|
XI. Article 9 back to top
A. Text of Article 9
Article 9
1.
Where the conversion of currency is necessary for the determination of
the customs value, the rate of exchange to be used shall be that duly
published by the competent authorities of the country of importation
concerned and shall reflect as effectively as possible, in respect of
the period covered by each such document of publication, the current
value of such currency in commercial transactions in terms of the
currency of the country of importation.
2.
The conversion rate to be used shall be that in effect at the time of
exportation or the time of importation, as provided by each Member.
B. Text of Interpretative Note to Article 9
Note to Article 9
For the purposes of Article
9, “time of importation” may include the time of entry for
customs purposes.
C. Interpretation and Application of Article 9
No jurisprudence or decision of a competent WTO
body.
XII. Article
10 back to top
A. Text of
Article 10
Article 10
All information which is
by nature confidential or which is provided on a confidential basis for
the purposes of customs valuation shall be treated as strictly
confidential by the authorities concerned who shall not disclose it
without the specific permission of the person or government providing
such information, except to the extent that it may be required to be
disclosed in the context of judicial proceedings.
B. Interpretation and Application of Article 10
47. The Panel in Thailand
— Cigarettes (Philippines) explained that Article 10 prohibits
customs authorities from disclosing information which is in essence
confidential when an importer provided it for the purpose of customs
valuation.(63) Regarding the specific types of information
falling within the scope of Article 10, the Panel stated that:
“The Customs Valuation Agreement neither defines
confidential information nor provides a specific list of information
that qualifies as confidential information.
We find useful guidance in the discussions of the
Ad Hoc Group on Implementation in the Committee on Anti-Dumping
Practices. The record of the discussions indicates that information can
be considered as confidential if it is not in the public domain and if
its disclosure would be likely inter alia: ‘to be of
significant competitive advantage to a competitor …, to have a
significant adverse effect upon the party who submitted the information
…, to prejudice the commercial position of a person who supplied or
who is the subject of the information, …’.
Both parties agree that the PM Thailand’s c.i.f.
price, transaction values and imports volume were revealed to the press
by Thai officials… .
Thailand does not dispute that PM Thailand’s
c.i.f. price is classified as confidential information. Thailand also
admits that PM Thailand’s customs value is confidential information.
Concerning import volumes, however, Thailand submits that although
import volumes may be confidential information, they would not be
confidential either when a company is the sole importer of a given good,
or when the company has agreed that the information shall be publicly
disclosed. In this regard, we note that PM Thailand is not the sole
cigarette importer in Thailand. Furthermore, at no point has PM Thailand
agreed to make its confidential information available to the public. On
the contrary, PMTL has insisted on multiple occasions that this
information should be kept confidential. Moreover, we agree that the
very disclosure of PM Thailand’s c.i.f. price, transaction values and
imports volume information could cause commercial damages to PM Thailand
by giving its competitors access to its sensitive business information.
For example, the nature of such information could give competitors
useful indications on PM Thailand’s business strategy, including
profit margins… .”(64)
XIII. Article
11 back to top
A. Text of
Article 11
Article 11
1.
The legislation of each Member shall provide in regard to a
determination of customs value for the right of appeal, without penalty,
by the importer or any other person liable for the payment of the duty.
2.
An initial right of appeal without penalty may be to an authority within
the customs administration or to an independent body, but the
legislation of each Member shall provide for the right of appeal without
penalty to a judicial authority.
3.
Notice of the decision on appeal shall be given to the appellant and the
reasons for such decision shall be provided in writing. The appellant
shall also be informed of any rights of further appeal.
B. Text of Interpretative Note to Article 11
Note to Article 11
1.
Article 11 provides the importer with the right
to appeal against a valuation determination made by the customs
administration for the goods being valued. Appeal may first be to a
higher level in the customs administration, but the importer shall have
the right in the final instance to appeal to the judiciary.
2.
“Without penalty” means that the importer shall not be subject to a
fine or threat of fine merely because the importer chose to exercise the
right of appeal. Payment of normal court costs and lawyers’ fees shall
not be considered to be a fine.
3.
However, nothing in Article 11 shall prevent a
Member from requiring full payment of assessed customs duties prior to
an appeal.
C. Interpretation and Application of Article 11
No jurisprudence or decision of a competent WTO
body.
XIV. Article 12
back to top
A. Text of
Article 12
Article 12
Laws, regulations,
judicial decisions and administrative rulings of general application
giving effect to this Agreement shall be published in conformity with Article
X of GATT 1994 by the country of importation concerned.
B. Interpretation and Application of Article 12
No jurisprudence or decision of a competent WTO
body.
XV. Article 13
back to top
A. Text of
Article 13
Article 13
If, in the course of determining the customs value
of imported goods, it becomes necessary to delay the final determination
of such customs value, the importer of the goods shall nevertheless be
able to withdraw them from customs if, where so required, the importer
provides sufficient guarantee in the form of a surety, a deposit or some
other appropriate instrument, covering the ultimate payment of customs
duties for which the goods may be liable. The legislation of each Member
shall make provisions for such circumstances.
B. Interpretation and Application of Article 13
48.
In US — Certain EC Products, the Panel examined whether the
increased bonding requirements imposed by the United States on certain
products imported from the European Communities were consistent with,
among others, Article II of GATT
1994 and certain provisions in the DSU. The United States put
forward Article 13 of the Customs Valuation
Agreement as a defence, arguing “that the noncompliance of the
European Communities [with a certain DSB recommendation] created a risk,
which allowed the United States to have concerns over its ability to
collect the full amount of duties which might be due”(65),
and that the increased bonding requirements were consistent with that
Article. The Panel stated that:
“In the present dispute the United States is not
claiming that, as of 3 March, it required additional guarantees because
the customs value of the EC listed imports had increased or changed on 3
March 1999. In the present dispute, there is no disagreement between the
parties on the customs value of the EC listed imports. Article
13 of the Customs Valuation Agreement allows for a guarantee system
when there is uncertainty regarding the customs value of the imported
products, but is not concerned with the level of tariff obligations as
such. Article 13 of the Customs Valuation Agreement
does not authorize changes in the applicable tariff levels between the
moment imports arrive at a US port of entry and a later date once
imports have entered the US market. As we discuss further below, the
applicable tariff (the applicable WTO obligation, the applicable law for
that purpose) must be the one in force on the day of importation, the
day the tariff is applied. In other words, Article
13 of the Customs Valuation Agreement is of no relevance to the
present dispute. We reject, therefore, this US defence.”(66)
XVI. Article 14
back to top
A. Text of
Article 14
Article 14
The notes at Annex I to this Agreement form an
integral part of this Agreement and the Articles of this Agreement are
to be read and applied in conjunction with their respective notes. Annexes
II and III also form an integral part of this Agreement.
B. Interpretation and Application of Article 14
49.
The text of Annex I is contained in Sections III.B,
IV.B, V.B,
VII.B, VIII.B,
IX.B, X.B,
XI.B, XIII.B and XXVII.A. With respect to the
interpretation and application of Annex I, see the respective sections
referring to paragraphs of Annex I.
50.
With respect to Annex II, see Section XXVIII.A below.
51.
With respect to Annex III, Section XXIX.A below.
XVII. Article
15 back to top
A. Text of
Article 15
Article 15
1.
