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: 2022-10-11
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, 11.10.2022  SWD(2022) 730 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(2022) 730 final}  
 
 
Contents 
EU TRADE AGREEMENTS COVERED BY THIS STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT ....... 7 

EU TRADE AGREEMENTS COVERED BY THIS STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT ....... 8 

PART I:  

ASIA ..................................................................................................................... 9 

ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE FREE 
TRADE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE EU AND VIETNAM ........................................... 10 

1.  THE AGREEMENTS ................................................................................................... 10 

2.  MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES ......................................................................... 10 

ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE FREE 
TRADE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE EU AND ITS MEMBER STATES AND 
SINGAPORE ........................................................................................................................... 13 

1.  THE AGREEMENTS ................................................................................................... 13 

2.  MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES ......................................................................... 14 

ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE ECONOMIC 
PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE EU AND JAPAN ................................... 15 

1.  THE AGREEMENT ..................................................................................................... 15 

2.  MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES ......................................................................... 15 

ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE EU-SOUTH 
KOREA FREE TRADE AGREEMENT ................................................................................. 18 

1.  THE AGREEMENT ..................................................................................................... 18 

2.  MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES ......................................................................... 18 

3.  ACTIVITIES SUBJECT TO SPECIFIC MONITORING ............................................ 22 

PART II:  

THE AMERICAS .............................................................................................. 23 

ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE EU-
CANADA COMPREHENSIVE ECONOMIC AND TRADE AGREEMENT (CETA) ........ 24 

1.  THE AGREEMENT ..................................................................................................... 24 

2.  MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES ......................................................................... 25 

ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE EU-
COLOMBIA/ECUADOR/PERU TRADE AGREEMENT ..................................................... 28 

1.  THE AGREEMENT ..................................................................................................... 28 

2.  MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES ......................................................................... 29 

3.  ACTIVITIES SUBJECT TO SPECIFIC MONITORING AND SPECIFIC AREAS OF 
IMPORTANCE .................................................................................................................... 33 

ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF PART IV OF THE 
ASSOCIATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE EU AND ITS MEMBER STATES AND 
CENTRAL AMERICA ............................................................................................................ 36 

1.  THE AGREEMENT ..................................................................................................... 36 

2.  MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES ......................................................................... 37 

3.  ACTIVITIES SUBJECT TO SPECIFIC MONITORING AND SPECIFIC AREAS OF 
IMPORTANCE .................................................................................................................... 39 

1 

 
 
ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TRADE 
PILLAR OF THE ASSOCIATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE EU AND CHILE ...... 42 

1.  THE AGREEMENT ..................................................................................................... 42 

2.  MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES ......................................................................... 42 

3.  ACTIVITIES OF SPECIFIC MONITORING AND RELEVANCE IN 2021 ............. 45 

ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TRADE 
PILLAR OF THE EU-MEXICO ASSOCIATION AGREEMENT ........................................ 46 

1.  THE AGREEMENT ..................................................................................................... 46 

2.  MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES ......................................................................... 46 

PART III: EU NEIGHBOURING COUNTRIES .................................................................... 50 

ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE ECONOMIC 
PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE EU AND ALGERIA .............................. 52 

1.  THE AGREEMENT ..................................................................................................... 52 

2.  MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES ......................................................................... 52 

ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE EU-EGYPT 
ASSOCIATION AGREEMENT .............................................................................................. 56 

1.  THE AGREEMENT ..................................................................................................... 56 

2.  MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES ......................................................................... 57 

ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE 
ASSOCIATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE EU AND LEBANON ............................. 59 

1.  THE AGREEMENT ..................................................................................................... 59 

2.  MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES ......................................................................... 59 

ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE ECONOMIC 
PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE EU AND JORDAN ................................ 61 

1.  THE AGREEMENT ..................................................................................................... 61 

2.  MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES ......................................................................... 61 

3.  ACTIVITIES OF SPECIFIC INTEREST ..................................................................... 62 

ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE ECONOMIC 
PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE EU AND MOROCCO ........................... 63 

1.  THE AGREEMENT ..................................................................................................... 63 

2.  MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES ......................................................................... 64 

ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE 
ASSOCIATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE EU AND TUNISIA ................................ 66 

1.  THE AGREEMENT ..................................................................................................... 66 

2.  MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES ......................................................................... 66 

ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE INTERIM 
ASSOCIATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE EU AND PALESTINE .......................... 68 

1.  THE AGREEMENT ..................................................................................................... 68 

2.  MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES ......................................................................... 68 

2 

 
 
ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE ECONOMIC 
PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE EU AND ISRAEL ................................. 70 

1.  THE AGREEMENT ..................................................................................................... 70 

2.  MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES ......................................................................... 71 

ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE DEEP AND 
COMPREHENSIVE FREE TRADE AREA BETWEEN THE EU AND UKRAINE ........... 73 

1.  THE AGREEMENT ..................................................................................................... 73 

2.  MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES ......................................................................... 73 

ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE DEEP AND 
COMPREHENSIVE FREE TRADE AREA BETWEEN THE EU AND GEORGIA ........... 76 

1.  THE AGREEMENT ..................................................................................................... 76 

2.  MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES ......................................................................... 77 

3.  MONITORING IN SPECIFIC AREAS ........................................................................ 80 

ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE DEEP AND 
COMPREHENSIVE FREE TRADE AREA BETWEEN THE EU AND MOLDOVA ......... 81 

1.  THE AGREEMENT ..................................................................................................... 81 

2.  MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES ......................................................................... 81 

3.  MONITORING IN SPECIFIC AREAS ........................................................................ 83 

ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TRADE 
PILLAR OF THE EU-KOSOVO* STABILISATION AND ASSOCIATION AGREEMENT
 .................................................................................................................................................. 85 

1.  THE AGREEMENT ..................................................................................................... 85 

2.  MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES ......................................................................... 85 

ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TRADE PILLAR 
OF THE EU-SERBIA STABILISATION AND ASSOCIATION AGREEMENT ................ 87 

1.  THE AGREEMENT ..................................................................................................... 87 

2.  MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES ......................................................................... 87 

ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TRADE 
PILLAR OF THE EU-BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA STABILISATION AND 
ASSOCIATION AGREEMENT .............................................................................................. 89 

1.  THE AGREEMENT ..................................................................................................... 89 

2.  MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES ......................................................................... 89 

ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON IMPLEMENTATION OF the trade pillar of the EU-
MONTENEGRO STABILISATION AND ASSOCIATION AGREEMENT ........................ 91 

1.  THE AGREEMENT ..................................................................................................... 91 

2.  MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES ......................................................................... 91 

ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TRADE 
PILLAR OF THE EU-ALBANIA STABILISATION AND ASSOCIATION AGREEMENT
 .................................................................................................................................................. 92 

1.  THE AGREEMENT ..................................................................................................... 92 

3 

 
 
2.  MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES ......................................................................... 92 

ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TRADE 
PILLAR OF THE STABILISATION AND ASSOCIATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN 
THE EU AND NORTH MACEDONIA .................................................................................. 94 

1.  THE AGREEMENT ..................................................................................................... 94 

2.  MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES ......................................................................... 94 

ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE EU-UNITED 
KINGDOM TRADE AND COOPERATION AGREEMENT ................................................ 97 

1.  THE AGREEMENT ..................................................................................................... 97 

2.  MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES ......................................................................... 99 

ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE EU-
SWITZERLAND TRADE AGREEMENT ........................................................................... 101 

1.  THE AGREEMENTS ................................................................................................. 101 

2.  MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES ....................................................................... 103 

ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE EU-
NORWAY TRADE AGREEMENT ...................................................................................... 105 

1.  THE AGREEMENT ................................................................................................... 105 

2.  MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES ....................................................................... 105 

ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE EU-TURKEY 
CUSTOMS UNION AND TRADE AGREEMENTS ........................................................... 107 

1.  THE AGREEMENT ................................................................................................... 107 

2.  MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES ....................................................................... 108 

PART IV: AFRICAN, CARIBBEAN AND PACIFIC COUNTRIES .................................. 111 

ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE ECONOMIC 
PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT (EPA) BETWEEN THE EU AND GHANA .................... 112 

1.  THE AGREEMENT ................................................................................................... 112 

2.  MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES ....................................................................... 112 

ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE ECONOMIC 
PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT (EPA) BETWEEN THE EU AND THE SOUTHERN 
AFRICAN DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY (SADC) ....................................................... 117 

1.  THE AGREEMENT ................................................................................................... 117 

2.  MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES ....................................................................... 118 

ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE ECONOMIC 
PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT (EPA) BETWEEN THE EU AND COTE D’IVOIRE ..... 121 

1.  THE AGREEMENT ................................................................................................... 121 

2.  MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES ....................................................................... 121 

ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE ECONOMIC 
PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT (EPA) BETWEEN THE EU AND CAMEROON ........... 125 

1.  THE AGREEMENT ................................................................................................... 125 

2.  MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES ....................................................................... 125 

4 

 
 
ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE ECONOMIC 
PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT (EPA) BETWEEN THE EU AND THE EASTERN AND 
SOUTHERN AFRICAN REGION (ESA) ............................................................................. 129 

1.  THE AGREEMENT ................................................................................................... 129 

2.  MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES ....................................................................... 130 

ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE ECONOMIC 
PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT (EPA) BETWEEN THE EU AND CARIFORUM .......... 133 

1.  THE AGREEMENT ................................................................................................... 133 

2.  MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES ....................................................................... 134 

ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE ECONOMIC 
PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT (EPA) BETWEEN THE EU AND PACIFIC STATES ... 140 

1.  THE AGREEMENT ................................................................................................... 140 

2.  MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES ....................................................................... 141 

Annex ..................................................................................................................................... 145 

SECTION IV OF THE REPORT: ADRESSING BARRIERS AND FINDING 
SOLUTIONS ......................................................................................................................... 145 

5 

 
 
 
 
 
This Staff Working Document (SWD) contains additional information (country information 
sheets)  on  38  individual  EU  trade  agreements,  complementing  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.  

Its  annex  has  a  list  of  new  barriers  reported  and  barriers  resolved  in  2021  completing 
section IV of the report, called  “Addressing trade barriers and finding solutions”.  

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 
meetings2; 

- General statistics (regularly updated) on trade in goods and services and on foreign direct 
investment for all EU trading partner countries3; 
The Commission/DG TRADE’s Implementation & Enforcement wegpage4 has the following 
information,  which  is  made  available  together  with  the  annual  report  and  staff  working 
document: 

- Statistics on trade in goods and services and on foreign direct investment between the EU 
and preferential trading partner countries (These are compiled for the annual report, based 
on Eurostat data for the EU27 as they stand in March 2022. NB: The latest statistics for trade 
in goods are for 2021, for trade in services and investment for 2020, except where indicated 
otherwise); 

- Tariff Rate Quotas (TRQs) for the EU and preferential partner countries’ fill rates in 2021; 

- Preference utilisation rates (PURs) on EU imports for partner countries as well as PURs on 
EU  exports  to  the  preferential  partners,  who  shared  the  information,  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://circabc.europa.eu/ui/group/7fc51410-46a1-4871-8979-20cce8df0896/library/5b6055b5-e853-4131-
9e67-f504cc35a78f/details?download=true  
2 https://policy.trade.ec.europa.eu/eu-trade-relationships-country-and-region/transparency-eu-trade-
negotiations_en  
3 https://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/countries-and-regions/statistics/  
4 https://policy.trade.ec.europa.eu/enforcement-and-protection/implementing-and-enforcing-eu-trade-
agreements_en  

6 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
EU TRADE AGREEMENTS COVERED BY THIS STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 

(Agreement/date of application)5 

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-Palestine6  
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. 

5 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 
6 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. 

7 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
EU TRADE AGREEMENTS COVERED BY THIS STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 

(Agreement /date of application) 

Western Balkans – Stabilisation and Association Agreements 

EU-Kosovo* 7 
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 

United Kingdom, Switzerland, Norway, Turkey 

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

EU-United Kingdom Trade and 
Cooperation Agreement 

1972 
1 July 1973 
Association Agreement signed in 1963; 
final phase of the customs union 
completed on 1 January 1996. 
1 January 2021 

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. 

8 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
PART I:  

ASIA 

9 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
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 and by the European Parliament, 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. In 2021, EU-Vietnam bilateral 
trade flows increased to €49.1 billion from 43.2 billion in 2020. Vietnam was the EU's largest 
partner for imports of goods among ASEAN countries in 2021 (Vietnam’s exports to the EU, 
rose  from  €34.5  billion  in  2020  to  €38.5  billion  in  2021.  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). Though hit by the 
health pandemic, its GDP grew by 2.9 % in 2020 and by 2.6% in 2021, showing a remarkable 
resilience. 

2. 

MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES 

2.1  Market Access: Progress and outstanding issues 

Since 1 August 2020, the EU and Vietnam have held regular informal meetings and convened 
the specialized committees and working groups established by the EVFTA.  The first ministerial 
Trade Committee was held on 19 July 2021. 

10 

 
 
 
 
 
 
2021  saw  the  launch  of  an  EU  project  to  improve  the  ability  of  EU  Businesses  (notably 
SMEs) to increase their trade and investment in Vietnam by providing practical information 
on how to make the most of the EVFTA. The online guide to EU SME on Vietnam trade and 
investment was launched in March 2022. 

On  specific  market  access  issues,  substantial  progress  was  achieved  on  SPS-related  issues, 
leading to a simplification and acceleration of clearance procedures by Vietnam for authorizing 
imports from approved EU Member States’ establishments (so called “pre-listing”). As a result, 
EU  market  access  for  animal  products  increased  for  various  EU  member  states.  Work  also 
continued over the reporting period to reduce the important backlog Vietnam has on Member 
States’ general applications for exports of animal products and plant products to Vietnam, as 
well as to amend the protocol on rules of origin, for which Vietnam’s internal procedures and 
decision making are lengthy.  

In addition,  in  the area of pharmaceuticals,  progress  was achieved on market  access  for EU 
pharmaceutical  products:  thanks  to  EU  Delegation’s  intense  engagement  with  Vietnamese 
authorities in Hanoi, on 30 December 2021 Vietnam decided to extend the validity of marketing 
authorizations  until  31  December  2022  with  the  aim  of  ensuring  continuity  to  international 
pharmaceutical businesses.  

Furthermore,  Vietnam,  from  the  entry  into  force  of  the  Agreement,  has  implemented  its 
commitments to protect 169 EU GIs and took further steps to codify its EVFTA commitments, 
by reflecting them in its domestic legislation.  

There are however still important unresolved issues: 

In the pharmaceutical sector, Vietnam continues to apply discriminatory and cumbersome rules 
to  medicinal  products  discriminating  among  EU  member  states’  regulatory  authorities. 
Vietnam’s legislation on the extension of the validity of marketing authorizations still remains 
to be properly implemented: The EU contributed to Vietnam’s public consultations concerning 
ongoing amendments to the relevant legislation and has regularly raised concern at technical 
and political level. 

Pending the completion of the ongoing revision of Vietnam’s IPR legislation, which is due in 
mid-2022, the EU main areas of concern continue to relate to the presence of counterfeit goods 
(online and in physical marketplaces), deficient enforcement of domestic IPR regulations, lack 
of ex-officio actions and efficient customs controls. The EU has continued the discussions with 
Vietnamese counterparts and is hopeful that over 134 legislative changes to the current  IPR 
laws, including providing customs the power to act ex officio on presumed counterfeit imports 
from neighbouring countries, will be promulgated in 2022. 

11 

 
 
 
 
2.2 

Trade and sustainable development: Progress and outstanding issues  

Vietnam over the reporting period 2021 and the first quarter of 2022, has reported delays to 
complete its labour reforms, in particular in relation to freedom of association and collective 
bargaining,  key  obligations  under  EVFTA.  The  2019  Labour  Code  contains  provisions  on 
independent workers representative organisations at enterprise level. Such provisions should be 
translated  into  implementing  decrees.  These  decrees  are  currently  still  undergoing  technical 
consultations with the relevant ministries despite the earlier commitment of Vietnam to enact 
them by end of 2020.  

The  EU  has  expressed  concerns  over  delays  in  establishing  independent  Workers 
Representative  Organisations  in  Vietnam.  On  the  basis  of  relevant  reports  from  the  ILO 
supervisory committees and other sources, the EU closely monitors developments in Vietnam 
regarding  for  freedom  of  expression  and  assembly  that  are  integral  parts  of  freedom  of 
association.  

By  1  January  2021,  Vietnam  had  also  ratified  and  participated  in  25  ILO  Conventions 
including  seven  out  of  the  eight  fundamental  Conventions.  Vietnam  is  one  of  the  leading 
countries when it comes to the ratification of ILO Core Conventions. The last fundamental ILO 
convention, i.e. C.87 on the Freedom  of Association  and Protection, awaits  to  be ratified in 
2023 fully in line with the promise by Vietnam, and agreed by the European Parliament, at the 
EVFTA ratification.  The EU encouraged Vietnam  to  elaborate a  plan  outlining  the concrete 
steps  towards  ratification  of  ILO  convention  Nr.  87  on  the  Freedom  of  Association  and 
Protection of the Right to Organise. 

Vietnam’s  National  Programme  of  Action  on  the  elimination  of  Child  Labour  is  now 
approved  at  national  level  and  work  is  focusing  on  implementation  at  the  regional  level.  A 
recent report showed considerable progress in this area during pre-pandemic period, while there 
are still more than 1 million children in child labour, more than half of them in hazardous works. 
Vietnam  has  committed  to  eliminate  child  labour  by  2025  in  accordance  with  Sustainable 
Development Goal 8.7. However, the recent National Action Programme aims at a child labour 
rate of still more than 4 percent by 2030 after 5.4 percent in 2018.  

The Commission has also raised with Vietnam the issue of alleged forced labour cases in drug 
detention centres, issues monitored by ILO under Convention 105 on the Abolition of forced 
labour. 

Vietnam established establishment a Domestic Advisory Group (DAG) in the fall of 2021 and, 
following the DAG establishment, the TSD Committee and the Joint Forum had a constructive 
first meeting in November 2021 – where Vietnam allowed many observers (beyond the actually 
DAG members) to participate. On 30 December 2021, Vietnam also followed up on its promise 
to broaden the membership of its DAG, whose members have been increased from three to six, 
though assumingly no independent workers’ organisation is a member yet. 

12 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
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.8  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. Singapore was the largest 
ASEAN destination for EU exports of goods in 2021: EU exports to Singapore increased by 
13%  (from  €24.1  billion  in  2020  to  €27.2  billion  in  2021).  EU-Singapore  trade  in  goods 
increased by 4.5% in 2021. Singapore is the EU’s largest trade and investment partner in South 
East Asia, ranking as the EU’s 5th largest trade partner for services globally and 7th largest FDI 
destination (in 202, latest figures available).  

The EU-Singapore trade and investment agreements 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. At the first inaugural 
trade committee meeting under the EUSFTA the EU and Singapore agreed to strengthen their 
bilateral partnership on digital trade, in view of their joint vision to work towards a digital and 
green economic recover. EU and Singapore officials were tasked to start technical discussions 
to identify the relevant digital trade elements. 

8 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. 

13 

 
 
 
 
                                                           
 
2. 

MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES 

2.1  Market Access: Progress and outstanding issues 

During the second year of implementation of the EUSFTA, progress was made by Singapore 
in the implementation of its commitments within the Chapter on Intellectual Property Rights 
(IPR): 

 

 

In November 2021, Singapore adopted a new Copyright Bill, which provides a right 
to  a  single  equitable  remuneration  for  the  producers  of  phonograms  where  their 
commercially published phonograms are used for broadcasting or public performance. 

In December 2021, new GIs were registered in Singapore. On 14 December 2021, 
the Commission adopted a Decision9 approving, on behalf of the EU, amendments to 
Annexes 10-A and 10-B to the EUSFTA, to reflect the registration of new EU GIs in 
Singapore. This Decision was adopted by the EUSFTA Trade Committee on 19 April 
2022. 

  Finally,  within  the  IPR  Chapter,  Singapore  also  committed  to  introduce  border 
measures against counterfeit GI goods, no later than three years after the entry into 
force of the EUSFTA. This legislative change is expected to be enacted by Singapore 
by the end of 2022.  

2.2 

Trade and sustainable development: Progress and outstanding issues 

The first EUSFTA Trade and Sustainable Development Board meeting took place in November 
2020. The next meeting will likely take place in 2022.  

On the occasion of the first EU-Singapore EUSFTA Trade Committee, which took place on 8 
December 2021, the EU has raised vis-à-vis Singapore the need to breach the gaps between 
Singapore’s labour legislation and the three  ILO  fundamental  conventions  mentioned above 
These are convention No. 111 (elimination of discrimination of work), Convention 87 (freedom 
of association) regarding the rights for higher public official to join trade unions and convention 
on forced labour (No. 105).  

9 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A22022D0823&qid=1654231391477  

14 

 
 
 
 
                                                           
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”;  hereinafter  “the 
Agreement”)  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 first three years of EPA implementation have been overall satisfactory. Bilateral trade is 
quickly recovering from the Covid-19 crisis and trade flows are returning to the pre-pandemic 
levels.  

In  2021  implementation  activities  brought  positive  outcomes  for  the  protection  of  GIs  and 
certain  TRQs.  On  –GIs,  the  Joint  Committee  decided  to  add  28  additional  EU  GIs,  and  28 
Japanese  GIs  to  the  list  of  GIs  protected  under  the  Agreement.  This  was  the  second  such 
extension  of  the  GI  list,  and  the  EU  and  Japan  are  currently  working  towards  a  third  one.  
Moreover, in order to increase the use by EU operators of the soft cheese as well as malt TRQs, 
Japan introduced substantive amendments to those TRQs management procedures. As a result, 
it is expected that the use of the soft cheese quota will reach 90% in FY 2021. The Commission 
continues to monitor the fill rate and management of TRQs under the Agreement. 

Limited  progress  was  further  observed  in  the  areas  of  government  procurement,  including 
through the adoption by Japan of circulars that set deadlines for procuring entities to ensure the 
publication  of  tender  notices  on  the  website  of  JETRO  (Japan  External  Trade  Organisation 
which is Japan’s “single point of access”). Those circulars do not, however, fully address EU’s 
concerns regarding timely publication of all tender notices falling under the EPA or GPA in 
Japan’s “single point of access”. Therefore, a systemic solution - through for example a specific 
IT tool ensuring the automatic and immediate publication of all tenders – is needed.  

15 

 
 
 
Some  valuable  results  were  also  achieved  on  offshore  wind  power,  as  Japan  removed  the 
discriminatory provisions in its tendering guidelines. There are, however, additional concerns 
linked  to  regulatory  aspects  and  cabotage,  which  require  continuing  and  even  enhancing 
technical discussions with Japan.  

Finally, in 2021 no meaningful progress was reached with regard to Japan’s overly complicated 
and lengthy market access approval procedures for certain EU agri-food products (fresh fruits 
and vegetables, meat from some Member States). In order to address this issue, Japan needs to 
recognise the EU as a single entity as set out in the EPA. This would allow Japan to simplify 
its lengthy and duplicative assessments conducted for each EU Member State individually, in 
spite of a common framework of SPS rules in the EU. 

2.2 

Trade and sustainable development: Progress and outstanding issues  

The Committee on Trade and Sustainable Development met (virtually) on 25-26 January 202210 
and saw a rich exchange of information and review activities in the various areas covered by 
the TSD chapter, including on cross-cutting issues such as the TSD review process, with a focus 
on the role and function of DAGs but also the implementation of sustainability provisions in 
trade  agreements  of  Japan    as  well  as  new  EU  initiatives  in  the  area  of  Corporate  Social 
Responsibility/Responsible Business Conduct (CSR/RBC).  

Furthermore, the EU presented recent developments on its environmental policies, notably the 
initiatives adopted by the in the framework of the Circular Economy package, as well as the 
proposal for a Revision of the Waste Shipment Regulation. Building on the recent collaboration 
in the area of plastics policy, the EU proposed a technical dialogue with a focus on product 
requirements for circularity by design. Building on the update on the EU Forest Strategy, the 
EU and Japan are considering the possibility to hold a follow-up technical-level meeting on the 
EU proposal for a regulation to curb deforestation and forest degradation. 

The Parties also updated each other on the respective policy developments on climate change, 
including the Japan-EU Green Alliance. In relation to the cooperation in multilateral fora, the 
Parties  discussed  the  Methane  Initiative,  the  Deforestation  Initiative,  and  indicated  their 
openness to cooperate to achieve further progress toward COP27. The EU and Japan also jointly 
played a key role in generating momentum towards the December 2021 ministerial statements 
on environment in the WTO. At the TSD Committee they stressed the positive contribution that 
bilateral  discussions  on  trade  and  climate  can  bring  to  the  multilateral  processes,  making 
specific  reference  to  the  joint  event  of  June  2021  on  Trade  and  Industry  towards  Climate 
Neutrality.  Further  work  may  involve  cooperation  on  the  development  of  standards  and 
certification framework for the international trade for hydrogen. 

In terms of trade and labour, the TSD Committee exchanged views on Japan’s efforts on the 
ratification of the ILO C105 on forced labour, which was followed by the transmission from 

10 https://circabc.europa.eu/ui/group/09242a36-a438-40fd-a7af-fe32e36cbd0e/library/99bdf2d0-edad-42f8-8bf4-
b38b51a2e6f7  

16 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
the Japanese government to the International Labour Office of the draft ratification instrument 
on 19 July 2022.11 The EU and Japan also  exchanged on their laws and  practices  regarding 
prohibition of discrimination in employment. 

The Joint Dialogue with Civil Society was held on 27 January 2022. It provided an opportunity 
for active and engaged discussions between civil society representatives of both sides on all 
issues relating to Trade and Sustainable Development. Considering the level of interest in the 
exchanges, the members of the DAGs of each side agreed to explore the possibility to hold a 
follow  up  bilateral  meeting  to  further  explore  topics  of  interests,  among  these  i) Industry 
perspectives  to  deliver  inclusive  economic  growth; ii)  transition  towards  a  carbon  neutral 
economy (basically CBAM, EU taxonomy and Sustainable Finance) and iii) Sustainable Forest 
and Land Use. The EU DAG has proposed a further follow up meeting on the ratification and 
implementation of the ILO Conventions by the EU and Japan.  

Last but not least, in 2021, Japan and the EU finalised the technical work on the ad-hoc TSD 
rules of procedure and on the establishment of the panel of experts. The formal adoption of the 
decision is expected in the course of 2022. 

11 https://www.ilo.org/global/standards/subjects-covered-by-international-labour-standards/forced-
labour/WCMS_851358/lang--en/index.htm  

17 

 
 
 
  
 
 
                                                           
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-South 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 the second half of 2021 and the first quarter of 2022.  

Progress was made in implementing the EU –South Korea FTA in a number of areas:  

  Sanitary  and  Phyto-sanitary  measures:  As  a  result  of  intense  high-level  engagement 
between the European Commission and the Republic of Korea, EU countries can, as of 
5 September 2022, export pork and poultry to the Republic of Korea more easily. The 
Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs of the Republic of Korea (MAFRA) 
has decided to remove a longstanding trade barrier, which affected EU exports of pork 
and  poultry  products,  as  the  Republic  of  Korea  now  recognises  the  EU's  stringent 
regionalisation  measures  to  control  outbreaks  of  African  swine  fever  and  the  highly 
pathogenic avian influenza. This decision could unlock over one billion euros of trade 
in the next years. 

  The  parties  continued  technical  work  to  reflect  technological  and  regulatory 
developments in the car sector, to facilitate trade by cutting red tape: In addition to the 
adoption  of  an  administrative  amendment  to  the  car  sector  annex  2-C  at  the  Trade 
Committee  meeting  in  2021,  both  sides  continued  technical  exchanges  to  explore 
potential new amendments to annex 2-C with a view to reflect further technological and 
regulatory  developments  in  the  automotive  sector.  These  new  amendments  once 
implemented  would  further  the  acceptance  of  automotive  products  by  the  competent 

18 

 
 
 
 

 

approval authorities on both sides and would enable businesses to save additional costs 
for testing and certification.  

