It was agreed at the Market Access Committee
meeting of 22 June 1999 that Annex II of document G/MA/63, setting out the situation of schedules of WTO Members, would be updated periodically.(2) In this connection,
the attached table is an update of the status of Members’ schedules incorporating information up to 29 April 2013. The introductory text contained in Annex II of the original Document G/MA/63 has been updated to take into account developments since the last revision.
All WTO Members have a schedule of tariff concessions which is either annexed to the Marrakesh Protocol to the GATT 1994 or to a Protocol of Accession(3). Some Members have also schedules pre-dating the Uruguay Round which reflect concessions granted previously(4).
The attached table reflecting the current situation of schedules of WTO Members has been prepared for information purposes in order to assist, inter alia, the project team in the Secretariat updating the CTS files into HS1996(5), HS2002(6), HS2007(7) and HS2012(8). The pending work on the schedules of concessions derives from obligations related to the introduction of the Harmonized System and its subsequent amendments, the results of the Uruguay Round, technical modifications or rectifications to the schedules, as well as renegotiations under Article XXVIII of the GATT 1994. Some background information on these issues has been provided for ease of reference.
The table consists of the following columns:
Column 1: Lists the WTO Members in alphabetical order in accordance with document WT/INF/43/Rev.15/. It also indicates whether or not the Member is a party to the Harmonized System Convention.
Column 2: Indicates the Roman numeral assigned to the Member’s schedule. Its equivalent Arabic numeral is included in parenthesis for ease of reference.
Column 3: Indicates the situation of the Pre-Uruguay Round schedule, if any.
Column 4: Indicates whether the schedule is annexed to the Marrakesh Protocol or to a Protocol of Accession. The date of accession and references to the relevant documentation is included for the latter.
Column 5: Provides information on the transposition of Uruguay Round schedules into the Harmonized System and its subsequent amendments. In the case of Members having acceded after 1 January 1995, it also indicates the tariff nomenclature used in the schedule annexed to its protocol of accession.
Column 6: Provides information on the rectifications/modifications undertaken by the Member, if any.
Column 7: Provides information on the renegotiations under GATT Article XXVIII initiated by the Member, if any.
II. The Harmonized System and its amendments back to top
A. Introduction of the
Following the entry into force of the Harmonized System(9) (HS) on 1 January 1988 (HS88), the pre-UR schedules of those GATT Contracting Parties that were also contracting parties to the HS Convention were required to be transposed into the HS nomenclature(10). The GATT Committee on Tariff Concessions developed procedures for this purpose(11). A number of schedules were transposed, certified and annexed to Protocols(12). Some Members undertook to renegotiate their schedules in connection with the implementation of the HS. The situation regarding pre-UR schedules is set out in column
3 of the table. The term “None” is used for those Members which did not have a GATT schedule of concessions. It should, however, be noted that these Members did submit a schedule either during the Uruguay Round or at the time of their accession.
The Harmonized System Committee of the World Customs Organization (WCO) undertakes a periodic review of the HS nomenclatureto take account of changes in technology and patterns in international trade, and recommends amendments to it. The first set of such modifications came into force on 1 January 1992 (HS92). A second, more substantial, set of amendments came into force on 1 January 1996 (HS96), a third one on 1 January 2002 (HS2002) and a fourth one on 1 January 2007 (HS2007). The most recent set of amendments was introduced on 1 January 2012 (HS2012)(13).
B. First Amendment to the HS (HS92)
With a view to keeping the authentic texts of GATT schedules up to date and in conformity with the national customs tariff, the Committee on Tariff Concessions adopted in 1991 simplified procedures to implement the HS92 and any future changes relating to the HS(14). Eleven GATT Contracting Parties followed these procedures and submitted the required documentation, with only one of them still pending(15).
C. Second Amendment to the HS (HS96)
Members made use of the 1991 procedures for introducing modifications to the schedules resulting from the introduction of HS96. A total of 49 Members submitted the required HS96 documentation, out of which: 29 were full loose-leaf schedules(16), 19 reflected only the HS96 changes and one included information on a preliminary basis(17). The General Council adopted, subject to certain conditions, a “collective waiver” suspending the application of Article II of the GATT for 33 Members(18). This initial waiver was renewed on ten occasions and covered a varying number of Members(19). The General Council noted at its last renewal that, although it would be the last time that an extension of the HS96 waiver would be granted collectively, Members were not precluded from requesting the suspension of GATT Article II on an individual basis(20). Since then, the General Council has adopted 48 individual waiver requests from 13 Members(21).
