WORLD TRADE G/L/113
4October 1996
ORGANIZATION(96-4055)
REPORT OFTHE TEXTILES MONITORING BODY
SUMMARY
Thisreport wasadopted andisbeing presented bytheTextiles Monitoring Body (TMB) in
thecontext ofthepreparation fortheSingapore Ministerial Conference. Itreflects thework carried
outbytheTMB onthebasis ofMembers 'notifications.
1. General
Chapter I(Introduction) provides abrief description oftheAgreement onTextiles and
Clothing (ATC) andtheroleoftheTMB. Italsogives information onthereports adopted bytheTMB
aswellasthenotifications submitted toitandtheircirculation toMembers.
2. Implementation
Chapters IItoIXcontain detailed information ontheimplementation ofthedifferent provisions
oftheATC. Chapter Xprovides information andanassessment onthefunctioning oftheTMB.
3. Built-in-agenda
(i) According toparagraphs 8(a)and11ofArticle 2oftheATC, programmes forthe
second stage ofintegration (1January 1998 -31December 2001) willhavetobenotified to
theTMB notlaterthanby31December 1996.
(ii) Pursuant toparagraph 11ofArticle 8,theCouncil forTrade inGoods shallconduct
amajor review ontheimplementation oftheATC during thefirststage ofintegration before
theendof1997. Toassist inthisreview, theTMB shalltransmit totheCouncil forTrade
inGoods acomprehensive report ontheimplementation oftheATC during thisfirststage
bytheendofJuly1997.
4. Observations, assessments andrecommendations
(i) Observations andassessments bytheTMB withrespect totheimplementation ofthe
different provisions oftheATC arereproduced inboldletters inthereport (integration -
paragraphs 11to16and21to27;quantitative restrictions under Article 2-paragraphs 34,
35and41;safeguard actions under Article 6-paragraphs 82to84;Article 7-paragraphs 99
to101; compliance withnotification requirements -paragraphs 19and102; andfunctioning
oftheTMB -paragraphs 111to122).
(ii) Recommendations aretobefound inparagraphs 103,107and119(printed inbold
letters andunderlined).G/L/113
Page2
INDEX
Page
I. INTRODUCTION ...........................................4
A. TheAgreement onTextiles andClothing (ATC) andthe
roleoftheTextiles Monitoring Body (TMB) ......................4
B. Reports bytheTMB .....................................4
C. Notification byMembers ..................................4
II. INTEGRATION .............................................5
A. Articles 2.6and2.7(a) ....................................5
B. Articles 6.1,2.6and2.7(b) ................................6
III. ARTICLE 2-QUANTITATIVE RESTRICTIONS MAINTAINED OR
NOTIFIED UNDER THE ARRANGEMENT REGARDING INTERNATIONAL
TRADE INTEXTILES (MFA), INFORCE ON31DECEMBER 1994 ..........8
A. Article 2.1-Restrictions inforce on31December 1994 ..............8
B. Article 2.2-Observations withregard toArticle 2.1notifications .........8
C. Article 2.15-Elimination ofrestrictions maintained under Article 2.......9
D. Article 2.17-Administration ofrestrictions ......................9
E. Article 2.18-Advanced implementation ofgrowth ratesfor
certain Members .......................................10
IV. RESTRICTIONS OTHER THAN THOSE MAINTAINED ORNOTIFIED
UNDER THE ARRANGEMENT REGARDING INTERNATIONAL TRADE
INTEXTILES (MFA) .........................................11
A. Review ofnotifications made under Article 3.1....................11
B. Programmes notified under Article 3.2(b) ........................11
C. Changes inexisting restrictions notified under Article 3.3 .............12
V. SAFEGUARD ACTIONS UNDER ARTICLE 6........................12
A. Review ofunilateral restraint measures applied under Article 6.10,
andfollow-up ofTMB recommendations ........................13
B. Agreed restraint measures notified under Article 6.9.................15
C. Unilateral measures taken under Article 6.11......................19
D. Present status ofsafeguard actions taken pursuant toArticle 6...........19
VI. OTHER MEASURES, MATTERS ORINFORMATION SUBMITTED
TOTHE TMB ..............................................20
A. Matters submitted under paragraphs 5and/or 6ofArticle 8............20
B. Matters submitted under paragraph 10ofArticle 8..................22
C. Information submitted totheTMB ............................22G/L/113
Page3
Page
VII. IMPLEMENTATION OFSPECIAL PROVISIONS INTHE ATC
RELATED TOTHE SPECIAL INTERESTS OFCERTAIN WTO
MEMBERS ...............................................23
A. Article 1.4...........................................23
B. Special provisions infavour ofdeveloping andleast-developing
country Members .......................................23
VIII. ARTICLE 7-COMMITMENTS UNDERTAKEN ASARESULT
OFTHE URUGUAY ROUND ...................................23
IX. COMPLIANCE WITH NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS
UNDER THE ATC ..........................................24
X. FUNCTIONING OFTHE TMB ..................................25
A. TMB working procedures ..................................25
B. Discharging functions onanadpersonam basis ....................25
C. Meetings oftheTMB ....................................25
D. Circulation ofreports, Chairman 'snotes, derestriction of
TMB documents .......................................25
E. Overall assessment ......................................26
ANNEX I Notifications Received Pursuant toParagraphs 6and7ofArticle 2........29
ANNEX II Application ofTransitional Safeguard Mechanism under Article 6
oftheAgreement onTextiles andClothing .......................30
ANNEX III TMB Meetings ........................................32G/L/113
Page4
I. INTRODUCTION
A. TheAgreement onTextiles andClothing (ATC) andtheroleoftheTextiles Monitoring
Body (TMB)
1. Asspecified inparagraphs 1ofArticle 1andArticle 9,1theATC setsoutprovisions tobe
applied byMembers during atransition period oftenyears fortheintegration ofthetextiles andclothing
sector intoGATT 1994. TheATC andallrestrictions thereunder shall stand terminated on
1January 2005, onwhich datethetextiles andclothing sector shallbefullyintegrated intoGATT 1994.
There shallbenoextension oftheATC.
2. TheTMB wasestablished inorder tosupervise theimplementation oftheATC, toexamine
allmeasurestakenunderitsprovisionsandtheirconformitytherewith,andtotaketheactionsspecifically
required ofitbytheATC.
3. Thecomposition oftheTMB forthefirststage ofimplementation oftheATC (1995 to1997)
wasdecided bytheGeneral Council on31January 1995 (WT/L/26) andsubsequently modified by
theGeneralCouncilon6February1996(WT/L/26/Add.1).AmbassadorAndrásSzepesiwasappointed
Chairman oftheTMB forthesameperiod bytheGeneral Council on31January 1995(WT/GC/M/1).
ThelistofTMB members, alternates, observers, andsuccessive changes, arecontained inparagraphs 2
ofG/TMB/R/1, 3,5,9,10,11,15and18.
B. Reports bytheTMB
4. TheTMB adopted reports ofitsmeetings, which werecirculated toWTO Members fortheir
information (G/TMB/R/1 to18). Asprovided forintheATC, atleastfivemonths before theend
ofeachstage oftheintegration process, theTMB shalltransmit totheCouncil forTrade inGoods
acomprehensive report ontheimplementation oftheATC during therespective stage. Thefirstsuch
comprehensive report isduebytheendofJuly1997.
5. TheGeneral Council decided atitsmeeting on15November 1995onprocedures tobefollowed
bytherelevant WTO bodies foranannual overview ofWTO activities andforreporting under the
WTO (WT/L/105). Pursuant tothisdecision, thefirstannual report oftheTMB wassubmitted in
November 1995 andiscontained indocument G/L/40.
6. Atthemeeting oftheGeneral Council on16April 1996, theChairman made astatement with
regard tothereporting procedures fortheSingapore Ministerial Conference (WT/L/145). Thepresent
report isbeing presented bytheTMB bearing inmind alltheelements contained inthisstatement.
Itcovers theperiod 1January 1995to1October 1996, andprovides anoverview oftheimplementation
ofthedifferent provisions oftheATC. Itcontains information onthework carried outbytheTMB
onthebasis ofMembers ’notifications andincludes some additional observations made bytheTMB
whenpreparingandadoptingthiscontributiontothepreparationoftheSingaporeMinisterialConference.
C. Notification byMembers
7. TheATC contains animportant number ofnotification requirements, some withaspecific
time-frame, andsome ad-hoc (mainly related tospecific actions taken byindividual Members).
1Unless otherwise specified, allArticles mentioned refer totheAgreement onTextiles andClothing.G/L/113
Page5
8. According totheATC, incarrying outitsfunctions theTMB “shallrelyonnotifications and
information supplied bytheMembers under therelevant Articles... ”oftheATC.
9. Inmost cases notifications aretobesubmitted totheTMB, andarecirculated bytheTMB
toallWTO Members forinformation andtransparency. Inlinewiththeworking procedures adopted
bytheTMB, notifications received pursuant toArticles 2.1,2.2,2.7(a) and(b),2.8(a)and(b),2.10,
2.11, 2.15, 3.1,3.3,3.4,6.1and7.2oftheATC arecirculated toWTO Members without delay.
Notifications addressed totheTMB forreview other thanthose listed above are,aftersuchreview,
alsotransmitted toWTO Members (G/TMB/R/1 and11).
II. INTEGRATION
10. Paragraph 6ofArticle 2states that“onthedateofentry intoforce oftheWTO Agreement,
eachMember shallintegrate intoGATT 1994products which accounted fornotlessthan16percent
ofthetotalvolume oftheMember ’s1990 imports oftheproducts intheAnnex, interms ofHSlines
orcategories ”.TheMembers which hadmade anotification under paragraph 1ofArticle 2(see
Chapter III)arecovered byparagraph 7(a)ofArticle 2,andtheother Members byparagraph 7(b)
ofthesame Article.
A. Articles 2.6and2.7(a)
11. Pursuant toparagraphs 6and7(a)ofArticle 2,notifications made totheGATT Secretariat
byCanada, theEuropean Communities, Norway andtheUnited States nolaterthan1October 1994,
inaccordance withadecision taken byMinisters atMarrakesh on15April 1994, weremade available
totheTMB forthepurposes ofparagraph 21ofArticle 2oftheATC. Inreviewing thesenotifications
theTMB noted that,inaccordance withparagraph 6ofArticle 2,thevolume ofproducts integrated
byCanada, theEuropean Communities, Norway andtheUnited States amounted toatleast16percent
ofthetotalvolume oftherespective Members ’1990 imports oftheproducts falling under thecoverage
oftheATC(Canada:16.34percent;EuropeanCommunities:16.4percent;Norway:16.26percent;
UnitedStates:16.21percent),includingproductsfromeachofthefourgroups:topsandyarns,fabrics,
made-up textile products, andclothing (seeAnnex I).Notwithstanding theprovisions ofparagraphs 6
and7ofArticle 2,theTMB wasaware that-withtheexception ofCanada affecting oneproduct
(work gloves) -theproducts thusintegrated werenot,prior totheirintegration intoGATT 1994,
subject toquantitative restrictions notified under paragraph 1ofArticle 2.
12. Paragraph 6ofArticle 2required Members tointegrate products selected from eachofthe
fourgroupsmentionedinparagraph11above;theintegrationprogrammessubmittedbytheMembers
concerned forthefirststage ofintegration metthisrequirement. TheTMB observed, however,
thattheshare oftops,yarns andfabrics intheintegration programmes notified under paragraphs 6
and7(a)ofArticle 2wassignificantly higher thanthatofmade-up textile products andclothing
(seeAnnex I).
13. Paragraph 6ofArticle 2alsorequired Members tointegrate inthefirststage products which
accounted fornotlessthan16percentofthetotalvolume oftheMember ’s1990imports oftheproducts
intheAnnex. However, astheproducts integrated were concentrated intherelatively less
value-added range ofproducts, itwould appear thattheshare ofproducts integrated, expressed
invalue terms, wassmaller thanthatexpressed involume.
14. Theintegration ofaproduct intoGATT 1994 pursuant toparagraph 6ofArticle 2has
twoconsequences: first, theprovisions ofArticle 6oftheATC cannot beinvoked withrespectG/L/113
Page6
toimports ofsuchproduct; second, anyquantitative restriction onthisproduct notified under
Article 2oftheATC iseliminated.
15. Inlight oftheobservation made bytheTMB reproduced inthelastsentence of
paragraph 11above, itcanbeobserved thattheincreases inaccess tothemarkets ofMembers
having notified restrictions pursuant toparagraph 1ofArticle 2havebeenlimited todate, with
oneexception, totheannual increases inthelevels ofrestrictions required under paragraphs 13
and,ifapplicable, 18ofArticle 2,andinonecasetotherecourse totheprovision ofparagraph 15
ofthesame Article. TheTMB alsoobserved thatnonotification hadbeen made under
paragraph 10ofthesame Article, which provides thepossibility ofintegrating products earlier
thatprovided forintheintegration programmes notified.
16. TheTMB wasaware oftheconcern expressed byseveral Members that,should thepattern
ofselection oftheproducts tobeintegrated inthesecond andthird stages pursuant toparagraphs
8(a)and(b)ofArticle 2reproduce thatofthefirststage, theimplementation oftheintegration
ofthetextiles andclothing sector intoGATT 1994on1January 2005, asstated inparagraph 8(c)
ofArticle 2,would prove difficult. TheTMB wasequally aware that, intheviewofsome other
Members, theeventual integration ofthetextiles andclothing sector intoGATT hadtobeseen
alsointhecontext oftheliberalization builtintotheATC inparagraphs 13,14and,ifapplicable,
18ofArticle 2.