In this Agreement:
(a)
“customs value of imported goods” means the value of goods for the
purposes of levying ad valorem duties of customs on imported goods;
(b)
“country of importation” means country or customs territory of
importation; and
(c)
“produced” includes grown, manufactured and mined.
2.
In this Agreement:
(a)
“identical goods” means goods which are the same in all respects,
including physical characteristics, quality and reputation. Minor
differences in appearance would not preclude goods otherwise conforming
to the definition from being regarded as identical;
(b)
“similar goods” means goods which, although not alike in all
respects, have like characteristics and like component materials which
enable them to perform the same functions and to be commercially
interchangeable. The quality of the goods, their reputation and the
existence of a trademark are among the factors to be considered in
determining whether goods are similar;
(c)
the terms “identical goods” and “similar goods” do not include,
as the case may be, goods which incorporate or reflect engineering,
development, artwork, design work, and plans and sketches for which no
adjustment has been made under paragraph 1(b)(iv) of Article 8 because
such elements were undertaken in the country of importation;
(d)
goods shall not be regarded as “identical goods” or “similar goods”
unless they were produced in the same country as the goods being valued;
(e)
goods produced by a different person shall be taken into account only
when there are no identical goods or similar goods, as the case may be,
produced by the same person as the goods being valued.
3.
In this Agreement “goods of the same class or kind” means goods
which fall within a group or range of goods produced by a particular
industry or industry sector, and includes identical or similar goods.
4.
For the purposes of this Agreement, persons shall be deemed to be
related only if:
(a)
they are officers or directors of one another’s businesses;
(b)
they are legally recognized partners in business;
(c)
they are employer and employee;
(d)
any person directly or indirectly owns, controls or holds 5 per cent or
more of the outstanding voting stock or shares of both of them;
(e)
one of them directly or indirectly controls the other;
(f)
both of them are directly or indirectly controlled by a third person;
(g)
together they directly or indirectly control a third person; or
(h)
they are members of the same family.
5.
Persons who are associated in business with one another in that one is
the sole agent, sole distributor or sole concessionaire, however
described, of the other shall be deemed to be related for the purposes
of this Agreement if they fall within the criteria of paragraph
4.
B. Text of Interpretative Note to Article 15
Note to Article 15: Paragraph 4
For the purposes of Article
15, the term “persons”
includes a legal person, where appropriate.
Paragraph 4(e)
For the purposes of this Agreement, one person
shall be deemed to control another when the former is legally or
operationally in a position to exercise restraint or direction over the
latter.
C. Interpretation and Application of Article 15
XVIII. Article
16 back to top
A. Text of
Article 16
Article 16
Upon written request, the importer shall have the
right to an explanation in writing from the customs administration of
the country of importation as to how the customs value of the importer’s
goods was determined.
B. Interpretation and Application of Article 16
1. Nature,
scope and extent of explanation to be provided under Article 16
52.
The Panel in Thailand — Cigarettes (Philippines) noted that
Article 16 sets forth two elements, namely (i) a written request from an
importer for an explanation in writing and (ii) a customs authority’s
obligation to provide an explanation in writing as to how the customs
value of the importer’s goods was determined.(67) The Panel
then elaborated on the nature, scope and extent of an explanation to be
provided under the second element:
“To understand the nature of the explanation
under Article 16, we first turn to the text of the provision. The term
‘explanation’ can be defined as ‘noun. 1 The action or act
of explaining. 2 A statement, circumstance, etc., which makes clear or
accounts for something… .’. The word ‘explain’ can in turn be
defined as follows: ‘1 verb trans. & intrans. Make clear or
intelligible (a meaning, difficulty, etc.); clear of obscurity or
difficulty; give details of (a matter, how, etc.) … 6 verb
trans. account for; make clear the cause or origin of’. The word
‘how’ means ‘adverb 1. In what way or manner; by what
means; in whatever way; by whatever means …’. The dictionary meaning
of the term ‘explanation’, taken together with the word ‘how’,
therefore indicates that the explanation to be provided under Article 16
requires customs authorities to ‘make clear’ and ‘give details’
of the manner and means in which a customs authority determined the
customs value of imported goods.
Further, considered in its context, as discussed
above, the explanation under Article 16 is temporarily and substantively
distinguished from the authority’s communication of its grounds for
its consideration under Article 1.2(a) as the explanation under
Article
16 must be provided after the final assessment of customs value is made
and thus must be based on complete information that formed the basis for
the customs authority’s decision. This can be contrasted with the ‘grounds’
under Article 1.2(a) that are based on the information initially
provided by the importer or otherwise.
We also heed the transparency and due process
objective that Article 16 is intended to achieve. As the Philippines
submits, an explanation under Article 16 enables importers and foreign
governments to effectively exercise their respective rights under
Articles 11 and 19 of the Customs Valuation Agreement when requesting
domestic reviewing tribunals, courts and WTO panels to determine whether
the manner or means of valuation by a customs authority was consistent
with the importing Member’s WTO obligations. It provides a window
through which domestic tribunals and WTO panels review and understand a
customs authority’s valuation determination… . our objective
assessment of the Philippines’ claims under Articles 1.1 and
1.2(a)
required us to base our evaluation of Thai Customs’ examination of the
circumstances of the sale on, inter alia, its explanation provided
pursuant to Article 16.”(68)
53.
The Panel in Thailand — Cigarettes (Philippines) also clarified
that the explanation under Article 16 must be understood to include in
its scope the reason for rejecting the transaction value as well as the
basis for the valuation method used:
“As we noted above, the primary basis for
customs value under the Customs Valuation Agreement is the transaction
value. Whenever the customs value cannot be determined based on the
transaction value under Article 1 for the reasons authorized under the
same provision, the methods under Articles 2 through
7 are to be used in
the sequential order. Therefore, it seems logical for a customs
authority to explain the basis for rejecting the transaction value in
situations where the authority relies on a valuation method other than
the transaction value under Article
1. Interpreting otherwise, in our
view, would defeat the procedural objective of Article 16 to preserve
due process rights and transparency in the context of customs value
determination. This is particularly the case because, if not through an
explanation under Article 16, the importer would be deprived of an
opportunity to understand the customs authority’s determination of the
final customs value for the concerned goods. Therefore, we consider that
the explanation under Article 16 must be understood to include in its
scope the reason for rejecting the transaction value as well as the
basis for the valuation method used.”(69)
54.
Further, the Panel in Thailand — Cigarettes (Philippines)
concluded that the explanation to be provided under Article 16 must be
sufficient to make clear and give details of how the customs value of
the importers’ goods was determined, including the basis for rejecting
the transaction value and other valuation methods that sequentially
precede the method actually used by the customs authorities:
“We now address the extent of an explanation to
be provided under Article 16, namely how extensive and detailed an
explanation should be to satisfy the obligations under Article
16. The
ordinary meaning of the word ‘explanation’, considered in its
context and in the light of the object and purpose of Article 16 as
discussed above, suggests that customs authorities’ explanation must
include, at the minimum, the basis for rejecting the transaction value
in the light of the information provided by the importer, the
identification of the method used and the illustration of how the method
was applied in reaching the final customs value.
