RESTRICTED
WORLD TRADE G/SCM/M/1
5May1995
ORGANIZATION(95-1174)
Committee onSubsidies andCountervailing Measures
MINUTES OFTHE MEETING HELD
ON22FEBRUARY 1995
Chairman: Mr.O.Lundby (Norway)
1. TheCommittee onSubsidies onCountervailing Measures ("the Committee") heldaregular
meeting on22February 1995.
2. TheCommittee adopted thefollowing agenda:
Page
A. Election ofOfficers 2
B. Observers: Governments 2
C. Rules ofProcedure 3
D. Participation inMeetings byCertain Signatories oftheFinal Act 3
Eligible toBecome Original Members oftheWTO (WT/L/27)
E. Observers: International Organizations 3
F. Coordination between Committees (WT/L/29) 4
G. Decisions Already Taken bytheTokyo Round Committee on 4
Subsidies andCountervailing Measures (SCM/186 and187)
H. Informal Contact Group onAnti-Dumping, Subsidies and 4
Safeguards (PC/IPL/11)
I. Legislation (Article 32.6andG/SCM/N/1) 6
J. Semi-Annual Reports ofCountervailing Duty Actions (Article 25.11 9
andG/SCM/N/4)
K. Preliminary andFinal Countervailing Duty Actions (Article 25.11) 10
L. Subsidy Notifications (Article XVIoftheGATT 1994, Article 25.2 11
andG/SCM/N/3)G/SCM/M/1
Page2
Page
M. Notification byMembers Regarding theAuthorities Competent to 11
Initiate andConduct Investigations andtheDomestic Procedures
Governing theConduct ofInvestigations (Article 25.12)
N. Presentation andDiscussion ofNotifications 11
O. Arbitration Procedures (Article 8.5) 12
P. Working Party onSubsidy Notifications (Article 25.3, Note 54) 12
Q. Updates ofArticle 8.3Notifications 12
R. Permanent Group ofExperts (Article 24.3) 12
S. Understanding Regarding Subsidization Calculations under Annex IV 13
T. Procedures fortheAnnual Review 13
U. Other Business 14
V. DateofMeetings 14
A. Election ofofficers
3. TheCommittee elected Mr.OleLundby Chairman oftheCommittee.
4. TheChairman noted thattheAgreement didnotexplicitly provide fortheelection ofaVice-
Chairman. Thus, thequestion ofapossible Vice-Chairman fortheCommittee should bediscussed
inthecontext ofRules ofProcedure fortheCommittee which willberaised under ItemC.
B. Observers: Governments
5. TheChairman stated thatcertain governments which were intheprocess ofacceding tothe
WTO orhadinitiated negotiations todosoorhaddeclared theirintention todosointhenearfuture
hadbeeninvited toattend meetings oftheGeneral Council asObservers. Inaccordance ofparagraph 6
oftheGuidelines ofObserver Status intheWTO which appeared inAnnex 2oftheRules ofProcedure
oftheMinisterial Conference andtheGeneral Council, thesegovernments "may participate asObservers
atmeetings ofworking parties andother subsidiary bodies oftheGeneral Council asappropriate,
withtheexception oftheCommittee onBudget, Finance andAdministration." Hetherefore proposed
thatsuchgovernments bewelcomed toattend meetings ofthisCommittee iftheysorequested, except
ifandwhen itwasconsidered appropriate toholdaclosed session ofparticipation ofMembers only.
Hefurther proposed thattheCommittee proceed likewise withanyother governments which might
begranted Observer Status intheGeneral Council inthefuture.
6. TheCommittee sodecided.
7. TheChairman proposed thattheCommittee adopt aruleoninformation forObservers desiring
toparticipate inthework oftheCommittee comparable tothatadopted bytheTokyo Round CommitteeG/SCM/M/1
Page3
andcomplementary totheparagraph 7oftheGuidelines forObserver Status forGovernments inthe
WTO. ForObservers, theTokyo Round Committee adopted thefollowing ruleatitsregular meeting
inOctober 1993:
"AnObserver government should provide theCommittee withanyinformation the
ObservergovernmentconsidersrelevanttomatterswithinthepurviewoftheAgreement,
including thetextofitslawsandregulations regarding countervailing duties, and
information regarding anycountervailing measures taken bytheObserver government.
Attherequest ofanysignatory ortheObserver government itself, anymatter contained
insuchinformation maybebrought totheattention oftheCommittee aftergovernments
havebeenallowed sufficient timetoexamine theinformation." (SCM/W/303).
Inlightofthelanguage inparagraph 7oftheWTO Guidelines forObserver Status forGovernments
intheWTO, itmight beappropriate tomodify theterm"should" inthefirstsentence to"shall."
8. TheCommittee sodecided.
C. Rules ofprocedure
9. TheChairman proposed theCommittee authorize himtoenter intoinformal consultations
regarding thequestion ofrulesofprocedure fortheCommittee. Intheseconsultations, account would
betaken ofthefactthatother Committees werealsoconsidering thisquestion andofthedesirability
ofensuring ameasure ofconsistency between therulesofprocedure ofthevarious Committees operating
under theauspices oftheCouncil forTrade inGoods. Until thenextmeeting theCommittee would
conduct itsbusiness onthebasis ofthepractice ontheTokyo Round Committee onSubsidies and
Countervailing Measures. TheChairman further proposed thattheCommittee authorize himtoconduct
informal consultations regarding theelection ofaVice-Chairman, andcandidates forthatposition,
withaviewtoelecting aVice-Chairman attheCommittee 'sfirstregular meeting.
