metadata: authors: 0: author: Borchert,Ingo
1: author: Gootiiz,Batshur
2: author: Magdeleine,Joscelyn
3: author: Marchetti,Juan A.
4: author: Mattoo,Aaditya
5: author: Rubio,Ester
6: author: Shannon,Evgeniia
count: World
docna: 0: docna: Applied Services Trade Policy: A Guide to
            the Services Trade Policy Database and the Services Trade
            Restrictions Index
docty: Policy Research Working Paper
subtopic: International Trade and Trade Rules,Trade Policy,Rules of Origin,Trade and Multilateral Issues,Trade and Services,Transport Services
teratopic: International Economics and Trade,Transport
abstracts: cdata!: This paper describes the Services Trade
            Policy Database, a joint initiative by the World Bank and
            the World Trade Organization Secretariat, which builds on a
            database developed by the World Bank nearly 10 years ago and
            draws on a recent Organisation for Economic Co-operation and
            Development database. The Services Trade Policy Database
            offers comparable information on services trade policies for
            68 economies in 23 subsectors across five broad areas --
            financial services, telecommunications, distribution,
            transportation, and professional services. The database
            features several improvements. First, the data are collected
            according to a newly developed policy classification,
            consistent with the earlier World Bank database and the
            current Organisation for Economic Co-operation and
            Development database, enabling a comparison of services
            policies over a significant period and across a large
            cross-section of industrial and developing economies.
            Second, in addition to trade policies, the database contains
            information on licensing conditions and data restrictions.
            Third, policy restrictiveness is quantified following a more
            systematic approach that aggregates the information within a
            single consistent and transparent framework. Building on
            these innovations will make it possible to identify global
            patterns of services trade policies and secular trends in
            policy making over the past decade.
repnme: repnme: Applied Services Trade Policy: A Guide to
            the Services Trade Policy Database and the Services Trade
            Restrictions Index
display_title: Applied Services Trade Policy: A
            Guide to the Services Trade Policy Database and the Services
            Trade Restrictions Index
listing_relative_url: /research/2020/06/32083460/applied-services-trade-policy-guide-services-trade-policy-database-services-trade-restrictions-index
topicv3: Transport m1326661 135,Trade m1326924 698,Trade in Services m1326928 780,Trade Policy and Integration m1327407 775,Trade Policy m1327640 776
publishtoextweb_dt: 2020-06-01T00:00:00Z
historic_topic: International Economics and Trade,Transport
origu: DECRG: Trade & Intl. Integration (DECTI)
no_of_pages: 67
author_keys: 0: author_key: 1002939
1: author_key: 865077
2: author_key: 429183
model_extractions: Policy Research Working Paper 9264

# Applied Services Trade Policy

A Guide to the Services Trade Policy Database and the Services Trade Restrictions Index _Ingo Borchert Batshur Gootiiz Joscelyn Magdeleine Juan A. Marchetti Aaditya Mattoo Ester Rubio Evgeniia Shannon_ Development Economics Development Research Group & East Asia and Pacific Region Office of the Chief Economist June 2020
Policy Research Working Paper 9264

# **Abstract**

This paper describes the Services Trade Policy Database, a joint initiative by the World Bank and the World Trade Organization Secretariat, which builds on a database developed by the World Bank nearly 10 years ago and draws on a recent Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development database. The Services Trade Policy Database offers comparable information on services trade policies for 68 economies in 23 subsectors across five broad areas—financial services, telecommunications, distribution, transportation, and professional services. The database features several improvements. First, the data are collected according to a newly developed policy classification, consistent with the earlier World Bank database and the current Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development database, enabling a comparison of services policies over a significant period and across a large cross-section of industrial and developing economies. Second, in addition to trade policies, the database contains information on licensing conditions and data restrictions. Third, policy restrictiveness is quantified following a more systematic approach that aggregates the information within a single consistent and transparent framework. Building on these innovations will make it possible to identify global patterns of services trade policies and secular trends in policy making over the past decade.

This paper is a product of the Development Research Group, Development Economics and the Office of the Chief Economist, East Asia and Pacific Region. It is part of a larger effort by the World Bank to provide open access to its research and make a contribution to development policy discussions around the world. Policy Research Working Papers are also posted on the Web at http://www.worldbank.org/prwp. The authors may be contacted at i.borchert@sussex.ac.uk, Joscelyn.Magdeleine@wto.org, juan.marchetti@wto.org, and amattoo@worldbank.org.

_The Policy Research Working Paper Series disseminates the findings of work in progress to encourage the exchange of ideas about development issues. An objective of the series is to get the findings out quickly, even if the presentations are less than fully polished. The papers carry the names of the authors and should be cited accordingly. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this paper are entirely those of the authors. They do not necessarily represent the views of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/World Bank and its affiliated organizations, or those of the Executive Directors of the World Bank or the governments they represent._ Produced by the Research Support Team
# **Applied Services Trade Policy**

A Guide to the Services Trade Policy Database and the Services Trade Restrictions Index Ingo Borchert (1) Batshur Gootiiz (2) Joscelyn Magdeleine (3) Juan A. Marchetti (3) Aaditya Mattoo (2) Ester Rubio (3) Evgeniia Shannon (3)<sup>**1,2**</sup>

**JEL codes:** F13, F14, F23, L80

**Keywords:** services, trade policy, investment, STRI, trade restrictions, quantification

_(1) University of Sussex_ _(2) World Bank_ _(3) World Trade Organization_ For Batshur Gootiiz and Evgeniia Shannon, affiliation at the time of writing.

> 1 Acknowledgments:  The authors would like to express their gratitude to all WTO and World Bank colleagues who assisted in the process of creating this Database; in particular Laura Baiker, Renjie Ge, Cecilia Heuser, Giulia Jonetzko, Justine Lan, Anastasiya Letnikava, Clemence Moreau and Fatima Anjum Quraishi. Cooperation by the OECD Secretariat, who made available data from the OECD Services Trade Restrictiveness Database (2016 vintage), which was used as source of information for 43 economies in the World Bank-WTO Services Trade Policy Database, is gratefully acknowledged. This paper is part of a World Bank research project on trade in services, supported in part by the Umbrella Trust Fund for Trade and Development.

> 2 Disclaimer:  This is a working paper, and hence it represents research in progress. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this paper are entirely those of the authors. They are not intended to represent the positions or opinions of the WTO or its Members and are without prejudice to Members' rights and obligations under the WTO. They also do not necessarily represent the views of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/World Bank and its affiliated organizations, the Executive Directors of the World Bank, the governments they represent, or any of the aforementioned individuals. Any errors are attributable to the authors.
|**1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................. 3**|
|---|
|**2 SERVICES TRADE POLICY DATA ..................................................................... 3**|
|Scope and organization of the database .................................................................... 3|
|Relationship to other databases ............................................................................... 7|
|**3 MEASURING SERVICES TRADE POLICY RESTRICTIVENESS ............................ 8**|
|Basic principles ...................................................................................................... 9|
|Scoring ............................................................................................................... 10|
|Aggregation ........................................................................................................ 13|
|Decomposition of changes in STRI scores in 2008-11 vs 2016 ................................... 18|
|Other considerations ............................................................................................ 21|
|**4 DATA PRESENTATION IN I-TIP SERVICES .................................................... 21**|
|Services Trade Policy Database .............................................................................. 22|
|Presentation of policy information on the screen ...................................................... 24|
|Description of Excel and CSV downloads of policy information.................................... 25|
|Presentation of the STRI results on the screen ......................................................... 25|
|Description of Excel and CSV downloads of the results of the selection for the STRI ..... 26|
|Description of the file "All World Bank STRI data (including 2008-11)" ........................ 26|
|**5 CONCLUDING REMARKS ............................................................................... 27**|
|**REFERENCES ..................................................................................................... 29**|
|**ANNEX 1 CLASSIFICATION OF MEASURES......................................................... 30**|
|**ANNEX 2: LIST OF ECONOMIES COVERED, SOURCE AND GROUPS ..................... 45**|
|**ANNEX 3 SUMMARY OF THE COVERAGE OF SECTORS AND MODES .................... 47**|
|**ANNEX 4 SECTOR DEFINITIONS USED IN THE QUESTIONNAIRE ....................... 48**|
|**ANNEX 5 SCORING OF MEASURES ..................................................................... 52**|
|**ANNEX 6 SECTORAL AND MODAL WEIGHTS ...................................................... 63**|
|**ANNEX 7 LIST OF LAW FIRMS THAT CONTRIBUTED TO FILLING**|
|**QUESTIONNAIRES ............................................................................................. 64**|

2
# **1  INTRODUCTION**

Compared to the vast empirical literature on policies affecting trade in goods, the empirical analysis of services trade policy is still in its infancy.<sup>3</sup> A major constraint has been inadequate data on policies affecting services trade. Significant progress has been made over the last decade, at the World Bank and the OECD, in developing cross-country databases on services regulations and policies, and methods to quantify them.

This paper describes a new initiative: the Services Trade Policy Database (STPD) developed jointly by the World Bank and the WTO Secretariat. The Database contains comparable information for 68 economies on services trade policy in five main services sectors – financial services, telecommunications, distribution, transportation, and professional services – further broken down into 23 subsectors. It is based on a new comprehensive classification of services trade policies jointly developed by the World Bank and the WTO Secretariat, consistent with both the past World Bank classification and the recent OECD classification. Hence, it offers recent information comparable across a large number of developing and industrial economies and backwards compatible with information for the years 2008-11 in the previous World Bank database.

The difficulty in creating such a database is well known but the task has large potential benefits. Our main reason for presenting a product that is inevitably imperfect and still a work-in-progress is to enhance policy transparency and to facilitate further research in this important area. Even in its present form, we see this Services Trade Policy Database as playing an important role: in advancing policy reform by facilitating the analysis of services policies; in informing international negotiations by providing data on actual policies; in assisting businesses by creating a first port-of-call for information on the state of access to markets; and in fostering dialogue among relevant stakeholders by making information on policies publicly available. We see this database as providing not a definitive picture of services trade policy, but a step in enhancing the availability of information which might hopefully evolve – through feedback from various interested parties –into a collectively created public good.

The paper describes, in Section 2, the scope of the data, the structure of the Database, the data collection process, and compares this new endeavor with other databases. Section 3 describes the Services Trade Restrictions Index (STRI), which builds on the previous World Bank STRI, and Section 4 presents the Services Trade Policy Database (STPD), which is accessible through the WTO’s Integrated Trade Intelligence Portal (I-TIP) interface. The final section discusses implications for future work, including within the overall joint project between the World Bank and the WTO Secretariat.

# **2  SERVICES TRADE POLICY DATA**

# **Scope and organization of the database**

# _Scope and definition_

Trade in services is defined, as is now customary, to include the supply of a service through various modes: on a cross-border basis, through establishing a commercial presence, or through the presence of a natural person.<sup>4</sup> Accordingly, the Services Trade Policy Database (STPD) contains information on policies and regulations that affect international trade in services across all these modes of supply.

We consider policies and regulations applied by the importing/'host' economy (i.e. the jurisdiction where the services consumer is located), which affect the ability of foreign suppliers to supply

> 3 For various examples of studies on the impact of services trade policies, see Borchert et al. (2017); Deardorff and Stern (2008); Findlay and Warren (2010); Fink et al. (2001, 2002); Francois and Wooton (2008); Gönenc and Nicoletti (2000); and Mattoo and Payton (2007).

> 4 While we do not cover, strictly speaking, "consumption abroad", a mode of delivery that is particularly important in services like tourism, education and health – sectors not covered by the database – we take in fact a broad view of 'cross-border supply', covering measures that apply directly to the consumer, such as the ability to make cross-border payments.

3
services to consumers in that economy.<sup>5</sup> Various domestic regulations that apply to both domestic and foreign agents are also covered insofar as they affect trade. The database focuses on economies’ Most-Favoured Nation (MFN) policies and contains only limited information on their relatively elusive applied preferential policies.<sup>6</sup> It is important to delineate the policy data covered by this database from other information that is not (yet) covered. First, the database does not include information on the existing market structure – e.g. the number of firms, their market share – across sectors and economies, which means that our policy measures capture the restrictions on entry into markets but do not capture the extent of competition among domestic and/or foreign firms. Second, we do not collect data on outcome variables such as prices or quality, although we include data on whether those variables are subject to regulation in various sectors. Third, we capture only limited information on the implementation of policies. For instance, we identify certain aspects of the process by which services providers are granted licenses, e.g. whether the requirements are publicly available or whether the regulator has been given discretion to reject authorizations even if criteria are complied with, but some features of the process remain opaque. For example, information on how discretion is exercised in practice, or on the number of license applications received versus the number of licenses granted, is not generally available; the lack of such information renders it hard to determine whether the licensing/authorization process in itself offers protection to domestic providers.

# _Economies covered in the database_

The database encompasses data on services policy and regulation in 68 economies – 41 high-income, 15 upper-middle and 12 lower-middle income economies. The selection of economies was based on two parameters: size of the economy, using Gross Domestic Product (GDP) as a basis, as well as participation in world services trade on a balance-of-payment (BoP) basis.<sup>7</sup> The full list of economies currently covered is reproduced in Annex 2 to this paper (2016 table). At the time of writing, data collection is being finalized for signatories of the Central European Free Trade Agreement (CEFTA), Jordan and Niger. Additional data on a significant number of economies in Africa are in the process of being collected or updated. These data will be incorporated in the STPD in due course.

# _Sectoral coverage_

The sectoral coverage is identical to that in the World Bank survey of 2008-2011. Apart from the continued importance of these sectors and sub-sectors for any economy – a factor that justified the World Bank's approach at the time – sticking to the same sectoral coverage in 2016 has allowed us to have a 'time' dimension in our data, and hence analyze policy developments in the last decade. However, three subsectors were added to ensure greater comparability with the sectors that overlapped with those in the OECD Services Trade Restrictiveness Regulatory (OECD STRI) database.<sup>8</sup> The database therefore covers 5 major service sectors, further disaggregated into a total of 23 subsectors, namely: financial services (commercial banking, life insurance, non-life insurance, reinsurance), telecommunications services (fixed-line, mobile, Internet), distribution services (retail, wholesale), transportation (air freight domestic, air freight international, air passenger domestic, air passenger international, rail freight, road freight, maritime freight transport, maritime auxiliary services, maritime intermediation and other), professional services (accounting, auditing, legal services on foreign law, legal services on domestic law, legal advice and representation).<sup>9</sup>

> 5 Consumers must be understood in a broad manner, encompassing both individuals and firms, depending on the service concerned.

> 6 We do not take commitments made in FTAs or other economic integration agreements covering services trade as indication of an applied preferential policy. We mean by the latter policies that in practice treat different trading partners differently. Our experience shows that in many cases, commitments under FTAs have been implemented in a non-discriminatory manner and led either to the binding of an MFN-based status quo policy or to the elimination of specific restrictions for all trading partners. See Marchetti and Roy (2009).

> 7 Data on trade through mode 3, e.g. foreign affiliates trade, are not available for all countries.

> 8 - <u>https://www.oecd.org/trade/topics/services trade/</u>

> 9 At the time of writing, policy information in additional sectors including architecture, engineering, computer, construction, tourism, and health services is being collected for the seven CEFTA Parties, Jordan, and other African economies.

4
# Classification of measures

Drawing from the World Bank's experience with its original Services Trade Restrictions Database (STRD) and developments since then, notably the OECD STRI, we developed a new classification of measures affecting trade in services. We organized measures into four main policy categories, namely a) conditions on market entry, b) conditions on operations, c) measures affecting competition, and d) regulatory environment and administrative procedures. Relevant policy measures that potentially affect trade but do not fit neatly into any of these four categories are included in a fifth category – miscellaneous measures (see Box 1).

<!-- Start of picture text --> Box 1: Structure of STPD classification of measures<br>A Conditions on market entry<br>A1 Legal forms of entry (including foreign equity limits)<br>A2 Quantitative measures (for firms and natural persons)<br>A3 Conditions on licensing/investment screening/qualifications relating to market entry<br>(firms /natural persons)<br>A4 Other conditions on market entry<br>B Conditions on operations<br>B1 Conditions on supply of services<br>B2 Conditions on service supplier<br>B3 Conditions on government procurement<br>B4 Other conditions on operations<br>C Measures affecting competition<br>C1 Conditions on conduct by firms<br>C2 Governmental rights/prerogatives (including public ownership)<br>C3 Other measures affecting competition<br>D Administrative procedures and regulatory transparency<br>D1 Administrative procedures<br>D2 Regulatory transparency (including licensing)<br>D3 Nature of regulatory authority (measures related to nature of regulator)<br>D4 International standards<br>D5 Other regulatory environment and administrative procedures<br>E Miscellaneous<br><!-- End of picture text --> All measures are classified according to the taxonomy above in binary form (yes or no), except for the few measures that require a quantitative reply (e.g. level of foreign equity allowed, number of days required to process a license application). The modal dimension was built into each of the policy categories. Thus, each policy category includes measures relevant for each mode of supply; for example, category A (conditions on market entry) includes the measures affecting entry through each of the modes of supply, i.e. cross-border, commercial presence and presence of natural persons.

The first category focuses on the measures affecting foreign service suppliers' ability to enter the host economy's market to supply services. Typical measures include quantitative limitations or economic/labor needs tests on the number of providers, Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) screening, foreign equity limitations, or requirements to adopt specific types of legal form. Category A also includes specific licensing and qualification requirements that are pre-requisites for entry, such as registration, the need to obtain a sectoral license, or specific education/training/experience requirements. While the distinction between entry and operational requirements is not straightforward, we may think of category A as encompassing those requirements that must be fulfilled by the supplier before it may actually start to operate in a foreign market.

Category B covers conditions on operations, focusing on two main aspects: 1) conditions on the supply of services – in other words, measures affecting 'how' the services must be supplied, i.e. types of services that may be supplied, through how many outlets, in which locations, at what prices, 5
etc.; and 2) conditions on the service supplier – in other words, measures affecting the 'production' of services, e.g. local content and performance requirements. Measures affecting government procurement of services are also captured in category B.

Category C covers measures related to competition. While this category and the next could arguably be part of conditions on operations, we treat them as separate to ensure compatibility with the OECD database. This category encompasses measures that grant rights or prerogatives to state-owned suppliers, as well as measures aimed at countering anticompetitive behavior or restrictive business practices.

Category D deals specifically with the regulatory framework and administrative procedures, focusing on non-discriminatory regulations – other than those already covered elsewhere in the classification – that may still have an impact on trade in services. Conscious of the efforts of governments to establish disciplines in new areas, we strove to include measures pertaining to the regulatory framework (e.g. licensing requirements and procedures, review mechanisms, regulatory transparency) as well as measures affecting cross-border data flows. Issues such as regulatory transparency, the nature of the regulatory authority, the application of international standards, or administrative procedures and requirements are captured by this category.

In addition, the classification identifies within each sub-category, whether measures discriminate against foreign provision or not. The latter is done by allowing for the inclusion of measures which are discriminatory by nature (e.g. foreign equity limitations), and by distinguishing, whenever relevant and to the maximum extent possible, between measures that apply to all services and service suppliers as opposed to those applying to foreign ones only.

The meta-classification of measures described above is intended to facilitate convergence towards a single classification and quantification methodology. Therefore, the classification remains, at the measure level, fully compatible with the classification utilized in the OECD Services Trade Restrictiveness Regulatory Database and the previous classification of measures developed by the World Bank 10 years ago.

# _Data collection methodology_

For the purposes of data collection, economies and information sources were divided into two groups. For the 43 economies that had been already included (in 2016) in the OECD STRI Database, the data were sourced from that database, thanks to the cooperation of the OECD Secretariat, which is gratefully acknowledged.<sup>10</sup> In a few cases, where information on certain measures in our database was not available from the OECD, other secondary sources were used. For the remaining 25 economies included in this analysis, data were collected through a survey jointly conducted by the World Bank and the WTO – the WB/WTO Survey on Impediments to Services Integration. In what follows, we will concentrate on the data-collection methodology used for the latter group.

For each of the 25 economies covered in the WB/WTO survey, we prepared 24 questionnaires: 23 (one per subsector) containing the <u>common</u> and <u>sector-specific questions</u> plus one containing <u>general questions. Each subsector questionnaire consisted of around 160 questions. The</u> questionnaires were completed by local law firms that were familiar with the policy regime in the respective economies and sectors and had experience in working on similar projects. The complete list of law firms that contributed to the questionnaires is contained in Annex 7.

The <u>general questions focus on</u> _economy-wide measures_ that are described in a single law or regulation applicable to all services sectors in the same way. Such measures include, among others, those pertaining to acquisition and rental of land and real estate by foreigners, notification and screening of foreign investment, restrictions on payments and transfers, conditions on visas, restrictions on cross-border data flows, etc. The <u>common questions cover measures that are</u> potentially pertinent for all sectors of the economy, but that are dealt with in _sector-specific legislation_ (and not in generally-applicable legislation, as in the case of general questions), such as the existence of a regulatory authority, forms of establishment and ownership conditions, licensing,

> 10 We are very grateful to the OECD Secretariat for its long-standing cooperation in our effort to put together the Services Trade Policy Database, which involved sharing information from the OECD regulatory database for the year 2016 and clarifying diverse aspects regarding the collection and comparability of data. For further information on the OECD data collection process, including the validation of information, see <u>https://www.oecd.org/trade/topics/services-trade/.</u>

6
quantitative limits, universal service obligations, prices, subsidies, government procurement matters and many others. In other words, these are measures that are pertinent for auditors, bankers, airlines and retailers alike, wishing to supply their services in any foreign jurisdiction. Even though the measures listed above are relevant for every subsector, responses to questions on these measures as well as the legal basis for those responses will be sector-specific. That is, we will get different answers to a question on a foreign equity limit for firms operating in commercial banking, retail distribution and rail transport services sectors. By legal basis we understand host economy's domestic laws and regulations laying down the statutory foundation for the specific measure - say, applicable quotas or price setting conditions - in every sector. Finally, the questionnaires include <u>sector-specific questions, aimed at capturing specific aspects of sectoral regulation. These questions</u> address measures such as limits on the expansion of the ATM network for foreign banks, dialing parity requirements from dominant suppliers of fixed-line telecommunications, whether foreign retailers are authorized to set up their own recycling systems. Each subsector questionnaire consists of a different number of sector-specific questions.

