   
  
G/TBT/GEN/330  
 
26 August  2022 
(22-6460) Page: 1/6 
Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade    
 
 
THEMATIC  SESSION ON TRANSPARENCY  
(PRODUCT COVERAGE AND DOMESTIC COORDINATION )  
12 JULY 2022, 10:00 -13:00  
Moderator's Report1  
_______________  
 
 
At the Ninth Triennial Review, Members agreed to continue to hold thematic sessions in conjunction 
with the TBT Committee's  regular meetings from 2022 to 2024 to further deepen the exchange of 
experiences on specific topics.  On this basis, the Committee ag reed to hold a thematic session on 
transparency .2 The first part of the session focused on practices and challenges with respect to 
product coverage information provided in notifications. The second part was on good practices and 
challenges for domestic c oordination and engagement with regulators and the private sector, 
including with respect to notifications.  Information about the speakers, presentations, and related 
material s is available  on the WTO website.3 
 
1  PRODUCT COVERAGE  
1.1  Guiding questions  
• How are the "products covered" identified when drafting a TBT notification? If HS or ICS 
codes are not specified in a (draft) regulation, does your notification authority still try to 
identify relevant HS or ICS codes when notifying? What tools or resource s are used to help 
in this regard?  
• Are there particular sectors/industries where the identification of HS codes poses a particular 
challenge?  
• How do regulators coordinate with customs authorities in identifying specific products 
subject to regulatory measu res and possibly border controls?  
• Could a revision to the notification format help improve inclusion of HS/ICS codes, for 
example a tickbox option to state that "indicative" codes have been provided for information 
purposes only"?  
• What are your expectation s from a Secretariat -organized training workshop on HS and ICS 
codes?  
 
1.2  Interventions  
1.1.  Mr George Op iyo (Uganda)4 started his presentation by explaining who participate s in the 
drafting of TBT notifications in Uganda: 80% of TBT notifications are drafted by officials directly 
responsible for preparing the TBT measures. The remaining 20%, he elaborated, are drafted by the 
TBT Enquiry Point. Regarding product coverage, he explained that ICS codes are usually identified 
both in the notified measures and the notifications, and in some instances also HS codes are included 
in the notifications by the officials. For the notifications prepared by regulators, he continued, the 
Enquiry Point review s the suggested product coverage. Mr Opiyo also pointed out that in some cases 
 
1 Mr Jia Jie Loh (Singapore ). This Report is provided on the Moderator's own responsibility.  
2 G/TBT/46 . 
3 WTO | Thematic Session on Transparency . 
4 TBT National Enquiry Point, Uganda National Bureau of Standards . G/TBT/GEN/330  
 
