RESTRICTEDWORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONG/VAL/M/20
6 August 2001
(00-3902)
Committee on Customs Valuation
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF 11 APRIL 2001
Chairman: Mr. Remo Moretta (Australia)
The agenda proposed for the meeting, circulated in WTO/AIR/1525 was adopted as follows:
Table of Contents
1. Report on the Work of the Technical Committee on Customs Valuation...........................2
2. Information on Implementation and Administration of the Agreement .............................2
(a) Notification of na tional legi slation ........................................................................................ .....2
(i) Brazil ...................................................................................................................... ....................2
(ii) Colo mbia................................................................................................................... ..................2
(iii) Jama ica................................................................................................................... ....................3
(iv) Kyrgyz Republic............................................................................................................ ..............4
(v) Oman ........................................................................................................................ ..................4
(vi) Romania.................................................................................................................... ..................4
(vii) Uruguay ................................................................................................................... ..................4
(b) Notification that national legislation under the Tokyo Round Customs Valuation
Agreement remains valid under the WT O Customs Valuation Agreement................................5
(c) Notifications made by de veloping country Members.................................................................5
3. Information on the application of decisions of the Committee on Customs
Valuation...................................................................................................................... ..............6
4. Technical Assistance ......................................................................................................... ........7
(a) Article 20.3 Technical Assistance and Trade-Related Technical Assistance .............................7
(b) Report from the Secretariat on it s technical assist ance activit ies ...............................................8
5. India - Information on Certain Aspects of the European Communities Valuation
Policy......................................................................................................................... .................8
6. Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Annual Reviews of the Implementation and Operation
of the Customs Valuation Agreement ...................................................................................10
7. Preshipment Inspec tion....................................................................................................... ...11
8. Other business............................................................................................................... ..........11
9. Election of  Offi cers ......................................................................................................... ........11G/VAL/M/20
Page 2
1. Report on the Work of the Technical Committee on Customs Valuation
1.1 The observer of the World Customs Organization reported on the activities of the WCO
Technical Committee which is contained in Annex I to this report.
2. Information on Implementation and Administration of the Agreement
(a) Notification of national legislation
2.1 The Chairman recalled that Article 22 of the Agreement required each Member to inform the
Committee of any changes in its laws and regulations relevant to the Agreement and any changes in
the administration of such laws and regulations.  In addition, the Decision on Notification and
Circulation of National Legislation, adopted by the Tokyo Round Committee, required each Member
to notify its legislation to the Committee.  He noted that legislation had recently been received from
the delegation of Madagascar and circulated in G/VAL/N/1MDG/1.  This w ould be taken up at the
next meeting.
(i) Brazil
2.2 The Chairman drew Members' attention to documents G/VAL/N/1/BRA/2 which contained
Decree No. 2.498 of 13 February 1998, Ministerial Order NO. 28/98 (regulates the application of
Decree No. 2.498), and Normative Instructions Nos 16, 17, and 18, of 16 February 1998;  and
document G/VAL/N/1/BRA/3 whic h contained Normative Instruction No. SRF 139/1998 and
Normative Instruction SRF No. 125/99.  At the last meeting, it was agreed to revert to this item at this
meeting pending consultations between the US and Brazil.
2.3 The representative of Brazil noted that his delegation's legislation, which had been submitted
in a timely manner, had been on the agenda of the Committee for the last two years.  The legislation at
question had been the object of certain questions to which replies had been sent in this Committee,
through bilateral consultations, as well as in the recent Trade Policy Review examination last year.
Since the last meeting of the Committee, no further questions had been received by his delegation.Therefore, as his delegation had no further clarifications or information to give on the legislation, it
considered that the Committee could conclude its examination of this item.
2.4 The representative of the United States confirmed that extensive consultations had taken place
with Brazil on the matter.  There were some outst anding questions with respect to the Brazilian
regime.  However, without prejudice to any future steps that the United States might take related to
the consistency of the Brazilian legislation with the Valuation Agreement, his delegation had noobjection to removing it from the agenda of future meetings of the Committee.
2.5 The Committee agreed to conclude examination of the Brazilian legislation.
(ii) Colombia
2.6 The Chairman drew Members' attention to document G/VAL/N/1/COL/2 which contained
Title VI of Decree 2685 modifying the customs legi slation, and Title VI of Resolution 4240 of 2 June
2000.  In addition, he drew attention to the responses to the Checklist of Issues contained in
G/VAL/N/2/COL/1.
2.7 The representative of the European Communities asked whether the document existed in
either French or English versions.