In the machinery sector an important trade barrier was further removed in 2021 has been 
which  concerned  lengthy  and  cumbersome  processes  for  Ballast  Water  Management 
System (BWMS) – an equipment to stabilize vessels in environmentally friendly ways.  
In October 2019, the EU submitted its claim to the WTO TBT committee and discussed 
the issue  with  Japan bilaterally  at  the February 2020  meeting of the  Trade in  Goods 
Committee under the FTA. Finally in October 2021, the Korean administration issued 
all the necessary certificates for the ballast  water treatment  application,  allowing EU 
BWMS to access the Korean market. 

In the area of  IPR protection, following the agreement in principle at the April 2021 
Trade  Committee  to  include  additional  84  EU  and  Korean  names  in  the  list  of  226 
geographical  indications  (GIs)  already  protected,  exchanges  on  the  draft  Trade 
Committee decision on the amendment of the GI Annexes continued in 2021 and early 
2022 with the aim to finalize the necessary domestic procedures on both sides as soon 
as possible.  

  Last but not least, the Commission services and the Korean authorities further continued 
technical  cooperation  on  e-certification  and  harmonisation  of  health  certificates  to 
further facilitate trade of several processed agri-food products. 

However, there are also a number of outstanding issues EU business is confronting in South 
Korea and on which the Commission has been focusing in 2021:  

Sanitary and Phyto-sanitary measures: 

The lack 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 export beef to Korea, however other 
Member States are still waiting for the finalisation of their approval process. 

Sector of offshore wind energy: 

This is a sector, which has seen a surge in new market access barriers (e.g.  new regulation on 
local  content  requirements  adopted  in  December  2021  and  potentially  other  barriers  in  the 
implementation of the current legislation), following the announcement by the government of 
its long-term energy transition plan (2020- 2034) to deliver 40% renewable energy generation 
by  2034.  Key  issues  identified  currently  include  local  content  requirements,  public 
procurement,  certification/standards  and  price-setting  transparency.  Moreover,  complex 
environmental  impact  assessments  are  delaying  licensing  processes,  and  social  acceptance 
issues  are  obstacles  to  the  emergence  of  wind  power  plants.  There  are  more  than  50  EU 
companies present in Korea who are involved in aspects of the offshore wind business including 
the largest wind power developers and manufacturers of turbines, small businesses, one-man 
businesses and consultancies, and certification companies.  

19 

 
 
Reacting to these developments as a first step,  the EU Delegation- together with seven Member 
States (BE, DE, DK, ES, FR, IT, NL) -established a Task Force to identify and map technical 
obstacles for EU players aiming to enter the Offshore Korean Market.  

Following the release by the Korean Ministry for Trade, Industry and Energy (MoTIE) of  new 
rules on Local Content Requirement (LCR) for the offshore market in December 2021, the EU 
Ambassador  sent  a  letter  to  Trade  Minister.  MoTIE.  This  led  to  discussions  at  the  Trade  in 
Goods Committee under the FTA as well as an informal working-level technical meeting in 
March  2022,  followed  by  a  written  exchange  on  legal  and  technical  questions.  In  addition, 
MOTIE  informed  that  EU  stakeholders  have  a  new  opportunity  to  express  their  views  by 
sending their comments through the Korean Wind Energy Industry Association by 29 April. 
The Commission (EU DEL with help of MS, continues engaging with South Korea at various 
levels to raise its concerns and to get the local content requirements removed. 

20 

 
 
 
 
EU beef exports to Korea 

Finally, the lack 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  export  beef  to 
Korea,  however  other  Member  States  are  still  waiting  for  the  finalisation  of  their  approval 
process. 

2.2 

Trade and sustainable development: Progress and outstanding issues  

Over the reporting period, the main advances relate to the implementation by Korea of the Panel 
of  Experts’  report12  of  January  2021  in  the  bilateral  labour  dispute  launched  by  the  EU 
under the TSD Chapter of the EU-South Korea FTA.  

In April 2022, as a follow-up to the dispute settlement process, the ratification process of three 
fundamental ILO Conventions was completed with their entry into force in Korea: Conventions 
No 87 on the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise, No 98 on the 
Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining and No 29 on Forced Labour. 

Following the TSD committee and technical meetings in April 2021, the amendments in the 
Korean Trade Union Act required to conform with the Panel report entered into force in July 
2021. In November 2021, EU and Korea held an interim TSD committee meeting to assess the 
implementation of those amendments (as well as their implementing guidelines). Concerning 
the labour amendments, discussions mainly revolved around the possibility for dismissed and 
unemployed workers to join trade unions, the eligibility of trade union officials, the access of 
self-employed workers to trade unions and the certification procedure for trade unions in Korea. 
The Parties agreed to continue monitoring the application of the Panel of Experts’ report and 
continue discussions at the next TSD committee, to be held in the last quarter of 2022. 

The  interim  TSD  committee  meeting  also  examined  progress  towards  the  ratification  of 
fundamental ILO Convention No 105 on the Abolition of Forced Labour. Concerning the latter, 
South Korea confirmed its commitment to continue its sustained efforts towards the ratification, 
and indicated that  a research project to  identify  any  inconsistent  domestic legislation would 
soon be finalised. A dedicated technical meeting was held in March 2022 to review the initial 
results of that research project. The meeting identified a number of legal incompatibilities that 
would need to be addressed before Korea may ratify this Convention, in particular in connection 
with  prison  labour  and  with  criminal  prosecution  of  labour-related  activities.  The  research 
project was published in May 2022 and further discussions are planned to take place on this 
matter at the next CTSD.  

12 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). 

21 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
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 
still pays full  duty on car parts while China benefits  from  tariff reduction (within  the South 
Korea-China agreement most car parts will be liberalised in 10 or 15 years).  

Within the RCEP, South 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  and  there  has  been  no  significant  increase  in  imports  of  car  components  and  key 
electronics  from  the  largest  suppliers  into  South  Korea  in  2021  compared  to  2020.  Korea’s 
imports of combustion (gasoline and diesel) engines and parts for engines (HS 8407, 8408 and 
8409) slightly increased in 2021 compared to 2020 (+8%), as well as the imports of core car 
parts (HS 8708) (+11%).  The EU remains the largest supplier of diesel engines (HS 8408) and 
an important supplier of parts and accessories of the motor vehicles (HS 8708). 

In  2021,  Korea’s  imports  of  lithium-ion  batteries  mainly  from  China  (HS  870560)  has 
significantly  increased  to  $  3.3  billion  (+105  %)  but  those  imports  remain  below  Korea’s 
exports of lithium-ion batteries ($5.8 billion). 

Based on these trade statistics, it is not possible to establish a link between the allowance of 
duty drawback and the increase in EU imports of cars (+29%) from South Korea. 

22 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
PART II:  

THE AMERICAS 

23 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
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”;  herinafter  ‘the 
Agreement’) has been provisionally applied since 21 September 2017 and 2021 was its fourth 
year of  application. The  Agreement will  fully  enter into force once all Member States have 
ratified it.  

At the second meeting of the CETA Joint Committee on 25 March 2021 the Parties reviewed 
the implementation of the Agreement in various areas, took note of the positive evolution of 
EU-Canada trade flows, which have increased by almost 12% since CETA’s entry into force 
and had an exchange of views on a number of issues related to joint work between the EU and 
Canada under CETA (see also further below).  

On 14 June 2021, at the EU-Canada Summit, EU and Canada leaders launched a series of joint 
events13 to promote sustainability, environmental stewardship and climate action in agriculture, 
within the framework of the Agriculture Dialogue under CETA. The series of events started 
with an EU-Canada workshop on soil health on 26 October 2021, the second one held on 10 
March 2022 concerned reduction of GHG emissions in the livestock sector and the third one 
held  on  8  June  2022  on  organic  production.  During  the  Summit,  the  EU  and  Canada  also 
established  the  EU-Canada  Strategic  Partnership  on  Raw  Materials,  with  a  view  to 
diversifying sources of important green and digital economy inputs away from less like-minded 
producers and foster competitive EU-Canada supply chains.  

To mark the occasion of CETA’s fourth anniversary on 21 September 2021, DG TRADE and 
EUCCAN  (the  European  Union  Chamber  of  Commerce  in  Canada)  co-hosted  an  event 
dedicated  to  SMEs’.  90  participants  attended,  including  European  SMEs,  stakeholders  and 
national  authorities.  2 EU  companies  gave testimony on how CETA helped them in  finding 
their parts to the Canadian market. The trade policy roundtable was followed by a workshop 
with presentations of all practical tools developed by the Commission for European companies 
(e.g. Access2Markets, ROSA, Access2Procurement Tool) as well as of the services offered by 
EEN  (Enterprise  Europe  Network)  and  ETPOA  (European  Trade  Promotion  Organisations 
Association) to help European companies to internationalise. 

13 https://ec.europa.eu/food/horizontal-topics/farm-fork-strategy/international-dimension/eu-canada-
dialogue_en?msclkid=76bf8992b04411ec8b59aa6c70522afb  

24 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
2. 

MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES 

2.1   Market Access: Progress and outstanding issues  

Progress was made in 2021 and early 2022 in the area of services professional services: At the 
2nd meeting of the CETA Joint Committee on 25 March 2021, the EU and Canada launched 
negotiations  for  a  Mutual  Recognition  Agreement  (MRA)  concerning  the  professional 
qualifications of architects. On 10 March 2022, negotiations were concluded. The conclusion 
of  the  negotiations  paves  the  way  for  the  adoption  of  the  MRA,  which,  once  in  force,  will 
remove most of the bureaucratic obstacles for EU architects seeking to provide their services in 
Canada, and vice-versa, allowing them to work almost as freely as they would at home. Thanks 
to the MRA, architects meeting certain qualification- and experience-based criteria will have 
their qualifications recognised by the relevant European and Canadian authorities. Both EU and 
Canadian architects will have to register with the local authorities to get permission to exercise 
their profession, while EU architects in Canada will additionally have to complete a one-off 10-
hour course. The MRA should in principle come into effect in early 2023. This MRA is the first 
of its kind, which the EU has ever negotiated with a third country.  

In 2021, progress was also made in removing certain discriminatory measures for wines and 
spirits maintained at federal and provincial level, which the EU continues to raise with Canada:  

  For example, Ontario and Quebec reduced the cost-of-service differential fees applied 
to  EU products,  based on the results of audits carried out  in  2019-2020 at  the EU’s 
request.  

  Canada  took  steps  to  eliminate  the  discriminatory  aspect  of  the  federal  excise  duty 
(exemption for local wines). The exemption was effectively removed on 30 June 2022.  
  There is also an announced path towards compliance by provinces (Ontario, Quebec 
and Nova Scotia) to remove certain discriminatory measures on wines (by mid-2023, 
end 2023 and mid-2024 respectively).  

In  2021,  one  additional  EU  food  GI  was  registered  directly  in  Canada  (Piadina 
Romagnola/Piada Romagnola). The EU and Canada also consider amending the annexes of the 
2003 Agreement between the European Community and Canada on trade in Wines and Spirits 
Drinks, incorporated into CETA, with regard to geographical indications (GIs) and oenological 
practices.  This  amendment  will,  for  example,  add  EU  wine  and  spirits  GIs  to  the  relevant 
annexes,  if  they  accomplish  the  relevant  registration  procedures  by  28  February  2023.  This 
could  include  in  particular  GIs  from  Member  States  that  joined  the  EU  after  2003,  which 
therefore are not listed in the annexes. 

In 2021, progress was also made on SPS measures, as the work on the harmonisation of EU 
export certificates continued, with priorities put forward by both sides:  

  At  the  end  of  2021,  after  several  years  of  negotiation,  Canada  accepted  an  EU 
harmonised certificate for poultry meat allowing for further trade facilitation of exports 
from authorised EU Member States.  
In 2021 France received authorisation to export grapevine plants to Canada.  

 

25 

 
 
In 2021, the CETA cheese TRQ that Canada grants to the EU was filled at 98%. Nevertheless, 
the EU continued to raise its concerns with the administration of this CETA TRQ and called 
upon Canada to introduce improvements in the context of its comprehensive TRQ review. 

At the same time, several SPS issues are still outstanding and continue to be discussed with 
Canada: 

  While 21 EU Member States are already recognised by Canada to be free of Asian and 
Citrus  longhorned  beetles,  Canada  has  been  requesting  more  information  to 
additionally recognise as pest free areas the other six EU Member States affected with 
these pests. The EU continues to discuss also the possibility to export to Canada fresh 
tomato with vines, stems, and calyces as well as cherries and berries from Spain.  
  The  EU  side  made  efforts  to  obtain  approval  of  exports  of  meat/poultry  from  EU 

Member States that are not yet recognised by Canada for these products. 

  The Commission decided to organise a follow-up audit in Canada in 2022 to make sure 
that all recommendations of the previous audit of production of pig and bovine meat 
have been followed up with concrete actions on the ground. 

2.2 

Trade and sustainable development: Progress and outstanding issues  

At the fourth  annual meeting of the CETA Trade and Sustainable Development Committee, 
which  took  place  on  9  and  10  February  2022,  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 plan, on exchanges and events aimed at sharing information on 
policies, laws and best practices on a range of issues, notably on the development of 
gender-relevant standards; 

  Trade and labour issues and future cooperation on a number of policy areas, including 
combatting forced and child labour in global supply chains. 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, notably Convention 190 on Violence  and 
Harassment.  They  also  reaffirmed  their  commitment  to  further  coordinate  efforts  to 
address forced labour in multilateral fora, in particular at the OECD and the G7;  

  The  EU  and  Canada  exchanged  views  on  topics  such  as  energy  transition,  climate 
adaptation and greening of supply chains. They also exchanged on recent developments 
on climate change and environment policy, agreeing to explore future cooperation in 
these areas: 

o 

 They  acknowledged  the  successful  CleanTech  Workshop  held  virtually  in 
March 2021(leading to the delivery of the Canada-EU CleanTech Summit later 
in 2022) and the expert exchange on the impacts of trade on biodiversity held in 
January 2022.  

26 

 
 
o  Discussions also covered a number of ongoing cooperation initiatives including 
on carbon pricing and border carbon adjustments, biodiversity, plastic pollution 
and circular economy, and chemicals management; 

  Finally, the EU and Canada took note of the ongoing work on the review of the EU 15-
point Action Plan on TSD, with the publication of the expert study taking place on the 
second  day  of  the  CETA  TSD  Committee  meeting  and  further  work  on  the  EU  side 
needed to analyse the study results and integrate them in the review. 

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 
Canadian CETA DAGs had their fourth  joint  meeting a  few days before  the  meeting of the 
CETA Trade and Sustainable Development Committee: 

  At the meeting, the Canadian DAGs provided updates on the implementation of the 

Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement (CUSMA) and first cases;  

  EU DAGs updated on the consultation process in the EU on the review of the TSD 

chapters of CETA;  

  The  DAGs  also  held  a  debate  on  the  impact  of  the  COVID19  pandemic  on  supply 
chains  from  the  perspectives  of  forced  labour/sustainable  development/labour 
rights/environment. 

The 4th CETA Civil Society Forum met before the CETA TSD Committee, with more than 150 
registered  participants  from  across  the  EU  and  Canada  from  business,  social  partners, 
environmental  organizations  and  other  civil  society  representatives.  Four  thematic  sessions 
explored the following topics: (i) Trade and Environment / Trade and Climate Change; (ii) EU-
Canada  Cooperation  on  Labour;  (iii)  Developments  in  the  field  of  Trade  and  Sustainable 
Development,  Trade  and  Labour  and  Trade  and  Environment  –  Policy,  Implementation, 
Enforcement; and (iv) CETA recommendations on SMEs and Trade and Gender. 

27 

 
 
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 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  2021.  The  minutes  of  all  meetings  are  publicly  available.14  The  next  Trade 
Committee will be chaired by Ecuador. 

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: In 2020, bilateral trade was impacted by the effects of the 
pandemic in global trade (experiencing a decline from €24 to €20 billion) driven amongst others 
by the significant decrease of commodities prices in the global market. However, in 2021, trade 
between the EU and the three Andean partners rebounded and  grew again by 26%, from 20 
billion in 2020 to around €27 billion in 2021. Exports to the EU of minerals and energy products 
significantly  increased  as  well  as  imports  by  the  three  Andean  partners  of  machinery  and 
pharmaceutical products.  

14 https://circabc.europa.eu/ui/group/09242a36-a438-40fd-a7af-fe32e36cbd0e/library/48db684c-602f-470f-87a5-
79b1932de21e  

28 

 
 
 
 
                                                           
2. 

MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES 

2.1  Market Access: Progress and outstanding issues 

In  2021,  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 America15 project in the area of intellectual 
property, the RBCLAC project16 implemented in partnership between the OECD, ILO and 
UN  OHCHR,  a  number  of  seminars  targeting  specific  concerns  in  the  area  of  SPS  and  the 
second edition of Expo Europa in Ecuador and respective projects (funded by the Partnership 
Instrument)  have  been  put  in  place  to  assist  more  globally  in  the  implementation  of  the 
Agreement.  

Colombia 

In 2021, Colombia and the EU made some progress on issues relating to market access in the 
automotive sector: 

  The new policy to modernize Colombia´s cargo fleet has proved satisfactory for truck 
importers as it effectively removed the import barriers derived from the previous 1:1 
scrappage policy.  

  The  EU  provided  technical  assistance  through  a  TAIEX  workshop  to  adopt  and 
implement the 1958 UN Agreement on Vehicle Regulations. Colombia has since then 
been  working  towards  accessing  the  UNECE  58  Agreement  and  has  accordingly 
updated  several  technical  vehicle  regulations.  The  EU  will  continue  to  work  with 
Colombia on these developments to prevent any deviations from the UNECE rules.  

Progress was also made in the area of market access with the completion of the tender to launch 
a new Market Access Teams (MAT) project to provide expertise and timely information to the 
EU Delegation and Member States with the aim to facilitate access to  EU companies to the 
Colombian market.  

Some  progress  was  also  made  on  SPS  -  regionalisation,  specifically  Colombia  recognised 
Belgium’s free status for African Swine Fever (ASF). 

On public procurement, the EU and Colombia continued discussions regarding the difficulties 
faced  by  EU  companies  when  procuring  at  the  sub-central  level.  Follow  up  and  continued 
discussions on this topic continued. 

In addition, a number of other outstanding issues persist, including the following: 

 

the  ongoing  WTO  case  regarding  antidumping  duties  imposed  to  several  EU 
companies exporting frozen fries to Colombia; 

15 https://ipkey.eu/en/latin-america 
16 Responsible Business Conduct in Latin America and the Caribbean: https://mneguidelines.oecd.org/rbclac.htm 

29 

 
 
                                                           
  EU companies exporting biological controllers are also affected by Colombia´s unfit 
norms and procedures to regulate this type of products. This is especially relevant in the 
framework  of  the  discussions  on  pesticides  and  maximum  residue  limits  (MRL)  as 
biological  controllers  could  replace  chemical  pesticides.  The  EU  will  continue  to 
monitor Colombia´s work to better regulate this sector.  

  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.  

In 2021, through its cooperation projects, the EU supported Colombia’s move towards a more 
sustainable and environmentally friendly economy, including a pilot project on sustainable 
mining in the poverty-ridden pacific region of Colombia. Furthermore, Colombia took part in 
the EU´s regional programmes on the fight against Antimicrobial Resistance, the promotion of 
Responsible  Business  Conduct  and  the  adoption  of  Low  Carbon  and  Circular  Economy 
business actions. 

Peru 

The Trade Agreement continues to promote 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  vegetables.  Since  2013, 
vegetable products exported to the EU have increased steadily and currently represent 34% of 
total exports to the EU.  

Limited progress was made in the area of 

  Technical Barriers to Trade where Peru, through its Supreme Decree 018-2021-AS 
of 12 June 2020, extended until 31 December 2022 the permission to use stickers to 
display health warnings on imported food products17; as well as in the area of  

  public  procurement,  including  by  the  government  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 Fever).  

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

30 

 
 
                                                           
 

In  the  field  of  public  procurement  there  are  also  concerns  regarding  technical 
specifications in public tenders. 

Ecuador 

Ecuador has made progress in lifting barriers to trade in 2021: 

 

 

In  SPS,  and  after  more  than  one  year  of  stalemate,  the  Ecuadorian  authorities 
approved the operative plans for imports of Spanish citrus fruits (mandarines and 
oranges) and apples from Portugal. Virtual visits to ES and PT establishments took 
place  at  the  end  of  2021  and  the  final  authorization  to  import  those  products  was 
obtained in March. 

In the area of industrial goods, Ecuadorian authorities repealed RTE INEN No. 033 
(3R),  thus  eliminating  the  need  to  present  sworn  documents  for  EU  imports  of 
ceramics as  wells as laboratory testing and certifications from AENOR from other 
origins.  

At the same time, outstanding issues remain, including the following: 

  With regard to the management of Ecuador´s non-automatic licences (NALS) and 
tariff-rate quotas (TRQs) system, and after a strong and continued pressure from 
the EU, the Ecuadorian authorities issued Resolution 097 at the end of 2021 to make 
them FTA and WTO compatible. However, due to the flaws and lack of clarity of the 
R097, it was revoked and replaced in March 2022 by a new Resolution 022. Renewed 
negotiations are ongoing between the EU and the Ecuadorian authorities in order to 
identify a solution in line with the text of the FTA.  

 

In  relation  to  EU  Geographical  Indications  (GIs),  the  usurpation  of  the  EU  GI 
“Feta” case is still outstanding, while the re-submission to protect the EU GI for  a 
Czech beer was accepted by the Ecuadorian authorities and the respective process is 
duly carried out in view of its expected final registration as a protected GI. 

2.2 

Trade and sustainable development: Progress and outstanding issues  

The implementation of the Trade and Sustainable Development (TSD) Chapter of the Trade 
Agreement was reviewed at the meeting of the TSD Sub-committee held in November 2021. 
The meeting allowed Parties to exchange on recent policy developments related to labour and 
environment, and on TSD-related cooperation activities and relevant priorities. The TSD Sub-
committee offered also an opportunity to touch upon the review of the TSD policy in the EU, 
to illustrate the various initiatives undertaken under the Green Deal – from CBAM, to horizontal 
due diligence and related sectoral legislation (Sustainable Product Initiative, deforestation), as 
well as forced labour, and to address the consultations with civil society. 

As regards TSD issues, the EU remains focused on labour related issues (inspections, freedom 
of  association  and  collective  bargaining,  child  labour,  social  dialogue,  labour  informality). 
legislative 
Concerning  environmental  policies,  priorities  have  expanded 

include 

to 

31 

 
 
developments in areas related to circular economy, biodiversity, deforestation, and initiatives 
to address global environmental challenges. 

Vis-à-vis Ecuador, the EU reiterated the importance given to the effective follow up to the ILO 
recommendations concerning the implementation of the Convention on freedom of association, 
in particular now that the matter has been seized by the judiciary at various levels. Ecuador was 
invited to join the Global Alliance on Circular Economy and Resource Efficiency. 

Vis-à-vis Colombia, the EU has expressed its concerns about the attacks on trade unions and 
social  leaders,  and  while  it  acknowledged  the  recent  efforts  made  by  the  government  to 
persecute those responsible for violent crimes, the EU recalled the importance of social dialogue 
as a pre-condition to address the root causes of violence.  

In relation to labour issues in Peru, the exchanges touched upon various topics of concern, in 
particular the persistent challenges to the freedom of association and of anti-union violence, 
and the need to continue with domestic reforms to implement ILO recommendations. Among 
the  environmental  topics,  the  EU  stressed  the  need  to  continue  building  the  capacity  and 
strengthen the systems for environmental quality control.  

At the meeting of the TSD Committee, the EU side presented and engaged on a number of EU 
policies dedicated to sustainability issues: 

  First,  on  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. 

  Second, on the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM), designed to support 
the adoption of Green Deal policies in third countries, and at the same time aimed at 
minimising  the  risk  of  carbon  leakage,  which  would  jeopardise  the  EU's  climate 
ambition. The EU underlined how the CBAM does not preclude progress in terms of 
international  coordination  for  the  adoption  of  effective  measures  such  as  carbon 
pricing, and stressed that the main principles of the CBAM underline its compatibility 
with WTO rules. 

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

The functioning of the Domestic Advisory Groups (DAGs) gave rise to intense exchanges which 
confirmed  the  recognition  that  the  role  of  civil  society  is  a  prominent  one  both  in  the 
implementation of the TSD provisions of the agreement, and in the reflection on the EU TSD 
policy review.  

In  that  context,  the  EU  underscored  the  principle  of  taking  into  account  the  views  on  the 
implementation of the Trade and Sustainable Development chapter, expressed in the framework 
of national mechanisms as set out in Article 281 of the Agreement. The EU also made specific 

32 

 
 
reference  to  the  communiqué  presented  on  13  November  2020  during  the  Sub-Committee's 
dialogue with civil society and the general public held under Article 282 of the Agreement. 

The Parties held the Open Session with civil society on 30 November 2021, via videoconference. 
Two topics took the centre stage in the lively discussions: the procedures for the establishment 
of  the  new  domestic  advisory  body  in  Ecuador,  and  the  findings  of  the  ex-post  evaluation 
carried  out  by  BKP  Economic  Advisors.  Labour  related  concerns  were  predominant  among 
unions and other organisations working on social issues. Concerns were raised in relation to use 
of pesticides in  banana cultivation,  and on the environmental impact  of illegal  gold  mining. 
Industry  voiced  concerns  about  costs  of  compliance  with  high  social  and  environmental 
standards  in  the  EU.  As  it  was  the  case  in  the  previous  year,  the  EU  DAG  jointly  with 
organisations from the civil society from the three countries submitted a communique calling, 
among  others,  for  improved  functioning  of  the  DAGs  and  for  access  to  information  on 
cooperation projects.  

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/tonne since 1 January 2020.  This treatment was 
linked to  a ‘stabilisation clause’ setting out  an annual  trigger volume for imports from  each 
Andean country during the transition period.  
Article 15 of Regulation (EU) No 19/201318 provided for the banana stabilisation mechanism 
(BSM). When the annual trigger volume of imports per country as set in the Agreement was 
met, the Commission examined the impact of these imports on the situation of the Union market 
for bananas to take a decision to either temporarily suspend the preferential customs duty or 
determine that such suspension was 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. A comprehensive  report on the functioning of the EU banana 
market after the BSM is due for the last quarter of 2022. 

18 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 

 
 
 
 
                                                           
2020/2021 imports of fresh bananas into the EU  

2020 Total 
imports  

2021 Total 
imports  

Variation 

(1.000 tonnes) 

(1.000 tonnes) 

2021/2020 

1.185 

1.516 

101 

2.802 

1.162 

1.600 

98 

2.860 

-2,3% 

5,5% 

-3% 

2%  

Country 

Colombia  

Ecuador  

Peru  

Total 

In 2021 EU imports of fresh bananas from Colombia amounted to 1.162 thousand tonnes, a bit 
more than 2% lower than in previous year. Ecuador exported 1.600 thousand tonnes of fresh 
bananas to the EU a roughly 5,5% higher than previous year. Peru exported 98 thousand tonnes 
of fresh bananas to the EU a roughly 4% below to previous year.  

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 
consultations19.  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  2020.20.  In  October  2020, 
Colombia initiated the review of the measures to assess whether the conditions are met to extend 
the anti-dumping measures. The EU sent its first written submission to the panel on 8 March 
2021. Panel hearings took place in July 2021  and in early February 2022.  