10. TheCommittee sodecided.
D. Participation inmeetings bycertain signatories oftheFinal Acteligible tobecome original
Members oftheWTO
11. TheChairman noted thattheGeneral Council haddecided that,during aperiod ofseven months
following thedateofentry intoforce oftheWTO Agreement, signatories oftheFinal ActEmbodying
theResults oftheUruguay Round thatwerecontracting parties totheGATT 1947 asof31January
1995 andwere eligible tobecome Members oftheWTO could bepresent andspeak atformal and
informalmeetingsofthebodiesestablishedundertheWTOAgreementotherthantheTextilesMonitoring
Body andwould haveaccess toalldocuments made available toMembers oftheWTO forsuchmeetings.
Suchsignatories didnothavetherighttoparticipate inthedecision-making ofthebodies established
under theWTO Agreement (WT/L/27). TheChairman proposed thattheCommittee takenoteofthis
decision.
12. TheCommittee tooknoteofthedecision.
E. Observers: Intergovernmental Organizations
13. TheChairman noted thattheGeneral Council wasconsidering, buthadnotyetadopted, rules
regarding theparticipation ofintergovernmental organizations asobservers toWTO bodies. Inthe
interim, theHeads ofDelegations hadagreed thattheChairman oftheCouncil onTrade inGoods
would consult regarding whether toinvite certain organizations tothefirstmeetings oftheirrespectiveG/SCM/M/1
Page4
subsidiary bodies (WT/G/COM/2). TheChairman oftheCouncil onTrade inGoods hadstated at
thefirstmeeting oftheCouncil thatUNCTAD andtheIMFqualified forinvitation tothefirstmeeting
ofthisCommittee, andtheyhadtherefore beeninvited toattend.
14. TheCommittee tooknoteofthediscussions intheGeneral Council andagreed torevert to
thismatter atitsnextmeeting.
F. Coordination between Committees
15. TheChairman recalled thatthePreparatory Committee hadproposed thattheWTO General
Council, theCONTRACTING PARTIES totheGATT 1947, andtheTokyo Round Committees adopt
aDecision on"Transitional Arrangements -Avoidance ofProcedural andInstitutional Duplication"
(PC/11, dated 13December 1994) providing forcooperation between theTokyo Round andWTO
Subsidies Committees, including notifications andtheholding ofjointand/or consecutive meetings.
TheGeneral Council hadadopted suchadecision (WT/L/29), andasimilar decision wasanticipated
bytheTokyo Round Subsidies Committee. Thedecision envisioned thattheWTO andTokyo Round
Subsidies Committees holdtheirmeetings jointly orconsecutively, asappropriate. Itfurther envisioned
thatthenotification ofameasure totheWTO Committee onSubsidies andCountervailing Measures
shall, unless otherwise indicated inthenotification, bedeemed tobealsoanotification ofthatmeasure
under theGATT 1947 ortheTokyo Round Agreement.
16. TheCommittee tooknoteofthedecisions bytheGeneral Council andtheCONTRACTING
PARTIES totheGATT 1947.
G. Decisions already taken bytheTokyo Round Committee onSubsidies andCountervailing
Measures
17. TheChairmannotedthattheTokyoRoundCommitteeonSubsidiesandCountervailingMeasures
hadtaken twodecisions ofrelevance tothework ofthisCommittee. Thefirstsuchdecision regarded
"Transitional Co-existence oftheAgreement onInterpretation andApplication ofArticles VI,XVI
andXXIII oftheGeneral Agreement onTariffs andTrade andtheMarrakesh Agreement Establishing
theWorld Trade Organization" (SCM/186). Thesecond regards "Consequences ofWithdrawal From
orTermination oftheAgreement onInterpretation andApplication ofArticles VI,XVIandXXIII
oftheGeneral Agreement onTariffs andTrade" (SCM/187).
18. TheCommittee tooknoteofthese decisions.
H. Informal Contact Group
19. TheChairman recalled thattheInformal Contact Group onAnti-Dumping, Subsidies and
Safeguards hadmade recommendations onanumber ofissues regarding notifications tothisCommittee
(PC/IPL/11, dated 2December 1994), which recommendations were approved bythePreparatory
Committee andsenttotheWTO forinformation andimplementation (PC/R andCorr.1), andwere
referred bytheGeneral Council tothisCommittee atitslastmeeting. TheChairman proposed that
theCommittee adopt therecommendations oftheInformal Contact Group.