Each question has its own answer type. Most questions call for a binary-type of answer, i.e. "yes" or "no", whereas a few others require a numerical answer (for instance, a question on the duration of stay initially allowed for intra-corporate transferees), or a textual answer. Every binary response could be further complemented with _comments_ (i.e. relevant additional information on the issue raised by the question) and information on the relevant _legal source_ , including, whenever available, relevant weblinks.

As the focus of the questionnaire is on the treatment granted to _foreign_ services and service suppliers, wherever relevant survey questions address the existence of discriminatory and/or preferential treatment. Put differently, for some questions a respondent will be prompted to indicate whether the treatment of foreign suppliers differs from that of domestic services and service suppliers; and whether any preference has been granted to services and service suppliers originating in specific jurisdictions by virtue of a Free Trade Agreement (FTA) or any other preferential arrangement. As much as possible, we tried to identify and capture 'actual' preferential treatment, i.e. treatment incorporated in specific regulations/guidelines as the result of (or linked to) specific FTAs.

Detailed guidelines were developed to ensure the coherence of the data collected. These guidelines enabled us to ensure consistency and reliability of information. The questionnaires were deployed online. As every law firm was given their specific token number, they could complete the questionnaires at their convenience during a six to seven weeks' time period. After having received the completed questionnaires, we reviewed them and sent our feedback back to the law firms.<sup>11</sup> Law firms made necessary adjustments or clarifications to the responses in light of our comments. These revised replies were further reviewed and, if needed, a second round of feedback was sent to the law firm.

# _Comparing policy information over time_

Throughout the process we paid particular attention to introducing a time dimension into our analysis. This was only possible for subsectors, modes and key restrictions for which information is available in both periods (2008-11 and 2016, respectively). The 2016 key restrictions and the resulting 2016 STRI were the starting point of the analysis. That required some adjustments to the 2008-2011 information. Thus, where there was a change in the score between 2008-11 and 2016, we checked the available documentation and adjusted the data as appropriate. In cases where we had not been able to identify the relevant measure for 2008-11, and with a view to ensuring that we included only documented changes in restrictiveness between the two periods, we neutralized that measure by imputing the 2016 value into the 2008-11 data set. We recognize that this approach may lead to an underestimation of the extent of change in policies.

# **Relationship to other databases**

The Services Trade Policy Database (STPD) builds on a number of prior initiatives by international and regional agencies. The first precedent is the GATS services database of WTO Members’ specific commitments and list of exemptions, which was established in the late 1990s.<sup>12</sup> This database is

> 11 Our team went through 672 questionnaires (23 subsectors questionnaires* 28 economies + 28

> general questionnaires).

> 12 See GATS module in ITIP Services, http://i-tip.wto.org/services/default.aspx.

7
analogous to the database on bound tariffs in the context of goods trade. With the rapid increase of regional and bilateral agreements by some WTO Members in which commitments were closer to applied policies, new data sets were built which provided a better sense of the policies at the time these agreements were signed. However, unlike the applied tariffs database that accompanied the bound tariffs database, no database was initially available on services applied policies.

Prior to 2008, information on applied services trade policies could be found in national (e.g. US International Trade Commission), regional (APEC STAR database), supranational (European Commission) or international databases (e.g. UNCTAD or OECD databases on investment policies).<sup>13</sup> Some information could also be gathered from the WTO's trade policy reviews. However, these sources only provided a partial picture, in terms of the type of information, and the economies, sectors and modes covered.

It was only in 2008 that the World Bank went a step further by collecting and compiling information on applied services policies (Borchert et al., 2012, 2014). The World Bank released its Services Trade Restrictions Database in 2012, presenting data on applied measures for 103 economies and 5 main sectors (financial services, telecommunications, retail trade services, transportation and professional services), which were further broken down into 19 subsectors.<sup>14</sup> Data mainly referred to the year 2008, with data for a number of economies updated in 2011. The database presented 4 tabs reflecting the STRI, the key restrictions, the main policy measures and policy measures at the most detailed level collected in the questionnaire. The last tab included information that was broken down into 9 categories of policy measures, namely Sector openness, Forms of entry, Licensing, Operations, Regulatory Environment, Conditions of provision of service, Restrictions on service providers, Type of entry and Entry condition.

The OECD developed a regulatory database as a basis for its own STRI, which was publicly released in 2014 (OECD, 2015, 2017).<sup>15</sup> The database currently includes information on the 36 OECD members, as well as 9 non-OECD economies (Brazil, China, Colombia, Costa Rica (since 2017), India, Indonesia, Malaysia (since 2018), the Russian Federation and South Africa, respectively). Measures for 22 sectors are presented, organized according to five policy areas (Restrictions on foreign ownership and other market entry conditions, Restrictions on the movement of people, Other discriminatory measures and international standards, Barriers to competition and public ownership, and Regulatory transparency and administrative requirements). The database has been updated annually since 2014.

In 2013, the World Bank and the WTO Secretariat started the development of a WTO-World Bank Services Trade Policy Database (STPD), which is disseminated through the I-TIP services portal.<sup>16</sup> For further information on the actual database and its functionalities, please refer to section 4 below.<sup>17</sup>

# **3  MEASURING SERVICES TRADE POLICY RESTRICTIVENESS**

It is notoriously difficult to measure policies affecting services trade because of their variety and complexity (see, for example, Hoekman (1996) and the overview by Deardorff and Stern (2008)).

> 13 See https://www.usitc.gov/, <u>http://www.servicestradeforum.org/, http://madb.europa.eu/madb/barriers_crossTables.htm, https://investmentpolicyhub.unctad.org/</u> and <u>http://www.oecd.org/investment/fdiindex.htm. See also Golub (2009); and Reisman and Vu (2012).</u>

> 14 <u>https://www.worldbank.org/en/research/brief/services-trade-restrictions-database</u>

> 15 - <u>http://www.oecd.org/trade/topics/services trade/</u>

> 16 In 2013, the World Bank and the WTO signed a Memorandum of Understanding concerning the establishment a unique database on services policies, covering commitments taken by WTO Members in various agreements, applied regimes and services statistics. This cooperation between the two organizations materialized in I-TIP Services, the services component of the Integrated Trade Intelligence Portal (I-TIP), which was released in 2013. The main objective of the integrated database is to make it easier for WTO Members and other stakeholders to access the various types of information relevant for services trade policymaking, see http://i-tip.wto.org/services/default.aspx.

> 17 I-TIP Services offers information on trade in services policies for a large sample of economies spanning all income groups. In its four modules (GATS, RTA Commitments, Services Trade Policy Database (STPD), and Statistics), the integrated database permits searches by economy (mainly WTO Members), subsector, agreement, or source of information. Search results are presented in summary form, as well as in more detail. Search results can be filtered using a number of additional criteria. Further, users can easily switch from one module to another, for example from looking at a particular economy's WTO commitments in a given subsector, to relevant commitments in RTAs, and then to applied policies and related services statistics.

8
In recent years a number of methods have been developed to assess the level of applied policies in services. Two approaches related to the creation of an index measuring the restrictiveness of service trade policies are worth noting: the first one, the Services Trade Restrictions Index (STRI) was developed by the World Bank; global patterns of policy restrictiveness revealed by that exercise were described in Borchert et al. (2014) and the Database is documented in Borchert et al. (2012). The data were released on the World Bank’s Open Data portal.<sup>18</sup> The second method, named Services Trade Restrictiveness Index (also STRI by its acronym) was developed by the OECD, and results were first published in 2014 (Grosso et al. 2014). Although both approaches use similar sets of underlying data, the methodology used to construct the respective indices differs in a number of ways.<sup>19</sup> Yet both STRI approaches measure the restrictiveness of an economy’s policy regime for the sectors and modes covered. The resultant restrictiveness indices depict overall patterns in policy, across economies, modes, and sectors.<sup>20</sup> The method used in the current paper is an updated version of the STRI developed by the World Bank a few years back. In updating the World Bank STRI, the main principles were maintained but a number of improvements were introduced, in particular the use of an algorithm and an automatized aggregation method to compute the STRI. Introducing these technical improvements removes the subjective bias that may have existed in the previous World Bank STRI. In particular, the aggregation methodology represents an innovation for practical and conceptual reasons: it entails the practical advantage of reproducibility as well as the conceptual advantage of capturing the combined restrictiveness of multiple measures in a well-defined and theory-consistent way. An additional improvement relates to the consideration of regulatory and competition policy measures. This improved methodology will be described below.

# **Basic principles**

The construction of the STRI follows the same steps as in Borchert et al. (2012):

- 1) the **selection** of key restrictions entering the STRI; 2) the **determination** of the level of restrictiveness of individual measures (or bundles of measures if they are conceptually intertwined, which we call ‘synthetic measures’); and

- 3) the **aggregation** of measures into indices at the sector-mode level, sector level, and economy level, respectively.

While the Services Trade Policy Database (STPD) described in the previous section has a very broad coverage of measures, the index is based on a subset of key restrictions on trade in services, approximately 115 regulations and policies. The selection of key restrictions entering the quantification exercise was driven by a number of considerations: 1) to cover the most significant restrictions – this was based on the previous analysis conducted by the World Bank as well as expert advice; 2) to respond to recent regulatory developments perceived as having a discernible impact on trade in services, e.g. screening policies, restrictions relating to cross-border data flows; 3) to ensure comparability with the 2008-2011 World Bank exercise; and 4) to adapt to – and be consistent with – the coverage of measures in the OECD database, which served as a fundamental source of information for economies covered by both the STPD and the OECD STRI. The list of measures selected for the construction of the STRI is provided in Annex 5.

Trade policies are assessed by looking at specific types of measures for each subsector and mode. For example, for commercial banking, we obtain separate measures for cross-border supply,

> 18 Accessible at https://www.worldbank.org/en/research/brief/services-trade-restrictions-database. 19 Country and sectoral coverage of both exercises also differ. More information on the OECD STRI methodology may be found in Services Trade Policies and the Global Economy, OECD (2017).

> 20 As opposed to bottom-up scoring methods described in the text, inference-based approaches have also been pursued, which attempt to quantify the degree of restrictiveness by estimating the effect of regulatory measures on outcome variables of interest, e.g. gravity-type regressions of services trade flows on restrictiveness indices.  When a price elasticity of demand is available, it is possible to convert such quantitybased estimates to ad valorem tariff equivalents of barriers.  While the outcome variables are often sectorspecific, e.g. the number of telephone mainlines in telecommunications, Dihel and Shepherd (2007) employ a sector’s price-cost margin, which enables them to consistently estimate the effect of trade-affecting measures across a range of services sectors.

9
commercial presence and the presence of natural persons. We assign a score depicting the level of restrictiveness to each measure (see following subsection on scoring).<sup>21</sup> While policy measures that underlie the STRIs are generally limited to discriminatory measures, the index also considers other policy measures regarding a sector's overall regulatory environment, such as the obligation to inform applicants of reasons for license rejection or the ability to appeal a regulator's decision.

After having determined the restrictiveness of individual measures in isolation (or synthetic measures, as discussed below), the next step is to deduce policy restrictiveness of a group of applied measures, since multiple measures are typically applied per subsector-mode. The process of determining overall restrictiveness is described in detail below. We will call the result of that algorithm an STRI. Most policy regimes have more than one provision in place per subsector and mode of supply, in which case the assigned score reflects the overall restrictiveness of all measures.

The STRI focuses on a subset of measures as explained above, and in the absence of any such restrictions, the STRI takes the value of zero, which is associated with the greatest level of openness. However, the STRI does not fully cover other policy areas, such as the state of prudential and procompetitive regulation. Since it is likely that the results of liberalization depend on the state of such complementary regulation, a zero level of STRI is not necessarily immediately desirable from a broader welfare or development perspective.

# **Scoring**

# _General scoring rules_

For each individual measure, we generally consider 6 distinct levels of restriction, each of which attracts a different (monotonically increasing) score:

1. not restrictive;

2. minimal procedural/transparency issues; 3. minor restriction; 4. “intermediate” category to reflect measures that are neither minor nor major restrictions; 5. major restriction; 6. service provision not possible.

Table 1 provides examples of concrete policy measures and associates a score to measures for each stage.

> 21 In that regard, some measures that would affect operations of service providers do not contribute to overall restrictiveness when other measures prohibit market entry in the first place, so that conditions of operations are in fact irrelevant. For example, the potentially restrictive impact of applying a labor market test (LMT) on intra-corporate transferees is only considered for STRI purposes in instances in which mode 4 entry via intra-corporate transferees is in fact permissible at all. Individual measure scores will take into account whether or not a restriction is logically contingent on other measures.

10
**Table 1: Examples of measures, level of restriction and associated score**

|**Level of restriction **|**Examples**|**Score**|
|---|---|---|
|Not restrictive|No restriction on the type of legal entity, no foreign<br>equity limitation|0|
|Not restrictive, but minimal<br>transparencyissue|No provision for prior notice of, or comment on,<br>regulatory changes|0.125|
|Minor restriction|Acquisition of land and real estate by foreigners<br>prohibited|0.25|
|Neither minor nor major|Limit on number of suppliers|0.5|
|Major restriction|Service<br>provision<br>is<br>reserved<br>for<br>statutory<br>monopoly or granted on an exclusive basis|0.75|
|Closed|Commercial presence is prohibited|1|

While in Borchert et al. (2012), five numerical levels of restriction were used (0, 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1), this time we decided to use six numerical levels, by adding 0.125 in between 0 and 0.25. The objective was to accommodate those regulatory measures that were not included in the previous World Bank data set (e.g. publication of draft regulation and opportunity to comment). The aim is to take account of measures that are aspects of the regulatory environment rather than restrictions, not even minor ones, in regard of the actual supply of services but that can nevertheless adversely affect the policy or regulatory environment in which firms operate.<sup>22</sup> The full list of measures and associated scores is provided in Annex 5. In addition to mapping scores directly to individual measures, more sophisticated rules are applied for certain measures (e.g. numeric type measures), or some combinations of entry measures (e.g. taking into account the complementarity or substitutability between individual mode 4 categories, and the necessity to consider additional measures if certain conditions are met). This section will present the methodology that applies to some of those specific cases.

# _Numeric type measures_

In the set of measures that we consider in the scoring for mode 3, we include two numeric type measures linked to the foreign ownership of firms, namely the maximum foreign ownership allowed in greenfield investment (%) and the maximum foreign ownership allowed in the acquisition of a domestic entity (%). Foreign equity limits are a continuous variable ranging from zero (no foreign equity allowed), to 100% (full foreign ownership allowed). Given that there are two types of foreign equity limits (greenfield and acquisition), the maximum score available for each is 0.5. These measures are scored in five different ways depending on the maximum foreign ownership allowed, as shown below.

<!-- Start of picture text --> 100% allowed 0<br>Between 50 and 99% allowed 0.125<br>Between 26% and 49% allowed 0.25<br>Between 0% and 25% allowed 0.375<br>0% allowed 0.5 23<br><!-- End of picture text -->

> 22 Sometimes policies apply in a more granular fashion than may be captured by our definition of measures or sectors. In this case we prorate the impact. The leading case is when a measure affects only parts of a market that we define as a subsector, e.g. only deposit taking is allowed in commercial banking, or, for non-life insurance, restrictions apply only to automobile insurance, which however is only one segment of nonlife insurance. In such cases we record the restrictiveness in the pertinent or closest measure but reduce the score of that measure appropriately so as to reflect the fact that the restrictiveness affects only part of the service supplying activity.

> 23 If other forms of commercial presence can be used to provide the service for certain sectors (e.g. branches, sole proprietorship, partnership), then the restrictiveness scores assigned are adjusted proportionally to the relevance of this form in the supply of services through mode 3. See subsection on synthetic measures and Annex 5 for more information.

11
Another numeric type measure is the percentage of insurance to be ceded to a domestic re-insurer. From 0 to 20% a score of 0.25 is used, whereas the score is 0.5 from 21 to 100%. The same rule is applied for both modes 1 and 3.

# _Synthetic measures_

Assigning a restrictiveness score to a single measure is insufficient in some special circumstances, which we explain in this subsection. This case arises when policies that we record as separate measures are intertwined and, hence, their restrictiveness can only be assessed by considering the entire bundle of such measures. We call such bundles ‘synthetic’ measures as they consist of two or more individual measures that are separate entries in the database, but whose impact on restrictiveness is scored jointly for the purposes of constructing the STRI. Only when the assessment of restrictiveness, i.e. scoring, is complete at the measure level including synthetic measures, does the process of aggregation start, which we describe a dedicated section below.

Among important examples of intrinsically linked measures are alternative routes of market entry. Indeed, in mode 3 foreign suppliers can in principle enter through mergers and acquisitions or via greenfield investment, and it does not make much sense to score restrictions for each route in isolation, for they represent alternative options. Rather, the difficulty of entering a market is most plausibly assessed by looking at the admissible _combinations_ of entry options, rather than individual routes. Notice that the scoring rules for assessing such bundles of measures are sector-specific. For instance, branch entry has to be considered as an important option in financial services but is practically irrelevant in most other sectors. As a result, the rule that assigns a sliding scale of restrictiveness scores to all possible combinations of entry measures has to be different in financial services subsectors compared to other sectors in which fewer or different options exist.

The approach of assigning a specific score to each individual combination of a bundle of measures affords the flexibility to account for the fact that some combinations are more restrictive than others. For example, in a sector in which investors would typically enter by acquiring an existing firm, the policy regime of allowing greenfield but barring M&A will attract a higher restrictiveness score than the converse case of prohibiting only greenfield investment. In other words, simply counting the number of restrictive measures per bundle is not enough.

Table 2 presents an example for the case of Mode 4, in which entry is possible either as an IntraCorporate Transferee (ICT), as a Service-Supplying Employee (CSS) of a firm based abroad, or as an Independent Professional or self-employed (IP), respectively. The table illustrates three features of scoring synthetic measures: (i) the complete scoring of all possible combinations of constituent measures, (ii) the sliding scale of restrictiveness ranging from full flexibility of entry across these categories of natural persons to complete market closure, and (iii) the nuance that restrictions on the same combination of entry categories can have a different restrictive impact in different services subsectors, depending on the prevailing business practices (shaded cells).

**Table 2: Scoring of Mode 4 entry by category of natural persons**

|<br>|**Score of sy**<br>|**nthetic measure**<br>|
|---|---|---|
|**Combination**<br>**of**<br>**measures**<br>**applied**|**Freight**<br>**transport**|**Professional**<br>**services**|
|ICT,CSS and IP all allowed|0|0|
|OnlyICT not allowed|0.25|0.25|
|OnlyCSS not allowed|0.25|0.25|
|OnlyIP not allowed|0.25|0.25|
|Both ICT and CSS not allowed|0.50|0.50|
|Both ICT and IP not allowed|0.50|0.75|
|Both CSS and IP not allowed|0.75|0.50|
|Neither ICT,CSS nor IP allowed|1.00|1.00|

Lastly, notice that the sliding scale of scores for "entry" bundles would ordinarily stretch the full range from zero to one for combinations of entry measures. But it will attain a maximum of lower than one (typically 0.75 or 0.50) for combinations of quantitative measures that, even if all were 12
applied, would **not entirely** close off a sector-mode (e.g. combination of ENT, LMT or other quotas for mode 4 entry, assuming that such entry is allowed in the first place).

# **Aggregation**

In the first version of the World Bank database (2008-11), the associated STRI relied on an assessment of groups of measures, which were included in a ‘policy summary’. The automatized aggregation methodology described here follows a similar approach. The overall restrictiveness of a group of policy measures, say at the sector-mode level for a given economy, results both from the **types** of measures applied as well as from the **number** of measures applied. The severity of measures is captured directly in the scores assigned to individual measures, as shown in Table 1. A major restriction, such as a quantitative limit, may attract a score of 0.5 whereas a minor measure affecting only transparency would be scored much lower (0.125). In a second step, the set of individual measure scores needs to be aggregated for a given sector-mode or even an entire economy.

Aggregation of this kind is a challenge in a wide range of fields. In consumer theory, individuals aggregate the utility from the consumption of a bundle of goods. In production theory, firms produce a good by combining a range of intermediate inputs. In each case, the aggregation of utility or inputs is achieved by a mapping—the utility function or the production function, respectively—that exhibit well-established properties. In particular, the marginal contribution of an additional unit to the aggregate (utility, output, or indeed restrictiveness) is typically positive but smaller than that of a previous unit.

