. /.  
 WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  WT/REG125/6 
15 November 2004 
 
 (04-4846) 
Committee on Regional Trade Agreements Original:   English 
  
 
FREE-TRADE AGREEMENT BETWEEN CHILE AND MEXICO 
 
Questions and Replies
 
 
 The following communication, dated 19 October 2004, is being circulated at the request of 
the Delegations of Chile and Mexico. 
  This document reproduces the questions addressed  to the Parties and the responses submitted. 
The questions and replies set out below are or ganized in accordance with document WT/REG125/3 
for the goods aspects of the Agreement, and WT/R EG125/4 for the services aspects of the Agreement. 
 
_______________ 
 
 
GOODS ASPECTS
 
 
I. BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON THE AGREEMENT 
3. Scope 
 
1. The Parties stated at the April 2003 meeting that 99% of bilateral trade was covered, 
but there was some 60 tariff lines excluded or benefited from tariff preferences under the 
Agreement. The Parties stated they had a commitm ent to review these exemptions at meetings 
of the commission to discuss whether products co uld be subject to further liberalization. Could 
the Parties provide an update on those discussions? 
 No discussion has taken place on this matter. 
  II. TRADE PROVISIONS  
5. Safeguards 
 
2. The provisions of the Agreement on emergency action give discretion to each Party as to 
whether or not to include the other Party in the imposition of global safeguard measures. Have 
there been any cases where the Parties have been exempted from a global safeguard measure? 
 Article 6.03 of the Mexico-Chile FTA clearly  establishes the conditions for a Party to be 
excluded from a global safeguard investigation. Rega rding the second part of the question, as of today 
Mexico does maintain any WTO safeguard measure, so no exemptions have been taken place yet. 
 
 Chile excluded Mexico from the global safeguard measure, in the context of the FTA in the 
following cases (none of these measures are in force):   * Definitive Safeguard measure on imports of socks of synthetic fibres. WT/REG125/6 
Page 2  
 
 Notification: G/SG/N/10/CHL/2/Suppl.1 (11.21.2000)   * Definitive Safeguard measure on imports of powdered milk and UHT milk  Notification: G/SG/N/10/CHL/3 (01.22.2001).  
 * Definitive Safeguard (e xtended) on imports on: 
 a) Wheat;  b) Wheat flour;  c) Sugar, and  d) Vegetables oils. 
 Notification: G/SG/N/14/CHL/1 (22.12.2000) 
  * Definitive Safeguard measures on:
 
 a) Coils and sheets, hot-rolled; and  b)Bars and rods 
 Notification: G/SG/N/11/CHL/4/Suppl.1 (06.29.2002) 
   * Definitive Safeguards on imports of fructose syrup  Notification: G/SG/N/10/CHL/5/Suppl.1 (12.18.2002).  
 
_______________ 
 
 
SERVICES ASPECTS
 
 
I. BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON THE AGREEMENT 
3. Scope 
 
3. In the April 2003 meeting, the representative of Chile noted that the liberalization of 
trade in financial services was the subject of on going negotiations. Would the Parties provide an 
update of the status of those negotiations. 
 The first and only meeting between the Mexi can and the Chilean financial authorities was 
held on August 24 and 25, 2000 in Santiago de Chile . The meeting had the objective of evaluating the 
possibility to negotiate a chapte r on financial services within th e Free Trade Agreement between 
Chile and Mexico. 
 
 During that meeting, and as an introduction to the topic, both Parties discussed the disciplines 
that a chapter on financial services should cover. Mexico explained the content and the provisions 
related to financial services in the NAFTA and in  the FTA with the European Union. On the other 
hand, the members of the Chilean delegation explai ned the characteristics of the Chilean financial 
system after a set of modifications to the legislation related to financial services. 
 
 As a result of this first meeting, both Par ties recognized that the Chilean legal framework 
prevailing at the entry into force of the FTA h as changed. Although the situation which at that 
moment gave place to not negotiating financial services, is different, the Parties did not find sufficient 
reasons to include such a chapter. Both Parties agre ed to assess, in an individual manner, the potential 
benefits of a chapter of this nature before deciding on a specific course of action. 
 
__________  