20. TheCommittee sodecided.
21. TheChairmanrecalledthatintheCommitteeonAnti-DumpingPracticesthequestionofwhether
notifications should berestricted wasraised. Heinvited anyviews onwhether notifications should
beunrestricted.G/SCM/M/1
Page5
22. Thedelegate oftheUnited States stated thatasCommittees created newseries ofdocuments,
decisions would havetobetaken regarding whether theyshould berestricted ornotrestricted. The
preference oftheUnited States, particularly inthisseries ofdocuments, would betowards transparency
because theCommittee would havetomake public decisions onthebasisoftheinformation provided
andtheUnited States would havetodoanalysis inwhich itwould relyinsome partoninput from
otherinterested parties intheprivate sector. Ingeneral itwould beagoodideatomake thesedocuments
public. Should theSecretariat receive notifications intheinterim period before thenextmeeting of
theCommittee,anydecisionstakenregardingthetreatmentofthosedocumentsshouldbeonaprovisional
basis.
23. TheChairman asked theUnited States whether itconsidered thatallnotifications should be
unrestricted orjustnotifications pursuant toArticle 8.3.
24. Thedelegate oftheUnited States stated thatthesame approach would bevalid forall
notifications. Thecontents ofthenotifications werenotsensitive anditwasimportant thatgovernments
beabletoprovide thepublic theinformation onthebasis ofwhich decisions were being made.
25. Thedelegate oftheEUtooknoteoftheproposal andindicated thattheEUwould liketothink
itover.
26. Thedelegate ofHong Kong considered thatthiswould beanappropriate subject forinformal
consultations bytheChairman. Herecalled thatCommittee onAnti-Dumping Practices hadagreed
thatnotifications oflegislation would beunrestricted. There wasnopoint treating thiskindof
information asrestricted.
27. Thedelegate ofCanada recalled thatunder thenextitemonlegislation Canada hadraised in
theCommittee onAnti-Dumping Practices thequestion ofwhether notifications oflegislation this
information could bereleased inanunrestricted manner.
28. Therepresentative ofArgentina stated thatthematter ofderestriction ofdocumentation was
ahorizontal question, forwhich there werenotasyetclearrules. TheCommittee onAnti-Dumping
Practices haddecided thatasfaraslegislation isconcerned there could benoquestion because the
lawispublic. TheUnited States proposal thatdecisions onrestricted status beprovisional untilsuch
timeasadefinitive solution istaken wasreasonable.
29. Therepresentative fromMexico considered thatitwould takeabitmore timetotakeafinal
decision onthisquestion.
30. TheCommittee decided thattheChairman should takeupthequestion oftreating information
innotifications asunrestricted ininformal consultations.
31. TheChairman reminded theCommittee thatArticle 28.1provided thatsubsidy programmes
which hadbeenestablished within theterritory ofaMember before thedateonwhich theMember
signed theWTO Agreement andwhich wereinconsistent withtheprovisions oftheAgreement shall
benotified totheCommittee notlaterthan90daysafterthedateofentry intoforce oftheWTO
Agreement forsuchMember. Forcountries andcustoms territories Members oftheWTO Agreement
asofitsdateofentry intoforce, suchnotifications were required by1April 1995. Since thiswas
aSaturday, Members might wanttoinsure theirnotifications werebeenreceived byFriday, 31March.
TheSecretariat hadcirculated totheMembers oftheCommittee adocument reminding Members of
thisrequirement (G/SCM/N/2 andCorr.1).G/SCM/M/1
Page6
32. Therepresentative oftheUnited States stated thatitmight make more sense rather thantaking
awayadayfromMembers toplanongetting thesenotifications inbyMonday, 3April. TheCommittee
would notwant toreject anotification because itwassubmitted overtheweekend andonlypicked
upbytheSecretariat staffonMonday morning.
33. TheCommittee sodecided.
34. TheChairman recalled thatArticle 29.3oftheAgreement, which related toMembers inthe
process oftransformation fromacentrally-planned intoamarket, free-enterprise economy, provided
thatsubsidy programmes falling within thescope ofArticle 3shallbenotified totheCommittee by
"theearliest practicable dateafterthedateofentry intoforce oftheWTO Agreement," while further
notifications ofsuchsubsidies could bemade uptotwoyears afterthedateofentry intoforce ofthe
WTO Agreement. TheInformal Contact Group hadindicated thatitmight beuseful fortheCommittee
toconsider thequestion ofwhen these notifications were tobeprovided.
35. Therepresentative oftheUnited States stated thatintheContact Group oneparty hadasked
whatwasmeant bythereference intheAgreement to"theearliest possible date". There hadbeen
some measure ofagreement thatsome flexibility wasintended, particularly ascountries would become
Members atdifferent times andtheAgreement would enter intoforce atdifferent times. There also
hadbeensome measure ofagreement thatitmight behelpful ingetting theattention ofcapitals tothis
requirement ifthere wasatleastthenormative suggestion astowhen these notifications should be
received. Nospecific timethreshold hadbeendiscussed, butdelegations hadinthebackoftheirminds
during thecourse ofthediscussion the90-day practice ofother notification requirements. Thepoint
regarding thevalue ofhaving something topoint towhen asking capitals tomeetanobligation was
stillvalid andcould facilitate thework oftheCommittee.
36. TheChairman stated thattheintention wasnottoestablish anydeadline. Hewould propose
thattheCommittee authorize himtoconduct informal consultations toidentify anindicative dateby
which suchnotifications should besubmitted.