3.3 

Ex post evaluation of the implementation of the Trade Agreement 

An ex-post evaluation, which was carried out between April 2020 and July 2021 and covered 
the  period  from  the  start  of  the  provisional  application  of  the  Agreement  (2013  for  the  EU, 
Colombia and Peru, 2017 for Ecuador) to May 2020, was concluded in April 2022. Its final 
report21 analysed the economic, social and environmental, and human rights (including labour 
rights) effects, which the Agreement has had since its application in the various Parties.  

Some of the main conclusions of the evaluation are the following: 

19  https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_19_6221  
20 https://trade.ec.europa.eu/wtodispute/show.cfm?id=792&code=1 
21 https://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/policy-making/analysis/policy-evaluation/ex-post-evaluations/  

34 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
  In  economic  terms,  the  reduction  in  barriers  to  trade  between  the  Parties  achieved 
through the implementation of the Agreement allows for resources to be allocated more 
efficiently. As a result, the economic effect of the Agreement on global gross domestic 
product (GDP) was positive, with gains estimated at USD 728 million (comparing world 
GDP in 2020 with the Agreement with world GDP in 2020 without the Agreement). All 
of  the  four  Parties  to  the  Agreement  have  benefited  from  an  increase  in  their  GDP, 
although the impact is modest. 

  The  estimated  effects  of  the  Agreement  on  employment  across  sectors  follow  the 
pattern  of  trade  impacts  and  are  most  positive  in  the  Andean  countries  in  the  fruits, 
vegetables, and nuts sectors, and in fisheries, notably in Ecuador. In industry, sectors 
such as food products, chemical products or textiles (the latter in Colombia and Peru) 
are also estimated as beneficiaries of the Agreement. 

  The  Agreement  is  likely  to  have  contributed  to  an  increase  in  overall  welfare  and 
poverty reduction, although it is difficult to draw conclusions based on available data. 
While the overall effects are likely to be limited, thanks to the Agreement and due to 
higher exports to the EU, jobs have been created in the Andean countries, mainly in 
agriculture,  in  rural  areas  which  had  much  higher  poverty  levels  and  lower  labour 
participation rate than in urban areas. However, these areas already benefited from lower 
levels of informality prior to the Agreement’s entry into force, even if the Agreement 
contributed to further reduce them in the analysed period. 

  The environmental impact of the Agreement overall is found to be small, with a very 

small negative impact on biodiversity and natural resources. 

  The  impact  of  the  Agreement  on  the  human  rights  situation  in  the  Andean  partner 
countries was found to be limited. Among others, the Agreement may have contributed 
to reducing child labour through creating job opportunities for adults. The Agreement 
did  not  have  a  significant  impact  on  the  right  to  water  overall’  while  all  Andean 
countries  have  faced  water  pressure  prior  to  the  application  of  the  Agreement.  The 
Agreement  was  found  to  have  contributed  to  the  creation  of  employment  mostly  on 
temporary  contracts,  which  had  a  negative  impact  on  the  capacity  of  workers  to 
organise.  

35 

 
 
 
 
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. 2022 marks the 10th Anniversary of its signature. The trade pillar (Part 
IV) of the Association Agreement (hereinafter referred to as the “Trade Agreement") has been 
provisionally applied for nine 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. The EU ratified the Protocol 
in July 2021, and Central American countries are also advancing well in this process.  

During  the  nine  years  of  its  application,  the  Trade  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.  

In 2021, the EU was the second export destination for Central America (16.2%) after the US 
(32.9%) and the third supplier (8.6%) after the US (30.2%) and China (roughly 12.8%)22. Total 
exports of merchandise from the EU to the Central American countries rose from €4.8 billion 
in 2020 to roughly €6.0 billion in 2021 – an increase of 23% - almost recovering to the pre-
pandemic level of 2019. Meanwhile, imports from Central America, which had shown more 
resilience during the crisis, further increased from € 5.9 billion in 2020 to almost 7.0 billion in 
2021, a robust growth of only 18% with respect to 2020.23 

The Association Committee and its six specialised Sub-committees oversee the implementation 
of the Agreement24. 

22 According to data from SIECA´s Central American Trade Statistics System. 
23 Based on data from EUROSTAT. 

24  The  Agreement  establishes  six  specialized  Sub-committees:  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.  

36 

 
 
 
 
                                                           
2. 

MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES 

2.1  Market Access: Progress and outstanding issues 

The Association Committee met on 17 June 2021 at senior official level.  

On Market Access, discussions continued on a  number of outstanding (offensive issues for the 
EU  side),  as  further  described  below.  Central  American  partners  raised  the  management  of 
Tariff Rate Quotas that the EU is applying to Central American exports of sugar and rum.  

In regard to SPS several trade restrictive measures persist in the region and are being discussed 
with the respective partner countries concerned:  

 

 

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  notably  in  Panama,.  The setting up of a new Food Safey Agency in 
Panama in October 2021 has increased the uncertainty on the administrativve process 
to register or update prea-approval of EU establishement. The regionalisation principle 
is still not yet applied in Panama.  

In Costa Rica, continued tax discrimination on imported beer prompted the EU side to 
request that a roadmap be established by Costa Rica to address the issue. Costa Rica had 
committed  in  a  joint  declaration  under  the  Association  Agreement  to  review  its 
discriminatory taxation systems for beer (by 2014 at the latest) and the one for spirits 
(by 2017 at the latest). 

  All Central America countries (except Costa Rica, which ceased to impose in its health 
certificates since 2020) still need to consider the elimination of the clause: “born and 
raised” in its health certificates for some imported products of animal origin. This clause 
goes against the recognition of EU as a single entity and constitutes a barrier trade. 

As concerns the Rules of Origin, the Commission has worked constructively with Guatemala 
to establish a uniform application of the rules of origin for products of tuna loins. This work 
ensures that only originating tuna comes into the EU with preferential tariffs and avoids any 
possible misapplication of the tolerance rule whereby non-originating tuna could be imported 
to  the  EU.  Work  will  continue  through  technical  meetings  and  in  the  Sub-Committee  on 
Customs, Trade Facilitation and Rules of Origin to ensure a common understanding of the rules 
of origin for tuna products and to protect the EU’s financial interests.  

In  respect  to  Geographical  indications,  the  Commission  continues  to  monitor  the  full 
implementation of the commitments made under the Association Agreement. Among others, 
the Commission continues to engage with Central American authorities to enhance enforcement 
of all 116 EU GIs protected through the agreement and to achieve effective protection of the 
term “Parmigiano Reggiano” in Guatemala and of the term “Queso Manchego” in Costa Rica, 
notably by establishing sound proof of producers enjoying grandfathering rights. Discussions 
on  these  matters  are  continuing.  At  the  same  time,  there  is  increasing  interest  in  Central 

37 

 
 
American  countries  to  seek  protection  for  GIs  through  the  existing  Association  Agreement. 
There have been applications for one new GI from Costa Rica (coffee ‘Tarrazú’) and for ten 
new GIs from El Salvador (coffee, cocoa and other food products), have successfully concluded 
their assessment procedure. A decision to add them to the protection under the agreement is 
envisaged to be taken in 2022.  

On  Technical  Barriers  to  Trade  (TBT),  Regarding  the  Central  American  Technical 
Regulations  (RTCA  Spanish  acronym)  the  implementation  of  article  305.4,  the  status  of 
adoption of the technical regulations included in Annex XX was reported, indicating that, of 
the  23  Central  American  Technical  Regulations  (Reglamentos  Técnicos  de  Centroamérica) 
included in that Annex, 21 are in force throughout the region, with the exception of Panama, 
which  has  5  of  them  pending  approval.  The  RTCAs  pending  harmonization  refer  to  the 
registration  of  technical  grade  active  ingredient,  formulated  synthetic  pesticides,  and  the 
prohibition and restriction of pesticides (As of May 2022 there are two RTCAs on pesticides 
that have not yet been approved by CA countries). 

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 2021 in line with the priority issues established for each 
partner  country.  The  EU  continued  to  attach  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 meetings25 - which took  place on  June 7, 8  and 9, 2021 - 
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 in Guatemala. 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 and  informality.  

On the environment, the EU and Central America discussed the situation and prospects for 
organic agricultural production in the EU and in Central American countries. The exchange of 
views  provided  both  parties  useful  insights  into  the  respective  conditions  for  organic 
agricultural production, trade patterns and product categories, the legal framework as well as 
challenges and opportunities relevant to further promote trade in organic products as trade in 
organics has the potential to yield benefits in terms of sustainability.  

As regards cooperation, the Secretariat for Central American Economic Integration (SIECA) 
and the Inter-American Institute for Cooperation on Agriculture (IICA), which  are supported 
by the EU through the INTEC programme, presented cooperation projects on trade facilitation, 

25 Board on Trade and Sustainable Development 

38 

 
 
 
 
                                                           
economic integration, sustainable value chains and sustainable agriculture: SIECA  presented 
the  activities  carried  out  within  Components  I  and  III  of  the  Central  American  regional 
economic integration programme INTEC, financed by the EU, related to trade and sustainable 
development  for  Central  America.  IICA  showcased  two  EU  regional  cooperation  projects: 
PROCAGICA,  the  Central  America  Coffee  rust  integral  management  programme,  and 
AGROINNOVA, which aims to improve the situation and resilience of small producers of the 
Central American Dry Corridor.  

Despite  the  circumstances  of  the  COVID-19  pandemic,  the  Commission  continued  frequent 
interactions with the EU Domestic Advisory Group (DAG). A joint note 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.  

3. 

ACTIVITIES SUBJECT TO SPECIFIC MONITORING AND SPECIFIC 

AREAS OF IMPORTANCE 

3.1 

Banana imports from Central America 

Since entry into force of the agreement, the absolute volume as (from 797.000 tonnes in 2012 
to 1.456.000 tonnes in 2019) well as the market share of bananas (from 18,8% in 2012 to 26,3% 
in  2019)  imported  from  Central  America  top  the  EU  has  increased,  thereby,  contributing  to 
diversify supply to the growing EU banana market.  

Article 15 of Regulation (EU) No 20/201326 (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 volumes between the EU and 
CA. In 2021, due to the Covid pandemic, EU imports of fresh bananas from Central America -
by volume amounted to 1,353 million tons, a decrease by 7% when compared to export volumes 
in 2020 (1,467 million). In value, EU imports amounted to €756 million, constituting a 53% 
decrease  when  compared  to  2020.  No  issues  on  price  fluctuations  were  reported  in  the  EU 
market. 

26 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.  

39 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
 
2020/2021 imports of fresh bananas27 

Country 

2020 Total 
imports (tons) 

2021 Total imports 
(tons) 

Variation 2021/2020 

           1.020.138  

Costa Rica 

        1.034.172  

Panama 

           261.120  

           214.991  

Guatemala 

           172.161  

           118.683  

Total 

        1.467.453 

        1.353.812  

-1% 

-17% 

-31% 

-7% 

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

3.2 
Agreement 

Since December 2020, an ex post evaluation of the implementation of the Trade Agreement 
between the EU and Central America is being carried out. The project is analysing 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. The project has 
a duration of 16 months. During the period under review, the consultant provided the inception 
report in May 2021 and a draft interim report in November 2021.28  

The preliminary conclusions are as follows: 

  Regarding the economic analysis, the model suggest that there has been a significant 
increase in both EU imports and exports. The increase in EU imports amounts to 30% 
whereas EU exports have increased by 40% since 2010. The difference in the relative 
increase is likely to be attributable to the fact that CA countries enjoyed zero tariffs on 
an overwhelming majority of on their exports to the EU, under the GSP+ arrangement. 
Important developments have also been present in the evolution of trade in services and 
foreign direct investment. 

 

In terms of social analysis, the economic model estimates an employment increase in 
the CA countries in sectors such as fruits and vegetables, sugar, and processed food, 
stemming from increased exports to the EU. Empirical evidence suggests that women 
may have benefitted from employment increase in some agricultural sectors; however, 
positive effects may be relatively limited due to a low share (10% to 30%) of women in 
the total number of workers in those sectors. The EU-CA FTA is likely to have created 
positive  effects  for  consumers  related  to  a  larger  availability  and  accessibility  of 

27 Statistics refer to the EU27   
28 https://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2022/february/tradoc_160031.pdf   

40 

 
 
         
 
 
 
                                                           
products and services traded between the Parties under the Agreement, and risks related 
to potentially unsafe products have been limited.  

  Finally,  concerning  trade  and  sustainable  development,  the  evaluation  confirms  the 
fragility of Central America vis à vis climate change. Furthermore, a potential impact 
of  the  Agreement  may  have  arisen  through  the  fruits  and  vegetables  sector  on  land 
conversion (related deforestation), ecosystems and biodiversity. 

The  recommendations  by 
in  January  202229.  The 
Commission/DG  TRADE’s  assessment  and  follow-up  actions  will  be  included  in  a  Staff 
working document, which should be published in the first half of 2023. 

the  consultant  were  published 

29  https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/79f623fa-aa5c-11ec-83e1-01aa75ed71a1/language-
en/format-PDF/source-254167460  

41 

 
 
 
 
                                                           
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 a cooperation pillar. The Agreement entered into 
force  in  2003  and  it  was  the  first  EU  bilateral  agreement  subject  to  an  ex-post  evaluation, 
conducted in 2016.30 Although the Agreement has worked well overall, as illustrated by the 
doubling of bilateral trade since its entry into force, a European Commission  impact assessment 
carried out in 2017 pointed at the need to modernise it, so as to adapt it to the new realities of 
global trade and investment, lifting it to the level of the more modern agreements that both the 
EU and Chile had concluded in the Americas and beyond, notably by complementing it with 
standard provisions enshrined in the latest version of deep and comprehensive trade agreements. 

In  November  2021,  technical  negotiations  on  the  modernisation  of  the  Agreement  were 
concluded,  resulting  in  the  most  comprehensive  and  progressive  bilateral  trade  agreement 
negotiated by the EU to date: 

 

 

In addition to further liberalisation of trade in agriculture under reorganised conditions, 
public  procurement,  services  and  investment,  the  modernised  Agreement  includes 
modern  rules  of  origin  and  customs  and  trade  facilitation  provisions,  ambitious 
commitments  on  IPR  (including  the  protection  of  EU  Geographical  Indications  for 
foodstuff)  and  non-tariff  barriers,  state-of-the-art  investment  protection  provisions 
(including an Investment Court System), and a new chapter on Trade and Sustainable 
Development among many other issues.  

It also contains strong provisions on sustainability and on energy & raw materials, which 
will help contribute to the green transition, as well as an ambitious chapter on SMEs 
and, for the first time in a bilateral EU agreement, separate chapters on trade and gender 
and on sustainable food systems.  

2. 

MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES 

In 2021, progress was made in addressing outstanding market access barriers in meetings of the 
institutional bodies and via EU demarches carried out by the EU Delegation in Chile.  

This  was  for  example  the  case  in  the  field  of  regulatory  data  protection  concerning 
pharmaceuticals and agro-chemicals products, there currently remains a lack of certainty 
with respect to two elements under Chilean law. Firstly, Chilean legislation provides protection 
of regulatory data upon request when applying for marketing authorisation (i.e. applicants must 
indicate  that  the  submitted  data  are  undisclosed).  However,  applicants  do  not  receive  any 

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

42 

 
 
 
 
                                                           
document  stating  that  such  protection  has  been  requested.  Neither  does  the  marketing 
authorization confirm that the protection has been granted. As a result, the pharmaceutical or 
agrochemical company has no legal documentation to defend itself against third parties trying 
to rely on their data to obtain a separate marketing authorisation. Secondly, Chilean law does 
not grant protection to data concerning a marketing authorisation for a product that obtained a 
marketing authorisation in any other country more than twelve months before the application 
is submitted to Chilean competent authorities.  

In  April  2021,  the  EU  Delegation  confirmed  that  the  barrier  had  been  partially  solved.  The 
problem of lack of legal documentation accrediting the protection had been resolved for pharma 
companies, as confirmed by the pharma association. For the agrochemical sector, the situation 
apparently improved during the pandemic thanks to electronic applications, although it is not 
clear whether this improvement will remain after the pandemic.  

In addition, the provisions of the modernised EU-Chile Agreement will partially contribute to 
solving  this  barrier,  as  they  incorporate  for  the  first  time  the  protection  of  regulatory  data 
protection concerning pharmaceutical and agro-chemical products. These rules feature a higher 
level of protection than that of Article 39.3 of the TRIPS Agreement. Therefore, the modernised 
Agreement would give the EU another forum to discuss the identified issues bilaterally with 
Chile, in  particular the first  element,  as the EU could  indicate that formalities related to  the 
protection of regulatory data cannot lead to lack of protection of the data, in accordance to the 
Agreement.  

As illustrated further below there are many other many instances, the modernisation of the 
Association Agreement, will help to solve or at least alleviate barriers: 

  This  will  be  the  case  in  the  area  of  IPR,  notably  for  concerns  on  copy-right 
enforcement  and  related  rights  on  the  internet  to  tackle  online  piracy  since  the 
modernised  agreement  should  increase  the  standards  of  the  enforcement  measures 
available for right holders in Chile, approximating them to those available in the EU. 
These standards include the rules on the legal protection of technological measures and 
of  rights  management  information.  They  also  include  effective,  proportionate  and 
dissuasive  enforcement  remedies,  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. 

transparency,  non-discrimination and  fairness 

  Likewise, in the area of public procurement, the modernised Agreement will establish 
rules  aimed  at  more 
in  public 
procurement procedures, and an increased use of electronic procurement. This will help 
to  address  requirements  currently  imposed  by  Chile,  mostly  for  tenders  run  by  the 
Ministry of Public Works,  on local presence and local experience.  In addition, Chile 
imposes  designs  and  technical  specifications  that  are  an  obstacle  for  EU  companies, 
especially for newcomers, and applies excessively short deadlines for the submission of 
offers.  In  2021,  the  Commission  continued  engaging  with  the  Chilean  authorities  on 

43 

 
 
 
 
these  issues.  Following  a  letter  by  the  EU  Delegation,  and  despite  the  denial  of  any 
wrongdoing  by  the  Chilean  authorities,  in  November  2021  Member  States  were 
reporting positive developments for EU companies on the ground. 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 provisions of TBT chapter of the modernised agreement are also likely to mitigate 

several trade barriers EU business continues facing in Chile:  

o  For  example,  imports  of  hygiene  products  and  cosmetics  from  the  EU 
presently suffer from burdensome administrative procedures, such as the cost 
and delay experienced by EU industry for the registration of products and the 
short  duration  of  the  registration.  In  practice,  this  means  that  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. The TBT Chapter of the modernised Agreement inter 
the  selection  of  conformity  assessment  procedures 
alia  provides  for 
proportionate to the risk of the products, disciplines on fees and cooperation on 
facilitation of acceptance of conformity assessment results.  

o  Furthermore, imports of EU electronic and fuel burning products are subject 
to a burdensome two-step certification procedure. Certificates or tests carried 
out in the origin country, although valid in Chile, must be completed with tests 
in  Chile  which  increase  the  cost  for  importing  goods.  This  requirement  also 
applies  for  products  certified  in  their  country  of  origin  by  internationally 
recognised laboratories and which are based on international standards, except 
if  a  bilateral  agreement  with  a  Chilean  laboratory  exists.  The  provisions  on 
recognition of EU certificates in the TBT Chapter of the modernised Agreement 
will help to partially solve this issue.  

o  Another example where the TBT chapter of the modernised agreement would 
help to solve the barrier can be found in the  area of food safety, where Chile 
prohibits the use of potato starch in processed meat products. This practice does 
not  appear to  be in  line with  the CODEX Alimentarius,  which 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.  In  March 
2021, the EU Delegation raised the issue once again with the Chilean Ministry 
of Health and, in October 2021, it provided detailed background documentation 
to the expert committee tasked with reviewing the Chilean legislation on food 
additives. This review, still underway, aims at bringing Chilean legislation in 

44 

 
 
line with the CODEX Alimentarius and could potentially solve the barrier. This 
potential solution would be in line with the provision of the TBT Chapter of the 
modernised Agreement, which includes the CODEX Alimentarius Commission 
into the list of organisations that develop relevant international standards.  

In 2021, a new trade irritant was reported related to import restrictions on seeds and dried 
legumes, linked to Chile's request to fumigate with methyl bromide (a substance prohibited in 
the  EU)  at  the  place  of  origin,  as  the  only  accepted  treatment  to  deal  with  the  Trogoderma 
Granarium pest.  

3. 

ACTIVITIES OF SPECIFIC MONITORING AND RELEVANCE IN 2021 

In 2021, monitoring activities continued to follow closely the procedure concerning requests 
for  registration  of  several  trademarks  that,  if  registered,  would  be  in  conflict  with 
Geographical Indications of EU cheeses and a meat product that Chile has agreed to protect 
under the modernised Agreement. 

The PI project on Data Collection on Public Procurement in Chile, implemented in 2021, 
helped to obtain a better understanding of the public procurement market in Chile, by measuring 
its size, describing its features and its entry barriers. This  could contribute to improving the 
participation of European companies in this market. 

The  PI  project  on  Preference  Utilisation  Rates  (PUR)  concluded  in  August  2021,  which 
included  Chile,  assessed  the  uptake  of  preferences  of  EU  goods  exported  under  the  trade 
agreement  with  Chile,  and  identified  potential  areas  for  improvement,  strengthening  the 
implementation and enforcement of trade agreements in line with EU Trade Strategy. 

In  2021,  through  its  regional  cooperation  programmes,  the  EU  supported  Chile’s  move 
towards  a  more  sustainable  and  environmentally  friendly  economy,  including  the  Mineral 
Development Platform on sustainable mining; the fight against Antimicrobial Resistance, the 
promotion  of  Responsible  Business  Conduct  and  the  adoption  of  Low  Carbon  and  Circular 
Economy business actions.  

45 

 
 
  
 
 
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’)31.  

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. The legal 
revision of the texts is ongoing. 

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 2021, the parties continued to engage to address outstanding issues such as in the area of 
SPS, TBT, IPR and government procurement. 

31 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. 

46 

 
 
 
                                                           
In the area of SPS, within the Special Committee on SPS Measures, the Parties continued to 
engage in technical discussions on the following outstanding issues affecting EU exports: 

  No application of “pre-listing” for EU meat products exports. Pre-listing is a priority 
in the EU’s SPS chapters in FTAs. To be authorised to export a certain commodity to 
the European Union, an exporting country should demonstrate that its controls meet EU 
requirements. If the exporting country's competent authority sees that an establishment 
meets the relevant EU import conditions, it can place the establishment on a list (often 
termed  a  "pre-list")  of  exporting  establishments  that  meet  relevant  EU  conditions. 
Mexico  does  not  apply  the  pre-listing  principle  and  inspects  every  establishment  for 
meat before granting export approval.  

  Non- recognition of the EU policy on animal disease regionalisation for African Swine 
fever in Poland, Belgium, Italy and Germany and Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza 
in Poland and France. 

  Delayed 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,  in  the  Special  Committee  on 
Standards  and  Technical  Regulations,  the  EU  and  Mexico  discussed  cumbersome  import 
certification  procedures  into  Mexico,  for  EU  parts  and  components  resulting  from  modified 
certification requirements under a number of Official Mexican Standard:  

  Mexico  provided  useful  information  about  a  possibility  to  place  products  on  the 
Mexican market while the certification is still ongoing and offered guidance to importers 
on individual products.  

  Mexico  also  presented  its  modernised  Quality  Infrastructure  Law  that  counts  with 
several  instruments  facilitating  recognition  of  conformity  assessment  results,  in 
particular  Mutual  Recognition  Agreements,  Mutual  Recognition  Arrangements  and 
Equivalence Agreements.  

  The  draft  versions  of  a  number  of  standards  related  to  foodstuff  (dairy  products  and 
alcoholic beverages) undergoing revision have nevertheless raised concerns from the 
industry, for including some trade restrictions which go beyond the legitimate policy 
objective. 

Regarding government procurement, Mexico continues its implementation of the agreement 
signed  with  UNOPS  (United  Nations  Office  for  Project  Services),  in  relation  to  medicines 
acquisition for the public health sector. Certain concerns on transparency requirements of this 
process were raised in the Special Committee on Government Procurement: 

  The  Committee  was  an  occasion  for  experts  to  exchange  information  on  recent 
developments  in  the  EU  and  Mexico  in  the  field  of  public  procurement  policies, 
including the EU outline of a proposal for an International Procurement Instrument.  
  Both  the  EU  and  Mexico  exchanged  statistics  on  the  use  of  direct  awards  in  their 

respective public procurement markets. 

47 

 
 
The EU and Mexico continued their cooperation on intellectual property, in particular through 
the Special Committee on Intellectual Property Matters, which met on 24 September 2021.  

  This  meeting  included  a  discussion  on  the  positive  developments  in  the  Mexican 
intellectual  property  legislative  framework,  with  particular  attention  to  the  Federal 
Copyright Law. The EU referred to the persistent concerns expressed by EU companies 
operating in Mexico about the ineffective enforcement of intellectual property rights in 
the country, including at the border and both online and in physical marketplaces. These 
concerns,  summarised  in  the  2021  Report  on  the  protection  and  enforcement  of 
intellectual property rights in third countries,32 have led EU stakeholders to call for a 
national  anti-piracy  plan  to  adopt  a  strategy  against  major  targets  and  to  coordinate 
federal, state and municipal enforcement activities in Mexico.  

  The  EU  and  Mexico  continue  committed  to  using  technical  cooperation  as  a  tool  to 
ensure effective protection of intellectual property rights in accordance with the highest 
international standards, including effective means to enforce such rights. IP Key Latin 
America33  remained in  2021 the main technical  cooperation programme between the 
EU  and  Mexico,  featuring  a  number  of  activities  aiming  to  address  some  of  the 
identified  challenges  in  the  area  of  intellectual  property  (e.g.  symposium  for  judges, 
patent  examination  training,  etc.).  In  2021,  IP  Key  Latin  America  and  the  Instituto 
Mexicano  de  la  Propiedad  Industrial  (IMPI)  presented  a  Study  on  the  Economic 
Contribution of Intellectual Property in Mexico.34  

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.  

  The Parties also explored flexibilities for the issuance of Mexican Certificates of Origin 

(movement certificate EUR.1).  

In the framework of the EU project on responsible business conduct35, 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:  

32 Report on the protection and enforcement of intellectual property rights in third countries (2021) (europa.eu) 

33 Latin America | IPKEY 

34 IP-Key-LA_Impact-Study-Mexico-2020_Report.pdf (ipkey.eu) 
35 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). 

48 

 
 
 
                                                           
 
  The project aims at promoting smart, sustainable and inclusive growth, by supporting 
responsible  business  conduct  practices  in  line  with  international  instruments  (OECD 
guidelines).  
It 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. 

 

Trade Barriers Regulation: Mobilising industry to solve the Tequila case 

In 2020, the Commission received a complaint from the Brewers of Europe on Mexico’s 
refusal  to  issue  export  certificates  for  the  geographical  indication  Tequila.  Brewers  of 
Europe alleged that the measure was WTO-incompatible, and was causing several hundreds 
of millions of euros of economic damage to the EU industry. The Commission opened an 
examination procedure in summer of 2020 and issued a report to the TBR Committee in 
April 2021 tacking stock of the situation and inviting the involved Parties to cooperate for 
a mutually agreeable solution.36. 

In October 2021, the Brewers of Europe notified that the affected EU company had found 
a  mutually  agreeable  solution  with  the  Mexican  authorities  allowing  for  the  exports  of 
Tequila to resume. Consequently, in February 202237, the Commission formally ended its 
investigation  under  the  EU’s  Trade  Barriers  Regulation  into  measures  taken  by  Mexico 
relating  to  the  exportation  of  Tequila.  The  positive  outcome  of  the  TBR  procedure 
underlines the important role of effective trade enforcement tools. 