B. Articles 6.1,2.6and2.7(b)
17. According toparagraph 9ofArticle 2,“Members which havenotified, pursuant toparagraph 1
ofArticle 6,theirintention nottoretain therighttousetheprovisions ofArticle 6shall, forthepurposes
ofthisAgreement, bedeemed tohaveintegrated theirtextiles andclothing products intoGATT 1994.
SuchMembers shall, therefore, beexempted fromcomplying withtheprovisions ofparagraphs 6to
8and11”ofthesame Article. Thereview oftheexamination bytheTMB ofnotifications received
under paragraphs 6and7(b)ofArticle 2has,therefore, tobemade inthecontext ofnotifications made
pursuant toparagraph 1ofArticle 6.
Article 6.1
18. Paragraph1ofArticle6statesthat“MembersnotmaintainingrestrictionsfallingunderArticle2
shallnotify theTMB ...astowhether ornottheywishtoretain therighttousetheprovisions ofthis
Article ”.TheTMB received suchnotifications fromfifty-eight WTO Members. TheTMB tooknote
thatthefollowing fifty-one Members hadnotified thattheywished toretain theright tousethe
provisions ofArticle 6:Argentina, Bangladesh, Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Costa Rica, Côted'Ivoire,
Cyprus, theCzech Republic, theDominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, ElSalvador, Guatemala,
Honduras, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Israel, Jamaica, Japan, Kenya, Korea, Lesotho, Malaysia, Malta,
Mauritius,Mexico,Morocco,Myanmar,Nicaragua,Nigeria,Pakistan,Paraguay,Peru,thePhilippines,
Poland, Romania, Senegal, theSlovak Republic, Slovenia, South Africa, SriLanka, Switzerland,
Thailand, Trinidad andTobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Uruguay, Venezuela andZambia. Italsotooknote
thatthefollowing seven WTO Members didnotwish toretain theright tousetheprovisions of
Article 6:Australia, Chile, Cuba, Hong Kong, Macau, NewZealand andSingapore.
19. TheTMB wishes todraw theattention ofMembers tothefactthattheMembers which
didnotmaintain restrictions falling under Article 2had,pursuant toparagraph 1ofArticle 6,
theobligation tonotify within aspecific time-frame whether ornottheywished toretain theright
tousetheprovisions ofArticle 6.TheTMB noted withconcern thatasignificant number of
suchMembers didnotsubmit anotification under thisparagraph.G/L/113
Page7
Articles 2.6and2.7(b)
20. TheTMB received forty-two notifications made, pursuant toparagraphs 6and7(b)ofArticle 2,
byArgentina, Bangladesh, Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cyprus, theCzech Republic, the
Dominican Republic, ElSalvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Israel, Japan,
Korea, Malaysia, Malta, Mauritius, Mexico, Morocco, Myanmar, Nicaragua, Pakistan, Paraguay,
Peru,thePhilippines,Poland,Romania,SaintKittsandNevis,theSlovakRepublic,Slovenia,SriLanka,
Switzerland, Thailand, Tunisia, Turkey, Uruguay, Venezuela andZambia. Itcompleted itsreview
ofthirty-nine ofthem. Inthisreview theTMB noted thatinallcases theproducts integrated amounted
toatleast16percentoftherespective Members ’totalimports oftheproducts falling under thecoverage
oftheATC (inmost cases involume of1990 imports, insome other cases invalue and/or witha
different base-year, seeAnnex I),andthatinallcases products from eachofthefourgroups (tops
andyarns, fabrics, made-up textile products, andclothing) hadbeenintegrated. Thereview ofthe
notifications made byIsrael, Myanmar andSaintKittsandNevis areinprogress, andwillbeconcluded
assoonastheadditional information sought bytheTMB from these Members isreceived.
21. Asnoted above, theTMB insome instances tooknoteofintegration programmes which, in
certain respects, didnotfullymeetthetechnical criteria established under paragraph 6ofArticle 2.
Thisconcerned cases where thedatawere notavailable involume, orfortheyear1990, orwhere
theshare ofintegration wascalculated relative todataforthetextiles andclothing sector asawhole
since datafortheexact product coverage oftheATC were notavailable. Prior totaking noteof
such notifications, theTMB ensured thatnobetter datacould beobtained. Furthermore, its
taking noteofsuchnotifications waswithout prejudice totherights andobligations ofMembers
under theATC.
22. Asalready mentioned inparagraph 12above, paragraph 6ofArticle 2requires Members to
integrate products selected fromeachofthefourfollowing groups: topsandyarns, fabrics, made-up
textile products, andclothing. Theintegration programmes submitted byMembers pursuant to
paragraphs 6and7(b)ofArticle 2metthisrequirement. However, although there were wide
variations intheprogrammes presented under these provisions, theTMB observed thatinthe
large majority ofcases theshare ofoneortwogroups (tops andyarns and/or fabrics) was
significantly higher thanthose oftheother groups (seeAnnex I).
23. Paragraph 6ofArticle 2alsorequired Members tointegrate inthefirststage products which
accounted fornotlessthan16percentofthetotalvolume oftheMember ’s1990imports oftheproducts
intheAnnex. However, withrespect tothecases where theproducts integrated wereconcentrated
intherelatively lessvalue-added range ofproducts, itwould appear thattheshare ofproducts
integrated, expressed invalue terms, wassmaller thanthatexpressed involume.
24. TheTMB observed thatnonotification hadbeenmade under paragraph 10ofthesame
Article, which provides thepossibility ofintegrating products earlier thanthatprovided forin
theintegration programmes notified.
25. TheTMB alsoobserved thatseven Members hadnotified theirchoice nottoretain theright
tousetheprovisions ofArticle 6(seeparagraph 18)andthatforthose Members theproducts falling
under thecoverage oftheATC hadbeenintegrated intoGATT 1994 asfrom 1January 1995. The
TMB commended these Members forhaving opted forthisapproach.
26. TheTMB observed furthermore thatamong thefifty-one Members which hadchosen toretain
therighttousetheprovisionsofArticle6,ten(Côted’Ivoire,Ecuador,Egypt,Jamaica,Kenya,Lesotho,
Nigeria,Senegal,SouthAfrica,TrinidadandTobago)hadnotsubmittedanotificationunderparagraphs6
and7(b)ofArticle 2.TheTMB wished todraw theattention ofMembers tothefactthattheG/L/113
Page8
notification requirement contained inparagraph 1ofArticle 6,andtheresulting notification
requirement contained inparagraph 7(b)ofArticle 2,were mandatory andhadtobesubmitted
totheTMB within prescribed deadlines.
27. TheTMB noted thatinsome cases products integrated under paragraphs 6and7(b)of
Article 2hadalready beensubject toquantitative restrictions, notified under Article 3andjustified
under aGATT 1994 provision, andthatsuchrestrictions were notaffected bytheintegration
oftheproducts concerned. Among theforty-two Members which submitted anotification pursuant
toparagraphs 6and7(b)ofArticle 2,twelve made notifications under paragraph 1ofArticle 3invoking
justification under aGATT 1994 provision fortherestrictions notified (seeparagraph 43below).
III. ARTICLE2-QUANTITATIVERESTRICTIONSMAINTAINEDORNOTIFIEDUNDER
THEARRANGEMENTREGARDINGINTERNATIONALTRADEINTEXTILES(MFA),
INFORCE ON31DECEMBER 1994
A. Article 2.1-Restrictions inforce on31December 1994
28. Paragraph 1ofArticle 2oftheATC states that“allquantitative restrictions within bilateral
agreements maintained under Article 4ornotified under Article 7or8oftheMFA inforce onthe
daybefore theentry intoforce oftheWTO Agreement shall, within 60daysfollowing suchentry into
force, benotified indetail, including therestraint levels, growth ratesandflexibility provisions, by
theMembers maintaining suchrestrictions totheTMB”.Notifications werereceived pursuant tothis
paragraphfromCanada,theEuropeanCommunities,NorwayandtheUnitedStates.TheTMBcompleted
theirreview, keeping alsoinmind observations made bysome other Members (seeSection Bbelow),
andtooknoteofcorrections oradditions tothese notifications made byCanada andtheUnited States
(G/TMB/R/6,7,10,11,12,13and15).Accordingtoparagraph4ofArticle2,“therestrictionsnotified
under paragraph 1[ofArticle 2]shallbedeemed toconstitute thetotality ofsuchrestrictions applied
bytherespective Members onthedaybefore theentry intoforce oftheWTO Agreement. Nonew
restrictions interms ofproducts orMembers shallbeintroduced except under theprovisions ofthis
Agreement orrelevant GATT 1994 provisions ”.
B. Article 2.2-Observations withregard toArticle 2.1notifications
29. According toparagraph 2ofArticle 2,“itisopen toanyMember tobring totheattention
oftheTMB, within 60daysofthecirculation ofthenotifications, anyobservations itdeems appropriate
withregard tosuchnotifications ”.Suchnotifications werereceived fromColombia (observations on
thenotification made bytheUnited States), Hong Kong (observations onthenotification made bythe
United States), Korea (observations onthenotifications made byCanada, theEuropean Communities
andtheUnited States) andMacau (observations onthenotification made bytheUnited States).
30. Inreviewing thenotifications made byColombia, Hong Kong andKorea, theTMB noted that
theobservations made inthese notifications hadbeentaken intoaccount inthecorrigenda oraddenda
tothenotificationsmadeunderparagraph1ofArticle2bytheWTOMembersconcerned(G/TMB/R/6).
31. TheTMB tooknotethatthecorrection made bytheUnited States hadbeenconfirmed ina
subsequent notification received from Hong Kong under paragraph 2ofArticle 2(G/TMB/R/10).
Thisnotification contained additional elements, andtheTMB reverted totheir consideration ata
subsequentmeeting.Inreviewingtheseadditionalelements,theTMBtooknoteofHongKong’sdemand
thatthefullproduct descriptions, theconversion factors applicable, thecoverage andstructure ofthe
groups andsub-groups notified withrespect toHong Kong aswellasthecategory number forG/L/113
Page9
made to-measure suits, benotified totheTMB. TheTMB understood thatthese elements would be
notified bytheUnited States under paragraph 17ofArticle 2(G/TMB/R/12).
32. TheTMB considered thenotification byMacau pursuant toparagraph 2ofArticle 2.Inthis
notification,MacaustatedthattheUnitedStates'notificationreceivedundertheprovisionsofparagraph1
ofArticle 2oftheATC contained restrictions which, according toMacau, were notinforce onthe
daybefore theentry intoforce oftheATC under thebilateral agreement withMacau maintained under
Article 4oftheMFA. Accordingly, Macau invited theTMB torecommend thatthese restrictions
werenotinconformity withparagraph 1ofArticle 2oftheATC. Given thecomplexity ofthematter,
theTMB invited bothparties toprovide inwriting anyadditional submission orexplanation theymight
finduseful, which bothparties did.
33. TheTMB considered alltheelements putforward bybothparties intheirsubmissions, including
thereference made byMacau tothereview bytheTextiles Surveillance Body in1994ofthebilateral
agreement concluded under theMFA between Macau andtheUnited States. TheTMB noted thatits
review wasconducted under paragraph 2ofArticle 2.Itfound thatarecommendation, asrequested
byMacau, thatintheabsence ofeither anagreement overtheconversion ofcertain designated
consultation levels (DCLs) (onUScategories 219, 225,317,326,611and625–9)intospecific
limits (SLs), oractual trade inthese fabric categories, thenotification bytheUnited States ofthose
specific limits should beconsidered nullandvoid, wasnotwarranted. Inarriving atitsconclusions,
theTMB tooknotethattheconversion ofDCLs intoSLstookplace in1994 under theMFA. The
TMB noted withconcern, however, thatSLswereintroduced bytheUnited States inthealmost complete
absence oftradeinthesecategories. Itwastheexpectation oftheTMB that,inmonitoring developments
inthisarea, theUnited States would bearinmind thisobservation. TheTMB alsowished todraw
theattention ofMembers tothefactthat,withtheentry intoforce oftheATC, specific provisions
hadbeeninoperation fortheestablishment ofnew restrictions (G/TMB/R/13).
34. Asindicated inparagraphs 30to33above, theTMB hascompleted thereview ofallthe
observations brought toitsattention under paragraph 2ofArticle 2byMembers, andthedeadline
forsubmitting suchobservations haslapsed. Itcan,therefore, beassumed thatthetotality of
restrictions applied pursuant toparagraph 1ofArticle 2hasbeennotified, andthatnone ofthe
elements contained inthese notifications iseither contested byother Members orrequires further
consideration bytheTMB.
C. Article 2.15-Elimination ofrestrictions maintained under Article 2
35. Paragraph 15ofArticle 2states that“nothing inthisAgreement shallprevent aMember from
eliminatinganyrestrictionmaintainedpursuanttothisArticle,effectiveatthebeginningofanyagreement
yearduring thetransition period, provided theexporting Member concerned andtheTMB arenotified
atleastthree months prior totheelimination coming intoeffect”.TheTMB reviewed anotification
made byNorway inSeptember 1995, under thisparagraph, oftheelimination ofcertain restrictions
withrespect tosome WTO Members, witheffect asof1January 1996. TheMembers affected had
alsobeeninformed inadvance. TheTMB commended Norway fortheearly elimination ofsome
ofitsrestrictions maintained under theATC (G/TMB/R/6).
D. Article 2.17-Administration ofrestrictions
36. Paragraph 17ofArticle 2states that“administrative arrangements, asdeemed necessary in
relation totheimplementation ofanyprovision ofthisArticle, shallbeamatter foragreement between
theMembers concerned. Anysucharrangements shallbenotified totheTMB”.Todate,notifications
under thisArticle have been made byCanada, theEuropean Communities, Mauritius andthe
United States.G/L/113
Page10
37. TheTMB considered under paragraph 17ofArticle 2anotification byMauritius ofavisa
arrangement ithadconcluded withtheUnited States, andtooknoteofthisnotification (G/TMB/R/9).