2.8 The Chairman explained that if a document was submitted in an official language of the
WTO, it would not be translated unless requested by a Member.G/VAL/M/20
Page 3
2.9 The represnetative of the European Communities asked that a translation be made available
and requested that the item remain on the agenda pending the translation.  He asked for the same for
the legislation of Uruguay.
2.10 The represnetative of Colombia stated her delegation's understanding that Spanish was one of
the official languages of the WTO, and this notification could be made in Spanish.  Her delegation
suggested that a translation be made as soon as possible so that the examination of the legislation
could be concluded.  Her delegation made an effort to notify on time and did not have an official
translation.  She asked whether Spanish was an official language in the EU.
2.11 The Chairman proposed that when a notification is received in an official language and a
Member wishes translation of the document, it make a prompt request for translation to the Secretariat
so that the time-lag could be avoided.
2.12 The representative of the European Communities confirmed that Spanish was an official EC
language.  However, the individuals working at present on the matter did not have the competence to
complete the work in a timely manner in Spanish.  He believed that it was possible for a Member tomake a request for translation which did not at all imply that the notifying country was obliged to
provide this translation.  If future translations we re necessary, he would comply with the Chairman's
proposal.
2.13 The representative of Philippines asked for clarification as to whether the responses to the
Checklist of Issues were translated, as was the case in other Committees.2.14 The Chairman clarified that translation of the legislation was triggered by request.
Translation of other documents, including the Checklist of Issues, was automatic.
2.15 The representative of Colombia informed the Committee that the replies to the questionnaire
had been translated into French and English.  Both documents had been submitted three months ago,
in January, which it appeared would be sufficient time to examine the documents in sufficient time for
the meeting.
2.16 The representative of India asked whether it was for Members to request such translations or
for the notifying Member to make the request.  She asked for clarification from the Secretariat.2.17 The Secretariat clarified that, in general, translations were not provided for notifications of
legislation that were submitted in one of the three official languages of the WTO.  The reason related
to the burden of work this would create on the translators.  However, the possibility of requesting
translation of legislation by Members had always existed in the Committee and, in fact, there hadbeen requests in the past.  Given that the responses to the Checklist of Issues was usually one or two
pages, they were translated as were all other Committee documents.
2.18 The Committee agreed to revert to the legislation of Colombia at the next meeting.
(iii) Jamaica
2.19 The Chairman drew Members' attention to document G/VAL/N/1/JAM/1 which contained the
Customs Act of Jamaica.  In addition, document G/VAL/N/2/JAM/1 contained Jamaica's responses to
the Checklist of Issues.  These documents were only recently circulated so Members may not have
had ample time to study them.
2.20 The Committee agreed to conclude the examination of the Jamaican legislation.G/VAL/M/20
Page 4
(iv) Kyrgyz Republic
2.21 The Chairman drew  Members' attention to document G/VAL/N/1/KGZ/1 which contained the
relevant sections of the Customs Code and Regulations of the Kyrgyz Republic.  It was agreed to
revert to this item at this meeting as one Member requested further time to study the document.
2.22 The Committee agreed to conclude the examination of the legislation of the Kyrgyz Republic.
(v) Oman
2.23 The Chairman draw Members' attention to  document G/VAL/N/1/OM N/1 which contained
Oman's Customs Valuation Law.
2.24 The Committee agreed to conclude the examination of the legislation of Oman.
(vi) Romania
2.25 The Chairman noted that, at the last meeting, the Committee examined legislation contained
in G/VAL/N/1/ROM/2.  It was agreed to revert to this legislation pending consultations between the
United States and Romania.
2.26 The representative of the United States stated that, similar to the situation with Brazil, his
delegation had carried out consultations with Romania.  Without prejudice to any action his
delegation might take in the future, his delegation could agree to conclude the examination of this
legislation.
2.27 The Committee agreed to conclude the examination of the legislation of Romania.
(vii) Uruguay
2.28 The Chairman drew Members' attention to document G/VAL/N/1/URY/1 which contained
Decree 574/994 of 29 December 1994.  He noted that the Secretariat had recently received the
responses to the Checklist of Issues which would be circulated in the next few days.  He suggested
take up the Checklist at the next meeting and today examine the legislation.
2.29 The Committee agreed to revert to this legislation at the next meeting pending translation into
English or French.2.30 The Chairman urged all Members, particularly those Members who had recently begun to
implement the Agreement, to notify their legislation under Article 22 of the Agreement and the
Committee's Decision on Notifications contained in G/VAL/5.  Presently, 47 Members which were
applying the Agreement had not notified their legislation and it would be unfortunate for this
Committee to fall into the same pattern regarding notifications that some other Committee's had been
facing.  Therefore, he urged all Members to take this obligation seriously and submit their legislation
as soon as possible.  Further, all Members applying the Agreement should notify their responses to the
Checklist of Issues which was found in the Annex to document G/VAL/5.  Both notifications wereobligations under the Agreement and should be respected as soon as possible.