37. TheCommittee sodecided.
38. TheChairman reminded countries intransformation toamarket economy thatthespecial and
differential treatment provided inArticle 29.2appeared tobelinked tonotification under Article 29.3.
Thus, irrespective ofanytarget dateagreed bytheCommittee forsuchnotifications, itwasintheinterest
ofthese Members tonotify within thetime-frame provided byArticle 29.3.
I. Legislation (Article 32.6)
39. TheChairman stated thattheCommittee hadadopted therecommendation ofthePreparatory
Committee thatthefirstnotification oflegislation andregulations would cover thefulltextoflegislation
andregulations relevant tocountervailing duties. Inanticipation ofthisresult, theSecretariat had
circulated arequest forsuchnotifications (G/SCM/N/1). Therequest fornotifications circulated by
theSecretariat didnotidentify adatebywhich notifications should bemade, nordiditsuggest aschedule
forthereview bytheCommittee ofthese notifications. Itseemed likely thatinatleastsome countries
newlegislation and/or regulations implementing WTO Agreement obligations inthecountervail are
were already inplace andbeing applied. Thus, there wasreason foracertain sense ofurgency in
themaking ofnotifications. Theprocessing ofthesenotifications bytheSecretariat andtheirtranslation
would beatime-consuming process, which made theneedforearlynotifications allthemore pressing.
Ontheotherhand,ithadtoberecognizedthatdifferentcountrieshaddifferentmannersforimplementing
theAgreement orwere indifferent stages intheprocess. Thus, insome Members theAgreement
itselfwasenforceable national legislation. Inothercountries, theAgreement wasnotself-implementingG/SCM/M/1
Page7
andlegislation wasrequired. Ineither case, supplementary legislation and/or regulations might be
required andthisprocess might beatdifferent stages indifferent Members. Totheextent theCommittee
desired toreview indetail these notifications, itwould needtoholdanumber ofspecial meetings.
Delegations hadtobegiven areasonable period oftimetostudy thenotifications before themeeting
atwhich theyweretobediscussed, andbypreference havetheopportunity tosubmit written questions.
Itwasalsoimportant that,inthemanner ofselecting theorder inwhich notifications weretaken up,
disincentives forthetimely submission ofnotifications werenotcreated. TheChairman further noted
thattheCommitteeonAnti-DumpingPracticeshaddecidedthatnotificationsoflegislationandregulations
would betreated asunrestricted documents. Members hadreasoned thatArticle XofGATT 1994
inanyevent requires Members topublish suchlawsandregulations.
40. TheChairmanproposedthatallMemberswhichhadneworexistinglegislationand/orregulations
which applied inwhole orinparttocountervailing dutyinvestigations orreviews covered bythenew
Agreementwouldnotifythefullandintegratedtextofthatlegislationand/orregulationstotheCommittee
by15March 1995. Iftherelevant legislation wasthetextoftheAgreement itself, theMember would
soinform theCommittee butneednotsubmit thetextoftheAgreement itself. Ifsuchlegislation
and/or regulations didnotexistorwerenotyetavailable (forexample, because theyhavenotyetbeen
translated intoaWTO working language), theMember would inform theCommittee by15March
ofthisfactandexplain thereasons therefor. TheSecretariat would endeavour totranslate andcirculate
thenotifications promptly (aprocess thatwould befacilitated ifthetextscould besubmitted ondiskette).
Theywould becirculated asunrestricted documents. TheCommittee would holditsfirstspecial meeting
toreview these notifications inconjunction withandimmediately following itsfirstregular meeting,
which heanticipated (subject todiscussion under agenda itemV)would beheldinthefirstweek of
May. TheCommittee would atleastbegin itsreview ofthesenotifications atitsfirstspecial meeting.
Ifinlightofthenumber ofnotifications received, itwasnotfeasible fortheCommittee toreview all
notifications initsfirstmeeting, theChairman would establish aschedule forthereview ofthese
notifications through aseries ofspecial meetings.
41. Therepresentative ofCanada asked ifitwould bepossible fortheSecretariat when circulating
thesubmitted notifications toother delegations iftheycould alsodoitondiskette.
42. TheChairman stated thatitmight beaquestion ofhundreds, welloverahundred diskettes
andtoanextent itisabudget question butitwillbeconsidered.
43. Therepresentative oftheEUqueried whether theCommittee should require thatthelegislation
bemade available atleastbythetimeofthefirstexamination bytheCommittee.
44. TheChairman stated thatitmight bedifficult tomake hardandfastrulesbecause theremight
bedifferent scenarios forthecompletion andtranslation ofthelegislation. Heproposed thatthe
Committee appeal toMembers tohavetheirlegislation notified byatleastthefirstregular meeting
ifitcould notbedoneby15March.
45. Therepresentative oftheEUproposed thatnotifications berequired by15March forthose
Members whose legislation wasalready inplace. Adateof15April would apply foreverybody else.
Thatwould giveenough notice toMembers thattheyshould undertake atranslation effort anditwould
leave outonlythecaseoftimeneeded fortheinternal constitutional process.
46. TheChairman inquired whatwould happen under theECproposal iflegislation wasfinished
inmidApril andbutwasnotyettranslated asof15April?