Italsoconsidered thedetailed notifications byCanada ofadministrative arrangements concluded with
Bangladesh, Brazil, Costa Rica, Cuba, Hong Kong, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Korea, Lesotho, Macau,
Malaysia, Mauritius, Pakistan, thePhilippines, Poland, Romania, Singapore, theSlovak Republic,
SriLanka, Swaziland, Thailand, Turkey andUruguay. Thearrangements hadbeenbilaterally agreed
andcontained provisions which implemented, inaccordance withtheprovisions ofparagraph 1of
Article 4oftheATC, administrative aspects oftherespective export control systems (export licences,
monitoring ofexports, quota flexibility provisions, exchange ofstatistics, re-exports byCanada,
consultations). TheTMB tooknoteofthese notifications (G/TMB/R/13 and17).
38. Anumber ofnotifications arepending review.
E. Article 2.18-Advanced implementation ofgrowth ratesforcertain Members
39. Paragraph 18ofArticle 2specifies that“asregards those Members whose exports aresubject
torestrictions onthedaybefore theentry intoforce oftheWTO Agreement andwhose restrictions
represent 1.2percentorlessofthetotalvolume oftherestrictions applied byanimporting Member
asof31December 1991 andnotified under thisArticle, meaningful improvement inaccess fortheir
exports shallbeprovided, attheentry intoforce oftheWTO Agreement andfortheduration ofthis
Agreement, through advancement byonestage ofthegrowth ratessetoutinparagraphs 13and14,
orthrough atleastequivalent changes asmaybemutually agreed withrespect toadifferent mixof
baselevels, growth andflexibility provisions ”.Notifications under thisprovision havebeenreceived
from Canada, theEuropean Communities andtheUnited States.
40. According tothese notifications, theMembers concerned foreachimporting Members, and
theimplementation ofthisprovision, were asfollows:
- forCanada:2CostaRica,Cuba,theCzechRepublic,theDominicanRepublic,Hungary,
Jamaica, Lesotho, Macau, Mauritius, Myanmar, Poland, theSlovak Republic,
South Africa, SriLanka, Swaziland andUruguay. Thegrowth rates setoutin
paragraph 13ofArticle 2were increased by25percent, instead of16percent;
- fortheEuropean Communities: PeruandSriLanka. Thegrowth rates setoutin
paragraph 13ofArticle 2were increased firstly by16percentandsecondly by
25percent, instead of16percent;
- fortheUnited States: Bahrain, Colombia, Costa Rica, theCzech Republic,
theDominicanRepublic,Egypt,ElSalvador,Fiji,Guatemala,Haiti,Hungary,Jamaica,
Kenya, Kuwait, Macau, Mauritius, Poland, Qatar, Romania, theSlovak Republic, the
United Arab Emirates andUruguay. Thegrowth rates setoutinparagraph 13of
Article 2were increased by25percent, instead of16percent.
TheTMB tooknoteofthese notifications.
41. TheTMB observed thattheimplementation ofthisprovision oftheATC hadbeenmade
bytheMembers concerned using different methodologies. Itshould benoted inthisrespect that
paragraph 18ofArticle 2does notprovide precise guidance astohow toimplement the
2Indetermining eligibility fortreatment, Canada alsoincluded those Members thataccounted forlessthan
1.2percentoftherestraints ineffect on31December 1994.G/L/113
Page11
advancement byonestage ofthegrowth rates setoutinparagraphs 13and14,orthrough at
leastequivalent changes asmaybemutually agreed withrespect toadifferent mixofbaselevels,
growth andflexibility provisions. However, itistobenoted thattheresult interms ofmarket
access inthefirststage isimproved ifthemethodology chosen fortheadvancement byonestage
ofthegrowth rates includes thegrowth factor ofthefirststage, themanner inwhich ithadbeen
done byoneoftheMembers concerned.
IV. RESTRICTIONS OTHER THAN THOSE MAINTAINED ORNOTIFIED UNDER THE
ARRANGEMENT REGARDING INTERNATIONAL TRADE INTEXTILES (MFA)
A. Review ofnotifications made under Article 3.1
42. Paragraph 1ofArticle 3states that“within 60daysfollowing thedateofentry intoforce of
theWTO Agreement, Members maintaining restrictions3ontextile andclothing products (other than
restrictions maintained under theMFA andcovered bytheprovisions ofArticle 2),whether consistent
withGATT 1994 ornot,shall (a)notify them indetail totheTMB, or(b)provide totheTMB
notifications withrespect tothem which havebeensubmitted toanyother WTO body”.TheTMB
hasreceived suchnotifications from twenty-nine WTO Members; todate, thereview oftwenty-six
ofthese notifications hasbeencompleted bytheTMB (G/TMB/R/5, 7,8,9,12,13and15),and
additional information isbeing sought from Mexico, Morocco andThailand before completing the
review. During itsconsideration ofnotifications made under paragraph 1ofArticle 3,theTMB noted
thatithadreceived noreverse notification under paragraph 4ofthatArticle.
43. Outofthesetwenty-nine notifications, although notrequired bytheATC, tenMembers notified
thattheydidnotapply anyrestriction within themeaning ofparagraph 1ofArticle 3(Chile, Indonesia,
Kenya, Macau, Mauritius, NewZealand, thePhilippines, Saint Kitts andNevis, Singapore and
SriLanka). Intwelve instances (Bangladesh, Cyprus, Egypt, theEuropean Communities, India, Korea,
Malaysia, Malta, Pakistan, Peru, theUnited States andVenezuela), Members notified restrictions on
imports andinvoked either Articles XVIII:B, XVIII:C, XX(b), XX(f), orXXIV, asaGATT 1994
justification forsuch restrictions. TheTMB tooknoteofsuchnotifications.
44. Infourcases (Cyprus, Hungary, Japan andSlovenia) Members hadnotified quantitative
restrictionswhichweresubjecttoaphase-outprogramme,inaccordancewithparagraph2(b)ofArticle3.
TheTMB tooknoteofsuchnotifications, andofthefactthatphase-out programmes hadbeenorwould
benotified totheTMB (seeSection Bbelow).
45. Inaddition, Canada andtheUnited States hadnotified under bothparagraph 1ofArticle 2
andparagraph1ofArticle3measuresapplied,interalia,tocountrieswhichwerenotyetWTOMembers
atthetimethenotification hadbeenmade. Since these countries hadsubsequently become Members,
these measures were reviewed bytheTMB inthecontext ofparagraph 1ofArticle 2.
B. Programmes notified under Article 3.2(b)
46. Paragraph2ofArticle3statesthat“Membersmaintainingrestrictionsfallingunderparagraph1,
except those justified under aGATT 1994 provision, shalleither ...(a)bring them intoconformity
withGATT 1994 within oneyearfollowing theentry intoforce oftheWTO Agreement, ...or...
(b)phase themoutprogressively according toaprogramme tobepresented totheTMB bytheMember
3Restrictions denote allunilateral quantitative restrictions, bilateral arrangements andother measures having
asimilar effect.G/L/113
Page12
maintaining therestrictions notlaterthansixmonths afterthedateofentry intoforce oftheWTO
Agreement ”.
47. FourMembersnotifiedaphaseout-programmepursuanttoparagraph2(b)ofArticle3:Cyprus,
Hungary, Japan andSlovenia (G/TMB/N/146, 147,175,and186,respectively). TheTMB tooknote
ofsuchprogrammes. Insodoing, theTMB observed, inthecaseofHungary, thatinview ofthe
general nature ofthisprogramme, itexpected thatthedetails ofitsimplementation intherespective
stages would benotified totheTMB priortotheirimplementation, forit’sconsideration (G/TMB/R/9).
InthecaseofJapan, theTMB expressed theexpectation thattheimplementation oftheprogramme,
inconformity with paragraph 2(b)ofArticle 3,would besuchastoprovide appropriate progressive
increases tothelevelofrestrictions onimports ofsilkyarnandsilkfabric fromKorea (G/TMB/R/11).
Although Cyprus notified aphase-out programme pursuant toparagraph 2(b)ofArticle 3,itshould
benoted thattherevised programme submitted byCyprus inreply totheadditional information and
clarification sought bytheTMB seems tofallmore under theprovisions ofparagraph 2(a)ofthesame
Article.
C. Changes inexisting restrictions notified under Article 3.3
48. Paragraph 3ofArticle 3provides that“during theduration ofthisAgreement, Members shall
provide totheTMB, foritsinformation, notifications submitted toanyother WTO bodies withrespect
toanynewrestrictions orchanges inexisting restrictions ontextile andclothing products, taken under
anyGATT 1994 provision, within 60daysoftheircoming intoeffect”.
49. TheTMB received andreviewed three notifications made pursuant tothisparagraph bythe
European Communities. Twonotifications contained agreed changes increasing thequantitative limits,
orconsultation levels, maintained vis-à vistheCzech Republic, Egypt, Hungary, Malta, Morocco,
Poland, Romania, theSlovak Republic, andTunisia. According tothesenotifications, thesequantitative
limits orconsultation levels hadbeenapplied inthecontext ofpreferential tradeagreements witheach
ofthese countries andwere being notified under Article XXIV oftheGATT. TheTMB tooknote
oftheinformation contained inthese notifications. Athirdnotification stated thatasaresult ofthe
completion ofthecustoms union between theEuropean Communities andTurkey, theconsultation
levelsnotifiedbytheEuropeanCommunitiestotheTMBunderparagraph1ofArticle3vis-à-visTurkey
were eliminated asof1January 1996. TheTMB tooknoteofthisinformation (G/TMB/R/12).
V. SAFEGUARD ACTIONS UNDER ARTICLE 6
50. Article 6oftheATC provides forthepossibility ofapplying transitional safeguard measures
onimports ofproducts covered bytheATC andnotyetintegrated intoGATT 1994thatcause serious
damage, oractual threat thereof, tothedomestic industry producing likeand/or directly competitive
products. According toparagraph 7ofArticle 6,“theMember proposing totakesafeguard action
shallseekconsultations withtheMember orMembers which would beaffected bysuchaction ”.Such
consultations mayresult inarestraint measure being applied unilaterally bytheimporting Member
under paragraph 10ofArticle 6,orinarestraint measure being agreed between theparties andnotified
under paragraph 9ofArticle 6.Inbothcases theTMB willhavetoreview themeasure. Or,asa
result ofsuchconsultations, theimporting Member maydecide nottointroduce thesafeguard measure
envisaged. Inaddition, paragraph 11ofArticle 6provides that“inhighly unusual andcritical
circumstances, where delay would cause damage which would bedifficult torepair, action under
paragraph 10maybetaken provisionally onthecondition thattherequest forconsultations and
notification totheTMB shallbeeffected within nomore thanfiveworking daysaftertaking theaction ”.G/L/113
Page13
51. TheUnited States made twenty-five requests forconsultation pursuant toparagraph 7of
Article 6:twenty-four in1995andonein1996(seeAnnex II).Eleven resulted inrestraint measures
being agreed either during theconsultation period, orprior to,orduring thereview ofthemeasure
bytheTMB. InonecasetheUnited States decided nottoapply asafeguard measure. Fiveunilaterally
applied measures weredropped bytheUnited States before theirreview bytheTMB, andanadditional
oneduring thereview. TheTMB, therefore, completed thereview ofseven safeguard measures applied
under paragraph 10ofArticle 6bytheUnited States. Section Arefers toallcases where theTMB
started itsreview ofthesafeguard measures applied unilaterally, although insome instances thereview
wasnotcompleted since, inthemeantime, themeasure wasrescinded (with Thailand for
UScategory 352/652) orameasure wasagreed (with Turkey forUScategory 352/652, andwith
Honduras forUScategory 435). Brazil requested consultations onimports ofseven product categories
under paragraph 7ofArticle 6inJune1996(twoonimports fromHong Kong, fiveonimports from
Korea), atthesame timeintroducing provisional safeguard measures pursuant toparagraph 11of
Article 6(seeSection Cbelow andAnnex II).
A. Review ofunilateral restraint measures applied under Article 6.10, andfollow-up ofTMB
recommendations
United States/Costa Rica, Honduras, Thailand andTurkey: imports ofcotton andman-made fibre
underwear (UScategory 352/652)
52. TheTMB reviewed safeguard measures applied bytheUnited States pursuant toparagraph 10
ofArticle6onimportsofcottonandman-madefibreunderwear(UScategory352/652)fromCostaRica,
Honduras, Thailand andTurkey. Thailand hadalsomade anotification ofthesame action under
paragraphs 5and6ofArticle 8.During thisreview, theTMB wasinformed thattheUnited States
andTurkey hadarrived atamutually agreed solution oftheissue under paragraph 9ofArticle 6.In
addition, while starting theexamination oftherequest submitted byThailand initsnotification, the
TMB wasinformed thattheUnited States haddecided torescind thissafeguard measure against Thailand
(G/TMB/R/2 andparagraphs 88and89below).
53. During itsreview under paragraphs 2and3ofArticle 6ofthesafeguard action taken bythe
United States against imports ofcategory 352/652 from Costa RicaandHonduras, theTMB found
thatserious damage, asenvisaged inthese provisions, hadnotbeendemonstrated. TheTMB could
not,however, reach consensus ontheexistence ofactual threat ofserious damage. TheTMB
recommended thatfurther consultations beheldbetween theUnited States andtheparties concerned,
withaviewtoarriving atamutual understanding, bearing inmindtheabove, andwithdueconsideration
totheparticular features ofthiscase, aswellasequity considerations. TheTMB alsorecommended
thatthese consultations should beheldconsistent withtheATC, inparticular withArticles 6and4,
andbeconcluded within 30days, andthattheparties should report totheTMB ontheoutcome of
suchconsultations nolaterthanattheendofthatperiod. TheTMB equally noted that,withrespect
totheintroduction ofasafeguard measure, theATC doesnotprovide anyindication withrespect to
theeffective dateofimplementation ofthatmeasure.