2.31 The representative of the United States informed the Committee that representatives of the US
had recently approached various officials in capitals to encourage notification of legislation and
submission of the responses to the Checklist of Issues to this Committee.  The United States attachedparticular importance at this time to notifications of customs valuation, given the increasing number
of Members which had recently undertaken implementation of the Agreement.  His delegation viewedG/VAL/M/20
Page 5
these notifications as an integral part of the continued constructive operation of this Committee.
Where appropriate, efforts related to notifications did not have to be done in a vacuum, noting this
Committee's work on technical assistance.
(b) Notification that national legislation under the Tokyo Round Customs Valuation Agreement
remains valid under the WTO Customs Valuation Agreement.
2.32 The Chairman informed the Committee that it was agreed at the last meeting to suspend
consideration of this item until there was something to report on the three Members, Botswana,  Lesotho
and Mexico, whose legislation was outstanding in this regard.  He reminded Members that, under this
item, those Members that were Tokyo Round parties to  the Agreement, were required to notify whether
the legislation notified under the Tokyo Round was still valid.  If there were changes, they should notify
these changes to the WTO Committee.  Since there ha d been no notifications in this regard, he proposed
that the Committee further suspend consideration of this sub-item.
2.33 The Committee so agreed.
(c) Notifications made by developing country Members
2.34 The Chairman drew Members attention to document G/VAL/2/Rev .12 which contained the
updated lists of all Members who had invoked special and differential treatment provisions under the
Agreement.  It was a revision of the previous ve rsion of this document to show those Members not
applying the Agreement, whether through invocati on of Article 20.1 or paragr aph 1 of Annex III.  In
addition, for those applying the Agreement, the doc ument showed those still maintaining a reservation
under Article 20.2 on the computed value, those who ha d invoked the reservation to maintain a system
of minimum values under paragraph 2 of Annex III, and those that still maintained the reservations
under paragraphs 3 and 4 of Annex III of the Agreem ent.  The document also maintained the list of
those developing country Members which may still retain some of the special and differential treatment
provisions according to the Decision on "Continue d Application under the WTO Customs Valuation
Agreement on Invocations of Provisions for Deve loping Countries for De layed Application and
Reservations under the Customs Va luation Agreement 1979" (WT/L/38).
2.35 In addition, he draw attention to documen t G/VAL/W/76/Add.1 which contained an updated
inventory of notification requirements pursuant to ex tension decisions and minimum value reservations.
He suggested that the Committee take note of th e information contained in these two documents.
2.36 The representative of India stated that he r delegation's reservations under the Decision in
WT/L/38 was the subject of discussion under another agenda item, namely item F of the present agenda.
Since this reservation was referred to in sec tion II of document G/VA L/2/Rev.12, it was without
prejudice to India's position on the issue that sh e could accept the Committee taking note of this
document.
2.36 The Committee took note of the statement made and agreed  to take note of the information
contained in these two documents.
- Extension requests of delay period
2.37 The Chairman informed the Committee that under this sub-heading, there were two pending
requests being dealt with by the Committee.  The fi rst, from Bahrain was noted on the agenda, and the
second, from the United Arab Emirates in G/VAL/W/ 83 was just received and not on the agenda.  He
was not in a position to report on any agreements having been reached on these outstanding requests.
2.38 The representative of the European Communities c onsidered that it was time that some progress
was shown on the request from Bahrain.  It was in th e hands of Bahrain to show willingness to progressG/VAL/M/20
Page 6
and his delegation urged Bahrain strongly to engage in the process and reply to the requests that had
been made for further information.
2.39 The representative of Switzerland asked Bahrain to clarify a point with respect to document
G/VAL/W/57/Add.2 and Add.3.  On the former document it stated, "the unified GCC customs
ordinance which was currently being finalized is expect ed to be enforced from year 2002".  In the latter
document, the work programme showed that the work  on the finalization of the GCC customs ordinance
would continue until 2005.  She asked what was the true  date of finalization of the customs ordinance.
2.40 The Chairman asked Switzerland to submit this  question in writing to be communicated to
Bahrain with a request for a prompt reply.  The Committee took note of the statements made.
