Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

**Council of the**
**European Union**

**Interinstitutional File:**

**2021/0350(NLE)**

**PROPOSAL**

**Brussels, 4 November 2021**
**(OR. en)**

**13493/21**

**WTO 256**
**AGRI 517**
**PECHE 405**

From: Secretary-General of the European Commission, signed by Ms Martine
DEPREZ, Director

date of receipt: 4 November 2021

To: Mr Jeppe TRANHOLM-MIKKELSEN, Secretary-General of the Council
of the European Union

No. Cion doc.: COM(2021) 672 final

Subject: Proposal for a COUNCIL DECISION on the position to be taken on
behalf of the European Union in the World Trade Organization’s 12 [th]
Ministerial Conference

Delegations will find attached document COM(2021) 672 final.

Encl.: COM(2021) 672 final

13493/21 BK/hp
## RELEX.1.A EN

EUROPEAN

COMMISSION

Brussels, 4.11.2021
COM(2021) 672 final

2021/0350 (NLE)

Proposal for a

**COUNCIL DECISION**

**on the position to be taken on behalf of the European Union in the World Trade**

**Organization’s 12** **[th]** **Ministerial Conference**

# **EN EN**

**EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM**

**1.** **S** **UBJECT MATTER OF THE PROPOSAL**

This proposal concerns the Council decision establishing the position to be taken on the
Union's behalf in the 12 [th] Ministerial Conference of the World Trade Organization in
connection with the envisaged adoption of several decisions. This proposal covers the
following areas:

1. Fisheries subsidies

2. Trade and health

3. Measures related to intellectual property, as provided for in the TRIPS Agreement, in
the circumstances of the COVID-19 pandemic and other pandemics

4. Transparency improvements in agriculture

5. Domestic support in agriculture

6. Public stockholding for food security purposes

7. Export restrictions in agriculture, including the World Food Programme exemption
from export restrictions

8. Export competition in agriculture

9. Market access in agriculture

10. Special safeguard mechanism (SSM) in agriculture

11. Review of the Understanding on Tariff Rate Quota Administration provisions of
Agricultural Products (Bali TRQ Decision)

12. Cotton

13. Least Developed Countries (LDCs) and Special and Differential Treatment (SDT)

14. Notifications

15. Trade concerns

**2.** **C** **ONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL**

**2.1.** **The Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization ("WTO**
**Agreement")**

The Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization (‘the WTO Agreement’) aims to
achieve the objectives mentioned in the preamble to the Agreement. The agreement entered
into force on 1 January 1995.

The European Union (EU) is a party to the Agreement. [1] All 27 EU Member States are also
parties to the Agreement. The WTO may take decisions in accordance with the procedures set
out in the WTO Agreement.

1 Council Decision [94/800/EC of 22 December 1994 concerning the conclusion on behalf of the](http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/AUTO/?uri=celex:31994D0800)
European Community, as regard matters within its competence, of the agreements reached in the
Uruguay Round of multilateral negotiations (1986-1994) OJ L 336 23.12.1994, p. 1.

# EN 1 EN

**2.2.** **The Ministerial Conference of the World Trade Organization**

The Ministerial Conference is the highest decision-making body of the WTO, and meets at
least once every two years. As a matter of practice, decisions are taken by consensus.

The next meeting of the Ministerial Conference will take place in Geneva, Switzerland (30
November – 3 December 2021).

**2.3.** **The envisaged acts of the WTO Ministerial Conference**

On 3 December, the WTO’s 12 [th] Ministerial Conference (‘MC12’) is expected to adopt
several decisions regarding:

1. Fisheries subsidies

2. Trade and health

3. Measures related to intellectual property, as provided for in the TRIPS Agreement, in
the circumstances of the COVID-19 pandemic and other pandemics

4. Transparency improvements in agriculture

5. Domestic support in agriculture

6. Public stockholding for food security purposes

7. Export restrictions in agriculture, including the World Food Programme exemption
from export restrictions

8. Export competition in agriculture

9. Market access in agriculture

10. Special safeguard mechanism (SSM) in agriculture

11. Review of the Bali Tariff Rate Quota (TRQ) Decision

12. Cotton

13. LDCs and SDT

14. Notifications

15. Trade concerns

**3.** **P** **OSITION TO BE TAKEN ON THE** **U** **NION** **'** **S BEHALF**

The objective of this proposal is to allow the EU to join a possible consensus in the WTO on
the adoption by the Ministerial Conference of the envisaged acts.