54. Inreaching itsrecommendation, theTMB examined alltheinformation provided bytheparties,
including theroleplayed byoutward processing trade. Onthatbasis, andkeeping alsoinmind the
particular nature ofthistrade flow, theTMB wasoftheviewthatanumber ofimportant indicators,
interalia,thedropinUSdomestic production ofcotton andman-made fibreunderwear, theparallel
increase inimports ofthese products, andthestatus ofthisindustry, were notsuchastowarrant a
claim ofserious damage being caused totheUSindustry byimports. However, theTMB could not
agree, onthebasis ofalltheinformation provided, whether ornotthere existed athreat ofserious
damage caused totheUSindustry byimports ofproducts ofcategory 352/652 (G/TMB/R/2).G/L/113
Page14
55. Following theTMB'srecommendation, theTMB wasinformed bytheUnited States and
Honduras thattheyhadheldconsultations without reaching acommon position, but,subsequently was
informed under paragraph 9ofArticle 6thatthetwoparties hadarrived atamutually agreeable
resolution ofthisissue (seeG/TMB/R/3 andparagraphs 68and69below).
56. Following thesameTMB recommendation, theTMB received reports byboththeUnited States
andCosta Ricaexplaining thatithadnotbeenpossible toreach amutually agreeable resolution of
theissue. InviewofCosta Rica’srequest toparticipate intheTMB'sexamination ofthese reports,
theBody decided toinvite theparticipation ofbothdelegations. TheTMB tooknoteofthereports
andofthefactthatthetwoparties didnotreach amutual understanding during theconsultations.
TheTMB'sdiscussions confirmed theBody'sprevious findings inthismatter (seeparagraph 54above).
There being nofurther requests bytheparties involved, theTMB considered itsreview ofthematter
completed (G/TMB/R/3 and5).4
United States/Honduras: imports ofcotton andman-made fibre pyjamas andother nightwear
(UScategory 351/651)
57. TheTMB reviewed under paragraphs 2and3ofArticle 6thesafeguard measure introduced
bytheUnited States pursuant toparagraph 10ofArticle 6onimports ofcotton andman-made fibre
pyjamas andother nightwear (UScategory 351/651) fromHonduras. TheTMB, having examined all
theinformation provided bytheparties, found thatserious damage, oractual threat thereof, hadnot
been demonstrated andrecommended thattheUnited States rescind themeasure (G/TMB/R/2).
Subsequently, theTMB wasinformed thattheUnited States haddecided torescind themeasure. The
TMB tooknoteofthisdecision (G/TMB/R/3).
United States/India: imports ofmen’sandboys’wool coats other thansuit-type (UScategory 434)
58. TheTMB considered asafeguard measure taken bytheUnited States onimports ofmen’sand
boys’wool coats other thansuit-type (UScategory 434)fromIndia. TheTMB, having examined all
oftheinformation provided bybothparties inthelightoftheconditions established under paragraphs 2
and3ofArticle 6,found thatserious damage, oractual threat thereof, hadnotbeendemonstrated,
andrecommended thattheUnited States rescind themeasure. Subsequently, theTMB wasinformed
andtooknotethattheUnited States haddecided torescind thissafeguard measure (G/TMB/R/3 and5).
United States/India: imports ofwomen ’sandgirls’wool coats (UScategory 435)
59. TheTMB considered, under paragraphs 2and3ofArticle 6,thesafeguard measure taken
bytheUnited States onimports ofwomen ’sandgirls’woolcoats (UScategory 435)fromIndia. The
TMB found thatserious damage, asenvisaged inthese provisions, hadnotbeendemonstrated. The
TMB could not,however, reach consensus ontheexistence ofactual threat ofserious damage. The
TMB added that,when reviewing theimplications ofthediscussions intheTMB andtheBody’sfinding
inthismatter, theparties should keepinmind thefactthattheATC issilent astowhether theimport
restraint cancontinue tobemaintained (seeG/TMB/R/3). Indiareferred thismatter totheTMB under
paragraph 6ofArticle 8(seeparagraph 90below).5
4Costa Ricasubsequently requested theestablishment ofapanel (WT/DS24/1). Thepanel wasestablished
bytheDispute Settlement Body on5March 1996.
5India subsequently requested theestablishment ofapanel (WT/DS32/1). TheUnited States laterwithdrew
therestraint,andIndiarequestedtheterminationoffurtheractioninpursuanceofthedecisiontakenbytheDispute
Settlement Body toestablish apanel toexamine thatmatter (WT/DS32/2).G/L/113
Page15
60. Atalaterstage, theTMB received anotification fromtheUnited States ofthewithdrawal of
thisunilateral restraint. TheTMB tooknoteofthisnotification (G/TMB/R/13).
United States/India: imports ofwoven wool shirts andblouses (UScategory 440)
61. TheTMB considered, under paragraphs 2and3ofArticle 6,thesafeguard measure taken
bytheUnited States onimports ofwoven woolshirts andblouses (UScategory 440)fromIndia. The
TMB found thattheactual threat ofserious damage hadbeendemonstrated, andthat,pursuant to
paragraph 4ofArticle 6,thisactual threat could beattributed tothesharp andsubstantial increase
inimports from India (G/TMB/R/3). India referred thismatter totheTMB under paragraph 10of
Article 8(seeparagraph 92below).6
United States/Honduras: imports ofwomen ’sandgirls’wool coats (UScategory 435)
62. TheTMB started itsreview ofasafeguard measures introduced bytheUnited States pursuant
toparagraph 10ofArticle 6onimports ofwomen ’sandgirls’wool coats (UScategory 435)from
Honduras. After thepresentation oftheirarguments, theparties informed theTMB thattheyhaddecided
toresume bilateral consultations, andasked forsuspension oftheconsideration ofthisissue bythe
TMB. TheBody wasinformed subsequently thattheUnited States andHonduras hadarrived ata
mutuallyagreeableresolutionoftheissueunderparagraph9ofArticle6(G/TMB/R/3andparagraphs73
and74below).
United States/Hong Kong: imports ofwoven wool shirts andblouses (UScategory 440)
63. TheTMB reviewed asafeguard measure introduced bytheUnited States onimports ofwoven
wool shirts andblouses (UScategory 440)from Hong Kong. TheTMB, having considered the
arguments putforward bytheparties, noted thatHong Kong'sexports ofproducts ofcategory 440
intotheUnited States werealready under restraint under agroup limitnotified bytheUnited States
inaccordance withparagraph 1ofArticle 2oftheATC. Itfound that,according toparagraph 4of
Article 6,theapplication ofasafeguard measure under thisArticle toHong Kong'sexports ofproducts
ofcategory 440intotheUnited States was, therefore, notjustified, andrecommended thatthe
United States rescind themeasure. Subsequently, theTMB wasinformed andtooknotethatthe
United States haddecided torescind thissafeguard measure (G/TMB/R/4 and6).
B. Agreed restraint measures notified under Article 6.9
64. Under theprovisions ofparagraph 8ofArticle 6oftheATC, twoMembers may, after
consultation heldpursuant toparagraph 7ofArticle 6,reach mutual understanding thatthesituation
callsforrestraint ontheexports ofaparticular product. Insuchcases, paragraph 9ofArticle 6states
that“details oftheagreed restraint measure shallbecommunicated totheTMB within 60daysfrom
thedateofconclusion oftheagreement. TheTMB shalldetermine whether theagreement isjustified
inaccordance withtheprovisions ofthisArticle. ...TheTMB maymake suchrecommendations as
itdeems appropriate totheMembers concerned ”.
65. TheTMBhasreceivedthenotificationunderparagraph9ofArticle6oftwelverestraintmeasures
agreed onimports ofvarious products intotheUnited States fromColombia, theDominican Republic,
ElSalvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Jamaica, Turkey andSriLanka. Inthree instances (involving
imports fromElSalvador, Jamaica andSri-Lanka), thenotification ofanagreed measure wassuperseded
6India subsequently requested theestablishment ofapanel (WT/DS33/1). Thepanel wasestablished by
theDispute Settlement Body on17April 1996.G/L/113
Page16
astheUnited States decided torescind theagreed measure. TheTMB tooknoteofsuchadecision
bytheUnited States. These three notifications were, therefore, notreviewed bytheTMB. Eight
notifications made pursuant toparagraph 9ofArticle 6have been reviewed bytheTMB. One
notification, received recently, remains tobereviewed.
66. Theeight notifications reviewed bytheTMB relate tomeasures agreed onimports intothe
United States offourproducts: cotton andman-made fibreunderwear (UScategory 352/652) from
Colombia, theDominican Republic, ElSalvador, Honduras andTurkey; women 'sandgirls'wool
coats (UScategory 435)from Honduras; women ’sandgirl’swool suits(UScategory 444)from
Colombia; andcotton andman–made fibreskirts (UScategory 342/642) fromGuatemala. Inreviewing
these agreed restraints, theTMB made thefollowing observations:
United States/Dominican Republic: imports ofcotton and man-made fibre underwear
(UScategory 352/652)
67. InreviewingtherestraintmeasureagreedbetweentheUnitedStatesandtheDominicanRepublic
onimports ofcotton andman-made fibreunderwear (UScategory 352/652), theTMB observed that
nogrowth ratewasprovided forwithrespect totheguaranteed access level (GAL).7However,
according toindications given bytheUnited States Government, theGALcanbeincreased onrequest.
Therefore, itwastheTMB'sunderstanding that,attherequest oftheDominican Republic, theGAL
would beincreased bynolessthan6percentannually. TheTMB recalled thatataprevious meeting,
when reviewing theaction taken bytheUnited States against imports ofcategory 352/652 from
Costa RicaandHonduras under paragraphs 2and3ofArticle 6,anaction taken atthesame timeas
thatonimports ofthesame product fromtheDominican Republic, ithadfound thatserious damage,
asenvisaged inthese provisions, hadnotbeendemonstrated. TheTMB hadnot,however, reached
consensus ontheexistence ofactual threat ofserious damage. TheTMB noted that,whilst thetotal
leveloftheagreed restraint wassubstantially above therollback level, thatportion oftherestraint which
wasavailable unconditionally totheDominican Republic (i.e.thespecific limit) waslower thanthat
rollback level(G/TMB/R/7).
United States/Honduras: imports ofcotton andman-made fibreunderwear (UScategory 352/652)
68. Inreviewing therestraint measure agreed between theUnited States andHonduras onimports
ofcotton andman-made fibreunderwear (UScategory 352/652), theTMB observed thatnogrowth
ratewasprovided forwithrespect totheGAL. However, according toindications given bythe
United States Government, theGAL canbeincreased onrequest. Therefore, itwastheTMB's
understanding that,attherequest ofHonduras, theGAL would beincreased bynolessthan6percent
annually. TheTMB recalled thatataprevious meeting, when reviewing theaction taken bythe
United States against imports ofcategory 352/652 fromCosta RicaandHonduras under paragraphs 2
and3ofArticle 6ithadfound thatserious damage, asenvisaged inthese provisions, hadnotbeen
demonstrated. TheTMB hadnot,however, reached consensus ontheexistence ofactual threat of
serious damage. TheTMB noted thatthetotalleveloftheagreed restraint, aswellasthatportion
oftherestraint which wasavailable unconditionally toHonduras (i.e.thespecific limit) were both
substantially above therollback level(G/TMB/R/8).
69. TheTMB alsoreceived acommunication from Honduras relating totheimplementation by
theUnited States ofthisagreed restraint measure. Inthiscommunication, Honduras expressed concern
7Guaranteed Access Levels (GALs) arequantities ofproducts ofacategory thatacountry canexport tothe
United States without being subject toquantitative limitation, provided theactual product shipped qualifies for
such treatment, inter alia, bybeing made of"UScomponents"G/L/113
Page17
thattheagreement wasnotimplemented consistently withitsterms bytheUnited States, notably with
respect tothelevel ofaccess totheUSmarket asof1January 1996, andthatthiswas,therefore,
threatening toseriously disrupt trade from Honduras. Honduras requested thattheTMB review the
implementation ofthelimits bilaterally agreed. TheTMB wasinformed thatitwastheUnited States
Government ’sintention toimplement theagreement infullandtobeincontact withHonduras with
aviewtoresolving thisquestion. TheTMB tooknoteofthis,informed Honduras oftheUnited States '
intention, anddecided that,should problems remain, itwould revert tothisquestion atitsnextmeeting.
Bothparties wereinformed ofthisdecision (G/TMB/R/8). TheTMB wasinformed subsequently by
bothparties thattheproblems hadbeensolved.
United States/El Salvador: imports ofcotton andman-made fibreunderwear(US category 352/652)
70. Inreviewing therestraint measure agreed between theUnited States andElSalvador onimports
ofcotton andman-made fibreunderwear (UScategory 352/652), theTMB observed thatnogrowth
ratewasprovided forwithrespect totheGAL. However, according toindications given bythe
United States Government, theGAL canbeincreased onrequest. Therefore, itwastheTMB's
understanding that,attherequest ofElSalvador, theGALwould beincreased bynolessthan6percent
annually. TheTMB recalled thatataprevious meeting, when reviewing theaction taken bythe
United States against imports ofcategory 352/652 fromCosta RicaandHonduras under paragraphs 2
and3ofArticle 6,anaction taken atthesame timeasthatonimports ofthesame product from
ElSalvador, ithadfound thatserious damage, asenvisaged inthese provisions, hadnotbeen
demonstrated. TheTMB hadnot,however, reached consensus ontheexistence ofactual threat of
serious damage. TheTMB noted thatthetotalleveloftheagreed restraint, aswellasthatportion
oftherestraint which wasavailable unconditionally toElSalvador (i.e.thespecific limit) wereboth
substantially above therollback level(G/TMB/R/8).
