report (2015) of the council for trade in
goods
In
accordance with the "Procedures for an Annual Overview of
WTO Activities and for Reporting under the WTO" (WT/L/105), the
Council for Trade in Goods is to report each year to the General Council on the
activities in the Council as well as in the subsidiary bodies. The reports are
to be "factual in nature, containing an indication of actions and
decisions taken, with cross references to reports of subordinate bodies and
could follow the model of the GATT 1947 Council reports to the CONTRACTING
PARTIES".
Since
its 2014 Annual Report (G/L/1094) was issued, the Council for Trade in
Goods (CTG, or the Council) met three times in formal session, on the
following dates: 26 March 2015 (G/C/M/122); 26 June 2015 (G/C/M/123);
and 10 November 2015 (G/C/M/124[1]).
The
subject matters raised and/or acted upon in the Council were as follows:
1 Election of Chairperson
of the Council for Trade in Goods. 3
2
Appointment of Officers for the subsidiary bodies of the Council. 3
3
Matters of the Committee on Market Access. 3
3.1 Derestriction of Historical Bilateral
Negotiating Documentation of the Tokyo Round. 3
3.2 Collective waiver requests on the
introduction of the Harmonized System 2002, 2007 and 2012 3
4
Waivers under Article IX of the WTO Agreement. 4
4.1 Introduction of Harmonized
System 2002 changes into WTO Schedules of Tariff Concessions: 4
4.1.1 Collective request for a waiver
extension (G/C/W/715) 4
4.2 Introduction of Harmonized
System 2007 changes into WTO Schedules of Tariff Concessions: 4
4.2.1 Collective request for a waiver
extension (G/C/W/716/Rev.1) 4
4.3
Introduction of Harmonized System 2012 changes into WTO Schedules of
Tariff Concessions: 4
4.3.1 Collective request for a waiver
(G/C/W/717) 4
4.4 United States of America – Request for
a waiver relating to the Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act (CBERA as amended)
(G/C/W/708) 4
4.5 Canada – Request for an Extension of
the Waiver for the Caribbean Initiative: CARIBCAN (G/C/W/710) 4
4.6 Jordan – Request for a Waiver Relating
to the Transitional Period for the Elimination of the Export Subsidy Program
for Jordan (G/C/W/705, G/C/W/705/Corr.1, and G/C/W/705/Rev.1) 5
4.7 United States of America – Request for
a Waiver – Africa Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA as amended) (G/C/W/713) 5
5
European Union enlargement: Procedures under Article XXVIII:3 of
GATT 1994 (G/L/1051/Add.3 and G/L/1051/Add.4). 5
5.1 Enlargement of the European Union on
1 July 2013 (G/L/1051/Add.3 and G/L/1051/Add.4) 5
5.2 Enlargement of the European Union:
Procedures under Article XXVIII of GATT 1994 – Request from Brazil 6
6
Accession of the republic of Armenia and of the Kyrgyz Republic to the eurasian
economic union (EAEU): procedures under article XXVIII:3 of gatt 1994
(G/L/1110 anD G/L/1110/Add.1, and G/L/1137, respectively). 6
7
Notification of Regional Trade Agreements. 6
8
Notifications. 7
8.1 Status of notifications under the
provisions of the Agreements in Annex 1A of the WTO Agreement 7
8.2 Notifications of actions taken under
the 1999 Waiver for Preferential Tariff Treatment for Least Developed
Countries (WT/L/304 and WT/L/759) 7
9
Indonesia's Import and export Restricting Policies and Practices – Request from
the European Union, Japan, and the United States of america. 7
10
Russian Federation – trade restricting measures. 7
11
Nigeria – Local Content Measures in Oil and Gas – request from the European
Union and the United States of America. 8
12
Nigeria – Restriction/Ban Imposed by Nigeria to Imports of Sea Products –
Request from Iceland and norway. 8
13
Nigeria – Import restriction MEASURES – request from Chile, the European Union,
Iceland, Norway, and uruguay. 8
14
Ecuador – import RESTRICTING measures – request from Japan.. 8
15
