on  Trade  in  Agricultural 
Products; and the Mutual Recognition Agreement. 

This  Institutional Framework Agreement aims at structuring EU-Swiss  relations, notably by 
providing crucial rules and procedures for dynamic take-over and homogenous application of 
internal  market  law,  for  enforcement  of  state  aid  rules  and  for  dispute  settlement.  A  Joint 
declaration is  annexed to the agreement, where  both  parties commit to modernise the trade-
related agreements.  

The  negotiations  were  concluded  in  November  2018.  However,  after  consultations  with  its 
stakeholders  between  January  and  April  2019,  the  Swiss  Federal  Council  came  to  the 
conclusion, on 7 June 2019, that it could not agree on the text, as it felt that further clarifications 
were needed on three parts of the agreement. While the EU has consistently stated its readiness 
to look at the requests for clarifications, it has also been urging for quick progress rebuffing at 
the same time any opening of the Institutional Framework Agreement for further negotiations.   

On 27 September 2020, a popular vote took place in Switzerland on the SVP/UDC initiative 
“For a moderate immigration”. The initiative was rejected by almost 62% of voters, thereby 
confirming the importance that Swiss people attach to the close relationship between the EU 
and Switzerland. 

On 28 September 2020, in her phone call to Swiss President Simonetta Sommaruga right after 
the above-mentioned vote, Ms von der Leyen reiterated the well-known position of the EU and 
asked  the  Federal  Council  to  act  swiftly  on  the  Institutional  Framework  Agreement.  On  14 
October  2020,  Switzerland  proceeded  to  the  nomination  of  a  new  Chief  negotiator 
and  the  Federal  Council  agreed  upon  a  final  position  as  regards  the  clarifications  to  be 
requested. Discussions resumed in January 2021 with a view to identifying solutions to the three 
contentious points. Notwithstanding the efforts by the EU side to bridge the differences, on 26 
May 2021, the Federal Council took the decision to unilaterally terminate the negotiations 
on the EU-Swiss Institutional Framework Agreement. Without this agreement, which the 
EU viewed as essential for the conclusion of possible future agreements regarding further Swiss 
participation to the Single Market, there is no longer a clear path for the modernisation of the 
existing bilateral trade agreements.   

2. 

MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES  

After a long delay, the 2019 process of adapting the reference prices of basic agricultural 
products needed in the context of the price compensation mechanism for processed agricultural 
products (protocol 2 to the FTA) was agreed on 16 January 2020.   

85 

 
 
 
 
The EU and Switzerland in 2020 started an in-depth exchange on FTA preference utilisation, 
following the publication in August 2020 by the Swiss State Secretariat for Economic Affairs 
(SECO)  of  a  study  on  the  benefits  of  their  free  trade  agreements.  Switzerland  and  the  EU 
initiated a joint reflection on possible areas of cooperation on preference use, including on the 
methodology and analysis of data and the reasons for foregone savings. 

Some of the main outstanding implementation issues pertain to market access in the services 
sector and state aid: 

  Market  access  in  the  services  sector  remains  a  major  issue.  The  so-called  “flanking 
measures” that the Swiss put  in  place to  accompany the implementation  of the EU-
Switzerland Free Movement of Persons Agreement79 are a long-standing trade issue, as 
the  EU  considers  them  burdensome  and  disproportionate.  For  example,  Switzerland 
imposes  obligations on EU natural persons who want to supply a service in Switzerland, 
including  an  8-days  pre-announcement  obligation,  a  deposit  requirement  and  an 
obligation to contribute to control costs. 

  The lack of a level playing field as regards state aid also remains an issue, as existing 
agreements  between the  EU and Switzerland do not  include effective state aid  rules. 
Solutions  were  found  in  the  context  of  the  EU-Swiss  Institutional  Framework 
Agreement,  which  includes  State  aid  rules  for  existing  and  future  market  access 
agreements between the EU and Switzerland and a compromise solution to deal with 
Switzerland’s  so-called  “flanking  measures”  relating  to  the  posting  of  workers. 
However, as explained above, this Institutional Framework Agreement remains to be 
signed.    

79 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A22002A0430%2801%29 

86 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE EU-
NORWAY TRADE AGREEMENT 

1.  THE AGREEMENT 

The Free Trade Agreement (FTA) between Norway and the EU entered into force on 1 July 
1973. It concerns goods only and is one of the oldest trade agreements signed by the EU.  

Although  still  in  force,  it  has  been  superseded  in  many  respects  by  the  Agreement  on  the 
European Economic Area  (EEA),  which entered into force on 1 January  1994, and brings 
together the EU Member States and the three EEA EFTA States — Iceland, Liechtenstein and 
Norway — in the internal market. The EEA agreement ensures the free movement of goods, 
services, capital and persons between Norway and the EU and is the backbone of EU-Norway 
cooperation. Members of the EEA fully apply the whole acquis communautaire related to the 
"four  freedoms"  through  dynamic  incorporation  of  the  relevant  legislative  acts  into  the 
Protocols and Annexes of the EEA Agreement via Joint Committee Decisions. 

The  EEA  Agreement  does  not  cover  the  common  agricultural  and  fisheries  policies,  which 
means that agricultural and fisheries products are not in free circulation between the EU and 
Norway. Preferential  trade in  agricultural  products  between the EU and  Norway is  ruled by 
Article 19 of the EEA Agreement and provides duty free access for 36 tariff lines and a number 
of tariff rate quotas. Processed agricultural products are covered by a dedicated protocol to the 
EEA agreement but are also not in free circulation. 

2.  MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES 

Some of the main implementation issues continue to be processed agricultural products (PAPs) 
and geographical indications (GIs): 

  EU exports of processed agricultural products80 remain below their potential due 
to high customs tariffs and this has been a long-standing trade barrier. Following the 
last Joint Working Group on processed agricultural products, which took place on 14 
November 2019, there has been no progress on the Commission request for a review of 
the trade regime for processed agricultural products in order to further promote trade in 
this area.  Norway has repeatedly expressed its wish to keep Protocol 3 unchanged and 
has  been  unwilling  to  make  any  commitments  towards  further  liberalization  in 
processed  agricultural  products  considering  the  perceived  positive  results  of  the 
Protocol. 

  The GIs negotiations launched in 2013 remain suspended since April 2016. The Council 
of  the  European  Union  in  its  Conclusions  of  December  2018  called  on  Norway  to 

80 Trade in processed agricultural products is regulated by Protocol 3 to the EEA agreement and to a certain 
extent by Protocol 2 to the 1973 FTA. Protocol 3 of the EEA foresees the possibility to levy customs duties 
based on the cost of the basic agricultural products in the EU and in Norway. 

87 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
“resume  the  negotiations  on  the  protection  of  geographical  indications,  which  is  an 
important element of international trade in agricultural products and foodstuffs”. In the 
context of the Joint Working Group on processed agricultural products of 14 November 
2019,  the  Commission  urged  the  Norwegian  delegation  to  consider  resuming  the 
negotiations on Geographical Indications. Despite the Norwegian delegation explaining 
that it would consult back with relevant authorities on the possibility to resume these 
negotiations, there has been no positive development in this area in 2020.  

88 

 
 
 
 
ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE EU-
TURKEY CUSTOMS UNION AND TRADE AGREEMENTS 

1. THE AGREEMENT         

The contractual relations between the EU and Turkey date back to 1963 when the European 
Economic  Community  (i.e.  the  EU’s  predecessor)  and  Turkey  signed  an  Association 
Agreement (the ‘Ankara Agreement’), in which both parties agreed to progressively establish 
a  Customs  Union  over  a  period  of  several  years.  An  Additional  Protocol  was  signed  in 
November 1970, setting out a timetable for the abolition of tariffs and quotas on industrial goods 
circulating  between  the  parties.  The  final  phase  of  the  Customs  Union  was  completed  on  1 
January 1996 in the shape of the EU-Turkey Association Council Decision No 1/95, which is 
currently in force.81 

The Customs Union ensures the free movement of all industrial goods and certain processed 
agricultural products between the EU and Turkey. It also requires Turkey to align with the EU’s 
customs  tariffs  and  rules,  commercial  policy,  competition  policy  and  intellectual  property 
rights, as well as with the EU’s technical legislation related to the scope of the Customs Union. 
The  Customs  Union  with  Turkey  therefore  goes  well  beyond  the  traditional  free  trade 
agreements which the EU has concluded with other third countries.  

In  addition  to  the  Customs  Union,  the  EU  and  Turkey  concluded  two  further  bilateral 
preferential  trade  agreements:  The  Agreement  between  the  European  Coal  and  Steel 
Community (ECSC) and Turkey on trade in products covered by the Treaty establishing the 
ECSC established a Free trade agreement for coal, iron and steel products in 1996, along 
with relevant competition rules. Association Council Decision No 1/98 (amended by Decision 
No 2/2006) provides  for preferential  concessions on trade in certain  agricultural  and fishery 
products. 

