TRADE FACILITATION: SOME DIVERGENCE ON TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE, SCOPE AND EXTENT OF COMMITMENTS

At a 5-6 October informal session, the WTO Negotiating Group on Trade Facilitation discussed the content of a possible report that it could submit to the December Ministerial Conference in Hong Kong. Exchanges at the meeting were described as being more opinionated than in the past, with the scope and extent of commitments emerging as potential points of disagreement.

Japan called on Members to take a 'text-based' approach to the report, which could, after receiving ministerial input in Hong Kong, serve as the basis for future negotiations.

Members consider new submissions

Delegations dedicated the first part of the meeting to discussing new submissions. Norway, New Zealand and Switzerland made a submission (TN/TF/W/67) on the need to simplify and standardise trade documentation, though they acknowledged that the WTO might not be the most competent body in which to develop a standard format. The EU warned that some Members would require flexibility and a transition period in order to comply. Brazil added that some would need technical assistance in order to do so.

Australia (TN/TF/W/66) elaborated on an earlier paper outlining principles for 'advance rulings,' i.e., binding rulings that customs agencies can issue in advance to traders in connection to the planned importation of goods, relating to issues such as tariff classification, valuation, origin or eligibility for preference. Several countries including India said that the concept was difficult to apply and pointed to the potential expense for developing countries.

Hong Kong report: "The devil is in the details"

During the second part of the meeting, Members reviewed the Secretariat's compilation (TN/TF/W/43 Rev3) of the different proposals Members have made thus far. The Secretariat also circulated an informal room document (JOB OS/222) containing the questions and answers about these proposals that Members had submitted. Chair Ambassador Muhammad Yacob Noor (Malaysia) urged Members to come forward with their views, since their input would determine the substance and general shape of the Hong Kong report.

Members expressed objections to the proposals similar to those voiced in earlier meetings, arguing that some of the proposed disciplines would fall afoul of existing domestic law. India, for instance, said that a requirement to consult with business before introducing new trade-related legislation would tread on territory normally reserved for parliament, though it admitted that this would not be an issue with regard to non-legislative decisions. Others suggested that issues such as corruption among customs officials were outside the purview of the WTO.

Many delegations expressed concerns about the technical feasibility and cost of the proposals, particularly those on the publication of information, simplification of customs procedures and expedited clearance. Tanzania reportedly pointed out that some countries relied more than others on customs duties for fiscal revenue and thus could not agree to a binding agreement to set minimum charges. With regard to transit, India called for 'balance' among the concerns of transit operators and transit-providing countries. Bolivia, a land-locked country, stressed that this balance was missing at present.

In the words of one trade source, the discussions made it clear that the 'devil is in the details.'

Differences over scope, extent of commitments; technical assistance

A developing country trade negotiator expressed the private view that for any report to emerge in time for Hong Kong, Members would have to agree on the pace and scope of the negotiations, the extent of potential commitments, and the provision of technical assistance.

Some countries would like greater clarity by Hong Kong about which issues would finally be subject to negotiations, as well as the potential extent of commitments. On the other hand, other delegations seem to be more in favour of a report that reflects different countries' positions on various issues, leaving the 'scope' and 'extent of commitment' flexible. Proponents of the former approach argue that a firmer decision on scope now would reduce future uncertainty about what would end up in an eventual agreement.

The negotiator expressed the desire for 'greater clarity' from developed countries about how, to whom, how much, and what sort of assistance would be provided before agreeing to binding commitments. In contrast, he said, many developed countries seem to want to see some sort of concrete commitments before providing details about technical assistance. This dilemma would need to resolved before Members can agree on any Hong Kong report.

The next formal meeting of the Negotiating Group on Trade Facilitation is scheduled for 8-9 November. Trade sources indicate that informal meetings will be held before then, with one expected next week.

ICTSD reporting.