Pakistan – discriminatory taxes – request from the european union and the
United States of America. 9
16
China – issues related to trade in seafood – request from Norway. 9
17
illicit trade: fighting money laundering in INTERNATIONAL trade – statement
from Colombia. 9
18
Ukraine – issues related to customs valuation – rEquest from Norway. 9
19
India – port closures for apple imports – request from Chile, the European
Union, New Zealand, and the United States of America. 10
20
Brazil – industrial nitrocellulose non‑automatic import licences – request from
the European Union.. 10
21
Work Programme on Electronic Commerce. 10
22
ISSUES CONSIDERED UNDER AGENDA ITEM "OTHER BUSINESS". 10
22.1 Fostering Participation of Micro‑,
Small‑, and Medium‑Sized Enterprises (MSMEs) in Regional Global
Trade – Statement by the Philippines. 10
22.2 Status of the Election Process of the
Permanent Group of Experts (PGE) under the Committee on Subsidies and
Countervailing Measures (SCM) – Statement by Japan. 10
22.3 China – Information about the expiry
date of Section 15(a)(ii) of the Protocol
on the Accession of the People's Republic of China. 11
23
Consideration of annual reports of subsidiary bodies of the Council for Trade
in Goods. 11
24
Adoption of the Annual Report of the Council for Trade in Goods to the General
Council. 11
1 Election of Chairperson of the Council for Trade in Goods
1.1. At its meeting of 26 March, the Council elected
Ambassador Héctor CASANUEVA (Chile) as its Chairperson for 2015.
2.1. At its meeting of 26 March, the Council agreed on the
nominations of the following persons as Chairpersons of its subsidiary bodies
for 2015:
|
Subsidiary Body
|
Chairperson
|
|
Market Access
|
Miss Krizia Denisse MATTHEWS (Panama)
|
|
Agriculture
|
Mr Michael WAMAI (Uganda)
|
|
Sanitary and
Phytosanitary Measures
|
Mr Felipe HEES (Brazil)
|
|
Technical Barriers to
Trade
|
Miss Alana Maria LANZA SUAZO (Honduras)
|
|
TRIMs
|
Mr Zaher AL-QATARNEH (Jordan)
|
|
Anti-Dumping Practices
|
Mr Hamed Mahmoud EL ETREBY (Egypt)
|
|
Subsidies and
Countervailing Measures
|
Mr Mitsuhiro FUKUYAMA (Japan)
|
|
Safeguards
|
Mr Víctor ECHEVARRÍA UGARTE (Spain)
|
|
Import Licensing
|
Miss Carrie I-Jen WU (Chinese Taipei)
|
|
Rules of Origin
|
Mr Christian WEGENER (Denmark)
|
|
Customs Valuation
|
Mr Ping LIU (China)
|
|
State Trading
Enterprises
|
Mr Andrew JORY (Australia)
|
|
Committee of
Participants on the Expansion of Trade in Information Technology Products
(ITA Committee)
|
Mr Andrew STAINES (UK)
|
2.2. At the same meeting, the Council
agreed to proceed on the understanding that, as concerns the Vice‑Chairpersons, it would be for the subsidiary bodies to decide if they needed a Vice‑Chairperson
in cases where the option existed under the respective Agreement and/or rules
of procedure, and for the respective Chairperson to hold the necessary
consultations.
3.1. At its meeting of 10 November, the Council considered
and approved the draft decision on the "Derestriction of Historical
Bilateral Negotiating Documentation of the Tokyo Round" contained in
document G/MA/W/115/Rev.1, which was previously discussed and approved by
the Committee on Market Access (CMA) on 29 September 2015. This
Decision, once approved, was forwarded to the General Council for adoption.
3.2. At its meeting of 10 November,
the Council considered three collective waiver requests on the
introduction of Harmonized System 2002, 2007 and 2012 changes into
WTO Schedules of Concessions (see Point 4 below).
4.1. At its meeting of 10 November,
the Council considered a collective request
for an extension of the waiver in connection with the introduction of
HS2002 changes to the Schedules of Concessions. The Council approved the
waiver request and recommended that the draft decision (G/C/W/715) be forwarded
to the General Council for adoption.