On 21 December 2016, the European Commission adopted a Recommendation for a Council 
Decision  authorising  the  opening  of  negotiations  with  Turkey  on  an  Agreement  on  the 
extension  of  the  scope  of  the  bilateral  preferential  trade  relationship  and  on  the 
modernisation of the Customs Union. The negotiations can start only once the Council adopts 
the related negotiating directives. In this respect, the Council (General Affairs Council meeting 
of 26 June 2018, and repeated on 18 June 2019) noted that "Turkey has been moving further 
away  from  the  European  Union.  Turkey's  accession  negotiations  have  therefore  effectively 
come to a standstill and no further chapters can be considered for opening or closing and no 
further work towards the modernisation of the EU-Turkey Customs Union is foreseen."  

In 2020, the 1-2 October Special European Council offered Turkey a conditional positive 
agenda  ‘with  a  specific  emphasis  on  the  modernisation  of  the  Customs  Union  and  trade 
facilitation’ provided constructive efforts to stop illegal activities vis-à-vis Greece and Cyprus. 
Inversely, in  case Turkey  failed to  do so, all options  would be on the table.  The  European 

81 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:21996D0213(01):EN:HTML  

89 

 
 
 
                                                           
Council of 10 December 2020 asked the HRVP and Commission to ‘submit a report on the 
state  of  play  concerning  the  EU-Turkey  political,  economic  and  trade  relations  and  on 
instruments and options on how to proceed’. That report was published on 22 March 2021.82 
The  statement  of  the  members  of  the  European  Council  of  25  March  202183  invited  the 
Commission to intensify talks with Turkey to address current difficulties in the implementation 
of the Customs Union, ensuring its effective application to  all Member States, and invite in 
parallel the Council to work on a mandate for the modernisation of the Customs Union. Such a 
mandate  may  be  adopted  by  the  Council  subject  to  additional  guidance  by  the  European 
Council. Following these Conclusions, the Commission intensified talks with Turkey and the 
mandate was discussed by the Council. 

 2.           MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES  

As  regards  the  implementation  of  the  existing  bilateral  preferential  trade  framework,  very 
limited progress was achieved in 2020 on certain issues.  

Instead, Turkey created further market access barriers in breach of the Customs Union rules, 
and aggravated existing ones, affecting European companies. The European Commission has 
consistently  raised  concerns  regarding  these  barriers  in  various  for  a,  as  well  as  in  written 
exchanges: 

  Turkey in 2020 upheld trade barriers in breach of the Customs Union agreement, notably 
in  massively broadening its deviation from  the Common Customs  Tariff through the 
imposition  of  additional  duties  on  products  originating  outside  the  EU  or  Turkey’s 
FTA  partners.  On  the  basis  of  these  duties,  Turkey  requires  a  proof  of  origin  for 
affected product categories, contrary to Customs Union rules. Customs implementation 
rules  introduced  in  May  2019  that  lead  to  a  sharp  increase  in  certificates  of  origin 
demanded and increased uncertainty on the part of EU exporters were raised throughout 
2020 by the Commission, and led to a further change to implementation rules, in force 
since 1 January 2021. This change was intended to clarify that shipments from the EU 
with  A.TR.  certificates  were  in  principle  exempt  from  origin  checks.  However,  the 
evidence  after  this  change  came  into  force  points  to  a  mixed  take-up  by  customs 
intermediaries.  

  The non-discriminatory implementation of the Additional Protocol to the Association 
Agreement towards all Member States including the Republic of Cyprus also remains a 
critical demand. 84 

82 https://ec.europa.eu/neighbourhood-
enlargement/sites/default/files/state_of_play_of_eu_turkey_relations_en.pdf  
83 https://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/48976/250321-vtc-euco-statement-en.pdf  
84 See statement of the members of the European Council of 25 March, stressing the need to implement the 
current Customs Union to all Member States: https://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/48976/250321-vtc-
euco-statement-en.pdf  

90 

 
 
 
 
                                                           
  The Commission in 2020 advanced its dispute settlement case brought by the EU in 
2019 against Turkey regarding localisation requirements imposed by Turkey in the 
pharmaceutical sector advanced in 2020, with the panel composed in March and first 
written  submissions  in  the  course  of  the  year.85  The  localisation  requirements  are 
measures requiring foreign producers to commit to localise in Turkey their production 
of  certain  pharmaceutical  products.  These  measures  are  in  clear  breach  not  only  of 
bilateral agreements but also WTO rules.  

  Regarding the state of play on the issue of cosmetics, the Turkish legislation is not yet 
aligned with the acquis. In the past years, Turkey had required EU companies to upload 
the full cosmetic product safety assessment report in Turkey’s electronic notification 
portal, which raised confidentiality concerns. However, as of January 2021, Turkey has 
discontinued  this  requirement.  Furthermore,  Turkey  no  longer  obliges  producers  to 
upload the entire artwork of the product to the Agency website. Now only packaging 
visuals  are  required.  Notwithstanding,  among  the  remaining  irritants  in  the  second 
Quarter  of  2021  for  cosmetics  is  Turkey’s  requirement  that  companies  create  new 
barcodes and new packaging specifically for the Turkish market. 

85 Information regarding the dispute settlement case can be found here : 
https://trade.ec.europa.eu/wtodispute/show.cfm?id=689&code=1#_eu-submissions  

91 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
 
PART IV: AFRICAN, CARIBBEAN AND PACIFIC COUNTRIES  

92 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE 
ECONOMIC PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT (EPA) BETWEEN THE EU AND 
GHANA 

1. 

THE AGREEMENT    

Pending  an  Economic  Partnership  Agreement  (EPA)  with  the  West  African  region,  Ghana 
concluded a stepping stone (or interim) EPA with the EU in December 2007.86 The EPA 
was signed on 28 July 2016 and entered into provisional application on 15 December 2016. The 
EU-Ghana interim EPA will be replaced by the regional EU-West Africa EPA once the latter 
enters into force.87 By the end of 2020, 15 out of 16 members of the Economic Community of 
Western African States (ECOWAS), and Mauritania, have signed the regional EPA; Nigeria’s 
signature is still outstanding. 

Ghana’s  revised  market  access  offer  foresees  that  78%  of  tariff  lines  will  be  progressively 
liberalised  over  the  period  2020-2029.  Ghana’s  revised  market  access  offer  and  full 
liberalisation schedule is available on the website of the Directorate-General for Trade.88  

The EPA foresees joint monitoring of EPA implementation by the parties. The EU has made 
a first proposal to Ghana for possible indicators and a process to annually monitor the EPA. 
This was presented to the Ghanaian side in February 2020. The Parties are to agree on the 
indicators and the process at the next Trade Committee in 2021. 

2. 

MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES  

2.1   Market access: Progress and outstanding issues  

In regard to tariff liberalisation, Ghana started reciprocating its preferential access to the 
EU at the beginning of 2020, while the EU continuously upheld duty-free quota-free access to 
its market for Ghanaian products since 2008. Only products where tariffs were already at 0% 
were included in this first round. The “Actual” liberalisation was planned to start in January 
2021 when 1056 lines should have been liberalised by Ghana, but was delayed to July 2021. 
This first round of “actual” liberalisation will concern only few products with significant EU 
exports  (i.e.  8  tariff  lines  with  exports  above  €1,000,000,  mainly  machinery  and  chemicals) 
whereas most agricultural goods, including fruits and vegetables, are altogether excluded from 
liberalisation by  Ghana,  as are inputs in  specific  value chains  such  as poultry, sugar,  edible 
offal, and food preparations.  

In February and November 2020, the Parties also held two virtual technical meetings, where 
they undertook to adopt the amendment of the Protocol on Rules of Origin and the text of 
the  Rules  of  procedures  of  the  Dispute  settlement  chapter  at  the  next  EPA  Committee  in 
2021.  