One of the most widely used mappings in economics for both utility and production functions is the ‘Constant Elasticity of Substitution’ (CES) functional form, which generically combines an array of elements according to � .<sup>24</sup> NN αα 1/αα ii= (1, ... , NN) xxii XX= ��ii=1 xxii A function of the CES type, commonly used as a utility or production function, also has desirable properties for aggregating policy restrictiveness. For instance, adding a restrictive measure to a set of other restrictive measures should increase the overall restrictiveness index. At the same time, adding -say- a tenth restriction to a set of nine restrictions should conceivably have less of an impact on overall restrictiveness than applying the first or second restriction to an otherwise open sector. This is the equivalent of ‘diminishing returns,’ such that adding more restrictions should add progressively less and less to the overall index number.

progressively less and less to the overall index number. Against the backdrop of these intuitive underpinnings, we combine individual measure scores for group according to ii mm kk STRI<sup>kk</sup> = ��NN (kk)�ρρkk�1/ρρkk (1) ii ii=1�mm The parameter governs the way in which constituent scores are combined. In other applications, these groups k are sometimes referred to as “CES nests” and different values of ρ can be assigned kk to group k depending on the context. Specifically, it determines the marginal contribution of adding ρρ another non-zero measure to the set of policies to be aggregated. By virtue of the functional form in equation (1), higher values of lead to smaller incremental contributions of additional measures to aggregate restrictiveness. Figure 1 illustrates the role of this parameter on a set of 10 individual measures with a score of 0.25 each, for alternative values of ρρ ranging from 1 to 10. It is readily seen from equation (1) that for unit values of , the aggregate score is the simple sum of constituent scores, i.e. 2.5. For high values of , the aggregate score of a group of individual measures with a ρρ score of 0.25 each will be only marginally above 0.25. For values of ρρ around 3, the aggregate score is slightly above 0.50. Column 2 of Table 3 shows the aggregate score that emerges for different ρρ combinations of measures with a value for . ρρ ρρ= 3

> 24 The parameter takes on different interpretations according to the context in which the function is used; for instance, in consumer theory, it is related to , the elasticity of substitution among products consumed. ρρ σσ

13
|**Table 3: Examples**<br> <br>|**of aggregati**<br> <br>|**ng different sets of policy restrictions (**ρ= 3)<br>|
|---|---|---|
|**Example set of**<br>**measure scores**<br>**(**mi**)**|**Aggregate**<br>**index**<br>**(**SS<sup>k</sup>**)**|<br>**Comment**|
|0+0+0+0.50|0.50|The aggregate STRI is driven by actual restrictions and<br>independent of the number of measures_not applied_in a given<br>context.|
|0.50+0.50|0.63|Adding a major restriction (0.5) to an already existing major<br>restriction increases restrictiveness, but by less than 0.5.|
|0.50+0.50+0.50|0.72|The marginal contribution to restrictiveness is falling: the<br>second 0.5 measure adds 0.13 and the third 0.5 measure adds<br>0.09. Taken together, the presence of three such restrictions<br>is roughly equivalent to the presence of one very restrictive<br>measure that would be scored 0.75 on a stand-alone basis.|
|0.25+0.25+0.50<br>|0.54<br>|With two 0.5 measures in place, adding a third such measure<br>adds merely 0.09 to overall restrictiveness (previous row),<br>whereas with two 0.25 measures in place (aggregating to<br>0.32), adding a 0.5 measure adds 0.22, commensurate with<br>the fact that this addition renders the bundle considerably more<br>restrictive. Viewed from a different angle, adding two minor<br>0.25 measures to a pre-existing 0.5 measure leaves<br>restrictiveness virtually unchanged, because minor restrictions<br>matter lessinthe presence ofamajor restriction.<br>|
|Large values of the<br>are mostly substitut<br>as quotas and econo<br>already applies to en<br>increase overall rest<br>captured by the quo<br>with a high value of<br>least in part substitu<br>Conversely, measur<br>|ρparameter a<br>able. For insta<br>mic needs tes<br>try in a given<br>rictiveness by<br>ta measure.<br> ρ. More gen<br>tes should be<br>es that are re<br>|re appropriate for aggregation if the policy measures in question<br>nce, different forms of quantitative market entry limitations such<br>ts are likely to exert a similar effect on market entry. If a quota<br>sector and mode, then applying an economics needs test may not<br>much, since the main contribution to restrictiveness is already<br>This result will be achieved by aggregating both measure scores<br>erally, measures with similar effects that could be considered at<br>combined using a high value ofρ.<br>garded as adding significantly to the restrictiveness of already<br>|

Conversely, measures that are regarded as adding significantly to the restrictiveness of already applied measures, e.g. operational restrictions that apply after any market entry limitations, would call for a lower value of the aggregation parameter, . As is well known, CES functions of the type outlined in equation (1) can be nested to accommodate ρρ As is well known, CES functions of the type outlined in equation (1) can be nested to accommodate different layers of aggregation, with each nest potentially having a different CES parameter.<sup>25</sup> We take advantage of this modular property and break the aggregation of scores across the universe of all measures into several steps, so that bundles of policy measures that bear a similar relationship with each other in terms of substitutability or complementarity correspond to a CES nest with a suitably chosen parameter.

> 25 For instance, in modeling production processes, it is not uncommon to have an upper-layer CobbDouglas version for combining a numeraire good with a bunch of differentiated intermediate inputs, which emerges in equation (1) as the limit case of going to zero, and another nest that would aggregate the differentiated inputs using the CES structure within that Cobb-Douglas aggregator. ρρ

14
# **Figure 1: Aggregation of individual measure scores**

<!-- Start of picture text --> Aggregate score as function of Rho parameter<br>1 3 5 7 9<br>Blue line: 10 measures with 0.25 score each.<br>2.5<br>2<br>1.5<br>1<br>.5<br>0<br><!-- End of picture text --> Before describing these different “nests” of aggregation in more detail, three principal advantages of combining scores with a single function as in equation (1) over traditional methods of aggregation are worth emphasizing. First, this approach is sufficiently general and can flexibly accommodate instances in which the economic impact of policy measures is nearly additive as well as instances in which the incremental impact of a measure is almost negligible. Both cases can be addressed in one consistent framework by defining two nests over a subset of measures, each with a suitable value of the parameter. Second, the approach is parsimonious and transparent in that the aggregation of a large number of measures is governed by a single parameter, rather than a potentially large set of weights, as would be the case with any kind of arithmetic average. Third, ρρ STRI scores obtained from a single functional form are reproducible, i.e. comparable scores can easily be obtained for new economies or sectors when coverage of the STPD is expanded, and policy simulations can be run by obtaining new sector-level or economy-level scores with different values for individual policy measures.

The combination of individual measure scores to subsector-level STRI values follows the conceptual classification of measures as set out in Box 1 above. This is because measures within a given category naturally share a similar relationship vis-à-vis each other, so that they form “nests” that can be aggregated with one suitable chosen parameter. At the point when aggregation commences, we observe scores for a total of 55,603 measures across all economies, subsectors and modes, respectively. Most of these measures pertain to Mode 3 (39,817 across all categories) and ρρ category A1 ‘Form of Entry’ (18,685 across all modes).

15
<!-- Start of picture text --> Subsector Score<br>Weighted average p=1<br>eet’<br>Mode 3 Mode 1 Mode 4<br>CES te ws<br>oN.<br>Ownership Quant entry Operations and<br>and control limits regulatory recourse<br>CES CES CES<br>Entryand A1** A2 A3 A4 B Cc D E<br>ownership*<br><!-- End of picture text -->
that the distribution of restrictiveness (across economies and sectors) is easily made transparent at each stage of aggregation—or “CES nest” —showing which kinds of policy measures drive the overall distribution of STRI values (Figure 3).

The overall distribution of the resultant scores is shown in Nest 4 (bottom right of Figure 3). The mass point at a score of 0 depicts the 315 entirely open cases, whereas the mass point at 1 reflects the 371 instances in which individual economy-subsector-mode combinations are closed altogether.<sup>26</sup> In between these polar cases, in which an economy-subsector-mode is either entirely open or entirely closed, the distribution of restrictiveness scores is fairly spread out. That said, two important features of the incidence of policy restrictions, and the way the algorithm deals with it, are apparent from Figure 3. First, most measures from the “operations and regulatory recourse” categories carry individual scores of 0.25 or 0.125, and the joint application of several such measures leads to a distribution of restrictiveness scores within the interval of [0.25, 0.50] for those subsectors that are not entirely open (see Nest 3). This is a reasonable result. Second, the overwhelming majority of high scores—those around 0.75—arise from the application of some sort of quantitative limitation, rather than outright ownership limitations (Nests 1 and 2).

**Figure 3: Scores by Principal Stage of Aggregation**

<!-- Start of picture text --> Nest 1: Ownership and Control Nest 2: Quantitative Limits<br>0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00<br>Nest 3: Operations/Reg Recourse Nest 4: Overall Scores<br>0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00<br>1000 1000<br>Frequency 750500 Frequency 750500<br>250 250<br>0 0<br>1000<br>1000<br>750<br>Frequency 750500 Frequency 500<br>250 250<br>0 0<br><!-- End of picture text --> At this point we have aggregated all individual measure scores to one STRI value per economy, subsector and mode. The nested aggregation described thus far is in principle the same within each mode of supply, even though the nature and number of measures within CES nests (such as ‘ownership and control’) will differ across modes.

The next step is to combine the modal scores to one STRI value per economy and subsector. We do this with a weighted arithmetic average, with a set of weights that differs across subsectors, reflecting the relative importance of the three modes for the provision of a given service (Table 6.2 26 Across sectors, this total comprises of 108 cases from the four Financial subsectors, 176 cases from the five Professional Services subsectors, and 87 cases from across all other remained sectors, half of which are in fact railway freight services.

17
in Annex 6). Setting the aggregation parameter to unity in equation (1) yields the arithmetic average as a special case of the CES with weights. We are therefore not stepping outside the framework we have consistently employed thus far. However, the aggregation of scores from ρρ different modes is different from the aggregation of measure scores because in any sector one mode of supply will invariably be more important than others, so that the symmetric treatment of measure scores is no longer appropriate for this step of the aggregation.

The weights for aggregating scores by mode of supply follow largely the ones employed in the previous World Bank STRI database, although certain modifications have led to a slight re-balancing of modal weights. First, unlike the treatment of Mode 4 in the previous World Bank STRD, in which Mode 4 restrictions were confined to professional services sectors only, we now consider policy measures affecting the movement of persons (e.g. prohibition of, or quotas on, intra-corporate transferees) in _all_ subsectors.<sup>27</sup> This coverage is consistent with the OECD policy area “Movement of People” that cuts across all sectors and increases the comparability of restrictiveness scores across both projects.

Second, the more comprehensive coverage of policy measures in this update also improves modal coverage directly or indirectly. For instance, Mode 1 is now covered as well in distribution (wholesale/retail), rail and road sectors, respectively (only Mode 3 used to be covered in the previous World Bank STRD). In international air transportation (both passenger and air cargo), the WTO’s “Worldwide Air Liberalisation Index” (WALI) as of 2012 is used to cover Mode 1. The WALI results had to be rescaled to the scaling used in the STRI: rescaled_WALI = (50 - WALI) * 2. This is an imperfect approximation of policy restrictiveness. WALI does not reflect the MFN policy, but rather is a synthetic measure of openness which relates to all services agreements an economy may have signed, and it pre-dates the policy information collected for 2016.<sup>28</sup> However, the importance of cross-border supply for air transport services means that the use of an imperfect approximation results is a less serious distortion than the omission of Mode 1 altogether.

This completes the aggregation of scores from the level of individual measures to the subsector and economy level, respectively. We then aggregate subsector STRIs to obtain sector-level and economy-level STRIs, respectively, using the weights provided in table 6.1 of Annex 6. These are based on the value-added weights of services sectors of individual economies’ total value added for 2013.

# **Decomposition of changes in STRI scores in 2008-11 vs 2016**

In this section we offer a comprehensive decomposition of differences in STRI scores across 200811 and 2016, respectively, to transparently identify the reasons for those changes. It is tempting to attribute any observed change in STRI scores between two periods in time to a corresponding change in policy regime, but in fact it could also be due to improvements in the quantification method (i.e. introduction of the algorithm and use of the CES aggregation method), or changes in the sectoral scope of the STRI. Hence, for the 55 economies covered in both periods, we map the scores from the earlier (2008-11) World Bank database against the new scores in the STPD as of 2016 and disentangle the three components that each play a role—to a varying degree—in driving the overall observed change in scores: (i) changes in the quantification methodology, (ii) actual changes in policy regime, and (iii) changes in sectoral scope.

- i. For this first level of analysis we use the 2008-11 raw policy data and aggregate these scores alternatively with the original methodology previously used by the World Bank and the improved 2016 methodology (i.e. introduction of the algorithm and use of the CES aggregation method),

> 27 Cross-sectoral differences in the relevance of Mode 4 measures are accounted for at the level of individual measure scores.  For instance, a quantitative limit on intra-corporate transferees attracts a restrictiveness score of 0.125 in professional and transport subsectors and a score of 0.25 in all other sectors where the use of ICTs is more widespread.

> 28 WALI is a synthetic measure of the openness of the air transport policy of a given economy. It is calculated as an average of the air liberalization indices of all the Air Services Agreements concluded by that economy, weighted by the respective traffic they cover. WALIs are computed for all four ALI weighting systems. Further assumptions are required to utilize the BASA-based WALI for gauging restrictiveness in air <u>cargo transportation.  We assume that (1) roughly 50% of air cargo travels in the belly hold of passenger</u> aircraft, and (2) mode 1 trade using dedicated cargo carriers is essentially open.  Combining both, we use a weighted average of (0.5*rescaled_WALI + 0.5*0) for mode 1 air cargo transport. It is also important to note that the same index was used for 2008-11.

18
respectively. We do this at the most disaggregated (subsector-mode) level, see Figure 4, Panel (a). The STRI scores aggregated with the improved methodology are shown on the vertical axis and are set against the original 2008-11 STRI values shown on the horizontal axis. The comparison reveals three key points:

- Most importantly, both aggregation methodologies lead to qualitatively similar results for individual economies, in the sense that the order in terms of overall restrictiveness is similar under both methods;

- At the same time, the improved methodology tends to lead to higher scores as evidenced by the fact that all economies lie above the 45-degree line (points along which indicate equal scores obtained from either methodology); and

- the difference in scores is more pronounced at the lower end of policy restrictiveness.  The reason is that the new CES aggregation method takes into account all non-zero policy measures, whereas the score under the original method had a tendency to reflect the score of the single most restrictive measure.  That is, under the improved 2016 method of aggregation, incremental non-zero measures lead to higher overall restrictiveness, albeit at a decreasing rate.

- ii. In a second step, we compare the 2008-11 scores to the 2016 scores when both are obtained by using the same new aggregation method so that they are comparable in terms of sectoral coverage and methodology.  This comparison therefore isolates the effect of the pure policy change.  As is evident from Figure 4, Panel (b), nearly all economies lie below the 45-degree line, which reflects the secular and broad-based pattern of liberalization in services trade policies over that period.

- iii. Lastly, we compare the 2016 scores comparable in terms of sectoral coverage with 2008-11 (used in the previous step) to the 2016 scores including the additional subsectors available from the new STPD. Both these scores are aggregated using the same (new) methodology, so that differences cannot be due to methodological changes; however, these scores differ in the coverage of subsectors as well as in broader modal coverage for a number of subsectors (e.g. mode 4 is included in all subsectors, whereas previously it was covered only for professional services).<sup>29</sup> The finding that the overwhelming majority of economy scores lie below the 45 degree line indicates that the narrower sectoral scope of the 2016 comparable scores (horizontal axis) is generally higher, i.e. more restrictive, than the complete 2016 scores (vertical axis), Figure 4, Panel (c).  This difference is mainly a consequence of the inclusion of the wholesale distribution subsector in the 2016 STPD, which effectively doubles the sector weight for distribution in the aggregate score from 20% to 40%.  Since service trade policies in the distribution sector are generally more open than in other sectors, the regular 2016 scores encompassing all subsectors (including wholesale distribution) are typically lower.

We conclude that for the economies covered in both the original World Bank exercise and the 2016 version—holding constant the quantification methodology and sectoral coverage—there is a trend towards more open trade policies in services sectors.

> 29 There has been a change in the way in which policies in the maritime shipping sector are assessed.

19
# **Figure 4: Decomposition of STRI score changes**

<!-- Start of picture text --> P a n e l (a ) P a n e l (b ) P a n e l (c )<br>2 0 0 8 d a ta ; o ld v s n e w s c o rin g 2 0 1 6 v s 2 0 0 8 d a ta ; s a m e s c o rin g 2 0 1 6 d a ta ; c o m p a ra b le v s s ta n d a lo n e s c o rin g<br>P A N<br>P A NID N IN D<br>T H A ID NIN D ID NIN D<br>C H N M Y S P H L P H LM Y S<br>T U N E G Y T H A C H N<br>E C U P O LN Z LN L DD O MIR LL T UG B RS WE S PP E RC Z EA U SK A ZA R GH U ND E UU S AA U TG R CC O LE D N KC A NP R TB E LB R AK O RJ P NC H LT U RR U SF I NF R AIT AU K RN G AP A KU R YC R IK E NM E X Z A F L K A V N MB G DO M N P E RA U S D O MU S AZ A FN L DC A NN Z LL T US WC H LC Z EEIR LT U RD E UU K RC O LR U SN G AP O LG B RA U TK A ZE S PK O RH U NB R AIT AMK P A K E C R I NX U R YV N MP R TA R GO MF I NND N KB E LG R CL K AB G DF R A E G YT U N C H N A U SN L DC A NIR LIT AD E UP R TC O LL T UN Z LS WG B RA U TD N KH U NEN G AU K RU R YP A KK O RR U SC R IG R CK E NM E XF R AK A ZP O LF I NB E LO MB R AT U RV N MB G DN A R GT U NL K AE G Y T H AP H LM Y S P A N<br>J P N C Z EP E RE S PU S AZ A FD O MC H L<br>J P N<br>E C U<br>E C U<br>0 2 0 4 0 6 0 8 0 3 0 4 0 5 0 6 0 7 0 2 0 3 0 4 0 5 0 6 0 7 0<br>S T R I 2 0 0 8 O L D S T R I 2 0 0 8 C E S S T R I 2 0 1 6 C E S c o m p a ra b le<br>80<br>70 70<br>60 60 60<br>50 50<br>40<br>STRI 2008 CES 40 STRI 2016 CES 40<br>STRI 2016 CES comparable<br>20<br>30 30<br>0 20 20<br><!-- End of picture text --> 20
# **Other considerations**

We recognize that the approach to quantifying policy restrictiveness as described above is not perfect. However, given data constraints and the wide range of sectors covered, there is no obviously superior method of comparable quantification. The imperfection is somewhat mitigated by the extensive consultations that have been conducted with the private sector representatives, regulators and experts in making the assignments of scores to individual and synthetic measures and defining modal and sectoral weights. We believe that the adopted approach to quantifying policy information yields broadly plausible restrictiveness scores.

The reasons for using a simple method are the following: first, methods that assign fixed weights to all types of restrictions (entry, operational, regulatory) and that treat the restrictions as additive are flawed in certain respects. For instance, a foreign equity limit of 49 percent already precludes foreign corporate control and so adding to it a further (frequently encountered) requirement that the majority of board of directors be nationals would amount to double counting. Second, more sophisticated methods have to rely on detailed sets of data that are difficult and costly to collect for many economies, particularly those that are less developed. Third, a parsimonious and straightforward method is likely to be readily understood by a wide range of diverse users. Finally, because of the conceptual separation of scoring and aggregating, the STRI obtained with our methodology do **not** depend on the total number of potentially applicable measures. As a result, it is easily possible to substitute, add or remove measures in the building of the index.

In any case, quantification is merely the tip of the iceberg, and best seen as a first step to create a broader picture of policy patterns and identify certain important issues. The main value of the database is the detailed information at the measure level which enables a more granular analysis of policy issues. In other words, the scores are a first step rather than the end result. The main goal of the database is to give to users the information and tools necessary for services trade policy analysis.

## **4  DATA PRESENTATION IN I-TIP SERVICES**

While a summary measure of restrictiveness is convenient and indeed indispensable for quantitative analysis, we believe that the real strength of this project is the richly textured policy information that has been collected. In addition, different users are likely to have different needs as to the data content, level of detail, and type of presentation. For these reasons, the Database enables users to view the information directly on the results screen of the application, as well as to download data for trade policy analysis and research. The Database will also offer the option of directly linking the applied policy information, to information relating to binding legal commitments made by economies in the context of the GATS or free trade agreements (bilateral or regional).

The joint WTO-World Bank Services Trade Policy Database is disseminated through the I-TIP services portal. I-TIP services consists of a set of linked databases providing information on WTO Members' commitments and MFN exemptions under the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) as well as preferential market access commitments for least developed countries granted by Members under the LDC Services Waiver, services commitments in regional trade agreements (RTAs), applied measures affecting access to and operations in economies' services markets, and relevant services statistics (see figure 5). In its four modules (GATS, RTA commitments, Services Trade Policy Database, and Statistics), the I-TIP interface permits searches by jurisdiction, sector, agreement, or source of information. Search results are presented in summary form, as well as in more detail. Search results can be filtered across a number of additional criteria. Users can easily switch from one module to another by selecting a different module from the menu bar, for example from looking at a particular economy's commitments in a given sector, to relevant commitments in RTAs, and then to applied regulatory information and related services statistics. We will now concentrate in the rest of this section on the description of the Services Trade Policy Database module.

21
<!-- Start of picture text --> Fy WORLD TRADE WORLD<br>A ORGANIZATION Nw tains SERVICES<br>a<br>toAr |<br>1<br>| OMecwOr - |<br>i SERVICES<br>< fj -%<= SE eget<br><!-- End of picture text -->

I-TIP Services is a joint initiative of the World Trade Organization and the World Bank. It is a set of linked databases that provides information on Members’ commitments under the WTO's General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS), services commitments in regional trade agreements (RTA), applied measures in services, and services statistics.