- 2 - 
 
  product names are added to further clarify the products covered. Several online tools are used to 
help in identifying ICS codes and HS codes.  
1.2.  Mr Opiyo continued by pointing out several challenges the TBT Enquiry Point face s in the 
identification of products covered in a notification. He explained that sometimes no precise HS codes 
are available, that HS code identification is difficult when the scientific names of  the products are 
not included in the draft measure, that skills and knowledge to identify HS codes are sometimes 
lacking and that identifying HS codes is particularly challenging when the draft measure cover s a 
wide range of products.  
1.3.  On coordination with  the customs offices, he indicated that this happen s after the TBT measure 
enter s into force. Furthermore, he mentioned that a WTO training could focus on how to identify HS 
codes across product sectors and that this training could be organized in cooperat ion with the World 
Customs Organization, considering its expertise on the matter.  
1.4.  Mr Bruno Standaert  (EU)5 provided insights on the product coverage indication in TBT 
notifications from a regulator's point of view, and in particular the experience with regulations 
affecting the machinery sector. He explained that t his is a very broad sector, which ma kes produc t 
identification particularly challenging, both for drafting EU notifications and for identifying relevant 
notifications from other WTO Members. He added that ICS codes are most often used, as HS codes 
can give a good first indication but are not sufficien t. Mr Standaert indicated that using standards to 
specify product coverage could be useful as it help s indicating the sector or the products of the 
regulation as well as the nature of the regulation and what it trie s to address. To review notifications 
from other Members, he explained, they rel y on the industry to flag issues, but the Unit for Machinery 
and Equipment also check s incoming notifications.  Regarding  coordination with customs offices, he 
mentioned that this happen s via a separate system that does not interfere with the work from the 
Unit for Machinery and Equipment.  
1.3  General discussion  
1.5.  The representative of New Zealand explained that  in the case of New Zealand, the domestic 
regulator is responsible for identifying the products covered in a concern ed regulation, with support 
from trade analysts at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Ministry of Business, Innovation and 
Employment and Customs as required. She added that it can be difficult to identify HS codes when 
regulations cover a broad se t of products, which also raises challenges in distinguishing between 
SPS and TBT measures. New Zealand  welcomed recommendations by other Members of including 
HS codes where possible, as they give clarity on product coverage. To this end , including checkboxes 
for information purposes as options on the ePing platform when submitting notifications would be 
very helpful.  New Zealand suggested that training involving th e World Customs Organization could 
be useful to inform and improve how codes are assign ed. 
1.6.  The session's moderator highlighted the challenge of identifying codes for measures of broad 
scope. While ICS codes may not explain what product s are specifically co vered, HS codes can be 
practical for analyzing the trade impact of a measure. He enquired with speakers whether they had 
witnessed a situation where a code was mistakenly assigned and how such a situation could be 
rectified .  
1.7.  Ms MaryAnn Hogan6 appreciated  comments regarding assigning ICS codes  instead of HS codes 
and noted that  the ICS codes link products back to standards. She pointed out that the United States 
assigns the ICS codes as appropriate, though there is a risk of accidentally choosing the wrong  code. 
She shared an example of an occasion when the US Trade Commissioner followed up on a product 
that should not have been assigned.  
1.8.  Mr Opiyo explained that HS codes are the "trade language" of the private sector and customs, 
while ICS codes are more broadly used by the international community for standards. He recalled  
that a draft measure is a work in progress, which means that the product coverage may change until 
the measur e is adopted. He also clarified that, in his experience, codes are assigned by the Enquiry 
 
5 Legal Officer for product harmonization, Unit for Machinery and Equipment, DG Internal Market, 
Indus try, Entrepreneurship and SMEs (GROW) , European Commission . 
6 USA WTO TBT Enquiry Point Standards Coordination Office (SCO) , National Institute of Standards and 
Technology (NIST) . G/TBT/GEN/330  
 
- 3 - 
 
  Point and regulators, and customs are not usually involved in their identification at the time of 
notifying. He added that finding ways to coordinate with customs at  the notification drafting stage  
could help avoid changes when a measure enters into force. The representative of Ecuador explained 
that their  Enquiry Point works closely with customs to identify product classification before the 
notification of a measure  and that Ecuador generally uses HS codes in the context of the Andean 
Community.  
1.9.  Mr Opiyo and Ms Hogan replied to queries regarding experiences with using the ePing platform 
to identify HS and ICS codes. They mentioned that having the codes integrated into  ePing is very 
useful, though sometimes it is necessary to resort to the ISO's ICS codes pdf publication and HS 
codes schedule online to have complete information. Ms Hogan added that the US Enquiry Point also 
resorts to what was assigned in the past and r elies on having two people review the notification to 
have a more comprehensive view. Mr Standaert explained that when it is not clear which set of 
codes should be assigned, his office analyzes the regulation itself. He added that the HS codes were 
first c onceived for import and export taxation, while ICS is much more sophisticated when looking 
from a regulator's perspective that goes beyond the scope of the product.  
2  DOMESTIC COORDINATION  
2.1  Guiding questions  
• What are the 3 to 5 key ingredients for an effective and sustainable domestic coordination 
mechanism, to comply with and benefit from TBT transparency mechanisms?  
• Could you share a concrete example of how active domestic coordination has helped follow 
up on a notified regulation of interest/concern ? Did this help address/prevent a potential 
trade issue, and how?  
• How can digital tools, such as ePing or others, be leveraged to improve domestic 
coordination ? 
 