- Notifications made under Decisions concerning delay extensions and minimum value
reservations
2.41 The Chairman noted that under this sub-item, the Committee was to consider the notifications
made under the Decisions concerning delay extens ions and minimum value reservations.  He drew
Members' attention to a recent notificati on received by Bolivia contained in document
G/VAL/N/4/BO L/1 which was not on the airgram but shoul d also be taken up at this meeting.
2.42 The representative of Bolivia read out the not ification made by her delegation, contained in
G/VAL/N/4/BOL/1.
2.43 The representative of Canada thanked the delegations of Mauritania, Dominican Republic,
Guatemala, Kuwait and Bolivia for providing the Co mmittee with their detailed progress reports.  His
delegation attached great importance to these progress reports which formed part of the Decisions on
extension requests.  They allow the Committee to en gage progress and to see how the extensions are
being used to prepared implementation of the Agre ement, as well as to see where future needs for
technical assistance may be.  He noted, however, that all the required reports had not been submitted and
his delegation urged those Members who were obliged  to provide progress reports under their extension
Decisions to do so.  In addition, th e Decisions on minimum value reservations also required notifications
of the criteria and methodologies for determining minimum values.  Similarly, not all Members had
submitted these notifications and his delegation urged them to do so.  Finally, his delegation associated
itself with the statement by the United States on the importance of notification of national legislation and
the responses to the Checklist of Issues.
2.44 The representative of Colombia informed the Committee that her delegation would be notifying
at the end of the month the legislation related to  the Colombian Decision on minimum values.  It was
now being published in Colombia.
2.45 The Committee took note of the statements made.
3. Information on the application of decisions of the Committee on Customs Valuation
3.1 The Chairman informed the Committee that unde r this agenda item, the Committee noted any
new notifications of application of the Decisi ons of the Committee on Customs Valuation on the
"Treatment of Interest Charges in the Customs Valu e of Imported Goods and on the Valuation of Carrier
Media Bearing Software for Data Processing Equipment", both adopted by the Committee and
contained in document G/VAL/5.  Since the last  meeting, document G/VAL/W/5/Rev.9 had been
circulated which included the addition of  notifications from Oman and Poland.
3.2 The Committee took note of the information.G/VAL/M/20
Page 7
4. Technical Assistance
4.1. The Chairman informed the Committee that unde r this agenda item, the Secretariat usually
provided a report of the recent WCO technical assistance activities.  Since, the WCO Technical
Committee had not yet met this year, he proposed that the Secretariat provide this update for the next
meeting of the Committee.
4.2 The Committee so agreed.
(a) Article 20.3 Technical Assistance and Trade-Related Technical Assistance
4.3 The Chairman informed the Committee that unde r this sub-item, the Committee had agreed to
take up the proposal by the European Communitie s on a technical assistance project on customs
valuation which had been contained in the minutes of the June/July 2000 meeting of the Committee,G/VAL/M/15, and in document G/VA L/W/71.  At the meeting of 21 July 2000, he gave a thematic
report on his consultations on this proposal.  At the Committee's meeting of 13 November 2000, he gave
another report in which he noted that an agreemen t had been reached in the Committee to begin further
work on reinvigorating the Committee's work on technical assistance, building on the work previously
carried out under this agenda item.  Document G/ VAL/W/82 followed on this agreement and contained
the communication from the European Communities on a draft work programme designed to give
structure to this reinvigoration.
4.4 The representative of the European Communitie s confirmed that its communication intended to
complete the process which had been successfully  followed in the past year by the Committee in
reinvigorating and fully recognizing its commitment to technical assistance and underlining the role of
technical assistance in the wider context.  The document G/VAL/W/82 was the subject of many
consultations and the response had been positive.  His delegation did not intend to reinvent the work
already carried out but to finalize the process of  reinvigoration for the Committee.  The Committee's
efforts in this regard would help in the wider cont ext of working with other organizations to structure
ideas, all in the context of making sure that techni cal assistance continued to be driven by good working
principles and used fully for the benefit of all Members who need it.
4.5 The representative of India considered the communication of the EC a useful sequel to the
Committee's agreement to reinvigorate its technical assistance work.  The EC had consulted India on an
earlier version of this document and her delegation was pleased that some of its comments had been
incorporated into the new text.  However, her dele gation needed further time to consider the revised
document and asked that the Committee revert to this item after a short delay.
4.6 The representative of Mexico considered the work programme proposed realistic and balanced.
His delegation believed that the main comments of Members had been taken into account.  His
delegation considered that part 3 of the documen t on coordination and cooper ation was important, and
this had to be viewed without prejudice to res ponsibilities of developed countries under Article 20.3.
Finally, there were a number of aspects connected w ith monitoring and follow-up that involved a major
effort and work should proceed as soon as possible.
