RESTRICTEDWORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONS/C/W/142
19 May 2000
(00-2058)
Council for Trade in Services Original:  Spanish
COMMUNICATION FROM CHILE
Review of Article II Exemptions
Questionnaire on the List of MFN Exemptions
The attached paper has been received from the delegation of Chile with the request that it be
circulated to Members of the Council for Trade in Services.S/C/W/142
Page 2
QUESTIONS FROM CHILE
Horizontal exemptions
This is the third largest group in terms of number of exemptions (73), after transport services
(143) and communications services (98).  Twenty per cent of the exemptions which apply to all
countries also apply to all sectors.  This group of exemptions includes the most held by individual
Members (EC with nine and United States with seven.)
1. Austria, page 2.  Could Austria indicate why it thinks the exemption on page 2 is a measure
not covered by Article V- bis of GATS?  Has it maintained the same measure after joining the EU?
2. Estonia, page 7.  Why does Estonia think that these measures would not be covered by
Article V- bis?
3. European Communities, page 8.   For the third entry on page 8, could you explain what the
activities and professions covered by the measure are and how they are linked to historical reasons?
4. European Communities, page 8.  What are the activities and professions referred to by the
exception in the last entry on page 8?  What are the historical reasons you suggest to justify the
exception in the cases of Romania and Switzerland?
5. European Communities, page 8.  Please indicate how the measures adopted by Denmark
(page 8) and Sweden (page 21) infringe the MFN treatment.  By whom and to what kind of
organizations is this credit granted?  What is the legal status of the Nordic Bank?  These samequestions are addressed to Finland (page 11), Iceland (page 13) and Norway (page 17).
6. Peru, page 18.  Please indicate with which countries you have this type of agreement.  Why
do you think that this exemption would not be covered by Article V- bis?  Is this reciprocity provided
for in national legislation or is it based on international agreements?
7. Thailand, page 23.  Please indicate what the better treatment granted to United States citizens
consists of.
8. United States, page 33.  Is the better treatment granted to small businesses from Canada
provided for in the provisions of the North American Free Trade Agreement?
9. Canada, (page 3) and Poland (page 19).  These two Members have defined the duration of
their exceptions in this group as "indeterminate" rather than "indefinite", which is the term used by
most.  In your opinion, is there a difference between these two concepts?
10. Sweden, page 21.  You have stated a minimum duration of 11 years for your exception
applied to all sectors.  How do you interpret the scope of paragraph 6 of the Annex to Article II in this
respect?  What are the improved conditions established by these Agreements?  Is there an expiry date
in the provisions of these Agreements?
11. Tunisia, page 24.  You have not specified a period of duration for the exception applied to all
sectors.  Are you now in a position to determine this period?
12. Guatemala, page 11.  While you mention the agreements involved, you do not explain which
measures are inconsistent with Article II.  Could y ou indicate more precisely which measures in these
treaties are strictly covered by the exception?S/C/W/142
Page 3
13. El Salvador, page 7.  A reservation is made for the General Treaty of Central American
Economic Integration.  Please indicate why you think this exception is necessary.  Wouldn't this
Agreement be covered by Article V of GATS?
14. In its third entry on page 9, the European Union establishes an exception for San Marino,
Monaco, Andorra and the Vatican City.  In your view , should this exemption really be considered an
exception relating to labour market integration agreements?  Wouldn't this exemption be covered by
Article V- bis of GATS?
Professional services exemptions
There are not many exemptions (15) in this group, but 11 of them apply to all countries.
15. Some of the exceptions made in the professional services sector are based on the fact that
professional qualifications are mutually recognized.  This is the case for the exemptions in the lists of
Costa Rica, the Dominican Republic, Honduras, Thaila nd and Turkey.  Would such circumstances not
be covered by the provisions of Articles VI and VII of GATS?  In the case of Costa Rica, would these
circumstances not also be covered by Article V of GATS?
16. Could Costa Rica, the Dominican Republic, Honduras, Thailand and Turkey please indicate
the criteria on which the granting of reciprocity depends?  How do the reciprocal agreements differ
from mutual recognition agreements?
17. Brunei Darussalam has stated that the exemption corresponding to its first entry and relating
to legal services, could be removed.  Has an analysis been carried out to remove this measure?  What
time-period has been foreseen for this?
18. The Dominican Republic.  Please explain the entry in the second column relating to legal
services.
19. Singapore.  Please explain the political reasons which led you to adopt this exemption in just
one subsector of professional services (legal services).
20. Thailand.  Please indicate the reasons which led you to adopt this exemption only in the
subsector of accounting services.
Other business services exemptions
21. Costa Rica has listed an advertising services exemption on the basis of the Agreement on
Central American Economic Integration.   Would this exemption not be covered by Article V of
GATS?
Telecommunications services exemptions
22. Antigua and Bermuda, Honduras and Colombia list exemptions from the MFN principle to
third countries because of their respective economic integration agreements.  Would these agreements
not be exempt under Article V of GATS?
Audio-visual services exemptions
23. The second entry for Australia on page 45 includes measures taken to respond to
unreasonable measures imposed on Australian services or services suppliers by another Member.
Could Australia please indicate what kind of measur es these are?  Could it explain the concept ofS/C/W/142
Page 4
"unreasonable unilateral actions" which appears in the third column of the same entry?  Could it give
examples of these kinds of measures?  What measures have been applied in practice?
Air transport
24. Canada, page 117.  Could you please indicate which countries and repair and maintenance
service suppliers have been granted preferential treatment.  What criteria have been used for this
improved treatment?
__________