Noting that 64 developing Members had not followed the 1991 procedures to introduce the modifications resulting from the introduction of HS96, the General Council adopted in 2010 a new set of procedures(22). This Decision instructed the Secretariat to conduct the technical work for the transposition of the Schedules, using the Consolidated Tariff Schedule database (CTS) as a working tool. The files were subject to multilateral review in dedicated sessions of the Committee on Market Access. The procedures have almost been finalized for the 64 Members concerned, including the circulation pursuant to the 1980 procedures for rectification and modification of 62 schedules, of which 61 have been certified(23).
D. Third Amendment to the HS (HS2002)
The General Council established on 18 July 2001 a set of new procedures for the introduction of HS2002 changes into the schedules of concessions(24). Although HS2002 had been implemented by most WTO Members, only 35 of them submitted the documentation required by these procedures(25). With a view to further facilitating and simplifying the introduction of HS2002 changes in the schedules of concessions of all Members, the General Council adopted on 15 February 2005 a set of amendments to the procedures in which the Consolidated Tariff Schedule (CTS) database was to be used as a working tool. The Secretariat was instructed to transpose the schedules of all developing countries(26).
Although the Secretariat concluded the technical work on most of Schedules, procedures remained outstanding for a high number of files in spite of the absence of comments by other Members and due to the lack of approval or comments by the Member concerned(27). With a view to redressing this situation, the General Council adopted on 14 December 2010 a new decision amending the procedures(28).
As a result of the amendments in the procedures of the 18 July 2001 Decision, modifications to 109 schedules have been circulated pursuant to the 1980 procedures for rectification and modification of schedules and 103 of them have been certified(29).
The General Council has adopted twelve “collective waivers” and one individual waiver suspending the application of Article II of the GATT(30) on an annual basis until 31December2013. The latest applies to 8 Members (counting the EU-27 as one)(31). The General Council established, in addition, a set of procedures and conditions that would need to be followed by any other Member wishing to be covered by the waiver(32).
E. Fourth Amendment to the HS (HS2007)
The General Council adopted on 15 December 2006 procedures for the introduction of HS2007 changes into schedules of concessions(33). On 30 November 2011, Members adopted a decision amending the transposition procedures leading to the certification of HS2007 changes(34). Under the revised procedures, developed country Members, and developing countries that made a notification by 31 December 2011, shall prepare their own transposition and the Secretariat shall transpose the schedules of all remaining Members.
The General Council has also adopted seven “collective waivers” suspending the application of Article II of the GATT on an annual basis until 31December2013(35). The waivers also provide that any other Member could be included therein upon request. Six Members have made use of this provision(36). There are currently 29 Members (counting the EU-27 as one) covered by the seventh HS2007 collective waiver(37).
The Secretariat has prepared 63 files that are currently being considered by each Member concerned, and 21 files which have been released for multilateral review.(38)
F. Fifth Amendment to the HS (HS2012)
The General Council adopted on 30 November 2011 the procedures for the introduction and certification of HS2012 into schedules of concessions(39). Under this decision, developed country Members, and developing countries that made a notification by 31 December 2011, shall prepare their own transposition and the Secretariat shall transpose the schedules of all remaining Members. However, the Secretariat will not begin with technical work in this area until the HS2007 work has been concluded.
The General Council has adopted two “collective waivers” suspending the application of Article II of the GATT on an annual basis until 31 December 2013(40). The waiver also provides that any other Member could be included therein upon request. There are currently 26 Members (counting the EU-27 as one) covered by the latest HS2012 waiver(41).
G. Status of HS Rranspositions
The status of HS92 changes and the introduction of the HS are included in Column 3 of the table as it relates to pre-UR schedules. Column 5 reflects the situation of HS96, HS2002, HS2007 and HS2012 changes. This column also indicates, for those transposition procedures which remain pending, whether or not the Member is currently under a waiver suspending the application of Article II of the GATT.
