RESTRICTED
WORLD TRADE GPA/IC/8
9January 1996
ORGANIZATION(96-0050)
Interim Committee onGovernment Procurement
Working Group onStatistical Reporting
REPORT OFTHE WORKING GROUP ONSTATISTICAL REPORTING TOTHE
INTERIM COMMITTEE ONGOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT
1. TheWorking Group onStatistical Reporting wasestablished bytheInterim Committee on
Government Procurement atitsmeeting on29June1994. Ithadthefollowing terms ofreference:
Topropose totheInterim Committee guidelines formeeting thestatistical reporting
requirements ofArticle XIX:5, inparticular inrespect oftheadoption ofuniform
classification systems andmethods tobeusedforproviding statistics onthecountry
oforigin ofproducts andservices.
2. TheWorking Group wasopentoallinterested members oftheInterim Committee andreported
totheInterim Committee.
A. OFFICERS
3. Chairman: Mr.Peter Young (United Kingdom)
B. MEETINGS OFTHE WORKING GROUP
4. TheWorking Group heldfivemeetings: on15November 1994 andon4April, 19June,
25Octoberand7December1995.Notesonthediscussionsatthesemeetingsarecontainedindocuments
GPA/IC/W/12, GPA/IC/W/22, GPA/IC/W/24, GPA/IC/W/32 andinthisreport. Inaccordance with
itsmandate, eachmeeting oftheWorking Group wasstructured along twomainagenda items: Uniform
Classification Systems andCountry ofOrigin ofProducts andServices. Thisreport isstructured
according tothese same twoheadings.
C. UNIFORM CLASSIFICATION SYSTEMS
5. Article XIX:5 oftheAgreement onGovernment Procurement stipulates thatannual statistical
reports shallcontain, forentities inAnnex 1,statistics onthenumber andtotalvalue ofcontracts awarded
above thethreshold value, broken down byentities andcategories ofproducts andservices according
touniformclassificationsystems.TheissueconsideredbythemembersoftheWorkingGroupconcerned
theidentification ofuniform classification systems forproducts andservices forthepurpose ofstatistical
reporting.
(i) Classification System(s) forProducts
6. TheWorking Group hadbefore itthefollowing documents: aSecretariat NoteontheMain
Arguments Advanced inPrevious Discussions heldintheCommittee onGovernment ProcurementGPA/IC/8
Page2
onaUniformClassificationSystem(GPA/IC/W/16);acommunicationfromtheEuropeanCommunities
containing some analyses ithadcarried outofthederogations andexclusions intheAgreement aswell
asofthecategories ofproducts inwhich itsprocurements tended tobeconcentrated withregard to
goods(GPA/IC/W/20);acommunicationfromtheUnitedStatescontainingprocurementsbytheFederal
Government fortheyear1994forcontracts andsupplies andequipment (GPA/IC/W/23); aSecretariat
Note containing atransposition ofthesystem of26product categories from CCCN toHS
(GPA/IC/W/26); andacommunication from theUnited States containing theconcordance between
thesystem of26product categories andtheUSFederal Supply Classification System, FSC
(GPA/IC/W/27).
7. During thediscussions, threesystems werementioned aspossible candidates foraclassification
system toreport statistics onproducts: theHarmonized System, theNAFTA classification system
andthesystem of26product categories asusedunder theTokyo Round Agreement onGovernment
Procurement forstatistical reporting purposes. However, somedelegations expressed theirreservations
about theNAFTA system, since itwasnotuniversally used, while other delegations haddifficulty
inaccepting theHarmonized System duetoproblems offinding concordances withtheirdomestic
systems.
8. Ultimately, itwasagreed tousethesystem of26product categories asaworking hypothesis
foraclassification system forproducts. However, theneedwasfelttochange orexpand thissystem
withaviewtoadapting itinawaywhich would more appropriately coincide withtheproducts which
weretypically procured bygovernments. Withaviewtoidentifying theprecise levelofdetail desirable,
delegations agreed tosubmit theirideas totheSecretariat by31January 1996 onwhatcategories of
the26product categories could beusefully divided intosub-headings and,where afurther breakdown
would besuggested, toidentify theprecise product oftheproposed newcategories. Based onthis
information, theChairman would, incooperation withtheSecretariat, come forward withapaper as
abasis fordiscussion atthenextCommittee meeting.
(ii) Classification System(s) forServices
9. TheWorking Group hadbefore itthefollowing documents: aSecretariat NoteontheMain
Arguments Advanced inPrevious Discussions heldintheCommittee onGovernment Procurement
onaUniform Classification System (GPA/IC/W/16); aninformal Note bytheSecretariat, dated
17August 1995, reproducing thepreliminary JointOECD-EUROSTAT Classification forServices;
andadocument distributed totheMembers oftheCouncil forTrade inServices entitled GATS and
Statistics andTrade inServices (S/C/W/5).