36 Report to the TBR committee on Mexican measures related to the exportation of Tequila (europa.eu) 
37 See press release: https://policy.trade.ec.europa.eu/news/trade-barriers-eu-concludes-two-examinations-
ceramic-tiles-and-tequila-2021-05-04_en  

49 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
PART III: EU NEIGHBOURING COUNTRIES  

50 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Mediterranean and Middle East countries –  

Free Trade Areas 

51 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
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 for tariff dismantling set forth in the Agreement 
for  certain  products  (steel,  textile,  electronics,  and  automobiles),  extending  the  transitional 
period from 12 to 15 years. The complete dismantling of tariffs and thus completion of the 
EU-Algeria free  trade  was  foreseen  for  September  2020 but  has  only  been  implemented 
partially,  as  Algeria  established  additional  duties  for  a  series  of  products  while  prohibiting 
imports of certain other products, in particular cars. 

Market opening for agricultural products so far only concerns a limited number of tariff lines, 
which are subject to either full liberalisation, Tariff Rate Quotas (TRQ) or a reduction of Most 
Favoured Nation (MFN) rates respectively, for both Parties. The agreement does not include a 
specific  Dispute  Settlement  Protocol,  but  only  general  provisions  on  dispute  settlement, 
allowing a Party to refer the matter to the EU-Algeria Association Council in accordance with 
Article 100 of the Association Agreement (this process has been initiated by the EU side in 
June 2020, see further information in section 2 below).  

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  

Over  the  reporting  period,  Algeria  made  very  modest  progress  on  existing  market  access 
barriers: 

  A customs duty hike imposed in 2017 on a group of 129 products was abolished by the 

2022 budget law; 

  Measures affecting the conditions of maritime transport, such as the obligatory use 

of FOB incoterms and utilization of the national carrier have been withdrawn: 

In 2021, a significant number of other market access issues imposed since 2015 remain in 
place in Algeria, notably:  

  Today  both  car  imports  and  imports  of  car  kits  and  loose  parts  (SKD/CKD)  are 
prohibited.  2  executive  decrees  of  9/2020  were  published  aiming  at  restarting  both 
activities, however they have never been applied until today: the government (i) has 
not authorised car dealers to reimport new cars and (ii) did not signed until today new 
deals to restart car manufacturing in Algeria (see details below): 

52 

 
 
 
  
  
o  De  facto  ban  on  vehicle  imports  remains:  On  29/1/2019  Algeria  had 
established a total ban on import vehicles (they were under import licenses from 
2016) effectively resulting in  a zero import quota for cars for three  years.  In 
2020  a  decision  was  taken  to  phase  out  the  import  ban.  The  secondary 
legislation to implement the elimination of these measures and to authorize car 
dealers to import again, published in August 202038  was never applied, even 
after having been revised in Mai 202139. As a consequence, not only EU but all 
car exports to Algeria remain practically banned since 2015.   

o  End  of  2018  Algeria  also  banned  the  import  of  car  kits  and  loose  parts 
(SKD/CKD) intended for local manufacturing on the basis of several corruption 
cases. In August 2020 another executive decree for local car manufacturing40 
was published elaborating conditions for local manufacturing. These conditions 
run against the AA rules especially as regards the requirements of local content. 
This decree too was not followed by an entry into force and as a result today no 
car manufacturing takes place in Algeria. According to the local association of 
car distributors, Algeria needs today at least 700.000 new cars.  

  Algeria in May 2021 re-established the 49/51 cap for foreign investments for  import, 
retail  and  distribution  activities  for  consumer  and  intermediary  goods  (limiting  its 
application to strategic sectors, such as oil, gas and transport); 

  Algeria applies called provisional safeguard measures (so-called DAPS), introduced 
in 2018, having an effect equivalent to a custom duty, ranging from 30% to 200% of the 
value of the goods, levied on 992 tariff lines, covering industrial and agri-food products; 

  Algeria  bans  the  import  of  medicines  for  which there exists  a  locally-produced 

equivalent;  

  Algeria applies obligatory inspections as well as restrictions on frozen meat imports.  

In the recent past Algeria took a panoply of new sectoral and horizontal measures and also 
continues to apply practices restricting trade and investment, introducing red-tape, such as: 

  Measures delaying the payments for imported goods, or the withdrawal of licenses 

from EU companies operating dry docks in the country; 

  Import restrictions for canned meat and fish (adopted in September 2021), which 

result in delaying the issuance of the necessary veterinary authorisations;  

  A new nomenclature for import activities and measures (decree No. 21-94 of March 
2021)  imposing  burdensome  and  repetitive  registration  requirements.  It  obliges 
companies  importing  and  selling  consumer  and  other  goods  to  re-register  in  the 
company’s registry for a single category of imported goods, thus limiting the scope to 
trade  in  different  categories  of  imported  goods  under  one  single  registration. 
Furthermore, the creation of such new legal entities would need to follow the rules of 
the  2021  Budget  Law  mentioned  above  i.e.  foreign  investors  should  find  Algerian 

38 Executive Decree n° 20-227 of 19/8/2020 
39 Décret exécutif n° 21-175 du 21 Ramadhan 1442 correspondant au 3 mai 2021 modifiant et complétant le décret 
exécutif n° 20-227 du 29 Dhou El Hidja 1441 correspondant au 19 août 2020 fixant les conditions et les modalités 
d’exercice de l’activité de concessionnaires de véhicules neufs 
40 Executive decree 20-229 of 19/8/2020 

53 

 
 
                                                           
partners as the Law foresees a 49% cap on foreign ownership. As a result of these new 
measures, those EU companies which did not succeed to find a negotiated solution with 
the Trade Ministry were obliged to either split, limit or close down their activities in 
Algeria. 

  Prohibition of importing goods under the denomination “other” as appears in the 
HS. Despite the fact that the government had announced the end of this prohibition by 
31/12/2021,  the  measure  is  still  in  place  and  banks  are  under  instruction  to  refuse 
payments of imported goods designated in the invoice as “other”.  

  While the above measures  target all imports not specifically EU imports, 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. In  particular,  a 
number  of  trade  barriers  put  in  place  by Algeria,  including  a  car  import  ban,  the 
safeguard duty on several hundreds of products (DAPS), additional duty hikes on other 
types of products as well as an import licensing scheme led to significant decrease in 
EU exports.  

54 

 
 
 
 
Dispute Settlement Procedure against Algeria: Several trade restrictive measures 

the  EU  side  referred 

the  Association  Agreement, 

Step 1: After years of informal discussions to no avail, on 24 June 2020, in accordance with 
the EU-
Article  100  of 
Algeria Association Council a dispute concerning five  measures mentioned above (DAPS 
or  droits  additionnelles  provisoires  de  sauveguard,  import  ban  on  cars,  import  licensing 
scheme, duty hikes on 129 products and procedural restrictions in the maritime transport 
sector) The initiation of the procedure was followed by  long technical consultations with a 
view to  resolve the dispute  by means of a joint  decision of the EU-Algeria Association 
Council. Besides the regular technical consultations these issues were also discussed at the 
EU-Algeria Subcommittee on Trade in October 2020 and at the last Association Council 
meeting of December 2020.   

to 

Step 2: Failing amicable resolution, the EU in March 2021 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.  

Step 3: The Algerian side did not appoint an arbitrator and in the subsequent months it also 
refused to implement a tentative compromise reached within the context of consultations. 
Since  late  2021  the  Algerian  side  does  not  reply  to  proposals,  signals  by  the  EU  side 
including several note verbales and a letter by EVP Dombrovskis of early December 2021. 

55 

 
 
 
 
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 Egypt’s 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 
enhancing bilateral cooperation on trade and investment has shown limited interest in a full-
fledged DCFTA so far. 

Since  2020,  the  EU  and  Egypt  are  engaged  in  a  regular  trade  dialogue  on  market  access 
challenges, focusing on enhancing the implementation of FTA commitments, elimination of 
trade irritants as well as improving transparency of business legislation. 

56 

 
 
 
 
2. 

MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES 

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.  

In 2021, the EU and Egypt intensified their trade dialogue within the sub-committee through 
regular  technical  consultations  to  further  remove  barriers  to  trade  affecting  businesses  and 
investors, building on progress achieved in 2020.  

Some progress could be achieved in 2021: 

  The  trade  dialogue  and  high-level  correspondence  with  Egypt’s  authorities  led  to  a 
successful removal inter alia of Egypt’s import ban on ceramics and sugar in March 
2021 and June 2021, respectively.  

  Close  cooperation  with  the  Egyptian  authorities  allowed  to  avert  the  planned  re-

reintroduction of Egypt’s customs duties on cars imported from the EU. 

  Partial progress was achieved in 2021 on Egypt’s new halal certification requirements 
applying  since  October  2021:  As  a  result  of  coordinated  efforts  of  the  EU  and  EU 
Member States, as well as the cooperation of the Egyptian authorities, the severe trade 
disruptions, which the new rules could entail for EU exports of dairy products have been 
prevented  by  the  extension  of  a  transitional  period  allowing  additional  time  for 
business to adapt. Efforts are continuing to address remaining problems related to the 
new certification rules.  

At the same time, a number of market access barriers continue to exist in Egypt and were 
subject to discussions in the relevant committees under the Agreement. The most significant 
one concerned Egypt’s import registration regime, which  continues to affect EU companies, 
whose  registration  applications  have  been  waiting  for  approval  for  several  years,  with  no 
possibility to export to Egypt during that time. The measures at issue include, inter alia  

 

 

 

the introduction of registration requirements for foreign factories or companies owning 
trademarks and wishing to import covered goods into the customs territory of Egypt as 
a pre-condition for importation;  

the  registration  procedure,  which  has  been  administratively  burdensome,  non-
transparent, costly and time-consuming; and  

the  failure  of  the  Egyptian  authorities  to  process  a  number  of  applications  for 
registration  submitted  by  EU  companies  and  to  keep  the  applicants  informed  on  the 
status of those applications.  

Given that the EU’s longstanding and repeated requests for Egypt to resolve this problem have 
not been adequately addressed, the EU in January 2022 filed a request for consultations at 
the  World  Trade  Organization,  which  are  the  first  step  in  WTO  dispute  settlement 
proceedings (see further below). 

57 

 
 
 
 
WTO dispute against Egypt: DS609 – Import Registration Requirements 

Step 1: On 26 January 2022, the EU filed in the WTO a request for consultations with Egypt 
concerning  the  registration  requirements  imposed  by  Egypt  affecting  the  importation  of 
certain categories of goods from the EU into Egypt. The registration requirements cover 29 
categories  of  goods  including  agricultural  and  food  products,  cosmetics,  toys,  textiles, 
garments,  household  appliances,  furniture  and  ceramic  tiles.  These  requirements  are 
designed as a precondition to trade in Egypt, hence being inconsistent with Egypt’s GATT 
commitments. 

Step  2:  The  EU  and  Egypt  held  consultations  in  a  virtual  format  on  23  February  2022. 
Proceedings are ongoing. 

In addition to the above, the bilateral trade dialogue covered also the following issues: 

  Egypt’s  customs  related  measures,  including  the  new  Advanced  Cargo  Information 

system; 

  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 the new risk-based import 
control system on food products, the food import licensing scheme, the new mechanism 
for import of seed potatoes and checks of pesticide residues in fruit;  

 

Import  refusals  due  to  Egypt’s  zero-radioactivity  requirement,  affecting  mostly 
shipments of wood, office furniture and whey powder. 

Finally, Egypt has not yet implemented the state aid/subsidy control rules as foreseen by 
Article 34 of the Association Agreement, which is needed to secure a level playing field. 

58 

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

1. 

THE AGREEMENT 

The EU and  Lebanon on 17 June 2002  signed  an  Association Agreement41 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’) 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  for  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 201742.  

Lebanon joined the Agadir Agreement in March 2020.  

Lebanon is still in the process of applying to join the WTO, which the EU continues to 
support, including by technical assistance, in light of the needs of the Lebanese government.  

2. 

MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES 

Additional custom duties raised in 2019 (and updated in October 2020) continued to be in 
place throughout 2021. They include a temporary additional duty of 3% on most imports and 
additional duties on imports of about 18 groups of products. Eight of them affect imports from 
the EU, with duties ranging from  7% to 20%.  These trade barriers  have  been raised several 
times at the highest level vis-à-vis the Lebanese authorities, as they do not appear to be in line 
with the Agreement, since they affect selected goods and differentiate between trading partners.  

Since the resignation of the government in August 2020, following the explosion at the Port of 
Beirut,  Lebanon  continued  to  function  with  a  caretaker  government  for  most  of  2021,  only 
managing  to  appoint  a  new  cabinet  in  September.  Mostly  for  this  reason,  and  despite  a 

41  https://ec.europa.eu/world/agreements/downloadFile.do?fullText=yes&treatyTransId=3121 
42 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  

59 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
continuous deterioration of the economic situation in Lebanon, there have been no significant 
decisions concerning trade, and little dialogue with the EU on trade matters. 

Neither  the  Sub-Committee  on  “Industry,  Trade  and  Services,  Customs”  nor  the  EU-
Lebanon Joint Working Group on Trade and Investment met since December 2019.  

Discussions  continued  during  2021  about  the  possible  adoption  by  Lebanon  of  the  PEM 
transitional Rules of Origin (the revised rules of the PEM Convention, applicable on a bilateral 
basis pending the adoption of the revised PEM Convention by all contracting parties). Lebanon 
finally referred the issue to its Ministry of Justice, who ruled that a specific law would need to 
be adopted by Parliament before Lebanon can sign these rules, which is  likely to provoke a 
considerable delay. 

The draft national budget for 2022, still not adopted at the time of reporting, was leaked by the 
press  and  included  the  extension  of  the  additional  3%  custom  duty  introduced  in  2019  for 
another 10 years, plus a new 10% import duty on products having a locally produced substitute. 
The government has been alerted of the possible infringement of the Association Agreement. 

60 

 
 
 
 
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. As of 1 September 2021, Jordan and 
the  EU  started  to  apply  the  PEM  transitional  rules  of  origin  (the  revised  rules  of  the  PEM 
Convention, applicable on a bilateral basis pending the adoption of the revised PEM Convention 
by all contracting parties).  

2. 

MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES  

The  Subcommittee  on  trade,  industry  and  services  met  in  November  2020  and  the  next 
meeting should take place in the autumn of 2022.  

Nevertheless, the EU side continued to raise outstanding issues in official meetings under the 
Agreement, such as on the occasion of the EU-Jordan Association Committee in May 2021, as 
well as in written correspondence and technical meetings. Some progress was recorded in 2021 
in  improving  the  conditions  for  exports  of  some  agricultural  products  from  the  EU:  Jordan 
notably removed restrictions imposed on the import of fresh persimmon fruits. 

61 

 
 
 
 
However, concerns remain with the lack of full predictability and transparency of the Jordanian 
system of erga omnes licences for agricultural products. One example concerns the conditions 
applied by Jordan to the import of dairy products, notably some types of cheeses, such as labneh 
cheese and grilled cheese. There are also some issues with testing procedures and practices on 
imports of seed potatoes to Jordan.   

3. 

ACTIVITIES OF SPECIFIC INTEREST 

Under  the  simplified  Rules  of  Origin  initiative,  adopted  in  2016  and  amended  in  2018, 
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  2016  and  2021,  the  Preference 
Utilisation  Rate  (PUR)  for  Jordanian  exports  of  textiles  and  clothing  to  the  EU  increased 
significantly, reaching 77%, indicating the positive impact of the simplified Rules of origin 
scheme.  

Furthermore, the EU continues working with the ILO and the Jordanian Government to ensure 
decent working conditions in companies exporting to the EU. 

62 

 
 
 
 
 
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,  quality  job  creation  and  decent  working 
conditions and the digital agenda. 

63 

 
 
 
 
 
 
2. 

MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES  

A  new  Government  took  office  in  2021,  which  confirmed  Morocco’s  focus  on  import 
substitution  in  its  industrial  and  trade  policies,  aiming  at  reducing  imports  while  actively 
supporting domestic production. This takes the form of the pursuit of an active industrial policy 
via  an  “industrial  project  bank”,  aimed  at  supporting  projects  with  the  potential  of 
substituting imports with domestic products, as well as mandatory domestic preferences 
in  public  procurement  and  the  compulsory  use  of  goods  of  Moroccan  origin  in  public 
procurement for all goods.  

There were no meetings of the Subcommittee on trade, industry and services since July 2020, 
but the Commission services and the EU Delegation conveyed concerns in 2021 to Morocco 
about  the  significant  increase  in  Morocco’s  non-tariff  barriers,  both  during  technical 
discussions and in written correspondence between senior officials.  

A number of technical exchanges took place upon EU request: 

  Technical consultations took place in 2021 on Morocco’s requirement to  localise the 
production of pharmaceutical products in order to obtain marketing authorisations. 
The meeting clarified the nature of the requirement and confirmed that Morocco does 
not grant market authorization for pharmaceutical products if an equivalent domestic 
product is already available.  

  On  cosmetics,  technical  consultations  in  2021  allowed  to  exchange  on  Morocco’s 

registration system and on progress in digitalizing the registration procedures.  

  On exports of raw hides and skins, technical consultations in early 2022 confirmed 
that  the  system  of  export  licenses,  that  according  to  Morocco  are  motivated  for 
environmental  reasons,  represent  a  restriction  of  exports  of  such  products.  Morocco 
endeavored  to  lift  these  restrictions  once  the  dedicated  industrial  zones  for  tanning, 
currently under construction, will become operational. 

The  EU  expressed  concerns  in  writing  with  regard  to  Morocco’s  system  of  conformity 
assessment  for  imported  products.  Morocco  since  2020  applies  compulsory  third  party 
certification for compliance with Moroccan standards to a wide range of industrial products, 
with adverse effects for EU exports. Only five private international companies are designated 
to  carry  out  the  checks  on  imported  products  subject  to  technical  regulations.  Conformity 
assessments need to be undertaken mostly in the country of origin of the goods, and for a more 
limited range of products upon their entry into Morocco. Domestic products are subject to a 
much lighter regime of conformity checks. European operators have reported difficulties with 
the new system mainly related to additional costs and delays and different interpretations of the 
applicable requirements by the conformity assessment companies. 

Morocco applies safeguard measures on imports of welded steel pipes, hot rolled steel plates, 
wire rods and reinforcing bars, cold-rolled steel sheets and plated or coated sheets, as well as 
coated  wood  boards.  It  also  applies  anti-dumping  duties  on  PVC  including  from  some  EU 
companies.  Morocco  launched  a  new  safeguard  investigation  in  2021  targeting  imports  of 
lighting columns. The EU swiftly submitted written observations, and the EU Delegation and 
(several) Member States engaged in intensive outreach with local authorities to convey the EU’s 
concerns in respect of the potential application of safeguard measures given that the conditions 

64 

 
 
 
 
 
for  imposing  safeguard  measures  were  not  fulfilled.  The  investigation  was  closed  in  March 
2022 without the application of a safeguard measure.   

European  General  Court  ruling  on  Western  Sahara  &  Sustainable  Fisheries 
Agreement43  

On 29 September 2021 the General Court of the EU annulled two Council decisions relating 
to international agreements with Morocco: 

- 

- 

the agreement between the EU and Morocco extending tariff preferences to products 
originating in Western Sahara (; 
the Sustainable Fisheries Partnership Agreement.  

The Council and the Commission both lodged appeals in December 2021. Pending a final 
judgement the Court decided that the effects of the Council decisions would be upheld, i.e. 
the agreements continue to apply between the Parties. 

On 22 December 2021 the European Commission issued the second 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 exports to the EU and employment figures show a continuing and moderate 
increasing trend, export and employment figures have increased, which can be considered 
as due largely to the favourable economic conditions of Western Sahara and to granting of 
the tariff preferences under the Agreement, following the amendment of 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.   

Finally, Morocco has not yet implemented the state aid/subsidy control rules as foreseen by 
Article 36 of the Association Agreement, which are needed to secure a level playing field. 

43 https://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2021-09/cp210166en.pdf  

65 

 
 
 
                                                           
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 hereinafter ‘the 
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 is free to export to the EU all industrial products covered by the Agreement 
tariff-free, while it benefited from a transitional period of 12 years for imports from the EU, 
which ended in 2010. The FTA thus established 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 than 
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 pending the establishment of the list of individuals to serve as arbitrators. 

Tunisia  also  signed  the  Regional  Convention  on  pan-Euro-Mediterranean  preferential 
rules of origin on 16 January 2013. Tunisia is considering joining 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, but has not formalised its request. 

Four rounds of negotiations on a Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Agreement (DCFTA or 
“Accord de libre échange complet et approfondi” ALECA in French) took place between 2015 
and 2019 and are on hold since then.  

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-Tunisia  trade  and 
investment relationship could support economic recovery and meet our common challenges in 
the  field  of  resilient  value  chains,  climate  change,  quality  job  creation  and  decent  working 
conditions and the digital agenda. 

2. 

MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES 

Several  long-standing  market  access  issues  remained  unresolved  in  2021.  They  mainly 
concern  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); sectorial market access limitations on pharmaceuticals, cosmetics, 

66 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
cars,  tyres,  ceramic  tiles;  and  de  facto  non-automatic  licences  on  cheese,  chocolate  and 
chocolate products.  

The EU side was able to negotiate a partial exception for some products of strong EU export 
interest from the scope of the Finance law 2022 adopted on 28 December 2021, which provided 
for an erga omnes increase of MFN customs duties for a series of products. Such increase built 
on a similar tariff increase decided in the budget law for 2018, still in force. The EU alerted 
Tunisian authorities ahead of the adoption of the measure of its negative impact on European 
exporters.  While  the  overall  measure  went  ahead,  considered  necessary  by  the  Tunisian 
authorities to address the country's current severe trade and economic situation, some products 
of strong export interest for the EU were removed from the list. The increase in erga omnes 
MFN customs duties notably affects some EU exports of some agricultural products, which, 
contrary to industrial products, are not liberalised under the Free Trade Area established as part 
of the EU-Tunisia Association Agreement. 

Finally, Tunisia has not yet implemented the state aid/subsidy control rules as foreseen by 
Article 36 of the Association Agreement, which are needed to secure a level playing field. 

67 

 
 
 
 
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 
Palestine44 (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.  The  latter  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 28 September 
2021  where  trade  relations  were  discussed  both  in  bilateral  and  regional  context,  notably 
focussing  on  how  the  EU  could  facilitate  trade  talks  between  Israel  and  the  Palestinian 
Authority, either in bilateral or trilateral format. 

The  Interim  Association  Agreement  is  far  from  reaching  its  full  potential,  hindered  by 
restrictions  imposed  by  the  Israeli  authorities.  Morever,  Palestinian  trade  also  faces 

44 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. 

68 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
competitiveness issues and has often difficulties in meeting the standards required on the EU 
market. 

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. Some concrete progress was achieved with 
the introduction of a pilot project for containerised transport between the West Bank and Jordan 
via the Allenby bridge, a project that was supported by the EU Delegation in Jerusalem.   

69 

 
 
 
 
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  liberalisation  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 agreement 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 an 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. There are 
currently no discussions on resuming this process. 

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.  Israel has expressed its interest  in adhering to the new revised 
PEM Convention. 

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.  

70 

 
 
 
 
In  June  2013,  the  EU  and  Israel  signed  an  EU-Israeli  Aviation  Agreement  (“Open  Skies 
Agreement”), which fully entered into force in August 2020.45 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. The Agreement has also prompted 
the Israeli Ministry of Tourism to adopt an incentive scheme for airlines bringing visitors to 
Eilat.  On  31  December  2020,  Israel  and  the  U.K.  signed  a  bilateral  agreement  mirroring 
provisions of the EU-Israel Open Skies agreement, it entered into force on 1 January 2021. 

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.  

2. 

MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES 

Substantial progress has  been achieved regarding the  long-standing trade irritant that certain 
Member States (those that acceded in and post 2004 and Luxembourg) face in their exports of 
medical devices to Israel. The list of the so-called “recognised” countries gives some Member 
States’  operators  access  to  a  fast-track  authorisation  procedure  in  Israel,  while  others  are 
confined to a standard track. However, a legislative amendment to solve the issue is currently 
discussed in the Knesset. Moreover, to bridge the gap until the new legislation is ready, the 
Israeli government has set up a pilot project of six months (1 January – 30 June 2022) under 
which  certifications  by  Notified  Bodies  from  all  Member  States  are  already  and  de  facto 
accepted for the fast-track procedure. The government has already expressed its willingness to 
extend the duration of the pilot if necessary.  

No significant roll back of commitments in the FTA has been recorded; however there are a 
number of persistent trade irritants, among those:  

  The lack of data protection on biological medicines; 

  The rigid regime of kosher certification for imported meat. 

The last meeting of the EU-Israel sub-committee on industry, trade and services was held 
on 6 and 7 December 2021 where trade relations were discussed in both bilateral and regional 
context, including a follow-up of the Union for the Mediterranean Ministers joint declaration 
of Ministers of Trade, adopted in November 2020, regarding efforts in removing obstacles to 
Palestinian trade. EU and Israel also exchanged views on existing trade irritants, as well as on 
some cross cutting issues, e.g. reduction of carbon emissions, and IPR. 

45 As of spring 2018, the EU-Israeli air transport market is fully open with no restrictions on the number of 
flights.  

71 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
Eastern countries – Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade 
Areas 

72 

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

This  report  only  covers  the  year  2021,  when  bilateral  EU-Ukraine  trade  reached  its  highest 
value  since  the  entry  into  force  of  the  DCFTA  in  January  2016  (€52.4  billion,  i.e.  a  100% 
increase as compared to 2015). This positive evolution has been seriously impacted since the 
start of the unprovoked and unjustified Russian aggression on 24 February 2022.  

1. 

THE AGREEMENT 

The Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area (DCFTA) between the EU and Ukraine, the 
trade part of the Association Agreement46, provisionally entered into force on 1 January 2016 
while the full Association Agreement formally entered into force on 1 September 2017. This 
information sheet constitutes the report on the implementation of the EU-Ukraine DCFTA, in 
line  with  the  reporting  requirements  of  the  Regulation  implementing  the  anti-circumvention 
mechanism provided for in the EU-Ukraine Association Agreement.47 

2. 

MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES 

2.1   Market access: Progress and outstanding issues  

Ukraine’s regulatory approximation to the EU acquis continued to progress well.  In some 
areas, effective enforcement by independent and transparent institutions is challenging.  

Overall implementation of the DCFTA was discussed during the 6th EU-Ukraine Association 
Committee in Trade Configuration (ACTC), held on 22-23 November 2021 in hybrid form (in 
Brussels  and  online).  During  this  meeting,  the  Committee  adopted  the  update  of  the  Annex 
XVII of the Association Agreement, notably a list of EU acquis in some services areas to which 
Ukraine  has  committed  to  approximate  (telecommunications,  postal  and  courier,  and 
international maritime transport). 

In 2021 both sides further agreed on a “Priority Action Plan for enhanced implementation 
of the EU-Ukraine DCFTA in 2021-2022”, with the aim of intensifying bilateral cooperation. 
In February 2021 both sides also agreed to activate the review of the scope of liberalisation 

46 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  
47 Regulation (EU) 2016/400 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  Moldova, of the other part 
(OJ  L 77/53  of  23.3.2016).  According  to  its  Article  14,  the  Commission  shall  submit  an  annual  report  on 
implementation of this Regulation and Title V (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 Moldova. 

73 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
of customs duties on imports, as foreseen in Article 29 of the Agreement. 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 2021, the 
first  conclusions  were  obtained  of  the  pre-assessment  mission  that  was  launched  in  2020  to 
examine progress in relation to the work done on the pre-conditions for the ACAA negotiations.  

Progress  was  made  on  a  number  of  customs  related48  issues  as  Ukraine  advanced  in  the 
implementation  of  legislation  to  comply  with  the  requirements  under  the  Common  Transit 
Convention and the Convention on the Simplification of Formalities in Trade in Goods49. Work 
also progressed on Authorised Economic Operators (AEOs). An agreement on the update of 
Annex XV on approximation of customs legislation was reached at the end of 2021, and the 
update  is  planned  to  be  formalised  in  due  course  by  the  Association  Committee  in  Trade 
configuration.  

