WORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONTN/MA/W/26
17 February 2003
(03-0983)
Negotiating Group on Market Access Original:  English
NEGOTIATING GROUP ON NON-AGRICULTURAL MARKET ACCESS
Communication from Thailand
The following communication, dated 11 February 2003 has been received from the Permanent
Mission of Thailand.
_______________
I. INTRODUCTION
1. Since the Uruguay Round of trade negotiations, many studies have shown crucial facts that a
wide tariff disparity between Members still exists.  High tariffs, tariff peaks, and tariff escalation arestill prevalent in all Members' tariff schedule, regardless of the level of development.  Moreover,
different types of non-tariff barriers have been created and imposed, resulting in the obstruction of
trade flows between Members.
2. The Doha Ministerial Declaration has provided preliminary guideline for negotiations and a
mandate for WTO Members to negotiate on tariffs of non-agricultural products aiming at reduction or
as appropriate elimination thereof, including the redu ction or elimination of tariff peaks, high tariffs,
and tariff escalation, as well as non-tariff barriers.  It also states that the product coverage must be
comprehensive and without a priori  exclusions.
3. However, the Doha Declaration also recognises the difference in development levels among
Members and therefore states that any agreed negotiations modalities shall take fully into account theneeds and interests of developing and least-developed Member countries, including through less than
full reciprocity principle.
4. Thailand fully recognises these facts and fully supports the mandate provided by the Ministers
at Doha.  To this end, we would like to present our preliminary views on certain key elements in thenon-agricultural market access negotiation as follows.
II. MODALITIES
We view that the following points should be considered:
5. A formula approach is an appropriate solution to achieve the negotiation objectives as
mandated by the Doha Ministerial Declaration.  All non-agricultural products, without prior
exclusion, must be taken on board.  The negotiations should aim to reduce the tariff disparity between
Members and also the gap between bound and applied tariffs.
6. Zero-for-zero approach should be accepted as a voluntary method.  On this basis, an emphasis
should be placed on goods which are considered important exports of developing countries.  Thailand
proposes that the Gems and Jewelry sector (HS 71), one of the sectors included in the APEC ATL, be
included under this approach.TN/MA/W/26
Page 2
7. Request/Offer should be accepted as a supplementary method to support tariff reduction by
the formula approach.
8. Thailand fully recognises the Doha mandate to reduce or eliminate tariff peaks, high tariffs,
and tariff escalation.  However, before taking further steps of negotiations the definitions of theseterms should be clarified, for the sake of enhancing mutual understanding among Members.
9. Two recent studies made by the WTO Secretariat, "Market Access: Unfinished Business" and
"Formula Approaches to Tariff Negotiations", indicate that two sets of criteria have been used for
identifying peaks:  "International peaks" and "National peaks".  The international peak is usually
identified by using a fixed percentage, and any tariff above that figure would be considered a peak.
The national peak is based on an agreed fixed number of times of the national bound tariff average.We consider that using one figure percentage i.e. international peak, across the board would not
reflect the real situation of each individual country development level.  Furthermore, it is difficult to
justify the use of a particular figure instead of another figure, especially when it is going to be applied
to different tariff levels.  On the other hand, using a fixed times of the national tariff average i.e.
national peaks, would better reflect those different needs.  Thailand therefore supports the use of thenational peak criteria in the negotiations.
III. BASIS FOR NEGOTIATIONS
10. We view that the basis for negotiations should be the committed bound rate from the previous
GATT/WTO round of negotiations.  In the case of unbound items, which are generally more sensitiveproducts than bound items, the national statutory rate should be the starting-point for negotiations.
Members should be allowed to bind all tariffs above the applied rate.
IV. NON-TARIFF BARRIERS
11. Admittedly, non-tariff barriers remain a significant issue which is difficult to identify and
remedy.  However, this is an important part of the task that needs to be undertaken during the course
of the new round of non-agricultural market access negotiations, the final outcome of which should be
well balanced with the aforementioned result of tariff reduction.
12. To this end, we view that NTBs should be identified and negotiated within the Negotiating
Group on Non-Agricultural Products as it is the most appropriate body to discuss and remedy NTBs
problems for the following reasons:
(1) This Group has been granted full authority by the TNC to negotiate on the subject of 
NAMA.
(2) It will facilitate developing and least-developed countries, which possess constraints
with regards to both human resource and budg et, and to help them to better focus on
the NAMA topics in one single forum.
(3) It will help facilitate developing and least-developed countries to better evaluate the
overall picture of the NAMA negotiations.
13. On the subject of process for negotiating removal of NTBs, we are of the opinion that the
request–offer process should be an appropriate process for the NTBs negotiations.
V. S&D
14. On the topic of Special & Differential Treatment for developing and least-developed
countries, Thailand considers that S&D should be provided in the forms of, among others, thedifferent target tariff cuts, different components of the formula, different time frames forTN/MA/W/26
Page 3
implementation.  These elements should be discussed in light of the S&D objectives as set out in the
Doha Declaration.
VI. ENVIRONMENTAL GOODS
15. Lastly, with regard to the Doha mandate to re duce or, as appropriate, eliminate tariff and non-
tariff barriers to environmental goods, we are of th e view that the most practical approach would be to
treat environmental products in the same manner as other products under negotiations in the Non-
Agriculture Market Access Group.
__________