In this connection, we observe that the extent of
an explanation to be provided under Article 16 is not the same as that
under the equivalent provisions of the WTO agreements on trade remedy
measures. The obligations imposed on domestic authorities to explain
determinations in the context of the trade remedy rules are much more
detailed and specific. For example, Article 12.2 of the Anti-Dumping
Agreement refers to ‘sufficiently detailed explanations’ and
‘a full explanation’. Article 4.1(c) of the Agreement on
Safeguards requires a detailed analysis of the case under
investigation as well as a demonstration of the relevance of the factors
examined. In contrast to these provisions, Article 16 of the Customs
Valuation Agreement contains succinct language that the importer shall
have the right to ‘an explanation … as to how the customs value of
the importer’s goods was determined’. The absence of any modifying
words such as ‘detailed’ or ‘full’ before the term ‘explanation’
in Article 16 should be taken into account in clarifying the extent of
the explanation under Article 16. Moreover, the obligation to provide
‘an explanation in writing’ under Article 16 arises only if there is
a written request from the importer. This too shows that the standard
for the explanation required under Article 16 of the Customs Valuation
Agreement is less stringent than that under the Anti-Dumping Agreement,
the SCM Agreement or the Agreement on Safeguards.
The above considerations lead us to conclude that
although not as extensive and detailed explanations as required under
the WTO agreements on trade remedy measures, the explanation to be
provided under Article 16 of the Customs Valuation Agreement must be
sufficient to make clear and give details of how the customs value of
the importer’s goods was determined, including the basis for rejecting
the transaction value and other valuation methods that sequentially
precede the method actually used by the customs authorities.”(70)
2. Form and timing of
explanation to be provided under Article 16
55.
In Thailand — Cigarettes (Philippines), Thailand raised an
argument that in evaluating the Philippines’ claim under Article
16,
if the Panel considers the information provided in a formal explanation
insufficient, the Panel should consider the circumstances in which the
explanation provided by Thai Customs pursuant to Article 16 was
provided. The Panel considered that this argument raised the question of
whether a meeting and/ or the minutes of a meeting that is not formally
part of the written explanation provided by a customs authority pursuant
to Article 16 can nevertheless be considered as constituting the
explanation. The Panel explained that:
“As in the case of the requirement to publish a
report under Article 3.1 of the Agreement on
Safeguards,
Article 16 of
the Customs Valuation Agreement does not dictate the manner in which a
written explanation must be provided. To that extent, we agree that the
question of whether a certain instrument can constitute an explanation
under Article 16 will have to be decided on a case-by-case
basis. We also
agree that if an explanation is to be given in multiple parts, factors
such as ‘the overall structure, logic and coherence’ among these
various parts must be considered to determine the appropriateness of the
explanation given on the determination of the customs value of the goods
imported. Furthermore, if explanations are provided in multiple parts,
it must also be considered whether such a fact deteriorates the
transparency and due process objective of Article
16.”(71)
56.
The Panel in Thailand — Cigarettes (Philippines) further
elaborated on the timing and form of an explanation to be provided under
Article 16:
“Article 16 specifically requires an explanation
to be provided ‘in writing’. In the light of this, we do not
consider the discussion that took place during the meeting on 6 March
2007 as forming part of the written explanation provided in accordance
with Article 16. Furthermore, the subject meeting took place before
the final assessment of the customs value for the entries at issue was
made, while the requirement to provide an explanation of the
determination of the customs value arises once the final assessment is
made. To recall, Thai Customs started issuing the Notices of Assessment
for these entries as of 16 March 2007. In fact, evidence shows that
further information was submitted to Thai Customs between the 6 March
2007 meeting and 16 March 2007… . The considerations above, taken
together, suggest that although discussions at the 6 March 2007 meeting
may be viewed as part of the process of determining the customs value of
the entries at issue, the meeting itself does not constitute a written
explanation as to the final customs determination. We consider that
accepting the position that a discussion(s) before the final assessment
of the customs value was even made forms an explanation, would not be in
line with the purpose of Article 16 to maintain transparency and due
process in the customs valuation process.”(72)
57.
The Panel further found that the minutes of the concerned meeting did
not constitute part of the written explanation within the meaning of
Article 16. In reaching this conclusion, the Panel considered both the
formalistic and substantive aspects of the minutes, including where both
the original and revised minutes were sent, whether the minutes were
referenced in the written explanation sent to the importer, and whether
the original and revised minutes refer to the same alternative valuation
method.(73)
3. Explanations to be
provided under Articles 1.2(a) and 16
58.
The Panel in Thailand — Cigarettes (Philippines) explained that
the obligation under Article 16 is to provide a formally sufficient
explanation to make clear and give details of the customs authority’s
decision to reject the transaction value and how the alternative
valuation method was applied to derive the customs value in a given
case. This obligation, according to the Panel, should be distinguished
from the obligation to explain a customs authority’s grounds under
Article 1.2(a):
“Further, we recall that we considered the
substantive content of the explanation provided by Thai Customs of its
determination in the context of reviewing the Philippines’ claims with
respect to Thailand’s obligations under Articles
1.1 and 1.2(a). Our
examination of the explanation in that context should be distinguished
from our evaluation of whether the explanation satisfies the
requirements within the meaning of Article 16. As the Philippines
responded to a question from the Panel, under a hypothetical in which an
authority determines the customs value using a spinning wheel, the
authority would be found to have complied with its obligations under
Article 16 if an authority concluded that the transaction value was not
acceptable and provided an adequate explanation for how the spinning
wheel was applied in a specific case. This will be the case even though
the disclosed reasons would be insufficient to prove a compliance with
Articles 1.1 and 1.2(a) in rejecting the transaction value. If, however,
no (or insufficient) reasons, including, for example, how the spinning
wheel was applied in a specific case, were disclosed in the explanation,
the authority would violate both Articles 1.1 and
1.2(a) as well as
Article 16. In this light, our assessment of the Article 16 claim should
be focused on whether an explanation is formally sufficient to
make clear and give details of its decision to reject the transaction
value and how the valuation method was applied to derive the customs
value.”(74)
XIX. Article 17
back to top
A. Text of
Article 17
Article 17
Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed as
restricting or calling into question the rights of customs
administrations to satisfy themselves as to the truth or accuracy of any
statement, document or declaration presented for customs valuation
purposes.
B. Interpretation and Application of Article 17
59.
Pursuant to the Ministerial mandate at Marrakesh, at its meeting of 12
May 1995, the Committee on Customs Valuation adopted the following
decision:(75)
“Decision regarding cases where Customs
Administrations have reasons to doubt the truth or accuracy of the
declared value
Ministers invite the Committee on Customs
Valuation established under the Agreement on Implementation of Article
VII of GATT 1994 to take the following decision:
The Committee on Customs Valuation,
Reaffirming that the transaction value is
the primary basis of valuation under the Agreement on Implementation of
Article VII of GATT 1994 (hereinafter referred to as the “Agreement”);
Recognizing that the customs administration
may have to address cases where it has reason to doubt the truth or
accuracy of the particulars or of documents produced by traders in
support of a declared value;
Emphasizing that in so doing the customs
administration should not prejudice the legitimate commercial interests
of traders;
Taking into account Article 17 of the
Agreement, paragraph 6 of Annex III to the
Agreement, and the relevant
decisions of the Technical Committee on Customs Valuation;
Decides as follows:
1. When a declaration has
been presented and where the customs administration has reason to doubt
the truth or accuracy of the particulars or of documents produced in
support of this declaration, the customs administration may ask the
importer to provide further explanation, including documents or other
evidence, that the declared value represents the total amount actually
paid or payable for the imported goods, adjusted in accordance with the
provisions of Article 8. If, after receiving further information, or in
the absence of a response, the customs administration still has
reasonable doubts about the truth or accuracy of the declared value, it
may, bearing in mind the provisions of Article 11, be deemed that the
customs value of the imported goods cannot be determined under the
provisions of Article 1. Before taking a final decision, the customs
administration shall communicate to the importer, in writing if
requested, its grounds for doubting the truth or accuracy of the
particulars or documents produced and the importer shall be given a
reasonable opportunity to respond. When a final decision is made, the
customs administration shall communicate to the importer in writing its
decision and the grounds therefor.