III. Rectifications/Modifications of schedules back to top
Following the Uruguay Round, a number of WTO Members submitted rectifications and modifications to their UR schedules. The procedures for the rectifications/modifications of schedules were adopted by the GATT Contracting Parties on 26 March 1980(42). Modifications made pursuant to these procedures have included, inter alia: (i) modifications of a technical nature that not affect the scope of the concessions; (ii) concessions made in the context of the Ministerial Declaration on Trade in Information Technology Products (ITA)(43); (iii) revisions and additions to the product coverage of the Pharmaceutical Understanding (Pharma)(44); (iv) bilateral sectorial negotiations (e.g. distilled spirits); (v) modifications pursuant to Annex 5 of the Agreement on Agriculture; and (vi) autonomous improvements in concessions.
Column 6 reflects the situation concerning the rectifications and modifications of schedules. Those pertaining to the ITA, the Pharma, Other Duties and Charges (ODCs), Annex 5 of the Agreement on Agriculture, and the results of bilateral negotiations on distilled spirits have been expressly identified. All others have been labelled as “other”. Approximately 177 proposals for modifications/rectifications of schedules have been put forward for the consideration of Members since the establishment of the WTO(45), 23 of which have been formally concluded by means of a Procès-Verbal of rectification and 141 through a certification. There are approximately 13 procedures which have not been concluded for various reasons (reservations, domestic approval procedures, etc.) or have not been pursued further by the Member concerned(46).
under GATT Article XXVIII back to top
Members are allowed to modify or withdraw concessions from their schedule through negotiation and agreement with other Members. Article XXVIII of the GATT 1994 entitled “Modification of Schedules” is the main provision dealing with the renegotiation of a tariff concession(47).
A 1957 note by the GATT Secretariat, concerning arrangements for negotiations under Article XXVIII of the GATT 1994, set out the procedural guidelines that were used until November 1980 when the current guidelines for procedures were adopted(48). Although the early practice makes it difficult to determine the exact number of renegotiations that took place under the GATT 1947, the Secretariat's records show that at least 42 GATT Contracting Parties initiated roughly 300 renegotiations between 1951 and 1994(49).
The 1980 procedures provide for a Member undertaking GATT Article XXVIII negotiations to submit to the Secretariat: (i) a report and a joint letter upon completion of each bilateral negotiation and (ii) a final report upon completion of all its bilateral negotiations. In practice, however, only 19 final reports were received by the Secretariat for the 79 renegotiations initiated between 1981 and 1994(50). The status recorded by the Secretariat for renegotiations lacking a final report is diverse. While in a few cases the Contracting Parties withdrew the invocation of Article XXVIII, in others they only submitted partial information regarding the bilateral agreements reached. No further information has been received by the Secretariat after the initiation of these renegotiations and only a few of them were formally carried-over into the WTO.
It remains unclear for the majority of these Pre-UR renegotiations whether they were: (i) concluded with the relevant Contracting Parties and their results incorporated into the Schedule annexed to the Marrakesh Protocol to the GATT 1994 (MP) during the Uruguay Round, (ii) concluded, but its results overridden by the Schedule annexed to the MP, (iii) concluded with all the relevant Contracting Parties, but never reported or included in a schedule, or (iv) are still on-going.
There have been 38 requests to enter into renegotiations under GATT Article XXVIII since the establishment of the WTO in 1995, 5 of which have been withdrawn, 13 have been concluded and formally certified, and 7 have been concluded, but have not been certified for various reasons. Although the remaining 13 are in principle still on-going, it should be noted that three of them relate to schedules, which were withdrawn in the context of an enlargement of the European Union (i.e. Hungary, Bulgaria, and Croatia)(51).
Column 7 reflects the status recorded by the Secretariat for all renegotiations invoked from 1 January 1981 when the current procedures started being implemented. The table also includes renegotiations related to GATT Article XXIV:6. The term “unclear” has been used to identify those GATT renegotiations initiated between 1981 and 1994 in which there is no final report or any other formal document indicating the conclusion of such negotiations. It should finally be noted that 19 Article XXVIII renegotiations invoked before the end of the UR by the EEC-9 and some of the EC-15 member states are not reflected therein(51).