GATS. Regional Trade Agreements Services Trade Policy | Database tall statistics This module contains information The RTA module allows to access The Applied Services Trade Policy The Services Statistics module on Member's market access and search for information on module provides information jointly | accompanies the GATS, RTA and commitments and exemptions to Members’ commitments in regional compiled by the World Bank and Applied regimes modules by providing the Most favoured Nation (MFN) trade agreements notified under the WTO on services regulatory relevant trade in services and related obligation. It also includes the Article V of the GATS. Currently, frameworks. Currently, the statistics. preferential market access the database covers a good database covers 23 service sectors commitments for least-developed proportion of services RTAs (see list in 68 Members. The information for countries granted by WTO Members _ attached). 25 of those Members was collected under the LDC Services Waiver (see in 2016-2017 through a survey list of notifying Members). The conducted by the World Bank and latter feature of I-TIP was the WTO. The information for the developed in cooperation with the remaining 43 Members was mainly International Trade Centre (ITC). sourced from the OECD STRI regulatory database (2016 version), thanks to the co-operation of the OECD, which is gratefully acknowledged. Links to other useful sources of information on applied services policies are also provided (e.g. WTO monitoring reports, WTO trade policy reviews).
<!-- Start of picture text --> Home | GATS RTACommitments Services Trade Policy Database __Statistics User Guide<br>Services Trade Policy Database and STRI<br>@Policy Information Ostri ®<br>Economies (i)<br>All Economies .<br>Sectors and Subsectors (i)<br>All Sectors °<br>Mode of supply<br>All Modes ~<br>Measure Categories \U<br>All Measure Categories ba<br>Measure Categories i)<br>ail<br>~<br>4-(7] All items<br>+ (] A. Conditions on market entry<br>h- (4) Ad Forms of entry {including foreign equity limits)<br>h- (] A2 Quantitative measures (for firms and natural persons)<br>+ (4) A.3 Conditions on licensing/investment screening/qualifications relating to market entry (for-<br>~ (4) Notification of investment required<br>~ (4) Registration required<br>h- (4) Screening of investment<br>h- (4) License or authorization required (incl. concessions)<br>~ (4) Minimum capital requirement<br>~ (4) Nationality or citizenship required for license to practice<br>~ (4) Prior or permanent residency required for license to practice<br>h- (4) Domicile required for licence to practice<br>~ (4) Consolidated supervision by their home regulator<br>~ (4) Period of time since an applicant's incorporation in its home country before obtaining a|<br>: : ~bo (4)[4] AutomaticLicence: other recognition requirements of foreign license granted ¥<br>< ><br><!-- End of picture text -->
|| Home | GATS<br>RTACommitments Servi**c**es<br>Trade Poli y Database | Statistics<br>|<br>|User Guide|
|---|---|
|"ServicesTrade Policy DatabaseandSTRE||
|Sectors:<br>Mobiletelecommunication services||
|Modeof supply:<br>Mode3||
|NOTE THATTHERE ARE LIMITATIONS ASTOTHE NUMBER OF ECONOMIESTHATCAN BE SHOWN ONTHE RESULTS PAGE, BUT THE FULL|SELECTION CAN|
|BE DOWNLOADED IN EXCEL OR CSV.||
|@ Policy Information<br>Ostri@®||
|» Show filters||
|4<br>16.BMobile<br>telecommunication<br>services(Showing<br>50of121items.Groupcontinuesonthenextpage.)<br><br> <br>||
|<br> <br> <br>4<br>Mode 3(Showing<br>50 of 121items. Group continues on the next page.)<br><br><br>||
|«<br>A.Conditions<br>on market entry<br><br>||
|4<br>A.1Formsofentry(includingforeignequitylimits)<br> <br>||
|<br>Foreignestablishementprohibited<br>No|No|
|<br><br>No<br>|No<br>|
|Yes<br><br>|Yes<br>|
|<br><br>||
|Max. foreign ownership allowed(%)<br>100<br>||100|
|Jointventurerequirementforforeignentity<br>No|No|
|<br><br>Yes<br>|No<br>|
|100|100|
|Domesticentityacquisition:controllingstakeallowed(Le.ifminorityownership)<br>Yes|Yes|
<!-- Start of picture text --> A THE<br>By)@/ ORGANIZATIONWORLD TRADE WORDBANK | PSERVICES<br>Bey<br>v BANGLADESH<br>v FOREIGN BRANCHES ARE ALLOWED<br>Mode: 3<br>Measure and<br>Branches of foreign. establishment. locally allowed : Yes<br>response:<br>Comments: ThereForeign.is branchesno restrictionceare allowedin operating. as a branch office.<br>Date collected: 2016<br>Collected by: WTOMB (based on survey)<br>v HONG KONG, CHINA<br>v FOREIGN BRANCHES ARE ALLOWED<br>Mode: 3<br>Measure and<br>Branches of foreign. establishment. locally allowed : Yes<br>response:<br>Foreign branches are allowed<br>Comments: A foreign company may register a branch in Hong Kong under the Companies Ordinance (Cap. 622). See see Part 16<br>of the Companies Ordinance.<br>Relevant source: Companieslegislation.gov.hk/blis_pdf.nsf/CurEngOrd/707C1C4DC6BDF92848257A5500549A21/SFILE/CAP_622_e_b5.pdfan Ordinance. (Cap. 622)<br>Date collected: 2016<br>Collected by: WTOMB (based on survey)<br><!-- End of picture text -->

<!-- Start of picture text -->
|Economy SectorCode SectorName Mode Category Subcategory Measure Response Comments Relevant Date Collec Collected By<br>{Bangladesh 16.B Mobile telecommunication services3 A- Conditions on marlA.1 - Forms of entry (i Foreign esta No Market entry is allowe Clause 3.2016 WTO/WB (based on survey)<br>{Bangladesh 16.B Mobile telecommunication services3 A- Conditions on marlA.1 - Forms of entry (i Restrictions No Absence of restrictions to estab 2016 WTOMWB (based on survey)<br>|Bangladesh 16.B Mobile telecommunication services3 A- Conditions on marlA.1 - Forms of entry (i Branches of Yes Foreign branches are allowed: 2016 WTOMB (based on survey)<br>|Bangladesh 16.8 Mobile telecommunication services 3 A- Conditions on marlA.1 - Forms of entry (i Foreign esta Yes Foreign establishement of new l'2016 WTO/WEB (based on survey)<br>|Bangladesh 16.B Mobile telecommunication services<br>Bangladesh 16.8 Mobile telecommunication services3 A- Conditions on marlA.1 - Forms of entry (i Greenfield: N100 Maximum foreign ownership in n2016 WTOMWB (based on survey)<br>|Bangladesh 16.B Mobile telecommunication services33 A-A- ConditionsConditions onon marlA.1marlA.1 -- FormsForms ofof entryentry (i(i JointRestrictions venture NoYes RestrictionsEstablishmenton ascross. joint-ventureBangladeis 20162016 WTOMBWTO/WEB (based(based onon survey)survey)<br>|BangladeshBangladesh 16.8 Mobile telecommunication services3 A- Conditions on marlA.1 - Forms of entry (i Domestic en Yes Foreign acquisition ofadomesti 2016 WTO/WEB (based on survey)<br>Bangladesh 16.816.B MobileMobile telecommunicationtelecommunication servicesservices3 A- Conditions on marlA.1 - Forms of entry (i Domestic en 100 Maximum aggregate foreign owr 2016 WTOMWB (based on survey)<br>|Bangladesh 16.B Mobile telecommunication services33 A-A- ConditionsConditions onon marlA.1marlA.1 -- FormsForms ofof entryentry (i(i DomesticLimits on theen YesYes ThereForeignare acquisitionlimits to the of Section 120162016 WTOMBWTO/WEB (based(based onon survey)survey)<br>|Bangladesh 16.8 Mobile telecommunication services<br>|Bangladesh 16.B Mobile telecommunication services33 A -- Conditions on marlA.1 -- Forms ofof entryentry (i(i RestrictionsMaximum fo No100 AbsenceMaximum of foreign restrictionsownershipon thein tyIc201201 6 WT OMWEOMV B (based on survey)survey)<br>|Bangladesh 16.8 Mobile telecommunication services<br>|Bangladesh 16.8 Mobile telecommunication services 33 A-A- ConditionsConditions onon marlA.1marlA.2 -- FormsQuantitative of entrymea(i Other Demonstratii restric No No other restictions on the legal 2016 WTO/WEB (based on survey)<br>|Bangladesh No No requirement to demonstrate (2016 WTO/WE (based on survey)<br>|Bangladesh 16.B16.B MobileMobile telecommunicationtelecommunication services3services3 A-A- ConditionsConditions onon marlA.2marlA.2 -- QuantitativeQuantitative meamea Limits Limit on onnur the YesNo LimitNumberon ofthe firmstotal ornur suppliersGuidelinenot 2016 2016 WTOMBWTO/WB (based(based onon survey)survey)<br>|Bangladesh 16.B Mobile telecommunication services<br>Bangladesh 16.B Mobile telecommunication services33 A-A- ConditionsConditions onon marlA.2marlA.3 -- QuantitativeConditions onmeaLocallic Notification data s'NocNo NotificationLocal data storageof investmentis not ais precinot 20162016 WTOMWBWTO/MB (based(based onon survey)survey)<br>Bangladesh 16.B Mobile telecommunication services3 A- Conditions on marlA.3 - Conditions on lic Registration Yes Registration required Section 32016 WTOMMB (based on survey)<br>Bangladesh 16.B Mobile telecommunication services3 A- Conditions on marlA.3 - Conditions on lic Screening of No No screening of foreign investme 2016 WTOMB (based on survey)<br>|Bangladesh 16.B Mobile telecommunication services3 A- Conditions on marlA.3 - Conditions on lic Screening of No Screening: foreign investors are 2016 WTOMB (based on survey)<br><!-- End of picture text -->
|Home<br>GATS<br>RTACommitments<br>ServicesTrade PolicyDatabase<br>Statistics|User Guide|
|---|---|
|ServicesTrade Policy Database and STRI<br><br><br>||
|Economies:<br>Bangladesh; Hong Kong, China<br>Back t|o selection screen|
|Sectors:<br>Telecommunication Services; Distribution Services||
|NOTE THAT THERE ARE LIMITATIONS AS TO THE NUMBER OF ECONOMIES THAT CAN BE SHOWN ON THE RESULTS PAGE, BUT THE FULL <br>BE DOWNLOADED IN EXCEL OR CSV.|SELECTION CAN|
|O Regulatory Information©sTRI @||
|_>Showfilters||
|<br>X Clearfilters|@|
|Economy||
|Telecommunication Services<br>42.1|18.2|
|Fixed-LineTelecommunication Services<br>42.1|19.2|
|Mode 3<br>438|15.7|
|Mode 4<br>268|50.0|
|MobileTelecommunication Services<br>42.1|19.2|
|Mode 3<br>43.8|15.7|
|Mode 4<br>268|50.0|
|Internet Services<br>42.1|16.3|
|Mode 3<br>43.8|12.5|
|Mode 4<br>268|50.0|
|Distribution Services<br>26.8|27.0|
|Wholesale Trade Services<br>24.7|27.0|
|Mode 1<br>15.7|15.7|
|Mode 3<br>26.9<br>Mode4<br>268|26.9<br>50.0|

<!-- Start of picture text -->
| |Bangiadesh |Hong Kong, China<br>Mode 2016 2016<br>Economy<br>Telecommunication Services ALL 42.1 "18.2<br>Fixed-Line Telecommunication Services 3 43.8 "15.7<br>Fixed-Line Telecommunication Services 4 26.8 50.0<br>Fixed-Line Telecommunication Services ALL "42.1 "19.2<br>Mobile Telecommunication Services 3 43.8 "15.7<br>Mobile Telecommunication Services 4 26.8 50.0<br>Mobile Telecommunication Services ALL "42.1 "19.2<br>Internet Services 3 43.8 12.5<br>Internet Services 4 26.8 50.0<br>Internet Services ALL "42.1 "16.3<br>Distribution Services ALL 26.8 27.0<br>Wholesale Trade Services 1 15.7 15.7<br>Wholesale Trade Services 3 "26.9 6.9<br>Wholesale Trade Services 4 "26.8 "50.0<br>Wholesale Trade Services ALL 4.7 27.0<br>Retailing Services 1 15.7 15.7<br><!-- End of picture text -->

|||||Bangiadesh||HongKong,China|
|---|---|---|---|
||Mode|2016|<br>2016|
|Economy<br>||||
|Telecommunication Services|ALL|42.1|"18.2|
|Fixed-Line Telecommunication Services|3|43.8|"15.7|
|Fixed-LineTelecommunication Services<br>|4<br>|26.8<br>|50.0<br>|
|Fixed-LineTelecommunicationServices|ALL|"42.1|"19.2|
|<br>MobileTelecommunication Services|3|43.8|"15.7|
|MobileTelecommunication Services<br>|4<br>|26.8<br>|50.0<br>|
|MobileTelecommunication Services<br>|ALL<br>|"42.1<br>|"19.2<br>|
|Internet Services<br>|3<br>|43.8<br>|12.5<br>|
|Internet Services<br>|4<br>|26.8<br>|50.0<br>|
|InternetServices<br>|ALL<br>|"42.1<br>|"16.3<br>|
|Distribution Services<br>|ALL<br>|26.8<br>|27.0<br>|
|WholesaleTrade Services<br>|1<br>|15.7<br>|15.7<br>|
|WholesaleTrade Services<br>|3<br>|"26.9<br>|6.9<br>|
|WholesaleTrade Services<br>|4<br>|"26.8<br>|"50.0<br>|
|WholesaleTrade Services<br>|ALL<br>|4.7<br>|27.0<br>|
|RetailingServices|1|15.7|15.7|
<!-- Start of picture text --> A B ie D E F<br>Economy | * |Economyname * |Economyname |EconomynameEconomyname * |Sectorcode | + | + + Subsector * Mode |*|Score | +<br>ARG Argentina 11.C.b.(b) Air freight freight international 4 0.0<br>ARG Argentina 11.C.b.(b) Air freight freight international All modes 34.4<br>ARG Argentina 11.E.b Rail: Freight transportation transportation 1 100.0<br>ARG Argentina 11.E.b Rail: Freight transportation transportation 3 77.7<br>ARG Argentina 11.E.b Rail: Freight transportation transportation 4 0.0<br>ARG Argentina 11.E.b Rail: Freight transportation transportation All modes 74.4<br>ARG Argentina 11.F.b Road: Freight transportation transportation 3 39.7<br>ARG Argentina 11.F.b Road: Freight transportation transportation 4 0.0<br>ARG Argentina 11.F.b Road: Freight transportation transportation All modes 29.3<br>ARG Argentina 13.B.1 Maritime cargo-handling, storage, warehousing and warehousing and and contai’3 42.7<br>ARG Argentina 13.B.1 Maritime cargo-handling, storage, warehousing and warehousing and and contai’4 0.0<br>ARG Argentina 13.B.1 Maritime cargo-handling, storage, warehousing and warehousing and and contai All modes 38.5<br>ARG Argentina 13.B.2 Maritime intermediation auxiliary services services 1 100.0<br>ARG Argentina 13.B.2 Maritime intermediation auxiliary services services e) 39.7<br>ARG Argentina 13.B.2 Maritime intermediation auxiliary services 4 0.0<br>ARG Argentina 13.B.2 Maritime intermediation auxiliary services All modes 47.8<br>ARG Argentina 16.4 Fixed-line telecommunication telecommunication services E 40.5<br><!-- End of picture text -->

A B ie D E F Economy | * |Economyname * |Economyname |EconomynameEconomyname * |Sectorcode | + | + + Subsector * Mode |*|Score | + ARG Argentina 11.C.b.(b) Air freight freight international 4 0.0 ARG Argentina 11.C.b.(b) Air freight freight international All modes 34.4 ARG Argentina 11.E.b Rail: Freight transportation transportation 1 100.0 ARG Argentina 11.E.b Rail: Freight transportation transportation 3 77.7 ARG Argentina 11.E.b Rail: Freight transportation transportation 4 0.0 ARG Argentina 11.E.b Rail: Freight transportation transportation All modes 74.4 ARG Argentina 11.F.b Road: Freight transportation transportation 3 39.7 ARG Argentina 11.F.b Road: Freight transportation transportation 4 0.0 ARG Argentina 11.F.b Road: Freight transportation transportation All modes 29.3 ARG Argentina 13.B.1 Maritime cargo-handling, storage, warehousing and warehousing and and contai’3 42.7 ARG Argentina 13.B.1 Maritime cargo-handling, storage, warehousing and warehousing and and contai’4 0.0 ARG Argentina 13.B.1 Maritime cargo-handling, storage, warehousing and warehousing and and contai All modes 38.5 ARG Argentina 13.B.2 Maritime intermediation auxiliary services services 1 100.0 ARG Argentina 13.B.2 Maritime intermediation auxiliary services services e) 39.7 ARG Argentina 13.B.2 Maritime intermediation auxiliary services 4 0.0 ARG Argentina 13.B.2 Maritime intermediation auxiliary services All modes 47.8 ARG Argentina 16.4 Fixed-line telecommunication telecommunication services E 40.5
the OECD. Data are presented using a new, detailed and innovative classification of services trade policies. It is entirely compatible at the measure level with the list of measures used in the context of other efforts, such as the previous 2008-11 World Bank exercise, or the more recent OECD services trade restrictiveness index.

The policy information is used to compute services trade restrictions indices (STRIs), based on the methodology developed by the World Bank in the early 2010s, but with a number of improvements. The ambition is to construct aggregate restrictiveness indices in a consistent and reproducible manner, which are nonetheless easy to understand and amenable to modification and/or simulation. The fact that we have collected very detailed information covering issues beyond market access or discriminatory measures enables us potentially to assess other policy areas relating to domestic regulation, transparency or competition issues. This will enhance the comparability of information, help to identify context-specific best regulatory practices, and ease regulatory cooperation among jurisdictions.

Additional policy data will be made available in due course. In particular, the World Bank and the WTO Secretariat are exploring ways to expand the number of economies covered, including through the participation of other agencies in this joint effort. At the time of writing, new data collection exercises have begun with the participation of the Central European Free Trade Area (CEFTA) and the African Union Secretariats to collect information on economies in the two regions. We are also improving the coverage of sectors, to enhance comparability with the OECD data set, and to focus on areas of interest to developing economies (e.g. architectural and engineering services, construction, computer services, health services, tourism). Efforts are also underway to benefit from synergies with some specialized agencies that may be interested in conducting similar exercises. For example, we have been collaborating with the International Telecommunications Union (ITU) to widen the scope of the ITU annual telecommunications regulatory survey to incorporate relevant trade policy questions. Such a collaborative approach would enable us to collect additional information of interest for this project, without unduly burdening the respondents of regulatory agencies in the economies.

Also, the World Bank and WTO Secretariat are engaged in the development of a new data set on services PTAs that will, for the first time, cover in a comprehensive manner the most important aspects of these agreements, from the design of the regulatory framework through to the specific commitments on liberalization. We aim at quantifying commitments in the PTAs covered in the new data set, which would allow us to compare the restrictiveness of services policies arising from different PTAs, and to compare them with the restrictiveness of applied services policies, for the economies covered by the World Bank -WTO Services Trade Policy Database.

Finally, the World Bank, the WTO Secretariat and the OECD are continuing to collaborate on the production and dissemination of services trade policy information as a global public good. We are committed to ensuring the gradual convergence of the respective projects. The three agencies are also working to increase the number of economies and sectors covered, and the inclusion of new policy measures.

28
# **REFERENCES**

Borchert, Ingo, Batshur Gootiiz and Aaditya Mattoo. 2014. “Policy Barriers to International Trade in Services: Evidence from a New Database,” _World Bank Economic Review_ , vol. 28(1), 162-188.

Borchert, Ingo, Batshur Gootiiz and Aaditya Mattoo (2012), “Guide to the Services Trade Restrictions Database”, World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 6108, available at http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/2012/06/16441094.

Borchert, Ingo, Batshur Gootiiz, Arti Grover and Aaditya Mattoo (2017), Services Trade Protection and Economic Isolation, _World Economy_ , DOI: 10.1111/twec.12327.

Deardorff, Alan V. and Robert M. Stern (2008), ―Empirical Analysis of Barriers to International Services Transactions and the Consequences of Liberalization‖, Chapter 5 in: Aaditya Mattoo, Robert M. Stern and Gianni Zanini (eds.), A Handbook of International Trade in Services, Oxford University Press, pp. 1220.

Dihel, Nora and Ben Shepherd (2007), Modal Estimates of Services Barriers, OECD Trade Policy Working Paper No. 51, OECD Publishing.

Findlay, Christopher and Tony Warren (ed.), (2000), Impediments to Trade in Services: Measurement and Policy Implications, London and New York: Routledge.

Fink, Carsten, Aaditya Mattoo and Ileana Cristina Neagu (2002), Trade in International Maritime Services: How Much Does Policy Matter?, _World Bank Economic Review_ 16 (1), pp. 81-108.

Fink, Carsten, Aaditya Mattoo and Randeep Rathindran (2001), Liberalizing basic telecommunications: the Asian experience, World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 2718.

Francois, Joseph and Ian Wooton (2008), ―Market structure in Transport and Distribution Services, Goods Trade, and the Effects of Liberalisation‖, in: OECD and International Transport Forum, Benefiting from Globalisation - 17th International Symposium on Transport Economics and Policy, pp. 97-130.

Golub, Stephen S. (2009), ―Openness to Foreign Direct Investment in Services: An International Comparative Analysis‖, _World Economy_ 32(8), pp. 1245–1268.