86 The official name of the Agreement ("stepping-stone Agreement") reflects the fact that the initial and ultimate 
objective for economic partnership in West Africa is a comprehensive, regional Agreement. It is also called 
"interim EPA". 
87 The regional Economic Partnership Agreement was signed in December 2014 by the European Union and 13 
West African Countries. The Agreement will enter into provisional application when the 16 West African 
Countries sign it and 2/3 of these countries ratify it. In 2018, Gambia and Mauretania signed the agreement, 
which means that only Nigeria’s signature is still missing. 
88 Published on DG Trade’s website: https://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2020/january/tradoc_158599.pdf  

93 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
The  EU  Delegation  to  Ghana  has  systematically  worked  in  close  coordination  with  the  EU 
Member States and the local authorities to address trade barriers. The ‘Project to support the 
EPA  implementation  between  the  EU  and  Ghana’  (€4  million,  2020-2024’)  is  aimed  at 
maximising  the  benefits  of  the  EPA  for  Ghana  by  strengthening  the  country’s  capacity  to 
implement  the  EPA,  upgrading  SMEs  in  three  value  chains,  improving  the  quality  of  their 
products, and better integrating them in the regional and global value chains; improving and 
aligning  Business  Policy  &  Regulatory  Environment  for  three  value  chains  with  regional 
directives. Through a close cooperation with Ghana’s Ministries of Trade and Industry and of 
Finance, the EU projects are assisting key stakeholders in a smooth roll-out of the EU-
Ghana  EPA.  In  implementing  the  project,  the  Commission  (through  its  EU  Delegation) 
actively seeks the views of the European and Ghanaian private sectors on the challenges and 
opportunities the Ghanaian market provides.  

The EU Delegation also seeks to involve the local private sector to participate in the process 
of addressing trade barriers and implementing the EPA. For example, the EU-funded West 
Africa  Competitiveness  Program  (€4.1  million,  2019-2021)  continued  to  support  small  and 
medium local trade associations to become more present in forums  and events and to better 
make  their  voice  heard  with  regard  to  value  chains  in  the  agriculture  sector.  Furthermore, 
through  the  Investment  Promotion  component  (€2.8  million,  2018-2021)  of  the  EU-funded 
Ghana Employment and Social Protection Programme, the EU campaigned for more Ghanaian 
small and medium enterprises to be linked with larger companies in the ECOWAS region and 
the EU market for improved export promotion and value-chain development in agriculture. 

2.2 

Trade and sustainable development goals 

The interim EPA with Ghana does not include a trade and sustainable development chapter.  

Nevertheless,  close  cooperation  is  taking  place,  e.g.  under  the  framework  of  the  Cotonou 
Agreement.  

In 2020, the parties continued a dialogue on sustainability of the cocoa value chain.  

In September 2020, the European Commission launched a Sustainable Cocoa Initiative aimed 
to address cocoa production in Côte d’Ivoire and Ghana. The objective of the multi-stakeholder 
dialogue is to foster progress in the elimination of child labour and child trafficking in cocoa 
supply chains, enhancing the protection and restorations of forests in cocoa-producing regions, 
and ensuring a living income for cocoa farmers. In 2020, the governments of Ghana and Cȏte 
d’Ivoire  imposed  a  living  income  differential  for  the  price  of  cocoa,  which  guarantees  a 
minimum  price  of  cocoa  for  farmers  with  the  aim  of  ensuring  a  living  income  for  local 
farmers.89  

The EU imports 65% of Ghana’s and Côte d'Ivoire’s cocoa exports, making it the first importer 
worldwide.  While  cocoa  beans  are  duty-free  on  a  MFN  basis,  exports  of  processed  cocoa 
(butter, paste and powder) benefit from EPA preferences.  

89 Ghana and Cȏte d’Ivoire jointly announced in June 2019 the suspension of their cocoa futures sales for the 
cocoa production of the 2020-2021 season (which will begin in October 2020) below a certain price (USD 
2600/tonne). This was accompanied by a joint public intervention, which led to an agreement with industry to 
offer a USD 400/tonne premium above the price of the world market. 

94 

 
 
 
 
                                                           
ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE 
ECONOMIC PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT (EPA) BETWEEN THE EU AND THE 
SOUTHERN AFRICAN DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY (SADC) 

1. 

THE AGREEMENT 

The EU-SADC European Partnership Agreement (EPA) is an agreement between the EU and 
six  countries  from  the  Southern  African  Development  Community  (SADC):  Eswatini, 
Botswana, Lesotho, Mozambique, Namibia and South Africa. It was signed on 10 June 2016 
and entered into provisional application on 10 October 2016 for all Parties to the Agreement 
except for Mozambique, for which it entered into provisional application on 4 February 2018. 
Hence, 2021 was the fourth year in which all SADC EPA states fully implement the EU-SADC 
EPA ("the Agreement").  

All SADC EPA States except South Africa receive duty free and quota free treatment for 
all their goods (except arms and ammunition) imported into the EU. South Africa receives such 
treatment for 96% of its exports to the EU and an additional 2.7% of exports from South Africa 
benefits  from  reduced  tariffs  or  from  preferential  tariff  rate  quotas.  The  Southern  African 
Customs Union (SACU), comprising Eswatini, Botswana, Lesotho, Namibia and South Africa, 
grants duty free and quota free treatment to 84.9% of products exported by the EU to the region. 
An additional 12.9% of EU exports benefits from partial liberalisation (reduced tariffs or tariff 
rate  quotas).  As  a  least  developed  country,  Mozambique  liberalises  a  smaller  percentage  of 
exports from the EU. The last wave of liberalisation will take place in 2025. 

The EU-SADC EPA is the first and only regional EPA in Africa to be fully operational (all 
partners are implementing the tariff cuts foreseen by the EPA). Since the 2019 meeting of the 
EU-SADC  EPA  Joint  Council,  the  institutional  framework  of  the  EPA  is  fully  in  place  and 
operational. The Agreement replaces all the trade provisions of the former bilateral Trade and 
Development Cooperation Agreement (TDCA) between the EU and South Africa.  

At  the  beginning  of  2020,  Angola  requested  to  join  the  EU-SADC  EPA  and  preparatory 
exchanges were held in 2020. The Trade and Development Committee of February 2020 took 
note of the request for starting accession negotiations from Angola and of a draft roadmap for 
this accession process presented by the EU. 

In February 2020, the Parties agreed that by October 2021 they would launch a process for 
reviewing the Agreement. The Parties also agreed on a list of monitoring indicators and on 
the principles of the monitoring and evaluation process   

2. 

MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES 

2.1   Market access: Progress and outstanding issues  

SADC  EPA  started  to  be  implemented  in  October  2016  by  Botswana,  Eswatini,  Lesotho, 
Namibia and South Africa. Tariff cuts have started since then. Mozambique signed the EPA in 
2018. In 2020, progress was made in terms of tariff reduction. As from 1st January 2024 all 
SADC EPA States apply the reduction in EPA customs duties for goods coming from the EU:  
Mozambique was the last EPA partner country to do so. Mozambique has also updated its tariff 
book (pauta aduaneira) to the Harmonized System nomenclature of 2017. Several EU Member 

95 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
States and EU companies confirmed that it is working in practice and that they are benefiting 
from preferential (reduced) EPA tariff for imports from the EU to Mozambique.  

Further progress is still to be made in the area of rules of origin and in regard to the lifting 
of SPS bans imposed by South Africa in 2016 following the Avian Influenza (HPAI) outbreak:  

  The  SADC  EPA  provision  that  foresees  the  application  of  diagonal  cumulation 
between the SADC EPA States could be key for integration within the SADC region 
but has not entered into force yet, in the absence of a confirmation by the SADC EPA 
States of their intention to start applying it. It has nevertheless been discussed by the EU 
and the SADC EPA States at several occasions.  

  EU  Member  States  are  still  banned  from  exporting  poultry  meat  to  South  Africa. 
Since South Africa does not recognise EU regionalisation decisions, the issue is now 
about re-opening the market access after the Member States have been declared avian 
influenza-free in accordance with the international standards of the World Organization 
for Animal Health.  

The EU in 2020 further advanced its legal dispute against SACU on frozen poultry:  

  On  21  April  2020,  the  EU  sent  SACU  a  request  to  establish  an  arbitration  panel 
regarding safeguard measures against imports of frozen poultry from the EU. The 
panel selection process, which was temporarily suspended due to the Covid-19 crisis, 
was restarted on 22 November 2020 and is ongoing.  

  By  way  of  background,  on  15  December  2016  a  provisional  safeguard  measure  of 
13.9% was imposed by SACU on imports from the whole EU based on Article 34 of 
the EU-SADC EPA. On 28 September 2018, SACU adopted a final safeguard measure 
against  imports  of  poultry  from  the  EU.  The  safeguard  measure  takes  the  form  of 
increased tariff duties, subject to progressive reduction over a period of four years. The 
safeguard  was  set  at  35.3%  for  the  first  six  months,  which  were  reduced  to  30%  in 
March 2019, 25% in March 2020 and in March 2021 to 15%. The safeguard will expire 
on  11  March  2022.  However,  it  could  possibly  be  extended  for  a  further  4  years 
thereafter.  

2.2 

Trade and sustainable development: Progress and outstanding issues  

The  EU-SADC  EPA  includes  a  chapter  on  cooperation  on  Trade  and  Sustainable 
Development and parties have used it, for example, to engage in a debate on trade and climate 
change during the Trade and Development (TSD) Committee meeting in February 2020: 

  The Committee took note of a presentation by the EU on the European Green Deal and 
of the EU's intention to engage at bilateral level with third countries on areas of common 
interest to move forward on the implementation of the Paris Agreement.  