United States/Turkey: imports ofcotton andman-made fibreunderwear (UScategory 352/652)
71. Inreviewing therestraint measure agreed between theUnited States andTurkey onimports
ofcotton andman-made fibreunderwear (UScategory 352/652), theTMB recalled thatataprevious
meeting, when reviewing theaction taken bytheUnited States against imports ofcategory 352/652
from Costa RicaandHonduras under paragraphs 2and3ofArticle 6,anaction taken atthesame
timeasthatonimports ofthesameproduct fromTurkey, ithadfound thatserious damage, asenvisaged
inthese provisions, hadnotbeendemonstrated. TheTMB hadnot,however, reached consensus on
theexistence ofactual threat ofserious damage. TheTMB noted thatthespecific limitagreed was
substantially above therollback level(G/TMB/R/8).
United States/Colombia: imports ofcotton andman-made fibreunderwear (UScategory 352/652)
72. Inreviewing therestraint measure agreed between theUnited States andColombia onimports
ofcotton andman-made fibreunderwear (UScategory 352/652), theTMB recalled thatataprevious
meeting, when reviewing theaction taken bytheUnited States against imports ofcategory 352/652
from Costa RicaandHonduras under paragraphs 2and3ofArticle 6,anaction taken atthesame
timeasthatonimports ofthesame product from Colombia, ithadfound thatserious damage, as
envisaged inthese provisions, hadnotbeendemonstrated. TheTMB hadnot,however, reached
consensus ontheexistence ofactual threat ofserious damage. TheTMB noted thatthetotallevelof
theagreed restraint, aswellasthatportion oftherestraint which wasavailable unconditionally to
Colombia (i.e.thespecific limit) were bothsubstantially above therollback level(G/TMB/R/8).G/L/113
Page18
United States/Honduras: imports ofwomen 'sandgirls'wool coats (UScategory 435)
73. Inreviewing therestraint measure agreed between theUnited States andHonduras onimports
ofwomen 'sandgirls'woolcoats (UScategory 435,seealsoparagraph 62above), theTMB observed
thatnogrowth ratewasprovided forwithrespect totheGAL. However, according toindications
given bytheUnited States Government, theGAL canbeincreased onrequest. Therefore, itwasthe
TMB'sunderstanding that,attherequest ofHonduras, theGAL would beincreased bynolessthan
2percentannually. TheTMB recalled thatataprevious meeting, when reviewing theaction taken
bytheUnited States against imports ofcategory 435fromIndiaunder paragraphs 2and3ofArticle 6,
anaction taken atthesame timeasthatonimports ofthesame product fromHonduras, ithadfound
thatserious damage, asenvisaged inthese provisions, hadnotbeendemonstrated. TheTMB had
not,however, reached consensus ontheexistence ofactual threat ofserious damage. TheTMB noted
thatthetotalleveloftheagreed restraint, aswellasthatportion oftherestraint which wasavailable
unconditionally toHonduras (i.e.thespecific limit) were bothabove therollback level. TheTMB
alsonoted thattheagreed growth rateof2percentwasjustified inaccordance withparagraph 13of
Article 6(G/TMB/R/8).
74. TheTMB alsoreceived acommunication from Honduras relating totheimplementation by
theUnited States ofthisagreed restraint measure. Inthiscommunication, Honduras expressed concern
thattheagreement wasnotimplemented consistently withitsterms bytheUnited States, notably with
respect tothelevel ofaccess totheUSmarket asof1January 1996, andthatthiswas,therefore,
threatening toseriously disrupt trade fromHonduras. Honduras requested thattheTMB review the
implementation ofthelimits bilaterally agreed. TheTMB wasinformed thatitwastheUnited States
Government ’sintention toimplement theagreement infullandtobeincontact withHonduras with
aviewtoresolving thisquestion. TheTMB tooknoteofthis,informed Honduras oftheUnited States '
intention, anddecided that,should problems remain, itwould revert tothisquestion atitsnextmeeting.
Bothparties wereinformed ofthisdecision (G/TMB/R/8). TheTMB wasinformed subsequently by
bothparties thattheproblems hadbeensolved.
United States/Colombia: imports ofwomen ’sandgirl’swool suits(UScategory 444)
75. TheTMB reviewed therestraint measure agreed between theUnited States andColombia on
imports ofwomen ’sandgirl’swoolsuits(UScategory 444)fromColombia. TheTMB examined the
information made available bytheUnited States toColombia during thebilateral consultations, aswell
asother relevant information provided bytheUnited States attheTMB'srequest. While itobserved
thatsome data,notably thepaceofincreased imports fromColombia, might leadtodifferent findings,
theTMB concluded thatthisagreement inoverall terms wasjustifiable inaccordance withtheprovisions
ofArticle 6oftheATC. Assuch, theagreement wasconsidered justified. TheTMB noted, however,
that,whilst thetotalleveloftheagreed restraint wassubstantially above therollback level, thatportion
oftherestraint available unconditionally toColombia (i.e.thespecific limit) waslower thantherollback
level(G/TMB/R/11).
United States/Guatemala: imports ofcotton andman-made fibreskirts (UScategory 342/642)
76. TheTMB reviewed therestraint measure agreed between theUnited States andGuatemala
onimports ofcotton andman-made fibreskirts (UScategory 342/642) from Guatemala. TheTMB
examined theinformation made available bytheUnited States toGuatemala during thebilateral
consultations, inparticular, andalsoother relevant information provided bytheUnited States atthe
TMB'srequest. While itobserved thatsome datamight point todiverging directions, theTMB
concludedthatthisagreementinoveralltermswasjustifiedinaccordancewiththeprovisionsofArticle6
oftheATC. TheTMB noted thatthetotalleveloftheagreed restraint, aswellasthatportion ofthe
restraint thatwasavailable unconditionally toGuatemala (i.e.thespecific limit), were substantiallyG/L/113
Page19
above therollback level. Itobserved thatnogrowth ratewasprovided forwithrespect totheGAL.
However, according toindications given bytheUnited States Government, theGAL canbeincreased
onrequest. Therefore, itwastheTMB'sunderstanding that,attherequest ofGuatemala, theGAL
would beincreased bynolessthan6percentannually (G/TMB/R/13).
C. Unilateral measures taken under Article 6.11
77. InJune1996,BrazilrequestedconsultationwithHongKongandKoreapursuanttoparagraphs7
and11ofArticle 6,introducing atthesametimeseven provisional safeguard measures (twoonimports
fromHong Kong, fiveonimports fromKorea). Theparties communicated totheTMB thattheyhad
failed toagree onrestraint measures within thedeadline envisaged inparagraph 11ofArticle 6.
78. On11September 1996, theTMB began itsexamination ofsafeguard measures introduced by
Brazil, pursuant toparagraph 11ofArticle 6,onimports ofproducts ofBrazilian categories 618(woven
artificialfilamentfabric)and838(men’sandboys’knitshirtsofmaterialotherthancottonandman-made
fibre) from Hong Kong. Thetwomeasures hadbeenintroduced witheffect asfrom 1June1996.
TheTMB invited theparticipation ofBrazil andHong Kong, which sentdelegations topresent their
respective cases. Bothparties made presentations andprovided replies toquestions withrespect to
bothmeasures. Onthisbasis, theTMB started itsin-depth discussion but,inviewofthecomplexity
oftheissue andthelackoftimeavailable, wasunable toconclude it.TheTMB, therefore, decided
torevert toitsexamination attheearliest possible dateacceptable tobothparties, which wereinvited
tosendrepresentatives upon theTMB’sresumption ofthisexamination (G/TMB/R/16).
79. On11September 1996, theTMB wasinformed byBrazil andKorea thattheyhaddecided
toresume consultations withrespect tothesafeguard measures introduced byBrazil pursuant to
paragraph 11ofArticle 6onimports ofthefollowing Brazilian product categories from
Korea: category 611(woven fabrics containing 85percentormore byweight ofartificial staple);
category 618(woven artificial filament fabric); category 619(polyester filament fabric); category 620
(other synthetic filament fabric); andcategory 627(sheeting ofstaple filament fibrecombination).
Both parties, consequently, requested theTMB todefer itsconsideration ofthese measures
(G/TMB/R/16).
D. Present status ofsafeguard actions taken pursuant toArticle 6
80. Since theTMB hadtodevote much ofitswork totheexamination ofactions referred toit
under thedifferent provisions ofArticle 6,itseems appropriate toprovide areport onthecurrent
outcome ofsuchactions, andtooffer some comments toMembers. Itistobenoted thatsince the
entry intoforce oftheWTO Agreement -hence oftheATC -twoMembers, theUnited States and
Brazil, haveinvoked theprovisions ofthisArticle totakesafeguard actions. TheUnited States sought
consultations withfourteen Members intwenty-five cases, while Brazil tookprovisional actions against
twoMembers inseven cases. Abreakdown ofsuchinvocations byquarters shows thefollowing pattern
(seealsoAnnex II):
1995 1stquarter 10requests (United States)
2ndquarter 14requests (United States)
3rdquarter None
4thquarter None
1996 1stquarter 1request (United States)
2ndquarter 7requests (Brazil)
3rdquarter None
Total 32requestsG/L/113
Page20
81. Outofthetwenty-five actions taken bytheUnited States, eleven safeguard measures remained
inforce inSeptember 1996, while fourteen hadbeendisinvoked orthemeasures rescinded. Ofthese
eleven measures, ninehadbeenagreed between theparties andnotified pursuant toparagraph 9of
Article6,andtwohadbeenintroducedunilaterallybytheUnitedStatesunderparagraph10ofArticle6.
Inoneofthetwolatter cases, theTMB hadreached theconclusion thatactual threat ofserious damage
hadbeendemonstrated, andcould beattributed tothesharp andsubstantial increase inimports from
theMember concerned. Intheother case, theTMB hadconcluded thatserious damage hadnotbeen
demonstrated butcould not,however, reach consensus ontheexistence ofactual threat ofserious
damage.8
82. Inallcases where theTMB conducted anexamination ofthemeasures taken under Article 6,
andinparticular ofthemeasures taken pursuant toitsparagraph 10,itcarried outaverythorough
review ofthematter, onthebasis ofthefactual datapresented toitinconformity withparagraph 7
ofArticle 6,complemented byanyadditional information submitted bytheparties, oritdecided to
seekfrom theMembers concerned. TheTMB observed that, inmost cases, Members were able
tocomply withitsrecommendations.
83. TheTMB isaware oftheimplications fortrade ofrequests forconsultations made with
aviewtointroducing safeguard measures, inparticular, when transitional measures areapplied
andsubsequently rescinded. Itbelieves, however, worthwhile tomention that, while during the
firsthalfof1995 (atatimetheTMB hadnotasyetreviewed anysafeguard action) twenty-four
requestsforconsultationshadbeenmade(allofthembytheUnitedStates)pursuanttoparagraph7
ofArticle 6,onlyeight hadbeen made (seven byBrazil andonebytheUnited States) inthe
following 15months.
84. TheTMB observed thatboththeMembers invoking thesafeguard provisions oftheATC
andtheMembers subject tosuchactions hadstrictly observed theprocedural requirements of
Article 6.TheTMB wasaware thatithadnotalways beenpossible tomeet allthedeadlines of
theATC foritsreview ofthemeasures notified. Thishadinallinstances taken place withthe
concurrence oftheparties involved andcould inpartbeexplained bytheimportance itsmembers
attached toaquick, butalsothorough consideration oftheissues.
VI. OTHER MEASURES, MATTERS ORINFORMATION SUBMITTED TOTHE TMB
A. Matters submitted under paragraphs 5and/or 6ofArticle 8
85. Paragraph 5ofArticle 8provides that“intheabsence ofanymutually agreed solution inthe
bilateral consultations provided forinthisAgreement, theTMB shall, attherequest ofeither Member,
andfollowingathoroughandpromptconsiderationofthematter,makerecommendationstotheMembers
concerned ”.Paragraph 6ofArticle 8states that“Attherequest ofanyMember, theTMB shallreview
promptly anyparticular matter which thatMember considers tobedetrimental toitsinterests under
thisAgreement andwhere consultations between itandtheMember orMembers concerned havefailed
toproduce amutually satisfactory solution. Onsuchmatters, theTMB maymake suchobservations
asitdeems appropriate totheMembers concerned andforthepurposes ofthereview provided for
inparagraph 11”.Thefollowing suchmatters havebeenbrought before theTMB.
8Both issues were referred tothedispute settlement mechanism bytheMembers affected.G/L/113
Page21
Articles 8.5and4.2-Philippines/United States: changes intheadministration orimplementation of
restrictions
86. InJuly1996 theTMB received acommunication from thePhilippines regarding changes in
theUnited States 'rulesoforigin, which, itwasargued, adversely affected imports intotheUnited States
ofcertain textile products fromthePhilippines andupset thebalance ofrights andobligations between
thetwoparties under theATC. ThePhilippines requested theTMB toconsider thismatter. Atits
meeting inJuly1996, theTMB wasinformed bythePhilippines andtheUnited States thattheyhad
decided tocontinue consultations onthematter, and,therefore, requested theTMB todefer its
consideration ofthisnotification.