While it is not yet clear if, and to what extent, WTO Members will be able to reach consensus,
the EU position at MC12 has to be established in advance by the Council pursuant to Article
218(9) TFEU. [2]

It should be noted that the EU position to support the extension of the moratorium on customs
duties on electronic transmissions and the extension of the moratorium on complaints of the
types provided for under subparagraphs 1(b) and 1(c) of Article XXIII of the General

2 To the extent that, contrary to the current expectations, the consensus was formalised in an international
agreement amending the WTO Agreement or in a plurilateral international agreement among some
WTO Members, the Commission would make the necessary proposals in accordance with Article
218(6) TFEU following the adoption of the texts and their opening for acceptance by the MC12 or by
the WTO Members concerned during MC12.

# EN 2 EN

Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 (non-violation and situation complaints) will not be
included in this proposal as Council Decision (EU) 2015/2236 of 27 November 2015 provides
that this can be done on an indefinite basis.

The current proposal covers the following issues on which decisions may be taken:

    - **Fisheries subsidies:** Reaching a multilateral agreement on rules on the elimination
of certain fisheries subsidies is foreseen in the UN Sustainable Development Goal 14
Target 6 ("SDG 14.6") agreed by Heads of States in 2015 and the WTO Ministerial
Decision of 13 December 2017 (WT/MIN(17)/64). Negotiations are underway and
the EU should support an agreed outcome.

    - **Trade and Health:** Discussions on Trade and Health issues started in 2020 with a
proposal of 13 like-minded countries (the ‘Ottawa Group’) in the WTO
(WTO/GC/223) of 24 November 2020 to agree on a Trade and Health Initiative in
response to the current and future pandemics. The EU was amongst the original
proponents of the initiative, which suggested a number of actions related, in
particular, to export restrictions, trade faciliating measures and enhanced
transparency. The proposal also encouraged the WTO to cooperate more closely with
other international organizations in the work on crisis preparedness. Over time, the
number of co-sponsors increased to 26. A revised proposal for a Draft General
Council Declaration was tabled in the WTO on 15 July 2021 (WT/GC/W/823)
regarding the trade policy response to the COVID-19 pandemic and to enhance
resilience against future pandemics. The EU should support a potential outcome in
this area on export restrictions, trade facilitating measures, enhanced transparency
and other elements included in the latest proposal for a draft General Council
Declaration. This may also include a WTO work programme for the work post
MC12, the objective of which would be to enhance Members’ resilience against
future pandemics.

    - **Measures related to intellectual property, as provided for in the TRIPS**

**-**
**Agreement, in the circumstances of the COVID** **19 pandemic and other**
**pandemics:** These negotiations are part of the ongoing discussions in the WTO on
how the trade system can enhance global access to COVID-19 vaccines and
therapeutics. On 21 May 2021, a number of WTO Members submitted to the WTO
Council for TRIPS a communication with a revised proposal for a waiver from
certain provisions of the TRIPS Agreement for the prevention, containment and
treatment of COVID-19 (IP/C/W/669/Rev.1). On 4 June 2021, the EU submitted a
communication on Urgent trade policy responses to the COVID-19 crisis to the
WTO General Council (WT/GC/231) and a communication on Urgent trade policy
responses to the COVID-19 crisis: intellectual property to the WTO Council for
TRIPS (IP/C/W/680). On 18 June 2021, the EU submitted to the WTO Council for
TRIPS a Communication with a draft Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and
Public Health in the circumstances of a pandemic (IP/C/W/681). The draft
declaration aims to clarify or facilitate the use of the compulsory licensing system
provided for in the TRIPS Agreement, in order to make it work as efficiently as
possible in the circumstances of a pandemic. Given the importance of this issue, the
EU should support an outcome in accordance with the EU Communications
mentioned above. At the same time, the position to be taken on the EU’s behalf
should be sufficiently flexible to take account of the dynamic nature of the ongoing
text-based process including as regards the instrument used by the Ministerial
Conference. In particular, the EU should remain open to accepting other elements
aiming to enhance or simplify the use of existing flexibilities provided for in the

# EN 3 EN

TRIPS Agreement in the circumstances of the COVID-19 pandemic, other
pandemics or other circumstances of extreme urgency related to public health that
other WTO Members may propose.