4.7 The representative of Sri Lanka considered th e EC proposal important and generally supported
the broad thrust of the work programme, in partic ular the Committee's role in promoting cooperation,
coordination and exchange of information on technical assistance planning with the Secretariats of other
international organizations.  His delegation also obser ved that the proposal had taken into consideration
the COMTD document on new strategies for technical assistance which emphasized that it should be
demand-driven and needs based and take into account needs identified through the Trade Policy ReviewMechanism.  His delegation also considered that concentrating on post-implementation issues, such as
building data-bases, enhanced capacity in using info rmation technology, etc. would be advisable since
many countries would be only beginni ng to apply the Agreement in the coming years.  His delegationG/VAL/M/20
Page 8
also appreciated the fact that, although Article 20.3 r ecognized that developed countries should furnish
technical assistance, a number of developing countri es had also provided assistance on a bilateral or
regional basis.  He hoped that the work programme could be adopted by the Committee and
implemented at an early date.
4.8 The representative of Jamaica appreciated the efforts of the EC in this area.  However, her
delegation would like more time to reflect on the pr oposal in G/VAL/W/82 in order to reflect its full
views on the content.
4.9 The Chairman noted overwhelming support for th e overall thrust of the EC communication and
that there were some delegations which still needed more time.  He urged Members to consult with their
capitals so that the Committee could revert to this item at its next meeting.
4.10 The Committee so agreed.
(b) Report from the Secretariat on its technical assistance activities
4.11 The Secretariat reported that it had carried out three additional technical assistance missions.
There were still about 15-20 requests which had b een made to the Technical Cooperation Division
which were pending additional financial resources.  The Market Access Division had been working with
the Secretariat Working Group on the Integrated Framework and LDC Issues in organizing a regional
workshop on customs valuation, similar to the one held in India in May 2000.  The idea was to provide
"hands-on" training for least-devel oped Asian countries.  Due to late arrival of participants' nominations,
it had been necessary to postpone this seminar until November-December 2001.  In addition, the
Secretariat Working Group on the Integrated Framew ork and LDC Issues intended to carry out two
additional such workshops for least developed Eng lish speaking and French speaking African countries
in the next year.  Finally, the Secretariat reported that the Market Access Division would be recruiting a
customs expert to work primarily on technical as sistance on customs valuation.  It was hoped that this
person would join the Division by September 2001 to bolster the Secretariat's human capacity to
respond to technical assistance requests, in coopera tion with the relevant WTO Divisions, as well as
with other organizations, in particular the WCO.
4.12 The representative of India thanked the Secretariat for its cooperation in organizing the regional
workshop which will now be held in November-December 2001.  She informed the Committee that the
Secretariat made a request to India to organize "ha nds-on" training at India' s Customs Houses for LDCs,
to which India indicated its acceptance forthw ith. Noting the postponement of the workshop her
delegation appreciated the fact that the LDC Me mbers did not get sufficient time to make their
nominations.  She urged the Secretariat's Workin g Group on the Integrated Framework and LDC Issues
to provide sufficient time to allow effectiv e participation by the LDCs at the workshop.
4.13 The Committee took note of the statements.
5. India - Information on Certain Aspects of the European Communities Valuation Policy
5.1 The Chairman informed the Committee that at the last meeting of the Committee, it was agreed
to revert to this item at this meeting following an exchange of views between India and the EC. He
urged both parties to use the interim time between mee tings to engage in bilateral discussions with a
view to reaching a resolution on this matter.
5.2 The representative of India informed the Comm ittee that since the last meeting, the EC had
provided her delegation with the legislation on the a pplication of standard import values.  Her delegation
was studying this legislation and she would not like to put forth all her delegation's questions at this
meeting. She recalled for the information of delegations that the EC regulation number 3223/94
provided for the use of standard import values for a number of agricultural products such as fresh fruitG/VAL/M/20
Page 9
and vegetables.  In light of the responses the EC had provided to an earlier series of questions posed by
her delegation, contained in G/VAL/W/66 of 7 Apr il 2000, she asked some additional questions to help
understand the legislation recently provided.
5.3 First, in its replies, the EC acknowledged that this regulation provided for use of standard
import values in a well-defined context.  In the reply to question 3, the EC noted that measures which
arose from this regulation did not implement the Customs Valuation Agreement.  Her delegation
sought further clarification on the bifurcation that was implicit in this statement of the EC.  Second, in
paragraph 3 of the General Information Section 1, it was noted that as a consequence of the EC's
commitments under the Uruguay Round in relation to fresh fruit and vegetable products, there was
non-application of the specific amount of duty listed in the EC's schedule if entry prices exceeded a
certain level.  In the reply to question 2 under example 3, the EC noted that in relation to thesestandard average values there may be some products which in fact attracted a mixed duty, both ad
valorem  and ad quantum.  Her delegation asked whether the entry price would trigger again a similar
non-application of the specific component of the mixed duty, so that only the ad valorem  would apply
or how it applied to those products which attracted mixed duty.