2. It is entirely
appropriate in applying the Agreement for one Member to assist another
Member on mutually agreed terms.”
60.
Further to this Decision, at the Doha Ministerial Conference Members
decided that the Agreement on the Implementation of Article VII of GATT
1994:
“[U]nderlines the importance of strengthening
cooperation between the customs administrations of Members in the
prevention of customs fraud. In this regard, it is agreed that, further
to the 1994 Ministerial Decision Regarding Cases Where Customs
Administrations Have Reasons to Doubt the Truth or Accuracy of the
Declared Value, when the customs administration of an importing Member
has reasonable grounds to doubt the truth or accuracy of the declared
value, it may seek assistance from the customs administration of an
exporting Member on the value of the good concerned. In such cases, the
exporting Member shall offer cooperation and assistance, consistent with
its domestic laws and procedures, including furnishing information on
the export value of the good concerned. Any information provided in this
context shall be treated in accordance with Article 10 of the Customs
Valuation Agreement. Furthermore, recognizing the legitimate concerns
expressed by the customs administrations of several importing Members on
the accuracy of the declared value, the Committee on Customs Valuation
is directed to identify and assess practical means to address such
concerns, including the exchange of information on export values and to
report to the General Council by the end of 2002 at the latest.”(76)
61.
At its meeting on 10–12 and 20 December 2002, the General Council took
note of the report of the Customs Valuation Committee(77), and
authorized the Committee to continue its work under the existing mandate(78) and to report to the General Council when it had
completed this work.
Part II: Administration, Consultations and
Dispute Settlement
XX. Article 18
back to top
A. Text of
Article 18
Article 18: Institutions
1.
There is hereby established a Committee on Customs Valuation (referred
to in this Agreement as “the Committee”) composed of representatives
from each of the Members. The Committee shall elect its own Chairman and
shall normally meet once a year, or as is otherwise envisaged by the
relevant provisions of this Agreement, for the purpose of affording
Members the opportunity to consult on matters relating to the
administration of the customs valuation system by any Member as it might
affect the operation of this Agreement or the furtherance of its
objectives and carrying out such other responsibilities as may be
assigned to it by the Members. The WTO Secretariat shall act as the
secretariat to the Committee.
2.
There shall be established a Technical Committee on Customs Valuation
(referred to in this Agreement as “the Technical Committee”) under
the auspices of the Customs Co-operation Council (referred to in this
Agreement as “the CCC”), which shall carry out the responsibilities
described in Annex II to this Agreement and shall operate in accordance
with the rules of procedure contained therein.
B. Interpretation and Application of Article 18
1. Observer
status
62.
At its meeting of 12 May 1995, the Committee on Customs Valuation agreed
on observership in its meetings.(79)
2. Rules of
procedure
63.
On 1 December 1995, the Council for Trade in Goods approved the Rules of
Procedure for meetings of the Committee on Customs Valuation adopted by
the Committee on Customs Valuation.(80)
3. Monitoring of the
Agreement on Preshipment Inspection
64.
At its meeting of 15 June 1999, the General Council adopted the
recommendation of the Working Party on Preshipment Inspection(81)
that the future monitoring of the Agreement on Preshipment Inspection
should be undertaken initially by the Committee on Customs Valuation,
and that Preshipment Inspection should be a standing item on its agenda.
XXI. Article 19
back to top
A. Text of
Article 19
Article 19: Consultations and Dispute Settlement
1.
Except as otherwise provided herein, the Dispute Settlement
Understanding is applicable to consultations and the settlement of
disputes under this Agreement.
2.
If any Member considers that any benefit accruing to it, directly or
indirectly, under this Agreement is being nullified or impaired, or that
the achievement of any objective of this Agreement is being impeded, as
a result of the actions of another Member or of other Members, it may,
with a view to reaching a mutually satisfactory solution of this matter,
request consultations with the Member or Members in question. Each
Member shall afford sympathetic consideration to any request from
another Member for consultations.
3.
The Technical Committee shall provide, upon request, advice and
assistance to Members engaged in consultations.
4.
At the request of a party to the dispute, or on its own initiative, a
panel established to examine a dispute relating to the provisions of
this Agreement may request the Technical Committee to carry out an
examination of any questions requiring technical consideration. The
panel shall determine the terms of reference of the Technical Committee
for the particular dispute and set a time period for receipt of the
report of the Technical Committee. The panel shall take into
consideration the report of the Technical Committee. In the event that
the Technical Committee is unable to reach consensus on a matter
referred to it pursuant to this paragraph, the panel should afford the
parties to the dispute an opportunity to present their views on the
matter to the panel.
5.
Confidential information provided to the panel shall not be disclosed
without formal authorization from the person, body or authority
providing such information. Where such information is requested from the
panel but release of such information by the panel is not authorized, a
non-confidential summary of this information, authorized by the person,
body or authority providing the information, shall be provided.
B. Interpretation and Application of Article 19
1. Articles of the Customs Valuation Agreement invoked in panel and
Appellate Body proceedings
65.
For a table of disputes under the Customs Valuation Agreement, see the
table of “Articles of the Covered Agreements Invoked in Panel and
Appellate Body Proceedings” in the Chapter on the DSU.
Part III: Special and Differential Treatment
XXII. Article 20
back to top
A. Text of
Article 20
Article 20
1.
Developing country Members not party to the Agreement on Implementation
of Article VII
of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade done on 12
April 1979 may delay application of the provisions of this Agreement for
a period not exceeding five years from the date of entry into force of
the WTO Agreement for such Members. Developing country Members who
choose to delay application of this Agreement shall notify the
Director-General of the WTO accordingly.
2.
In addition to paragraph 1, developing country Members not party to the
Agreement on Implementation of Article VII of the General Agreement on
Tariffs and Trade done on 12 April 1979 may delay application of paragraph 2(b)(iii) of Article 1 and
Article 6 for a period not
exceeding three years following their application of all other
provisions of this Agreement. Developing country Members that choose to
delay application of the provisions specified in this paragraph shall
notify the Director-General of the WTO accordingly.
3.
Developed country Members shall furnish, on mutually agreed terms,
technical assistance to developing country Members that so request. On
this basis developed country Members shall draw up programmes of
technical assistance which may include, inter alia, training of
personnel, assistance in preparing implementation measures, access to
sources of information regarding customs valuation methodology, and
advice on the application of the provisions of this Agreement.
B. Interpretation and Application of Article 20
1. General
66.