  The  Committee  agreed  that  discussions  in  the  context  of  the  EPA's  Trade  and 

Sustainable Development Chapter would take place on a regular basis. 

96 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE 
ECONOMIC PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT (EPA) BETWEEN THE EU AND COTE 
D’IVOIRE 

1. 

THE AGREEMENT 

Pending  an  Economic  Partnership  Agreement  (EPA)  with  the  West  African  region,  Côte 
d’Ivoire concluded a stepping stone or interim EPA with the EU in November 2008.90 The 
interim EPA was signed on 26 November 2008 and entered into provisional application on 3 
September 2016. The interim EPA will be substituted by the regional EU-West Africa EPA 
once the latter enters into force.91 By the end of 2020, 15 out of 16 members of the Economic 
Community of Western African States (ECOWAS), and Mauritania, have signed the regional 
EPA, with only Nigeria’s signature still outstanding.  

Côte d'Ivoire is the first country in West Africa that started liberalising its market for trade 
with the EU and applying reciprocity to the market access enjoyed in the EU. The liberalisation 
of  the  first  1115  products  was  applied  from  1  January  2019.  The  second  round  of  tariff 
liberalisation took effect on 1 January 2021. The liberalisation process will be completed by 1 
January 2029. Most agricultural  products,  including  fruit and vegetables,  are  excluded from 
liberalisation. The revised market access offer and schedule have been published.92 

2. MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES    

2.1  Market access: Progress and outstanding issues  

Further  progress  was  made  in  2020  on  tariff  liberalisation  as  Côte  d'Ivoire  continued  to 
implement its market access offer. On 9 December 2020 the Ivorian government adopted a 
decision setting out the rules and principles for the second phase of tariff dismantlement, which 
entered  into  force  on  1  January  2021.  The  liberalisation  had  become  fully  effective  on  6 
December 2019 with the publication of the Customs notices. EU companies in 2020 continued 
to gain from the first round of tariff liberalisation (2019) of a few products with significant 
EU exports (9 tariff lines with exports above €1,000,000), e.g. vaccines (human and veterinary 
medicine),  printed  books,  laboratory  reagents,  some  chemicals  (diammonium  phosphate, 
contraceptive preparations), newspaper, electrical equipment (e.g. motors). Agricultural goods, 
including fruits and vegetables, are all together mostly excluded from liberalisation, as well as 
inputs in specific value chains such as cotton, cement, cosmetic goods, plastics and cardboards. 
The liberalisation process will be completed by 1 January 2029.  

In 2020, the Parties also carried out procedural steps for the adoption of EPA Committee 
decisions  agreed  in  2019,  namely  the  decisions  on  the  rules  of  procedures  on  dispute 
settlement, the code of conduct and the list of arbitrators, as well as a Joint Declaration on 

90 The official name of the agreement ("stepping-stone agreement") reflects the fact that the initial and ultimate 
objective for economic partnership in West Africa is a comprehensive, regional agreement. It is also called 
"interim EPA".  
91 The Economic Partnership Agreement was signed in December 2014 by the European Union and 13 West 
African Countries. In 2018, the Gambia and Mauretania signed the agreement, to date only Nigeria is yet to sign 
the EPA. The Agreement will enter into provisional application when all the 16 West African Countries sign it 
and 2/3 of these countries ratify it.  
92 Offer and schedule can be found on the DG Trade website:  
https://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2020/january/tradoc_158598.pdf 

97 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
the rules procedures on mediation. The decisions are to be signed at the EPA Committee of 
2021 or adopted via written procedure/exchange of letters. 

EU projects managed by EU Delegation in Côte d'Ivoire in 2020 in close liaison with business 
stakeholders  made  an  important  contribution  towards  improving  business  climate  and 
addressing key impediments in important sectors of the economy. Examples of initiatives that 
were rolled out in 2020 include the following:   

  Within the framework of a contract called “S’investir ensemble” set in 2019, the EU 
Delegation continued to work together with the European private sector (Eurocham93), 
as  well  as  with  the  national  private  sector,  represented  by  the  Union  des  Grandes 
Entreprises Industrielles de Côte d'Ivoire (UGECI) and the Confédération Générale des 
Entreprises de Côte d'Ivoire (CGECI), to improve the business climate.  

  Eurocham continued to organise strategic monitoring sessions on key impediments to 
doing  business  in  sectors  such  as  energy,  agriculture  and  new  technologies.  These 
sessions aimed at better understanding the evolution and identifying the challenges and 
problems concerning a specific sector to be able to issue recommendations. Given the 
COVID-19  context,  some  of  these  meetings  were  either  replaced  by  webinars  or 
postponed. 

2.2 

Trade and sustainable development goals  

The  interim  EPA  with  Côte  d’Ivoire  does  not  include  a  dedicated  chapter  on  trade  and 
sustainable  development  (TSD).  Nevertheless,  the  parties  cooperate  closely  under  the 
framework of the Cotonou Agreement to ensure the contribution of trade to the achievement 
of the sustainable development goals. Furthermore, the parties have continued to work together 
to address sustainability matters under the EPA, e.g. on a monitoring mechanism and an EPA 
civil society platform. 

Further progress in 2020 on TSD objectives was made in particular on the sustainable cocoa 
initiative94:  

 

In  September  2020,  the  European  Commission  launched  a  Sustainable  Cocoa 
Initiative  aimed  to  address  cocoa  production  in  Côte  d’Ivoire  and  Ghana.  The 
objective of the multi-stakeholder dialogue is to foster progress in the elimination of 
child labour and child trafficking in cocoa supply chains, enhancing the protection and 
restoration  of  forests  in  cocoa-producing  regions,  and  ensuring  a  living  income  for 
cocoa farmers. 

93 The European private sector is supported by a European Chamber of Commerce and national chambers of 
Commerce to identify trade and investment barriers. Eurocham, the European Chamber of Commerce, set up 
with the support of the EU delegation 10 years ago, was the first European chamber in West Africa. This 
Chamber was also the first European chamber in West Africa to join the network of European chambers 
(EBOWNN) in 2017. In addition, national chambers of commerce from France, Belgium, UK and more recently 
Germany are present in Côte d’Ivoire.  

94 The EU is the first importer of cocoa of Côte d'Ivoire and Ghana, amounting to 65% of their exports. While 
cocoa beans are duty-free on a MFN basis, exports of processed cocoa (butter, paste and powder) benefit from 
EPA preferences. 

98 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
 

In 2020, the government of Cȏte d’Ivoire (as done by Ghana) imposed a living income 
differential  for  the  price  of  cocoa,  which  guarantees  a  minimum  price  of  cocoa  for 
farmers with the aim of ensuring a living income for local farmers.95  

The EU and Côte d’Ivoire continued to work on setting up of a monitoring mechanism for the 
Agreement. Following the publication of the first joint monitoring report 2019 (covering the 
year  2018),96  the  parties  are  discussing  the  second  report  2020  (covering  the  year  2019) 
including the possibility to include indicators on trade aspects of sustainable development.  

A number of outstanding issues remained in 2020. In particular, Côte d'Ivoire and the EU are 
to  take  concrete  steps  to  establish  an  EPA  civil  society  platform  with  the  support  of  the 
European and  Ivorian Economic and Social Committees to address  all trade and sustainable 
development issues from a civil society perspective. It will bring together representatives from 
the EU and Côte d’Ivoire civil society and become a key instrument with which civil society 
can be involved in the implementation of the agreement.  

95 Ghana and Cȏte d’Ivoire jointly announced in June 2019 the suspension of their cocoa futures sales for the 
cocoa production of the 2020-2021 season (which will begin in October 2020) below a certain price (USD 
2600/tonne). This was accompanied by a joint public intervention, which led to an agreement with industry to 
offer a USD 400/tonne premium above the price of the world market. 
96 Available here: https://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/html/158529.htm   

99 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE 
ECONOMIC PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT (EPA) BETWEEN THE EU AND 
CAMEROON 

1.  THE AGREEMENT 

On  15  January  2009,  Cameroon  and  the  EU  signed  a  stepping-stone  Economic  Partnership 
Agreement (EPA). The European Parliament approved this agreement on 13 June 2013 and the 
Parliament of Cameroon proceeded to its ratification on 22 July 2014. On 4 August 2014, the 
agreement entered into provisional application. This EPA is a regional agreement and is open 
therefore  to  the  accession  of  other  Central  African  countries.  In  2019,  during  the  4th  EPA 
Committee meeting, the Parties signed the Decision concerning the accession of Croatia and 
concluded negotiations on dispute settlement procedures. Negotiations on a joint protocol on 
rules of origin are still ongoing and are expected to be concluded in 2021 
In August 2016, Cameroon started reciprocating its preferential access to the EU. After 4 years, 
the liberalisation process has now reached cruising speed. 