2.2  Interventions  
2.1.  Mr Roy Chun Lee  (Chinese Taipei)7 presented the experience of Chinese Taipei in enhancing 
private sector participation in the TBT notification processes. He highlighted how the significant 
increase in the number of notifications resulted in an information overload in the private sector, 
which led to a lack of interest and participation. He also added that in the last three years Chinese 
Taipei changed its approach to processing notifications. The development of a filter mechanism helps 
to reduce the number of notifications circulated for c omment to associations, manufacturers, and 
competent authorities. The Chinese Taipei TBT regulator also collects feedback from these 
stakeholders, including on the notifications  that are not captured in the filtering process  but were of  
concern  to stakehol ders. All this is fed into an accessible database of  TBT measures, which constitute 
the foundations for comments on notifications and STCs during the TBT Committee. In 2021, the 
Chinese Taipei TBT regulator organized two virtual workshops to receive feedba ck from the private 
sector on this system, and to promote ePing. The main results of this process of circulating more 
targeted information included increased interest and more participation from public and private 
stakeholders; a better understanding of th e private sector's interests; and regulations updated 
consistently with commercial interests.  
2.2.  In response to comments from Uganda and Brazil, Mr Lee noted  that the process of filtering 
relevant notifications is labo ur intensive, as it needs dedicated staff  to produce the two -page 
summaries, which contain information on product coverage, the content of proposed regulations and 
weblinks, when available. He added th at ePing is very useful to identify HS codes, though it does 
not help filter information for ind ividual Members. In response to a question, Mr Lee also clarified 
that private sector associations play a role in coordinating information for individual companies, who 
are the system's final users. He reasoned that this approach is particularly useful for  MSMEs, which 
have limited resources to cover costs with legal experts and staff to review and comment on 
notifications.  
 
7 Senior Deputy Executive Director WTO&RTA Center, Chung -Hua Institution for Economic Research . G/TBT/GEN/330  
 
- 4 - 
 
  2.3.  Ms Becxi Sanchez (United States )8 presented on inter -agency coordination for the review of 
measures on agricultural products. Ms Sanchez highlighted that transparency is a fundamental 
component to ensure companies' access to information and clarity on market access issues. She 
explained that the inter -agency approach is based on key ingredients for effectiveness, including 
instituti onal structure with clear roles for the various agencies and offices; procedural terms of 
reference defining timelines, document management, meetings frequency and criteria to measure 
trade impact of notifications and filter those that will be reviewed; gu idelines for drafting comments; 
and USTR's leadership to get inter -agency consensus. The F oreign Agriculture Service (FAS) 
Multilateral Affairs (MA) office uses ePing alert function to track notifications. The office also manages 
the inter -agency process, including maintaining a comment status report based on actions by 
government stakeholders. Regulators and FAS Commodity Divisions provide market access 
information to determine whether to comment, based on trade impact criteria. Comments are 
drafted with i nput from regulators, industry, regional officers and other stakeholders, and sent by 
relevant commodity divisions to MA, which in turn, reviews whether they are in line with the TBT 
Agreement and circulates them for interagency clearance. MA submit commen ts to the US TBT 
Enquiry Point for submission to foreign governments. US embassies help to follow up on comments 
on the ground. Given the trade impact criteria, about 1 ,000 notifications are reviewed per year, of 
which, approximately 100 receive comments.   
2.4.  Ms Sanchez emphasized  how domestic coordination is important to develop sound arguments 
and identify potential barriers to trade. She shared  information  about instances  where other 
Members took comments into account and modified a notified  measure, which led to improved 
regulations. She also noted that having a single platform where all notifications and trade concern 
history is integrated, such as ePing, facilitates identifying systematic issues. She added that MA is 
working to replace their digital tool to coordinate internal procedures, STAR, with ePing.  In response 
to queries , Ms Sanchez  further clarified that commodity analysts coordinate closely with industry 
associations regarding market access issues they face . In addition, the trade impact criteria  set a 
baseline to determine whether notifications will be analyzed. That is, comments are prepared if the 
expected impact  is above a million dollars and the topic is of concern. Yet, if trade is not significant 
but there are systematic issues , stakeholders may also provide comments on notifications. The US 
is not yet using the ePing outreach function for domestic coordination, though this is under 
consideration .  
2.5.  Ms Kristan Callahan  (United States )9 presented US domestic coordination from a re gulator's 
perspective. She explained that the FDA has six major cent res to cover the commodities it regulates, 
including food safety, cosmetics, medical devices, drugs, biologics, and tobacco. The Office of Trade, 
Mutual Recognition, and International Arra ngements has staff assigned to handle domestic 
coordination between FDA and other agencies, as also explained by Ms Sanchez, and within the FDA. 
She highlighted the importance of working with the cent res to have their technical viewpoint, which 
includes un derstanding WTO obligations and the regulatory perspective when providing comments 
back to the trade agencies about potential trade concerns. Ms Callahan also underscored how having 
staff that are familiar with trade and WTO obligations helps with developi ng better regulations. For 
this, her office works to provide training for the technical experts within the FDA so that they are 
aware of the value of coordinating with other agencies to include others' perspectives when 
developing regulations.  In response to a question, she explained  that the FDA relies on coordination 
with other agencies and private sector stakeholders to make their opinion on whether there is a 
trade challenge related to regulations to be addressed.  
2.6.  Ms MaryAnn Hogan  (United States )10 relayed how the TBT Enquiry Point had been using 
ePing at the national level. She explained that after ePing had been launched in 2016, it was used 
for browsing notifications, but that the Enquiry Point was more accustomed to using the TBT 
Information Mana gement System (IMS). Since 2003, US stakeholders were encouraged and 
accustomed to using the Notify U.S. alert service, which allowed for branding of the TBT Enquiry 
Point and created awareness of TBT domestically. However, as the TBT IMS was discontinued and 
the ePing SPS&TBT Platform was launched, it was decided to integrate ePing in the national 
 