47. Therepresentative oftheEUstated thatinthecasecited bytheChairman, theMember
concerned would nothavethetimematerially toarrange fortranslation. ButtheEU'sproposal wouldG/SCM/M/1
Page8
atleastreduce theextent oftheproblem andavoid thepossibility thatMembers whose legislation was
already inplace would feelunder noobligation tonotify itbefore thenextmeeting oftheCommittee.
48. Therepresentative ofJapan didnotthink itwasnecessary tosetasecond deadline.
49. Therepresentative ofBrazil hadsome difficultly insetting asecond dateonlywhere therewere
translation problems. This would bedistinguish between Members oftheCommittee based ontheir
language. Every Member should abide bythesame datewhatever theirlanguage.
50. Therepresentative oftheUnited States stated thatallMembers hadanobligation asofthefirst
oftheyeartobeincompliance withtheAgreement. Forthose Members whodonothavelegislation,
anotification tothateffect wasallthatshould benecessary. Iftwodeadlines weresetthesecond one
could become therealone. Also, withtwodeadlines itwould bedifficult todevelop anequitable
schedule forthereview oflegislation. Nobody wanted tobethefirstMember reviewed, andwhile
Members thatoperated inanon-GATT language were atadisadvantage, thisshould notmean that
theirlegislation would notgetreviewed untilthefallbecause ofdelays intheirnotifications. There
would benopenalties forcountries thatcould notgettheirlegislation translated bythedeadline.
However, itshould berecognized thatifMembers didnotmake thedeadline therewould beaproblem
insetting aschedule forreview oflegislation.
51. TheChairman proposed thattheCommittee adopt thedecision hehadreadoutwiththeproviso
thattheCommittee appeal tocountries thatcould notprovide thelegislation by15March either because
itwasnotready yetorbecause ithadnotbeentranslated trytohavethatnotification inasearly as
possible before theregular meeting.
52. Therepresentative oftheEUstated thatthedecision toexamine legislation atthenextregular
meeting onthebasisofanotification dateof15March could onlybetaken oncondition thatthedecision
bereviewed inthelightofthenumber ofnotifications received. Inthisconnection, delegations should
ataminimum by15March notify whether theyhadlegislation inplace orwhen theyplanned tohave
itandunder whatschedule.
53. Therepresentative oftheUnited States stated thathisgovernment alsowould findunacceptable
thesituation where ahandful ofcountries thathadsubmitted legislation by15March werereviewed.
TheChairman would havetowork outaschedule forreview oflegislation andthere would beno
agreement unless thenotifications ofallthemajor players andprobably justabout everybody elsehad
beenreceived. TheUnited States would notaccept asituation where justahandful ofcountries were
subject toreview andothers were notsimply because ofthese delays.
54. Therepresentative ofHong Kong agreed thatthepoint made bytheEUandtheUnited States
wasafairone. However, twodeadlines would notsolve theproblem. Hong Kong wanted asingle
deadline, butwould alsoreview withacritical eyeanynotifications indicating aninability tosubmit
legislation by15March.
55. TheChairman stated thathestood byhisoriginal proposal. Those countries whodidnotmake
thedeadline ofthe15March would havetoexplain indetail whytheywere notabletodothisand
thisexplanation would havetobegiven totheCommittee. Intheevent thatnumerous Members did
notnotify thenitwould beaserious situation andadecision would berequired regarding whether
toputthereview ofthese notifications ontheagenda.
56. Therepresentative ofThailand supported theproposal foronefirmdeadline withtheappeal
thatnotifications besubmitted assoonaspossible before thefirstregular meeting. Sheadded that
Members which could notsubmit anotification by15March should provide areason whytheycouldG/SCM/M/1
Page9
notdosoandalsogivethedateonwhich theycould submit thenotifications ofthelegislation sothat
theCommitteewouldknowexactlywhentheMemberthataskedforadelaycouldsubmitthenotification.
57. TheChairman proposed thattheCommittee accept hisproposal withtheproviso thatany
Member thatdidnotmake thedateof15March explain initsnotification whyitwasnotabletonotify
andgiveanindicative dateofwhen itexpected tobeabletonotify.
58. Therepresentative oftheEUstated thattheChairman 'sproposal wasacceptable totheEU
ontheunderstanding thattheinclusion ofthisitemontheagenda ofthenextregular meeting onthe
Committee would beconsidered inthelightofthenumber ofnotifications received.
59. TheCommittee sodecided.
60. Therepresentative ofColombia asked whether countries which hadnotyetconcluded the
ratification process wererequired tonotify by15March inrespect ofexisting legislation orwerethey
freefrom saidobligation untilaftertheyhaveconcluded theirprocedure foraccession?
61. Therepresentative ofPoland stated thatacountry which hadnotyetratified wasnotaMember
oftheWTO Agreement andtheobligation tonotify extended onlytoMembers oftheWTO Agreement.
62. TheChairman stated thatinthecaseofacountry nothaving ratified theWTO Agreement
there would benonotification obligation other thantheonethatfollowed fromtheobserver rulethat
theCommittee hadadopted earlier today.