Golub, Stephen S., and Takeshi Koyama (2006), OECD‘s FDI Regulatory Restrictiveness Index: Revision and extension to more economies, OECD Working Papers on International Investment No. 2006/4.

Gönenç, Rauf and Giuseppe Nicoletti (2000), Regulation, Market Structure and Performance in Air Passenger Transportation, OECD Economics Department Working Paper No 254, OECD Publishing.

Hoekman, Bernard (1995), Tentative First Steps: An Assessment of the Uruguay Round Agreement on Services, the World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 1455.

Hoekman, Bernard (1996), Assessing the General Agreement on Trade in Services, in: Will Martin and L. Alan Winters (eds.), The Uruguay Round and the developing countries, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 88-124.

Marchetti, J., & Roy, M. (2009). Services liberalization in the WTO and in PTAs. In J. Marchetti & M. Roy (Eds.), Opening Markets for Trade in Services: Countries and Sectors in Bilateral and WTO Negotiations (WTO Internal Only, pp. 61-112). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Mattoo, Aaditya and Lucy Payton (eds.) (2007), Services Trade and Development – The Experience of Zambia, New York and Washington D.C.: The World Bank and Palgrave Macmillan.

OECD (2015), Services Trade Restrictiveness Index (STRI): Scoring and Weighting Methodology. OECD (2017), Services Trade Policies and the Global Economy.

Reisman, Matthew and Danielle Vu (2012), ―Nontariff Measures in the Global Retailing Industry‖, Office of Industries Working Paper No. ID-30, Washington DC: U.S. International Trade Commission.

29
# **ANNEX 1 CLASSIFICATION OF MEASURES**

|**Measure**|**M1**|**M3**|**M4**<br>**Sector**<br>**scope**|
|---|---|---|---|
|**A.**<br>**Conditions on market entry**||||
|**1.**<br>**Legal forms of entry (including foreign equity limits)**||||
|**Cross-border supply and franchising**||||
|Cross-border supply prohibited|x||COM|
|Partial sectoral coverage of cross-border supply<br>|x||COM|
|Consumers must use the services of a resident intermediary|x||COM|
|Commercialpresencerequirement as a condition forcross-bordersupply ofthe service|x||COM|
|Exception to commercialpresence requirement for domesticallyunavailable services|x||COM|
|Limits on e-commerce/other forms of non-store retailing/wholesaling without commercial presence|x||SS|
|Restrictions on franchising|x|x|COM|
|**Commercial Presence**||||
|Foreign establishment prohibited||x|COM|
|Restrictions to establish or operate representative offices||x|COM|
|Branches of foreign establishment locally allowed||x|COM|
|Foreign establishment of locally incorporated company allowed||x|COM|
|Greenfield: Max. foreign ownership allowed (%)||x|COM|
|Joint venture requirement for foreign entity||x|COM|
|Joint venture: Max. aggregate foreign ownership allowed (%)||x|COM|
|Restrictions on cross-border mergers and acquisitions||x|COM|
|Domestic entity acquisition allowed||x|COM|
|Domestic entityacquisition: Max. aggregate foreign ownershipallowed(%)||x|COM|
|Domestic entity acquisition:controlling stake allowed (i.e. if minority ownership)||x|COM|
|Limits on the % of capital that can be acquired by foreign investors in state-controlled firms||x|COM|
|Board of directors requirements||X|COM|
|Board of directors: at least one must be national||X|COM|
|Board of directors: % nationality requirement||x|COM|
|Board of directors: at least one must be resident||X|COM|
|Board of directors: % residence requirement||X|COM|
|Board of directors: at least one must be a locally-licensed professional||X|SS|
|Board of directors: majority must be locally-licensed professionals||x|SS|
|Sole foreign proprietorship allowed||x|COM|
|Partnership with foreigner allowed||x|COM|
|Other restrictions on legal form of entry||x|COM|

30
|**Measure**|**M1**|**M3**|**M4**|**Sector**<br>**scope**|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|Restrictions on the type of shares or bonds held by foreign investors||x||COM|
|Maximum foreign ownership in local investment companies (%)||x||COM|
|**Commercial Presence in Professional Services**|||||
|Equity restrictions apply to non-locally licensed professionals/firms<br>||x|x|SS<br>|
|Majority of shareholders must be locally licensed<br>||x||SS|
|Commercial association prohibited between fully integrated practitioners and other professionals||x||SS|
|Commercial association prohibited between not fully integrated practitioners and fully integrated professionals||x||SS|
|**Presence of Natural Persons**|||||
|Service-Supplying Employee (CSS) of a Firm Based Abroad-Allowed|||x|COM|
|CSS- Residencyrequired|||x|COM|
|Independent Professional as Contractual Service Provider (IP)-Allowed|||x|COM|
|IP-Residency required|||x|COM|
|Intra-CorporateTransferee (ICT)- Allowed|||x|COM|
|ICT-Residency required|||x|COM|
|Foreign employee of a local firm-Allowed|||x|COM|
|Foreignemployee- Residencyrequired|||x|COM|
|Foreign drivers permitted to transport cargo/passengers in a host country|||x|SS|
|**2.**<br>**Quantitative measures (for firms and natural persons)**|||||
|Demonstration of unavailability of service required|x|x|x|COM|
|Quantitative limits on the total number of suppliers/licences||x|x|COM|
|Service provision is reserved for statutory monopoly or granted on an exclusive basis<br>||x||COM<br>|
|ENT on number of suppliers (including if implemented through licensing process)||x|x|COM|
|Local data storage precondition to supply services|x|x|x|HZ|
|Quota–Foreign workers|||x|COM|
|Quota–Contractual service supplier|||x|COM|
|Quota–Independent Professionals|||x|COM|
|Quota–Intra-Corporate Transferees|||x|COM|
|LMT/ENT–Foreign workers|||x|COM|
|LMT/ENT -Contractualservice supplier|||x|COM|
|LMT/ENT-Independent professionals|||x|COM|
|LMT/ENT-Intra-Corporate Transferees|||x|COM|
|Limit on numberof foreigners employed percompany<br>|||x|COM|
|Limit on share of foreigners employed in the domestic economy|||x|HZ|

31
|**Measure**|**M1**|**M3**|**M4**|**Sector**|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|||||**scope**|
|**3.**<br>**Conditions on licensing/investment screening/qualifications relating to market entry**<br>**(firms /natural persons)**<br>|||||
|**Registration**|||||
|Registration required<br>|x|x|x|COM|
|**Screening of Investment**|||||
|Screening of investment||x||HZ|
|Screening of investment:Subject tonotificationonly||x||HZ|
|Screening of investment: Subject to evidence of economic benefits||x||HZ|
|Screening: approval unless contrary to national interest||x||HZ|
|**Licensing**|||||
|Licence or authorization required (incl. concessions)|x|x|x|COM|
|Licence for e-commerce required||x|x|SS|
|Each ATM considered as a separate branch in the licensing and authorization process<br>||x||SS<br>|
|Limited or temporary licensing system available||x|x|COM|
|Licensing requirements<br>||x|x|COM|
|Minimum capital requirement||x||COM|
|Nationality or citizenship required for license to practice|||x|SS|
|Prior or permanent residency required for license to practice|||x|SS|
|Domicile required for licence to practice|||x|SS|
|Domicilerequiredfor license to practice as afullyintegratedlawyer|||x|SS|
|Period of time since an applicant’s incorporation in its home country before obtaining a licence||x||SS|
|Other licensing requirements||x||COM|
|Criteria to obtainalicence are differentfor foreigncompanies||x|x|COM|
|Automatic recognition of foreign license granted||x|x|COM|
|Licensing fee||x|x|COM|
|License automaticifpublicly available criteriafulfilled||x|x|COM|
|Restrictions related to the duration and renewal of licences||x|x|COM|
|**Education/training/work experience**<br>||x|x|COM|
|Mandatory additional domestic education|||x|SS|
|Training or work experience–Number of years|||x|SS|
|Recognition of education and training/work experience|||x|SS|
|Laws or regulations establish a process for recognising higher education degrees earned abroad|||x|SS|
|Passing a professional exam in the host country required|||x|SS|
|**Other conditions on licensing/investment screening/qualifications**|||||
|Other conditions on licensing/investment screening/qualifications relating to market entry|x|x|x|COM|
|Licence technology neutral||x||SS|
|Access rights for rail transport|x|||SS|

32
|**Measure**|**M1**|**M3**|**M4**|**Sector**<br>**scope**|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|Access rights for international rail transport|x|||SS|
|Access rights for international combined transport|x|||SS|
|Transit rights for international rail transport|x|||SS|
|Other access rights for rail transport|x|||SS|
|**4.**<br>**Other Conditions on market entry**|||||
|Acquisition and/or rental of land and real estate by foreigners restricted||x||HZ|
|Limits on direct selling|x|x|x|SS|
|Conditions to own and register vessels under the national flag|x|||SS|

33
|**Measure**|**M1**<br>**M3**|**M4**<br>**Sector**<br>**scope**|
|---|---|---|
|**B.**<br>**Conditions on operations**|||
|**1.**<br>**Conditions on supply of service**|||
|Limits on scope of service (numerical and non-numerical)<br>|x<br>x|x<br>COM<br>|
|Regulations limit the range of products a retailer may carry|x|SS|
|Restrictions on the type of vessels<br>|x|SS<br>|
|Restrictions on the type of cargo transported (other than cargo reservations)|x|SS|
|Restrictions on the quantity of cargo transported (other than cargo reservations)<br>|x|SS<br>|
|Limits oncabotage: Exclusion foreign-flagged ships (orothercriteria, suchasforeign-built ships)|x|SS|
|Licences for department stores or large-store formats are subject to quotas or economic needs tests<br>|x|SS|
|Some banking services reserved for domestic suppliers|x<br>x|x<br>SS|
|Some insurance activities are reserved for domestic suppliers|x<br>x|x<br>SS|
|Restrictions on internet banking|x|SS|
|Repositioning ofequipmentrestricted|x|SS|
|Feedering restricted|x|SS|
|Bilateral/plurilateral cargo sharing agreements|x|SS|
|Limits onexpansionofoperations<br>|x|COM<br>|
|Restrictions on the number of outlets|x|SS|
|Number of branches restricted|x|SS|
|Number of ATMs restricted|x|SS|
|Only domestic banks can establish their own ATM networks<br>|x|SS<br>|
|Quota for private cargo: Bulk|x|SS|
|Quota for private cargo: Liner<br>|x|SS|
|Approval by regulatory authority required for new products or services|x<br>x|x<br>COM|
|Approvalby theregulatory authorityrequiredfor newproducts orservices:compulsoryinsurance<br>|x<br>x|x<br>SS<br>|
|Use of foreign firm names prohibited|x|COM|
|Use of foreign firm names is allowed if alongside that of the local partner<br>|x|SS<br>|
|Conditions onprices/fees/rates|x<br>x|x<br>COM|
|Approval by the regulatory authority required for new rates and fees|x<br>x|x<br>COM|
|Recommended minimum and/or maximum prices|x<br>x|x<br>COM|
|Mandatoryminimumand/or maximumprices|x<br>x|x<br>COM|
|Retail roaming rates are regulated|x|SS|
|Interconnection prices and conditions are regulated|x|SS|
|Local loop unbundling prices regulated|x|SS|
|Wholesale access prices regulated|x|SS|
|Wholesale roaming rates are regulated<br>|x|SS|
|Mobile termination rates are regulated|x<br>x|x<br>SS|
|Vertical agreements: Resale price maintenance is subject to regulation|x|SS|

34
|**Measure**<br>|**M1**<br>**M3**|**M4**<br>**Sector**<br>**scope**|
|---|---|---|
|Interest rate restricted|x<br>x|SS|
|Regulated contractual interest rates|x<br>x|SS|
|Regulated banking fees<br>|x<br>x|SS|
|Early repayment conditions and fees subject to regulation|x<br>x|SS|
|Restrictions on the currency deposited<br>|x<br>x|SS|
|Size of the loan restricted|x<br>x|SS|
|Insurance premiums, fees or margins regulated<br>|x<br>x|SS<br>|
|Value of insurance policy restricted|x<br>x|SS|
|Term of insurance policy restricted|x<br>x|SS|
|Restrictions on writinginsurance contractsin foreigncurrency|x<br>x|SS|
|Rail rates are regulated|x|SS|
|Confidential contracts allowed|x|SS|
|Accessfees areregulated<br>|x|SS<br>|
|Interswitching rates are regulated|x|SS|
|Rates for terminal running rights regulated<br>|x|SS<br>|
|Retailprices of roadfreight services areregulated|x<br>x|x<br>SS|
|Government pricing guidelines for road freight companies<br>|x<br>x|x<br>SS<br>|
|Freight carriers required to file tariffs|x<br>x|x<br>SS|
|Advertising either prohibited or subject to restrictions|x<br>x|x<br>COM|
|Duration of stay initially allowed–Foreign workers||x<br>COM|
|Duration of stay initially allowed-CSS||x<br>COM|
|Duration of stay initially allowed-IP<br>||x<br>COM|
|Duration of stay initially allowed-ICT||x<br>COM|
|Limitation on a number of days a foreign driver may stay in a host country||x<br>SS|
|Minimum wage/salary requirement–Foreign workers||x<br>COM|
|Minimum wage/salary requirement–CSS<br>||x<br>COM|
|Minimum wage/salary requirement–IP||x<br>COM|
|Minimum wage/salary requirement–ICT<br>||x<br>COM<br>|
|Universalservice obligations|x|COM|
|Contracts for universal services obligations assigned through grandfathering<br>|x|SS|
|Contracts for universal service obligations awarded through competitive bidding|x|SS|
|Otherconditions onsupply ofservices|x<br>x|x<br>COM|
|Spectrum sharing|x|SS|
|VoIP operation allowed|x|SS|
|Labelling provisions beyondinformation requirements|x<br>x|SS|
|Zoning laws: Differential treatment|x|SS|
|Seasonal sales periods regulated|x<br>x|SS|

35
|**Measure**|**M1**<br>**M3**|**M4**<br>**Sector**<br>**scope**|
|---|---|---|
|Laws or regulations impose restrictions on the nature or content of contracts|x<br>x|SS|
|Large stores are subject to different regulations/requirements than other types of stores (e.g. different tax<br>policies)<br>|x|SS<br>|
|Regulation imposes anupper limit onshop openinghours|x|SS|
|Prepackaging of products subject to mandatory nominal quantities<br>|x<br>x|SS<br>|
|Consumer credit licences available to foreign retailers|x<br>x|SS|
|Directed credit schemes|x|SS|
|Restrictions on lending to non-residents for domestically licensed banks|x|SS|
|Commercial banks prohibited from engaging in securities activities<br>|x|SS|
|Commercial banks prohibited from engaging in insurance activities|x|SS|
|Insurance companies prohibited from engaging in other financial activities: Banking|x|SS|
|Insurance companies prohibited from engaging in other financial activities: Securities|x|SS|
|Life insurance company authorized to supply non-life insurance services<br>|x<br>x|SS|
|Non-life insurance company authorized to supply life insurance services|x<br>x|SS|
|Mandatory cession requirements (to domestic reinsurers)<br>|x<br>x|SS<br>|
|Percentage of insurance to be ceded to a domestic re-insurer|x<br>x|SS|
|Limits on the share of risks that can be ceded to foreign reinsurers<br>|x<br>x|SS|
|Mandatory cessions by foreign-owned insurers to domestic reinsurers|x|SS|
|Cargo reservation|X|SS|
|Cargoreservation:bilateral/plurilateralcargoreservation|x|SS|
|Other cargo reservations or preferential schemes|x|SS|
|Unilateral cargo reservations<br>|X|SS<br>|
|Restrictions onthe chartering of vessels|x|SS|
|Access to port services on reasonable and non-discriminatory terms and conditions|X|SS|
|Obligation to use local maritime and port services|x|SS|
|Obligationto use alocal maritime port agent|x<br>x|x<br>SS|
|Discriminatory port tariffs and other port-related fees|x|SS|
|Restrictions on cargo-handling<br>|x<br>x|x<br>SS<br>|
|Restrictions on storage and warehouse services|x<br>x|x<br>SS|
|Restrictions on container-station and depot services|x<br>x|x<br>SS|
|Restrictions on sale & marketing and organising the ship’s call|x<br>x|SS|
|Restrictions on pilotage and towing services|x<br>x|x<br>SS|
|Obligation to use local tug and tow services|x<br>x|x<br>SS|
|Other restrictions on auxiliary services|x<br>x|x<br>SS|
|Limit on ability to rent/hire/charter other forms of transport for the purpose of providing multimodal transport<br>services|x|SS|
|Schedules for airport use|x<br>x|x<br>SS|

36
|**Measure**|**M1**<br>**M3**|**M4**<br>**Sector**<br>**scope**|
|---|---|---|
|Slot trading-Barter trade allowed: Slots can be exchanged on a one-to-one basis|x<br>x|x<br>SS|
|Slot allocation system|x<br>x|SS|
|Slot allocation systems - Grandfathering: Air carriers are allowed to retain already allocated slots from one<br>seasonto thenext|x<br>x|x<br>SS|
|Slot allocation systems - First come first served: There is no administrative system in place and air carriers<br>are allowed to schedule their flights simply taking into account expected delays at the busier airports|x<br>x|x<br>SS|
|Slot allocation systems - Auctioning: Slots are given to the highest bidder in an auction scheme organised by<br>the authorities|x<br>x|x<br>SS|
|Slot allocation system - Discretionary allocation: Slots are allocated at the discretion of airport and other<br>authorities or incumbent carriers|x<br>x|x<br>SS|
|Slot allocation systems - Other allocation: Allocation schemes which cannot be classified under any of the<br>categories above, or combinations of these categories|x<br>x|x<br>SS|
|Slot trading-Monetary trade allowed: Air carriers are allowed to commercially exchange slots|x<br>x|x<br>SS|
|Airlines allowed to self-handle|x<br>x|SS|
|Airlines allowed to mutually-handle|x<br>x|SS|
|Third-party handling allowed|x<br>x|SS|
|Limits on number of third-party handlers (depending on airport's sizes)|x<br>x|SS|
|Interoperability/interlinking required|x|SS|
|Interswitchingmandated<br>|x|SS<br>|
|Terminal running rights in place|x|SS|
|Bottleneck services regulated<br>|x|SS|
|Trackaccessforsupply ofservices to portsmandated|x|SS|
|Track access for supply of services to terminals mandated|x|SS|
|Running rights mandated|x|SS|
|**2.**<br>**Conditions on service supplier**|||
|Sector subsidies (incentives)|x<br>x|x<br>COM|
|Foreign suppliers treated less favourably regarding taxes and/or eligibility for subsidies|x<br>x|x<br>COM|
|Foreign suppliers are treated less favourably regarding eligibility to subsidies<br>|x<br>x|x<br>COM|
|Financial guarantee requirement|x|COM|
|Liability insurance|x|COM|
|Technology transfer requirements|x|COM|
|Export performance requirements|x|COM|
|Restrictions on foreign subsidiaries|x|SS|
|Restrictions on foreign branches|x|SS|
|Foreign bank"branches"subject to endowment capital requirement<br>|x|SS<br>|
|Local operations limited by amount of capital|x|SS|
|Foreignbank "branches"subject toliquidityrequirements|x|SS|

37
|**Measure**|**M1**<br>**M3**|**M4**<br>**Sector**<br>**scope**|
|---|---|---|
|Foreign branches allowed to take all types of deposit-taking and lending|x|SS|
|Foreign branches limited to wholesale lending|x|SS|
|Local content requirement|x|COM|
|Local sourcing requirements imposed<br>|x|SS<br>|
|Training requirements<br>|x|COM|
|Cross-border data processing: establishment required|x<br>x|x<br>HZ|
|Domestic data storage required|x<br>x|x<br>HZ|
|International data transfer or access prohibited|x<br>x|x<br>HZ|
|Managers requirements (nationality or residency)<br>|x|COM<br>|
|Managersmust benationals|x|COM|
|Managers must be residents|x|COM|
|Managers must be locally-licensed professional|x|SS|
|Nationalemployeesrequirements (numberorshare)|x|COM|
|National employees: Min. number required|x|COM|
|National employees: Min. percentage required<br>|x|COM<br>|
|Nationalcabincrewemployees: Min.percentagerequired|x|SS|
|National ground staff employees: Min. percentage required|x|SS|
|Hiring of locally-licensed professionals as employees permitted|x|SS|
|Ownership and operation of an international gateway permitted|x|SS|
|Foreign firms discriminated against on trademark protection|x<br>x|x<br>SS|
|Foreign retailers can set up their own recycling systems<br>|x|SS<br>|
|Access to main payments system|x|SS|
|Raising capital domestically restricted|x|SS|
|Access to Central Bank's discount window|x|SS|
|Non-discriminatory access to retail payment systems|x|SS|
|Non-discriminatory access to clearing houses|x|SS|
|Type of investment restricted|x|SS|
|Access to deposit insurance schemes|x|SS|
|Restrictions onthenature ofassetsin which insurers can holdfunds|x|SS|
|Discriminatory financial requirements for foreign reinsurers|x|SS|
|Explicit discrimination in favour of local firms for domestic traffic|x<br>x|SS|
|Explicit discrimination in favourof local firmsfor internationaltraffic<br>|x<br>x|SS<br>|
|Discriminatory environmental and/or security standards|x|SS|