    - **Transparency improvements in agriculture:** The EU strongly believes that its
proposal (JOB/AG/213) for a Ministerial Decision on transparency improvements in
agriculture co-sponsored by Canada, Japan and the United States could constitute a
basis for a decision at MC12. The proposal includes ideas for transparency
improvements across the board in agriculture. This is an important initiative for
MC12 considering that the pandemic has renewed the importance of greater
transparency and predictability of agricultural support and trade. This initiative could
be a credible element of a food security agenda indicated by the WTO Director
General as a priority for MC12.

    - **Domestic support in agriculture:** Negotiations on trade-distorting domestic support
are embedded in Article 20 of the WTO Agreement on Agriculture and have been
part of the Doha Development Agenda (DDA) mandate, as embodied in the Doha
Ministerial Declaration of 14 November 2001 (WT/MIN(01)/DEC/1). Given the
divergence of positions in the negotiations, the EU sees as a possible outcome a postMC12 work programme on a reform of trade distorting domestic support.

    - **Public stockholding for food security purposes:** Negotiations aim at agreeing on a
'permanent solution' fulfilling the goal set out in the Bali Ministerial Decision of 7
December 2013 on Public Stockholding for Food Security Purposes
(WT/MIN(13)/38-WT/L/913), as interpreted by the subsequent General Council
Decision of 27 November 2014 (WT/L/939). This goal was repeated in the Nairobi
Ministerial Decision of 19 December 2015 (WT/MIN(15)/44-WT/L/979). This issue
may be part of the work programme on domestic support.

    - **Export restrictions in agriculture:** Negotiations on export restrictions in
agriculture, including the World Food Programme exemption from export
restrictions, have shown that a large part of the WTO Membership supports the
commitment not to impose such restrictions on purchases for humanitarian purposes.
Given the importance of the issue, the EU should continue to support the proposal for
a Ministerial Decision on this matter, which could constitute an important element of
a food security package at MC12. The EU should support an agreed outcome.

    - **Export competition in agriculture:** While we see a need to seek improvements to
both transparency and disciplines in export competition, the reality of negotiations
shows that there is only limited interest. There is, however, some chance of progress
on transparency improvements for MC12. Indeed, the EU included several ideas in
this respect in our co-sponsored proposal (JOB/AG/213) for a Ministerial Decision
on transparency improvements in agriculture. Also in the area of export competition,
a triennial review of the Nairobi Decision on Export Competition (WT/MIN(15/45))
is ongoing in the regular Committee on Agriculture as mandated in paragraph 5 of
that decision. The purpose is to review the disciplines contained in the decision. It
has been agreed to postpone the review until the next meeting of the Committee on
Agriculture in March 2022. Such agreement may require a Ministerial level decision
at MC12. The EU is supportive of this postponement.

    - **Market access in agriculture:** Discussions on market access negotiations in
agriculture have shown that there is no appetite or realistic chance for any revival of
tariff reduction negotiations at the WTO any time soon. Nevertheless, some of the
WTO Members have made proposals which aim at launching negotiations post

# EN 4 EN

MC12 including a proposal in the area of tariff simplification containing the
calculations of Ad Valorem Equivalents (AVEs). The EU sees transparency elements
as the only possible outcome in market access. This should include the proposal
(JOB/AG/212) by Australia, Brazil, Canada and Ukraine on transparency in applied
tariff changes and treatment of goods _en route_ where the EU is supportive. The EU
should support an agreed outcome.