These part needs to be in line with the proposal to be made to the Committee
The situation of the Schedules of concessions has improved considerably over the last years thanks to a number of specific Decisions adopted by Members, in particular with regard to the HS amendments. However, Members still are at very different stages with respect to their schedules. Some Members currently applying the HS, and even HS2012, still have pre-UR concessions which are scheduled in a different nomenclature. In these cases, and although the technical work undertaken in the context of HS1996, HS2002 and HS2007 has minimized considerably the problem, Members still need to transpose the relevant concessions into the HS. Moreover, the HS transposition work is still lagging behind with respect to nomenclature used in practice by Members, a situation that was exacerbated by the implementation of the fifth amendment to the HS on 1 January 2012. Finally, it would be advisable for Members to clarify the status of the renegotiations under Article XXVIII of the GATT that remain outstanding or that lack a final report, and in particular for those Pre-UR cases labelled as “unclear”.
i) The table does not include the
renegotiation contained in G/SECRET/23 + G/SECRET/23/ Corr.1 for Section D (Netherland
Antilles) of Schedule II — BENELUX. back to text ii) The term “reservations” in the plural is
used to signal the existence of reservations and does not reflect whether
reservations are from one or more Members. back to text iii) The Council for Trade in Goods agreed, on
10 November 2005, that provisions should be made to give legal effect to
approved commitments by means of a certification (see
G/C/M/82). back to text iv) The transposed pre-UR schedule does not
include the uniform bound rate contained in Bolivia's pre-UR schedule found
in Part II of its Protocol of Accession (03.08.1989). back to text v) Schedule established in Annecy
1949 Protocol (amended in Fourth and Fifth Protocols of Rectifications,
1950), additional concessions contained in Torquay 1951 Protocol, at the
time of Japanese 1955 Protocol, in Geneva 1956 and Kennedy (1964-67) Rounds
Protocols. back to text vi) The concessions in this document were the subject of a panel in
Dominican Republic — Cigarettes case (WT/DS302). According to the conclusion
of that Panel, which was not challenged on appeal, the Dominican Republic
had not established that its Selective Consumption Tax measure was actually
in the nature of an “other duty or charge” within the meaning of Article
II:1(b) of the GATT 1994. back to text vii) On 1 December 2009, the Treaty of Lisbon amending the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty establishing the European Community (done at Lisbon, 13 December 2007) entered into force. On 29 November 2009, the WTO received a Verbal Note (WT/L/779) from the Council of the European Union and the Commission of the European Communities stating that, by virtue of the Treaty of Lisbon, as of 1 December 2009, the European Union replaces and succeeds the European Community. back to text viii) The European Union indicated through a communication (L/7614) its intention to withdraw the tariff concessions in Schedule XXXII of Austria, Schedule XXIV of Finland, Schedule XXX of Sweden and Schedule LXXX for the EC-12. This withdrawal became effective on 1 January 1995. Schedule CXL of EC-15 was circulated in G/L/65 + G/L/65/Rev.1 + G/L/65/Rev.1/ Add.1 + G/L/65/Rev.1/ Add.2 + G/L/65/Rev.1/ Add.2/ Corr.1 + G/L/65/Rev.1/ Add.3 + G/L/65/Rev.1/ Add.4 + G/L/65/Rev.1/ Add.5. It has been certified (WT/Let/666). back to text ix) The European Union indicated through a communication (G/SECRET/20 and G/SECRET/20/ Add.1) its intention to withdraw the tariff concessions in Schedule XCII of Czech Republic, Schedule CXLIV of Republic of Estonia, Schedule CVII of Republic of Cyprus, Schedule CXLIII of Republic of Latvia, Schedule CL of Republic of Lithuania, Schedule LXXI of Republic of Hungary, Schedule CXVII of Republic of Malta, Schedule LXV of Republic of Poland, Schedule XCVI of Republic of Slovenia, Schedule XCIII of Slovak Republic and Schedule CXL of EC-15. This withdrawal became effective from 1 May 2004. Reservations were raised. back to text x) The European Union indicated through a communication (G/SECRET/26) its intention to withdraw the tariff concessions in Schedule CXXXIX of Bulgaria and LXIX of Romania. This withdrawal became effective on 1 