8 International Trade Specialist, Multilateral Affairs Division, Trade Policy and Geographic Affairs, Foreign 
Agricultural Service, United States Department of Agriculture . 
9 Public Health Advisor , United States Food and Drug Administration . 
10 USA WTO TBT Enquiry Point Standards Coordination Office (SCO) , National Institute of Standards and 
Technology (NIST) . G/TBT/GEN/330  
 
- 5 - 
 
  processes and to phase out the Notify U.S. alert service, which only facilitated tracking via ICS codes, 
while ePing provides a broad set of services and functio nalities.  
2.7.  To roll out ePing, Ms Hogan stated, the TBT Enquiry Point started communicating about the 
new tool with stakeholders to inform and train them and was in communication with the US 
delegation to the WTO. She further explained that the TBT Enquiry Point had decided to opt for a 
slow transition from its domestic alert service to the new ePing platform, going sector by sector, to 
be able to manage the process and to give stakeholders time to adjust to the new system. It was 
also pointed out that this awareness raising and training exercise was not a one -off, but rather an 
iterative process of communication, training and follow -up. 
2.8.  Ms Hogan indicated that she intends to set up an ePing chat with other Enquiry Point officials 
to share quick tips and best  practices on how to implement ePing at the national level. The presenter 
gave a few examples of lessons learned such as the fact that different users were interested in 
different sets of services ePing offered.  
2.9.  Ms Gabriela Szmidt (European Union)11 presen ted on the three -level domestic coordination 
in the EU, which includes : intra-European Commission ; contribution from the member States ; and 
inputs from stakeholders. She noted  that the three levels are equally important and that coordination 
within them ha ppens simultaneously, which is challenging given the size and complexity of the 
organization. Other challenges regarding domestic coordination include the timing to process 
comments internally and making sure that all stakeholders in the Commission and the  EU are 
subscribed to ePing and actively analyzing notifications.     
2.10.   In terms of notifications by the EU to the WTO, Ms Szmidt shared that the challenge relies on 
ensuring that colleagues across the Commission are aware of their obligation to notify and make 
sure that those notifications give enough time for comments by other WTO Members. She added 
that the key ingredient s for effective domestic coordination are: general awareness of TBT 
transparency mechanisms; respect of deadlines by all actors in the p rocess; accessibility of 
translations; and correct identification of Commission experts responsible for a given topic. She 
concluded with the benefits of ePing, mentioning that it allowed the EU TBT Enquiry Point to abandon 
the manual processing of incomin g notifications. After participating in information sessions on how 
to use the ePing platform, stakeholders are active in analyzing notifications in a timely manner.  
2.11.   In response to questions,  Ms Szmidt explained  that identifying the right expert can somet imes 
be challenging given the organization's five-year staff turnover  and to remedy that, directors of 
specific divisions identify TBT coordinators, who analyze the highest number of notifications that fall 
under their competence. She also clarified that w hen notifications are of particular concern , the EU 
asks for an extension of the comment period. Regarding translations, the EU has translators for non -
EU languages,  however,  given that this may be time -consuming, they also ask stakeholder 
associations and  other Members for informal translations.  
2.3  General discussion  
2.12.   The representative of Türkiye expressed appreciation for the exchange of  experience s, in 
particular  those that highlighted the integration of coordination procedures with ePing. Türkiye also 
suggested that the Secretariat organize a general ePing session, with presentations from Members 
whose domestic/international coordination systems are migrating to i t. 
2.13.   The representative of New Zealand noted that  the session was a great learning opportunity, 
as they also face challenges with domestic coordination. She provided insights about four key 
ingredients for domestic coordination, including : adopting an overar ching TBT strategy, with a focus 
on embedding domestic coordination on regulatory measures; integrating the consideration of 
international obligations within the regulatory development process, as this can serve to prompt 
coordination among regulators; est ablishing contact points and networks of regulators across 
agencies, as this is the necessary precondition for domestic coordination to take place; and building 
 