At its meeting of 31 January 1995, the General Council took a decision
on the Continued Application under the WTO Customs Valuation Agreement
of Invocations of Provisions for Developing Countries for Delayed
Application and Reservations under the Customs Valuation Agreement 1979.(82)
67.
At its meeting of 12 May 1995, the Committee on Customs Valuation agreed
to continue the practice established by the Tokyo Round Committee on
Information on Technical Assistance, in order to ensure transparency on
technical assistance activities.(83)
2. Article 20.1
68.
Pursuant to paragraph 1 of Article 20, 58 developing country Members,
which were not party to the 1979 Agreement on Implementation of Article
VII of the GATT, requested a five-year delay of the application of the
WTO Customs Valuation Agreement. This five-year delay was computed from
the date of entry into force of the WTO Agreement for each of the
Members concerned.(84) However, 22 Members requested a further
extension of this five-year period pursuant to paragraph 1 of Annex
III.
The length of this additional extension varied by Member.(85)
69.
At its meeting of 15 December 2000, the General Council adopted a
decision concerning implementation related issues and concerns in
respect of several WTO Agreements.(86) With respect to the
Customs Valuation Agreement, the General Council decided:
“Noting that the process of examination and
approval, in the Customs Valuation Committee, of individual requests
from Members for extension of the five-year delay period in Article 20.1
is proceeding well, the General Council encourages the Committee to
continue this work.”(87)
3. Article 20.2
70.
Pursuant to paragraph 2 of Article 20, 51 developing country Members
delayed application of paragraph
2(b)(ii) of Article 1 and of Article 6
for three years from the date of entry into force of the WTO Agreement
for each of them.(88)
4. Article 20.3
71.
At its meeting on 24 July 2001 the Committee agreed on resuming its work
on technical assistance in response to a proposal from the European
Communities and adopted its work programme on technical assistance(89).
On 26 February 2002, the Committee decided to start its work programme
with a seminar on technical assistance(90).
5. Annex III
72.
The special and differential treatment for developing countries in
respect of the application of the Customs Valuation Agreement is also
developed in Annex III. See Section XXVIII
below.
Part IV: Final Provisions
XXIII. Article
21 back to top
A. Text of
Article 21
Article 21: Reservations
Reservations may not be entered in respect of any
of the provisions of this Agreement without the consent of the other
Members.
B. Interpretation and Application of Article 21
73.
At its meeting on 12 May 1995, the Committee on Customs Valuation
adopted the decisions of the Tokyo Round Committee on Customs Valuation
on reservations.(91)
XXIV. Article 22
back to top
A. Text of
Article 22
Article 22: National Legislation
1.
Each Member shall ensure, not later than the date of application of the
provisions of this Agreement for it, the conformity of its laws,
regulations and administrative procedures with the provisions of this
Agreement.
2.
Each Member shall inform the Committee of any changes in its laws and
regulations relevant to this Agreement and in the administration of such
laws and regulations.
B. Interpretation and Application of Article 22
1. Notification
74.
At its meeting on 12 May 1995, the Committee on Customs Valuation agreed
to adopt for all WTO Members the procedures regarding notification and
circulation of national legislation that had been in use by the Tokyo
Round Committee on Customs Valuation.(92)
2. Checklist of
Issues
75.
As the basis of an initial examination of national legislation, the
Committee on Customs Valuation agreed to adopt the checklist of issues
elaborated by the Tokyo Round Committee on Customs Valuation.(93)
It also decided that in the cases of Members who were Tokyo Round
signatories and whose legislation had already been examined, a
communication from those Members could be sent to the Secretariat
indicating that their responses to the Checklist of Issues remained
valid under the WTO Customs Valuation Agreement.(94)
XXV. Article 23
back to top
A. Text of
Article 23
Article 23: Review
The Committee shall review annually the
implementation and operation of this Agreement taking into account the
objectives thereof. The Committee shall annually inform the Council for
Trade in Goods of developments during the period covered by such reviews(95).
B. Interpretation and Application of Article 23
76.
The Committee on Customs Valuation reports to the Council for Trade in
Goods on an annual basis.(96)
XXVI. Article 24
back to top
A. Text of
Article 24
Article 24: Secretariat
This Agreement shall be serviced by the WTO
Secretariat except in regard to those responsibilities specifically
assigned to the Technical Committee, which will be serviced by the CCC
Secretariat.
B. Interpretation and Application of Article 24
No jurisprudence or decision of a competent WTO
body.
XXVII. Annex I
back to top
A. Text of Annex I
Annex I: Interpretative Notes
General Note Sequential
Application of Valuation Methods
1. Articles 1 through
7 define how the customs value of imported goods is
to be determined under the provisions of this Agreement. The methods of
valuation are set out in a sequential order of application. The primary
method for customs valuation is defined in Article 1 and imported goods
are to be valued in accordance with the provisions of this Article
whenever the conditions prescribed therein are fulfilled.
2.
Where the customs value cannot be determined under the provisions of
Article 1, it is to be determined by proceeding sequentially through the
succeeding Articles to the first such Article under which the customs
value can be determined. Except as provided in Article
4, it is only
when the customs value cannot be determined under the provisions of a
particular Article that the provisions of the next Article in the
sequence can be used.
3.
If the importer does not request that the order of Articles 5 and
6 be
reversed, the normal order of the sequence is to be followed. If the
importer does so request but it then proves impossible to determine the
customs value under the provisions of Article
6, the customs value is to
be determined under the provisions of Article
5, if it can be so
determined.
4.
Where the customs value cannot be determined under the provisions of
Articles 1 through 6 it is to be determined under the provisions of
Article 7.
Use of Generally Accepted
Accounting Principles
1. “Generally accepted accounting principles” refers to the recognized
consensus or substantial authoritative support within a country at a
particular time as to which economic resources and obligations should be
recorded as assets and liabilities, which changes in assets and
liabilities should be recorded, how the assets and liabilities and
changes in them should be measured, what information should be disclosed
and how it should be disclosed, and which financial statements should be
prepared. These standards may be broad guidelines of general application
as well as detailed practices and procedures.
2.
For the purposes of this Agreement, the customs administration of each
Member shall utilize information prepared in a manner consistent with
generally accepted accounting principles in the country which is
appropriate for the Article in question. For example, the determination
of usual profit and general expenses under the provisions of Article 5
would be carried out utilizing information prepared in a manner
consistent with generally accepted accounting principles of the country
of importation. On the other hand, the determination of usual profit and
general expenses under the provisions of Article 6 would be carried out
utilizing information prepared in a manner consistent with generally
accepted accounting principles of the country of production. As a
further example, the determination of an element provided for in
paragraph 1(b)(ii) of Article 8 undertaken in the country of importation
would be carried out utilizing information in a manner consistent with
the generally accepted accounting principles of that country.
…
B. Interpretation and Application of Annex I
77.
See Sections III.B, IV.B,
V.B, VII.B,
VIII.B, IX.B,
X.B, XI.B,
XIII.B
and XXVII.B which contain the respective parts of
Annex I.
XXVIII. Annex II
back to top
A. Text of Annex II
Annex II: Technical Committee on Customs Valuation
1.
In accordance with Article 18 of this Agreement, the Technical Committee
shall be established under the auspices of the CCC with a view to
ensuring, at the technical level, uniformity in interpretation and
application of this Agreement.