4.2. At its
meeting of 10 November, the Council considered a collective request
for an extension of the waiver in connection with the introduction of
HS 2007 changes to the Schedules of Concessions. The Council approved the
waiver request and recommended that the draft decision (G/C/W/716/Rev.1) be
forwarded to the General Council for adoption.
4.3. At its
meeting of 10 November, the Council considered a collective request
for a waiver in connection with the introduction of HS 2012 changes to the
Schedules of Concessions. The Council approved the waiver request and
recommended that the draft decision (G/C/W/717) be forwarded to the General
Council for adoption.
4.4. At its meeting of 26 March the Council considered a
waiver request and a draft waiver decision submitted by the United States of
America relating to the Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act (CBERA) contained
in document G/C/W/708. The Council took note of the statement made by the
United States of America and of the statements made by the European Union, India,
Jamaica, Trinidad and Tobago, Dominica, and Haiti, approved the waiver request
contained in document G/C/W/708, and agreed to forward the draft waiver
decision contained therein to the General Council for adoption.
4.5. At its meeting of 26 March
the Council considered a waiver request and a draft waiver decision relating to
the extension of Canada's waiver for the Caribbean initiative: CARIBCAN
(document G/C/W/710). The Council took note of the statement made by
Canada to introduce its request and of the statements made by Jamaica, Dominica,
Trinidad and Tobago, Haiti, and the European Union. The Council agreed to
revert to this issue at its next meeting.
4.6. At its meeting of 26 June
the Council considered and approved the waiver request submitted by Canada in
document G/C/W/710 and agreed to forward the draft waiver decision
contained therein to the General Council for adoption.
4.7. At its meeting of 26 March,
as agreed by the CTG meeting of 17 November 2014, the Council
continued considering Jordan's waiver request and draft waiver decision
concerning the Transitional Period for the Elimination of the Export Subsidy
Program for Jordan (G/C/W/705). The Chairperson informed the Council that,
according to Article IX:3(b) of the Marrakesh Agreement, on 20 February 2015
he had made a factual report to the General Council informing it that this
issue had been under the CTG's consideration for more than 90 days, and
that this Council would continue considering this request. He also drew Members'
attention to document G/C/W/705/Corr.1 submitted by Jordan clarifying the
exact date of the extension of the transitional period. The Council took note
of the statement made by Jordan; and of the statements made by Australia; Kingdom of Bahrain; Canada; China; El Salvador; the
European Union; Guatemala;
India; Japan; the Republic of Korea; the State of Kuwait; Nepal;
New Zealand; Oman; Pakistan; Qatar; the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia on behalf of the Arab Group; Sri
Lanka; Switzerland; Chinese Taipei; Turkey; Uganda; and
the United States of America. The Council agreed to revert to this issue at its
meeting in June 2015.
4.8. At its meeting of 26 June Jordan informed the Council of
the further consultations it had had with interested delegations and the
national stakeholders. Jordan also introduced document G/C/W/705/Rev.1
according to which the number of years indicated in its initial waiver request
had been reduced to only four years after 2015, and specifying that in the
meanwhile Jordan would design and implement an entirely new WTO‑consistent
subsidy programme to benefit SMEs. The Council took note of Jordan's statement
and of the statements made by Australia; Kingdom of Bahrain; Canada; China;
Egypt; the European Union; Guatemala; Japan; Republic of Korea; New Zealand;
Norway; Oman; Pakistan; Qatar; Kingdom of Saudi Arabia on behalf of the Arab
Group; Switzerland; Chinese Taipei; Turkey; and the United States of America.
The Council also agreed to revert to this issue at its next meeting in November 2015.
4.9. At its meeting of 10 November Jordan informed the
Council of the further consultations it had had with interested delegations and
the Secretariat, and of the technical assistance activity that had taken place
in Amman. Jordan also introduced document G/C/W/705/Rev.2, that further reduced,
to only three years, or up to 2018, the extension period initially requested for
the purpose of phasing out Jordan's subsidy programme and replacing it with a
new and WTO‑consistent programme, the details of which had been indicated in
the programme attached to the document. In his closing remarks the Chair
indicated that Jordan's request continued to have wide support among the WTO membership.