63. Therepresentative ofPoland stated thatitcould bethecasethatonecountry could ratify very
soon, evenbefore thenextsession oftheCommittee. Inthiscasesome flexibility ofdates should be
accepted bytheCommittee.
64. TheChairman stated thatinasituation where acountry ratified totheWTO on14March,
adayahead ofthedeadline, theywould notbeableofcourse tonotify by15March other thantosay
thattheywould havetocome backlaterandthenofcourse thedecision thatanexplanation hadto
beprovided would takecareofthatsituation.
65. TheChairman noted thatsome Members might notyethaveenacted legislation andregulations
implementing theAgreement. AllMembers were aware thatinvestigations initiated pursuant to
complaints made afterthedateofentry intoforce oftheWTO Agreement foraMember weresubject
totheprovisions oftheAgreement. Keeping inmind thatnational legal systems differed andthat
different stepsmight therefore berequired toimplement theAgreement, hetrusted thatMembers who
donothaveanadequate legalbasistoconduct investigations inamanner consistent withtheAgreement
would refrain from initiating investigation untilsuchanadequate legalbasis existed.
J. Semi-Annual Reports ofCountervailing Duty Actions (Article 25.11 andG/SCM/N/4)
66. TheChairman recalled thatunder therecommendation ofthePreparatory Committee, which
thisCommittee hadadopted thismorning, thesereports should cover themostrecent six-month period -
January-June orJuly-December -prior totheentry intoforce oftheWTO Agreement foraMember.
ThismeantthatthisWTOnotificationobligationwasnotlimitedtomeasuresarisingoutofinvestigations
covered bythenewAgreement. Arequest forthesemi-annual report forthesecond halfof1994had
been circulated toMembers inG/SCM/N/4. Consistent withthepractice intheTokyo Round
Committee, Members wererequested tomake thisnotification by24February 1995. AllMembers
wereurged tonotify promptly. InviewoftheDecision onAvoidance ofProcedural andInstitutional
Duplication, which Tokyo Round Committee onSubsidies andCountervailing Measures expected toG/SCM/M/1
Page10
adopt thisafternoon, these notifications could alsoserve asnotifications under theTokyo Round
Agreement.
67. TheChairman stated thattheCommittee might alsowanttoconsider theadoption ofguidelines
regarding theformat forthesereports. Under theTokyo Round Agreement therewasarevised standard
form which maycould found inSCM/79 andwhich haditscounterpart under theAnti-Dumping
Agreement. Inaddition, theTokyo Round Committee onAnti-Dumping Practices hadlastyearadopted
additional guidelines regarding thesemi-annual reports tobefound inADP/122. Heproposed that
theCommittee adopt therevised standard form found inSCM/79 onaninterim basis forusebythe
Members oftheCommittee. Hefurther proposed thattheCommittee authorize himtoconduct informal
consultations regarding additional guidelines based onADP/122 andtaking intoaccount thattheWTO
Committee onAnti-Dumping Practices wasreviewing theformat found inADP/122. Toassist inthis
consultationprocess,heproposedthattheCommitteeauthorizehim,withtheassistanceoftheSecretariat,
toprepare andcirculate toMembers adocument indicating themodifications toADP/122 which might
berequired tomake itappropriate inthecontext ofcountervailing duties andtheWTO Agreement.
68. TheCommittee sodecided .
K. Preliminary andFinal Countervailing Duty Actions (Article 25.11)
69. TheChairman recalled thatArticle 25.11 oftheAgreement provided thatMembers shallreport
without delay totheCommittee onpreliminary andfinalactions taken withrespect tocountervailing
duties. Under theTokyo Round Agreement, signatories whopublished notices oftheiractions ina
GATT working language typically fulfilled thisrequirement bysubmitting those notices while other
signatories submitted asummary regarding theaction taken. TheTokyo Round Committee onAnti-
Dumping Practices lastyearhadadopted adecision onminimum information tobeprovided inthese
notifications, whether intheformofthepublic notice orotherwise (ADP/124). TheChairman proposed
thattheCommitteeauthorizehimtoenterintoinformalconsultationsregardingtheminimuminformation
tobeprovided inthese reports andsuchother issues regarding thistypeofnotification asdelegations
desired toraise. Hefurther proposed thattheCommittee authorize theSecretariat toprepare draft
guidelines based onthose adopted bytheTokyo Round Anti-Dumping Committee tofacilitate those
consultations.
70. TheCommittee sodecided.
71. TheChairmanstatedthatanotherquestionwithrespecttothesereportsaroseoutofthetransition
from theTokyo Round Agreement tothenewAgreement. TheCommittee hadadopted a
recommendation oftheInformal Contact Group pursuant towhich thefirstsemi-annual report submitted
byeachWTO Member would cover theperiod July-December orJanuary-June, whichever wasmore
recent, prior totheentry intoforce oftheWTO Agreement. Theintention oftheInformal Contact
Group appeared tohavebeentoimprove transparency, buttheInformal Contact Group certainly had
notintended thatbynotifying actions inasemi-annual report those actions somehow were deemed
tobecovered bytheAgreement. TheChairman proposed thattheCommittee inthesamespirit decide
thatallpreliminary andfinalactions taken afterthedateofentry intoforce oftheWTO Agreement
benotified tothisCommittee. TheMember would indicate initsnotification whether initsviewthe
action related toaninvestigation orreview towhich theprovisions ofthisAgreement, oroftheTokyo
Round Agreement, orofArticle VIofGATT 1947 applied. Ifthisproposal wasaccepted, inview
oftheDecision onAvoidance ofProcedural andInstitutional Duplication thesenotifications could also
serve asnotifications under theTokyo Round Agreement.G/SCM/M/1
Page11
72. Therepresentative ofArgentina asked whether itwould beuptothenotifying Member to
determine which agreement covered aparticular investigation. Thiswould depend ontherulesstipulated
intheAgreements themselves.