5.4 Third, in reply to India's first question, the EC responded that under the system that arose
through Commission Regulation 3223/94 for the application of standard values, the entry price of the
good was determined and this then triggered a choice of methodology.  Her delegation sought
clarification as to how the choice of methodology was consistent with Article I of the Customs
Valuation Agreement, which mandated the customs auth orities to go for the transaction value.  The
fourth question related to the reply to question 2,  where the EC noted 'in addition to transaction value,
importers also have the choice inter alia  of using standard import values if available.'  How was the
choice given to importers to determine the valuation method consistent with the Customs Valuation
Agreement, and under what provision of the Cu stoms Valuation Agreement was such a choice
triggered?  In reply to the same question, the EC also added that while the option of using standardimport values would normally be only available in the absence of a basis for transaction value in the
interest of efficiency, etc., the importer was allowed to use standard import values.  Her delegation
sought to understand what were the other circumstances under which the option could be exercised by
the importer.  Further, a transaction was normally between the exporter and the importer, and while it
was the importer under the EC's regulation who was to determine the method of valuation, she asked
whether the exporter was informed prior to the transaction regarding the importer's choice of method.
5.5 In example 3, which was also in reply to question 2, the EC noted that when the importer
wished to use standard import values, he/she would opt for the determination of customs value to be
on an equivalent basis.  How would the Article 8 adjustments of the Customs Valuation Agreement
apply with this "equivalent basis"?  Was the equivalent basis clearly defined in the EC's regulation,
and if so, where?  In the same example, the EC noted that in such cases the importer would have hadthe choice to use the transaction value.  Did this imply that even when a transaction value could be
applied, the importer still had a choice to say that the transaction value should not be applied and that
the standard value should be applied?  Under what provision of the Customs Valuation Agreement
would this choice be exercised?
5.6 In relation to question 3, her delegation understood from the EC's reply that the regulation at
question set out details for the application of the import arrangements for fruit and vegetables, and
that as a consequence of these arrangements, specif ic rules for determining the tariff position and the
tariff sub-heading and then the level of import duties applicable to the products in question was
worked out.  She asked whether such a choice to be exercised by the importer could influence theimport duty paid by the importer, and did the alternative methods of valuation implicit in the EC's
regulation lead to different duties to be paid by the importer on the product in question?  In reply to
question 5 the EC acknowledged that the tariff position did not appear in the regulation.  However, in
its reply, the use of the term tariff position was repeated.  She asked what was meant by a tariff
position and in which regulation was it defined? Finally, in reply to question 6, the EC stated thatG/VAL/M/20
Page 10
relevant tariff headings were sub-divided on the basis of different entry price levels.  In an earlier
reply the EC had indicated that it was the choice of the entry price level that was linked to the option
of methodology and was subsequently then used to determine the tariff position, and hence the level
of tariff.  Her delegation wished to understand how such a determination would be in compliance with
the EC's obligations under the Customs Valuation Agreement.
5.7 The representative of Pakistan noted that this bilateral matter also had certain systemic concerns
to his delegation.  He asked whether the regulations in question had been notified to the WTO.  If not,
could the EC provide the legislation to Members?
5.8 The representative of the European Communities confirmed that the legislation in question had
been notified to the WTO and copies were always available to Members.  Indeed, the legislation
provided to India was copies of texts they would have already received and examined.  This applied to
the entire Customs Code of the EC, of which a frac tion covered customs valuation.  With regard to the
additional questions posed by India at this meeting,  his delegation asked for them in writing and stated
that it would respond in writing.  He added that  with regard to the questions on regulation 3223/94, he
considered that his delegation had already replied co mprehensively to the initial set of questions.  He
noted that this regulation was not primarily a cust oms valuation regulation but implemented Agreements
and commitments in the agricultural sector.  It estab lished the tariff structure for a range of fresh fruit
and vegetable products.  His responses to the questi ons on this regulation would have to be made in
cooperation with agricultural specialists but he not ed that this Committee's role did not extend to
examining tariff structures, which had previously been agreed elsewhere.