Some Members still held systemic concerns, even though they recognized Jordan's
unprecedented situation, and nevertheless welcomed Jordan's efforts, openness,
and transparency to address their concerns, and particularly welcomed the
"detailed action plan" attached to the revised request. The Council agreed
to revert to this issue at its next meeting.
4.10. At its meeting of 10 November the Council considered a waiver request and a
draft waiver decision relating to the extension of the Africa Growth and
Opportunity Act (AGOA as amended), submitted by the United States of America
and contained in document G/C/W/713. The Council took note of the
statement made by the United States of America, approved
the waiver request, and agreed to forward the draft waiver decision contained
in document G/C/W/713 to the General Council for adoption.
5.1. At the meeting of 26 March the Council agreed to the extension of the
deadline set out in the communication G/L/1051/Add.3 from the European
Union, or until 1 January 2016. The Council also took note of the
statements made by Argentina; Australia; Brazil; New Zealand; and Uruguay about
the pace of the negotiations under Article XXVIII (Croatia's accession to
the EU), and of the responses from the European Union.
5.2. At the meeting of 10 November
the Council agreed to the extension of the deadline set out in the
communication G/L/1051/Add.4 from the European Union, or until
1 July 2016. The Council also took note of the information provided
by the European Union on the compensatory offers it had
submitted in 2014.
5.3. At the meeting of 26 March
the Council took note of the statement made by Brazil concerning the pace and
content of the bilateral negotiations towards a mutually satisfactory agreement
under GATT Article XXVIII. The Council also took note of the
statements made by Argentina, Australia, New Zealand, and Uruguay, and of the
responses from the European Union.
5.4. At its meeting of 10 November,
the Council took note of the statement made by Brazil, echoed by Argentina, Australia, New Zealand,
and Uruguay, and of
the responses from the European Union.
6.1. At the meeting of 26 March the Council agreed to the
extension of the deadline set out in the communication G/L/1110 from the
Republic of Armenia (until 2 January 2016). The Council also took
note of the statements made by Canada; Hong Kong, China; Japan; Switzerland; Chinese
Taipei; and Ukraine; and of the responses from Armenia.
6.2. At its meeting of 10 November the Council agreed to the
extension of the deadline set out in the communication G/L/1110/Add.1 from
the Republic of Armenia (until 2 January 2017). The Council also took
note of the statements made by Chinese Taipei, the European Union, Japan, and
Ukraine.
6.3. At that meeting the Council also agreed to the extension of the
deadline set out in the communication G/L/1137 from the Kyrgyz Republic (until
9 November 2016). The Council also took note of the statement made by
the European Union.
7.1. At its meetings on 26 March,
26 June, and 10 November, the Council was informed of the
following notifications on regional trade agreements:
‑ Free Trade Agreement
between the EFTA States and the Central American States – Costa Rica and
Panama (WT/REG357/N/1);
‑ Eurasian Economic
Union (the EAEU) between the Russian Federation, Belarus and Kazakhstan
(WT/REG358/N/1);
‑ Free Trade Agreement
between the Republic of Korea and Australia (WT/REG359/N/1);
‑ Free Trade Agreement
between the EFTA States and Bosnia and Herzegovina (WT/REG360/N/1);
‑ Economic Partnership Agreement between Japan
and Australia (WT/REG361/N/1);
‑ Free Trade Agreement between Canada and the
Republic of Korea (WT/REG362/N/1);
‑ Accession of Armenia to the Eurasian Economic
Union (WT/REG363/N/1);
‑ Free Trade Agreement between Canada and
Honduras (WT/REG364/N/1);
- Free Trade Agreement (FTA) between Chile
and Viet Nam (WT/REG365/N/1); and
- Accession of the Kyrgyz
Republic to the Treaty on the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) (WT/REG366/N/1).
8.1. At its meeting of 26 March,
the Council took note of the latest revision of the status of notifications
contained in document G/L/223/Rev.22.
8.2. At its meeting of 10 November,
the Council took note of the notification submitted by Thailand in document G/C/W/714
– WT/COMTD/N/46 on the preferential tariff treatment for Least Developed
Countries (LDCs).