    - **Special safeguard mechanism (SSM) in agriculture:** Given the divergence of
positions and lack of engagement of Members, no outcome is expected at MC12.
Nevertheless, the EU has an interest to ensure that SSM is not negotiated as a standalone element, but rather as part of the wider market access negotiations.

    - **Review of the Bali Tariff Rate Quota (TRQ) Decision:** Discussions on the review
of the Understanding on Tariff Rate Quota Administration provisions of Agricultural
Products, as defined in Article 2 of the Agreement on Agriculture (WT/MIN(13)/39,
WT/L/914)) should reach a result by 31 December 2021. The current unequal
coverage of the decision exempting the US and developing countries from the
underfill mechanism is not acceptable. Considering the discussions take place in the
regular Committee on Agriculture it is possible that a General Council level outcome
would be considered instead of a Ministerial outcome. The EU should support an
agreed outcome.

    - **Cotton:** Given the divergence of positions in the negotiations, the most likely
outcome for MC12 would be some transparency improvements. The EU has included
an idea on transparency in cotton in the co-sponsored proposal (JOB/AG/213) for a
Ministerial Decision on transparency improvements in agriculture.

    - **LDCs and SDT:** Negotiations on SDT provisions are part of the DDA and a possible
outcome at MC12 may clarify existing provisions or grant additional SDT for the
LDC group and possibly other vulnerable WTO Members. Given the importance of
the issue the EU should support an agreed outcome.

    - **Notifications:** In view of the need to improve the transparency and compliance with
existing notification requirements, the EU put forward a proposal for a General
Council Decision on Procedures to Enhance Transparency and Improve Compliance
with Notification Requirements under WTO Agreements (JOB/GC/204/Rev.7).
Negotiations are underway and the EU should support an agreed outcome.

    - **Trade concerns:** Seeking to strengthen the effectiveness of the work of regular
WTO councils and committees, notably as regards the consideration of trade
concerns, the EU submitted a proposal to the WTO on a General Council Decision
on Procedural Guidelines for WTO Councils and Committees Addressing Trade
Concerns (WT/GC/W/777/Rev.6). Negotiations are underway and the EU should
support an agreed outcome.

Since negotiations are currently ongoing on all elements above, the Commission expects that
the Council will take its decision on the EU position on the outcome of the negotiations once
the situation regarding the relevant texts becomes clear during the Ministerial Conference
itself.

The initiative is fully consistent with existing policy provisions. Similar decisions were
prepared for previous WTO Ministerial Conferences, including most recently for the 11th
WTO Ministerial Conference in 2017.

# EN 5 EN

**4.** **L** **EGAL BASIS**

**4.1.** **Procedural legal basis**

_4.1.1._ _Principles_

Article 218(9) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) provides for
decisions establishing ‘ _the positions to be adopted on the Union’s behalf in a body set up by_
_an agreement, when that body is called upon to adopt acts having legal effects, with the_
_exception of acts supplementing or amending the institutional framework of the agreement_ .’

The concept of ‘ _acts having legal effects_ ’ includes acts that have legal effects by virtue of the
rules of international law governing the body in question. It also includes instruments that do
not have a binding effect under international law, but that are ‘ _capable of decisively_
’ [3]
_influencing the content of the legislation adopted by the EU legislature_ .

_4.1.2._ _Application to the present case_

The WTO Ministerial Conference is a body set up by an agreement, namely the WTO
Agreement, which according to Article IV:1 of the WTO Agreement has the authority to take
decisions on all matters covered under any of the multilateral trade agreements, including
decisions having legal effects.

The envisaged acts mentioned above constitute acts having legal effects, as they may affect
the rights and obligations of the Union.

The envisaged acts do not supplement or amend the institutional framework of the
Agreement.

Therefore, the procedural legal basis for the proposed decision is Article 218(9) TFEU.

**4.2.** **Substantive legal basis**

_4.2.1._ _Principles_

The substantive legal basis for a decision under Article 218(9) TFEU depends primarily on
the objective and content of the envisaged act in respect of which a position is taken on the
Union's behalf. If the envisaged act pursues two aims or has two components and if one of
those aims or components is identifiable as the main one, whereas the other is merely
incidental, the decision under Article 218(9) TFEU must be founded on a single substantive
legal basis, namely that required by the main or predominant aim or component.