In regard to public procurement, Ukraine’s alignment to EU’s public procurement legislation 
continued in 2021 and both sides agreed that there was a good basis to launch the assessment 
on the completion of Phases 1 and 2 of the roadmap in Annex XXI-A., to be formalised through 
a decision of the EU-Ukraine Association Committee in Trade Configuration (ACTC) in  due 
course.  

In the area of SPS50, Ukraine continued to implement the SPS strategy, particularly as regards 
animal  welfare,  which  is  of  particular  interest  for  stakeholders.  Work  is  ongoing  on  80 
implementing  acts,  and  transitional  periods  are  foreseen  until  2026  for  some  categories  of 
animals.  

There has been no decisive progress in  2021on the wood export ban, a long-standing trade 
irritant on which the EU had initiated bilateral dispute settlement in 2019. A panel published 
its final ruling in December 2020 and found Ukraine’s 2015 temporary export ban incompatible 
with Article 35 of the Association Agreement. Ukraine did not notify in 2021 any measure that 
it has taken to comply with the panel ruling.51 

In the rules area, systemic problems remained 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 202152. The issues were raised in the 19th IPR Dialogue, which took place 
on 27 January 2022. As regards Geographical Indications (GIs)53, cooperation continued in 
order to ensure alignment of Ukraine’s GI system with EU norms and standards. In the field of 
competition,  both  sides  discussed  ways  of  addressing  outstanding  issues  related  to  the 
independence of the anti-monopoly committee, the way the committee applies competition law 

48 The 5th Customs Sub-committee took place on 22 September 2021.  
49 Law of Ukraine No 78-ІХ “On a common transit regime and introduction of the national electronic transit 
system”, adopted on 12 September 2019. 
50 The 6th SPS Sub-committee took place on 15 and 22 November 2021. 
51 More Detailed information and regular updates can be found on DG TRADE’s website: 
https://policy.trade.ec.europa.eu/enforcement-and-protection/dispute-settlement_en  
52 https://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2021/april/tradoc_159553.pdf  
53 The 5th GI Sub-committee took place on 17 November 2021. 

74 

 
 
                                                           
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. 

2.2 

Trade and sustainable development: Progress and outstanding issues  

The  5th  Sub-Committee  on  Trade  and  Sustainable  Development  (TSD)  was  held  on  28 
October 2021. 
In regard to the establishment of the TSD Group of Experts, it was noted that Ukraine had not 
yet identified five Ukrainian TSD experts in accordance with the provisions of the Agreement. 
Ukraine and the EU agreed a timetable of steps to be taken so that a full group of experts would 
be in place in 2022.  

With  respect  to  trade  and  labour,  the  Parties  noted  the  need  to  bring  the  Ukrainian  legal 
framework in line with and implement ILO standards, including ILO conventions 81 and 129 
on labour inspections, as a cross-cutting issue for all labour standards. The EU and Ukraine 
noted  the  positive  contribution  of  the  EU-funded  ILO  project  ‘Towards  safe,  healthy  and 
declared  work  in  Ukraine’  and  stressed  the  importance  of  taking  into  account  its 
recommendations in the preparation of draft laws on labour relations, occupational health and 
safety and labour inspections. The Parties also agreed on the need for improving social dialogue.  

The  EU  and  Ukraine  also  discussed  sustainable  and  legal  forest  management.  Ukraine 
presented  the  main  developments  towards  ensuring  the  legality  of  harvested  wood  and  the 
timeline  for  the  Ukrainian  Forest  Strategy  to  be  adopted  by  the  end  of  2021.  The  parties 
reiterated the principle that any system for a robust forest control and inspection body/ies should 
be independent from the State Forest Resources Agency and wood harvesting activities.  

As regards climate and energy, the parties discussed the importance of the commitments under 
the Paris Agreement on climate change and the European Commission’s proposal on a Carbon 
Border Adjustment Mechanism. The parties reiterated the importance the energy sector has for 
sustainable economic growth, climate and Ukraine’s security. Ukraine informed about further 
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. 
On this occasion, members of the EU Domestic Advisory Group (DAG) of the Ukrainian 
DAG produced a joint statement54. 

54 https://www.eesc.europa.eu/sites/default/files/files/joint_statement_5th_dag-to-dag_oct_2021.pdf  

75 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
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 
Agreement55 (AA) entered into force on 1 July 2016, after having been applied on a provisional 
basis  since  1  September  2014.56  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.57  

The  Government  of  Georgia  adopted  in  December  2020  its  third  Action  Plan  for  the 
implementation  of  the  DCFTA  2021-202358.  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.   

As part of the process of amending 21 origin protocols within the PEM Convention, the EU 
implements  a  transitional  set  of  rules  of  origin  applicable  alongside  the  rules  of  the  PEM 
Convention, on a bilateral basis, pending the adoption of these amendments. On 1 September 
2021, the new rules became applicable, in an initial stage, between the EU and Georgia. In 2021 
and 2020 they became applicable between Georgia and Turkey and Georgia and the Ukraine, 
respectively.  

Background: On 1 July 2017 Georgia joined the  Convention on pan-Euro-Mediterranean 
preferential rules of origin (“PEM Convention”)59. The joint Decision of the Customs sub-
committee  on  the  linkage  of  the  rules  of  origin  in  bilateral  trade  to  the  Protocol  of  PEM 
Convention60 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 

55 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  
56 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. 
57 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. 
58 DCFTA AP 2021-2023 ENG.pdf 
 59 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 
60 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. 

76 

 
 
 
 
                                                           
regional trade flows. The rules of origin providing for diagonal cumulation became applicable 
between Georgia and the EU in 2018. In 2017 and 2018, they also became applicable between 
Georgia and the following partners: Switzerland and Lichtenstein, Iceland and Norway. 

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

2. 

MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES 

2.1   Market Access: Progress and outstanding issues 

The  8th  Association  Committee  in  Trade  Configuration  was  held  by  video  conference  in 
December 2021. 

The approximation commitments for 2015-2021 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 by Georgia in 2021 in several areas of legal approximation: 

 

 

In the area of SPS the necessary steps to add Georgia to the lists of countries from where 
export of snails is permitted are being finalised.  Georgia is also looking to accelerate 
the process of allowing for exports of queen bees and aquaculture to the EU.  

in  2020,  continues 

In the area of technical barriers to trade, the new Market Surveillance Agency (MSA), 
institutional  development  and  has  started 
established 
implementation of market surveillance activities regarding the technical regulations 
adopted in line with DCFTA approximation process. Georgia has highlighted progress 
on  the  increased  number  of  recognised  services  and  introduction  of  new  demanded 
service  in  the  field  of  calibration  of  density  meters.  For  supporting  the  legal 
approximation  process  of  Georgia,  GEOSTM,  strives  to  ensure  the  adoption  of  EU 
harmonised  standards  according  to  the  DFCTA.  As  of  November  2021,  in  total  the 
Georgian standards base consists of 19 331 standards, out of which: 6841 – International 
(ISO/IEC),  12490  –  European  (CEN/CENELEC/ETSI), 
including  harmonised 
standards. The Georgian Centre for Accreditation is preparing for peer evaluation from 
co-operation  for  Accreditation  (EA)  in  2022.  Furthermore,  the  digitalisation  of  their 
accreditation services is progressing.  Georgia initiated a study that will assess current 
conformity  assessment  capacities  in  Georgia  and  will  suggest  a  market  based 
assessment on needs. 

  On  Public  Procurement,  the  Association  Committee  for  Trade  Configuration 
adopted Decision No 2/2021 on the positive assessment of Phase 1 set out in Annex 

77 

 
 
 
 
 
XVI-B61  to  the  Agreement.  After  the  completion  of  the  internal  procedures  to  allow 
signing and adoption of the Association Council Joint Decision, mutual market access 
to public procurement procedures for supplies at central government authority level in 
the EU and Georgia will be granted. Georgia is working on the final draft for the new 
Public Procurement Law, which, according to Georgia, encompasses 1st, 2nd and 4th 
phases  of  the  approximation  (except  for  utilities)  and  is  ready  to  be  presented  to 
Parliament. 

In  the  area  of  IPR,  the  Georgian  Government  has  made  efforts  to  reform  the 
intellectual property protection and enforcement system. The Intellectual Property 
Centre of Georgia – Sakpatenti- carried out advocacy and awareness raising and training 
activities  for  judges,  SMEs,  students,  teachers  and  provided  technical  assistance 
(including the exchange of best practices etc.).  

In the area of energy policy, Georgia, since joining the Energy Community in 2017, is 
approximating its energy acquis according to the Energy Community work programme. 
Georgia  continues  to  develop  the  related  framework,  methodologies  and  regulations 
relating  to  the  implementation  of  the  Energy  Efficiency  Law,  Law  on  Energy 
Performance of Buildings and Law on Energy Labelling. Relevant by-laws adopted in 
2021 concern e.g. the minimum energy efficiency requirements for building unit and 
building  elements  and  national  methodology  for  calculating  the  energy  efficiency  of 
buildings.  The  Georgian  draft  National  Energy  and  Climate  Plan  (NECP)  is  being 
discussed with stakeholder groups, adoption is expected in early 2022. As of 2021, the 
implementation performance of energy-related provisions is at 45 percent.  

In  the  area  of  customs  and  trade  facilitation,  there  is  good  cooperation  with  well-
advanced  implementation  of  the  customs  code  and  electronic  systems.  On  the  New 
Computerised Transit System (NCTS) deployment phase 5, Georgia is a frontrunner in 
the region, deployment of the software was started in January 2021. As of the end of 
2021,  Georgia  is  working  on  the  development  for  the  national  programme  and  is 
expected  to  have  its  first  Authorised  Economic  Operators  (AEO)  in  the  near  future. 
Georgia was one of the first countries where the Rules of Origin were applicable from 
1 September 2021.  Georgia and EU have the intention to sign the Agreement on the 
accession to the EU customs and Fiscalis programmes.  

In the area of  services, the approximation in the context  of the DCFTA experienced 
some delays. On postal services, Georgia was notified of new EU acts adopted since 
2013. Georgia is set to provide its position on the substance of updated Annex XV-B 
and  XV-C.  A  new  draft  postal  law  is  ready  for  adoption,  but  Georgia  preferred  to 
introduce  commitments  of  the  2018  EU  Regulations  on  cross-border  parcel  delivery 
services and submit one draft law to Parliament with an extended deadline. With regard 

 

 

 

 

61 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. 

78 

 
 
                                                           
 
to  telecommunication  commitments,  the  draft  amendment  of  the  Law  of  Georgia  on 
Electronic Communication has been prepared, for the purpose of approximating with 
the |Directive on privacy and electronic communications62, Authorisation Directive63, 
Access Directive64 and Framework Directive65. The procedure for adoption will start in 
2022. Georgia’s new commitments of the European Electronic Communications Code 
might be included into the pending draft and the deadline set out in Annex XV-B might 
be  postponed.  The  EU  noted  the  importance  of  strong  digital  flexibility  and 
transformation needed, e.g. on eHealth and Digital Trust, Cyber Security and regional 
agreements (EaP roaming).  

There remained a number of outstanding issues in 2021:  

 

In  the  area  of  Energy  Policy,  the  pace  of  reforms  implemented  by  the  Georgian 
government  is  commendable,  but  developing  relevant  legislation  on  renewables  and 
energy efficiency remains a priority.  

  With regard to the new  Public Procurement Law, evidence of compliance with the 

approximation phases has been requested for review.  

 

In the area of IPR, inquiries were made about the IPR protection in Georgia relating to 
the implementation, enforcement and capacity of the relevant law-enforcement bodies. 
This data will be provided in 2022.  

 

In  the  area  of  services,  there  are  delays  with  regard  to  the  approximation  processes 
concerning postal and telecommunications services.  

2.2   Trade and sustainable development: Progress and outstanding issues 

The  6th  TSD  Sub-Committee  under  the  DCFTA  was  held  in  December  2021  by  video 
conference. It included dynamic discussions with the Civil Society Forum.  

Progress  was  made  in  2021  by  Georgia  in  implementing  the  TSD  chapter  commitments  in 
2021, EU-Georgia TSD implementation priorities are adopted in the new action plan for the 
period 2021-2023:  

In  regard to  environment protection related commitments,  Georgia  adopted the  National 
Climate Change Strategy 2030 and its Action Plan 2021-2023, that identifies measures and 
actions  that  support  the  development  of  the  Georgian  economy  and  infrastructure  in  a  way 
which sets Georgia on a pathway to meet its international obligations and national ambitions 

62 Council Directive 2002/58/EC of 12 July 2002: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-
content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX%3A32002L0058  
63 Council Directive 2002/20/EC of 7 March 2002: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-
content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:32002L0020  
64 Council Directive 2002/19/EC of 7 March 2002: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-
content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX:32002L0019  
65 Council Directive 2009/140/EC of 25 November 2009: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-
content/en/ALL/?uri=CELEX%3A32009L0140  

79 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
for climate change mitigation. Georgia is in the process of adopting the Law on Biodiversity, 
and several decrees regarding forest management, record keeping and monitoring. Georgia has 
submitted  its  4th  National  Communication  to  the  UNFCCC  on  April  2021.  Also,  Georgia 
submitted an updated ‘National Determined Contribution’, with more ambitious targets. The 
EU noted that this would still result in an increase in emission. However, with the support of 
EU4Climate,  Georgia  is  working  on  the  preparation  of  a  Long-Term  Low  Emission 
Development Strategy, and aims to ratify the Kigali amendment by 2022.  

With  regard  to  labour  conditions,  Georgia  established  a  full-fledged  labour  inspection 
service with extended mandate. The Labour Inspection Service is in place since 1 January 2021 
and its institutional development is underway. Georgia implemented recent amendments that 
brought its Labour Code closer to |EU and international standards. The Parties also discussed 
measures to address child labour and the importance of effective social dialogue and promotion 
of  collective  bargaining.  Additionally,  Georgia  has  been  encouraged  to  pursue  efforts  on 
ensuring non-discrimination and equal pay between men and women and complete alignment 
of the legal framework to ILO fundamental Conventions 100 (Equal Remuneration) and 111 
(Non-discrimination).  

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 2021, due to the low trade levels for those products 
in the analysed period. 

80 

 
 
 
 
 
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. This information sheet constitutes the report on 
the implementation of the EU-Moldova DCFTA, in line with the reporting requirements of the 
Regulation implementing the anti-circumvention mechanism provided for in the EU-Moldova 
Association Agreement.66 

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. As a result of the negotiations, which were initiated after Moldova requested the 
activation of the review clause contained in the DCFTA (Article 147(5)), 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 made significant progress in the regulatory approximation process in different fields 
of the EU acquis, especially on  customs, TBT and SPS. . Such approximation  needs to  be 
accompanied by  effective enforcement by independent  and transparent  institutions, which is 
challenging  in  some  areas,  as  well  as  by  the  necessary  secondary  legislation.  Overall 

66 Regulation (EU) 2016/400 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 Moldova, of the other part 
(OJ  L 77/53  of  23.3.2016).  According  to  its  Article  14,  the  Commission  shall  submit  an  annual  report  on 
implementation of this Regulation and Title V (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 Moldova. 

81 

 
 
 
                                                           
implementation  of  the  DCFTA  was  discussed  during  the  8th  EU-Moldova  Association 
Committee in Trade Configuration (ACTC), which was held on 16 December 2021.  

In  2021,  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 and the withdrawal of conflicting standards. 
Regarding  the  selection  of  potential  priority  sectors  to  negotiate  an  Agreement  on 
Conformity Assessment and Acceptance of Industrial Products (ACAA), Moldova will 
propose a new list of potential sectors, taking into account the potential export volumes 
and the need for full compliance with EU legislation. The new EU acquis in the area of 
TBT, including the new EU Regulation on market surveillance will be reflected in the 
updated Annex XVI of the Association Agreement. 

  In  the  area  of  sanitary  and  phytosanitary  measures  (SPS),  Moldova  continued  its 
approximation to the EU acquis. Moldova cooperated constructively and obtained good 
practical results, including the listing for export of dairy products to the EU. The first 
establishment for the export of dairy products has been authorised for export to the EU. 
The audits on poultry and category B eggs are programmed to take place in 2022.  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. Both sides agreed to work towards an update of the Annex XVII (SPS) in 2022.  

  In  regard  to  public  procurement,  Moldova  is  moving  forward  with  its  legal  and 
institutional alignment to the EU acquis. The assessment of the approximation under 
phases  1  and  2  under  the  indicative  time  schedule  for  institutional  reform, 
approximation and market access (Annex XXIX-B) is finalized and, the focus will now 
be on phases 3 and 4, the completion of which could trigger additional mutual market 
access for Moldova. 

  In the area of Customs, in 2021 the Moldovan Parliament adopted the new Customs 
Code, which is based on the Union Customs Code.  It will now be important to plan the 
implementation ahead of the entry into force. Moldova made very good progress on the 
mutual recognition of authorised economic operators (AEOs), where the country is the 
front-runner among the DCFTA countries. A Mutual Recognition Agreement (MRA) 
could  be concluded in  2022. Moldova  will also work towards the deployment of the 
New  Computerised  Transit  System  (NCTS),  in  order  to  join  the  Common  Transit 
Convention by 2024.  

  On  intellectual  property  rights  (IPR),  Moldova  developed  a  new  draft  Law  on 
Copyright  and  Related  Rights,  consulted  with  relevant  stakeholders  and  made  it 
available  for  public  consultation  on  the  website  of  the  State  Agency  on  Intellectual 

82 

 
 
 
 
 
 
Property (AGEPI). Moldova also cooperated with the EU Intellectual Property Office 
on trademarks and designs and provided updated statistics on IPR enforcement.  

At the same time, a number of issues remain to be resolved:  

  The EU has reiterated on several occasions that some provisions currently included in 
the  Domestic  Trade  Law  constitute  a  systemic  breach  of  Moldova’s  international 
commitments. In 2021, Moldova announced the launch of a public consultation for a 
legislative proposal, which would take over key elements of EU directive 633/2019 on 
unfair  practices  in  the  agricultural  and  food  supply  chain  and  at  the  same  time  re-
establish the full compliance of the law with Moldova’s international commitments in 
trade matters.   

  Concerning  the  Application  of  the  DCFTA  to  Transnistria,  the  Trade  Facilitation 
Agreement remains very important for businesses on the left bank of the Dniester River 
in  their  exports  to  the  EU.  Continuous  engagement  of  the  two  sides  is  necessary  to 
ensure the application of the DCFTA to the entire territory of Moldova, in particular in 
the fields of TBT, customs and IPR. 

2.2   Trade and sustainable development: Progress and outstanding issues  

The last meeting of the TSD Sub-Committee between the EU and Moldova took place on 19 
October 2020, which was held 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. This meeting of the Sub-Committee enabled a substantial exchange on labour, 
forestry and energy provisions. 

As regards labour provisions, priority issues discussed at the 2020 TSD Subcommittee included 
child labour and labour inspections. After the 2020 TSD Subcommittee, Moldova carried out 
an important  reform,  bringing the competence  for labour inspections on occupational  health 
and safety back within the remit of the State Labour Service. Further amendments to the legal 
framework remain necessary to complete alignment with ILO standards on labour inspections. 
Progress was also evident on environmental matters, in particular through the transmission by 
Moldova of the  updated and more ambitious  Moldova Nationally Determined Contributions 
(NDCs) under the UNFCCC, with support of EU4Climate.  

3. 

MONITORING IN SPECIFIC AREAS  

An anti-circumvention mechanism applies to several agricultural goods (inlcuding pig and 
poultry meat, dairy products, eggs, sugar and some cereals such as wheat, barley and maize) as 
well  as  to  processed  agricultural  products  such  as  sweet  corn,  processed  sugars,  dairy  and 
cereals and cigarettes. In 2021, Moldova exceeded the thresholds for wheat (103%), processed 
cereals (285%) and sweet corn (190%) but provided satisfactory explanations for the respective 
levels.  

83 

 
 
 
 
 
 
Western Balkans – Stabilisation and Association 
Agreements 

84 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
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. 

In addition, Kosovo needs to put in place a more transparent trade policy, in line with WTO 
practices,  and  avoid  protectionism.  A  draft  law  on  foreign  trade  has  been  prepared,  but  it 
contains  provisions  that  still  needed  to  be  brought  in  closer  alignment  with  WTO  rules  and 
principles  and  SAA  provisions.  The  Commission  has  expressed  concerns  that  the  draft  law 
would give the government too much control over trade and would be too protectionist. 

85 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
No progress was made in 2021 in the implementation of the SAA’s trade related commitments 
and a number of important issues remain unresolved: 

 

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.  Although  Kosovo  has  promised  to  remove  this  trade  barrier,  in  practice  no 
progress was made in 2021. 

  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  still  lacks  adequate  legislation  on  trade  in  arms,  military  equipment  and 

dual-use goods, which the EU side has criticised.  

  Kosovo is only partially aligned with EU Regulations on dumping and countervailing 

duties. 

86 

 
 
 
 
 
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. 

In  2021,  a  proposal  by  Serbia  to  introduce  import  tariffs  on  certain  EU  processed  meat 
products could be averted that would clearly have been a breach of the SAA. Serbia was arguing 
that  this  was  necessary  as  a  temporary  safeguard  measure  to  protect  domestic  producers, 
although  insufficient  evidence  was  provided  to  the  EU  to  demonstrate  that  a  safeguard 
measurement could be justified, and there was no evidence of any sudden increase in imports 
nor any causal link to difficulties being suffered by domestic producers in the sector. As in the 
similar measure, which was introduced by Bosnia and Herzegovina, the decision to proceed 
with  the introduction of  tariffs seems  to have been  drive by political  considerations, and  an 
attempt to manage domestic competition issues by blocking foreign imports.  

87 

 
 
 
 
A new system to manage wine quotas67 was adopted by Serbia in January 2021, changing the 
previous 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. Although the 
EU expressed concerns that this risks harming market access by EU exporters and imposing 
additional costs, in practice it seems to be operating without major problems for EU exporters 
or domestic businesses. The Commission continues to monitor the situation, as the measure 
represents a step backwards in the state of alignment with the EU approach, but is currently not 
taking any further action.  

Serbia continued to raise concerns regarding the impact of the EU’s steel safeguard measures 
at the highest political levels.  

67 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. 

88 

 
 
 
                                                           
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  (BiH)  has  made  reasonable  progress  in  implementing  the  SAA 
provisions since their entry into force. However, the political situation in the country became 
increasingly  unstable  during  2021,  reducing  the  ability  of  the  federal  authorities  to  make 
progress on reforms. Several SAA sub-committees were delayed. No progress was made on 
BiH’s WTO accession. 

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. However, no progress was made 
in 2021, despite the Commission’s engagement with  BiH.  

A major concern in 2021 was a proposal by BiH 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 was presented. The Commission expressed its concerns that 

89 

 
 
 
 
 
such  a  measure  would  constitute  a  breach  of  the  SAA.  The  decision  to  proceed  with  the 
introduction of tariffs seems to have been a political move in disregard of BiH’s commitments 
under the SAA. After considerable engagement by the EU side with BiH, the BiH authorities 
decided not to proceed with the measure.  

There was good news regarding public procurement. BiH did not extend its 30% preferential 
rate for domestic businesses in public procurement after 31 May 2021. The government had 
argued that this measure was necessary in order to support economic recovery following the 
pandemic,  but  it  was  a  clear  breach  of  article  74  of  the  SAA,  and  no  economic  or  legal 
assessment of the measure was undertaken.  

Like  Serbia  and  North  Macedonia,  Bosnia  and  Herzegovina  continued  to  raise  concerns 
regarding the EU’s steel safeguard measures during 2021.  

90 

 
 
 
 
 
 
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 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).  In  this  regard,  Albania  expressed 
during the last Subcommittee meetings on Agriculture and Fisheries their wish to improve their 
existing market access under the SAA for certain fish and fishery products tariff rate quotas 
(TRQs). On the other hand, EU agricultural  exports to Albania remain subject to tariffs and  
TRQs. 

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.  

Among others, Montenegro has made substantial progress in adapting its legislation to the EU 
acquis in the field of dual use goods. Montenegro has already drafted an update to its framework 
Law on Export Control of Dual-Use Goods, to bring it in line with most provisions of the latest 
EU Regulation (821) from May 202168, although certain parts of the EU Regulation can only 
be integrated once Montenegro becomes an EU member state. The List of dual use goods and 
technologies is regularly updated and aligned with  the EU List. 

68 http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2021/821/oj   

91 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
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 Albania and 
North Macedonia. However, one Member State has blocked the opening of these negotiations 
due to a dispute 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.  

Among others, Albania has made substantial progress in adapting its legislation to the EU 
acquis in the field of dual use goods. Albania is drafting an update to its framework Law on 
Export Control of Dual-Use Goods, to bring it in line with most provisions of the latest EU 

92 

 
 
 
 
 
 
Regulation (821) from May 2021, and is making efforts to enhance capacity for the application 
of  dual  use  export  controls.  Albania’s  national  List  of  dual  use  goods  and  technologies  is 
regularly updated and aligned with the EU List. 

There  are  no  significant  trade  barriers.  However,  there  remains  a  concern  regarding  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. Although Albania has 
given the Commission assurances that the projects and procedures included in the Agreement 
with the United Arab Emirates will be in line with the obligations of the SAA, they have not 
yet explained how Article 6 of the Agreement will be applied in practice, and how compatibility 
with Article 74 of the SAA will be ensured. 

93 

 
 
 
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  and  Albania.    However,  one  Member  State  has  blocked  the  opening  of  these 
negotiations due to a dispute with North Macedonia. 

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. 
No trade irritants arose in 2021.  

North Macedonia has made good progress in adapting its legislation to the EU acquis in the 
field of dual use goods. Following the adoption by the EU of a revised Regulation (821) on 
dual use goods export controls69, North Macedonia put on pause its own drafthe Law on dual 
use goods, and is now reviewing what changes need to be made to bring it in line with the EU 
legislation. North Macedonia’s national  List of dual use goods and technologies is regularly 
updated and aligned with the EU List. 

69 Reference: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2021/821/oj  

94 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
North Macedonia is preparing legislation on export credits, which it intends to bring in line 
with EU Regulation 1233/2011 during 2022. 

Like Serbia and Bosnia and Herzegovina, North Macedonia has  continued to raise concerns 
regarding the EU’s steel safeguard measures during 2021.  

95 

 
 
 
 
 
United Kingdom, Switzerland, Norway, Turkey 

96 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNUAL INFORMATION SHEET ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE EU-
UNITED KINGDOM TRADE AND COOPERATION AGREEMENT70 

1. 

THE AGREEMENT 

The EU-UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement (“TCA”) concluded between the EU and 
the UK sets out preferential arrangements in areas such as trade in goods and services, digital 
trade, intellectual property, public procurement, aviation and road transport, energy, fisheries, 
social  security  coordination,  law  enforcement  and  judicial  cooperation  in  criminal  matters, 
thematic cooperation and participation in Union programmes. It is underpinned by provisions 
ensuring  a  level  playing  field  and  sustainable  development  (LPFS)  as  well  as  respect  for 
fundamental rights. 

The  Trade  and  Cooperation  Agreement  was  signed  on  30  December  2020,  was  applied 
provisionally as of 1 January 2021 and entered into force on 1 May 2021.  The Commission 
presented a report on the implementation and application of the EU-United Kingdom Trade and 
Cooperation Agreement on 24 March 2022.71 

The main benefits of the trade part of the agreement can be summarised as follows: 

Goods: 

  Zero tariffs or quotas on goods, as long as the rules of origin are met. 
  Traders  can  self-certify  the  origin  of  goods  and  enjoy  full  bilateral  cumulation,  but 

cumulation with products originating in third countries is not allowed. 

  Mutual recognition of trusted traders programmes ensures lighter customs formalities 

and smoother flow of goods. 