38
|**Measure**|**M1**<br>**M3**|**M4**<br>**Sector**<br>**scope**|
|---|---|---|
|**3.**<br>**Conditions on government procurement**|||
|Memo: thresholds above which tender is mandated|x<br>x|x<br>COM|
|Limitations on foreign participation in public procurement|x<br>x|x<br>COM|
|Explicit access discrimination favours local firms in public procurement|x<br>x|x<br>COM|
|Procurement process affects conditions of competition in favour of local firms|x<br>x|x<br>COM|
|Preferences granted to national suppliers in government procurement|x<br>x|x<br>COM|
|Commercial presence requirement for government procurement|x|x<br>COM|
|Government procurement: international data transfer allowed|x<br>x|x<br>HZ|
|Government procurement: local data storage required|x<br>x|x<br>HZ|
|**4.**<br>**Other conditions on operations**|||
|Limits on transfers|x|x<br>HZ|
|Restrictions on repatriation of earnings/profits|x|HZ|
|Limitations oncross-bordertransfers by customers|x|COM|
|Limitations affecting cross-border consumption of services|x|COM|
|Other forms of restriction|x<br>x|x<br>COM|

39
|**Measure**|**M1**|**M3**|**M4**|**Sector**<br>**scope**|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|**C.**<br>**Measures affecting competition**|||||
|**1.**<br>**Conditions on conduct by firms**|||||
|Competitionpolicyapplies<br>|x|x|x|COM<br>|
|Practices punished||x||COM|
|Cross-subsidisation punished||X||COM|
|Price-fixing punished||x||COM|
|Dumping practices punished||x||COM|
|Product-tying practices||x||COM|
|Product tying regulated|x|x|x|COM|
|Carrier agreements exempt from competition law|x|x|x|SS|
|Verticalseparation required|x|x|x|COM|
|Assessment of M&A||x||COM|
|Dialling parity required|x|x|x|SS|
|Number portability required|x|x|x|SS|
|Unbundling of the local loop required||x||SS|
|Vertical agreements: Territorial or customer group sales restrictions are subject to regulation|x|x|x|SS|
|Firmsrequired to disclose confidential information|x|x|x|SS|
|Competitive entry/exit allowed||x||SS|
|Access capacity regulated||x||SS|
|Shipping agreements: Price fixing or quantity regulations are allowed|x|||SS|
|Shipping agreement: Right of independent action mandated|x|x|x|SS|
|Shipping agreements: Confidential service contract mandated|x|x|x|SS|
|**2.**<br>**Governmental rights/prerogatives (including public ownership)**|||||
|National, state or provincial government have special voting rights (e.g. golden shares) in any firms in the<br>sector||x||COM|
|Government controls at least one major firm in the sector||x||COM|
|Publicly-controlledfirms subject to exclusionorexemption fromgeneralcompetition law||x||COM|
|Government can overrule decision of regulator||x||COM|
|Publicly-controlled firms or undertakings are subject to rules that affect the competition with private insurers||x||SS|
|Government Cargo|x|||SS|
|**3.**<br>**Other measures affecting competition**|||||
|Dispute resolution mechanism available|x|x|x|COM|
|Arbitration structures in place to deal with reinsurance disputes|x|x||SS|
|Other restrictions in barriers to competition|x|x|x|COM|
|Memo: At least one dominant firm in the market segment considered<br>||x||COM|
|Interconnection mandated|x|x|x|SS|
|Resale of public telecommunications services to other suppliers mandated|x|x|x|SS|

40
|**Measure**|**M1**<br>**M3**|**M4**<br>**Sector**<br>**scope**|
|---|---|---|
|Access to and use of public telecommunications service mandated|x<br>x|x<br>SS|
|Collocation or site sharing mandated|x|SS|
|Secondary spectrum trading allowed|x<br>x|SS|
|Existence of a collateral registry and access of all lending institutions to collateral information|x<br>x|SS|
|Access to railway infrastructure mandated at national level|x|SS|
|Independence of infrastructure managers required|x|SS|
|Transfer of public funds between services and infrastructure management activities is prohibited|x|SS|
|Transfer or trading of infrastructure capacity is prohibited|x|SS|
|Functions relating to infrastructure access provided by rail firms|x|SS|
|Memo: Monopoly on infrastructure|x|SS|
|Industry representatives involved in setting entry and pricing regulations|x<br>x|x<br>COM|

41
||**Measure**|**M1**|**M3**|**M4**|**Sector**|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
||||||**scope**|
|**D.**|**Administrativeprocedures and regulatory transparency**|||||
|**1.**|**Administrativeprocedures**|||||
||Licensingdecision within a certainperiod required||X|X|COM|
||Rules/requirements related to data flows applied and enforced uniformly|X|X|X|HZ|
||Right to appeal regulatorydecisions|X|X|X|COM|
||Foreign firms have redress when businesspractices areperceived to restrict competition|X|x|X|COM|
||Average visaprocessingtime(days)|||X|HZ|
||Cost to obtain a business visa|||X|HZ|
||Number of documents needed to obtain a business visa|||X|HZ|
||Other conditions related to administrativeprocedures|x|x|x|COM|
|**2.**|**Regulatory transparency (including licensing)**|||||
||License criteriapubliclyavailable||x|x|COM|
||Licence allocation system/method described in law/policy||x|x|COM|
||Single window for submission of applications||x|x|COM|
||Obligation to inform applicants of reasons for license rejection||x|x|COM|
||Appealprocedurespubliclyavailable||x|x|COM|
||Prior notice of regulatory changes|x|x|x|COM|
||Public commentsprocedures open to interestedpersons,includingforeign suppliers|x|x|x|COM|
||Licensing agreements publicly available||x|x|SS|
||Regulatory transparency, other|x|x|x|COM|
||PublishingReferenceInterconnectionOffer required|x|x||SS|
||Interconnection and/or access agreements made public|x|x||SS|
||Publication and filing of rail rates required|x|||SS|
||Accessfees and conditions developed andmade publicinadvance||x||SS|
|**3.**|**Nature of regulatory authority (measures related to nature of regulator)**|||||
||Existence of regulatory authority for the sector|x|x|x|COM|
||Length of term of heads of the supervisory authority|x|x|x|SS|
||Full authority of supervisor over licensing and enforcement of prudential measures|x|x|x|SS|
||Discretionary control of government over funding of the supervisory agency|x|x|x|SS|
||Regulator independent from service supplier|x|x|x|COM|
||Regulator independent from sector ministry|x|x|x|COM|
||Regulatory authority for data transfers|x|x|x|HZ|
||Discretion in regulating cross-border data flows|x|x|x|HZ|
||Independent appeal authority|x|x|x|COM|

42
|**Measure**|**M1**|**M3**|**M4**|**Sector**<br>**scope**|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|**4.**<br>**International standards**|||||
|Laws, regulations or relevant standard-setter require the use of or have adopted international standards|x|x|x|COM|
|National standards deviate from international standards|x|x|x|COM|
|Deviation from international standards: Basel standards|x|x||SS|
|Deviation from international standards: Accounting rules|x|x||SS|
|Deviation from international standards: Transparency and AML/CFT rules|x|x||SS|
|Deviation from international standards-transport|x|x|x|SS|
|**5.**<br>**Other regulatory environment and administrative procedures**|||||
|Monitoring of compliance with licensing requirements||x|x|COM|

43
||**Measure**|**M1**|**M3**|**M4**<br>**Sector**<br>**scope**|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|**E.**|**Miscellaneous**||||
|**1.**|**Miscellaneous measures**||||
||Reciprocity requirement (unrelated to recognition)|x|x|x<br>COM|
||Other restrictions to movement of people|||x<br>COM|
||Membership in professional associations closed to foreigners|||x<br>SS|
||8<sup>th</sup>and 9<sup>th</sup>Freedom not granted in any bilateral agreement|x||SS|
|**2.**|**Miscellaneous, other**||||
||Minimum floor space to be considered large format retail outlet (m2)||x|SS|
||Memo-Market share of the monopoly||x|SS|

**_______________**

44
**ANNEX 2: LIST OF ECONOMIES COVERED, SOURCE AND GROUPS**

# **2016**

|**Economy**|**Source**|**Economy**|**Source**|
|---|---|---|---|
|Argentina|WB-WTO|Lithuania|OECD|
|Australia|OECD|_Luxembourg_|OECD|
|Austria|OECD|Malaysia|WB-WTO|
|Bangladesh|WB-WTO|Mexico|OECD|
|Belgium|OECD|_Myanmar_|WB-WTO|
|Brazil|OECD|Netherlands|OECD|
|Canada|OECD|New Zealand|OECD|
|Chile|OECD|Nigeria|WB-WTO|
|China|OECD|_Norway_|OECD|
|Colombia|OECD|Oman|WB-WTO|
|Costa Rica|WB-WTO|Pakistan|WB-WTO|
|Czech Republic|OECD|Panama|WB-WTO|
|Denmark|OECD|Peru|WB-WTO|
|Dominican Rep.|WB-WTO|Philippines|WB-WTO|
|Ecuador|WB-WTO|Poland|OECD|
|Egypt, Arab Rep.|WB-WTO|Portugal|OECD|
|_Estonia_|OECD|Russian Federation|OECD|
|Finland|OECD|_Singapore_|WB-WTO|
|France|OECD|_Slovak Republic_|OECD|
|Germany|OECD|_Slovenia_|OECD|
|Greece|OECD|South Africa|OECD|
|_Hong Kong SAR, China_|WB-WTO|Spain|OECD|
|Hungary|OECD|Sri Lanka|WB-WTO|
|_Iceland_|OECD|Sweden|OECD|
|India|OECD|_Switzerland_|OECD|
|Indonesia|OECD|_Chinese Taipei_|WB-WTO|
|Ireland|OECD|Thailand|WB-WTO|
|_Israel_|OECD|Tunisia|WB-WTO|
|Italy|OECD|Turkey|OECD|
|Japan|OECD|Ukraine|WB-WTO|
|Kazakhstan|WB-WTO|United Kingdom|OECD|
|Kenya|WB-WTO|United States|OECD|
|Korea, Rep.|OECD|Uruguay|WB-WTO|
|_Latvia_|OECD|Vietnam|WB-WTO|

Data for all economies are available for 2008-11, except the ones shown in _italics_ .
**2008-11**

|Albania|Greece|Pakistan|
|---|---|---|
|Algeria|Guatemala|Panama|
|Argentina|Honduras|Paraguay|
|Armenia|Hungary|Peru|
|Australia|India|Philippines|
|Austria|Indonesia|Poland|
|Bahrain, Kingdom of|Iran, Islamic Rep.|Portugal|
|Bangladesh|Ireland|Qatar|
|Belarus|Italy|Romania|
|Belgium|Japan|Russian Federation|
|Bolivia, Plurinational State of|Jordan|Rwanda (2009)|
|Botswana (2009)|Kazakhstan|Saudi Arabia, Kingdom of|
|Brazil (2011)|Kenya|Senegal|
|Bulgaria|Korea, Rep.|South Africa|
|Burundi (2011)|Kuwait, the State of|Spain|
|Cambodia|Kyrgyz Republic|Sri Lanka|
|Cameroon|Lebanese Republic|Sweden|
|Canada|Lesotho|Tanzania|
|Chile|Lithuania|Thailand|
|China (2011)|Madagascar|Trinidad and Tobago|
|Colombia|Malawi|Tunisia|
|Costa Rica|Malaysia|Turkey|
|Côte d'Ivoire|Mali|Uganda|
|Czech Republic|Mauritius|Ukraine|
|Democratic Rep. of the Congo|Mexico (2011)|United Kingdom|
|Denmark|Mongolia|United States of America|
|Dominican Republic|Morocco|Uruguay|
|Ecuador|Mozambique|Uzbekistan|
|Egypt, Arab Rep.|Namibia|Venezuela, RB|
|Ethiopia|Nepal|Vietnam|
|Finland|Netherlands|Yemen, Rep.|
|France|New Zealand|Zambia|
|Georgia|Nicaragua|Zimbabwe|
|Germany|Nigeria||
|Ghana|Oman||

Data sourced from the previous World Bank exercise (see Borchert et al., 2012), with some adjustments, see Section 2. All data correspond to 2008, except as indicated otherwise.

46
# **ANNEX 3 SUMMARY OF THE COVERAGE OF SECTORS AND MODES**

|**Sectors**|**Subsectors**|**Mode 1**|**Mode 3**|**Mode 4**|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|**Financial**|Commercial banking (deposit-taking, lending)|X|X|X|
||Non-life insurance (incl. MAT)|X|X|X|
||Life insurance|X|X|X|
||Reinsurance|X|X|X|
|**Telecom**|Telecom fixed (international and local)||X|X|
||Telecom mobile||X|X|
||Internet||X|X|
|**Distribution**|Retailing services|X|X|X|
||Wholesale services|X|X|X|
|**Transportation**|Air passenger domestic and international||X|X|
||Air freight domestic and international||X|X|
||Maritime shipping international|X|X|X|
||Maritime auxiliary (intermediation, other services)|X|X|X|
||Road freight domestic and international|X|X|X|
||Rail freight domestic and international|X|X|X|
|**Professional**|Accounting|X|X|X|
||Auditing|X|X|X|
||Legal advice domestic law<sup>30</sup>||X|X|
||Legal representation on domestic law<sup>11</sup>||X|X|
||Legal advice foreign law|X|X|X|

**Mode 1 content (apply to some sectors): Mode 4 content (apply mainly to all sectors for** i. Form of entry **generic questions)**<sup>31</sup> ii. Licensing/registration i. Form of entry iii. Operations ii. Quantitative limits iii. Licensing/qualification (apply only to professional services) iv. Operations

## **Mode 3 content (apply to all sectors)**

i. Form of entry ii. Quantitative limits iii. Licensing/registration iv. Operations

> 30 Cross border legal advice/representation on domestic law is not covered, as it is unlikely/technically infeasible to provide the services via this mode.

> 31 Some generic questions on mode 4 are raised for consistency reasons across all sectors covered by this survey. In principle they will trigger the same responses. Such relevant restrictions may not be part of sector-specific legislation/regulation. However, even if regulation (e.g. immigration legislation) is of a general nature, insofar as it applies to the sector, information was reported accordingly. More detailed questions on mode 4 are included for professional services (licensing, qualifications).

47
# **ANNEX 4 SECTOR DEFINITIONS USED IN THE QUESTIONNAIRE**

# Distribution services

_"Retail trade":_ Retail trade refers to the resale (sale without transformation) of new and used goods mainly to the general public for personal or household consumption or utilization, by shops, department stores, stalls, mail-order houses, hawkers and peddlers, consumer cooperatives etc. It is important to note that in principle any type of good may be sold by retailers (derived from ISIC Rev. 4 definition). However, there are a number of specialty retail sectors (e.g. pharmacies, car dealers) and some special types of goods (e.g. tobacco, alcohol, pharmaceutical products) in which the rules for distribution are contained in specific product regulation. When responding to this questionnaire you should take into account the laws, regulations, rules, guidelines etc. which apply to the retail trade sector in general, and not the specifics relating to the retail sale of specific types of products, unless prompted explicitly. If there are any restrictions concerning the coverage of retail trade services in regulations (e.g. geographical areas, types of consumers, size of stores or prohibition of sale), please describe in the relevant questions, in particular those dealing with the scope of the service. Please also briefly indicate as relevant if there are laws, regulations, guidelines etc. which deal with specific types of goods sold by retailers. W/120 section 4C (CPC PROV. 631, 632, 6111, 6113, and 6121; and part of 8929) _"Wholesale trade":_ Wholesale is the resale (sale without transformation) of new and used goods to retailers, to industrial, commercial, institutional or professional users, or to other wholesalers, or involves acting as an agent or broker in buying goods for, or selling goods to, such persons or companies. Wholesale covers the activities of wholesale merchants or jobbers, industrial distributors, exporters, importers, and cooperative buying associations, sales branches and sales offices (but not retail stores). It is important to note that in principle any type of good may be sold by wholesalers (derived from ISIC Rev. 4 definition). However, there may be some specialty wholesale sectors (e.g. primary agricultural or mining products) or some special types of goods (e.g. tobacco, alcohol, pharmaceutical products) in which the rules for (wholesale) distribution are contained in specific product regulation. When responding to this questionnaire, you should take into account the laws, regulations rules, guidelines etc. which apply to the wholesale trade sector in general, and not the specifics relating to the wholesale of specific types of products, unless prompted explicitly. Any restrictions concerning the coverage of wholesale trade services in regulations (e.g. geographical areas, types of consumers, or prohibition of sale of certain goods) please describe in the relevant questions, in particular those dealing with the scope of the service. Please also briefly indicate as relevant if there are laws, regulations, guidelines etc. which deal with specific types of goods sold by wholesalers. W/120 section 4B (CPC PROV. 621; 622; and part of 8929)

# Financial services

_"Life insurance services":_ Insurance underwriting services consisting in making payments upon the death of the policy holder, or at the end of an agreed term, with or without a profit element. For the purposes of this exercise, accident and health insurance services are not covered. W/120 section 7Aa (CPC 8121), EBOPS2010EBOPS20102010 6.1.1 _"Non-life insurance services":_ Non-life insurance or general insurance, provide payments depending on the loss from a particular financial event. General insurance is typically defined as any insurance that is not determined to be life insurance. It typically includes motor vehicle insurance, fire and other property damage insurance, pecuniary loss insurance, and general liability insurance. W/120 section 7Ab (CPC 8129), EBOPS2010 6.1.2 and 6.1.3 _"Marine, Aviation and Transport (MAT) insurance"_ is a sub-item of "non-life insurance". It covers insurance of risks comprising maritime shipping, commercial aviation, space launching and freight (including satellites), with such insurance to cover one or both of the following: the goods being transported, the vehicle transporting the goods and any liability arising therefrom.

_"Reinsurance":_ Reinsurance is a financial transaction by which risk is transferred (ceded) from an insurance company (cedant) to a reinsurance company (reinsurer) in exchange of a payment (reinsurance premium). When it is a reinsurer that cedes risk to another reinsurer, the service is called _retrocession_ . Providers of reinsurance are professional reinsurers which are entities exclusively dedicated to the activity of reinsurance (e.g. SwissRe). Also in most jurisdictions insurance companies are allowed to participate in reinsurance. W/120 section 7Ac (part of CPC 81299), EBOPS2010 6.2 _"Commercial banking":_ most services supplied by banks, such as acceptance of deposits and other repayable funds from the public, lending of all types, financial leasing, guarantees and commitments, and payment and money transmission services. If there are any restrictions concerning the coverage of those services in regulations, please describe in the relevant questions, in particular those dealing with the scope of service. For the purposes of this exercise, commercial banking does not include the services typically supplied by investment banks, such as brokerage or trading of securities, securities underwriting services, and mergers and acquisitions (M&A) and corporate reorganization services. Part of W/120 section 7B (CPC 81115-81119, 8113), EBOPS2010 7 48
_"Retail Bank":_ A bank which provides checking and saving deposits, home loans, credit cards, and other similar services to all types of domestic consumers (includes consumers and firms).

_"Central Bank's discount window"_ : the practice whereby the central bank extends short-term loans secured by government bonds to financial institutions. The financial institutions can turn to the Central Bank for a loan, the interest that the Central Bank charges the bank is called the discount rate.

_"Main payments system"_ refers to the main system used for moving funds, payments, and money between financial institutions.

# Professional services

_"Accounting":_ The collection, recording and extraction of financial information, and the summary of it in the form of a periodic profit and loss account, a balance sheet and a cash flow statement in accordance with legal, professional, and capital market requirements (e.g. accounting review, compilation of financial statements). Bookkeeping services are included here as the difference in regulation between accountants and book-keepers are typically small or not existent. In most jurisdictions, book-keeping is synonymous with accounting and is not separately regulated. If any divergence of regulation for book-keeping please describe in the questions relating to the scope of services. Part of W/120 section 1Ab (CPC 86212), part of EBOPS2010 10.2.1.2 _"Auditing":_ The examination and assessment of the activities, controls, records and systems that underpin accounting information and reports. Financial audits are typically performed by firms of practicing accountants due to the specialist financial reporting knowledge they require. If any divergence of regulation for some specific auditing activities please describe in the questions relating to the scope of services. Part of W/120 section 1Ab (CPC 86211), part of EBOPS2010 10.2.1.2 _"Legal advice on domestic law":_ General counseling, advice and drafting of documents and other related legal services concerning domestic law (i.e. the law of the jurisdiction under review), whether criminal law or other than criminal. Also covered are advisory services in statutory procedures of quasi-judicial bodies. The following are excluded: activities in relation to the administration of public justice (such as judges); and notaries who typically perform their activities as public officials and are subject to a different regulatory regime. Part of W/120 section 1Aa (CPC 8611, 8612-86120, 8613-86130), part of EBOPS2010 10.2.1.1 _"Legal services: representation services on domestic law":_ Court appearances/oral arguments: Legal representation of one party’s interest against another party, before the courts or other domestic judicial or quasijudicial bodies, whether concerning criminal law or other than criminal. Also covered are representation services in statutory procedures of quasi-judicial bodies. The following are excluded: activities in relation to the administration of public justice (such as judges); and notaries who typically perform their activities as public officials and are subject to a different regulatory regime. Part of W/120 section 1Aa (CPC 8611, 8612-86120, 8613-86130), part of EBOPS2010 10.2.1.1 _"Legal services: advice on foreign law (Legal advice/counseling)":_ General counseling, advice and drafting of documents and other related legal services concerning foreign or international law. International law includes advisory services in home country law (i.e. law of the country of the foreign supplier or foreign law), third country law, international law, as well as a right to appear in international commercial arbitration. It also covers advisory services in statutory procedures of quasi-judicial bodies. Excluded are activities in relation to the administration of public justice (such as judges); and notaries who typically perform their activities as public officials and are subject to a different regulatory regime. Part of W/120 section 1Aa (part of CPC 861), part of EBOPS2010 10.2.1.1 A “locally licensed” lawyer means a lawyer licensed in the host country to provide both domestic and international law. “Not locally licensed” means a professional licensed or otherwise allowed to practice only international law.