2.
The responsibilities of the Technical Committee shall include the
following:
(a)
to examine specific technical problems arising in the day-to-day
administration of the customs valuation system of Members and to give
advisory opinions on appropriate solutions based upon the facts
presented;
(b)
to study, as requested, valuation laws, procedures and practices as they
relate to this Agreement and to prepare reports on the results of such
studies;
(c)
to prepare and circulate annual reports on the technical aspects of the
operation and status of this Agreement;
(d)
to furnish such information and advice on any matters concerning the
valuation of imported goods for customs purposes as may be requested by
any Member or the Committee. Such information and advice may take the
form of advisory opinions, commentaries or explanatory notes;
(e)
to facilitate, as requested, technical assistance to Members with a view
to furthering the international acceptance of this Agreement;
(f)
to carry out an examination of a matter referred to it by a panel under
Article 19 of this Agreement; and
(g)
to exercise such other responsibilities as the Committee may assign to
it.
General
3.
The Technical Committee shall attempt to conclude its work on specific
matters, especially those referred to it by Members, the Committee or a
panel, in a reasonably short period of time. As provided in paragraph 4
of Article 19, a panel shall set a specific time period for receipt of a
report of the Technical Committee and the Technical Committee shall
provide its report within that period.
4.
The Technical Committee shall be assisted as appropriate in its
activities by the CCC Secretariat.
Representation
5.
Each Member shall have the right to be represented on the Technical
Committee. Each Member may nominate one delegate and one or more
alternates to be its representatives on the Technical Committee. Such a
Member so represented on the Technical Committee is referred to in this
Annex as a “member of the Technical Committee”. Representatives of
members of the Technical Committee may be assisted by advisers. The WTO
Secretariat may also attend such meetings with observer status.
6.
Members of the CCC which are not Members of the WTO may be represented
at meetings of the Technical Committee by one delegate and one or more
alternates. Such representatives shall attend meetings of the Technical
Committee as observers.
7.
Subject to the approval of the Chairman of the Technical Committee, the
Secretary-General of the CCC (referred to in this Annex as “the
Secretary-General”) may invite representatives of governments which
are neither Members of the WTO nor members of the CCC and
representatives of international governmental and trade organizations to
attend meetings of the Technical Committee as observers.
8.
Nominations of delegates, alternates and advisers to meetings of the
Technical Committee shall be made to the Secretary-General.
Technical Committee Meetings
9.
The Technical Committee shall meet as necessary but at least two times a
year. The date of each meeting shall be fixed by the Technical Committee
at its preceding session. The date of the meeting may be varied either
at the request of any member of the Technical Committee concurred in by
a simple majority of the members of the Technical Committee or, in cases
requiring urgent attention, at the request of the Chairman.
Notwithstanding the provisions in sentence 1 of this paragraph, the
Technical Committee shall meet as necessary to consider matters referred
to it by a panel under the provisions of Article 19 of this
Agreement.
10.
The meetings of the Technical Committee shall be held at the
headquarters of the CCC unless otherwise decided.
11.
The Secretary-General shall inform all members of the Technical
Committee and those included under paragraphs 6 and
7 at least 30 days
in advance, except in urgent cases, of the opening date of each session
of the Technical Committee.
Agenda
12.
A provisional agenda for each session shall be drawn up by the
Secretary-General and circulated to the members of the Technical
Committee and to those included under paragraphs 6 and
7 at least 30
days in advance of the session, except in urgent cases. This agenda
shall comprise all items whose inclusion has been approved by the
Technical Committee during its preceding session, all items included by
the Chairman on the Chairman’s own initiative, and all items whose
inclusion has been requested by the Secretary-General, by the Committee
or by any member of the Technical Committee
13.
The Technical Committee shall determine its agenda at the opening of
each session. During the session the agenda may be altered at any time
by the Technical Committee.
Officers and Conduct of Business
14.
The Technical Committee shall elect from among the delegates of its
members a Chairman and one or more Vice-Chairmen. The Chairman and
Vice-Chairmen shall each hold office for a period of one year. The
retiring Chairman and Vice-Chairmen are eligible for re-election. The
mandate of a Chairman or Vice-Chairman who no longer represents a member
of the Technical Committee shall terminate automatically.
15.
If the Chairman is absent from any meeting or part thereof, a
Vice-Chairman shall preside. In that event, the latter shall have the
same powers and duties as the Chairman.
16.
The Chairman of the meeting shall participate in the proceedings of the
Technical Committee as such and not as the representative of a member of
the Technical Committee.
17.
In addition to exercising the other powers conferred upon the Chairman
by these rules, the Chairman shall declare the opening and closing of
each meeting, direct the discussion, accord the right to speak, and,
pursuant to these rules, have control of the proceedings. The Chairman
may also call a speaker to order if the speaker’s remarks are not
relevant.
18.
During discussion of any matter a delegation may raise a point of order.
In this event, the Chairman shall immediately state a ruling. If this
ruling is challenged, the Chairman shall submit it to the meeting for
decision and it shall stand unless overruled.
19.
The Secretary-General, or officers of the CCC Secretariat designated by
the Secretary-General, shall perform the secretarial work of meetings of
the Technical Committee.
Quorum and Voting
20.
Representatives of a simple majority of the members of the Technical
Committee shall constitute a quorum.
21.
Each member of the Technical Committee shall have one vote. A decision
of the Technical Committee shall be taken by a majority comprising at
least two thirds of the members present. Regardless of the outcome of
the vote on a particular matter, the Technical Committee shall be free
to make a full report to the Committee and to the CCC on that matter
indicating the different views expressed in the relevant discussions.
Notwithstanding the above provisions of this paragraph, on matters
referred to it by a panel, the Technical Committee shall take decisions
by consensus. Where no agreement is reached in the Technical Committee
on the question referred to it by a panel, the Technical Committee shall
provide a report detailing the facts of the matter and indicating the
views of the members.
Languages and Records
22.
The official languages of the Technical Committee shall be English,
French and Spanish. Speeches or statements made in any of these three
languages shall be immediately translated into the other official
languages unless all delegations agree to dispense with translation.
Speeches or statements made in any other language shall be translated
into English, French and Spanish, subject to the same conditions, but in
that event the delegation concerned shall provide the translation into
English, French or Spanish. Only English, French and Spanish shall be
used for the official documents of the Technical Committee. Memoranda
and correspondence for the consideration of the Technical Committee must
be presented in one of the official languages.
23.
The Technical Committee shall draw up a report of all its sessions and,
if the Chairman considers it necessary, minutes or summary records of
its meetings. The Chairman or a designee of the Chairman shall report on
the work of the Technical Committee at each meeting of the Committee and
at each meeting of the CCC.
B. Interpretation and Application of Annex II
No jurisprudence or decision of a competent WTO
body.
78.
With respect to the practice developed under the GATT 1947, see GATT
Analytical Index, page 265.
XXIX. Annex III
back to top
A. Text of Annex III
Annex III
1.
The five-year delay in the application of the provisions of the
Agreement by developing country Members provided for in paragraph 1 of
Article 20 may, in practice, be insufficient for certain developing
country Members. In such cases a developing country Member may request
before the end of the period referred to in paragraph 1 of Article 20 an
extension of such period, it being understood that the Members will give
sympathetic consideration to such a request in cases where the
developing country Member in question can show good cause.