  Common definition of international standards and possibility to self-declare conformity 

of low-risk products to facilitate for producers to export to both markets. 

Services 

While the TCA framework for services is significantly below the freedoms of establishment or 
to  provide  services  within the single market,  we  achieved ambitious outcome for the EU in 
trade in services and investment, for example: 

  Comprehensive coverage: all modes of services supply and investment, in almost all 

economic sectors; 

  Market  access  on  services  and  investment  beyond  the  level  achieved  in  other  trade 

agreements; 

70 Additional information on the first year of application of the EU TCA can also be found in the first Annual 
Report on its application and implementation published by the Commission on 24 March 2022: 
https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/default/files/com_2022_126_1_en.pdf  
71 https://ec.europa.eu/info/publications/annual-report-implementation-and-application-trade-and-cooperation-
agreement-between-european-union-and-united-kingdom-great-britain-and-northern-ireland_en  

97 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
  Common regulatory provisions for a number of services sectors, such as for example 
delivery  services,  telecommunications  services,  international  maritime  transport 
services,  and  for  the  first  time,  a  regulatory  chapter  on  legal  services  resulting  in  a 
clearer presentation of our existing commitments; 
  Best practice rules on licensing and qualifications; 
  A  mechanism  to  agree  on  arrangements  for  the  mutual  recognition  of  professional 

qualifications; 

  Rules  on  temporary  stay  of  persons  for  business  purposes,  in  line  with  the  highest 

standards of EU services agreements.  

Intellectual property 

There are commitments going beyond multilateral treaties in the area of IPR covering wide range 
of  various  types  of  IPR,  including  copyright  and  related  rights,  trade  marks,  designs,  plant 
varieties, trade secrets, etc. The chapter also contains strong civil, administrative and border 
enforcement provisions 

Public procuremnt 

The TCA incorporates the GPA rules and includes additional and market access, beyond the 
GPA commitments, which covers privately-owned procuring entities with monopoly rights in 
all utility sectors, procuring entities operating gas and heat networks, as well as some additional 
services. There are non-discrimination rules for EU-owned companies established in the United 
Kingdom, even for small procurement (national treatment below the GPA threshold), as well 
as additional public procurement standards (e.g. enhanced use of electronic means, acceptance 
of self-declarations, sustainable procurement and single portal for all tenders). 

Level playing field and sustainable development: 

Given their geographic proximity and close economic ties, as well as the scope and the depth 
of the TCA, the EU and the United Kingdom agreed to robust commitments to ensure a level 
playing and to contribute to sustainable development. 

More specifically, these provisions mean that: 

  The  current  high  standards  applicable  in  the  areas  of  labour  and  social  standards, 
environment, and climate cannot be lowered in a manner affecting trade or investment. 
  Robust  and  comprehensive  rules  prevent  distortions  created  by  subsidies,  anti-
competitive  practices,  or  dicriminatory  and  abusive  behaviour  by  state-owned 
enterprises. 

  Specific standards and rules and the joint political declaration in the area of taxation 

counter tax avoidance and harmful tax regimes and practices. 

  A wide-ranging set of commitments building on the EU's most ambitious precedents 

ensure that trade supports sustainable development. 

The enforcement of the level playing field provisions in the TCA is based on the following 
mechanisms mainly: 

98 

 
 
 
 
  Effective implementation domestically, including regarding subsidies the creation of an 
independent  authority  and  the  control  of  their  legality  by  courts;  as  well  as  an 
appropriate administrative and judicial proceedings in the areas related to labour and 
social standards, environment and climate;  

  Appropriate and effective governance and dispute settlement mechanisms for solving 
disputes  between  the  EU  and  the  United  Kingdom,  including  through  the  horizontal 
dispute settlement mechanism or tailored panel of experts; 

  Unilateral  remedial  measures  to  react  quickly  to  trade-distoring  subsidies  and  the 
possibility  to  apply  unilateral  rebalancing  measures  in  the  case  of  significant 
divergences in the areas of labour and social, environment or climate protection, or of 
subsidy control. 

2. 

MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES 

The  consequences  of  the  United  Kingdom  and  the  EU  to  split  into  two  separate  customs 
territories,  and  two  separate  markets  for  goods  and  services,  each  with  its  own  regulatory 
regime, inevitably created barriers to trade that did not exist before. 

Although  the  TCA  provides  for  trade  without  tariffs  and  quotas  on  all  imports  between  the 
parties, frictionless trade in goods ended and non-tariff barriers re-emerged. As of January 2021, 
all exports from the United Kingdom to the EU are subject to customs procedures and 
checks72.  Agri-food  consignments  must  be  accompanied  by  health  certificates  and  undergo 
sanitary  and  phytosanitary  (SPS)  inspections  at  Member  States'  border  control  posts.  In 
addition, all goods need to comply with different rules and regulatory measures, as the principle 
of  mutual  recognition  ceased  to  apply.  In  this  regard,  businesses  reported  widely  about 
disruptions in supply chains which could be expected. 

The  Commission  published  timely  and  detailed  information  on  the  applicable  provisions  of 
import formalities to bring EU goods into the United Kingdom on its website73 and is making 
every effort to assist Member States and EU businesses to navigate the new environment. In 
this context, extensive guidance was published on preferential treatment, rules of origin and 
customs  procedures.  The  Commission  is  also  working  with  the  United  Kingdom  to  provide 
clarifications  to  operators,  where  needed.  For  example,  in  relation  to  the  declaration  of  EU 
origin,  the  Commission  obtained  clarification  from  the  United  Kingdom  that  there  is  no 
obligation for EU exporters to provide a Member State as a country of origin under the TCA, 
and that the “EU origin” is the only origin relevant for the purposes of the statements on origin 
for exports from the EU to the United Kingdom. The latter was a concern for operators since 
an initial notice from the United Kingdom HM Revenue & Customs pointed to the contrary. 

implementation  of  United  Kingdom’s 
The  Commission  closely  monitored  the 
commitments across the entire agreement, with a particular focus on matters related to level 

72 The United Kingdom gradually imposed the checks on goods throughout 2021 and decided to further delay the 
SPS checks and the requirement for an Entry Summary Declaration that were supposed to be introduced in July 
2022. 
73   https://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/customs-4/international-affairs/third-countries/united-kingdom/new-

import-formalities-bring-goods-eu-uk-1-january-2022_en  

99 

 
 
 
                                                           
playing field and sustainable development notably as regards United Kingdom’s subsidy rules, 
developments  related  to  the  environment,  including  the  chemical  sector,  United  Kingdom’s 
Emission Trade Scheme as well as freeports. 

The  Commission  also  monitored  the  subsidies  for  supporting  renewable  energy  (in 
particular,  offshore  wind  energy)  under  the  United  Kingdom’s  ‘Contracts  for  Difference’ 
scheme.74 In this  context, the Commission expressed its concerns about the inclusion of ‘the 
percentage of United Kingdom content’ in the supply chain plan questionnaire of the fourth 
Allocation Round. 

WTO case against the United Kingdom: Renewable energy (DS 612) 

Step  1:  The  Commission  raised  this  issue  in  the  meetings  of  the  Trade  Specialised 
Committee on Goods and the Trade Specialised Committee on Level Playing Field for Open 
and  Fair  Competition  and  Sustainable  Development,  as  well  as  the  Trade  Partnership 
Committee.  The  Commission  requested  the  United  Kingdom  to  remove  information  on 
local content from the questionnaire and adapt the scoring of the eligibility criteria, as well 
as to issue additional guidance to confirm that the question on the United Kingdom content 
has been removed and would not be scored in any way, including in the implementation 
stage, effectively removing any role of location.  

Step 2: Given that the United Kingdom maintained the local content criterion, which the 
EU considered it to be in breach of WTO non-discrimination (National Treatment principle) 
rules,  we  decided  to  bring  the  matter  to  the  WTO  and  on  28  March  2022  requested  the 
consultations with the United Kingdom. As a result of the WTO consultations, the United 
Kingdom has now clarified that, both for the current and future allocation rounds, United 
Kingdom’s content does not play any role whatsoever in the allocation of subsidies and that 
CfD beneficiaries do not need to achieve any particular level of United Kingdom’s content 
to receive payments. Any request for information on United Kingdom’s content remains for 
information  purposes  only.  This  agreement  reached  with  the  United  Kingdom  on  1 July 
2022  is  reflected  in  an  exchange  of  letters  at  ministerial  level  between  Executive  Vice 
President  Valdis Dombrovskis and  the  United  Kingdom’s  Secretary  of  State  for 
International Trade Anne-Marie Trevelyan. The United Kingdom also published additional 
guidance to ensure that this is fully understood by the industry.75    

74   https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/contracts-for-difference/contract-for-difference 
75 https://policy.trade.ec.europa.eu/news/eu-and-uk-agree-way-forward-wto-dispute-concerning-uks-green-
energy-subsidy-scheme-2022-07-01_en  

100 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
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 
197276 (hereinafter, the “FTA”), one of the oldest agreements signed by the EU. It concerns 
goods  but  lacks  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  Agreement77  allows  for  the  provision  of  services, 
limited in time.  
The  Mutual  Recognition  Agreement  in  relation  to  conformity  assessment78  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 Agreement79 builds on the WTO Government Procurement 
Agreement. 
The Agreement on trade in agricultural products80 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 
and  Switzerland  and  the  standards  governing  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. 

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

101 

 
 
 
                                                           
Between  2014  and  2018,  both  parties  negotiated  an  Institutional  Framework  Agreement 
(IFA)  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 IFA aims at re-structuring EU-Swiss trade relations, notably by providing crucial rules and 
procedures for the dynamic take-over and homogenous application of internal market law, for 
enforcement  of  state  aid  rules  and  dispute  settlement.  A  Joint  declaration  is  annexed  to  the 
agreement, where both parties commit to modernise the trade-related agreements.  

Negotiations  were  concluded  in  November  2018.  However,  following  consultations  with  its 
stakeholders  between  January  and  April  2019,  the  Swiss  Federal  Council  came  to  the 
conclusion that it could not agree on the text, as it felt that further clarifications were needed.  

Discussions on the IFA resumed in January 2021 with a view to identifying solutions to the 
three contentious points: wages and posted workers; state aid and free movement of people. 
Notwithstanding the efforts by the EU side to bridge these remaining differences, on 26 May 
2021, the Federal Council took the decision to unilaterally terminate the negotiations on the 
EU-Swiss Institutional Framework Agreement. 

In  February  2022,  the  Swiss  Federal  Council  announced  its  new  approach  for  negotiations 
with  the EU  that  seeks  to  address  the pending issues  concerning overall  EU-Swiss  relations 
based on a broad package of measures. Since then, the European Commission has engaged with 
the Swiss side in exploratory discussions to gain a better understanding of the Federal Council’s 
proposals. In the EU’s view, Switzerland needs to show unambiguous political will to engage 
with the EU on the open structural issues within a credible timetable. These issues include:  

the dynamic alignment with EU law;  

 
  a level playing field between Switzerland and the EU;  
  a functioning dispute settlement mechanism;  
  Switzerland’s regular financial contribution to the EU cohesion policy for the future. 

The systemic solution the EU and Switzerland would agree upon now would also need to apply 
to any additional agreement they would conclude in the future. Finally, the EU considers that 
agreements should remain interconnected in case of non-compliance. 

The EU side reiterated that without a deal, there would be no status quo. This means that there 
cannot be any new agreements providing for Swiss access to the EU Single market, and that 
any  update  of  the  existing  agreements  will  be  decided  on  a  case-by-case  basis,  which  will 
inevitably  lead  to  an  erosion  of  Swiss  market  access  over  time.  For  example,  as  a  direct 
consequence  of  the  refusal  to  sign  the  IFA,  the  EU  did  not  update  the  Mutual  Recognition 
Agreement Chapter for Medical Devices81. 

81  https://ec.europa.eu/health/latest-updates/notice-stakeholders-status-eu-switzerland-mutual-recognition-
agreement-mra-medical-devices-2021-05-26_en  

102 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
2. 

MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES  

The 68th EU-Switzerland Joint Committee under the FTA took place on 30 November 2021 
via videoconference due to the pandemic. Recalling the progress made in recent years to deepen 
bilateral relations, the EU expressed its deep regret regarding Switzerland’s unilateral decision 
to  end  talks  on  the  Institutional  Framework  Agreement  (IFA).  Both  sides  discussed  issues 
related  to  inter  alia  market  access,  processed  agricultural  products,  exchange  of  views  on 
relations with main partners, and Switzerland’s new Foreign Economic Policy Strategy.  

Nevertheless,  in  2021 some progress  was made on implementation,  notably  on 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): The last 
adaptation of Protocol 2 entered into force on 1 March 2021. Looking forward, on 30 November 
2021, following the Annual Joint Committee meeting on Agriculture which took place on 18 
November 2021, parties agreed to start discussions on the next price adaptation of Protocol 2 
based on updated prices, and to address outstanding issues notably on the reference prices for 
potatoes. In spring 2022, the discussions continued in order to reach the mutual solution.  

The  Joint  Committee  under  the  EU-Switzerland  Agreement  on  Mutual  Recognition  in 
relation to conformity assessment met on 1 December 2021. The main issue discussed in the 
meeting  related  to  the  non-update  of  the  EU-Switzerland  Mutual  Recognition  Agreement 
(MRA)82  in  the  sector  of  medical  devices  as  a  consequence  of  Switzerland’s  decision  to 
withdraw from discussions on the IFA (see remarks under section I above). 

By  contrast,  a  number  of  implementation  issues  regarding  public  procurement,  the 
agricultural sector, the services sector and state aid remain unsolved: 

  EU Member States noted that persistent inconsistencies in procurement procedures 
regularly lead to preferential treatment of Swiss companies. In June 2019, Switzerland 
revised  the  Federal  Law  on  Public  Procurement  (LMP)  and  the  corresponding 
ordinances. One of the novelties is that the contracting authority examines the tenders 
on  the  basis  of  economic,  ecological  and  socially  sustainable  award  criteria  and  a 
contract  must  be  awarded  to  the  "most  advantageous"  tender  instead  of  the  "most 
economically  advantageous",  as  was  the  case  before.  The  ecological  and  socially 
sustainable award criteria are an important improvement but should in no way be used 
as a pretext to unjustifiably disadvantage European market players.  

  One of the market access barriers in agriculture for EU companies is the certification 
of organic food in  Switzerland. There exists only  one certification body  for organic 
food in Switzerland, which is currently the private organization Biosuisse, whose label 
(the "Biosuisse Bud") is highly recognized by consumers. However, the awarding of the 
Biosuisse label lacks transparency in many respects, so that, even when equivalent, few 
EU  products  meet  the  required  conditions  to  acquire  the  label.  In  addition,  the  strict 

82 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A22002A0430%2805%29  

103 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
content requirements  of  the Biosuisse label  for  food products  mean that  suppliers of 
organic  raw  materials  from  the  EU  are  indirectly  disadvantaged  compared  to  Swiss 
suppliers.  

  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 Agreement83 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. Protocol 1 to the draft IFA included a number 
of  specific  solutions  to  some  of  the  issues  raised  by  the  EU  in  relation  to  “flanking 
measures”. However, with the unilateral termination of the negotiations of the IFA by 
the Swiss government, the solutions enshrined in Proocol 1 have become obsolete. 

  The lack of a level playing field as regards state aid also remains an issue. The FTA 
does contain state aid rules but  these  are not  respected by Switzerland.  The other as 
existing  agreements  between  the  EU  and  Switzerland  (with  the  exception  of  the  Air 
Transport Agreement) do not include effective state aid rules. Solutions were found in 
the context of the EU-Swiss IFA, which includes State aid rules for the future market 
access  agreements  between  the  EU  and  Switzerland  and  the  creation  of  a  dispute 
settlement  mechanism.  However,  as  explained  above,  the  Swiss  side  decided  to 
terminate the negotiations on the IFA. 

In 2021, the EU and Switzerland continued their exchange at expert level on FTA preference 
utilisation, notably on rules of origin, following the launch of a study84 by the Swiss State 
Secretariat for Economic Affairs (SECO), which aims to estimate the economic potential from 
the creation of a cumulation zone between common free trade partners.  

83 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A22002A0430%2801%29 
84 The study is available in German with an executive summary in English: 
https://www.seco.admin.ch/seco/en/home/Aussenwirtschaftspolitik_Wirtschaftliche_Zusammenarbeit/Wirtschaft
sbeziehungen/Freihandelsabkommen/nutzung_freihandelsabkommen.html  

104 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
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 applies to 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. Negotiations on a limited number of tariff-
rate quotas for exports of fisheries products from Norway to the EU have started in summer 
2022  in  conjunction  with  negotiations  on  Norway’s  financial  contribution  to  economic  and 
social cohesion in the EEA (“financial mechanism”). This reflects the practice of past cycles of 
the financial mechanism.  

2. 

MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES 

In 2021 the main implementation issues continue to be processed agricultural products (PAPs) 
and geographical indications (GIs): 

EU exports of processed agricultural products85 remain below their potential due to high 
customs tariffs and this has been a long-standing trade barrier. As of March 2022, there is still 
a lack of progress towards a constructive negotiation process on the liberalisation of trade in 
PAPs within the framework of Article 2 (2) and Article 6 of Protocol 3 to the EEA Agreement.  

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. 

85 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. 

105 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
The negotiations  on Geographical Indications (GIs) launched in  2013 remain suspended 
since April 2016. The Council of the European Union in its Conclusions of December 2018 
called on Norway to “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 2021.  

106 

 
 
 
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.86 

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 were made 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 

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

107 

 
 
 
                                                           
European 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 2021.87 

The  European  Council  of  25  March  202188  concluded  that  “provided  that  the  current  de-
escalation  is  sustained  and  that  Turkey  engages  constructively  […]  the  European  Union  is 
ready  to  engage  with  Turkey  in  a  phased,  proportionate  and  reversible  manner  to  enhance 
cooperation in a number of areas of common interest”. In particular, the Council 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 invited 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. 

The  European  Council  on  25  June  202189  took  note  of  the  start  of  work  at  technical  level 
towards  a  mandate  for  the  modernisation  of  the EU-Turkey  Customs  Union  and  recalls  the 
need to address current difficulties in the implementation of the Customs Union, ensuring its 
effective  application  to  all  Member  States.  Such  a  mandate  may  be  adopted  by  the  Council 
subject to additional guidance by the European Council. 

2. 

MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES  

As  regards  the  implementation  of  the  existing  bilateral  preferential  trade  framework,  some 
limited progress was achieved in 2021 on outstanding issues:  

  Turkey had imposed additional duties on many products originating outside the EU, 
requiring proof of origin for the affected categories, contrary to the Customs Union. 
Interventions by the Commission with the Turkish authorities throughout 2020 resulted 
in an amendment of the implementation rules in January 2021. The amendment clarified 
that shipments from the EU with A.TR. certificates were in principle exempt from origin 
checks, unless trade defence measures were in place. Turkish customs stopped requiring 
the  certificates  of  origin,  and,  following  the  Commission’s  interventions  in  2021, 
Turkish  authorities  issued  additional  clarifications  to  Turkish  importers  (who  kept 
requiring it, as often they did not get the right advice from customs consultants). Since 
then,  the  number  of  the  certificates  of  origin  required  overall  has  been  gradually 
decreasing and the recent clarifications should result in a further improvement of the 
situation.  

87  https://ec.europa.eu/neighbourhood-enlargement/joint-communication-european-council-state-play-eu-turkey-
political-economic-and-trade-relations_en 
88 https://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/48976/250321-vtc-euco-statement-en.pdf  
89 https://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/50763/2425-06-21-euco-conclusions-en.pdf 

108 

 
 
 
 
                                                           
 
  Elements of Turkish legislation on cosmetics saw improvements (although it is not 
yet fully aligned with the EU acquis): As of January 2021, Turkey its past requirement 
towards EU companies to upload the full cosmetic product safety assessment report in 
Turkey’s  electronic  notification  portal  (a  request  that  had  raised  confidentiality 
concerns).  Furthermore,  Turkey  no  longer  obliges  producers  to  upload  the  entire 
artwork of the product to the Agency website. Now only packaging visuals are required. 
Nevertheless,  Turkey  still  requires  companies  to  create  new  barcodes  and  new 
packaging specifically for the Turkish market. 

A number of important market access barriers are being raised with Turkey regularly and in 
different fora. In particular, in the Customs Union Joint Committee that took place in July 
2021 and in the context of the bilateral EU-Turkey Trade Barriers Group in March 2022.  
These barriers hamper the proper implementation of the Customs Union, among them first and 
foremost  restrictions  Turkish  authorities  imposed  on  imported  pharmaceutical  products, 
through  de  facto  mandatory  localisation  requirements  combined  with  import  bans  for 
equivalents to localised products.  

WTO case against Turkey on pharmaceutical products (DS583) 

Step 1: In 2019 the EU initiated WTO dispute settlement against Turkey: the panel was 
composed on 17 March 2020. 

Step 2: The Panel’s ruling of 28 April 2022 upheld all of the EU’s claims against Turkey. 
In  particular,  the  Panel  ruled  that  Turkey  cannot  require  foreign  producers  of 
pharmaceutical  products  to  move  their  production  to  the  country  in  order  for  those 
pharmaceuticals to be eligible for reimbursement by social security schemes in Turkey.  

Step  3:  Turkey  appealed  on  25  April  2022.  Appeal  arbitration  proceedings  pursuant  to 
Article  25  of  the  DSU  are  under  way  based  on  an  ad  hoc  appeal  arbitration  agreement 
between the EU and Turkey.  

In addition to the localisation requirements, several other barriers continue to affect trade with 
Turkey  in  the  pharmaceutical  sector,  in  particular  the  application  by  Turkey  of  artificial 
exchange rates instead of actual exchange rates for pharmaceutical products.  

Other barriers include export tax measures that Turkey continues to apply to hides, skins and 
wet-blue leather as well as copper scrap and new export restrictions on cotton and timber, 
clearly violating Turkey’s Custom Union obligations.  

Furthermore, Turkey is systematically refusing to open the annual quotas for beef and live cattle 
foreseen under the bilateral agreement and has refused to issue licenses to importers.  

109 

 
 
 
 
 
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. 90 

90 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  

110 

 
 
 
 
                                                           
 
PART IV: AFRICAN, CARIBBEAN AND PACIFIC COUNTRIES  

111 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
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 2007.91 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.92 By the end of 2020, all EU Member States and 15 out of 16 West African 
countries have signed the regional EPA; Nigeria’s signature is still outstanding. 

Ghana’s  HS2017  updated  market  access  offer  foresees  that  78%  of  tariff  lines  will  be 
progressively  liberalised  over  the  period  2020-2029.  Ghana’s  HS2017  tariff  liberalisation 
schedule is available on the website of the Directorate-General for Trade.93  

The  Parties  recently  revamped  efforts  towards  EPA  implementation,  following  political 
impetus arising from the meeting between Executive Vice President Mr. Valdis Dombrovskis 
and the President of Ghana Mr. Nana Akufo-Addo on 19 May 2021 in Brussels. 

2. 

MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES  

2.1   Market access: Progress and outstanding issues  

The third meeting of the EPA Committee took place on 29 and 30 July 2021. The meeting 
brought  together  Senior  Officials  from  the  Parties  to  take  stock  of  progress  on  EPA 
implementation. The Parties agreed on four draft texts on (1) the Rules of Procedure of the EPA 
Committee, (2) the Rules of Procedure for Dispute Settlement, (3) the Draft Code of Conduct 
for  panellists  and  mediators,  and  (4)  the  Monitoring  and  Evaluation  of  the  interim  EPA 
implementation. As a result, the EU launched the procedures for the publication of the text (1) 
in the Official Journal, and for the adoption of the later three texts. 

91 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". 
92 The regional Economic Partnership Agreement was signed in December 2014 by the European Union and 13 
West African Countries. In 2018, Gambia and Mauretania signed the Agreement, which means that only 
Nigeria’s signature is still missing. The Agreement will enter into provisional application when the 16 West 
African Countries sign it and 2/3 (11 out of 16) of these countries ratify it.  
93 Published on DG Trade’s website: https://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2020/january/tradoc_158599.pdf  

112 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
The Parties discussed ways of supporting Ghana to become a hub for vaccines and medicines 
manufacturing in Africa. They agreed to step up the policy dialogue and to work closely with 
the Ghanaian National Coordination Unit and the Secretariat of the African Continental Free 
Trade  Agreement  (AfCFTA),  ensuring  that  the  private  sector  takes  advantage  of  the 
implementation of current trade agreements, notably the AfCFTA (in place since 30 May 2019), 
and the interim EPA with the EU. 

The first meeting of the EU-Ghana Special Committee for Customs and Trade Facilitation 
took  place  on  30  November  2021.  The  EU  has  completed  the  necessary  administrative 
requirements to apply the cumulation of origin provided for in Article 7 of the Agreement. The 
Parties also exchanged contact points for mutual administrative assistance.  

The EU assisted Ghana to transpose its market access commitments to the Harmonized System 
nomenclature HS2022, which entered into force on 1 January 2022. 

With 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.  

The  “actual”  liberalisation  started  on  1st  July  2021,  when  Ghana  published  the  tariff  cuts, 
applicable to EU products on its Customs Integrated System94. 

The Customs Division of the Ghana Revenue Authority is setting up a Unit dedicated to tariffs 
and trade, for effective monitoring and enforcement of the application of the tariff cuts. Ghana’s 
Export Promotion Agency has set up an end-to-end electronic trade hub to provide up-to-date 
export related information to the exporter community. 

The  EU  Delegation  to  Ghana  has  systematically  worked  in  close  coordination  with  the  EU 
Member States and the local private sector to address trade barriers and to implement the 
interim EPA.  

These efforts were underpinned in 2021 by ad hoc technical assistance projects as follows. 

  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 

94 https://external.unipassghana.com 

113 

 
 
 
  
 
                                                           
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.  

Background: The project does not target any particular sector but rather focuses on building up 
Ghana’s capacity to implement the EPA and to engage on EPA-related matters, on improving 
competitiveness  at  firm  level  and  on  mainstream  regional  policies  in  favor  of  industrial 
competitiveness.  To this end, the project encompasses four main components: iEPA ownership 
and management; Export and competitiveness; iEPA related reforms and business environment 
and public private dialogue support mechanism. Among the most relevant outcomes occurred 
in 2021 are the completion of the long and simplified version of iEPA handbook and a two-
page leaflet in the iEPA for public and private sector awareness, significant number of trainings 
of the EPA Secretariat Staff, several  reports on the needed reforms, notably a report one on 
identification and documentation of all commitment on fiscal matters deriving from iEPA and 
other commenting on all the obligations of Ghana that derived from the iEPA in the field of 
trade facilitation and customs were drafted, finally a report on trade reforms derived from iEPA 
has been as well completed.  

  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.  

  The  Investment  Promotion  component  (€2.8  million,  2018-2021)  of  the  EU-funded 
Ghana  Employment  and  Social  Protection  Programme  was  used  by  the  EU  to 
campaign  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. 

114 

 
 
 
 
 
2.2 

Trade and sustainable development goals 

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

Nevertheless, the parties cooperate closely under the framework of the Cotonou Agreement. 

Sustainability was also part of the 2021 EPA Committee meeting.  

Sustainable Cocoa Initiative 

In 2021 the parties continued a dialogue on sustainability of the cocoa value chain.  

 

In 2021, a series of eight thematic roundtables - “CocoaTalks” took place, which looked 

into various aspects of sustainability in the cocoa value chain – living income, standards, 

transparency  and  traceabiliy  related  to  child  labour  and  deforestation,  due  diligence, 

agroforestry,  development  and  financing  assistance  and  consumer  perspective.  The 

2021 series of the Cocoa Talks was concluded with a technical wrap-up in December 

2021, taking stock of the thematic meetings and outlining the way forward, which is 

expected to be politicaly confirmed at a High level event in the first half of 2022.   