# Telecommunication services

5.1. _"Telecommunications – Fixed line, Mobile and Internet":_ This questionnaire seeks to gather information relating to the supply of fixed-line and mobile telephony telecommunication services, and Internet services (carrying of electronic signals (traffic) over the Internet, providing access to the Internet, providing telecommunications services on the Internet and similar distributed computer networks that rely on, but are not part of, the normal telecommunications network). Parts of W/120 section 2C (CPC 7521, 7522, 7523, 7529), parts of EBOPS2010 9.1 49
# Transport services

# a. Maritime transport

_"Maritime freight shipping":_ this questionnaire covers the two main types of services offered by the maritime shipping industry, namely liner and tramp services, whether coastal or transoceanic. Cabotage is also covered. While there is no widely accepted definition for these terms, “liner” refers to those services by carriers operating in regular, advertised schedules with published dates of calls at ports. “Tramp” services, on the other hand, do not operate on fixed, scheduled routes. This type of shipping service is notably used to transport bulk cargo, although bulk freight can also operate on scheduled routes. A growing share of liner services is containerized. Both liner and non-liner (i.e. “tramp”) shipping services should be considered, although certain measures may prevail in one particular segment. If a measure is applied to any of these shipping services, answers should be provided accordingly. All types of goods transported should be covered (e.g. frozen or refrigerated goods; bulk liquids or gases; dry bulk goods such as cereals, flour, cement or sand; letters and parcels; goods that have been containerized for ease of transport). Rental services of freight ships with crew are also covered. W/120 section 11Ab (CPC 7212), EBOPS2010 3.1.2 Note that when it comes to commercial presence, a distinction is made between establishing a commercial presence for flying the flag of the jurisdiction, and other forms of commercial presence of the shipping operators/ship-owners (e.g. marketing and sales of the service, providing business information). Further details are provided in relevant parts of the questionnaire.

If there are any restrictions concerning the coverage of the service in regulations (e.g. geographical areas or routes, type or quantity of cargo transported), please describe in the relevant questions, in particular those dealing with the scope of the service.

For all of the above: Charter services are not covered to the extent that they are subject to a different regulatory regime. Note that the scope of the questionnaire is mainly limited to commercial-establishment related measures (and accompanying movement of persons).

_"Maritime cargo-handling, container station and depot, and storage and warehouse services":_ in general, regulatory frameworks (laws, regulations, rules, guidelines, etc.) deal with maritime cargo handling, container depot station, and storage and warehouse activities as a package, given that these activities are often conducted jointly and in an integrated manner. If there are any restrictions concerning the full coverage of this combination of services, please describe as appropriate when replying to questions, in particular those dealing with the scope of the service. Part of W/120 section 11Ha and 11Hb (part of CPC 741, 742), part of EBOPS2010 3.1.3 Maritime cargo handling services are activities exercised by stevedore companies, including terminal operators, but not including the direct activities of Dockers, when this workforce is organized independently of the stevedoring or terminal operator companies. The activities covered include the organization and supervision of:

- The loading/discharging of cargo to/from a ship;

- The lashing/unlashing of cargo;

- The reception/delivery and safekeeping of cargoes before shipment or after discharge.

_"Container station and depot services"_ means activities consisting in storing containers, whether in port areas or inland, with a view to their stuffing/stripping, repairing and making them available for shipments.

_"Maritime intermediation services":_ Maritime intermediation services cover maritime agency, freight forwarding and customs clearance services. In general, regulatory frameworks (laws, regulations, rules, guidelines, etc.) deal with these activities in conjunction, given that they are often conducted jointly and/or are substitutable. If there are any restrictions concerning the full coverage of this combination of services, please describe as appropriate when replying to questions. Note that this refers to intermediaries/agents which are not related (i.e. no direct investment relationship) with the maritime shipping operators or ship owners. In other words, for commercial presence they are distinct from those covered under "other forms of commercial presence" in the maritime freight shipping questionnaire. Part of W/120 section 11Hc and part of 11Hd (Part of CPC 748 and 749), part of EBOPS2010 3.1.3 _"Maritime agency services"_ are activities consisting in representing, within a given geographic area, as an agent the business interests of one or more shipping lines or shipping companies, for the following purposes:

- marketing and sales of maritime transport and related services, from quotation to invoicing, and

- issuance of bills of lading on behalf of the companies, acquisition and resale of the necessary related services, preparation of documentation, and provision of business information;

50
- acting on behalf of the companies organizing the call of the ship or taking over cargoes when required.

_"Freight forwarding services"_ represent activities consisting of organizing and monitoring shipment operations on behalf of shippers, through the acquisition of transport and related services, preparation of documentation and provision of business information.

_"Customs clearance services"_ (alternatively "customs house brokers' services") conduct activities consisting in carrying out on behalf of another party customs formalities concerning import, export or through transport of cargoes, whether this service is the main activity of the service provider or a usual complement of its main activity.

# b. Road freight transport domestic and international services

_"Road freight transport services"_ are defined as covering freight transportation and relevant rental of commercial vehicles with operator. This definition entails transportation of frozen or refrigerated goods, transportation of bulk liquids or gases, transportation of containerized freight, transportation of furniture, mail transportation, freight transportation by man- or animal-drawn vehicles and transportation of other freight, whether domestically or internationally. If there are any restrictions concerning the coverage of the service in regulations (e.g. geographical areas or routes, type or quantity of cargo transported), please describe in the relevant questions, in particular those dealing with the scope of the service. W/120 section 11Fb (CPC 7123), EBOPS2010 3.7.2

# c. Rail freight transport domestic and international services

In rail transport, some economies have separation of network operator (usually sole operator) and rail service providers or carriers (usually more than one). In some economies, network operators also provide the rail services and/or lease the part of network to other carriers. In the subsequent parts of the survey, we interested in the rail freight service providers (or carriers). Covered items are rail freight transportation of frozen or refrigerated goods, transportation of bulk liquids and gases, transportation of containerized freight, mail transportation and other freight. Inter-urban rail transport of freight is also covered. If there are any restrictions concerning the coverage of the service in regulations (e.g. geographical areas or routes, type or quantity of cargo transported), please describe in the relevant questions, in particular those dealing with the scope of the service. W/120 section 11Eb (CPC 7112), EBOPS2010 3.6.2

# d. Air transport

_"Air freight domestic services":_ this questionnaire focuses on domestic air transport of freight on a scheduled basis. It covers air transportation of individual articles and packages assembled and shipped in specially constructed shipping containers designed for ease of handling in transport. It includes air transportation services of letters and parcels. Part of W/120 section 11Cb (part of CPC 732), part of EBOPS2010 3.2.2 _"Air freight international services":_ this questionnaire focuses on international air transport of freight on a scheduled basis. It covers air transportation of individual articles and packages assembled and shipped in specially constructed shipping containers designed for ease of handling in transport. It includes air transportation services of letters and parcels. Part of W/120 section 11Cb (part of CPC 732), part of EBOPS2010 3.2.2 _"Air passenger international services":_ this questionnaire focuses on international air transport of passengers on a scheduled basis (pre-determined international routes/schedules). It covers the accompanying passenger baggage and other items that may be carried at no extra cost. Part of W/120 section 11Ca (part of CPC 731), part of EBOPS2010 3.2.1 _"Air passenger domestic services":_ this questionnaire focuses on domestic air transport of passengers on a scheduled basis (pre-determined domestic routes/schedules). It covers the accompanying passenger baggage and other items that may be carried at no extra cost. Part of W/120 section 11Ca (C part of PC 731), part of EBOPS2010 3.2.1 _"Charter services"_ are not covered in the air transport services questionnaires to the extent that they are subject to a different regulatory regime. Note that the scope of the questionnaire is mainly limited to commercialestablishment related measures (and accompanying movement of persons).

51
# **ANNEX 5 SCORING OF MEASURES**

|**Category**|**Sub-**<br>**category**|**Subcategory name**|**SECTOR/Common**|**Label**|**Answer**|**Score**|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|A -Market entry|A1|Legal forms of entry|Common|Cross-border supply prohibited|yes|1|
|A -Market entry|A1|Legal forms of entry|Common|Commercial presence requirement as a condition for<br>cross-border supply of the service|yes|0.75|
|A -Market entry|A1|Legal forms of entry|Financial|Commercial presence is required: deposit-taking|yes|0.25|
|A -Market entry|A1|Legal forms of entry|Financial|Commercial presence is required: Lending|yes|0.25|
|A -Market entry|A1|Legal forms of entry|Financial|Commercial presence is required: Payment services|yes|0.25|
|A -Market entry|A1|Legal forms of entry|Non-life insurance|Cross-border supply prohibited for MAT insurance|yes|1|
|A -Market entry|A1|Legal forms of entry|Financial|Commercial presence required to provide MAT insurance<br>cross-border services|yes|0.75|
|A -Market entry|A1|Legal forms of entry|Non-life insurance|Residents must use services of resident insurance<br>intermediary for MAT insurance|yes|0.25|
|A -Market entry|A1|Legal forms of entry|Distribution|Restrictions on franchising|yes|0.25|
|A -Market entry|A1|Legal forms of entry|Common|Foreign establishment prohibited|yes|1|
|A -Market entry|A1|Legal forms of entry|Financial|Branches of foreign establishment locally allowed|no|0.25|
|A -Market entry|A1|Legal forms of entry|Financial|Restrictions on foreign branches|yes|0.25|
|A -Market entry|A1|Legal forms of entry|Common|Foreign establishment of (or investment in) locally<br>incorporated company allowed|no|0.5|
|A -Market entry|A1|Legal forms of entry|Professional|Foreign establishment of (or investment in) locally<br>incorporated company allowed|no|0.25|
|A -Market entry|A1|Legal forms of entry|Common|Greenfield: Max. foreign ownership allowed (%)|numeric||
|A -Market entry|A1|Legal forms of entry|Common|Joint venture requirement for foreign entity|yes|0.5|
|A -Market entry|A1|Legal forms of entry|Common|Domestic entity acquisition: Max. aggregate foreign<br>ownership allowed (%)|numeric||
|A -Market entry|A1|Legal forms of entry|Common|Domestic entity acquisition: controlling stake allowed<br>(i.e. if minority ownership)|no|0.5|
|**Category**|**Sub-**<br>**category**|**Subcategory name**|**SECTOR/Common**|**Label**|**Answer**|**Score**|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|A -Market entry|A1|Legal forms of entry|Professional|Equity<br>restrictions<br>apply<br>to<br>non-locally<br>licensed<br>professionals/firms|parent<br>child||
|A -Market entry|A1|Legal forms of entry|Professional|Majority of shareholders must be locally licensed|yes|0.5|
|A -Market entry|A1|Legal forms of entry|Transport<br>and<br>Telecom|Limits on share of capital that can be acquired by foreign<br>investors in publicly-controlled state-controlled firms|yes|0.25|
|A -Market entry|A1|Legal forms of entry|Common|Domestic entity acquisition allowed|no|0.5|
|A -Market entry|A1|Legal forms of entry|Professional|Partnership with foreigner allowed|no|0.5|
|A -Market entry|A1|Legal forms of entry|Professional|Sole proprietorship allowed|no|0.125|
|A -Market entry|A1|Legal forms of entry|Professional|Commercial<br>association<br>prohibited<br>between<br>fully<br>integrated practitioners and other professionals|yes|0.25|
|A -Market entry|A1|Legal forms of entry|Common|Board of directors: majority must be nationals|yes|0.25|
|A -Market entry|A1|Legal forms of entry|Common|Board of directors: majority should be residents|yes|0.25|
|A -Market entry|A1|Legal forms of entry|Professional|Board of directors: majority must be locally-licensed<br>professionals|yes|0.25|
|A -Market entry|A1|Legal forms of entry|Common|Service-Supplying Employee (CSS) of a Firm Based<br>Abroad - Allowed|no|0.25|
|A -Market entry|A1|Legal forms of entry|Common|Independent Professional as Contractual Service Provider<br>(IP) – Allowed|no|0.25|
|A -Market entry|A1|Legal forms of entry|Professional,<br>transport|Intra-Corporate Transferee (ICT) - Allowed|no|0.25|
|A -Market entry|A1|Legal forms of entry|<br>Distribution,<br>financial,<br>telecom,<br>maritime<br>transport<br>aux.|Intra-Corporate Transferee (ICT) - Allowed|no|0.5|
|A -Market entry|A2|Quantitative<br>measures|Financial|Demonstration of unavailability of service required|yes|0.75|

53
|**Category**|**Sub-**<br>**category**|**Subcategory name**|**SECTOR/Common**|**Label**|**Answer**|**Score**|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|A -Market entry|A2|Quantitative<br>measures|Common|Limits on the total number of suppliers/licences<br>(numerical) or monopoly|yes|0.5|
|A -Market entry|A2|Quantitative<br>measures|Telecom|Service provision is reserved for statutory monopoly or<br>granted on an exclusive basis|yes|0.75|
|A -Market entry|A2|Quantitative<br>measures|Common|ENT on number of suppliers (including if implemented<br>through licensing process)|yes|0.5|
|A -Market entry|A2|Quantitative<br>measures|Distribution|Limit on total number of suppliers (numerical) - large<br>stores|yes|0.5|
|A -Market entry|A2|Quantitative<br>measures|Distribution|ENT on number of supplier - large stores|yes|0.5|
|A -Market entry|A2|Quantitative<br>measures|Common|Quotas - Contractual service supplier|yes|0.125|
|A -Market entry|A2|Quantitative<br>measures|Common|Quotas - Independent Professionals|yes|0.125|
|A -Market entry|A2|Quantitative<br>measures|Professional,<br>transport|Quotas - Intra-Corporate Transferees|yes|0.125|
|A -Market entry|A2|Quantitative<br>measures|Distribution,<br>financial,<br>telecom,<br>maritime<br>transport<br>aux.|Quotas - Intra-Corporate Transferees|yes|0.25|
|A -Market entry|A2|Quantitative<br>measures|Common|ENT/LMT - Contractual service supplier|yes|0.125|
|A -Market entry|A2|Quantitative<br>measures|Common|ENT/LMT - Independent professionals|yes|0.125|
|A -Market entry|A2|Quantitative<br>measures|Professional,<br>transport|ENT/LMT - Intra-Corporate Transferees|yes|0.125|
|A -Market entry|A2|Quantitative<br>measures|<br>Distribution,<br>financial,<br>telecom,<br>maritime<br>transport<br>aux.|ENT/LMT - Intra-Corporate Transferees|yes|0.25|
|A -Market entry|A2|Quantitative<br>measures|Professional|Limit on share of foreigners employed per company|yes|0.25|
|A -Market entry|A3|Conditions<br>on<br>licensing and market<br>entry|Common|Screening of investment: Subject to evidence of<br>economic benefits|yes|0.25|

54
|**Category**|**Sub-**<br>**category**|**Subcategory name**|**SECTOR/Common**|**Label**|**Answer**|**Score**|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|A -Market entry|A3|Conditions<br>on<br>licensing and market<br>entry|Common|Screening: approval unless contrary to national interest|yes|0.25|
|A -Market entry|A3|Conditions<br>on<br>licensing and market<br>entry|Professional|Nationality or citizenship required for license to practice|yes|0.75|
|A -Market entry|A3|<br>Conditions<br>on<br>licensing and market<br>entry|Professional|Prior or permanent residency required for license to<br>practice|yes|0.5|
|A -Market entry|A3|Conditions<br>on<br>licensing and market<br>entry|Professional|Mandatory additional domestic education|yes|0.5|
|A -Market entry|A3|Conditions<br>on<br>licensing and market<br>entry|Professional|Recognition of education and training/work experience|no|0.5|
|A -Market entry|A3|Conditions<br>on<br>licensing and market<br>entry|Professional|Laws or regulations establish a process for recognising<br>higher education degrees earned abroad|no|0.5|
|A -Market entry|A3|Conditions<br>on<br>licensing and market<br>entry|Financial|Criteria to obtain a licence are different foreign companies|yes|0.25|
|A -Market entry|A4|Other conditions of<br>market entry|Horizontal|Acquisition and/or rental of land and real estate by<br>foreigners prohibited|yes|0.25|
|B- Operations|B1|Conditions on supply<br>of services|Common|Limits on scope of service (numerical and non-numerical)|yes|0.25|
|B- Operations|B1|Conditions on supply<br>of services|Financial|Approval by regulatory authority required for new<br>products or services|yes|0.125|
|B- Operations|B1|Conditions on supply<br>of services|Financial|Number of branches restricted|yes|0.25|
|B- Operations|B1|Conditions on supply<br>of services|Financial|Number of ATMs restricted|yes|0.25|
|B- Operations|B1|Conditions on supply<br>of services|Financial|Regulated contractual interest rates|yes|0.125|
|B- Operations|B1|Conditions on supply<br>of services|Financial|Some banking services reserved for domestic suppliers|yes|0.25|
|B- Operations|B1|Conditions on supply<br>of services|Financial|Regulated interest rates for deposits|yes|0.125|

55
|**Category**|**Sub-**<br>**category**|**Subcategory name**|**SECTOR/Common**|**Label**|**Answer**|**Score**|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|B- Operations|B1|Conditions on supply<br>of services|Financial|Mandatory cession requirements (to domestic reinsurers)|<br>parent<br>child||
|B- Operations|B1|Conditions on supply<br>of services|Financial|Percentage of insurance to be ceded to a domestic re-<br>insurer|numeric||
|B- Operations|B1|Conditions on supply<br>of services|Telecom|VoIP operation allowed|no|0.25|
|B- Operations|B1|Conditions on supply<br>of services|Transport|Quota for private cargo: Bulk|yes|0.25|
|B- Operations|B1|Conditions on supply<br>of services|Transport|Quota for private cargo: Liner|yes|0.25|
|B- Operations|B1|Conditions on supply<br>of services|Transport|Obligation to use local maritime and port services|yes|0.25|
|B- Operations|B1|Conditions on supply<br>of services|Transport|Obligation to use a local maritime port agent|yes|0.25|
|B- Operations|B1|Conditions on supply<br>of services|Transport|Restrictions on maritime auxiliary services|yes|0.5|
|B- Operations|B1|Conditions on supply<br>of services|Transport|Port services serving own-ships allowed|no|0.25|
|B- Operations|B1|Conditions on supply<br>of services|Transport|Slot trading - Barter trade allowed: Slots can be<br>exchanged on a one-to-one basis|<br>no|0.25|
|B- Operations|B1|Conditions on supply<br>of services|Transport|Slot trading - Monetary trade allowed: Air carriers are<br>allowed to commercially exchange slots|<br>no|0.25|
|B- Operations|B1|Conditions on supply<br>of services|Professional|Restrictions on name|yes|0.25|
|B- Operations|B1|Conditions on supply<br>of services|Distribution|Regulations limit the range of products a retailer may<br>carry|<br>yes|0|
|B- Operations|B1|Conditions on supply<br>of services|Distribution|Zoning laws: Differential treatment|yes|0.25|
|B- Operations|B1|Conditions on supply<br>of services|Distribution|Restrictions on the number of outlets|yes|0.5|
|B- Operations|B1|Conditions on supply<br>of services|Telecom|Interconnection prices and conditions are regulated|no|0.125|
|B- Operations|B1|Conditions on supply<br>of services|Telecom|Local loop unbundling prices regulated|no|0.125|

56
|**Category**|**Sub-**<br>**category**|**Subcategory name**|**SECTOR/Common**|**Label**|**Answer**|**Score**|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|B- Operations|B2|Conditions on services<br>suppliers|Common|Managers must be nationals|yes|0.25|
|B- Operations|B2|Conditions on services<br>suppliers|Common|National employees: Min. percentage required|yes|0.25|
|B- Operations|B2|Conditions on services<br>suppliers|Common|International<br>data<br>transfer/access<br>constrained<br>or<br>prohibited|yes|0.25|
|B- Operations|B2|Conditions on services<br>suppliers|Common|Foreign suppliers treated less favourably regarding taxes<br>and/or eligibility for subsidies|yes|0.25|
|B- Operations|B2|Conditions on services<br>suppliers|Horizontal|International<br>data<br>transfer:<br>distinction<br>between<br>economies/regions|yes|0.25|
|B- Operations|B2|Conditions on services<br>suppliers|Professional|Hiring of locally-licensed professionals as employees<br>prohibited|yes|0.25|
|B- Operations|B2|Conditions on services<br>suppliers|Telecom|Ownership and operation of an international gateway<br>permitted|no|0.25|
|B- Operations|B2|Conditions on supply<br>of services|Financial|Foreign branches allowed to take all types of deposit-<br>taking and lending|no|0.25|
|B- Operations|B2|Conditions on supply<br>of services|Financial|Foreign bank "branches" subject to endowment capital<br>requirement|yes|0.25|
|B- Operations|B3|Conditions<br>on<br>government<br>procurement|Transport|Quota for government cargo: Bulk|yes|0.125|
|B- Operations|B3|Conditions<br>on<br>government<br>procurement|Transport|Quota for government cargo: Liner|yes|0.125|
|B- Operations|B4|Conditions on supply<br>of services|Horizontal|Limits on subsequent transfer of capital and investments|yes|0.25|
|C- Competition|C1|Conditions on conduct<br>of firms|Transport|Carrier agreements exempt from competition law|yes|0.25|
|C- Competition|C1|Conditions on conduct<br>of firms|Telecom|Unbundling of the local loop required|no|0.25|
|C- Competition|C3|Other measures|Transport|Industry representatives involved in setting entry and<br>pricing regulations|yes|0.125|
|C- Competition|C3|Other measures|Telecom|Interconnection mandated|no|0.25|