73. TheChairman gavethefloor totheSecretariat.
74. Themember oftheSecretariat stated thattheintention wasthatthenotification state inthe
viewofthenotifyingMemberwhichagreementappliedbasedonitsbestunderstandingoftheAgreement.
ThustheSecretariat would nothavetoreview every single notification andtryandmake ajudgement.
Thiswould simply beanexpression oftheview ofthenotifying Member andwould nothaveany
juridical status ofcourse ifonewere togetinadispute.
75. TheCommittee adopted theproposal oftheChairman.
L. Subsidy Notifications (Article XVIoftheGATT 1994, Article 25.2andG/SCM/N/3)
76. TheChairman recalled thatarequest forsubsidy notifications under Article XVIoftheGATT
1994 andArticle 25oftheAgreement wascirculated toMembers oftheCommittee on23January
inG/SCM/N/3. AllWTO Members wererequired tomake thisnotification. Asindicated intherequest
thefirstnotification under thisAgreement should beafullnotification asenvisaged byArticle 26.1.
Thisnotification hadtobesubmitted pursuant toArticle 25.1by30June1995. InviewoftheDecision
onAvoidance ofProcedural andInstitutional Duplication these notifications could alsoserve as
notifications under theTokyo Round Agreement. Members oftheCommittee should recall thatall
specific subsidies within themeaning ofArticles 1and2oftheAgreement hadtobenotified. Under
Article 25.7thenotification ofameasure didnotprejudge itslegalstatus under GATT 1994 orthis
Agreement, theeffects under thisAgreement orthenature ofthemeasure itself. Inother words, if
there wasanydoubt astowhether ameasure wasaspecific subsidy itcould benotified without in
anywaycompromising theMember 'slegal position regarding thatmeasure. IfaMember hadno
subsidies itwasnevertheless required tonotify thatfacttotheCommittee. Thisnotification requirement
wasofcritical importance totheeffective operation oftheAgreement. TheChairman trusted that
allMembers would gettheWTO offtoasound startbymaking afullandexhaustive notification by
30June.
77. TheCommittee tooknoteoftheChairman 'sstatement.
M. Notification byMembers Regarding theAuthorities Competent toInitiate andConduct
Investigations andtheDomestic Procedures Governing theConduct ofInvestigations
(Article 25.12)
78. TheChairman recalled thatArticle 25.12 oftheAgreement provided thateachMember shall
notify theCommittee which ofitsauthorities arecompetent toinitiate andconduct investigations and
itsdomestic procedures governing theinitiation andconduct ofsuchmeasures. Intheview ofthe
Chairman, theremight besome overlap between thenotification requirements formArticle 25.12 and
those under Article 32.6. Heexpected thatnotifications oflegislation andregulations pursuant to
Article 32.6would satisfy thisprovision aswell.
79. TheCommittee tooknoteoftheChairman 'sstatement.
N. Presentation andDiscussion ofNotifications
80. TheChairman stated that,inview ofthelarge number ofMembers oftheCommittee, the
Committee might want toconsider whether there wasaneed toalter thewayinwhich certainG/SCM/M/1
Page12
notifications werepresented totheMembers andwhether some short-cuts could betaken interms of
thediscussion ofdifferent notifications atmeetings oftheCommittee. Heproposed tosolicit theviews
oftheSecretariat onthisscore andtoconsult informally withdelegations toexplore thismatter further
andtoreport backtotheCommittee atafuture meeting. Heencouraged anydelegation withsuggestions
tocontact him.
81. TheCommittee sodecided.
O. Arbitration Procedures (Article 8.5)
82. TheChairman recalled thatanInformal Group onprocedures forarbitration under Article 8.5
oftheAgreement wasworking onthismatter. Itwashisintention tocomplete thework oftheInformal
Group bytheendofMarch. Heexpected thattheInformal Group would submit areport tothe
Committee intimeforitsconsideration atthefirstregular meeting oftheCommittee.
83. TheCommittee tooknoteoftheChairman 'sstatement.
P. Working Party onSubsidy Notifications (Article 25.3, Note 54)
84. TheChairman noted thatNote54oftheAgreement provided thattheCommittee shallestablish
aWorking Party toreview theform andcontent ofthesubsidies questionnaire. Onedelegation had
suggested thatthisWorking Party alsoexamine theissueofpossible overlapping subsidy notification
requirements under theAgreement onSubsidies andCountervailing Measures andother WTO
Agreements. Inthisrespect, henoted thattheCouncil forTrade inGoods hadestablished aWorking
Group whose Terms ofReference included simplifying, standardizing andconsolidating notification
requirements tothegreatest extent practicable. Thequestion ofoverlapping notifications might be
themost effectively raised inthatcontext. TheChairman proposed thattheCommittee establish a
Working Party with, asitsTerms ofReference, toreview thecontents andformofthequestionnaire
ascontained inBISD 9S/193, 194andtoundertake suchother tasks astheCommittee maydecide.