5.9 The representative of India acknowledged that the EC had since provided the Regulation
3223/94.  An examination of the replies by the EC in G/VAL/W/66, raised further questions relating
to the determination of customs valuation of these products which by the EC's replies were related to
Regulation 3223/94, which had not been examined by the Customs Valuation Committee. Sheunderlined the fact that while she was not seekin g to examine the EC's tariff structures in this
Committee, the Committee could examine issues of conflict with the EC's obligations under the
Customs Valuation Agreement arising from this Regulation.  She agreed to provide her questions in
writing and reserved the right to ask further questions pending the replies that she would receive from
the EC.
5.10 The Chairman urged the parties to this matter to continue to consult with a view to reaching a
resolution as soon as possible.  He urged the delegation of India to submit its questions in writing as
soon as possible and for there to be constructive engagement between the parties.  The Committee
took note of all statements.
6. Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Annual Reviews of the Implementation and Operation of the
Customs Valuation Agreement
6.1 The Chairman reported that when he first took  up the Chairmanship of this Committee, he had
carried out significant consultations on this matter.  Unfortunately, these consultations had not been
fruitful and the matter remained unresolved.  Since that time, the additional work of the Committee
related to technical assistance and the requests for c onsideration of certain items by the Special Session
of the General Council on Implementation and other ma tters did not allow him further time to consult on
this matter.  At this point, he suggested that th e Committee take note of the three documents containing
these Annual Reviews, namely G/VAL/W/29, G/VA L/W/43, and G/VAL/W/77, and that the incoming
Chair take up the matter through consultations among the interested Members.
6.2 The representative of India asked what was meant by the Committee 'taking note' of these
documents.  Her delegation had an outstanding issue relating to the text of these documents which
required an amendment pursuant to the consultations which the Chairman was meant to carry out and
which were being passed on to the new Chairman.  Therefore, her delegation could not agree with thatG/VAL/M/20
Page 11
part of the Chairman's statement, but could only agree to further consultations on the matter.  She
urged the new Chairman to consult as expeditiously as possible on this matter.
6.3 The Chairman clarified that he was not asking the Committee to adopt the reports, but to note
that the drafts were contained in these documents.6.4 The representative of Mexico deplored the fact that this item was still on the Committee's
agenda because it was becoming a systemic problem.  His delegation considered that a greater effort
could have been made to achieve concrete results.  The Secretariat should properly inform the new
Chairman of the matter particularly since there were still some Members which were not sufficiently
familiar with this issue.  His delegation sugge sted that the new Chairman carry out in-depth
consultations so as to reach agreement on the matter and inform the Committee at its next meeting.  Incase no solution was found, he should give an update of the situation.  He asked if, in this case, the
matter would go the Council for Trade in Goods?
6.5 The Chairman clarified that he had consulted on the matter which, indeed, had become a
systemic problem given the unwillingness of certain Members to compromise on their positions.  He
hoped that the next Chairman would be able to consult on the matter and that interested delegations
might show some flexibility in order to achieve its resolution.
6.6 The Committee agreed that the incoming Chairman would consult on the matter as
expeditiously as possible.
7. Preshipment Inspection
7.1 The Chairman informed the Committee that, fo llowing adoption of the final report of the
Working Party on Preshipment Inspection in document G/L/300, the General Council agreed that
future monitoring of the Agreement on Preshipment Inspection should be undertaken initially by theCustoms Valuation Committee, where PSI would be a standing agenda item.  Therefore, this subject
had been included on the agenda.  The Secretariat had prepared an update of the document listing the
Members using PSI regimes in document G/VAL/W/63/Rev.1.
7.2 The representative of the United States stated that his delegation was pleased that, as several
Members had begun implementing the Agreement on Customs Valuation, they had also moved away
from using a PSI regime and moved towards improving their customs administration.  However, at thesame time, his delegation had also received reports from US exporters that the PSI regime for several
Members was being conducted on the basis of the Brussels Definition of Value.  His delegation was
still examining these situations to determine wh ether these PSI companies were operating without
proper instructions or were simply incapable of  moving away from the BDV and conducting price
verification activities in accordance with the strict requirements of the Agreement on PSI.  Hisdelegation wished to note the importance it attached to resolving these situations.
7.3 The Committee took note of the statement made.
8. Other business
8.1 The Chairman proposed that the next meeting of the Committee be held on 22 October 2001.
8.2 The Committee so agreed.
9. Election of Officers
9.1 The Chairman informed the Committee that the Rules of Procedure for meetings of the
Committee on Customs Valuation provided that the Comm ittee elect a Chairperson at the end of the firstG/VAL/M/20
Page 12
meeting of the year.  The Chairman of the C ouncil for Trade in Goods had carried out informal
consultations on a slate of names for appointment as chairpersons of standing bodies in accordance with
the established Guidelines for appointment of officer s.  On the basis of the understanding reached and
approved by the General Council, he proposed that  the Committee elect Mr. K. J. Weerasinghe (Sri
Lanka) as Chairperson by acclamation.