  Cameroon will liberalise 80% of imports from the EU over 15 years. Products under 
liberalisation  are  mainly  industrial  machines  (e.g.  pumps,  generators,  turbines), 
electrical  equipment  (e.g.  transformers,  capacitors,  resistors)  and  certain  chemicals. 
These are mostly inputs used by Cameroon's industries that are not produced locally. 
Eliminating import duties will reduce the costs of inputs for local businesses and benefit 
consumers.  

  Cameroon has excluded a number of agricultural and non-agricultural processed goods 
from liberalisation of EU imports, mainly to ensure the protection of certain sensitive 
agricultural markets and industries but also to maintain fiscal revenues. The excluded 
products  include  most  types  of  meat,  wines  and  spirits,  malt,  milk  products,  flour, 
certain vegetables, wood and wood products, used clothes and textiles, paintings, and 
used tyres. 

2.  MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES    

2.1   Market access: Progress and outstanding issues  

Progress  could  be  made  in  2020  on  the  implementation  of  the  tariff  liberalisation 
commitments by Cameroon:  

  Following the special EPA Committee meeting  on 28 October Cameroon decided to 
repeal its decision of suspending the agreed tariff dismantling schedule and to renew 
with the liberalisation foreseen in the EPA, as from 1.1.2021;  

100 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

In  October  2020,  the  parties  held  a  virtual  meeting  to  discuss  the  liberalisation  of 
sensitive products of categories 2 and 3 of the Agreement.  

For  background:  The  EPA  foresees  that  Cameroon  successively  liberalises  80%  of  imports 
from the EU. Effective liberalisation started for the first category of products (1727 tariff lines) 
on 4 August 2016, for the second category of products (985 tariff lines) on 4 August 2017 and 
for  the  third  category  (1418  tariff  lines)  on  4  August  2018.  The  two  first  categories  consist 
mainly  of  necessities,  industrial  and  agricultural  inputs,  machines,  chemicals,  vehicles  and 
spare  parts,  computers,  papers,  and  consumer  products  for  households.  The  liberalisation 
schedule is foreseen to come to an end in 2029 when all products of the three categories will be 
fully liberalised. 

2.2 

Trade and sustainable development goals 

The EPA with Central Africa / Cameroon does not include a dedicated chapter on trade and 
sustainable  development.  However,  under  the  framework  of  the  Cotonou  Agreement,  and 
funded  by  the  European  Development  Fund  (EDF),  the  Parties  are  cooperating  actively  on 
matters related to the environmental sustainability of trade.   

101 

 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE 
ECONOMIC PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT (EPA) BETWEEN THE EU AND THE 
EASTERN AND SOUTHERN AFRICAN REGION (ESA) 

1. 

THE AGREEMENT 

Pending a comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA) with the full Eastern and 
Southern  African  region,  an  interim  EPA  was  signed  in  2009  by  four  ESA  countries 
(Madagascar,  Mauritius,  Seychelles  and  Zimbabwe).  This  ESA-EU  interim  EPA  has  been 
provisionally applied since 14 May 2012 for the four countries. Comoros signed the EPA in 
2017,  ratified  the  EPA  in  December  2018  and  implements  the  EPA  since  7  February  2019. 
Zambia took part in the negotiations of the interim EPA and may decide to sign the agreement 
in the near future.  

Negotiations  continued  in  2020  to  deepen  the  ESA  EPA:  Three  rounds  of  negotiation 
meetings  took  place  in  October  2019,  in  January  and  in  November  (the  last  one  by  video 
conference).  The  discussions  concerned  customs  and  trade  facilitation,  technical  barriers  to 
trade, sanitary and phytosanitary issues, rules of origin, and agriculture, trade and sustainable 
development and trade in services, investment liberalisation and digital trade. A sustainability 
impact assessment is being conducted in parallel to the negotiations and stakeholders from the 
public  and  private  sector  have  been  consulted.  NB:  In  2017,  the  then-four  ESA  partners 
requested to deepen this Agreement beyond trade in goods. In May 2019, the Parties agreed on 
a  joint  scoping  paper  at  technical  level  that  paved  the  way  for  the  official  launch  of  the 
negotiations in October 2019.  

In 2020, progress was also made in regard to the evaluation of the present interim EPA: Parties 
agreed to undertake further steps towards the development of a common methodology aimed 
at finalising a monitoring and evaluation framework for the interim  EPA, and consulted 
stakeholders  from  the  public  and  private  sector.  This  is  an  important  step  to  define  a  joint 
understanding of the progress and to identify remaining challenges in order to be able to address 
these latter ones adequately. 

2. 

MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES  

2.1   Market access: Progress and outstanding issues  

ESA EPA States are in the process of liberalising their market to EU imports in line with the 
individual  schedules  of  each  ESA  EPA  State,  annexed  to  the  interim  EPA.97  The 
implementation  of  the  tariff  schedule  by  the  four  EPA  partners,  i.e.  Madagascar,  Mauritius, 
Seychelles  and  Zimbabwe,  to  liberalise  goods  trade  with  the  EU  continued  to  progress 
according to plan in 2020. For Comoros that joined the EPA in 2019, there is need to agree on 
a catch-up scenario currently under discussion.  

  Mauritius  and  Seychelles  are  implementing  the  EPA  according  to  their  respective 
schedule. Zimbabwe has now fully met its tariff liberalisation commitments following 
the gazette of the EU EPA market access offer covering the period 2017-2022 through 
the  Statutory  Instrument  (S.I.  2017  of  2019)  in  October  2019.  Madagascar  needs  to 
complete, as agreed among the Parties, the transposition of the tariff lines into the 2017 

97 The ESA countries were not in a position to table a common regional market access offer and each country 
presented an individual offer based on its specificities. 

102 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
Harmonised  System  nomenclature  to  ensure  a  smooth  implementation  of  the  tariff 
reduction phases. 

  By way of background: The interim EPA offers duty-free quota-free access to the EU 
for all imports from ESA EPA States as of 1 January 2008. By 2022, Madagascar and 
Zimbabwe will liberalise around 80% of their trade, while Mauritius and Seychelles will 
liberalise 96% and 98%, respectively. As for Comoros, discussions are currently being 
undertaken for  a catch-up scenario  given its  late  accession to  the Agreement.  Goods 
excluded from liberalisation vary according to the individual market access offer but 
include predominantly agricultural products and some industrial goods such as plastics, 
paper, or textiles.98  

In  January  2020,  the  EPA  Committee,  Customs  Cooperation  Committee  and  Joint 
Development  Committee  –  a  sub-Committee  of  the  EPA  Committee  -  took  a  number  of 
decisions advancing the implementation of the Agreement, including the following:  

  The amendment of the Protocol on Rules of Origin with a view to simplifying and 
facilitating  trade  between  the  ESA  EPA  sub-region  and  the  EU.  The  technical 
amendments,  which entered into force in  March  202099, allow  inter alia ‘accounting 
segregation’ for fungible materials and the use of the Registered Exporter (REX) system 
for EU exports to the ESA EPA countries.  

  The update of Annex II relating to the product specific rules in line with the 2017 

Harmonised System nomenclature.  

  The  advancing  of  a  consolidated  concept  note  on  an  appropriate  monitoring  and 

evaluation framework to assess the effectiveness of the current agreement. 

The EU Delegations in the region notwithstanding Covid 19 maintained a close dialogue with 
government and private sector on economic matters, including trade policy:  

 

  For  example,  in  Madagascar,  the  EU  participates  in  the  Economic  Round  Tables 
(organised annually for last 5 years), which the government uses to consult and obtain 
recommendations  on  how  to  improve  the  business  climate  and  increase  EU 
investments; EPA matters are also discussed.  
In  Mauritius,  the  Delegation  met  with  the  EU  private  sector  to  discuss  the  business 
environment  in  Mauritius  and  opportunity  to  formalize  EU  companies  into  an 
Eurochamber. E-licencing and regulatory assessment projects also led to private sector 
consultations.  
In Seychelles, project launches and political dialogues are being used as an opportunity 
to consult and engage with the private sector.  

 

2.2  

Trade and sustainable development goals  

The  interim  EU-ESA  EPA  does  not  include  a  dedicated  chapter  on  trade  and  sustainable 
development. The Parties are committed to negotiate such a chapter in the course of the ongoing 
negotiations to deepen the Agreement. Under the umbrella of the Cotonou Agreement, and in 
the framework of development cooperation, the EU and the five ESA EPA States cooperate 
closely on achieving the sustainable development goals, including ensuring the contribution of 
trade policy towards that objective.  