  The Cocoa Talks dialogue was mirrored locally in Ghana under “The Sustainable Cocoa 

Dialogue”. The latter reached its climax at the High-level conference on 30 June 2021. 

The event drew conclusions from a series of four events held in the first half of 2021 – 

including  thematic  roundtable  discussions  on  child  labour,  deforestation  and 

coordination  needs.  Each  time,  the  dialogue  brought  together  the  full  spectrum  of 

stakeholders: the Government of Ghana, representatives of the dialogue partners, civil 

society,  the  industry  and  the  farmers.  The  EU  in  Ghana  is  now  at  the  centre  of  the 

process with all stakeholders in demand for the dialogue to continue.  

Background: 

Ghana, Ivory Coast and Cameroon together account for 48% of EU imports of cocoa products 
(cocoa beans, shells, paste and butter), for a value of 4.6 million euros in 2021. In particular the 
EU  imports  almost  60%  of  cocoa  beans  and  shells  from  these  three  countries.  While  cocoa 
beans  are  duty-free  on  a  MFN  basis,  exports  of processed  cocoa  (butter,  paste  and  powder) 
benefit from EPA preferences. All three countries take advantage of the quota free-duty free 
regime of the interim EPA for cocoa and its transformed products since 46% for Ghana, 47% 
for Côte d'Ivoire and 35% for Cameroon of the exported cocoa to  EU consists of processed 
products.  

115 

 
 
In September 2020, the European Commission launched a Sustainable Cocoa Initiative with 
a focus on Côte d’Ivoire, Ghana and Cameroon. The objective of the multi-stakeholder dialogue 
is to foster progress in the elimination of child labour in cocoa supply chains, enhancing the 
protection  of  forests  in  cocoa-producing  regions,  and  ensuring  a  living  income  for  cocoa 
farmers. The dialogue brings together key stakeholders from the cocoa value chain including 
government  representatives  from  the  producing  countries,  EU  Member  States,  European 
Parliament,  EU  chocolate  business  representatives,  retailers,  farmers,  and  non-governmental 
organisations.  

116 

 
 
 
 
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  Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA), between the  EU and six countries 

from the Southern African Development Community (SADC): Botswana, Eswatini, Lesotho, 

Mozambique,  Namibia  and  South  Africa,  was  signed  on  10  June  2016.  It  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 

marked  the  fifth  year  of  provisional  application  of  the  Agreement  for  all  its  Parties  except 

Mozambique.   

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 

benefit  from  reduced  tariffs  or  from  preferential  tariff  rate  quotas.  The  Southern  African 

Customs Union (SACU), comprising Botswana, Eswatini, 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 benefit from partial liberalisation (reduced tariffs or tariff 

rate quotas). Mozambique (a Least Developed Country and not a member of SACU) liberalises 

a smaller percentage of exports from the EU. The final wave of liberalisation will take place in 

2025 (for Mozambique in 2028).  

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. 

117 

 
 
 
 
 
Launching accession negotiations with Angola is still awaiting agreement from the SADC EPA 

States. 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 (TDC) 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.  

At the 8th TDC in November 2021 the Parties finally agreed to launch the joint EPA review 

process, as foreseen in the agreement itself and the first technical meeting took place. In early 

2021, the Parties finalised the list of indicators which will enable them to monitor the impact 

of  the  Agreement,  but  progress  towards  compiling  the  first  joint  monitoring  report  suffered 

from data collection challenges. To address the challenges, SADC EPA States benefitted, as 

from late 2021, of capacity building by an external consultant.  

The Commission is planning to launch an independent ex-post EPA evaluation study by an 

external  contractor  in  the  beginning  of  2023.  Its  outcomes  will  feed  into  the  joint  review 

process.  

2. 

MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES 

2.1  Market access: Progress and outstanding issues  

As from 1st January 2019, all SADC EPA States apply the reduction in EPA customs duties for 

goods coming from the EU. The final wave of liberalisation will take place in 2025 (2028 for 

Mozambique). In 2021, SADC EPA States migrated to the Harmonized System nomenclature 

of 2022 (HS 2022), except for Mozambique, who is continuing to apply HS 2017 and is yet to 

migrate to the HS 2022.  

Further progress is still to be made in the area of rules of origin and SPS, in particular in 

regard to the lifting of SPS bans imposed by South Africa on poultry since 2017 following 

several Avian Influenza outbreaks throughout the EU. The bans are still in place.  

  The  SADC  EPA  rules  of  origin  provisions  foresee  the  application  of  diagonal 

cumulation between the SADC EPA States. This could support integration within the 

SADC region. In the absence of a required notification by the SADC EPA States, the 

118 

 
 
diagonal cumulation has however not yet entered into force. This issue was discussed 

by the EU and the SADC EPA States on several occasions and the EU has offered the 

SADC EPA States technical assistance to advance on the matter.   

  South Africa requested to increase applied duty rates to articulated dumpers and also 

further expanded local content requirements applying in public tenders. 

 

In 2021, South Africa’s SPS measures on poultry and pork meat have brought EU’s 

exports to South Africa to a complete standstill. So far, South Africa does not recognise 

the  EU  system  of  regionalisation  or  the  disease-free  status  according  to  the  World 

Organisation for Animal Health (OIE) standards. But even other meat exports from EU 

(not subject to avian influenza or FMD) were suffering from delays in authorizations, 

given that discussions over authorisations and health certificates tend to be very lengthy. 

In  2021 

there  has  been  also  an 

increase 

in  the  number  of  trade  defence 

investigations/measures taken by South Africa on behalf of SACU (frozen fries, industrial 

bolts, pasta and, notably, poultry. 

Dispute against SACU over frozen poultry under the SADC EPA 

Step 1: In April 2020, the EU had sent SACU a request to establish an arbitration panel 
regarding safeguard measures  imposed by SACU against imports of frozen poultry from 
the EU.  

Step 2: The panel selection process was temporarily suspended due to the Covid-19 crisis, 
but was finally completed in 2021. By March 2022, the arbitration process had advanced to 
oral hearing of the parties before the arbitration panel.  

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 expired on 11 March 2022. 

119 

 
 
 
 
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  discussions  on  trade  and 

climate  change  during  the  Trade  and  Development  Committee  (TDC)  meetings  in  February 

2020 and November 2021. The discussions in the TDC concerned notably the European Green 

Deal, and the SADC EPA States expressed the need to deepen the dialogue on its impact on 

trade.  Based  on  agreement  of  the  TDC,  discussions  in  the  context  of  the  EPA's  Trade  and 

Sustainable Development Chapter are planned to take place regularly.  

120 

 
 
 
 
 
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 2008.95 The 

interim EPA was signed on 26 November 2008 and entered into provisional application on 3 

September 2016. The EU - Côte d’Ivoire interim EPA will be replaced by the regional EU-

West Africa EPA once the latter enters into force.96 By the end of 2020, 15 out of 16 West 

African countries had 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.  Côte d’Ivoire’s HS2017  updated market  access  offer and  schedule have been 

published on Directorate-General for Trade website.97 

2. 

MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES 

2.1  Market access: Progress and outstanding issues  

The 5th EU-Cote d’Ivoire EPA Committee was held on 18 to 22 October 2021 in Brussels. A 

number  of  meetings  was  held  in  the  margins  of  the  Committee:  (1)  the  first  meeting  of  the 

Special Committee on Customs and Trade Facilitation between the Parties, and (2) the meeting 

between the European Economic and Social Committee and the Ivoirian Technical Group of 

the Civil Society to discuss the mechanisms for setting up a joint platform for EPA monitoring. 

95 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".  
96 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 (11 out of 16) of these countries ratify it.  
97 Offer and schedule can be found on the DG Trade website:  
https://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2020/january/tradoc_158598.pdf 

121 

 
 
 
                                                           
The Parties signed two EPA Committee decisions on (1) the Procedure for Dispute Settlement 

and  Code  of  Conduct  of  the  Arbitrators,  and  (2)  the  List  of  Arbitrators.98  The  Parties  also 

adopted the second joint monitoring report at the Trade Committee meeting in October 2021, 

prepared under the EU-Côte d’Ivoire monitoring mechanism for the Agreement.99 

In  2021,  further  progress  was  made  on  tariff  liberalisation:  On  1  January  2021  the  decision 

setting out the rules and principles for the second phase of tariff dismantlement entered into 

force as Côte d'Ivoire continued to implement its market access commitments.  

In  2021,  EU  companies  were  able  to  benefit  from  the  first  and  second  rounds  of  tariff 

liberalisation of products with significant EU exports, such as medicines (mixed or unmixed 

products for therapeutic or prophylactic purposes), light oils and preparations of petroleum or 

bituminous  minerals  with specific  characteristics, category of aeroplanes  and other powered 

aircraft,  vaccines  (human  and  veterinary  medicine),  road  tractors  for  semi-trailers,  printed 

books, laboratory reagents.  

EU-Côte  d’Ivoire  trade  relations  are  overall  good.  Trade  barriers  still  exist,  e.g.  tax 

discrimination on imported spirits and on imported meat: For several years, Côte d'Ivoire has 

maintained discriminatory taxation on imported spirits and wines, which are subject to an excise 

tax 25% higher than that applied to locally manufactured beverages. Besides, in early 2021 Côte 

d'Ivoire introduced a VAT on imported meat, whereas local meat remains exempted. The 2021 

joint EPA Committee addressed these issues and Côte d’Ivoire has committed to tackle them. 

EU  projects  managed  by  the  EU  Delegation  in  Côte  d'Ivoire,  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 

took place in 2021 include the following:  

Within the framework of the contract “S’investir ensemble” signed in 2019, the EU Delegation 

continued to work together with the European private sector (Eurocham100), as well as with 

98 (EU Official Journal «L» on 17/11/2021). 
99 Rapport de suivi de l’Accord de Partenariat Economique intérimaire Union Européenne - Côte d’Ivoire 
(europa.eu). 
100 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 

122 

 
 
                                                           
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.  

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. Sustainability topics have also been discussed in the 2021 

EPA Committee. Furthermore, the parties continued to work together to address sustainability 

matters under the EPA, e.g. (the introduction of) a monitoring mechanism and (the creation of) 

an EPA civil society platform: 

In the context of the second joint monitoring report 2020 (covering the year 2019) adopted in 

October 2021101, both parties stressed the importance of sustainable development issues, and 

the need to include them in future reports. 

ôte d'Ivoire and the EU have stepped-up efforts to establish an EPA civil society platform with 

the  support  of  both  the  European  and  Ivorian  Economic  and  Social  Committees  in  order  to 

address  all  trade  and  sustainable  development  issues.  In  the  margins  of  the  joint  EPA 

Committee  of  October  2021,  the  two  social  and  economic  committees  met  and  agreed  to 

strengthen further their cooperation including on sustainability aspects. 

Sustainable Cocoa Initiative102 

In 2021 the parties continued a dialogue on sustainability of the cocoa value chain.  

(EBOWNN) in 2017. In addition, national chambers of commerce from France, Belgium, UK and more recently 
Germany are present in Côte d’Ivoire.  

101 Available here: Rapport de suivi de l’Accord de Partenariat Economique intérimaire Union Européenne - 
Côte d’Ivoire (europa.eu). 

102 For background and content of the initiative, see country sheet on Ghana. 

123 

 
 
                                                           
Following  the  start  of  the  (virtual)  “Cocoa  Talks”  in  September  2020  in  Brussels,  the  EU 

delegation in Côte d’Ivoire launched early 2021 the “EU-Côte d’Ivoire Political Dialogue on 

Sustainable Cocoa”. During eight sessions in Côte d’Ivoire, the most relevant aspects regarding 

the  sustainability  of  cocoa  were  covered,  namely  the  price  of  cocoa  and  a  living  income, 

standards, the traceability of cocoa and the fight against child labour and deforestation, as well 

as the mobilisation of development cooperation and finance. By bringing together all relevant 

stakeholders in Brussels as well as in the main cocoa-producing countries to discuss those key 

topics, the EU is seeking to build consensus on a common pathway towards a sustainable cocoa 

sector.  

124 

 
 
 
 
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 an interim (or 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. Being a regional agreement, the EPA 

is open to the accession of other Central African countries.  

The EPA provides Cameroon with duty-free quota-free access to the EU market for all products 

originating  from  Cameroon.  This  benefits,  among  others,  exports  of  Cameroonian  bananas, 

aluminium, processed cocoa products, plywood and other fresh and transformed agricultural 

products.  

For its part, Cameroon will progressively reduce its tariffs to zero for 80% of its imports 

from the EU by 2029. This targeted elimination of import tariffs will help Cameroon's local 

producers  to  develop  their  production  and  become  more  competitive  and,  indirectly,  it  will 

benefit local consumers.  

To ensure the protection of certain sensitive agricultural markets and industries, but also to 

maintain fiscal revenues, the EPA allows Cameroon to maintain tariffs on 20% of imports of 

goods originating from the EU (such as meat, wines and spirits, malt, milk products, flour, fruit 

and 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  

Cameroon’s tariff dismantling applies to three groups of goods. It started in August 2016 for 
group 1 (1727 tariff lines), in 2017 for group 2 (985 tariff lines), and in 2021 for group 3. The 
two first  groups mainly consist of essential items that are often used as inputs for industrial 

125 

 
 
 
 
 
 
processes in Cameroon or consumer products that are not found on the local market such as: 
medicines  and  medical  equipment,  industrial  and  agricultural  inputs,  machines,  chemicals, 
spare parts for vehicles, computers, and paper. The third group includes a number of products, 
such as cars, on which Cameroon has traditionally charged the highest duties.  

Following the special EPA Committee meeting on 28 October 2020, the suspension  of tariff 
dismantling introduced by Cameroon due to the Covid 19 crisis was lifted, and as of 1 January 
2021 is now back on track. By (date), Cameroon has fully removed import duties for all 
products of group 1 and reduced its tariffs by 90% on products of group 2 and by 30% of 
group  3.  The  HS2017  update  of  the  Market  Access  Offer  is  published  on  DG  TRADE 
website103.  

The  5th  EPA  Committee  took  place  in  April  2021104  and  allowed  both  sides  to  discuss  the 
finalisation of the protocol on rules of origin and exchange views on a possible deepening of 
the EPA to cover other subjects (such as trade in services and sustainable development). 

Given the importance of agri-food exports  to  Cameroon  and recurring difficulties related to 
respect of the EU sanitary and phytosanitary norms, the 2021 EPA Committee meeting also 
recommended to operationalise  the EPA  sub-committee on agriculture and fisheries to 
step-up the dialogue on these issues.  

Cameroon and the EU are also actively monitoring the effects of the agreement. The first joint 
monitoring report, covering years 2014-2019, was adopted by the 5th EPA Committee in 2021 
and published105: 

  The most important outstanding issue concerns the rules of origin. Negotiations on a 
protocol started at the end of 2016. A draft text of the protocol was agreed at technical 
level  at  the  6th  meeting  of  the  EPA  Committee  on  9th  June  2022.  In  the  meantime, 
Cameroon benefits from the general EPA rules of origin included in EU Market Access 
Regulation. The rules of origin applicable to products imported from the EU are laid 
down in Cameroon's Presidential Decree 2016/367 of 3 August 2016.” 

  The  report  also  informs  about  tariff  preference  use  on  both  sides  in  2020:  While  -in 
terms of value- 99% of exports from Cameroun were using preferences, exports are still 
limited to a few sectors, showing lack of diversification of Cameroonian exports. By 
contrast, EU exports to Cameroon used preferences only at a rate of 59%.  

To increase awareness among Cameroonian business of the opportunities the EPA creates, the 
EU  in  2021  has  been  intensifying  its  communication  efforts  and  outreach  to  the  private 
sector:  

103 https://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2020/february/tradoc_158637.pdf 
104 Joint conclusions: Cinquieme réunion (virtuelle) du comité APE CAM-UE, les 26 et 27 avril 2021 
(europa.eu) 
105 ʺMonitoring de l’Accord de Partenariat Économique (APE) d'étape, Union Européenne – Cameroun, Rapport 
Conjoint 2020 pour la période 2014 / 2019ˮ, July 2021, available here : Rapport monitoring conjoint APEi UE 
Cameroun (europa.eu). 

126 

 
 
                                                           
  Despite the difficulties related to COVID-19 sanitary conditions, ten outreach events 
took  place,  either  in  virtual,  hybrid  or  traditional  form,  involving  groups  of  local 
Cameroonian  entrepreneurs  from  various  sectors  with  potential  to  develop  an  export 
activity  or  invest  in  EU-produced  inputs  and  equipment  that  could  upgrade  their 
production activities.  

  In early 2022, the EU Delegation in Cameroun published a practical EPA guide for 
Cameroonian companies106 and held an EPA workshop in the framework of the Salon 
PROMOTE 2022, a major international trade fair held in Yaoundé in February 2022. 

For the EPA to deliver benefits including to EU firms and local business the improvement of 

the  business  environment,  notably  the  conditions  for  foreign  direct  investment,  will  be  key. 

Therefore, the EU and its Member States in Cameroon have also been supporting the creation 

of a European Business Organisation (EBO), since 2020. Once operational, EBO Cameroon, 

which is  still awaiting authorisation from  the  Cameroonian  government,  could  contribute to 

foster a private-public dialogue in Cameroon to the benefit of all market operators.  

The EPA also comes with a package of accompanying measures that help Cameroon and its 

companies to make better use of the Agreement, such as technical assistance provided by the 

EU to Cameroon, to evaluate the fiscal impact of the Agreement and to reform the Cameroonian 

fiscal system in a way to compensate for the loss of custom revenues. Other EU-funded EPA 

accompanying measures support the local private sector, for instance as regards the adaptation 

of local producers to the EU sanitary and phytosanitary standards (e.g. through the EU-financed 

COLEACP programme,  Fit-4-Market  or  a similar EU programme related to  shrimps  supply 

chain), or their capacity to develop a business plan (e.g., through the EU programme Dispositive 

d’Appui  a  la  Competitivite  du  Cameroun).  This  action  is  complemented  by  activities  of  the 

European Investment Bank  increasing the capacity of local commercial banks to provide access 

to finance for local business.  

106 https://www.eeas.europa.eu/sites/default/files/epa_brochure.pdf  

127 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
2.2 

Trade and sustainable development goals 

The EPA with Cameroon does not currently include a dedicated chapter on trade and sustainable 

development. Such a chapter could be negotiated in the future on the basis of a ‘rendezvous 

clause’  included  in  the  Agreement.  Nevertheless,  the  parties  cooperate  closely  under  the 

framework of the Cotonou Agreement.  

The Parties continue to cooperate on matters related to trade and sustainable development. For 
instance,  Cameroon  is  party  to  a  Voluntary  Partnership  Agreement,  which  is  a  key 
component  of  the  EU  Forest  Law  Enforcement,  Governance  and  Trade  (FLEGT)  Action 
Plan107.  

Sustainable Cocoa Initiative108 

In  2021  the  parties  continued  a  dialogue  on  sustainability  of  the  cocoa  value  chain.  In 
November  2021,  Cameroon  participated  in  the  EU  Multi-stakeholders  Dialogue  for 
Sustainable Cocoa. Preparatory talks are now underway to operationalise the national dialogue 
through working groups dedicated on specific aspects of the initiative.  

107 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52003DC0251  
108 For background and content of the initiative, see country sheet on Ghana. 

128 

 
 
 
 
                                                           
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 interim EPA is provisionally applied 

since 14 May 2012 by the EU and 5 EPA partners. Comoros, Zimbabwe and Seychelles have 

also ratified the EPA, while Mauritius and Madagascar provisionally apply it. Zambia took part 

in the negotiations of the interim EPA and may decide to sign the agreement in the near future. 

The agreement remains open for the possible accession to other ESA countries who would want 

to join. 

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  progress  made  implementing  the  EPA  and  to  identify  remaining 

challenges in order to be able to address them adequately. 

Negotiations for the deepening of the Agreement continued in 2021. Since the beginning of this 

process,  six  rounds  of  negotiation  meetings  took  place,  all  but  the  first  one  by  video 

conference. In 2021, three negotiating rounds took place, in April, July and November. The 

modernised  Economic  Partnership  Agreement  will  include:  updated  rules  of  origin; 

provisions  on  customs  and  trade  facilitation;  sanitary  and  phytosanitary  measures;  technical 

barriers  to  trade;  trade  in  services,  investment  liberalisation  and  digital  trade;  public 

procurement;  intellectual  property  rights;  trade  and  competition;  trade  and  sustainable 

development; agriculture; fisheries; dispute avoidance and settlement; institutional structure; 

and economic development cooperation /means of implementation. A sustainability impact 

assessment looking into the impact of the new agreement has been conducted in parallel to the 

negotiations, with public consultations.  

129 

 
 
 
 
Background:  In  2017,  the  then-four  ESA  partners  (ESA4)  implementing  the  Agreement 

requested  to  deepen  it  beyond  trade  in  goods,  in  accordance  with  the  ‘rendezvous  clause’ 

embedded  in  the  Agreement.  In  May  2019,  the  EU  and  ESA5  Countries  (Madagascar, 

Mauritius, Seychelles, Zimbabwe and Comoros) agreed on a joint scoping paper that paved 

the way for the official launch of the negotiations in October 2019. 

2. 

MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES  

2.1   Market access: Progress and outstanding issues  

The interim EPA offers duty-free, quota-free access for all imports from the ESA EPA States 

to the EU since 1 January 2008. The five ESA EPA States are in the process of opening their 

markets  to  EU  imports  in  line  with  the  individual  tariff  schedules  of  each  ESA  EPA  State 

annexed to the interim EPA.109  

  The  implementation  of  tariffs  dismantling  schedules,  initially  foreseen  to  start  in 
2012 (for ESA4), was completed by Seychelles and Mauritius on 1st  January 2022, 
when the percentage of tariff lines fully liberalised for products originating in the EU 
reached 97.5% in Seychelles and 96.2% in Mauritius.  

  Tariff  commitments  implementation  encountered  some  difficulties  in  Zimbabwe, 
Madagascar and Comoros. A catch-up scenario was however agreed for each of the 
three countries: 

o  Zimbabwe  has  now  fully  met  its  tariff  liberalisation  commitments.  With 
Madagascar,  discussions  continue.  By  2022,  Madagascar  and  Zimbabwe  will 
liberalise around 80% of their trade.  

o  Comoros  will  complete  its  market  access  liberalisation  schedule  by  2024.  
Comoros will need two additional years (2024 instead of 2022) as it joined this 
agreement much later (in 2019) than the other four ESA partners.110  

109 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. 
110 More details can be found here: http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2012/march/tradoc_149213.pdf  

130 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
The  last  EPA  Committee,  Customs  Cooperation  Committee  and  Joint  Development 

Committee – a sub-Committee of the EPA Committee - were held in January 2020 where a 

number of decisions advancing the implementation of the Agreement were taken, notably:  

  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  2020111,  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 (e.g. the EU must use REX for exports to ESA partners, while the 
latter are free to use REX for their exports to the EU).  

  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 next EU-ESA EPA Joint Committee is scheduled to take place in the third quarter of 2022. 

In  2021,  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, at ESA5 level, two Market Access Team meetings, comprising EU Member 
States representatives covering trade topics and EU Business associations, were set-up and 
carried out in 2021 to exchange information on trade policy and enquire on trade barriers.  
In  Comoros,  the  EU  continued  the  dialogue  with  the  Ministry  for  Economy  on  tariff 
dismantling  schedule.  The  EU  is  heading  the  trade  and  private  sector  group  and  met 
regularly with the private sector, national and European on trade opportunities and business 
environment, including delivering a presentation on the current EPA and its opportunities.  
In Madagascar, the EU maintained close dialogue with the private sector, in the framework 
of the elaboration of the White paper of the Malagasy Private Sector, with the support of 
the ICR (Investment Climate Reform) Facility. In parallel, discussions were engaged with 
the France-Madagascar Chamber of Commerce, with a view to broaden the scope of their 
activities  and  include  both  services  to  European  businesses  and  public-private  dialogue 
dedicated to EU businesses based in Madagascar.  
In  Mauritius,  the  Delegation  met  with  the  EU  private  sector  to  discuss  the  business 
environment in Mauritius. E-licencing and regulatory assessment projects also led to private 
sector consultations. Meetings were held with representatives of government, with leading 
private sector associations and with industry captains. Support was provided to individual 
companies to facilitate export to the EU. 
In Seychelles, project launches and political dialogues are being used as an opportunity to 
consult and engage with the private sector. Besides virtual bilateral meetings, a mission was 
carried out in Seychelles to further deepen the dialogue with Seychelles authorities, business 
organizations and enterprises trading with the EU. A presentation on the interim EPA and 
its opportunities has been delivered to the private sector. Specific requests from individual 
companies were answered. 

 

 

111 OJ L93,  Decision No 1/2020 of the EPA Committee of 14.1.2020, p.1 

131 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
 

In Zimbabwe, EPA awareness dialogue meetings were conducted in 5 provinces to discuss 
opportunities and barriers to trade as part of capacity building of the Zimbabwe national 
EPA Committee. A presentation on EPA opportunities was delivered on the occasion of 
Zimbabwe  International  Trade  Fair.  An  EPA  Performance  Planning  Monitoring  and 
Evaluation (PPME) tool was developed for use by the Zimbabwe National EPA Committee 
to  track  progress  in  the  implementation  of  the  interim  EPA  Agreement.  Bilateral  virtual 
meetings were held to facilitate exports of avocado to the EU.  

In addition, several EU development cooperation programmes are linked to the EPA. They 
aim to facilitate tax and customs reforms, improve the business environment and improve ESA 
States’ competitiveness. Current programmes to support ESA-EPA countries include:  

  Capacity-building    assistance  to  help  ESA5  producers  and  farmers  meet  EU  standards 

through the Fit for Market programme (€ 20 million) launched in 2016; 

  Under the 11th EDF (2014-2020), €10 million were earmarked for each of the four initial 
signatory  countries  to  help  them  implement  the  EPA  and  they  are  already  benefitting 
through concrete projects: 

o  Mauritius has set up an online single-entry point for businesses to obtain licences 
and permits and is in the process of reforming its intellectual property rights system. 
The  Industrial  Property  Act  2019  and  related  regulations  are  expected  to  be 
proclaimed  and  in  force  by  end  January  2022.  For  the  use  of  Regulatory  Impact 
Assessment  (RIA)  as  a  policy  instrument  to  critically  assess  the  positive  and 
negative  effects  of  proposed  and  existing  regulations  and  non-regulatory 
alternatives, a pilot RIA is being carried out in collaboration with the Organization 
for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).   

o  Madagascar has started work on an APEX export promotion agency and a one-stop-
shop for customs clearance, and the information, communications and technology; 
tourism; and textile sectors will be developed.  

o  Seychelles  is  working  on  diversifying  its  economy  and  ways  to  add  value  in  the 

manufacturing, agriculture and fisheries sectors.  

o  Zimbabwe is developing an online customs portal connecting customs posts around 
the country.  It is also helping small and medium-sized businesses export, with a 
focus on agricultural value chains.  

2.2 

Trade and sustainable development goals  

The EU and the ESA5 EPA States under the umbrella of the Cotonou Agreement and in the 
framework  of  development  cooperation  already  work  together  closely  on  achieving  the 
sustainable development goals, including ensuring the contribution of trade policy towards that 
objective.  The  interim  EU-ESA  EPA  does  not  include  a  dedicated  chapter  on  trade  and 
sustainable  development.  However,  in  the  course  of  the  ongoing  negotiations  to  deepen  the 
Agreement,  the  Parties  are  committed  to  negotiate  an  ambitious  Trade  and  Sustainable 
Development chapter, in line with EU trade policy. 