9.2 The Committee agreed to the election of Mr. Weerasinghe as Chairman of the Committee.  It
was also agreed that Mr. Weerasinghe would consu lt on the matter of choosing a Vice-Chairman before
the next meeting.
9.3 The meeting was adjourned.G/VAL/M/20
Page 13
Annex I
Report to the Committee on Customs Valuation on the Activities of the Technical Committee on
Customs Valuation and Technical Assistance.
Mr. Chair and Members of the Committee:
My name is Aziz El Kassimy and I am the Deputy Director of the WCO’s Valuation Sub-
Directorate.  As the 12th Session of the Technical Committee on Customs Valuation is scheduled to
commence on Monday 28 May 2001 and the 11th Session of the Technical Committee was reported at
the previous meeting of your Committee, my report to you today will focus on the current work of the
Technical Committee and the technical assistance programme of the Valuation Sub-Directorate.
The first two days of the 12th Session of the Technical Committee will be a theme meeting
which will be the second of its type introduced by  the Technical Committee.  The focus of this theme
meeting is Valuation Management in a Post Impor t Audit Environment.  There are six (6) separate
topics within the programme and for each topic, there will be two (2) speakers, one from a developed
country member and one from a developing country.  The one exception being the topic on “How to
Manage Post Import Audit” when a developed country member will co-present with an ICC
representative on the private sector perspective.  The other topics are “Post Import Audit in EnsuringCompliance with the WTO Valuation Agreement”; “The WTO Valuation Agreement and Post Import
Audit”; “Infrastructure Considerations in Mana ging Compliance and Self-Assessment”; Valuation
Procedural and Policy Aspects of Post Import Audi t”; and, “Other Post Import Audit Considerations”.
The theme programme is the continuation of the previous future directions work of the
Technical Committee undertaken during 1998/1999.  The theme focus is an alternative approach to
providing further technical assistance to developing and least developed country members.  The first
theme meeting which was held during the 10
th Session, was very successful.  The programme for this
next theme meeting as well as the 12th Session agenda of the Technical Committee has been available
on the WCO’s web site for some time.
The balance of the 12th Session will continue over Wednesday 30 May to Friday 1 June and
its agenda includes a number of technical items submitted by Members.  These include a matter tabled
by Colombia on “The valuation treatment of price-influenced importations from related parties” and,
“Application of the Valuation Agreement with respect to Decision 6.1” submitted by Brazil.
A practical demonstration by the Secretariat on the WCO’s “on-line discussion forum” will
also take place.  This forum will be available to Members through the WCO’s web-site and will
enable Members to discuss issues on-line between themselves and with the Secretariat.
In regard to technical assistance, since the 11th Session of the Technical Committee and our
last report to this Committee, the Valuation Sub-Directorate has delivered workshops, seminars andtraining courses in twenty (20) member countries.  Of these, three were joint regional missions and
two were joint national missions.  By “joint” I mean that these missions concentrated on Valuation
and Valuation Fraud and were co-managed with other technical experts from the Compliance and
Facilitation Directorate of the WCO.  As such, since last report, valuation technical assistance has
been delivered to a total of 58 countries.  This assistance also includes the review of nationallegislation in a number of countries.
Since late 2000, the WCO has introduced a new approach to all technical assistance
programmes, where the WCO is working in closer partnership with its Members in technical
assistance delivery.  In regard to valuation, a recent national technical assistance programme toJamaica was conducted in partnership with a valuation officer from the Canadian Customs
Administration.  Another recent WCO valuation mission to Vietnam was not only extended by oneG/VAL/M/20
Page 14
week to enable the workshop to be conducted in Hanoi and Ho Chi Minh City, but was also conducted
in partnership with the Japan Customs and Tariff Bureau.  Eventually, it is anticipated that a corps of
Member trainers will be developed to deliver WCO Valuation technical assistance, even without the
actual participation of a WCO representative.  The focus however remains the WCO technical
assistance programme and not the national programmes of the Members.  Further details on thisinitiative will be reported to the 12
th Session of the Technical Committee as well as the next WCO
Council session scheduled for 28 to 30 June 2001.  It is hoped that this initiative will enable more
technical assistance to be delivered to more Members.
Finally, I would like to stress that cooperation and coordination with the WTO is essential in
the delivery of Valuation technical assistance, and I trust that the excellent cooperative relationship
between the two Secretariats will continue in the future.
__________