9.1. At its meeting of 26 March
the Council took note of the statements made by Australia;
Brazil; Canada; Chile; the European Union; Japan; New Zealand; Chinese Taipei; and
the United States of America reiterating their continued concerns about Indonesia's lack of transparency
and use of protectionist measures, including import entry restrictions, non‑automatic
licensing requirements, export restrictions, discriminatory taxation, local
content requirements, and of the law on distribution and the Industry and Trade
Laws. Concerns also referred to the statements made by members of the new
government about the reduction of imports, and the increase of exports to balance
both the trade and current accounts. The Council also took note of the
responses from Indonesia.
9.2. At its meeting of 26 June
the Council took note of the statements made by Australia; Brazil; Canada; the
European Union; Japan; New Zealand; Chinese Taipei; and the United States of
America reiterating the concerns already raised in the CTG and at the
Committees on Import Licensing, TBT, TRIMs, and SPS, about Indonesia's lack of
transparency and use of protectionist measures, which included import entry
restrictions, non‑automatic licensing requirements, export restrictions,
discriminatory taxation, local content requirements, and of the law on
distribution and the Industry and Trade Laws. The Council also took note of the
responses from Indonesia.
9.3. At its meeting of 10 November,
the Council took note of the statements made by the European Union, Japan, and the United
States of America, supported by Australia, Brazil, Canada, Chinese Taipei, New
Zealand, Norway, and Switzerland, on their continued concerns about Indonesia's increased trade and
investment restrictions affecting a broad range of products.
The Council also took note of the responses from Indonesia.
10.1. At its meeting of 26 March
the Council considered this issue at the request of the delegations of the
European Union and Japan. The Council took note of the statements made by Australia; Canada; the European Union; Japan; Republic of Korea; New
Zealand; Chinese Taipei; Ukraine; and the United States of America regarding
their continued concerns over the trade restricting measures applied by the Russian
Federation, such as the control of freight and lorries at the Russian border;
transit restriction measures affecting agricultural goods; local content
requirements in the industrial assembly programme to obtain preferential
treatment; import tariffs on refrigerators; lack of transparency regarding
border measures; lack of adherence to accession commitments; tariff treatment applied
to certain agricultural and manufactured goods; and local content requirements
applied to automobiles and telecommunication equipment. The Council also took
note of the responses from the Russian Federation.
10.2. At its meeting of 26 June
the Council considered this issue at the request of the delegation of Japan.
The Council took note of the statements made by Australia;
Canada; the European Union; Japan; New Zealand; and the United States of
America on their continued systemic and commercial concerns about the
resolutions adopted by the Russian Federation providing subsidies to the
automobile producers in four specific areas; the lack of transparency and
responses concerning the bans and controls imposed at the Russian border; the
lack of implementation of the Russian Federation's accession commitments; and
the industrial policies which favoured Russian products at the expense of
competition. The Council also took note of the responses from the Russian
Federation.
11.1. At its meeting of 26 March,
the Council took note of the statements made by Australia;
the European Union; Japan; and the United States of America reiterating their concerns about
the Local Content Act of 2010, the review of Schedule A of such Law and
the lack of responses from Nigeria to the written questions posed to it at the
TRIMs Committee. The Council also took note of the responses from Nigeria.
11.2. At its meeting of 26 June,
the Council took note of the statements made by Australia;
the European Union; Norway; and the United States of America, and reiterated
their longstanding concerns about the Local Content Act of 2010 and its revised Bill which required
mandatory use of locally manufactured products in the oil and gas industry, and
about how Nigeria intended to achieve the goal of enhancing domestic capacity
in its oil and gas industry through this Law. The Council also took note of the
responses from Nigeria.
12.1. At its meeting of 26 March,
the Council took note of the statements made by the European
Union; Iceland; Norway; the United States of America; and Uruguay, reiterating
once again their concerns about the lack of transparency and predictability of
Nigeria's regime applied to imports of fish and fish products and the possible
new fish import policy that Nigeria was preparing. The Council also took note
of the statement made by Nigeria.