10. During thediscussions, threeclassification systems werementioned aspossible candidates for
aclassification system toreport statistics onservices: theUNCPC; theOECD/EUROSTAT
classification system, developed withaviewtobeing useddomestically bytheOECD member countries
astheclassification system tocollect statistical information necessary tomonitor theGATS; andthe
NAFTA classification system. However, some delegations feltthattheNAFTA system wasnotsuitable
since itwasnotuniversally usedwhile theOECD/EUROSTAT classification system wasconsidered
notnecessarily practicable forthereporting ofprocurement statistics sinceitwasbased onabalance-of-
payments classification.
11. Ultimately, delegations found common ground intheUNCPC sinceitincluded allservice areas
andsince concessions onservices under theAgreement onGovernment Procurement werealsobased
onUNCPC. Withaviewtoreaching some preliminary conclusions onthelevelofdetail which would
bedesirable, delegations agreed toreview the30UNCPC divisions withaview toadvising which
ofthese divisions should becombined andifanysub-divisions would bedesirable andtosubmit their
ideas totheSecretariat by15March 1996. Based onthisinformation, theChairman would, inGPA/IC/8
Page3
cooperation withtheSecretariat, come forward withapaper asabasis fordiscussion atafuture
Committee meeting.
D. COUNTRY OFORIGIN OFPRODUCTS AND SERVICES
12. Article XIX:5 oftheAgreement onGovernment Procurement stipulates that,totheextent that
suchinformation isavailable, eachParty shallprovide statistics onthecountry oforigin ofproducts
andservices purchased byitsentities. Itfurther requires that,withaviewtoensuring thatsuchstatistics
arecomparable, theCommittee onGovernment Procurement shallprovide guidance onmethods to
beused. Furthermore, Article IVoftheAgreement addresses thebasicquestion oftheorigin ofgoods
andservices andrefers tothework programme fortheharmonization ofrulesoforigin forgoods to
beundertaken under theAgreement onRules ofOrigin inAnnex 1AoftheAgreement Establishing
theWTO andnegotiations regarding trade inservices, whose results Parties shalltakeintoaccount
inamending Article IVasappropriate.
13. TheWorking Group hadbefore itthefollowing documents: aSecretariat Notedescribing the
wayinwhich thequestion of"nationality" wasdefined incertain WTO Agreements (GPA/IC/W/15);
andacommunication fromtheEuropean Communities regarding thedesirability ofestablishing alink
between theissueoforigin instatistical reporting andthedegree oftransparency oftender notices as
awayofeffective monitoring ofprocurement (GPA/IC/W/20).
(i) Origin ofProducts
14. Delegations agreed thattherules oforigin usedforthepurposes ofstatistical reporting in
Article XIX:5 oftheAgreement should bethesame asthose applied under Article IV,which were
those usedinthenormal course oftrade.1Itwasnoted that,forpractical purposes, itwould benecessary
tohavesimple andeasily-applied rulesforstatistical purposes andthatadministrative burdens should
beavoided wherever possible.
15. Asaseparate butlinked issue, thedelegation oftheEuropean Communities suggested that
there wasmerit inexamining ways toestablish alinkbetween statistical information onthedegree
oftransparency ofnotices asawayofeffective monitoring ofprocurement. TheWorking Group was
oftheviewthatthisissuewould bemoreappropriately addressed bythenewCommittee onGovernment
Procurement.
(ii) Origin ofaService
16. TheWorking Group recognized thattheissueoffinding ways todefine theorigin ofaservice
wasfarfrom concluded, either inthecontext oftheAgreement onGovernment Procurement orin
wider contexts, suchastheGATS andtheEUROSTAT TaskForce forEstablishing Trade Statistics.
Itwasagreed that,inthelightofthewording ofArticle XIX:5, lastparagraph -"totheextent that
suchinformation isavailable", theCommittee under thenewAgreement should consider postponing
application oftherequirement toreport statistics ontheorigin ofservices untilapracticable ruleof
origin forservices hadbeendefined. TheCommittee under thenewAgreement should revert tothis
matter when thework intheGATS andother relevant international contexts willhave advanced
sufficiently towarrant it.
1Onedelegationexpressed itsunder standingthattheissuewouldberevisitedoncetheworkprogramme ontheharmonization
ofrulesoforigin under theWTO hadbeencompleted andthatthisdecision would cover itspractice tousethe"vendor supply
point" asitsmethod todetermine origin forstatistical reporting purposes inprocurement, untilsuchtimeasnewmultilateral
rules were established.