11 TBT Coordinator, EU -TBT Enquiry Point, DG Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs 
(GROW), European C ommission . G/TBT/GEN/330  
 
- 6 - 
 
  capacity among domestic regulators and private actors, and strengthen ing knowledge of TBT 
transparency obligations.   
3  COMMENT BY  THE MODERATOR  
3.1.  We had informative and insightful exchanges  during this thematic session  on two specific 
topics: product coverage in notifications and domestic coordination.  Some of the take -aways from 
the session are the following:  
3.2.  On product coverage:  
• HS codes w ere highlighted as being  important to traders and other stakeholders to better 
assess the trade impact of a notified measure. We heard that some of the tools and resources 
used in identifying r elevant HS codes include searching in ePing's dropdown options; 
consulting with national customs officials; consulting guidance documents from the ISO and 
the World Customs Organization; and searching in Google.  
 
• However, it was raised that there could be  inaccuracies in this best -endeavour effort. In 
addition, HS codes could be inadequate to define a product coverage and supplementary 
product names or descriptions could be necessary. Some regulators also shared that they 
tend to refer more frequently to I CS codes as they consider this information more relevant 
especially when the notified measure is based on an international standard.  
 
• As for a workshop to be organized by the Secretariat, it was suggested to involve the World 
Customs Organization , and focu s in particular on regulations spanning across HS Chapters, 
such as food products, chemicals, etc.  
 
3.3.  On domestic coordination:  
• It was underscored that domestic coordination is key for complying with and benefitting from 
the TBT transparency framework. Some ingredients for an effective coordination mechanism 
include  general awareness of the TBT transparency mechanism and benefits; an institutional 
structure for coordination with clear timelines and procedural terms of reference; and a 
diverse support network of officials, experts and private sector representatives.  
 
• An increasing number of Members are relying on ePing  for their stakeholders to track 
changes to product requirements in export markets, including some who have discontinued 
their own online tools. ePing is helping Members save time and resources and speed up their 
domestic consultation process. Nonetheless, having a domestic entity monitor and present 
relevant notifications in more digestible form can improve engagement with the private 
sector.  
 
• Members expressed interest in learning more about the range of ePing functions that can 
support domestic communication and coordination. To this end, it was suggested to hold an 
ePing information session on the margins of the next Committee meeting.   
 
_______ ___ 