_4.2.2._ _Application to the present case_

The main objective and content of the envisaged acts relate to the common commercial
policy, as the envisaged possible decisions on DDA issues fall thereunder.

The substantive legal basis of the proposed decision, therefore, is Article 207 TFEU.

**4.3.** **Conclusion**

The legal basis of the proposed decision should be Article 207 TFEU in conjunction with
Article 218(9) TFEU.

3 Judgment of the Court of Justice of 7 October 2014, Germany v Council, C-399/12,
ECLI:EU:C:2014:2258, paragraphs 61 to 64.

# EN 6 EN

2021/0350 (NLE)

Proposal for a

**COUNCIL DECISION**

**on the position to be taken on behalf of the European Union in the World Trade**

**Organization’s 12** **[th]** **Ministerial Conference**

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular
Article 207(4), first subparagraph, in conjunction with Article 218(9) thereof,

Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission,

Whereas:

(1) The Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization (‘the WTO
Agreement’) was concluded by the Union by Council Decision 94/800/EC of 22
December 1994 [4] and entered into force on 1 January 1995.

(2) Pursuant to Articles IV:1 and IX:1 of the WTO Agreement, the Ministerial Conference
of the World Trade Organization (‘WTO’) may adopt decisions by consensus.

(3) The WTO Ministerial Conference, during its 12th meeting on 30 November – 3
December 2021, may adopt decisions on Fisheries subsidies, Trade and health,
Measures related to intellectual property, as provided for in the TRIPS Agreement in
the circumstances of the COVID-19 pandemic and other pandemics, Transparency
improvements in agriculture, Domestic support in agriculture, Public stockholding for
food security purposes, Export restrictions in agriculture, including the World Food
Programme exemption from export restrictions, Export competition in agriculture,
Market access in agriculture, Special safeguard mechanism (SSM) in agriculture,
Review of the Bali Tariff Rate Quota (TRQ) Decision, Cotton, LDCs and SDT,
Notifications, and Trade concerns.

(4) It is appropriate to establish the position to be taken on the Union's behalf in the WTO
Ministerial Conference, as the decisions are binding on the Union.

(5) Negotiations on fisheries subsidies are part of the Doha Devleopment Agenda (DDA)
and were identified as a priority in UN Sustainable Development Goal 14 Target 6
("SDG 14.6") agreed by Heads of States in 2015 and the WTO Ministerial Decision of
13 December 2017 (WT/MIN(17)/64). Given the importance of the issue for trade and
sustainable development, and the fact that the Union has been one of the proponents,
the Union should support an agreed outcome.

(6) Discussions on Trade and Health issues started in 2020 with a proposal of 13 likeminded countries (the so-called Ottawa Group) in the WTO (WTO/GC/223) of 24
November 2020 to agree on a “Trade and Health Initiative” in response to the current
and future pandemics. The EU was amongst the original proponents of the initiative. A
revised proposal for a Draft General Council Declaration was tabled in the WTO on 15
July 2021 (WT/GC/W/823) regarding the trade policy response to the COVID-19

4 OJ L 336, 23.12.1994, p. 1.

# EN 7 EN

pandemic and to enhance resilience against future pandemics. Given the importance of
the issue, the Union should support an outcome in this area.

