RESTRICTEDWORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONG/STR/M/11
1 December 1998
(98-4816)
Working Party on
State Trading
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE
WORKING PARTY ON STATE TRADING ENTERPRISES
HELD ON 18 SEPTEMBER 1998
Chairman:  Mr. Jacques Teyssier d'Orfeuil (France)
Page
A. Adoption of the Agenda 1
B. Review of notifications submitted by Members pursuant to requests 1
for notifications in G/STR/N/1, 3, and 4
(1) New and full notifications under G/STR/N/1 and 4 2
(2) Updating notifications under G/STR/N/3 2
C. Illustrative list showing the kinds of  relationships between governments 2
and enterprises and the kinds of activities engaged in by these enterprises
(G/STR/W/35)
A. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA
1. The Working Party adopted the agenda contained in WTO/AIR/903, as above.
B. REVIEW OF NOTIFICATIONS SUBMITTED BY MEMBERS PURSUANT TO REQUESTS FOR
NOTIFICATIONS IN G/STR/N/1, 3, AND 4
2. The Chairman recalled that, according to paragraph 5 of the Understanding on the
Interpretation of Article XVII ("the Understanding" ), the Working Party was tasked to review the
notifications and counter-notifications on state trading submitted by Members, and in the light of thisreview, the Council for Trade in Goods may make recommendations with regard to the adequacy of
notifications and the need for further information.
3. The Chairman recalled that the Council for Trade in Goods, at its meeting on
20 February 1995, had established a deadline of 30 June 1995 for new and full notifications by
Members on their state trading enterprises ("STEs") , and that subsequently the Working Party had
agreed to maintain 30 June as the date for further (updating) notifications.  On 17 March 1997, a
request for updating notifications – which were to be based on the new and full notifications due inG/STR/M/11
Page 2
1995 – had been circulated in document G/STR/ N/3.  These most recent updating notifications,
required of all WTO Members, had been due by 30 June 1997.
4. The Chairman said that, as of the date of circulation of the airgram convening the present
meeting – 2 September 1998 – a total of 58 Members (counting the EU as one Member) had
submitted new and full notifications in response to the 1995 request.  In the area of updatingnotifications, 25 had been received for 1996 and only 27 for 1997 (again counting the EU as one
Member).  While the number of new and full notifications had increased, the failure of a number of
Members to make timely updating notifications remained disappointing.  The Understanding provided
for the submission of counter-notifications where a Member felt that a notification by another
Member was either incomplete or incorrect.  However, no counter-notifications had been received
thus far.
5. The Chairman suggested that the Working Part y conduct the review in the same manner as at
previous meetings, i. e. with a focus on two ma in elements: (1) Whether the notification responded
adequately to the information requested in the questionnaire; and (2) Whether more information was
needed in order to permit – in the language of paragraph 2 of the Understanding – "a clear
appreciation of the manner of operation of the enterprises notified and the effect of their operations on
international trade". He noted that the airgram divided the review exercise into two sections: onedealing with new and full notifications made under G/STR/N/1 and 4, and the other with updating
notifications made under G/STR/N/3.
(1) New and full notifications under G/STR/N/1 and 4
6. No questions were posed regarding the notification of Qatar (G/STR/N/1/QAT).
7. No questions were posed regarding the notification of Mongolia (G/STR/N/4/MNG).
(2) Updating notifications under G/STR/N/3
8. No questions were posed regarding the notification of Jamaica (G/STR/N/3/JAM).
9. No questions were posed regarding the notification of Macau (G/STR/N/3/MAC).
10. No questions were posed regarding the notification of the Slovak Republic
(G/STR/N/3/SVK).
11. The Chairman indicated that, as agreed at the Working Party's meeting in September 1996,
notifications that had already been reviewed and on which there may be written questions would not
be retained on the airgram for the Working Party's next meeting unless a Member specifically so
requested.
12. The Chairman also emphasised the need for the Members to whom written questions had
been addressed to respond in writing to those questions as soon as possible.
C. ILLUSTRATIVE LIST SHOWING THE KINDS OF RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN GOVERNMENTS AND
ENTERPRISES AND THE KINDS OF ACTIVITIES ENGAGED IN BY THESE ENTERPRISES
(G/STR/W/35)
13. The Chairman recalled that, at the Working Party's meeting in November 1997, he had
reported that a Chairman's text would be prepared which would consolidate in a single text the various
elements submitted thus far for an illustrative list,  with a view to developing a working draft of an
illustrative list and thus advancing work on that important task.  Since then, five informal meetingsG/STR/M/11
Page 3
had been held, at which the Chairman's text was di scussed at length.  At the most recent of those
meetings, a second revision of the text was considered, and after further changes to that text, it was
agreed that the text should be forwarded by the Working Party as a whole for consideration by the
Council for Trade in Goods.  Would any delegatio n have comments on the draft illustrative list?
14. The representative of the United States indicated that his delegation was unable to agree to the
draft text at the present moment.
15. The representative of Australia stated that the Working Party had been discussing the
illustrative list for some time and that the draft was a good compromise text.  He hoped that the matter
would soon be resolved.  The illustrative list would be helpful in making the new and full
notifications for 1998.
16. The Chairman expressed regret at the lack of consensus on the draft illustrative list, and
indicated that he would continue to work on the matter.  With respect to the date of the Working
Party's next meeting, he stated that it would be determined by the number of notifications received in
the coming weeks.  The Working Party could possibly meet in December 1998.
__________