98 More details can be found here: http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2012/march/tradoc_149213.pdf  
99 OJ L93,  Decision No 1/2020 of the EPA Committee of 14.1.2020, p.1 

103 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE 
ECONOMIC PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT (EPA) BETWEEN THE EU AND 
CARIFORUM 

1. 

THE AGREEMENT 

The  Economic  Partnership  Agreement  (EPA)  between  the  EU  and  CARIFORUM  is  a 
regional  trade  and  development  Agreement  between  the  EU  and  its  Member  States  and  15 
Caribbean countries. The Agreement was signed in October 2008 and entered into provisional 
application on 29 December 2008. In 2020, this Agreement was provisionally applied by the 
EU  and  its  Member  States  and  by  14  Caribbean  States.100  Haiti  still  needs  to  ratify  the 
Agreement in parliament before applying it, due to domestic legal requirements. By the end of 
2020, 25 EU Member States and 10 Caribbean States had ratified the EPA.101 

The EU - CARIFORUM EPA is asymmetric in terms of commitments, but ‘comprehensive’ 
both in the geographic and thematic sense. The Agreement covers the whole region and includes 
not  only provisions on trade in  goods, but  also  trade in  services, trade-related issues  and an 
important  development  component  with  the  EU  commitment  towards  fostering  long-term 
sustainable economic growth in the Caribbean.102 

At the end of 2020, the European Commission published the 10-year Evaluation Study103 of 
the  EU-CARIFORUM  EPA  looking  into  the  implementation,  economic  and  sustainability 
impact of the Agreement for the 14 CARIFORUM partner countries and the EU, as well as at 
cooperation commitments and relevant  cooperation assistance. The conclusions of the study 
will also provide input to the Joint Review process taking place every 5 years. The study has 
noted  several  challenges  and  shortcomings  in  the  implementation  of  the  commitments, 
particularly on the side of CARIFORUM partner States, mostly related to capacity constraints, 
so EPA-tailored cooperation remains crucial to overcome these implementation challenges.104 

In  2020,  the  EU  and  CARIFORUM  partner  States  launched  a  periodic  joint  EU-
CARIFORUM EPA review that is conducted every 5 years. The conclusions of the review 
will  inform  the  next  meeting  of  the  EU-CARIFORUM  Joint  Council,  which  was  initially 
planned for 2020, but was postponed to 2021 due to the Covid-19 crisis.  

100 Antigua and Barbuda, Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Grenada, Guyana, 
Jamaica, St. Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, St. Vincent and the Grenadines, Suriname, and Trinidad and Tobago. 
101  On the Cariforum side, the agreement has not been ratified yet by the Bahamas, Jamaica, Suriname and 
Trinidad and Tobago; on the EU side, the agreement has not been ratified yet by Hungary, Poland and Slovenia. 
102 A factsheet on the EU-CARIFORUM EPA can be found : 
http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2012/april/tradoc_149286.pdf  
103 https://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/policy-making/analysis/policy-evaluation/ex-post-evaluations/  
104 https://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2021/january/tradoc_159351.pdf; 
https://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2021/january/tradoc_159353.pdf.  

104 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
2. 

MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES  

2.1   Market access: Progress and outstanding issues 

In 2020 the CARIFORUM partners progressed with the implementation of the goods market 
access schedules, which is well advanced in most Caribbean States, however some are in delay 
with the applicable schedules.  

Background: Caribbean states have up to 25 years (until 2033) to complete import tariff cuts. 
They have excluded from these cuts around 17% of goods and services, which they consider 
sensitive.105 The exclusion list includes fresh fruits and vegetables, most alcoholic beverages, 
some  garments,  a  number  of  processed  agricultural  products,  fish,  meat,  chemicals  and 
furniture.  In  general,  25%  of  CARIFORUM's  agricultural  and  fisheries  products  have  been 
covered  by  liberalisation  under  the  EPA.  The  EU  is  becoming  increasingly  an  important 
exporter of processed agricultural goods to CARIFORUM, a market that has traditionally been 
dominated by US imports. However, China is gaining importance and influence in the region. 

Progress was also made in 2020 on services and rules (IPR):  

  On services, the Parties made progress towards the adoption of a decision establishing 
the Special Committee on Services to be formally constituted at the next joint meeting 
with CARIFORUM and fully operational by 2021. 

  On geographical indications, progress was made at the technical level with a view of 
establishing a list of potential geographical indications to be protected under the EPA. 
Although  progress  was  delayed  due  to  Covid-19,  negotiations  are  expected  to  be 
concluded in the near future.   

  To advance the correct transposition of tariff commitments of market access offers from 
the 2002 Harmonised System nomenclature to the 2017 one the EU in 2020 continued 
bilateral  technical  assistance  offered  to  CARIFORUM  countries/customs  authorities, 
with a view of enhancing the transparent application of the EPA rates throughout the 
region. In 2020, the process was successfully finalised for Dominican Republic. This 
process  should  significantly  improve  the  transparency  of  applicable  EPA  rates  and 
possibly  improve  EPA  utilization  rates,  as  also  supported  by  tailored  FPI  project  in 
2021.  

  On the Joint Monitoring Mechanism to be set up under the EPA, in the framework of 
the  meetings  of  the  Task  Force  on  Monitoring,  the  Parties  agreed  on  a  final  set  of 
compliance  and  impact  indicators  aimed  at  yearly  EPA  monitoring.  Parties  also 
agreed  to  start  the  pilot  project  for  the  first  EPA  monitoring  report  in  2021,  with  a 
possible technical support of Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit 
GmbH (‘GIZ’). 

105 The Cariforum states submitted individual market access schedules and not one single regional offer. Hence 
figures and information provided here are an average over all 14 market access schedules.  

105 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
In January 2021 the Commission published its second evaluation of the implementation of 
the EU-CARIFORUM EPA106. The study points to the main outstanding issues and where the 
focus  in  implementation  should  be  placed,  also  identifying  problems  more  typically 
encountered with the region:  

  Among the challenges identified in the final report concluding the evaluation are a lack 
of absorption capacity of the authorities/agencies in the CARIFORUM countries, a lack 
of  awareness  of  the  agreements  and  deficits  in  observing  transparency  obligations 
needed by business.  

  The evaluation also identified areas where the EU needs to do more, in particular greater 
Member  States’  engagement,  improved  communication  and  support  for  business-to-
business links and platforms, if the EU is to counter traditional US dominance in the 
region and the growing influence of China. 

In line with  the recommendations of the Evaluation  Study, the  EU engaged in activities to 
raise awareness and provide information  about  the EPA, as  well as support to  business-to-
business links:  

  At  the  beginning  of  2020,  the  EU  Delegation  in  Barbados  together  with  Caribbean 
Export  and  other  business  organizations  prepared  a  sub-regional  EPA  awareness 
seminar and regional workshop on the impact and applicability of the EU General Data 
Protection  Regulation.  Delegation  also  contributed 
series  of  EPA 
awareness/business-to-business matchmaking and investment promotion virtual events 
that included the virtual edition of the Trade and Investment Convention (Trinidad and 
Tobago), the virtual follow-up to the IV CARIFORUM EU Business Forum (Barbados), 
the  presentation  of  the  EPA  ex-works  evaluation  (Barbados)  and  an  investment 
promotion webinar (Guyana).  

to  a 

  The EU Delegation to the Dominican Republic organised the third edition of the EPA 
awards to successful importers and exporters using EPA preferences, as well as a series 
of seminars on EU policies, including the EPA, in the framework of the Diploma in EU-
Dominican Republic relations.  

2.2 

Trade and sustainable development: Progress and outstanding issues   

Chapter  IV  (Environment)  and  V  (Social  aspects)  of  the  EU-CARIFORUM  EPA  foresee 
cooperation provisions in the areas of environment and social aspects.  Certain provisions in 
the  Agreement  (for  example  on  tourism)  aim  to  ensure  that  trade  activities  do  not  entail 
environmental  degradation.  More  generally,  the  Agreement  also  reaffirms  the  Parties’ 
commitment  to  conserve,  protect  and  improve  their  natural  environment  and  to  prioritise 
sustainable development.  

Both chapters are being implemented at the regional level by the joint EPA institutions  (i.e. 
EPA  Committee  and  Council)  and  at  national  level  by  the  respective  authorities  of  the 
CARIFORUM countries, supported through national development cooperation programmes, in 
particular the current EDF Programme.  