132 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
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 2021, the Agreement was provisionally applied by the 

EU  and  its  Member  States  and  by  14  Caribbean  States.112  Haiti  still  needs  to  ratify  the 

Agreement in parliament before applying it, due to domestic legal requirements. By the end of 

2021, 25 EU Member States and 10 Caribbean States had ratified the EPA.113 

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, competition, innovation and 

intellectual property rights, government procurement and an important development component 

with  the  EU  commitment  towards  fostering  long-term  sustainable  economic  growth  in  the 

Caribbean.114  

On 3 February 2021 the Commission published the 10-year Evaluation Study115 of the EU-

CARIFORUM EPA looking into the implementation, as well as economic and sustainability 

impacts of the Agreement for the 14 CARIFORUM partner countries and for the EU, as well 

as at cooperation commitments and relevant cooperation assistance.  

The study serves as a direct input to the ongoing 5 years’ Joint Review process of the EU-

CARIFORUM EPA andconsiderations of the Task Force that met virtually on regular basis in 

2021, discussing the implementation of the EPA and its impact across the various parts of the 

Agreement. The final report of the Review process will identify key implementation challenges 

and provide joint conclusions and recommendations on the functioning of the EPA. It is planned 

to be finalized by mid-2022 and it should be  approved by the next Trade and Development 

112 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. 
113  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. 
114 Further info on: Access2Markets The EU-CARIFORUM Economic Partnership Agreement (europa.eu)  
115 https://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/policy-making/analysis/policy-evaluation/ex-post-evaluations/  

133 

 
 
 
                                                           
Committee and presented for considerations of to EU-CARIFORUM Joint Council, planned 

tentatively for 2nd or 3Q 2022. 

The  region  has  high  food  imports  dependency  and  the  EU  is  increasingly  becoming  an 

important  exporter  of  processed  agricultural  goods  to  CARIFORUM,  a  market  that  has 

traditionally been dominated by US imports. However, China is also gaining importance and 

influence  in  the  region,  becoming  an  important  trading  partner  for  CARIFORUM  countries 

ahead of the EU in some countries, i.e. Belize, the Dominican Republic, Grenada, Guyana, Haiti 

and St. Kitts and Nevis. The region remains of strategic importance to US and is an important 

voting bloc of 14 States at the United Nations and in other fora. There is an increased interest 

of China in the region competing with the US interests and, as estimated, China has committed 

more  than  US$7bn  in  flexible  loans  and  investments  in  Caribbean  countries  since  2005, 

focusing  on  construction  sector,  maritime  transport,  communication  technology  and  5G 

telecoms system, tourism and energy (Trinidad & Tobago with Guyana and Suriname) as well 

as more recent support post-pandemic economic recovery, vaccines and creation of the disaster 

relief funds.  

2. 

MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES  

2.1   Market access: Progress and outstanding issues 

In 2021, CARIFORUM partners progressed with the implementation of their market access 

schedules for goods, which is well advanced in most Caribbean States. While some countries 

are  in  delay  with  the  applicable  schedules,  five  CARIFORUM  States116  have  reported  the 

implementation of the full schedule of tariff liberalisation.  

In general, CARIFORUM partners 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:117 The list includes fresh fruits and vegetables, most alcoholic beverages, 

some  garments,  a  number  of  processed  agricultural  products,  fish,  meat,  chemicals  and 

furniture. Overall, only 25% of CARIFORUM's agricultural and fisheries products have been 

covered by liberalisation under the EPA.    

116 The Bahamas, Belize, the Dominican Republic, Guyana and Jamaica. 
117 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.  

134 

 
 
                                                           
The Dominican Republic (DR) is not only the most important partner, accounting for 37% of 

EU trade with CARIFORUM, but also the most advanced in terms of EPA implementation and 

the most dynamic partner in the CARIFORUM region. Its exports to the EU have increased by 

more than 86% since  the start  of implementation  in  2008 and bilateral  trade has  augmented 

160%  as  a  whole  based  on  Eurostat  data.  The  Dominican  Republic  and  the  EU  are  holding 

regular informal  bilateral  discussions (“mesa del  commercio” or  “trade table”) to  solve a 

number  of  market  access  barriers,  notably  delays  in  issuance  of  import  licenses, 

discriminatory  application  of  the  VAT  tax  (ITBIS)  on  imported  products,  concerns  over 

implementation of the fiscal control and traceability system for alcoholic beverages and tobacco 

(TRAFICO) and application of a law requiring a local representation of foreign brands118.  This 

“trade table” served as a platform to find a satisfactory legal solution on discriminatory taxation 

ITBIS on EU imported products (notably cheese and ham), but still waiting for the enforcement. 

With regard to TRAFICO, it allowed inter alia to channel timely concerns of the EU exporters 

and it led to extension of the implementation deadline and a potential exclusion from this system 

of the imported beers and wines, under the final consideration by the tax authorities. 

Ongoing  implementation  activities  with  all  the  CARIFORUM  partners  under  the  EPA 

include: 

  creation of the Task Force on Rules of Origin and start of the modernisation of the 

Rules of Origin Protocol;  

  creation of the Special Committee on Services;  

  on-going negotiations of geographical indications (GIs);  

  ongoing efforts to create the annual Joint Monitoring Mechanism – with the agreed 

final set of compliance and impact indicators ready for a first pilot report; 

 

technical assistance on HS transposition of the market access offers – offered by the 

Commission  to  CARIFORUM  countries/customs  authorities  to  advance  on  a  correct 

transposition of tariff commitments of market access offers from the 2002 Harmonised 

System  (HS)  nomenclature  to  the  2017/2022  HS  version.  HS  transposition  was 

successfully finalised by Dominican Republic.  

118 Access2Markets Barrier: Dealer Protection Law - discrimination (europa.eu). 

135 

 
 
                                                           
 
  Support to Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) under CARIPI project implemented 

together with EUIPO aimed at increasing implementation capacity of the CARIFORUM 

States on IPR commitments under EPAs.  Over the 2020 - 2021 period several meetings, 

workshops,  training  and  events  were  conducted  virtually,  including  trainings  on: 

Trademarks  Classification,  GIs,  Protecting  non-EU  GIs  in  the  EU  and  an  IPR 

Enforcement Seminar for Law Enforcement Agencies. EUIPO has proposed a 6-month 

extension in the implementation period to overcome the impact of the pandemic on the 

planned project implementation and an increase in the total cost of the action of EUR 

720,000.   

The 10-year Evaluation Study of the EU-CARIFORUM EPA published in 2021119 identified 

some key implementation challenges and cooperation needs for the region, such as:  

 

Implementation  delays  of  the  full  comprehensive  scope  of  the  agreement,  capacity 

constraints  and  absorption  capacity  of  the  authorities/agencies  in  the  CARIFORUM 

countries; 

  a lack of business awareness of the agreements and deficits in observing transparency 

obligations for business purposes; 

  need for a greater Member States’ engagement to support business to business relations; 

  need to increase communication around EPA potential and to support for business-to-

business  links  and  platforms,  for  the  EU  to  counter  traditional  US  dominance  in  the 

region and the growing influence of China. 

In  line  with  these  recommendations,  the  EU  engaged  in  activities  to  raise  awareness,  to 

provide business oriented information about the EPA, as well as to support to business-

to-business links and fora: 

  In  2021,  DG  TRADE  together  with  the  EU  Delegation  in  Barbados  and  Dominican 

Republic and in close collaboration with the Caribbean Export Development Agency 

organized  a  webinar  on  the  findings  and  recommendations  of  the  10-year  ex-post 

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

136 

 
 
                                                           
evaluation study of the EPA - “How to unlock the trade potential behind the EPA”.  

The Webinar gathered 430 participants, with approximately 150 stakeholders from the 

EU.  

  During 2021, under the Policy Support Facility, the EU has launched a regional project 

with the objective to reach out to business and explain opportunities of this EPA for 

trade and investment.  

  The EU Delegation in  Dominican Republic started to  implement  another  project on 

“Support to improved transparency and market access for European operators in 

the area of customs”. This project is meant to improve preference utilisation rates by 

EU exporters through the promotion and use of the EPA signed between CARIFORUM 

and the EU. 

  The Delegation in Barbados organised the 2021 Trade and Investment Convention 

(Trinidad and Tobago) and a virtual investment forum (Guyana).  

  The EU Delegation to the Dominican Republic is organising since 2017 a successful 

EPA promotion event with EPA awards given each year to several SMEs in different 

categories  of  goods  and  services  for  the  best  trade  performance  under  EPA.  Its  4th 

edition took place in November 30, 2021 and included some new categories such as 

exporting women, resilience and sustainability. Each year it is accompanied by media 

presence and production of EPA promotion material120.  

  The EU Delegation in Dominican Republic has also organised a series of seminars on 

EU policies, including the EPA, in the framework of the Diploma in EU-Dominican 

Republic relations as well as a number of workshops on the efficient utilisation of EPA 

preferences and the Access2Markets tool. Also, a workshop called Services Go Global 

was held, with the purpose of providing support for the strengthening and development 

of  Dominican  exports  of  services.  This  workshop  was  coordinated  by  the  Services 

Coalition and the Ministry of Industry, Commerce and MSMEs of the Dominican 

Republic, supported and financed by the Caribbean Export and the European Union.  

120 Video summary of the EPA awards event: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sjeK6d0-9fs 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sjeK6d0-9fs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sjeK6d0-9fs 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sjeK6d0-9fs  

137 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
  In the context of EPA promotion, the Delegation in Dominican Republic also produced 

in 2021 a tutorial121 on the tool Access2Markets in Spanish language for domestic use 

in Dominican Republic and the rest of Latin American countries.   

2.2 

Trade and sustainable development: Progress and outstanding issues   

-  The EU-CARIFORUM EPA is the first EU’s trade agreement with specific chapters on 

sustainable development and social aspects (Chapter IV - Environment and Chapter V 

–  Social  aspects).  These  generally  reaffirm  the  Parties’  commitment  to  existing 

international  conventions  and  agreements  to  conserve,  protect  and  improve  natural 

environment, respect core labour standards, and to prioritise sustainable development. 

It  is  further  strengthen  by  a  reference  to  Article  32  of  the  Cotonou  Agreement  and 

principles included in this agreement and subsequent post-Cotonou Agreement bringing 

these in line with more recent conventions. 

-  This  dimension  is  also  strongly  supported 

through  development  cooperation 

programmes.  

Among the actions taken by the Parties in 2021 to achieve the objectives of the EPA’s trade 

and sustainable development chapter were the following: 

EU  cooperation  funds  supported  CARIFORUM  states  in  implementing  programmes  to 

improve energy efficiency, developing the CARIFORUM’s renewable energy potential (e.g. 

in  Barbados,  Dominica,  Grenada,  St.  Vincent  and  St.  Kitts  and  Nevis),  increasing  grid 

penetration for energy from renewable sources, as well as by supporting the circular economy, 

notably with a focus on plastics and waste management.  

EU funds supported resilient workforce in St. Lucia (with a particular focus on unemployed 

workers,  young  people,  women,);  development  of  a  regulatory,  institutional  and  digital 

121 Acces2Markets video tutorial: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z1zRPtOFt5o 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z1zRPtOFt5o https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z1zRPtOFt5o 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z1zRPtOFt5o  

138 

 
 
 
                                                           
framework for sustainable delivery of social services in Barbados (by also providing training 

opportunities for young people to gain alternative employment); strengthening of the capacity 

of Jamaican business to provide gender sensitive and inclusive services to SMEs (notably by 

encouraging inclusiveness and participation of women); development of the export readiness 

of  companies  in  Trinidad  and  Tobago  (while  promoting  gender  equality,  youth  inclusive 

participation in trade, compliance with environmental standards and sustainable approaches to 

trade);  or  strengthening  of  the  structural  involvement  of  civil  society  in  the  regional 

development  and  integration  agenda  of  the  CARIFORUM  (notably  with  regard  to  the 

capacity  for  CSOs  to  influence  and  participate  in  CARIFORUM’s  social  and  economic 

policies including in relation to the EPA). 

In Dominican Republic, EU funds supported sustainable value chains for processed fruit 

and  quality  standards  by  SMEs  operating  in  avocado,  pineapple  and  mango  (including 

training  on  quality  systems  and  food  innocuousness,  sustainable  practices  and  responsible 

business conduct and social responsibility best practices). It has covered 70 Dominican SMEs, 

1000 small farmers, and mobilised 100 technicians in the above mentioned areas.  

Furthermore, under the ACP Business Friendly project, the EU, together with the Organization 

of African, Caribbean and Pacific States, supported a webinar on sustainable production and 

exports. This activity was aimed at cocoa producers and exporters in the Dominican Republic 

and sought to raise awareness of new production trends and demands of the European market, 

in line with the Green Deal and sustainable production practices. The event brought together 

agricultural exporters and potential exporters, as well as representatives of various multilateral 

institutions and private associations. 

139 

 
 
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”122  Economic  Partnership  Agreement  (EPA)  with 

Papua  New  Guinea  since  December  2009  and  with  Fiji  since  July  2014  (i.e.  the  original 

signatories),  and  with  Samoa  and  Solomon  Islands  since  December  2018  and  May  2020, 

respectively, following their accessions to the Agreement. The interim EPA only covers trade 

in goods. Originally it was supposed to be replaced by a comprehensive regional EPA with all 

Pacific  States123,  however  the  negotiations  were  put  on  hold  in  2016  mainly  due  to  lack  of 

progress  and  the  withdrawal  of  Papua  New  Guinea  from  the  negotiations.  Currently,  the 

preferred way forward is the geographical widening of the interim EPA and later, deepening of 

its content and/or increasing its scope, based on rendezvous clause. 

In 2021, preliminary accession talks continued with potential future members - Tonga and 

Timor-Leste.  The  Parties  are  open  to  consider  the  request  for  accession  by  Vanuatu,  which 

graduated from Least Developed Countries (LDC) status on 4 December 2020, and Kiribati and 

Tuvalu  whose  graduation  from  LDC  status  is  due  soon.  These  countries  will  lose  the  EU's 

Everything-But-Arms  (EBA)  preferences  three  years  after  the  graduation  from  LDC  status. 

They will fall under the standard Generalised Scheme of Preferences (GSP), unless they decide 

to accede to the EPA. 

The interim EPA provides for rules of origin for processed fisheries products (mainly tuna), 

which is not provided for in any other EPA – the so-called "global sourcing" provision, which 

is intended to boost development in the region. This means that 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 concession by the EU has boosted 

122 The title "interim" has lost much of its meaning, as this EPA is being transformed into a definitive one, with 
more  and  more  countries  in  the  region  choosing  to  accede  to  it  rather  than  seeking  to  continue  the  regional 
negotiations as a block for a "full" EPA with all the 14 countries in the region. 

123 Regional negotiations involved 14 Island States: Fiji, PNG, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Tonga, Vanuatu (all 6 
currently WTO members), Cooks Islands, Kiribati, Marshall Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, Nauru, Niue, 
Palau and Tuvalu (all 8 are neither WTO members nor observers). To note: Timor-Leste is part of the Small 
Pacific Islands group of ACP States, signatory to the Cotonou Agreement, but was not part of the regional EPA 
negotiations as it is not a member of the Pacific Islands Forum with which negotiations were carried out. 

140 

 
 
                                                           
investments in the tuna cooking and canning industry, creating tens of thousands of new jobs 

in Papua New Guinea (since 2009) and Solomon Islands (since 2020). 

The Parties held their 8th Trade Committee meetings (virtual), between 4 and 8 October 2021, 

on  the  margins  of  which  other  bilateral  meetings  and  the  second  meeting  of  the  Special 

Committee on Customs Cooperation and Rules of Origin took place. Tonga and Timor-Leste 

attended as observers and renewed their commitment to accede to the EU-Pacific interim EPA. 

  The  Trade  Committee  adopted  its  first  two  decisions,  namely  on  (1)  the  Rules  of 

Procedure of the Trade Committee and Special Committees, and (2) the amendment of 

Annex II to the Agreement to take account of the accession of Samoa and of Solomon 

Islands.  

  The Parties made progress on the preparation of (3) the Joint Declaration on trade and 

sustainable development – they agreed to complete all internal processes, clearing the 

way  for  its  endorsement  at  the  next  Committee  meeting;  and  (4)  the  National  EPA 

Implementation Plan of Actions by the Pacific States.  

  The  Parties  also  made  progress  in  the  preparation  of  the  joint  monitoring  and 

evaluation  mechanism  involving  civil  society,  which  has  been  discussed  in  the  last 

four EPA Committees. In the 2021 Committee meeting, the Parties progressed on the 

concept note on monitoring and evaluation of the EPA implementation, with a view to 

agree on the mechanism in next EPA Committee in 2022. 

The Parties agreed to hold the next Trade Committee in Apia, Samoa in 2022.  

2. 

MAIN IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES  

2.1   Main steps in implementation  

In 2021, progress was made in implementing tariff liberalisation under the interim EPA: 

  On 30 March 2021, the EU and Fiji held a dedicated Senior Official meeting during 

which they agreed on the way forward – a roadmap for Fiji’s effective implementation 

and ratification of the interim EPA. The EU assisted in the transposition of the Fijian 

Market Access Offer from Harmonised System (HS) 2007 to HS 2017 nomenclature. 

These  efforts  aim  at  enabling  economic  operators  on  both  sides  to  maximise  the 

expected  benefits,  including  the  improved  rules  of  origin,  which  have  attracted 

141 

 
 
 
important investments and generated jobs in the tuna canning industry in Papua New 

Guinea and Solomon Islands. 

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. 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% over 15 years, Samoa will liberalise 

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

Unlike  the  EPAs  with  other  ACP  partners,  the  Pacific  EPA  does  not  have  a  development 

cooperation chapter. Nevertheless, development cooperation is crucial in order to assist the 

Pacific States to meet some specific EPA implementation needs and to improve their capacity 

to export.  

The EU continued to play an active role to support trade relations with the Pacific, particularly 

through three combined trade-related assistance actions funded under the Pacific Regional 

Integration Support Programme (PRISE): Contracted in 2021 for a total value of EUR 26.25 

million, these actions (Strengthening Pacific Intra-Regional and International Trade –SPIRIT, 

Safe  Agriculture  Trade  Facilitation  in  the  Pacific  -  SAFE  and  Improving  Pacific  Islands 

Customs  and  Trade  -  IMPACT)  have  initiated  complementary  activities  to  support  the 

implementation of the EPA and new accessions to it and improved awareness of EU preferential 

trade schemes and market access requirements. Initial interventions, which will continue over 

a period of four years included assisting Pacific countries to:  

 

formulate  national  EPA  implementation  plans  (Fiji,  Samoa,  Solomon  Islands), 

accession (Timor-Leste and Tonga),  

  address  sanitary  and  phyto-sanitary  requirements  (e.g.  coconut,  coffee,  kava  and 

turmeric value chains),  

  harmonise of customs operations at regional and national levels (ASYCUDA and single 

windows), 

 

implement the EPA and WTO trade facilitation commitments. 

142 

 
 
 
 
Example: Implementation of the Pacific EPA by Papua New Guinea 

- 

In 2021, Papua New Guinea completed its Plan of Actions in order to enhance the 
implementation of the EPA. The EU Delegation in Papua New Guinea organised 
the second EU-  Papua  New Guinea  Business,  Trade  and  Investment  Conference, 
with the view to raise awareness on EPA benefits, increase business opportunities 
and contacts, and foster new partnerships between the EU and Papua New Guinea, 
Fiji, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Tonga and Timor-Leste.  

-  The  EU  Delegation  continued  to  implement  one  of  its  flagship  projects  in  the 
economic  sector,  namely  the  Support  to  Rural  Entrepreneurship,  Investment  and 
Trade  in  Papua  New  Guinea  (EU-STREIT  Papua  New  Guinea),  the  EU  largest 
grant-funded  programme  in  the  country  and  in  the  Pacific  sub-region,  which  is 
intended to contribute to sustainable and inclusive economic development of rural 
areas. Apart from improving the livelihood of smallholder farmers, it also has the 
potential to increase exports to the EU. 

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 in the framework of the Cotonou 

Agreement, to step up efforts on trade and sustainable development matters under the EPA. 

In  2021,  the  Parties  increased  efforts  to  promote  the  principles  of  trade  and  sustainable 

development  (TSD)  through  a  non-binding  instrument  –  Joint  Declaration  on  trade  and 

sustainable development that seeks political endorsement. The aim is to build the foundation 

for potential commitments on TSD between the EU and the Pacific States. Although the Joint 

Declaration entails no new legal commitments, it constitutes an important political commitment 

and a milestone for the Pacific partners to place sustainable development solidly at the heart of 

the EU-Pacific trade relations under the interim EPA. The Parties agree on the principles and 

some concrete actions (information and experience sharing) in order to develop and implement 

cooperation and capacity-building activities in priority areas. The joint declaration places the 

EU-Pacific States’ joint objectives firmly on the map of efforts towards meeting the UN 2030 

goals: 

  During  the  Trade  Committee  in  October  2021,  the  Parties  discussed  the  draft  Joint 

Declaration, including the comments made by EU Member States on the inclusion of 

143 

 
 
 
internationally  recognised  core  labour  standards  (ILO  conventions),  the  multilateral 

environmental agreement (in particular the UNFCCC and the Paris Agreement), with 

specific attention to gender issues.  

  The  Pacific  partners  reiterated  their  commitment  to  sustainability  and  particularly 

referred to the fight against climate change – a critical challenge for the Pacific region. 

They are consulting stakeholders ahead of endorsing the Joint Declaration possibly at 

the next Trade Committee, expected in the second half of 2022 in Apia, Samoa. 

144 

 
 
Annex  

SECTION IV OF THE REPORT: ADRESSING BARRIERS AND FINDING 
SOLUTIONS  

LIST OF BARRIERS RECORDED AND SOLVED in 2021 

(1 January 2021 – 31 December 2021) 

1. NEW TRADE AND INVESTMENT BARRIERS REPORTED IN 2021 

COUNTRY  BARRIER 

SECTOR 

A2M124 

Algeria 

Algeria 

Restrictions to maritime auxiliary services 
providers (Exec. Decree 20-348) 
Re-registration of companies 

Services - 
Transport 
Horizontal 

Dominican 
Republic 
Egypt 

Discriminatory VAT on imported ham and 
cheese. 
Temporary import ban of ceramic tiles 

India 

Quality Control Orders on Footwear 

Agriculture and 
Fisheries 
Ceramics and 
Glass 
Textiles and 
Leather 

16782 

16942 

16702 

16502 

16842 

India 

Quality Control Order for Man-made Fibres 

Chemicals 

17182 

Indonesia 

Medical devices 

Other industries 

17164 

Japan 

Procurement - Single Point of Access for 
tenders 

Horizontal 

16822 

Nigeria 

Nigerian postal legislation 

10 

Oman 

Import restrictions of olive oil 

Philippines 

Ceramic tiles mandatory certification 

Saudi Arabia  Setting of mandatory expiry dates for several 

food products 

Saudi Arabia  Saudi Arabia ECall 4G requirement 

Services - 
Communication 

17002 

Agriculture and 
Fisheries 

Ceramics and 
Glass 
Agriculture and 
Fisheries 
Automotive 

17242 

16862 

16882 

16922 

South Korea  Restricted market access for European 
vacuum street-cleaners 

Electronics 

16902 

United States 
of America 
Vietnam 

Spanish ripe olives 

Market access procedures for animal products 
and for food additives 

Agriculture and 
Fisheries 
Services - 
Communication 

17062 

16982 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

124 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 

145 

 
 
 
                                                           
2. TRADE AND INVESTMENT BARRIERS RESOLVED IN 2021125 

COUNTRY 

BARRIER 

1  Australia 

Australian Fuel Standards – 
sulphur content 

SECTOR 

Automotive 

A2M126 

15423 

2  Bangladesh 

Export restrictions on hides and 
skins 

Textiles and Leather 

12325 

3  Bosnia and 

Herzegovina 

Preferential rate for domestic 
businesses in public procurement 

Horizontal 

16665 

4  Canada 

5  Canada 

6  Chile 

EU harmonised certificates for 
exports of animal products to 
Canada 

exports of grapevine plants to 
Canada 

IPR enforcement - 
pharmaceuticals and agro-
chemicals 

Agriculture and Fisheries 

16362 

Agriculture and Fisheries 

16682 

Pharmaceuticals 

11405 

7  China 

Financial services 

Services - Financial 

11001 

8 

Ecuador 

Procedure for the approval of 
establishments without prior 
inspection  

Agriculture and Fisheries 

17022 

9 

Egypt 

10  Egypt 

11  Egypt 

Temporary import ban of ceramic 
tiles 

Ceramics and Glass 

16502 

Agriculture and Fisheries 

16185 

Temporary ban on imports of 
white sugar 

Several measures on imports 
related to Covid-19 

Horizontal , Iron, Steel and 
Non-Ferrous Metals, 
Agriculture and Fisheries 

15796 

14123 

14382 

12 

India 

Standards on alcoholic beverages  Wines & Spirits 

13 

India 

Mandatory veterinary certificates 
for importing leather 

Textiles and Leather 

14 

India 

Indian ban on import of furskins 

Textiles and Leather 

12401 

125 Fully resolved or partially resolved barriers 
126 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 

146 

 
 
 
                                                           
15 

Indonesia 

IPR: local working requirements 

Horizontal 

12780 

16 

Indonesia 

New Regulation  on Traditional 
Markets, Shopping Centers and  

Services - Distribution 

10144 

17 

Indonesia 

Import permit for importing batik 
patterned fabrics 

Textiles and Leather 

12480 

18  Japan 

19  Japan 

20  Kenya 

21  Mexico 

22  Nicaragua 

23  Pakistan 

24  Peru 

Non- recognition of EU' s 
regionalisation measures 

Member States applications on 
beef and ban due to Bovine  

Cessation of warehousing goods 
in customs bonded warehouses 

Complaint regarding trade 
restrictive measure to the export 
of Tequila destined for use of  
flavoured beer 

Non- recognition of EU' s 
regionalisation measures 
implemented due  

Animals and meat import 
restrictions - BSE 

Peru implementation of FTA 
provisions. 

Agriculture and Fisheries 

12741 

Agriculture and Fisheries 

15324 

Horizontal 

16102 

Wines & Spirits 

16162 

Agriculture and Fisheries 

17042 

Agriculture and Fisheries 

11623 

Agriculture and Fisheries 

10500 

25  Saudi Arabia 

Setting of mandatory expiry dates 
for several food products 

Agriculture and Fisheries 

16882 

26  Singapore 

27  South Korea 

IPR-Deficient Neighbouring 
rights for performers and 
phonogram  

Non- recognition of EU 's 
regionalisation measures 
implemented due  

Services - Recreational, 
incl. news agency services 

11840 

Agriculture and Fisheries 

12740 

28  South Korea 

Ballast water treatment systems 
for Korean vessels 

Shipbuilding 

14782 

29  South Korea 

Illegal use of EU MS national flag  Agriculture and Fisheries 

16962 

30  South Korea 

Restricted market access for 
European vacuum street-cleaners 

Electronics, Machinery 

16902 

147 

 
 
31  Thailand 

32  Thailand 

33  Tunisia 

Non-recognition of 
regionalisation due to avian 
influenza 

Cumbersome and undue delays of 
import application procedures 

Higher tariffs on "non-essential" 
consumer products (including  

34  United States of 

America 

Sheep and goat meat market 
access to the USA 

Agriculture and Fisheries 

15404 

Agriculture and Fisheries 

11600 

Chemicals, Cosmetics, 
Textiles and Leather, 
Agriculture and Fisheries 

13049 

Agriculture and Fisheries 

13623 

35  United States of 

America 

Section 232 tariffs on steel and 
aluminium imports 

Iron, Steel and Non-Ferrous 
Metals 

14162 

36  United States of 

Boeing Subsidies 

Aircraft 

11880 

America 

37  United States of 

America 

Import restrictions on poultry 
meat and egg products 

Agriculture and Fisheries 

14534 

38  Vietnam 

39  Turkey 

Market access procedures for 
animal products and for food 
additives 

Amendments to the Cosmetic 
legislation 

Agriculture and Fisheries 

16982 

Cosmetics 

14822 

148