13.1. At its meeting of 10 November,
the Council took note of the statements made by Chile,
the European Union, Iceland, Norway, and Uruguay, supported by Malaysia,
Switzerland, Thailand, and the United States of America about a recent
restriction applied to a group of 41 products for which foreign exchange
transactions were prohibited. This affected imports of fish as well as
agricultural products, plastics, aircraft and aircraft parts, and metal and
metal products. Under this new agenda item, concerns were also expressed with
regard to the local content requirements in Nigeria's oil and gas industry, an
issue already raised at the CTG and at the TRIMs Committee. The Council also
took note of the statement made by Nigeria.
14.1. At its meeting of 26 March,
the Council took note of the statements made by Canada;
the European Union; Japan; and the United States of America, expressing
concerns about the restricting measures on automobiles adopted by Ecuador since
2012, which had been extended to end–December 2015 and justified by
Ecuador under GATT Article XX(b); however, a different treatment was
applied to imported assembled cars and to CKD assembled cars circulating
in Ecuador. The Council also took note of the systemic concerns raised by Colombia;
Guatemala; Japan; Mexico; Panama; Peru; and the United States of America about
Ecuador's Resolution 11‑2015 establishing a surcharge in the
form of temporary taxes for balance of payment reasons on a wide range of
goods; Ecuador had justified such measures under
GATT Article XVIII:B but it had already applied similar measures in
2009. The Council took note of the statement made by Ecuador on these issues.
14.2. At its meeting of 26 June
the Council took note of the statements made by Canada;
Chile; Colombia; Costa Rica; the European Union; Israel; Japan; Republic of Korea;
Mexico; Panama; Chinese Taipei; the United States of America; and Uruguay,
reiterating their concerns expressed at the previous meeting about the measures
applied by Ecuador to the automobile sector and about the tariff surcharge
imposed by Ecuador as from 11 March 2015 for balance of payment
purposes. The Council also took note of the statement made by the Dominican
Republic explaining the situation faced by Ecuador as it did not have a Central
Bank; and of the statement made by Ecuador.
14.3. At its meeting of 10 November,
the Council took note of the statement made by Japan,
echoed by Canada, Korea, Mexico, and the United States of America, over the
restricting measures on automobiles adopted by Ecuador since 2012, which had
been extended to end‑December 2015. Chile, Colombia, the European Union, Japan,
Panama, Peru, Switzerland, and the United States of America also reiterated
their systemic concerns about Resolution 11‑2015 that established a
surcharge in the form of temporary taxes on a wide range of products. The
Council also took note of Ecuador's answers.
15.1. At its meeting of 26 June, the Council took note of the
statements made by Canada; the European Union; Norway; Switzerland; and the United
States of America expressing concerns over Pakistan's Regulatory Order
No. 1125 on domestic sales taxes, which covered a large number of products
destined for industrial use and retail sale such as apparel, footwear, leather, and
sporting goods. The Regulatory Order imposed a sales
tax of 17% upon imported goods, while similar domestically produced goods were
taxed only at 5%;
these ran counter to GATT Article III. The Council also took note of
the statement made by Pakistan.
15.2. At its meeting of 10 November, the Council took note of
the statements made by the European Union and the United States of America,
echoed by Canada, Japan, and Switzerland, reiterating their concerns over
Pakistan's Regulatory Order No. 1125 on domestic sales taxes. Delegations
indicated that this
issue had also been raised at the Committee on Market Access and during
Pakistan's Trade Policy Review (TPR). The Council also took note of Pakistan's
responses.
16.1. At its meeting of 10 November, the Council took note of
the statement made by Norway, echoed by the European Union, expressing concerns
over China's measures established since 2010 that included quarantine and
testing procedures, import licences for salmon, and lack of indication about
the list of companies authorized to export seafood to China. The Council also
took note of the responses from China.
17.1. At its meeting on 10 November, the Council took note of
the statement made by Colombia presenting the conclusions of the Panel on Illicit
Trade and Money Laundering in International Trade that took place at the 2015
WTO Public Forum, and to include this issue on the WTO agenda. The
Council also took note of the statements made by Chile, Costa Rica, the European
Union, Guatemala, Mexico, and Peru.