Articles 8.5and5.4-Pakistan/United States -Alleged circumvention byPakistani companies
87. InFebruary andMarch 1996 theTMB considered anotification made byPakistan, under
paragraphs 4ofArticle 5and5ofArticle 8,ofdebits made bytheUnited States toPakistan ’squotas
forUScategory 361(bedsheets) onaccount ofalleged circumvention byPakistani companies. The
TMB invited theparticipation ofPakistan andtheUnited States, which sentdelegations topresent their
respective cases. Both parties made presentations andprovided replies toquestions. AtitsMarch
meeting, theTMB wasinformed bythetwodelegations that,following consultations, amutually
satisfactory understanding hadbeenreached between them, andthatthisunderstanding would benotified
totheTMB (G/TMB/R/10 and11). TheTMB received thenotification on1October 1996.
Articles 8.5and8.6:Thailand/United States
88. Inthecontext ofthesafeguard action introduced bytheUnited States onimports ofcotton
andman-made fibreunderwear (seeparagraph 52above), theTMB received anotification fromThailand
under paragraphs 5and6ofArticle 8oftheATC. According tothisnotification, since paragraph 4
ofArticle 6oftheATC provided thatnosafeguard measure shallbeapplied totheexports ofany
member whose exports oftheparticular products were already under restraint under theATC, the
United States hadnoright tointroduce asafeguard measure onimports ofcategory 352/652 from
Thailand,asthatcategorywasalreadysubjecttoagrouplimit.TherepresentativeofThailandconfirmed
that,irrespective oftheUnited States 'decision torescind thesafeguard measure against imports from
Thailand, Thailand wanted theTMB toreview thequestion ofprinciple raised. After having heard
thepresentation oftheparties, theTMB decided toresume thediscussion ofthisissueatasubsequent
meeting (G/TMB/R/2).
89. TheTMB didnotresume thisdiscussion, butitrecalled initsreply toThailand thatwhen it
hadreviewed thesafeguard measure introduced bytheUnited States onimports ofwoven woolshirts
andblouses (UScategory 440)fromHong Kong (G/TMB/R/4 and6),ithadnoted thatHong Kong's
exports ofproducts ofcategory 440intotheUnited States werealready under restraint under agroup
limit notified bytheUnited States andhadfound that,according toparagraph 4ofArticle 6,the
application ofasafeguard measure under Article 6toHong Kong'sexports ofproducts ofcategory 440
intotheUnited States was,therefore, notjustified.
Article 8.6:United States/India: imports ofwomen ’sandgirls’wool coats (UScategory 435)
90. TheTMB received acommunication from India under paragraph 6ofArticle 8,following
thereview bytheTMB ofthesafeguard action taken bytheUnited States onimports ofproducts of
category 435(women ’sandgirls’wool coats) from India (seeparagraph 59above). Inthis
communication, Indianoted thattheTMB hadarrived ataconsensus ontheabsence ofserious damage,
butcould notreach aconsensus ontheexistence ofactual threat thereof. Thus, theTMB hadnotbeen
abletomake appropriate recommendations, though paragraph 6ofArticle 6mandated ittodosoinG/L/113
Page22
situations where therehadbeennoagreement between theMember proposing totakesafeguard action
andtheMember which would beaffected bysuchaction. Itwastheunderstanding oftheGovernment
ofIndiathat,intheabsence ofaclearrecommendation oftheTMB upholding thevalidity oftherestraint
action bytheUnited States, itwasincumbent upontheUnited States towithdraw therestraint. India,
therefore, requested theTMB toreview theaction bytheUnited States incontinuing itsrestraint on
imports ofcategory 435from India, assuchaction wasdetrimental toIndia’sinterests. TheTMB
heard thepresentation byIndia, andconsidered theelements putforward. TheBody could notmake
anyrecommendation inaddition totheconclusions ithadreached ataprevious meeting (G/TMB/R/3),
norcould theTMB reach aconsensus onwhether ornottherestraint oncategory 435could continue
tobemaintained inlightoftheabsence ofconsensus ontheexistence ofactual threat ofserious damage.
TheTMB, therefore, considered itsreview ofthematter under therelevant provisions oftheATC
completed (G/TMB/R/6).9
B. Matters submitted under paragraph 10ofArticle 8
91. Paragraph 10ofArticle 8gives thepossibility toaMember which “considers itself unable
toconform withtherecommendations oftheTMB”,to“provide theTMB withthereasons therefor
notlaterthanonemonth afterreceipt ofsuchrecommendations. Following thorough consideration
ofthereasonsgiven,theTMBshallissueanyfurtherrecommendationsitconsidersappropriateforthwith.
If,aftersuchfurther recommendations, thematter remains unresolved, either Member maybring the
matter before theDispute Settlement Body andinvoke paragraph 2ofArticle XXIII ofGATT 1994
andtherelevant provisions oftheDispute Settlement Understanding ”.TheTMB hasreceived one
suchnotification. Itsreview isdescribed below.
India/United States: imports ofwoven wool shirts andblouses (UScategory 440)
92. TheTMB received acommunication from India under paragraph 10ofArticle 8,following
thereview bytheTMB ofthesafeguard action taken bytheUnited States onimports ofproducts of
category 440(woven wool shirts andblouses) from India (seeparagraph 61above). Inthis
communication, India conveyed itsinability toconform withtherecommendation theTMB hadmade,
which allowed forthecontinuance oftherestraint levels imposed bytheUnited States. TheTMB
heard thepresentation andconsidered theelements putforward byIndia. TheBody could notmake
anyrecommendation inaddition totheconclusions ithadreached ataprevious meeting (G/TMB/R/3).
TheTMB, therefore, considered itsreview ofthematter completed (G/TMB/R/6).10
C. Information submitted totheTMB
Information submitted byHong Kong
93. TheTMB wasinformed byHong Kong, pursuant toArticle 4.4oftheDispute Settlement
Understanding,oftherequestforconsultationsaddressedtoTurkeybyHongKongunderArticleXXII.1
ofGATT 1994 relating totheunilateral imposition ofquantitative restrictions byTurkey onimports
ofabroadrangeoftextileandclothingproductsfromHongKongasfrom1January1996(WT/DS29/1).
TheTMB tooknoteofthisinformation (G/TMB/R/10).
9Seealsofootnote 5onpage 14.
10Seealsofootnote 6onpage 15.G/L/113
Page23
Information received from theChairman oftheTrade Negotiating Committee atofficial level
94. Atitsfirstmeeting theChairman informed theTMB thathehadreceived fromtheChairman
oftheTrade Negotiating Committee atofficial levelaNotefortheRecord, regarding paragraph 13
ofArticle 6oftheATC, providing anagreed interpretation ofthephrase “unless otherwise justified
totheTMB”.TheTMB agreed totransmit thisnote(G/TMB/N/107) toWTO Members fortheir
information (G/TMB/R/1).
VII. IMPLEMENTATION OFSPECIAL PROVISIONS INTHE ATC RELATED TOTHE
SPECIAL INTERESTS OFCERTAIN WTO MEMBERS
A. Article 1.4
95. Paragraph 4ofArticle 1states that“Members agree thattheparticular interests ofthe
cotton-producingexportingMembersshould,inconsultationwiththem,bereflectedintheimplementation
oftheprovisions ofthisAgreement ”.TheTMB received nospecific notification under paragraph 4
ofArticle 1related totheimplementation ofthisprovision.
B. Special provisions infavour ofdeveloping andleast-developed country Members
96. Several paragraphs oftheATC contain special provisions infavour ofdeveloping and/or
least-developed country Members. Initssubmission totheCommittee onTrade andDevelopment,
made attherequest oftheChairmen oftheCouncil forTrade inGoods andtheCommittee onTrade
andDevelopment,theTMBidentifiedthefollowing:paragraph2ofArticle1,paragraph18ofArticle2,
paragraphs 6(a),(b)and(c)ofArticle 6,andparagraph 3(a)oftheAnnex. Inthesame submission,
theTMB alsoidentified provisions oftheATC which could beapplied insuchawayastoprovide
favourable treatment, orbebeneficial, interalia,todeveloping country orleast-developed country
Members. These areparagraph 4ofArticle 1,paragraphs 6and7(a)and(b),15and18ofArticle 2,
Article 3,paragraphs 6(b)and(d)ofArticle 6,paragraphs 1and2ofArticle 7.Thissubmission,
based onnotifications received bytheTMB upuntilmid-July 1996, hasbeencirculated toWTO
Members indocument WT/COMTD/W/17.
VIII. ARTICLE 7-COMMITMENTS UNDERTAKEN ASARESULT OFTHE URUGUAY
ROUND
97. Paragraph 1ofArticle 7states that,“aspartoftheintegration process andwithreference to
thespecific commitments undertaken bytheMembers asaresult oftheUruguay Round, allMembers
shalltakesuchactions asmaybenecessary toabide byGATT 1994 rules anddisciplines soasto:
(a) achieve improved access tomarkets fortextile andclothing products through such
measuresastariffreductionsandbindings,reductionoreliminationofnon-tariffbarriers,
andfacilitation ofcustoms, administrative andlicensing formalities;
(b) ensure theapplication ofpolicies relating tofairandequitable trading conditions as
regards textiles andclothing insuchareas asdumping andanti-dumping rules and
procedures,subsidiesandcountervailingmeasures,andprotectionofintellectualproperty
rights; and
(c) avoid discrimination against imports inthetextiles andclothing sector when taking
measures forgeneral trade policy reasons ”.G/L/113
Page24
98. Paragraph 2ofArticle 7states, interalia,that“Members shallnotify totheTMB theactions
referred toinparagraph 1which haveabearing ontheimplementation ofthisAgreement. Inaddition,
paragraph 3ofthatArticle offerthepossibility that“where anyMember considers thatanother Member
hasnottaken theactions referred toinparagraph 1,andthatthebalance ofrights andobligations under
thisAgreement hasbeenupset, thatMember maybring thematter before therelevant WTO bodies
andinform theTMB”.TheTMB hasnotreceived anynotification orinformation from Members
pursuant tothese paragraphs.
99. TheTMB wasaware oftheconclusions reached bytheCommittee onMarket Access in
April 1995, according towhich insupervising theimplementation ofconcessions relating totariffs
andnon-tariff measures, theapproach tobefollowed wastorelyoncross orreverse notifications
toidentify problems thatmight arise outoftheimplementation ofthese concessions. According
totheinformation available totheTMB, nosuchcross orreverse notification hadbeensubmitted
todatetotheCommittee onMarket Access. TheTMB wasequally aware, however, thatona
fewoccasions, issues which mayalsoberelevant inthecontext oftheprovisions ofArticle 7of
theATC hadbeen raised intheCommittee onMarket Access.
100. TheTMB wasalsoaware oftheconcerns expressed bysome Members withrespect to
thelackofsufficient improvements inaccess tothemarkets insome developing Members.
101. Inaccordance withtheprovisions ofparagraph 11ofArticle 8,thecomprehensive report
theTMB isduetosubmit totheCouncil forTrade inGoods bytheendofJuly1997inthecontext
ofthemajor review oftheimplementation oftheATC willhave toaddress, interalia,theissue
ofimplementation ofArticle 7oftheATC. Inorder tohaveareliable basis forsuchanassessment,
theTMB willhavetorelyoncontributions from Members aswellasrelevant information from
WTO bodies.
IX. COMPLIANCE WITH NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS UNDER THE ATC
102. Theimplementation oftheATC cannot bemonitored fullyunless Members comply with
itsnotification requirements. Inthisrespect, theoverall picture isamixed one.Ontheonehand,
theMembers accounting forthemajority ofinternational trade intextiles andclothing under
theATC complied with theessential notification requirements oftheATC. Anumber of
notifications have, however, beenaddressed totheTMB after therespective deadlines foreseen.
Inthisrespect theTMB observed thatitstaking noteoflatenotifications waswithout prejudice
tothelegal status ofsuchnotifications. Ontheother hand, asindicated inthecontext ofsome
oftheprovisions discussed above, theTMB noted withconcern thatanimportant number of
Members hadnotprovided anynotification. TheTMB observed thattheSecretariat hadsent
reminders toMembers ontheir notification obligations. TheTMB expressed itsserious concern
that theabsence ofnotifications ortheir latesubmission may have implications forthe
implementation oftheATC.
103. TheTMB requests theCouncil forTrade inGoods totakenoteoftheabove observations
andconcerns andtorecall toMembers theparticular importance ofstrictly adhering tothe
notification requirements under theATC.G/L/113
Page25
X. FUNCTIONING OFTMB
A. TMB working procedures
104. Pursuant toparagraph 2ofArticle 8oftheATC, theTMB devoted several formal andinformal
sessions ofitsfirstmeeting totheelaboration andadoption ofitsworking procedures (G/TMB/R/1).
105. Atasubsequent meeting, theTMB hadadiscussion onwhen notifications made totheTMB
foritsinformation pursuant toparagraph 3ofArticle 3oftheATC should becirculated toWTO
Members.Bearinginmindparagraph5ofArticle3theTMBdecidedthatinsuchcasesparagraph4.2(a)
oftheTMB’sworking procedures would apply, i.e.thatsuchnotifications would becirculated toWTO
Members without delay, itbeing understood thattheTMB might examine orreview thesenotifications
atalaterstage (G/TMB/R/11).
B. Discharging functions onanadpersonam basis
106. Paragraph 1ofArticle 8oftheATC states thatTMB members discharge theirfunction on
anadpersonam basis. Theworking procedures adopted bytheTMB specify that“indischarging their
functions ...,TMB members andalternates undertake nottosolicit, accept oractupon instructions
fromgovernments, nortobeinfluenced byanyother organisations orundue extraneous factors. They
shalldisclose totheChairman anyinformation thattheymayconsider likely toimpede theircapacity
todischargetheirfunctionsonanadpersonambasis.Shouldseriousdoubtsariseduringthedeliberations
oftheTMB regarding theability ofaTMB member toactonanadpersonam basis, theyshallbe
communicated totheChairman. TheChairman shalldealwiththeparticular matter asnecessary ”.