(7) Negotiations on measures related to intellectual property, as provided for in the TRIPS
Agreement, in the circumstances of a pandemic, including the COVID-19 pandemic,
are part of the ongoing discussions in the WTO on how the trade system can enhance
global access to COVID-19 vaccines and therapeutics. On 21 May 2021, a number of
WTO Members submitted to the WTO Council for TRIPS a communication with a
revised proposal for a waiver from certain provisions of the TRIPS Agreement for the
prevention, containment and treatment of COVID-19 (IP/C/W/669/Rev.1). On 4 June
2021 the Union submitted a communication on Urgent trade policy responses to the
COVID-19 crisis to the WTO General Council (WT/GC/231) and a communication on
Urgent trade policy responses to the COVID-19 crisis: intellectual property to the
WTO Council for TRIPS (IP/C/W/680). On 18 June 2021 the EU submitted to the
WTO Council for TRIPS a Communication with a draft Declaration on the TRIPS
Agreement and Public Health in the circumstances of a pandemic (IP/C/W/681),
which aims to clarify or facilitate the use of the compulsory licensing system provided
for in the TRIPS Agreement, in order to make it work as efficiently as possible in the
circumstances of a pandemic. Given the importance of this issue, the Union should
support an outcome in accordance with the EU Communications mentioned above. At
the same time, the position to be taken on the EU’s behalf should be sufficiently
flexible to take account of the dynamic nature of the ongoing text-based process
including as regards the instrument used by the Ministerial Conference. In particular,
the EU should remain open to accepting other elements aiming to enhance or simplify
the use of existing flexibilities provided for in the TRIPS Agreement in the
circumstances of the COVID-19 pandemic, other pandemics or other circumstances of
extreme urgency related to public health that other WTO Members may propose.

(8) Negotiations on transparency improvements in agriculture as a cross-cutting issue
have gained renewed attention during the COVID-19 pandemic due to its contribution
to keeping trade flows open. Transparency is an essential element for monitoring
obligations under the Agreement on Agriculture, for informing negotiations, and for
ensuring fair, effective, and resilient agricultural markets and trade. Given the
importance of the issue, the Union together with Canada, Japan and the United States
have made a proposal for a Ministerial Decision on transparency improvements in
agriculture (JOB/AG/213) and therefore the Union should support an agreed outcome.

(9) Negotiations on trade-distorting domestic support are embedded in Article 20 of the
WTO Agreement on Agriculture and have been part of the DDA mandate, as
embodied in the Doha Ministerial Declaration of 14 November 2001
(WT/MIN(01)/DEC/1). Given the divergence of positions in the negotiations, the EU
sees as a possible outcome a post-MC12 work programme on a reform of trade
distorting domestic support. Given the importance of the issue the Union should
support an agreed outcome.

(10) Negotiations aim at agreeing on a 'permanent solution' fulfilling the goal set out in the
Bali Ministerial Decision of 7 December 2013 on Public Stockholding for Food
Security Purposes (WT/MIN(13)/38-WT/L/913), as interpreted by the subsequent
General Council Decision of 27 November 2014 (WT/L/939). This goal was repeated
in the Nairobi Ministerial Decision of 19 December 2015 (WT/MIN(15)/44WT/L/979). Given the importance of the issue the Union should support an agreed
outcome. This issue may be part of the work programme on domestic support.

# EN 8 EN

(11) Negotiations on export restrictions in agriculture, including the World Food
Programme exemption from export restrictions have shown that a large part of the
WTO Membership supports the commitment not to impose such restrictions on
purchases for humanitarian purposes. Given the proposal for a Ministerial Decision on
this matter and the fact that this is an important element of a food security package at
MC12, the Union should support an agreed outcome.

(12) A triennial review of the disciplines contained in the Nairobi Decision on Export
Competition (WT/MIN(15/45) is ongoing in the regular Committee on Agriculture as
mandated in paragraph 5 of that decision. It has been agreed to postpone the review
until the next meeting of the Committee on Agriculture in March 2022. Such
agreement may require a Ministerial level decision at MC12. The EU is supportive of
this postponement. Moreover, the discussions have shown a certain interest of the
Membership in transparency improvements in export competition. Indeed, the EU
included several ideas in this respect in its co-sponsored proposal (JOB/AG/213) for a
Ministerial Decision on transparency improvements in agriculture. Given that the
Union has been one of the proponents, it should support an agreed outcome.

(13) Discussions on market access negotiations in agriculture have shown that there is no
appetite or realistic chance for any revival of tariff reduction negotiations at the WTO
any time soon. Nevertheless, some of the WTO Members have made proposals which
aim at launching negotiations post MC12 including a proposal in the area of tariff
simplification containing the calculations of Ad Valorem Equivalents (AVEs). The EU
sees transparency elements as the only possible outcome in market access. This should
include the proposal (JOB/AG/212) by Australia, Brazil, Canada and Ukraine on
transparency in applied tariff changes and treatment of goods en route where the EU is
supportive. The Union should support an agreed outcome.