An example of one of the actions directly relevant to achieve the objectives of the EPA’s trade 
and sustainable development chapter is a project focusing on cocoa production and fair trade 

106 Final report: https://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2021/january/tradoc_159352.pdf  

106 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
and implemented by the NGO “Save the Children”. This project aims at improving the respect, 
protection  and  enforcement  of  the  human  rights  of  vulnerable  groups,  with  an  emphasis  on 
children,  adolescents  and  women,  in  the  cocoa  value  chain  in  the  Dominican  Republic  by 
promoting  and  monitoring  the  incorporation  and  implementation  of  the  United  Nations 
Business  and  Human  Rights  Guiding  Principles,  as  well  as  the  Children  Rights  Business 
Principles (CRBP). Furthermore, it contributes to disseminate information and awareness on 
the  need  to  comply  with  the  relevant  standards  of  fair  trade  with  regard  to  children  labour, 
discrimination and forced labour.  

107 

 
 
ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE 
ECONOMIC PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT (EPA) BETWEEN THE EU AND 
PACIFIC STATES 

1. 

THE AGREEMENT 

The EU is implementing an "interim" Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA) with Papua 
New Guinea since December 2009, with Fiji since July 2014, with Samoa since December 2018 
and with the Solomon Islands since May 2020. This interim EPA covers only trade in goods. 
Papua New Guinea and Fiji account for the majority of trade between the 15 ACP Pacific States 
and the EU107. While the original plan was to replace the interim EPA by a regional one with 
all Pacific States, the negotiations were put on hold in 2016 due to lack of progress and the 
withdrawal of Papua New Guinea from the negotiations.  

The  interim  EPA  is  gradually  becoming  a  regional  agreement,  with  the  possibility  of 
extending it to other countries and areas beyond trade in goods. In 2020, preliminary accession 
talks with potential future members continued, including with Tonga. In October 2020, Timor-
Leste notified the EU of its intention to join the interim EPA. The Parties are open to consider 
the requests for accession of Vanuatu, which graduated from Least Developed Countries (LDC) 
status on 4 December 2020, and Kiribati and Tuvalu whose date of graduation will be decided 
in 2021. Upon graduation from LDC status, these countries will lose the EU's Everything-But-
Arms  (EBA)  preferences  three  years  thereafter.  They  will  fall  under  the  standard  General 
Scheme of Preferences (GSP), unless they decide to accede to the EPA. 

The Parties are to agree on the joint monitoring mechanism at the next Trade Committee in 
2021. During the last Trade Committee meeting in October 2019, the EU presented a detailed 
concept  note,  which  aims  to  involve  the  civil  society  in  monitoring  and  evaluation  of  the 
implementation  of  the  interim  EPA,  including  the  achievement  of  trade  and  sustainable 
development (TSD) objectives. 

2. 

MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES  

2.1   Main steps in implementation  

In 2020 further progress was made in implementing tariff liberalisation under the EPA:   

  The EU and Fiji held five bilateral technical meetings (9 September, 24 September, 1 
October, 15 October and 22 October 2020), which resulted in the transposition of the 
Fijian market access offer from the 2007 Harmonised System nomenclature to the 2017 
one. On 30 March 2021, the EU and Fiji held a senior officials meeting, during which 
they  agreed  on  a  roadmap  for  Fiji’s  effective  implementation  and  ratification  of  the 
interim EPA. 

  All  exports from  Papua New Guinea, Fiji,  Samoa and Solomon  Islands  continued to 
enter  the  EU  market  duty-free  and  quota-free  on  a  permanent  basis.  NB:  Taking  full 
account of differences in development levels and sensitive sectors, Papua New Guinea 
has liberalised 88% of imports from the EU since 2008, Fiji undertook to liberalise 87% 

107 The 15 ACP Pacific States are Cook Islands, Fiji, Kiribati, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Nauru, Niue, Palau, 
Papua New Guinea, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Tonga, Tuvalu, Vanuatu and Timor-Leste. 

108 

 
 
 
                                                           
over  15  years,  Samoa  will  liberalise  80%  over  20  years  and  Solomon  Islands  will 
liberalise 83.5% over 18 years. 

Furthermore, in the context of the EPA Trade Committee, the EU and the Pacific States made 
progress on the preparation of decisions on (1) the rules of procedure of the Trade Committee, 
(2) the amendments to the Agreement on rules of origin, (3) the amendment of the Agreement 
in order to take account of the recent accessions of Samoa and Solomon Islands and of future 
ones. The EU and Pacific States also progressed in the preparation of the texts of (4) the Joint 
Declaration on Trade and Sustainable Development and (5) the concept Note on Monitoring 
and Evaluation  of the EPA implementation. The EU and the Pacific States carried out  their 
respective internal procedures to pave the way for the adoption of the above five measures at 
the next Trade Committee meeting in mid-2021.  

Owing to the success of the tuna canning industry in Papua New Guinea, which has attracted 
important  investments  and generated jobs,  the Parties’ common  ambition is  to  replicate this 
experience in other sectors/products and other countries in the region. To this end, Solomon 
Islands started using global sourcing in September 2020. For background: The EPA provides 
for  improved  rules  of  origin  for  processed  fisheries  products  (mainly  tuna)  –  the  so-called 
"global sourcing" provision which is intended to boost development in the region. Fish brought 
on-shore by foreign vessels but processed in a Pacific EPA country can be exported to the EU 
duty-free  and  quota-free,  regardless  of  where  the  fish  was  caught.  This  significant  and  rare 
concession by the EU, which is not provided for in any other EPA, has boosted investments in 
the tuna cooking and canning, creating tens of thousands of new jobs in PNG. 

To support Pacific States in the preparation of national plans of actions for EPA implementation 
EU  development  cooperation  remains  essential.  Examples  of  support  provided  via  EU 
Delegation to partner countries in 2020 include the following, amongst others:  

  The  EU  Delegation  for  the  Pacific  stepped  up  efforts  to  support  Pacific  Islands’ 
countries to implement and seize the opportunities provided by the EPA. This includes 
trade-related  programmes  such  as  the  Pacific-European  Union  Marine  Partnership 
(PEUMP), including a component with the Pacific Islands Tuna Industry Association, 
and  the  Pacific  Regional  Integration  Support  Programme  (PRISE),  including 
components  on  strengthening  Pacific  intra-regional  and  international  trade  and  safe 
agriculture trade facilitation projects.  

  The  EU  Delegation  in  Papua  New  Guinea  continued  to  support  the  development  of 
value chains and in collaboration with the Government of Papua New Guinea (Trade 
Department and the Investment Promotion Authority) and the Papua New Guinea-EU 
Business  Council  made  progress  on  the  organization  of  the  second  EU-Papua  New 
Guinea Business, Trade and Investment conference, which was foreseen for 2020 but 
had to be postponed to 2021 due to Covid-19 crisis. 

2.2 

Trade and sustainable development  goals 

The  Pacific  EPA  does  not  include  a  chapter  on  trade  and  sustainable  development. 
Nevertheless,  the  EU  and  the  Pacific  States  are  cooperating  on  a  number  of  related  matters 
under the framework of the Cotonou Agreement and are also stepping up their cooperation on 
trade and sustainable development matters under the EPA.  

109 

 
 
 
 
The  EU  and  the  Pacific  States  met  in  September  2020  in  the  context  of  the  EPA  Trade 
Committee and exchanged views inter alia on a draft Joint Declaration on trade and sustainable 
development. They undertook to endorse the Joint Declaration at the next Trade Committee 
meeting in mid-2021. 

110 

 
 
 
 
EU TRADE AGREEMENTS COVERED BY SECTION IV OF THE REPORT 

 LIST OF BARRIERS COVERED  

(1 January 2020 – 31 December 2020) 

1. NEW TRADE AND INVESTMENT BARRIERS REPORTED IN 2020 

COUNTRY  BARRIER 

SECTOR 

A2M108 

1.   Argentina 

Import ban of pork meat and products on 
African swine fever grounds  

Agriculture 
and Fisheries 

2.   Australia 

International Freight Assistance 
Mechanism (IFAM) 

Agriculture 
and Fisheries 

16184 

15863 

3.   Australia 

Investment Screening mechanism 
(Foreign Investment Reform Act 2020) 

Horizontal 

15862 

4.   Bangladesh  Cargo and berthing preferences for 

Bangladeshi flag vessels 

5.   Belarus 

Mandatory payments when submitting 
electronic declarations to the Belarusian 
customs authorities 

Services - 
Transport 

16202 

Horizontal 

16062 

6.   Bosnia 

Herzegovina 

Bosnia Herzegovina -- Procurement (30 % 
price advantage for local products) 

Horizontal 

16665 

7.   Brazil 

Import ban of pork meat and products on 
African swine fever grounds 

Agriculture 
and Fisheries 

8.   China 

Import restrictions related to Covid-19 

Agriculture 
and Fisheries 

Agriculture 
and Fisheries 

9.   China 

10.  Egypt 

11.  Egypt 

Registration and listing of establishments 
exporting food and drink products to 
China 