107. When adopting itsworking procedures, theTMB invited itsChairman tosubmit totheCouncil
forTrade inGoods thefollowing forappropriate action: “WTO Members which, pursuant tothe
decision oftheGeneral Council of31January 1995, appoint TMB members under Article 8.1ofthe
Agreement onTextiles andClothing accept thatTMB members serve intheiradpersonam basis and
notasgovernment representatives. Consequently, theyshallnotgiveTMB members instructions, nor
seektoinfluence them, withregard tomatters before theTMB. Thesame applies toalternates. ”This
proposal wastransmitted totheCouncil forTrade inGoods inJuly1995, andthematter isstillwith
theCouncil. TheTMB requests theCouncil totakeappropriate action onthisproposal.
C. Meetings oftheTMB
108. TheTMB hastodateheldnineteen meetings, ninein1995 (thefirstonewasheldinseven
sessions), tenfrom January to1October 1996, totalling overall eighty-four days(seeAnnex III).It
hasreviewed tensafeguard measures imposed pursuant toparagraph 10ofArticle 6,aswellasfive
matters referred totheTMB under Article 8,forwhich itinvited delegations oftheparties concerned,
inaccordance withitsworking procedures. Ithasstarted toreview twosafeguard measures imposed
under paragraph 11ofArticle 6.TheTMB alsoreviewed, pursuant toparagraph 9ofArticle 6,eight
agreed restraint measures. Inaddition ithasreviewed, interalia,forty-two notifications made pursuant
toparagraphs 6and7(a)and(b)ofArticle 2,twenty-five notifications under paragraph 1ofArticle 3,
andtaken noteoftwenty-five notifications under paragraph 17ofArticle 2,aswellasoffifty-eight
notifications under paragraph 1ofArticle 6.Forthispurpose, theTMB hadinmany instances to
seekadditional information orexplanations fromtheMembers before thereview could becompleted.
D. Circulation ofreports, Chairman ’snotes, derestriction ofTMB documents
109. TheTMB usually adopts thereports ofitsmeetings atthesubsequent meeting, onthebasis
ofadraftproposed bytheTMB secretariat incorporating, whenever appropriate, thetextsofTMB’sG/L/113
Page26
recommendations, findings andobservations; these textsthemselves havealready beenadopted bythe
TMB. Such reports are,therefore, normally circulated toWTO Members more thanamonth after
eachmeeting oftheTMB. TheTMB feltthatthistimelagwasunnecessarily long. It,therefore,
authorized itsChairman onseveral instances, inparticular when theTMB hadreviewed dispute cases
betweenWTOMembers,toissueanoteforwardinginformationontheTMB’srecommendations,findings
andobservations toWTO Members (G/TMB/1 to8).
110. Following thedecision adopted bytheGeneral Council atitsmeeting on18July1996, the
TMB considered thequestion ofthederestriction ofitsworking documents (G/TMB/W/- and
G/TMB/SPEC/-series). TheTMB recalled thatinadopting itsownworking procedures on13July1995
ithadagreed thatitwould “...decide ontheimplementation ofthedecision oftheGeneral Council
onderestriction ofdocuments when theGeneral Council hasadopted itsdecision onthismatter ”
(G/TMB/R/1). TheTMB tooknoteoftheGeneral Council ’sdecision anddecided thatitwould act
infullcompliance withit(G/TMB/R/16).
E. Overall assessment
111. Anassessment ofTMB’sfunctioning cannot bemade without taking intoconsideration
thecircumstances ofitsestablishment, theinitial workload itwasfaced with, aswellasthe
importance ofthissector ofinternational trade foralarge number ofWTO Members. Atthe
entry intoforce oftheATC, theTMB composition hadyettobedecided, which tooktheGeneral
Council onemonth. TheTMB, therefore, hadtostarttheelaboration ofitsworking procedures,
amandatory requirement ofparagraph 2ofArticle 8,withconsiderable delay. Itadopted them
inadifficult context, asmany ofthenotifications called forbytheATC were arriving anda
number ofsafeguard actions were being taken andhadtobereviewed.
112. TheadoptionofworkingprocedureswasapreconditionfortheTMBtobecomeoperational.
TheTMB took four months todevelop andadopt them, but,after more than oneyear of
experience, theTMB isoftheviewthatithasbeen aworthwhile investment. Nevertheless, the
TMB keeps itsworking procedures under review.
113. Theamount ofnotifications anddispute cases theTMB hashadtoreview sinceitsinception
hasbeensubstantial, inparticular in1995. TheTMB hasbeenabletocopewithit,although in
some instances thereview ofdispute cases hadtobeslightly delayed. Thiswasdone inallcases
inconsultation -andagreement -withtheMembers concerned, which showed anunderstanding
forwhich theTMB isthankful.
114. Afirstsetofnotifications (e.g.notifications pursuant toArticles 2.1and2.2,2.6and2.7(a)
and(b),3.1and6.1)reached theTMB initsearly days. Inview oftheir great number, and
ofthenumber ofsafeguard actions theTMB hadtocopewithatthesame time, thereview of
these notifications hadtobesomewhat delayed. TheTMB, however, tookthedecision tocirculate
suchnotifications toWTO Members without delay. Itdidanin-depth review ofthese notifications,
often seeking additional information (formally andinformally) from Members. Thisinmany cases
leadtoimportant modifications oftheoriginal notifications, withaviewtobringing them inline
withtherelevant provisions oftheATC.
115. TheTMBreviewedfourteendisputesorrelatedcases;thecompletionoftwoofthesereviews
ispending. Inthemajority ofcases theTMB could reach aconsensus andadopt recommendations,
asrequired bytheATC, withwhich theparties were abletocomply.
116. Asaresult ofthese reviews, aswellasoftheexamination oftheother notifications, the
TMB believes thatithasbeen abletoestablish acertain authority andtosetcertain standardsG/L/113
Page27
which canprovide guidance toMembers interms oftheirimplementation ofthedifferent provisions
oftheATC.
117. Thedeadlines provided bytheATC totheTMB foritsreview ofdispute cases places it
under tighttimeconstraint. Ontheonehand, theTMB hastoreach aconclusion relatively quickly,
butontheother hand, ithastocopewithaverysubstantial amount ofinformation andmake
anin-depth analysis ofmany economic andlegal arguments andconsiderations. TheTMB is
oftheview thatinsome instances additional -iflimited -timeisnecessary toreach decisions
asrequired.
118. TheTMB isconcerned thatinafewcases itcould notarrive ataconsensus decision on
matters brought toit,and,therefore, could notfulfil itsmandate. Partofthiscanbeattributed
tothelackoftimeavailable foritsreview. ButtheTMB isfully aware oftheadverse impact
suchinability hadontheMembers affected. While similar circumstances causing atemporary
deadlock cannot totally beexcluded inthefuture, theTMB isdetermined tomake allthenecessary
efforts toovercome suchdifficulties andreach thedecisions required ofitbyconsensus.
119. Anorganizational aspect hasalsoabearing onthework oftheTMB. Anumber ofTMB
members arenominated byWTO Members represented bysmall delegations, andhaveanumber
ofimportant duties toperform astheir country orterritory representatives, inaddition tothe
TMB. While theTMB, incompliance withthedecision oftheGeneral Council, submitted well
inadvance itstentative schedule ofmeetings for1996, thiswasoften notaccommodated inthe
WTO schedule ofmeetings. Onanumber ofoccasions, meetings oftwoorthree other WTO
bodiestookplaceinparallelwithTMBmeetings,makingitdifficultforsomemembersoralternates
toparticipate inTMB meetings. Inorder tofacilitate thework oftheTMB, dueconsideration
should begiven totheschedule ofmeetings oftheTMB intheWTO ’soverall schedule ofmeetings.
120. TheTMB hasmade substantial efforts toensure andtoimprove thetransparency ofits
proceedings. Ithasdecided tocirculate most ofthenotifications itreceives toWTO Members
without delay, asreflected initsworking procedures. Ithasalsotried toprovide asmuch
information aspossible initsreports onmatters athand, reproducing inparticular theviews
oftheparties toadispute, andalsogiving, totheextent possible, thereasons forthedecisions
reached byconsensus. Furthermore, theconcern fortransparency wasgermane tothefactthat
indeveloping itsworking procedures theTMB agreed that, indispute cases, representatives of
theMembers involved could bepresent andparticipate inthediscussion, within certain limits,
throughout thereview, upto,andinsome cases, including, thedrafting oftherecommendations.
TheTMB hasalsoauthorized itsChairman tocirculate anotetoWTO Members after the
conclusion ofthereview ofdispute cases, sothatitsrecommendations orfindings areimmediately
available toWTO Members.
121. TheTMB isaware ofthefactthatinanumber ofcases thecommon rationale forits
recommendations orfindings wasnotasclearly expressed asitwould havehoped. Itiscommitted
toimproving transparency inthisrespect, aswellasmaking further efforts toprovide asmany
details andexplanations aspossible initsreports. Members should, however, take into
consideration thatconsensus issometimes reached onthebasis ofdifferent considerations or
different rationales, andthatamore detailed report mayrender consensus more difficult toachieve
and/or require additional time.
122. TheTMB isoftheview that, although ithasinmost cases been possible forMembers
torelyonit,there maybeaneed -andpossibility -forimprovement incertain areas such as
itsability toreach decisions byconsensus, andtomake itsdecisions more understandable by
Members. Inthisregard, theTMB feelsthatoneimportant waytoachieve these objectives isG/L/113
Page28
toensure thattheTMB continues todevelop itscollegiality inorder toovercome possible difficulties
stemming, interalia,fromthefactthat,ontheonehand, TMB members areappointed byMembers
designated bytheCouncil forTrade inGoods anditsmembership hastobebalanced andbroadly
representative oftheMembers and,ontheother hand, TMB members discharge their functions
onanadpersonam basis. Alsowithregard todeveloping collegiality, noticeable progress could
beachieved overtime, which provides agood basis forfuture improvements.G/L/113
Page29
ANNEX I
Notifications Received Pursuant to Paragraphs /n6 and /n7 of Article /n2
Situation as of /n1 October /n1/n9/n9/n6
WTO Member Share of total volume of the Member /JC s /n1/n9/n9/n0 imports of
the products in the Annex integrated
/CIunless otherwise indicated/CJ
/CI/CF/CJShare of
tops and
yarns
/CI/CF/CJ/CKShare of
fabrics
/CI/CF/CJ/CKShare of
made/CNup textile
products
/CI/CF/CJ/CKShare of
clothing
/CI/CF/CJ/CK
Argentina /n1/n6/CO/n8 /n0/CO/n1/n2 /n1/n2/CO/n7/n3 /n3/CO/n9/n6 /n0/CO/n0/n0/n1
Bangladesh /n1/n6/CO/n0/n4 /CIof the /n1/n9/n9/n0 value of imports/CJ /n4/CO/n5/n9 /n6/CO/n1/n5 /n0/CO/n0/n5 /n5/CO/n2/n5