(14) Discussions on the Special Safeguard Mechanism (SSM) in agriculture have continued
pursuant to the proposals on the table and the Nairobi Ministerial Decision
(WT/MIN(15)/43 - WT/L/978). Given the divergence of positions and lack of
engagement of Members, no outcome is expected at MC12. Nevertheless, the EU has
an interest to ensure that SSM is not negotiated as a stand-alone element. The Union
should thus support an outcome on SSM only if it forms part of the wider market
access negotiations.

(15) Discussions on the review of the Understanding on Tariff Rate Quota Administration
provisions of Agricultural Products, as defined in Article 2 of the Agreement on
Agriculture (WT/MIN(13)/39, WT/L/914)) should reach a result by 31 December
2021. The current unequal coverage of the decision exempting the US and developing
countries from the underfill mechanism is not acceptable. Considering the discussions
take place in the regular Committee on Agriculture it is possible that a General
Council level outcome would be considered instead of a Ministerial outcome. The
Union should support an agreed outcome.

(16) Discussions on cotton have continued in the framework set up in paragraphs 5, 6 and 7
of the Bali Ministerial Decision on Cotton (WT/MIN(13)/41 - WT/L/916 ) and in
paragraph 14 of the Nairobi Ministerial Decision on Cotton (WT/MIN(15)/46 WT/L/981). Given the divergence of positions in the negotiations, the most likely
outcome for MC12 could be some transparency improvements. The Union should
support an agreed outcome.

(17) Negotiations on Special and Differential Treatment provisions are part of the DDA
and a possible outcome at MC12 may clarify existing provisions or grant additional

# EN 9 EN

SDT for the LDC group and possibly other vulnerable WTO Members. Given the
importance of the issue, the Union should support an agreed outcome.

(18) Discussions on notifications are ongoing in the General Council as regards the
proposals on a General Council Decision on Procedures to Enhance Transparency and
Improve Compliance with Notification Requirements under WTO Agreements
(JOB/GC/204/Rev.7). Given the importance of improving the transparency and
compliance with existing notification requirements and the Union’s role as one of the
proponents of the proposal, the Union should support an agreed outcome in this area.

(19) Discussions on trade concerns are ongoing in the General Council as regards the
Decision on Procedural Guidelines for WTO Councils and Committees Addressing
Trade Concerns (WT/GC/W/777/Rev.6). Given the importance of strengthening the
effectiveness of the work of regular WTO councils and committees, notably as regards
the consideration of trade concerns and the Union’s role as one of the proponents of
the proposal, the Union should support an agreed outcome in this area,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

_Article 1_

The position to be taken on the Union's behalf in the 12 [th] session of the WTO Ministerial
Conference shall be:

To join the consensus reached among WTO Members with a view to adopting decisions
regarding Fisheries subsidies, Trade and health, Measures related to intellectual property, as
provided for in the TRIPS Agreement in the circumstances of the COVID-19 pandemic and
other pandemics, Transparency improvements in agriculture, Domestic support in agriculture,
Public stockholding for food security purposes, Export restrictions in agriculture including the
World Food Programme exemption from export restrictions, Export competition in
agriculture, Market access in agriculture, Special safeguard mechanism (SSM) in agriculture,
Review of the Bali Tariff Rate Quota (TRQ) Decision [5], Cotton, LDCs and SDT,
Notifications, and Trade concerns.

_Article 2_

This Decision is addressed to the Commission.

Done at Brussels,

_For the Council_

_The President_

5 Having regard to Article IV:2, second sentence, of the WTO Agreement, this includes a possible
consensus reached among WTO Members on the adoption of a decision regarding the Review of the
Understanding on Tariff Rate Quota Administration provisions of Agricultural Products, as defined in
Article 2 of the Agreement on Agriculture (WT/MIN(13)/39, WT/L/914)) (Bali Tariff Rate Quota
(TRQ) Decision) in a meeting of the General Council.

# EN 10 EN