2.
Developing countries which currently value goods on the basis of
officially established minimum values may wish to make a reservation to
enable them to retain such values on a limited and transitional basis
under such terms and conditions as may be agreed to by the Members.
3.
Developing countries which consider that the reversal of the sequential
order at the request of the importer provided for in Article 4 of the
Agreement may give rise to real difficulties for them may wish to make a
reservation to Article 4 in the following terms:
“The Government of ………… reserves the
right to provide that the relevant provision of Article 4 of the
Agreement shall apply only when the customs authorities agree to the
request to reverse the order of Articles 5 and
6.”
If developing countries make such a reservation,
the Members shall consent to it under Article 21 of the
Agreement.
4.
Developing countries may wish to make a reservation with respect to
paragraph 2 of Article 5 of the Agreement in the following terms:
“The Government of ………… reserves the
right to provide that paragraph 2 of Article 5 of the Agreement shall be
applied in accordance with the provisions of the relevant note thereto
whether or not the importer so requests.”
If developing countries make such a reservation,
the Members shall consent to it under Article 21 of the
Agreement.
5.
Certain developing countries may have problems in the implementation of
Article 1 of the Agreement insofar as it relates to importations into
their countries by sole agents, sole distributors and sole
concessionaires. If such problems arise in practice in developing
country Members applying the Agreement, a study of this question shall
be made, at the request of such Members, with a view to finding
appropriate solutions.
6. Article 17 recognizes that in applying the Agreement, customs
administrations may need to make enquiries concerning the truth or
accuracy of any statement, document or declaration presented to them for
customs valuation purposes. The Article thus acknowledges that enquiries
may be made which are, for example, aimed at verifying that the elements
of value declared or presented to customs in connection with a
determination of customs value are complete and correct. Members,
subject to their national laws and procedures, have the right to expect
the full cooperation of importers in these enquiries.
7.
The price actually paid or payable includes all payments actually made
or to be made as a condition of sale of the imported goods, by the buyer
to the seller, or by the buyer to a third party to satisfy an obligation
of the seller(97).
B. Interpretation and Application of Annex III
1. Paragraph 1
79.
With respect to the extension of the five-year delay in the application
of the Customs Valuation Agreement under paragraph 1 of Annex
III, see
paragraph 69 above.
2. Paragraph 2
80.
Pursuant to the Ministerial Decision at Marrakesh, at its meeting of 12
May 1995, the Committee on Customs Valuation adopted the following
decision:(98)
“Decision on Texts relating to Minimum Values
and Imports by Sole Agents, Sole Distributors and Sole Concessionaires
Ministers decide
to refer the following texts to the Committee on Customs Valuation
established under the Agreement on Implementation of Article VII of GATT
1994, for adoption.
I
Where a developing country makes a reservation to
retain officially established minimum values within the terms of
paragraph 2 of Annex III and shows good cause, the Committee shall give
the request for the reservation sympathetic consideration.
Where a reservation is consented to, the terms and
conditions referred to in paragraph 2 of Annex III shall take full
account of the development, financial and trade needs of the developing
country concerned.
II
1. A number of developing
countries have a concern that problems may exist in the valuation of
imports by sole agents, sole distributors and sole concessionaires.
Under paragraph 1 of Article 20, developing country Members have a
period of delay of up to five years prior to the application of the
Agreement. In this context, developing country Members availing
themselves of this provision could use the period to conduct appropriate
studies and to take such other actions as are necessary to facilitate
application.
2. In consideration of
this, the Committee recommends that the Customs Co-operation Council
assist developing country Members, in accordance with the provisions of
Annex II, to formulate and conduct studies in areas identified as being
of potential concern, including those relating to importations by sole
agents, sole distributors and sole concessionaires.”
81.
Pursuant to paragraph 2 of Annex III, 38 Members made reservations
regarding officially established minimum values.(99) The
establishment of minimum values allows developing countries to apply the
same minimum values to all identical products, without the need to look
for the value that the products would have in the event of the
application of the mandates contained in the present Agreement. No
Members currently maintain this reservation.
3. Paragraph 3
82.
Pursuant to paragraph 3 of Annex III, at the time of the 2010 annual
review meeting of the implementation and operation of the Agreement on
Customs Valuation, 53 Members maintained reservations concerning
reversal of sequential order of Articles 5 and
6.(100)
4. Paragraph 4
83.
Pursuant to paragraph 4 of Annex III, at the time of the 2006 annual
review meeting of the implementation and operation of the Agreement on
Customs Valuation, 51 Members maintained reservations concerning
application of Article 5.2 whether or not the importer so
requests.(101)
5. Paragraph 6
84.
See Interpretation and Application of Article 17,
paragraphs 59–60
above.
Footnotes:
63. Panel Report, Thailand
— Cigarettes (Philippines), para. 7.407. back to text
64. Panel Report, Thailand
— Cigarettes (Philippines), paras. 7.408–7.410. back to text
65. Panel Report, US
— Certain EC
Products, para. 6.75. back to text
66. Panel Report, US
— Certain EC
Products, para. 6.77. back to text
67. Panel Report, Thailand
— Cigarettes (Philippines), para. 7.231. back to text
68. Panel Report, Thailand
— Cigarettes (Philippines), paras. 7.232–7.234. back to text
69. Panel Report, Thailand
— Cigarettes (Philippines), para. 7.237. back to text
70. Panel Report, Thailand
— Cigarettes (Philippines), paras. 7.238–7.240. back to text
71. Panel Report, Thailand
— Cigarettes (Philippines), para. 7.259. back to text
72. Panel Report, Thailand
— Cigarettes (Philippines), para. 7.262. back to text
73. Panel Report, Thailand
— Cigarettes (Philippines), paras. 7.263–7.265. back to text
74. Panel Report, Thailand
— Cigarettes (Philippines), para. 7.241. back to text
75. G/VAL/M/1, Section F. The text of
the decision can be found in G/VAL/1.
back to text
76. WT/MIN(01)/17,
para. 8.3. back to text
77. G/VAL/50.
back to text
78. WT/GC/70, para. 1.i).
back to text
79. G/VAL/M/1, Sections D and E.
back to text
80. G/C/M/7. The text of the adopted
rules of procedure can be found in G/L/146.
back to text
81. WT/GC/M/40/Add.3, section 5. The
text of the recommendation can be found in G/L/300, para. 23.
back to text
82. WT/GC/M/1, section 11. The text of
the adopted decision can be found in WT/L/38.
back to text
83. G/VAL/M/1,
paras. 80–81; see also G/VAL/W/1, Section B.7. The text of the agreement can be found in
G/VAL/5, Section B.4. Its revisions can be found in G/VAL/8.
back to text
84. These 58 developing Members which
requested a five-year extension were: Bahrain, Bangladesh, Benin,
Bolivia, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cameroon, Central
Africa Republic, Chad, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire,
Cuba, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Gabon,
Ghana, Guatemala, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Indonesia, Israel, Jamaica,
Kenya, Kuwait, Madagascar, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania,
Mauritius, Morocco, Myanmar, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Pakistan, Paraguay,
Peru, Philippines, Senegal, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Togo,
Tunisia, Uganda, United Arab Emirates, Uruguay, Venezuela, Zambia. On 25
April 2002 none of them maintained this special and differential
treatment provision, G/L/590 pf 5. See G/VAL/W/3, 13, 22, 29, 43, 77,
89, 108, 124, 136 and G/VAL/2/Rev.19.