Bolivia /n1/n6/CO/n4/n2 /CIof /n1/n9/n9/n0 imports of textiles and clothing/CJ /n7/CO/n3/n8 /n1/CO/n9/n6 /n0/CO/n3/n5 /n6/CO/n7/n3
Brazil /n1/n6 /n6/CO/n0/n2 /n3/CO/n0/n1 /n7/CO/n0/n2 /n0/CO/n0/n1
Canada /n1/n6/CO/n3/n4 /n9/CO/n6 /n4/CO/n3/n3 /n1/CO/n2/n8 /n1/CO/n1/n3
Colombia /n1/n6/CO/n2/n1 /n1/n6/CO/n2/n1 /n0/CO/n0/n0 /n0/CO/n0/n0 /n0/CO/n0/n0
Costa Rica /n1/n6 /n8/CO/n6/n8 /n1/CO/n6/n1 /n5/CO/n3/n9 /n0/CO/n3/n2
Cyprus /n1/n6/CO/n4/n4 /CIof the /n1/n9/n9/n0 value of imports/CJ /n0/CO/n7/n3 /n1/n3/CO/n8/n8 /n1/CO/n4/n9 /n0/CO/n3/n3
Czech Republic /n1/n6/CO/n1/n6 /CIof /n1/n9/n9/n3 imports/CJ /n1/n2/CO/n5/n5 /n1/CO/n6/n3 /n1/CO/n0/n6 /n0/CO/n9/n2
Dominican Republic /n1/n6/CO/n0/n2 /CIof /n1/n9/n9/n1 imports/CJ /n7/CO/n4/n8 /n8/CO/n1/n1 /n0/CO/n2/n9 /n0/CO/n1/n4
El Salvador /n1/n6 /n1/n2/CO/n6/n8 /n1/CO/n1/n2 /n2/CO/n0/n5 /n0/CO/n1/n5
European Communities /n1/n6/CO/n4 /n4/CO/n4 /n8/CO/n1/n0 /n3/CO/n6/n0 /n0/CO/n4/n0
Guatemala /n1/n6/CO/n1/n7 /n4/CO/n5/n7 /n7/CO/n7/n9 /n0/CO/n3/n7 /n3/CO/n4/n4
Honduras /n1/n6/CO/n0 /n5/CO/n3/n6 /n5/CO/n3/n2 /n3/CO/n0/n9 /n2/CO/n2/n3
Hungary /n1/n6/CO/n0/n1 /CIof /n1/n9/n9/n2 imports/CJ /n7/CO/n0/n0 /n5/CO/n6/n7 /n2/CO/n7/n8 /n0/CO/n5/n6
India /n1/n6/CO/n3/n5 /CIApril /n1/n9/n9/n0 /CN March /n1/n9/n9/n1/CJ /n1/n6/CO/n3/n5 /n0/CO/n0/n0 /n0/CO/n0/n0 /n0/CO/n0/n0
Indonesia /n1/n6 /n1/n5/CO/n9/n6 /n0/CO/n0/n3 /n0/CO/n0/n1 /n0/CO/n0/n0
Japan /n1/n6 /n4/CO/n4/n5 /n2/CO/n1/n0 /n9/CO/n0/n2 /n0/CO/n4/n4
Korea /n1/n6/CO/n3/n5 /n1/n4/CO/n8/n1 /n1/CO/n5/n2 /n0/CO/n0/n0 /n0/CO/n0/n1
Malaysia /n1/n8/CO/n0/n9 /CIof the /n1/n9/n9/n0 value of imports/CJ /n6/CO/n9/n7 /n9/CO/n7/n9 /n0/CO/n1/n4 /n1/CO/n1/n7
Malta /n1/n7/CO/n3 /n0/CO/n7/n4 /n1/n6/CO/n3/n2 /n0/CO/n1/n5 /n0/CO/n0/n9
Mauritius /n1/n6/CO/n9/n4 /CIof the /n1/n9/n9/n0 value of imports of textiles and clothing/CJ /n7/CO/n6 /n9/CO/n2 /n0/CO/n0/n4 /n0/CO/n2
Mexico /n1/n6 /n5/CO/n4/n6 /n9/CO/n2/n0 /n0/CO/n5/n4 /n0/CO/n7/n9
Morocco /n1/n6/CO/n8/n9 /CI/n1/n9/n9/n0 imports of textiles and clothing/CJ /n1/n4/CO/n5/n4 /n0/CO/n1/n6 /n2/CO/n1/n7 /n0/CO/n0/n0
Nicaragua /n1/n6/CO/n6/n4 /CIof /n1/n9/n9/n0 imports of textiles and clothing/CJ /n1/n0/CO/n1/n9 /n6/CO/n3/n8 /n0/CO/n0/n1 /n0/CO/n1/n2
Norway /n1/n6/CO/n2/n6 /n3/CO/n5/n1 /n1/n1/CO/n9/n5 /n0/CO/n6/n5 /n0/CO/n1/n5
Pakistan /n2/n8/CO/n1/n4 /CIJuly /n1/n9/n9/n0 /CN June /n1/n9/n9/n1/CJ /n0/CO/n3/n3 /n0/CO/n0/n0 /n0/CO/n0/n1 /n2/n7/CO/n7/n9
Paraguay /n1/n6/CO/n7/n8 /n0/CO/n1/n0 /n2/CO/n5/n3 /n8/CO/n4/n5 /n5/CO/n7/n1
Peru /n1/n6/CO/n2/n6 /n0/CO/n2/n6 /n1/n5/CO/n8/n7 /n0/CO/n0/n0 /n0/CO/n1/n3
Philippines /n1/n6/CO/n1/n3 /n9/CO/n6/n1 /n4/CO/n9/n1 /n0/CO/n3/n2 /n1/CO/n2/n8
Poland /n1/n6/CO/n2/n8 /n1/n5/CO/n7/n0 /n0/CO/n0/n4 /n0/CO/n2/n0 /n0/CO/n3/n4
Romania /n4/n3/CO/n3/n4 /CIof the /n1/n9/n9/n0 value of imports/CJ /n1/n7/CO/n0/n6 /n0/CO/n0/n0 /n2/n6/CO/n2/n8 /n0/CO/n0/n0
Slovak Republic /n1/n6/CO/n1/n1 /CIof /n1/n9/n9/n3 imports/CJ /n6/CO/n4/n6 /n5/CO/n8/n2 /n3/CO/n8/n2 /n0/CO/n0/n0/n3
Slovenia /n1/n8/CO/n6/n1 /CIof /n1/n9/n9/n2 imports/CJ /n7/CO/n7/n4 /n4/CO/n4/n7 /n3/CO/n5/n2 /n2/CO/n8/n8
Sri Lanka /n1/n6/CO/n0/n6 /CIof the /n1/n9/n9/n0 value of imports/CJ /n7/CO/n4/n2 /n7/CO/n5/n6 /n0/CO/n5/n6 /n0/CO/n5/n1
Switzerland /n1/n6/CO/n1/n9 /n4/CO/n9/n9 /n2/CO/n4/n0 /n8/CO/n1/n3 /n0/CO/n6/n7
Thailand /n1/n6/CO/n0/n2 /n1/n5/CO/n1/n0 /n0/CO/n0/n0 /n0/CO/n6/n9 /n0/CO/n2/n3
Tunisia /n1/n7/CO/n3/n4 /n1/n5/CO/n2/n2 /n0/CO/n5/n9 /n1/CO/n5/n3 /n0/CO/n0/n0
Turkey /n1/n8 /n1/n5/CO/n0 /n2/CO/n3/n0 /n0/CO/n6/n7 /n0/CO/n0/n3
United States /n1/n6/CO/n2/n1 /n8/CO/n4/n2 /n2/CO/n3/n8 /n3/CO/n2/n5 /n2/CO/n1/n6
Uruguay /n1/n6/CO/n4/n9 /n6/CO/n7/n8 /n9/CO/n5/n9 /n0/CO/n1/n1 /n0/CO/n0/n1
Venezuela /n1/n6 /n7/CO/n3/n5 /n8/CO/n0/n9 /n0/CO/n3/n3 /n0/CO/n2/n3
Zambia /n1/n6/CO/n0/n1 /CIof the /n1/n9/n9/n0 value of imports of textiles and clothing/CJ /n4/CO/n4/n4 /n7/CO/n2/n6 /n2/CO/n2/n1 /n2/CO/n1/n1
/CK Shares in most cases calculated by the Secretariat on the basis of notifications/COG/L/113
Page30ANNEX II
Application of the Transitional Safeguard Mechanism under Article /n6 of the Agreement on Textiles and Clothing
Situation as of /n1 October /n1/n9/n9/n6
Member
requesting
consultationsMember subject to
a request for
consultationCategory
numberProduct description Date of the
request for
consultationsType of safeguard
measure introducedReview by the TMB Follow/CNup of the TMB
reviewSafeguard
measure
currently in
force
United States El Salvador /n3/n5/n1/CP/n6/n5/n1 Cotton /CG man/CNmade fibre pyjamas /CG other
nightwear/n2/n7 March /n1/n9/n9/n5 Agreed restraint United States rescinded No
United States Honduras /n3/n5/n1/CP/n6/n5/n1 Cotton /CG man/CNmade fibre pyjamas /CG other
nightwear/n2/n7 March /n1/n9/n9/n5 Unilateral restraint Yes United States rescinded No
United States Jamaica /n3/n5/n1/CP/n6/n5/n1 Cotton /CG man/CNmade fibre pyjamas /CG other
nightwear/n2/n7 March /n1/n9/n9/n5 Agreed restraint United States rescinded No
United States Costa Rica /n3/n5/n2/CP/n6/n5/n2 Cotton /CG man/CNmade fibre underwear /n2/n7 March /n1/n9/n9/n5 Unilateral restraint Yes Dispute settlement panel Yes
United States Dominican Republic /n3/n5/n2/CP/n6/n5/n2 Cotton /CG man/CNmade fibre underwear /n2/n7 March /n1/n9/n9/n5 Agreed restraint Yes Yes
United States El Salvador /n3/n5/n2/CP/n6/n5/n2 Cotton /CG man/CNmade fibre underwear /n2/n7 March /n1/n9/n9/n5 Agreed restraint Yes Yes
United States Honduras /n3/n5/n2/CP/n6/n5/n2 Cotton /CG man/CNmade fibre underwear /n2/n7 March /n1/n9/n9/n5 Unilateral restraint Yes Subsequent agreed restraint/CM
reviewedYes
United States Turkey /n3/n5/n2/CP/n6/n5/n2 Cotton /CG man/CNmade fibre underwear /n2/n8 March /n1/n9/n9/n5 Unilateral restraint Agreed restraint during review Agreed restraint reviewed Yes
United States Colombia /n3/n5/n2/CP/n6/n5/n2 Cotton /CG man/CNmade fibre underwear /n2/n9 March /n1/n9/n9/n5 Agreed restraint Yes Yes
United States Thailand /n3/n5/n2/CP/n6/n5/n2 Cotton /CG man/CNmade fibre underwear /n2/n9 March /n1/n9/n9/n5 Unilateral restraint United States rescinded during
reviewNo
United States India /n4/n4/n0 Woven wool shirts and blouses /n1/n8 April /n1/n9/n9/n5 Unilateral restraint Yes Dispute settlement panel Yes
United States India /n4/n3/n5 Women /JC s and girls /JC wool coats /n1/n8 April /n1/n9/n9/n5 Unilateral restraint Yes Dispute settlement panel/DL
United States rescinded/DL
India requested termination
of further action in
pursuance of decision to
establish a panelNo
United States India /n4/n3/n4 Men /JC s /CG boys /JC wool coats other than suit/CNtype /n1/n8 April /n1/n9/n9/n5 Unilateral restraint Yes United States rescinded NoG/L/113
Page31Member
requesting
consultationsMember subject to
a request for
consultationCategory
numberProduct description Date of the
request for
consultationsType of safeguard
measure introducedReview by the TMB Follow/CNup of the TMB
reviewSafeguard
measure
currently in
force
United States Honduras /n4/n3/n5 Women /JC s and girls /JC wool coats /n2/n4 April /n1/n9/n9/n5 Unilateral restraint Agreed restraint during review Agreed restraint reviewed Yes
United States Philippines /n6/n7/n0/CNL Man/CNmade fibre luggage /n2/n4 April /n1/n9/n9/n5 Unilateral restraint Rescinded before review No
United States Brazil /n4/n3/n4 Men /JC s /CG boys /JC wool coats other than suit/CNtype /n2/n6 April /n1/n9/n9/n5 None No
United States Hong Kong /n4/n4/n0 Woven wool shirts and blouses /n2/n7 April /n1/n9/n9/n5 Unilateral restraint Yes United States rescinded No
United States Sri Lanka /n6/n7/n0/CNL Man/CNmade fibre luggage /n2/n7 April /n1/n9/n9/n5 Agreed restraint United States rescinded No
United States Thailand /n6/n7/n0/CNL Man/CNmade fibre luggage /n2/n8 April /n1/n9/n9/n5 Unilateral restraint Rescinded before review No
United States Thailand /n6/n0/n3 Artificial staple yarn /n2/n8 April /n1/n9/n9/n5 Unilateral restraint Rescinded before review No
United States Guatemala /n3/n4/n2/CP/n6/n4/n2 Cotton and man/CNmade fibre skirts /n3/n1 May /n1/n9/n9/n5 Agreed restraint Agreed restraint reviewed Yes
United States Colombia /n4/n4/n4 Women /JC s and girls /JC wool suits /n3/n1 May /n1/n9/n9/n5 Agreed restraint Agreed restraint reviewed Yes
United States Philippines /n4/n4/n4 Women /JC s and girls /JC wool suits /n3/n1 May /n1/n9/n9/n5 Unilateral restraint Rescinded before review No
United States Costa Rica /n3/n5/n1/CP/n6/n5/n1 Cotton /CG man/CNmade fibre pyjamas /CG other
nightwear/n2/n9 June /n1/n9/n9/n5 Unilateral restraint Rescinded before review No
United States El Salvador /n3/n4/n2/CP/n6/n4/n2 Cotton and man/CNmade fibre skirts /n2/n9 March /n1/n9/n9/n6 Unilateral restraint Agreed restraint before review Yes
Brazil Hong Kong /n6/n1/n8 Woven artificial filament fabric /n1 June /n1/n9/n9/n6 Unilateral restraint Review started Yes
Brazil Hong Kong /n8/n3/n8 M/CGB shirts/CM knitted or crocheted/CM of other
textile material/n1 June /n1/n9/n9/n6 Unilateral restraint Review started Yes
Brazil Korea /n6/n1/n1 Woven fabric containing /n8/n5/CF or more by
weight artificial staple/n1 June /n1/n9/n9/n6 Unilateral restraint Review deferred at the request
of both partiesYes
Brazil Korea /n6/n1/n8 Woven artificial filament fabric /n1 June /n1/n9/n9/n6 Unilateral restraint id/CO Yes
Brazil Korea /n6/n1/n9 Polyester filament fabric /n1 June /n1/n9/n9/n6 Unilateral restraint id/CO Yes
Brazil Korea /n6/n2/n0 Other synthetic filament fabric /n1 June /n1/n9/n9/n6 Unilateral restraint id/CO Yes
Brazil Korea /n6/n2/n7 Sheeting of staple filament fibre combinations /n1 June /n1/n9/n9/n6 Unilateral restraint id/CO YesG/L/113
Page32
ANNEX III
TMB Meetings
Meeting number Meeting dates Meeting reports
1 8-9and23-24 March, 10-11 April, 15-19 May,
7-9June, 4-6and12-13 July1995G/TMB/R/1
2 13-15 and17-21 July1995 G/TMB/R/2
3 28August to1September 1995 G/TMB/R/2
4 12-15September 1995 G/TMB/R/3
5 25-28 September 1995 G/TMB/R/4
6 16-20 October 1995 G/TMB/R/5
7 13-17 November 1995 G/TMB/R/6
8 4-5December 1995 G/TMB/R/7
9 18-20 December 1995 G/TMB/R/8
10 1-2February 1996 G/TMB/R/9
11 26-29 February 1996 G/TMB/R/10
12 20-22 March 1996 G/TMB/R/11
13 22-24 April 1996 G/TMB/R/12
14 3-5June 1996 G/TMB/R/13
15 24-27 June 1996 G/TMB/R/14
16 22-23 July1996 G/TMB/R/15
17 9-11 September 1996 G/TMB/R/16
18 16-18 September 1996 G/TMB/R/17
19 30September-1 October 1996 G/TMB/R/18