Temporary ban on imports of white sugar 
and import restriction of raw sugar 

Agriculture 
and Fisheries 

Mandatory Pesticide residue testing 
requirement 

Agriculture 
and Fisheries 

16186 

16602 

15522 

16185 

15982 

108 More details about the barriers can be found at this reference number under the Barriers section of 
“Access2Markets” portal https://trade.ec.europa.eu/access-to-markets/en/barriers 

111 

 
 
 
 
                                                           
12.  Egypt 

13.  Egypt 

14.  Egypt 

15.  Egypt 

16.  India 

17.  India 

Import permits for chilled, frozen and 
processed meat 

Agriculture 
and Fisheries 

15842 

Several measures on imports related to 
Covid-19 

Multisector 

15796 

Postponement of a downward revision of 
safeguard duties on steel products 

Iron, Steel & 
non-ferrous 
materials 

15804 

Refusal of imports of timber wood due to 
their level of radioactivity 

Wood, paper 
and pulp 

16562 

Request for GM-free certificate for certain 
agricultural crops imports 

Agriculture 
and Fisheries 

16462 

Quality Control orders on wheel rims, 
safety glass, two-wheeler helmets and 
Brake linings 

Automotive 

16144 

18.  India 

Licencing scheme for importing tyres 

Automotive 

16143 

19.  India 

Ban on the sale of imported alcoholic 
beverages products in Canteen 
Department Stores 

Wines & 
Spirits 

20.  Indonesia 

Restriction/prohibition on import of 
finished textile products 

Textile & 
Leather 

21.  Indonesia 

Additional certification/ testing 
requirements for imports of import of live 
animals 

Agriculture 
and Fisheries 

15922 

15662 

16324 

22.  Japan 

23.  Kenya 

24.  Kuwait 

Japanese regulations related to off-shore 
wind power market 

Services - 
Energy 

16382 

Cessation of warehousing goods in 
customs bonded warehouses 

Horizontal 

16102 

Ban on imports of poultry and its products 
from Czech Republic due to avian 
influenza 

Agriculture 
and Fisheries 

15582 

25.  Mauritius 

Import ban imposed during COVID-19 

Agriculture 
and Fisheries 

26.  Mexico 

Trade restrictive measure to the export of 
Tequila destined for use of  flavoured beer 

Wines & 
Spirits 

15722 

16162 

112 

 
 
 
 
27.  Moldova 

Amendments to the Domestic Trade Law 
introducing provisions against national 
treatment of imported goods 

Horizontal 

16662 

28.  Nepal 

29.  Peru 

30.  Qatar 

Import bans ranging automotive, Wines & 
Spirits, Agriculture and Fisheries 

Horizontal 

16262 

Regionalization (lack of), country-wide 
bans imposed by Peru  

Agriculture and 
Fisheries 

16242 

Additional certification requirements for 
imports of food due to COVID-19 

Agriculture and 
Fisheries 

15622 

31.  Russian 

Federation 

Winegrowing and Winemaking Law 
(labelling / GIs) 

Wines & Spirits  15702 

32.  South 
Africa 

33.  South 
Africa 

34.  South 
Korea 

35.  South 
Korea 

Import ban pig meat (African swine fever)  Agriculture and 

16183 

Restrictions on domestic sales of 
Alcoholic Beverages 

Fisheries 

Wines & Spirits  15776 

Homologation procedure of vehicles 
bound to preferential origin 

Automotive 

15682 

Non recognition of regionalisation due to 
outbreaks of avian influenza (Hungary) 

Agriculture and 
Fisheries 

16422 

36.  Sri Lanka 

Sri Lanka import ban on several products 
during COVID-19 

Multisector 

15813 

37.  Tunisia 

Non-automatic import licences on 
chocolate, chocolate products and cheese 

Agriculture and 
Fisheries 

15769 

38.  UAE 

United 
Arab 
Emirates 

39.  Ukraine 

country wide band on Poland due to avian 
influenza outbreak (Poland) 

Agriculture and 
Fisheries 

15389 

Restrictive patentability criteria of 
medical products 

Pharmaceuticals  16664 

40.  Ukraine 

Amendments to the Public Procurement 
Law introducing LCR 

Horizontal 

16663 

41.  USA 

Defense Production Act (DPA) 

Horizontal 

15818 

113 

 
 
 
2. TRADE AND INVESTMENT BARRIERS RESOLVED IN 2020109 

COUNTRY  BARRIER 

SECTOR 

1.   

Bangladesh 

Cargo and berthing preferences for 
Bangladeshi flag vessels 

Services - 
Transport 

2.   Brazil 

Labelling for wines and spirits 

3.   Egypt 

Postponement of a downward revision 
of safeguard duties on steel products 

Wines & 
Spirits 

Iron, Steel & 
non-ferrous 
materials 

A2M
110 

16202 

13342 

15804 

4.   Egypt 

Restrictions on import of Feta cheese  Agriculture and 

14682 

Fisheries 

5.   Egypt 

6.   Egypt 

7.   India 

Lack of some MS on the Egyptian 
"List of Reference countries" 

Agriculture and 
Fisheries 

13962 

Requirement for bill statement "Origin 
Declaration" EUR 1 (administrative 
and customs procedure) 

Horizontal 

13062 

Quality Control orders on wheel rims, 
safety glass, two-wheeler helmets and 
Brake linings 

Automotive 

16144 

8.   India 

Request for GM-free certificate for 
certain agricultural crops imports 

Agriculture and 
Fisheries 

16462 

9.   Indonesia 

Additional certification/ testing 
requirements for imports of import of 
live animals 

Agriculture and 
Fisheries 

16324 

10.  Indonesia 

Import restrictions on dairy products, 
spirits and alcoholic beverages 

Multisector 

15082 

11.  Iran 

Double certification for beef and 
sheep meat 

Agriculture and 
Fisheries 

13127 

12.  Iran 

Minimum age requirements for meat 

Agriculture and 
Fisheries 

13125 

13.  Japan 

Ban on imports of beef due to Bovine 
Spongiforme Encephalopathy (BSE) 

Agriculture and 
Fisheries 

16303 

109 Fully resolved or partially resolved barriers 
110 More details about the barriers can be found at this reference number under the Barriers section of 
“Access2Markets” portal https://trade.ec.europa.eu/access-to-markets/en/barriers 

114 

 
 
 
                                                           
14.  Kenya 

15.  Kuwait 

16.  Kuwait 

Cessation of warehousing goods in 
customs bonded warehouses 

Horizontal 

16102 

Ban on imports of poultry and its 
products from Czech Republic due to 
avian influenza 

Agriculture and 
Fisheries 

15582 

Country-wide ban on ruminants (and 
their products) due to outbreak of 
anthrax 

Agriculture and 
Fisheries 

15562 

17.  Lebanon 

Mandatory requirement of registration 
of factories for certain products 

Multisector 

14882 

18.  Mauritius 

Import ban imposed during COVID-
19 

Agriculture and 
Fisheries 

15722 

19.  Mexico 

Long approval procedures – Italian 
kiwi (solved in 2019, first export 
season in 2020) 

Agriculture and 
Fisheries 

15406 

20.  Panama 

Government procurement restrictions  Horizontal 

14722 

21.  Philippines 

VAT on imported medicines 

Pharmaceutical
s 

15284 

22.  Qatar 

Additional certification requirements 
for imports of food due to COVID-19 

Agriculture and 
Fisheries 

15622 

23.  Russian 

Federation 

Specific bans: chilled meat from 
Germany and finished meat and milk 
products from 3 Lander 

Agriculture and 
Fisheries 

16323 

24.  Russian 

Transit ban 

Federation 

Multisector 

12141 

25.  Saudi Arabia 

Introduction of (oxo-biodegradable) 
certification for plastic products 

Multisector 

14529 

26.  Saudi Arabia  Country-wide ban on livestock from 
Spain due to notification of atypical 
BSE case 

Agriculture and 
Fisheries 

15563 

27.  South Africa  Health warning regulation for alcohols  Wine & Spirits  13743 

28.  South Korea  Non recognition of regionalisation due 

to outbreaks of avian influenza 
(Hungary) 

Agriculture and 
Fisheries 

16422 

115 

 
 
29.  Thailand 

Cumbersome and undue delays of 
import application procedures 

Agriculture and 
Fisheries 

16802 

30.  UAE United 

Arab 
Emirates 

31.  UAE United 

Arab 
Emirates 

restrictions on food additive 
requirements (in dairy products) 

Agriculture and 
Fisheries 

15542 

country wide band on Poland due to 
avian influenza outbreak (Poland) 

Agriculture and 
Fisheries 

15389 

32.  UAE United 

Arab 
Emirates 

New standards dairy and fruit juices 
(ECAS certification) including food 
safety requirements 

Agriculture and 
Fisheries 

14442 

33.  Ukraine 

lack of VAT refund on exports of 
soybeans and rapeseed 

Agriculture and 
Fisheries 

14528 

116