January 2007. back to text xi) The Appellate Body found that the framework agreement on bananas was inconsistent, inter alia, with Article XIII of GATT 1994 . See Appellate Body Report (WT/DS27/AB/R). back to text xii) Paragraph five of the Geneva Agreement on Trade in Bananas (WT/L/784) establishes that, upon certification, the pending disputes (WT/DS27; WT/DS361; WT/DS364; WT/DS16; WT/DS105; WT/DS158; WT/L/616; WT/L/625) and all claims filed to date by any and all Latin American MFN banana suppliers under the procedures of Articles XXIV and XXVIII of the GATT 1994 with respect to the EU trading regime for bananas (including G/SECRET/22 item 0803.00.19 and G/SECRET/22/ Add.1; G/SECRET/20 and G/SECRET/20/ Add.1; and G/SECRET/26) shall be settled. back to text xiii) With regard to concessions relating to the agricultural sector granted by Guatemala in the course of its accession, these are set forth in the HS nomenclature in the MP. back to text xiv) Schedule established in Annecy 1949 Protocol (replaced in Sixth Protocol of Rectifications and Modification, 1957). Additional concessions contained in Japanese Protocol of Accession, 1955. back to text xv) In accordance with TAR/W/7, Schedule established in GATT 1947 (amended in: Protocol of Rectifications to the GATT, 1948; Third Protocol of Rectifications to the GATT, 1949; First Protocol of Modifications to the GATT, 1949; Fourth Protocol of Rectifications to the GATT, 1950; First Protocol of Rectifications and Modifications to the Texts of the Schedules of the GATT, 1951; Fifth Protocol of Rectifications and Modifications to the Texts of the Schedules to the GATT, 1955); Annecy 1949 Protocol (amended in: Fourth Protocol of Rectifications to the GATT, 1950 and First Protocol of Rectifications and Modifications to the Texts of the Schedules of the GATT, 1951); Torquay 1951 Protocol; Japanese 1955 Protocol; Geneva 1962 Protocol; and Protocol Supplementary to the Geneva 1979 Protocol. In addition, information on bilateral negotiations which have not yet been included in an official schedule: SECRET/31 + SECRET/31/ Add.1 + SECRET/31/ Add.2 + SECRET/31/ Add.3; SECRET/127 + SECRET/127/ Add.1 + SECRET/127/ Add.2 + SECRET/127/ Add.3 + SECRET/127/ Add.4 + SECRET/127/ Add.5 + SECRET/127/ Add.6 + SECRET/127/ Add.7 + SECRET/127/ Add.8 + SECRET/127/ Add.9 + SECRET/127/ Add.10 + SECRET/127/ Add.11 + SECRET/127/ Add.12 + SECRET/127/ Add.13 + SECRET/127/ Add.14; SECRET/139 + SECRET/139/ Add.1 + SECRET/139/ Add.2 + SECRET/139/ Add.3 + SECRET/139/ Add.4; L/1474 and L/1293. An unofficial consolidated schedule was circulated to contracting parties in September 1978 with document L/4609/ Add.3. back to text xvi) Liechtenstein has no pre-UR schedule. back to text
1 This document has been prepared under the Secretariat’s own responsibility and is without prejudice to the positions of Members or to their rights and obligations under the WTO. back to text 2 See G/MA/M/19, paragraph 4.1. back to text 3 Supporting Tables relating to commitments on agricultural products (AGST Supporting Tables) and specifically identified in Part IV of the Schedules annexed to the Marrakesh Protocol can be found in WTO document series G/AG/AGST. Supporting Tables of acceded Members are now circulated in WT/ACC or WT/ACC/SPEC document series. These documents can be obtained from the WTO website. back to text 4 The situation of Pre-Uruguay Round schedules can be found in GATT documents TAR/W/7 and TAR/W/85. back to text 5 Decision of 27 May 2009 (WT/L/756), Procedures Leading to the Verification and Certification of HS96 Changes Relating to the Schedules of 64 Members. back to text 6 Decision of 15 February 2005 (WT/L/605), A Procedure for the Introduction of Harmonized System 2002 Changes to Schedules of Concessions Using the Consolidated Tariff Schedules (CTS) Database. back to text 7 Decision of 15 December 2006 (WT/L/673), A Procedure for the Introduction of Harmonized System 2007 Changes to Schedules of Concessions Using the Consolidated Tariff Schedules (CTS) Database. back to text 8 Decision of 30 November 2011 (WT/L/831), Procedure for the Introduction of Harmonized System 2012 Changes to Schedules of Concessions Using the Consolidated Tariff Schedule (CTS) Database. back to text 9 The Harmonized System (HS) nomenclature, which was developed in the World Customs Organization (formerly the Customs Cooperation Council), entered into force on 1 January 1988 through a Convention. As of 