back to text
85. The following eight Members, for
which the five-year delay period expired before or on 1 January 2000,
requested an additional extension pursuant to paragraph 1 of Annex
III:
(i) Bahrain (requested three years (consultation pending) — G/VAL/W/57
and Adds.1–4); (ii) Côte d’Ivoire (requested five years, extension
granted for 18 months (expired 01.07.01) — G/VAL/32); (iii) Kuwait
(requested two years, extension granted for one year (expired 01.01.01)
— G/VAL/18); (iv) Myanmar (requested five years, extension granted for
two years (expired on 01.01.02) — G/VAL/28); (v) Paraguay (requested
two years, extension granted for one year (expired 01.01.01) — G/VAL/17/Rev.1); (vi) Senegal (requested five years, extension granted
for six months (expired 30.06.01) — G/VAL/39); (vii) Sri Lanka
(requested one year, extension granted for one year — G/VAL/23,
requested second year extension, granted for 10 months — G/VAL/41,
requested third extension, granted for 6 months to 30.04.02 — G/VAL/42, requested fourth extension, granted for six months to 31.10.02
— G/L/46, requested
fifth extension, four months expired 28.02.03); and
(viii) Tanzania (extension granted for one year (expired 01.01.01) — G/VAL/19). Also, the following 14 Members, for which this delay period
expired during 2000 and 2001, requested extension: (i) Bolivia
(requested two years, extension granted for 15 months (expired 31.12.01)
— G/VAL/37); (ii) Burundi (requested two years, extension granted for
two years to 01.08.02 — G/VAL/38); (iii) Cameroon (requested six
months — G/VAL/W/80,
G/C/W/245
and Add.1
— granted for six months
(expired 01.07.01) — WT/L/396); (iv) Dominican Republic (requested two
years, extension granted for 16 months (expired 01.07.01) — G/VAL/22);
(v) El Salvador (requested two years, extension granted for 16 months
(expired 07.09.01) — G/VAL/30); (vi) Egypt (requested three years,
extension granted for one year (expired 30.06.01) — G/VAL/31); (vii)
Guatemala (requested two years, extension granted for 16 months (expired
21.11.01) — G/VAL/33); (viii) Haiti (requested three years, extension
granted for two years to 30.01.03 — G/C/W/256
and Rev.1, was granted
by the General Council as Article IX waiver — WT/L/439); (ix) Jamaica
(requested one year extension, extension granted for one year (expired
09.03.01) — G/VAL/24); (x) Mauritania (requested three years, extension
granted for two years to 31.05.02- G/VAL/29); (xi) Maldives (requested
two years, extension granted for two years to 31.05.02- G/VAL/35); (xii)
Rwanda (requested three years — G/VAL/W/84); (xiii) Tunisia (requested
three years, extension granted for 18 months (expired 28.09.01) — G/VAL/27); and (xiv) United Arab Emirates (expired 01.01.04,,
G/VAL/55).
Currently no Members maintain an extension under Annex III, paragraph
1. back to text
86. WT/GC/M/62, para. 17. The text of
the decision can be found in WT/L/384. See also Chapter on WTO
Agreement, refer to the text on Articles
IV:1, IV:2 and IX:1 of the WTO
on the powers of the General Council more generally. back to text
87. WT/L/384, para. 4.
back to text
88. Members requesting an extension
were: Bahrain, Bangladesh, Bolivia, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso,
Burundi, Cameroon, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire,
Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Gabon,
Guatemala, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Indonesia, Israel, Jamaica, Kenya,
Kuwait, Madagascar, Malaysia, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mexico, Morocco,
Myanmar, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Pakistan, Peru, Philippines, Senegal,
Singapore, Sri Lanka, Tanzania, Thailand, Togo, Tunisia, Turkey, United
Arab Emirates, Uruguay, Venezuela, Zambia. See G/VAL/W/3, 13, 22, 29, 43, 77,
89, 108, 124, 136.
back to text
89. G/VAL/M/21. The technical assistance
programme, which started in May 1997, was created with a view to
enhancing the capacity of developing countries to implement and to
administer the Agreement on Customs Valuation. It was a demand-driven
programme. The activities in the early years “focused on improving
awareness and understanding of the activities already carried out or
being carried out by international organizations and Members either
bilaterally or regionally”; G/VAL/W/70. The new phase of the programme
is oriented on promoting the coordination and cooperation between
providers and donors; G/VAL/W/82/Rev.1.
back to text
90. The seminar was held in Geneva on 6–7
November 2002; G/VAL/47/Rev.2.
back to text
91. G/VAL/M/1,
paras. 75–76; see also G/VAL/W/1, Section B.4. The text of the decisions can be found in
G/VAL/5, Section B.1.
back to text
92. G/VAL/M/1, Section I; see also
G/VAL/W/1, Section B.5. The text of the decisions can be found in
G/VAL/5, Section B.2.
back to text
93. G/VAL/M/1, Section I; see also
G/VAL/W/1, Section B.6. The text of the decisions can be found in
G/VAL/5, Section B.3.
back to text
94. G/VAL/M/1,
paras. 36–38. back to text
95. See above, footnote
97. back to text
96. The reports are contained in
documents G/L/55,
121,
205,
323,
414,
488,
590,
654,
718,
750,
799,
833,
907,
942.
back to text
97. See G/PSI/IE/R/2.
back to text
98. G/VAL/M/1, Section F. The text of
the decision can be found also in G/VAL/1.
back to text
99. Members requesting a reservation
were: Bahrain, Bangladesh, Burkina Faso, Chile, Colombia, Côte d’Ivoire,
Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Gabon, Guatemala, Guyana, Haiti,
Indonesia, Jamaica, Kenya, Madagascar, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta,
Mauritania, Morocco, Myanmar, Niger, Pakistan, Paraguay, Peru,
Philippines, Senegal, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Togo, Tunisia,
Uganda, Uruguay, Venezuela, Zambia. See G/VAL/W/3, 13, 22, 29, 43, 77,
89, 108, 124, 136,
150 and
156.
back to text
100. These Members were: Argentina,
Bahrain, Bangladesh, Benin Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso,
Cameroon, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Djibouti,
Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Gabon, Guatemala,
Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, India, Indonesia, Israel, Jamaica, Kenya,
Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Mexico, Morocco, Myanmar,
Nicaragua, Niger, Pakistan, Panama, Peru, Philippines, Senegal, Sri
Lanka, Thailand, Togo, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, United Arab Emirates,
Uruguay, Venezuela, Zambia, Zimbabwe. See G/VAL/64.
back to text
101. These Members were: Argentina,
Bahrain, Bangladesh, Benin, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso,
Cameroon, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Djibouti,
Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Gabon, Guatemala,
Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, India, Indonesia, Israel, Jamaica, Kenya,
Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Mexico, Morocco, Myanmar,
Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Pakistan, Peru, Philippines, Senegal, Sri
Lanka, Thailand, Togo, Tunisia, Turkey, Uruguay, Venezuela, Zambia,
Zimbabwe. See G/VAL/64.
back to text
|
