WORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONG/C/W/400
19 July 2002
(02-4017)
Council for Trade in Goods Original:  English
TRADE FACILITATION: ARTICLE VIII OF  GATT 1994 ON FEES AND FORMALITIES
CONNECTED WITH IMPORTATION AND EXPORTATION
Communication from the United States of America
The following communication, dated 19 July 2002, has been received from the Permanent
Mission of the United States.
_______________
Summary
As the Council for Trade in Goods proceeds with its Doha mandate to “review and, as appropriate,
clarify and improve relevant aspects of Articles V, VIII and X of GATT 1994 and identify the trade
facilitation needs and priorities of Members, in particular developing and least-developing countries,”
the United States makes this submission with regard to GATT Article VIII.  Since work within theWTO on Trade Facilitation commenced after the Singapore Ministerial, a great deal of discussion has
centered around specific techniques that are often described as ‘best practices.’  The United States
underscores the importance of these exchanges, since they make clear the commonality of available
methodologies, the shared needs and priorities, and, ultimately, the systemic nature of the undertaking
on Trade Facilitation.  In this submission, the United States identifies more generally those relevant
elements within the context of GATT Article VIII itself that appear to warrant clarification and
improvement, in the form of questions intended to contribute to formal and informal discussions aswork proceeds toward the Fifth Ministerial.
With regard to the specific challenges and opportunities that arise for developing country Members as
we advance toward WTO negotiations on Trade Facilitation, the United States will make a separate
contribution in the future, pending further informal consultations with developing country Members.
Background
The United States continues to hold the view that a successful achievement in the area of Trade
Facilitation does not need to be a complex undertaking, given the core objective of ensuring arules-based transparent and efficient environment for goods crossing borders.  Meeting this objective
is not only a matter that will improve market access for traders, it is also a critical issue for
manufacturers facing the challenges of operating in today’s global just-in-time economy.  The
stability and certainty of a border regime that provides for rapid release of imported goods are also
important factors in investment decision-making, and are repeatedly cited as a key to expandingregional trade between developing countries.
Improvements and clarifications to GATT Article VIII would contribute to ensuring that Members’
regulatory infrastructure keeps pace with advancem ents in commercial logistical practices.  The
experience of many Members demonstrates that increased regulatory efficiency also enhances
administrative capabilities to achieve compliance with applicable requirements pertaining to duty
collection or concerning health, safety, and the environment.G/C/W/400
Page 2
In some cases, improvements to GATT Article VIII may be achieved simply through clarification
resulting in greater specificity, such as with regard to the use and applicability of fees.  Another
example involves the silence of GATT Article VIII with regard to treatment of express shipments.
Express shipments represent an increasingly important element of every Member’s logistical andsupply-chain infrastructure -- and are particularly important to small and medium size enterprises that
often rely on nimbleness in operation to compete. By their very nature, express shipments present
unique issues that should be addressed in the co ntext of a clarification and improvement of GATT
Article VIII.
Questions for Discussion
Fees
• With regard to Article VIII 1 (a-b), can improvement be achieved through specification of types
of fees permitted, and types of fees disallowed?
• Can there be greater specification with regard to the calculation of such fees with reference to
“approximate cost of services rendered”?
• Can transparency in the operation of such fees be improved, such as, for example, through
publishing, making publically available, or notifying such fees?
Formalities and Requirements
• With regard to Article VIII 1(c), can there be a clarification through an articulation of specific
standards by which a regime is considered to have minimized the “incidence and complexity” ofits formalities, and decreased and simplified its documentation requirements?
• Can the inefficiencies of many traditional formalities be diminished through specification of the
use of methods allowing rapid release of goods while also ensuring necessary customs control is
maintained?
• Can efficiency be enhanced by specification of a quantifiable measurement of timely release of
goods?
• How best can Article VIII be clarified to bring about improvements concerning the treatment of
express shipments of goods?
• What improvements and clarifications could address problems arising from disparate treatment
through significant variances in border regime operations between members of customs unions?
• With regard to paragraph 2 of Ad Article VIII of GATT 1994, can clarification be achieved
through greater specification of the very limited situations in which the use of certificates oforigin could be deemed “strictly indispensable” or otherwise be inconsistent with GATT Article
VIII?
Penalties
• With regard to Article VIII 3(b), can improvement result from further clarification of what
constitutes appropriate treatment for specified “minor breaches of customs regulations orG/C/W/400
Page 3
procedural requirements,” including clerical errors and other similar types of mistakes that are
rectified in a timely and voluntarily manner?
• Can improvement result through clarification of “substantial penalties” or penalties “greater than
necessary to serve merely as warning.”
Scope of coverage
• With regard to Article VIII 4(b), can clarification enhance the certainty with regard to the scope
and coverage of GATT Article VIII?
__________