5 March 2012, there are 93 WTO Members (counting the EU-27 as one), which are contracting parties to the HS Convention. Practically all the remaining 33 WTO Members apply the HS in spite of not being contracting parties to it. back to text 10 Article 3 of the HS Convention obliges HS contracting parties to ensure that their customs tariff and statistical nomenclatures are in conformity with the Harmonized System. It is to be noted that those GATT Contracting Parties that were not contracting parties to the HS, but nevertheless applied the HS in their national customs tariff, also undertook this exercise in order to keep the authentic texts of their schedules up to date and in conformity with their national customs tariff. back to text 11 Decision of 12 July 1983, GATT BISD 30S/17. back to text 12 See GATT doc. TAR/W/67/Rev.15 and TAR/W/74/Rev.12. back to text 13 See G/MA/W/100 and G/MA/W/105. back to text 14Decision of 8 October 1991, Annex to L/6905, GATT BISD 39S/300. back to text 15 See GATT docs. Let/1793, TAR/M/34 and TAR/M/35. back to text 16 See Decision of 29 November 1996, G/L/138. back to text 17 For a detailed list, see G/MA/TAR/2/Rev.46.back to text 18 WT/L/124 and WT/L/124/ Corr.1. The Annex to the first “collective waiver” listed the following Members: Argentina, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Canada, Colombia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, European Union, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Israel, Malaysia, Mexico, Norway, Paraguay, Philippines, Poland, Singapore, Slovak Republic, Slovenia, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Switzerland, Thailand, Tunisia, Turkey, the United States, Uruguay, Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of and Zimbabwe. back to text 19WT/L/173, WT/L/216, WT/L/243, WT/L/268, WT/L/281, WT/L/303, WT/L/338, WT/L/351, WT/L/379, WT/L/400. back to text 20WT/L/400, item number (v). back to text 21 The General Council received and approved individual requests from Argentina (WT/L/464, WT/L/485, WT/L/523, WT/L/590, WT/L/618, WT/L/653, WT/L/692, WT/L/757 and WT/L/801), Brazil (WT/L/454), El Salvador (WT/L/456, WT/L/486 and WT/L/525), Israel (WT/L/455, WT/L/487, WT/L/531, WT/L/554, WT/L/568, WT/L/589 and WT/L/639), Malaysia (WT/L/465, WT/L/529, WT/L/569 and WT/L/619), Morocco (WT/L/462, WT/L/488 and WT/L/530), Norway (WT/L/459 and WT/L/489), Pakistan (WT/L/466 and WT/L/528), Panama (WT/L/458, WT/L/524, WT/L/570, WT/L/620, WT/L/652, WT/L/693 and WT/L/734, WT/L/758), Paraguay (WT/L/461), Switzerland (WT/L/460), Thailand (WT/L/463, WT/L/490, WT/L/527), and Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of (WT/L/457, WT/L/491 and WT/L/526). back to text 22Decision of 27 May 2009 (WT/L/756), Procedures Leading to the Verification and Certification of HS96 Changes Relating to the Schedules of 64 Members. back to text 23 For more details, see JOB/MA/41/Rev.2 back to text 24WT/L/407. back to text 25 See G/MA/TAR/4/Rev.8. back to text 26 Decision of 15 February 2005, WT/L/605. back to text 27 See JOB/MA/42 back to text 28 Decision of 14 December 2010 (WT/L/807), Amendment to the Procedures Leading to the Certification of HS2002 Changes. back to text 29
See JOB/MA/42/Rev.4. back to text 30 The Decisions are contained in documents WT/L/469, WT/L/477 (in respect of Romania), WT/L/511, WT/L/562,WT/L/598, WT/L/638, WT/L/674, WT/L/712, WT/L/744, WT/L/786, WT/L/808 and WT/L/832back to text 31 The waiver decision contained in document WT/L/832 now covers the following Members: Argentina, Australia, Brazil, China, Croatia, European Union, Iceland, India, Mexico, and Uruguay. Malaysia and Thailand are no longer covered as they have concluded the exercise. back to text 32 The Decision indicates that those Members not listed in the Annex, that have approved their draft HS02 files and whose draft HS02 files have been released for multilateral review, shall notify the Committee on Market Access of their wish to be included in the waiver decision. back to text 33WT/L/673back to text 34WT/L/830back to text 35WT/L/675, WT/L/713, WT/L/745, WT/L/787, and WT/L/809, and WT/L/833back to text 36 The Decision provides that those Members not listed in the Annex may notify the Committee on Market Access of its wish to be included in the waiver decision. Thailand, Mexico, Pakistan, Singapore and Israel have used this provision (WT/L/675/ Add.1, WT/L/675/ Add.2, WT/L/675/ Add.3, WT/L/675/ Add.4 and