18.1. At its meeting of 10 November
the Council took note of the statements made by Norway, Iceland, and
Switzerland on Resolution 724, which permitted the
use of indicative prices for customs valuation purposes. The Council also took note of the statement made by Ukraine.
19.1. At its meeting of 10 November
the Council took note of the statements made by Chile,
the European Union, New Zealand, and the United States of America, supported by
China, concerning India's decision, adopted in September 2015, to limit
imports of apples to only one port (Nhava Sheba), an issue that had also been raised
at the Committees on Agriculture, Import Licensing, Sanitary and Phytosanitary
Measures, and TBT. The Council also took note of the statement made by India.
20.1. At its meeting of 10 November
the Council took note of the statement made by the European Union over Brazil's import licensing requirements to import industrial
nitrocellulose (NC), an issue in which the Ministry of Defence of Brazil had
also been involved. It also took note of the
statement made by Brazil. When adopting this Annual Report, Brazil requested,
and the European Union accepted, that the title of this item be changed to
"Industrial Nitrocellulose Non‑Automatic Import Licences", instead of
"Industrial Nitrocellulose Import Ban" as indicated in the meeting's agenda.
21.1. At its meeting of 26 March,
the Chairperson reminded delegations that Ministers in
Bali agreed, first, to continue with the positive work under the Work Programme
on E‑Commerce based on its existing mandate and guidelines and on the basis of
proposals submitted by Members in the respective WTO bodies; second, to
instruct the General Council and its relevant bodies, including this Council,
to continue to reinvigorate this work, especially under the initiatives taken
in relation to commercial issues, development, and evolving technologies; and
third, that any relevant body of the Work Programme might explore appropriate
mechanisms to address the relationship between electronic commerce and
development in a focused and comprehensive manner. He invited delegations to
express their opinions and to make suggestions as to how to work on the
preparations of the periodic reviews to be held in the General Council at its
session of July 2015. The Chairperson also informed the Council that, on 16 February 2015,
the 10th Dedicated Session on E‑commerce had taken place, where
Members had expressed varied views on the way forward on possible outcomes for
MC10, and where delegations had emphasized the importance of a bottom‑up
approach; he also indicated that a background information note had been
prepared by the Secretariat. The Council also took note of the statement made
by Canada.
21.2. At its meeting on 26 June,
the Chairperson recalled the Bali mandate on the Work Programme on E‑commerce
and invited delegations to make further comments on this issue. In the absence
of any comments he informed the Council that he, on his own responsibility,
would make a factual report to the General Council on the discussions held in
the Goods Council.[2]
22.1. At its meeting of 26 June,
the Council took note of the statement made by the Philippines to introduce
this issue at the WTO, and of the statement made by Malaysia on behalf of
ASEAN.
22.2. At its meeting of 26 June,
the Council took note of the statement made by Japan about the status of the
election process of a member of the PGE of the SCM Committee. It also took
note of the statements made by Thailand and Turkey.
22.3. At its meeting of 10 November China informed the Council
that Section 15(a)(ii) of its Protocol of Accession would expire on
11 December 2016 and indicated that, consequently, Members using the
surrogate or analogue country methodology in their anti‑dumping investigations
against China should take the necessary steps to bring their legislation into
line with the new conditions after the expiry date of Section 15.
23.1. At its meeting of 10 November,
the Council took note of the annual reports of its subsidiary bodies.[3]
24.1. At its meeting of 10 November,
the Council adopted its Annual Report (2015) to the General Council.
__________
[3] Agriculture (G/L/1126); TRIMs (G/L/1123); Subsidies and
Countervailing Measures (G/L/1133); Anti‑dumping (G/L/1134); Safeguards
(G/L/1130 and G/L/1130/Corr.1); Market Access (G/L/1131/Rev.1); Import
Licensing (G/L/1132); Customs Valuation (G/L/1135); Sanitary and Phytosanitary
Measures (G/L/1129); ITA (G/L/1125); Preshipment Inspection and
Independent Entity (G/L/1136); Rules of Origin (G/L/1127 and G/RO/77); Technical
Barriers to Trade (G/L/1138); and Working Party on State Trading Enterprises
(G/L/1124).