57
|**Category**|**Sub-**<br>**category**|**Subcategory name**|**SECTOR/Common**|**Label**|**Answer**|**Score**|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|D-<br>Administrative<br>procedures<br>and<br>regulatory<br>transparency|D1|Regulatory<br>transparency|Common|Prior notice of regulatory changes|no|0.125|
|D-<br>Administrative<br>procedures<br>and<br>regulatory<br>transparency|D1|Regulatory<br>transparency|Financial|Obligation to inform applicants of reasons for license<br>rejection|no|0.125|
|D-<br>Administrative<br>procedures<br>and<br>regulatory<br>transparency|D1|Regulatory<br>transparency|Telecom|Interconnection and/or access agreements made public|no|0.125|
|D-<br>Administrative<br>procedures<br>and<br>regulatory<br>transparency|D4|Administrative<br>procedures|Common|Right to appeal regulatory decisions|no|0.125|

58
# **Mode 3 synthetic measures and scoring**

Weights given to the different types of Mode 3 entries by sector:

|•|All sectors except Financial and Professional services:|
|---|---|
||Greenfield investment<br>50%|
||Acquisition<br>50%|
|•|Financial services|
||Greenfield investment<br>37.5%|
||Acquisition<br>37.5%|
||Branches<br>25%|
|•|Professional services|
||Greenfield investment<br>18.75%|
||Acquisition<br>18.75%|
||Partnership<br>50%|
||Sole proprietorship<br>12.5%|

|**Category**|**Sub-**<br>**category**|**Sub-category**<br>**name**|**Sub-sector**|**Type of Measures**|**Answer**|**No. of**<br>**Answers**|**Score**|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|B. Operations|B2|Conditions on<br>services suppliers|Legal services|National employees: Min. percentage required, Hiring of<br>locally-licensed professionals as employees prohibited|yes|2|0.5|
|B. Operations|B2|Conditions on<br>services suppliers|Legal services|Hiring of locally-licensed professionals as employees<br>prohibited|yes|1|0.25|
|B. Operations|B2|Conditions on<br>services suppliers|Legal services|National employees: Min. percentage required|yes|1|0.25|

59
# **Mode 4 synthetic measures and scoring**

|**Category**|**Sub-**|**Sub-category**|**Sub-sector**|**Type of**|**Service**|**Answer**|**No. of**|**Score**|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
||**cat.**|||**Measures**|||**Answers**||
|A. Market<br>entry|A1|Legal forms of entry|Professional|Entry|Intra-corporate transferees, Contractual<br>service suppliers, Independent suppliers|no|3|1|
|A. Market<br>entry|A1|Legal forms of entry|Professional|Entry|Intra-corporate transferees, Independent<br>suppliers|no|2|0.75|
|A. Market<br>entry|A1|Legal forms of entry|Professional|Entry|Contractual service suppliers, Independent<br>suppliers|no|2|0.5|
|A. Market<br>entry|A1|Legal forms of entry|Professional|Entry|Intra-corporate transferees, Contractual<br>service suppliers|no|2|0.5|
|A. Market<br>entry|A1|Legal forms of entry|Professional|Entry|Intra-corporate transferees|no|1|0.25|
|A. Market<br>entry|A1|Legal forms of entry|Professional|Entry|Contractual service suppliers|no|1|0.25|
|A. Market<br>entry|A1|Legal forms of entry|Professional|Entry|Independent suppliers|no|1|0.25|
|A. Market<br>entry|A1|Legal forms of entry|Transport (exept<br>maritime aux.)|Entry|Intra-corporate transferees, Contractual<br>service suppliers, Independent suppliers|no|3|1|
|A. Market<br>entry|A1|Legal forms of entry|Transport (exept<br>maritime aux.)|Entry|Intra-corporate transferees, Independent<br>suppliers|no|2|0.5|
|A. Market<br>entry|A1|Legal forms of entry|Transport (exept<br>maritime aux.)|Entry|Contractual service suppliers, Independent<br>suppliers|no|2|0.75|
|A. Market<br>entry|A1|Legal forms of entry|Transport (exept<br>maritime aux.)|Entry|Intra-corporate transferees, Contractual<br>service suppliers|no|2|0.5|
|A. Market<br>entry|A1|Legal forms of entry|Transport (exept<br>maritime aux.)|Entry|Intra-corporate transferees|no|1|0.25|
|A. Market<br>entry|A1|Legal forms of entry|Transport (exept<br>maritime aux.)|Entry|Contractual service suppliers|no|1|0.25|
|A. Market<br>entry|A1|Legal forms of entry|Transport (exept<br>maritime aux.)|Entry|Independent suppliers|no|1|0.25|
|A. Market<br>entry|A1|Legal forms of entry|Distribution, telecom,<br>financial, maritime aux.|Entry|Intra-corporate transferees, Contractual<br>service suppliers, Independent suppliers|no|3|1|
|A. Market<br>entry|A1|Legal forms of entry|Distribution, telecom,<br>financial, maritime aux.|Entry|Intra-corporate transferees, Contractual<br>service suppliers|no|2|0.75|
|A. Market<br>entry|A1|Legal forms of entry|Distribution, telecom,<br>financial, maritime aux.|Entry|Intra-corporate transferees, Independent<br>suppliers|no|2|0.75|
|<br>A. Market<br>entry|A1|Legal forms of entry|<br>Distribution, telecom,<br>financial, maritime aux.|Entry|<br>Contractual service suppliers, Independent<br>suppliers|no|2|0.5|
|A. Market<br>entry|A1|Legal forms of entry|Distribution, telecom,<br>financial, maritime aux.|Entry|Contractual service suppliers|no|1|0.25|
|A. Market<br>entry|A1|Legal forms of entry|Distribution, telecom,<br>financial, maritime aux.|Entry|Independent suppliers|no|1|0.25|

60
|**Category**|**Sub-**<br>**cat.**|**Sub-category**|**Sub-sector**|**Type of**<br>**Measures**|**Service**|**Answer**|**No. of**<br>**Answers**|<br>**Score**|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|A. Market<br>entry|A1|Legal forms of entry|Distribution, telecom,<br>financial, maritime aux.|Entry|Intra-corporate transferees|no|1|<br>0.5|
|A. Market<br>entry|A2|Quantitative<br>measures|Professional|Quotas|Intra-corporate transferees, Contractual<br>service suppliers, Independent suppliers|yes|3|<br>0.5|
|A. Market<br>entry|A2|Quantitative<br>measures|Professional|Quotas|Intra-corporate transferees, Independent<br>suppliers|yes|2|<br>0.5|
|A. Market<br>entry|A2|Quantitative<br>measures|Professional|Quotas|Contractual service suppliers, Independent<br>suppliers|yes|2|<br>0.25|
|<br>A. Market<br>entry|A2|Quantitative<br>measures|Professional|Quotas|<br>Intra-corporate transferees, Contractual<br>service suppliers|yes|2|<br>0.25|
|A. Market<br>entry|A2|Quantitative<br>measures|Professional|Quotas|Intra-corporate transferees|yes|1|<br>0.125|
|A. Market<br>entry|A2|Quantitative<br>measures|Professional|Quotas|Contractual service suppliers|yes|1|<br>0.125|
|A. Market<br>entry|A2|Quantitative<br>measures|Professional|Quotas|Independent suppliers|yes|1|<br>0.125|
|A. Market<br>entry|A2|Quantitative<br>measures|Transport (exept<br>maritime aux.)|Quotas|Intra-corporate transferees, Contractual<br>service suppliers, Independent suppliers|yes|3|<br>0.5|
|A. Market<br>entry|A2|Quantitative<br>measures|Transport (exept<br>maritime aux.)|Quotas|Intra-corporate transferees, Independent<br>suppliers|yes|2|<br>0.25|
|A. Market<br>entry|A2|Quantitative<br>measures|Transport (exept<br>maritime aux.)|Quotas|Contractual service suppliers, Independent<br>suppliers|yes|2|<br>0.5|
|<br>A. Market<br>entry|A2|Quantitative<br>measures|<br>Transport (exept<br>maritime aux.)|Quotas|<br>Intra-corporate transferees, Contractual<br>service suppliers|yes|2|<br>0.25|
|A. Market<br>entry|A2|Quantitative<br>measures|Transport (exept<br>maritime aux.)|Quotas|Intra-corporate transferees|yes|1|<br>0.125|
|A. Market<br>entry|A2|Quantitative<br>measures|Transport (exept<br>maritime aux.)|Quotas|Contractual service suppliers|yes|1|<br>0.125|
|<br>A. Market<br>entry|A2|Quantitative<br>measures|<br>Transport (exept<br>maritime aux.)|Quotas|Independent suppliers|yes|1|<br>0.125|
|A. Market<br>entry|A2|Quantitative<br>measures|Distribution, telecom,<br>financial, maritime aux.|Quotas|Intra-corporate transferees, Contractual<br>service suppliers, Independent suppliers|yes|3|<br>0.5|
|A. Market<br>entry|A2|Quantitative<br>measures|Distribution, telecom,<br>financial, maritime aux.|Quotas|Intra-corporate transferees, Contractual<br>service suppliers|yes|2|<br>0.5|
|A. Market<br>entry|A2|Quantitative<br>measures|Distribution, telecom,<br>financial, maritime aux.|Quotas|Intra-corporate transferees, Independent<br>suppliers|yes|2|<br>0.5|
|A. Market<br>entry|A2|Quantitative<br>measures|Distribution, telecom,<br>financial, maritime aux.|Quotas|Contractual service suppliers, Independent<br>suppliers|yes|2|<br>0.25|
|A. Market<br>entry|A2|Quantitative<br>measures|Distribution, telecom,<br>financial, maritime aux.|Quotas|Contractual service suppliers|yes|1|<br>0.125|
|<br>A. Market<br>entry|A2|Quantitative<br>measures|<br>Distribution, telecom,<br>financial, maritime aux.|Quotas|Independent suppliers|yes|1|<br>0.125|
|A. Market<br>entry|A2|Quantitative<br>measures|Distribution, telecom,<br>financial, maritime aux.|Quotas|Intra-corporate transferees|yes|1|<br>0.25|

61
|**Category**|**Sub-**<br>**cat.**|**Sub-category**|**Sub-sector**|**Type of**<br>**Measures**|**Service**|**Answer**|**No. of**<br>**Answers**|<br>**Score**|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|A. Market<br>entry|A2|Quantitative<br>measures|Professional|ENT/LMT|Intra-corporate transferees, Contractual<br>service suppliers, Independent suppliers|yes|3|<br>0.5|
|A. Market<br>entry|A2|Quantitative<br>measures|Professional|ENT/LMT|Intra-corporate transferees, Independent<br>suppliers|yes|2|<br>0.5|
|A. Market<br>entry|A2|Quantitative<br>measures|Professional|ENT/LMT|Contractual service suppliers, Independent<br>suppliers|yes|2|<br>0.25|
|A. Market<br>entry|A2|Quantitative<br>measures|Professional|ENT/LMT|Intra-corporate transferees, Contractual<br>service suppliers|yes|2|<br>0.25|
|<br>A. Market<br>entry|A2|Quantitative<br>measures|Professional|ENT/LMT|<br>Intra-corporate transferees|yes|1|<br>0.125|
|A. Market<br>entry|A2|Quantitative<br>measures|Professional|ENT/LMT|Contractual service suppliers|yes|1|<br>0.125|
|<br>A. Market<br>entry|A2|Quantitative<br>measures|Professional|ENT/LMT|Independent suppliers|yes|1|<br>0.125|
|A. Market<br>entry|A2|Quantitative<br>measures|Transport (exept<br>maritime aux.)|ENT/LMT|Intra-corporate transferees, Contractual<br>service suppliers, Independent suppliers|yes|3|<br>0.5|
|A. Market<br>entry|A2|Quantitative<br>measures|Transport (exept<br>maritime aux.)|ENT/LMT|Intra-corporate transferees, Independent<br>suppliers|yes|2|<br>0.25|
|A. Market<br>entry|A2|Quantitative<br>measures|Transport (exept<br>maritime aux.)|ENT/LMT|Contractual service suppliers, Independent<br>suppliers|yes|2|<br>0.5|
|<br>A. Market<br>entry|A2|Quantitative<br>measures|<br>Transport (exept<br>maritime aux.)|ENT/LMT|<br>Intra-corporate transferees, Contractual<br>service suppliers|yes|2|<br>0.25|
|A. Market<br>entry|A2|Quantitative<br>measures|Transport (exept<br>maritime aux.)|ENT/LMT|Intra-corporate transferees|yes|1|<br>0.125|
|A. Market<br>entry|A2|Quantitative<br>measures|Transport (exept<br>maritime aux.)|ENT/LMT|Contractual service suppliers|yes|1|<br>0.125|
|A. Market<br>entry|A2|Quantitative<br>measures|Transport (exept<br>maritime aux.)|ENT/LMT|Independent suppliers|yes|1|<br>0.125|
|A. Market<br>entry|A2|Quantitative<br>measures|Distribution, telecom,<br>financial, maritime aux.|ENT/LMT|Intra-corporate transferees, Contractual<br>service suppliers, Independent suppliers|yes|3|<br>0.5|
|A. Market<br>entry|A2|Quantitative<br>measures|Distribution, telecom,<br>financial, maritime aux.|ENT/LMT|Intra-corporate transferees, Contractual<br>service suppliers|yes|2|<br>0.5|
|A. Market<br>entry|A2|Quantitative<br>measures|Distribution, telecom,<br>financial, maritime aux.|ENT/LMT|Intra-corporate transferees, Independent<br>suppliers|yes|2|<br>0.5|
|A. Market<br>entry|A2|Quantitative<br>measures|Distribution, telecom,<br>financial, maritime aux.|ENT/LMT|Contractual service suppliers, Independent<br>suppliers|yes|2|<br>0.25|
|A. Market<br>entry|A2|Quantitative<br>measures|Distribution, telecom,<br>financial, maritime aux.|ENT/LMT|Contractual service suppliers|yes|1|<br>0.125|
|A. Market<br>entry|A2|Quantitative<br>measures|Distribution, telecom,<br>financial, maritime aux.|ENT/LMT|Independent suppliers|yes|1|<br>0.125|
|A. Market<br>entry|A2|Quantitative<br>measures|Distribution, telecom,<br>financial, maritime aux.|ENT/LMT|Intra-corporate transferees|yes|1|<br>0.25|

62
# **ANNEX 6 SECTORAL AND MODAL WEIGHTS**

# **Table 6.1**

|**Sector**|**Percent**<br>**in total**<br>**value**<br>**added**|**Weight**|
|---|---|---|
|**Commercial banking services**|6.6|15.7|
|**Insurance services**|1.6|3.8|
|**Telecom services**|2.7|6.4|
|**Retail services**|9.6|22.9|
|**Wholesale services**|8.7|20.8|
|**Air transport services**|0.6|1.4|
|**Maritime shipping services**|0.8|1.9|
|**Maritime auxiliary services**|1.0|2.5|
|**Road freight services**|2.0|4.8|
|**Rail freight services**|2.0|4.8|
|**Professional services**|6.3|15|
|**Total**|41.9|100.0|

Note: The sectoral weights were estimated using the share of individual services industry's 2013 value added in the total economy for the 26 economies for which all data were available.

# **Table 6.2**

|**Sector**|**Mode 1**|**Mode 3**|**Mode 4**|
|---|---|---|---|
|**Commercial banking services**|15|75|10|
|**Direct insurance services (life and non-life)**|10|80|10|
|**Reinsurance services**|70|20|10|
|**International air passenger and freight transport serv.**|50|30|20|
|**Domestic air passenger and freight transport services**||80|20|
|**Telecom services**||90|10|
|**Maritime freight shipping services**|60|20|20|
|**Maritime intermediation services**|20|70|10|
|**Maritime other auxiliary services**||90|10|
|**Retail services**|20|70|10|
|**Wholesale services**|20|70|10|
|**Rail freight services**|20|70|10|
|**Road freight services**||75|25|
|**Accounting and auditing, foreign law services**|20|40|40|
|**Local law advisory and representation services**||50|50|

Note: For the comparison between 2008-11 and 2016 mode 4 is only included for professional services, and the weights for other sectors are adjusted accordingly (i.e. adding the weights to other modes proportionally). A similar approach is adopted for mode 1 for retail and rail 63
# **ANNEX 7 LIST OF LAW FIRMS THAT CONTRIBUTED TO FILLING QUESTIONNAIRES**

|**Country**|**Firm**|**Address**|**Website**|
|---|---|---|---|
|Argentina|EDN Abogados|Nueva Costanera 3698, Of. 405 Vitacura,<br>Santiago, Chile|https://www.ednabogados.cl|
|Bangladesh|Dr. Kamal Hossain &<br>Associates|Chamber Building, 122-124 Motijheel C/A,<br>Dhaka, Bangladesh|https://www.khossain.com|
|Costa Rica|BLP Legal|BLP Building, 4th floor. Via Lindora Business<br>Center. Radial Santa Ana – Belen, Km 3. Santa<br>Ana, San Jose. Costa Rica|https://www.blplegal.com|
|Dominican Republic|Jiménez Cruz Peña|Av. Winston Churchill 1099, Citi Tower, Piso 14,<br>SantoDomingo,D. N. 10148|http://www.jcpdr.com|
|Ecuador|Pérez Bustamante &<br>Ponce|Av. República de El Salvador, N36-140, Edif.<br>Mansión Blanca, 170505 Quito, Ecuador|https://www.pbplaw.com/es/#modal|
|Egypt, Arab Rep.|Al Kamel Law Office|Dokki Building, 17, Nabil El Wakkad Street,<br>Dokki, Giza, Cairo, Egypt|http://www.kamelaw.com|
|Hong Kong SAR, China|Squire Patton Boggs|29/F, Edinburgh Tower, The Landmark, 15<br>Queen's Road Central, Hong Kong, China|https://www.squirepattonboggs.com/en|
|Kazakhstan|GRATA Law Firm LLP|104 M. Ospanov Street, Almaty, Kazakhstan|https://gratanet.com|
|Kenya|Anjarwalla & Khanna<br>Advocates|ALN House, Eldama Ravine Close, Off Eldama<br>Ravine Road, Westland, Nairobi, Kenya|https://www.africalegalnetwork.com/kenya|
|Malaysia|Raja, Darryl & Loh|Level 26, Menara Hong Leong, No. 6, Jalan<br>Damanlela, Bukit Damansara, 50490, Kuala<br>Lumpur, Malaysia|https://rajadarrylloh.com|
|Myanmar|DFDL Myanmar|134/A, Than Lwin Road, Golden Valley Ward,<br>Bahan Township, Yangon 11201, Myanmar|https://www.dfdl.com/locations/myanmar|
|Nigeria|Udo Udoma & Belo-<br>Osagie|13th Floor, St. Nicholas House, Catholic Mission<br>Street, Lagos, Nigeria|https://www.uubo.org|
|Oman|Al Busaidy Mansoor<br>Jamal & Co.|Muscat International Centre, P.O. Box 686,<br>Ruwi, Muscat, Oman|https://www.amjoman.com|
|Pakistan|Abraham & Sarwana|PIDC House, Mezzanine Floor, Dr. Ziauddin<br>Road, Karachi, PAKISTAN|http://www.abraham-sarwana.com|
|Panama|Alfaro, Ferrer &<br>Ramirez|Ave. Samuel Lewis y Calle 54, Edificio AFRA,<br>Piso10,Panama|https://www.afra.com|
|Peru|Philippi Prietocarrizosa<br>Ferrero DU & Uría|Av. Sta. Cruz 888, Miraflores 15074, Lima,<br>Peru|https://www.ppulegal.com|
|Philippines|Angara Abello<br>Concepcion Regala &<br>Cruz Law Offices|22/F, ACCRALAW Tower, 2nd. Ave. cor. 30th.<br>St., Crescent Park West, Bonifacio Global City<br>0399 Taguig, Metro Manila, Philippines|http://www.conventuslaw.com/law-<br>firm/accralaw|

64
|Singapore|DFDL Singapore Pte Ltd<br>(working in<br>collaboration with<br>Gateway Law<br>Corporation)|<br>61 Robinson Road, #12-03 Robinson Centre,<br>Singapore 068893, Singapore|https://www.dfdl.com|
|---|---|---|---|
|Sri Lanka|Julius & Creasy|No 41, Janadhipathi Mawatha, (Queen Street),<br>P.O. Box 154, Colombo 01, Sri Lanka|http://www.juliusandcreasy.com|
|Chinese Taipei|Eiger|Bldg. A, 12F, 25-2 Ren Ai Rd, Sec. 4 Taipei<br>10685 Chinese Taipei|https://www.eiger.law|
|Thailand|Tilleke & Gibbins|Supalai Grand Tower, 26th Floor, 1011 Rama 3<br>Road, Chongnonsi, Yannawa, Bangkok 10120,<br>Thailand|https://www.tilleke.com|
|Tunisia|Ferchiou & Associés|34 Place du 14 Janvier 1001 Tunis, Tunisie|http://www.ferchioulaw.com|
|Ukraine|Asters|19-21 Bogdana Khmelnytskoho St., Kyiv,<br>Ukraine|https://www.asterslaw.com|
|Uruguay|Guyer & Regules|Plaza Independencia 811 PB, Montevideo,<br>Uruguay|https://www.guyer.com.uy/en|
|Vietnam|LuatViet Advocates &<br>Solicitors|Unit 03-0A, 3rd floor, Pan Pacific Hanoi, No.1<br>Thanh Nien Street, Ba Dinh District, Hanoi,<br>Vietnam|https://luatviet.com|

**__________**

65