WT/L/787/ Add.1 respectively). back to text 37 The annex to the sixth waiver lists the following Members: Argentina; Australia; Brazil; Canada; China; Costa Rica; Croatia; Dominican Republic; El Salvador; European Union; Guatemala; Honduras; Hong Kong, China; India; Israel; Korea, Republic of Macao, China; Malaysia; Mexico; New Zealand; Nicaragua; Norway; Pakistan; Philippines; Singapore; Switzerland; Thailand; the United States; and Uruguay. back to text 38 For additional details, see document JOB/MA/104/Rev.1. back to text 39 WT/L/831back to text 40 WT/L/834back to text 41 Australia; Brazil; Canada; China, Costa Rica; Dominican Republic; El Salvador; the European Union; Guatemala; Honduras; Hong Kong, China; India; Israel; Korea, Republic of; Macao, China; Malaysia; Mexico; New Zealand; Norway; Pakistan; Singapore; Switzerland; Chinese Taipei; Thailand; and the United States. back to text 42 GATT BISD 27S/25. back to text 43WT/MIN(96)/16. back to text 44 GATT document L/7430. Reviews to the product coverage have been agreed by the participants and circulated in G/MA/W/10 (1st review), G/MA/W/18 (2nd review), G/MA/W/85 (3rd review) and G/MA/W/102 (4th review). back to text 45 The number of proposals is calculated based on all documents circulated under the G/MA/TAR/RS, G/SP and G/RS document symbols, as well as various independent Procès-Verbal of Rectification. It does not take account of the modifications circulated pursuant to the HS1996 Decision for 64 Members (see section II.C) and the HS2002 procedures (see section II.D). back to text 46 The estimate takes account of procedures which were subsequently replaced or overtaken by other procedures. back to text 47 The provisions of the Understanding on the Interpretation of Article XXVIII of the GATT 1994 and the Procedures for Negotiation under Article XXVIII, Guidelines adopted on 10 November 1980 (GATT BISD 27S/26), are also applicable. back to text 48 In compliance with instructions given by the Contracting Parties (L/641, GATT BISD 6S/158) the Executive Secretary issued a note concerning the arrangements for negotiations under GATT Article XXVIII on 31 May 1957 (GATT doc. L/635). A revised version of the procedural guidelines were prepared in 1978 (GATT doc. L/4651) which served as the basis for the technical discussions at the Committee on Tariff Concessions, which were finally adopted as guidelines on 10 November 1980. See GATT doc. C/113 and C/113/ Corr.1, GATT BISD 27S/26. back to text 49 Due to their provisional nature, tariff commitments made in the 1947 Geneva negotiations had an initial validity of three years. Consequently, the original drafting of GATT Article XXVIII contained no provision for the modification or withdrawal of these commitments before 1 January 1951. Contracting Parties initially extended the validity of these Schedules through “Declarations on the Continued Application of Schedules”. During the Torquay Tariff Conference of 1950 the negotiations for new concessions took place in parallel with some renegotiations. The Review Session of the GATT that took place subsequently disposed of the need to extend the validity of the Schedules periodically. It also proposed amendments to several Articles of the GATT (including Article XXVIII) and proposed the incorporation of a new Article XXVIII bis entitled “Tariff negotiations”. These amendments were formally adopted through the Protocol Amending the Preamble and Parts II and III of the General Agreement of 10 March 1955, which entered into force on 7 October 1957. back to text 50 See footnote 46. The status of GATT Article XXVIII negotiations up to June 1980 can be consulted in GATT doc. TAR/W/7 of 18 June 1980. back to text 51 The number of renegotiations is calculated based on all documents circulated under the SECRET document symbol, plus document SECRET/347, and renegotiations of schedules in connection with the HS transposition from Sri Lanka (G/SECRET/HS/11) and the Dominican Republic (G/L/4 and G/C/M/3). back to text 52 The 19 GATT renegotiations that were initiated during the period 1981-1994 and which are not reflected in the table are the following: EEC-9 (SECRET/270, SECRET/286, SECRET/296, SECRET/310, SECRET/311, SECRET/312, SECRET/317 and SECRET/325), Austria (SECRET/291 and SECRET/323), Finland (SECRET/320 and SECRET/321), Portugal (SECRET/300), Spain (SECRET/308) and Sweden (SECRET/278, SECRET/299, SECRET/322, SECRET/327 and SECRET/331). back to text