TheWorking Party would bechaired bytheChairman oftheCommittee andwould be
opentoallMembers oftheCommittee andtoCONTRACTING PARTIES oftheGATT 1947 as
of31January 1995 eligible tobecome original Members oftheWTO.
85. TheCommittee sodecided.
Q. Updates ofArticle 8.3Notifications
86. TheChairman stated thattheInformal Contact Group onAnti-Dumping, Subsidies and
Countervailing Measures hadnoted thatfurther workwasrequired withrespect totheformat forannual
updates ofnotifications under Article 8.3oftheAgreement. Heproposed thattheCommittee authorize
theWorking Party established under theprevious itemalsototakeupthismatter.
87. TheCommittee sodecided.
R. Permanent Group ofExperts (Article 24.3)
88. TheChairman recalled thattheCommittee wasrequired byArticle 24.4oftheAgreement
toestablish thePermanent Group ofExperts andtoelectitsMembers. Itwasimportant thatthe
Committee begin work assoonaspossible toconsider theestablishment, composition andoperation
ofthePermanent Group ofExperts. TheChairman proposed thattheCommittee authorize himto
undertake informal consultations onthisissue.G/SCM/M/1
Page13
89. TheCommittee sodecided.
S. Understanding Regarding Subsidization Calculations under Annex IV
90. TheChairman recalled thatFootnote 62toAnnex IVtotheAgreement provided thatthe
Members should develop, asnecessary, anunderstanding regarding thecalculation ofthe5percent
threshold forthepurposes ofAnnex IV.Hesought theguidance oftheCommittee regarding whether
theCommittee should establish aWorking Party inwhich tobegin work onthisissue.
91. Therepresentative ofJapan stated thattheCommittee needed tomonitor theimplementation
oftheAgreement forawhile before developing newrules. Therefore, Japan didnotbelieve itwas
necessary todiscuss thispoint atthemoment andwasnotappropriate toestablish aWorking Party
ontheissue.
92. Therepresentative oftheUnited States believed thatitwould beveryappropriate tohavea
Working Party discuss theverytechnical andpotentially difficult questions arising under Annex IV
andthatitwould bewisetobegin investigating anddiscussing these issues.
93. Therepresentative ofCanada agreed thatinprinciple itwould beagoodideatoestablish such
aGroup. TheCommittee should beclear inadvance ofthemandate oftheGroup andthetimein
which itwould beexpected todoitswork.
94. Therepresentative oftheEUwasnotcertain itwasnecessary toestablish thisWorking Group
today. However, hethought itshould beestablished andtheGroup should produce some work before
thequestion oftheinterpretation ofAnnex IVbecame arealonebecause afteroneortwodisputes
theposition ofMembers would become more entrenched anddiscussions would bemore difficult.
Thus, itwould beappropriate toestablish thisGroup within arelatively short time-frame andtogive
itaprecise mandate which wasanyway dictated bytheprovisions ofAnnex IVitself.
95. TheChairman asked Japan whether itwould liketoreconsider theirposition taking intoaccount
thatthefootnote inquestion wasofJapanese origin. Ifnot,heproposed tohaveinformal consultations
toresolve thispoint.
96. TheCommittee sodecided.
T. Procedures fortheAnnual Review
97. TheChairman recalled thatpursuant toArticle 32.7oftheAgreement, theCommittee was
required toreview annually theimplementation andoperation oftheAgreement, taking intoaccount
theobjectives thereof, andtoinform annually theCouncil forTrade inGoods ofdevelopments during
theperiod covered bysuchareview. Under theTokyo Round Agreement theCommittee fulfilled
thisobligation inthefollowing manner. First, theSecretariat prepared adraft report tothe
CONTRACTING PARTIES, which report wascirculated totheMembers oftheCommittee either
inadvance ofthesecond regular meeting oftheyearoratthatmeeting. TheCommittee reviewed
thedraftreport attheendofthemeeting andinstructed theSecretariat regarding anymodification
thatshould bemade taking intoaccount anyevent which occurred atthatmeeting. TheSecretariat
finalized thereport andconveyed ittotheCONTRACTING PARTIES. TheChairman proposed that
intheabsence ofanycontrary decision bytheCommittee between nowandthesecond regular meeting
oftheCommittee, thisCommittee follow thesame procedure astheTokyo Round Committee.
98. TheCommittee sodecided.G/SCM/M/1
Page14
U. Other Business
99. Noissue wasraised under thisitem.
V. DateofMeetings
TheChairmanstatedthatundertheTokyoRoundAgreementtheCommitteehelditstworegularmeetings
atthesame timeeachyear, insthelastweek ofApril andthelastweek ofOctober. Heproposed that
theCommittee decide thatitstworegular meetings normally would beheldonthissame schedule.
Thisstandard schedule would provide ameasure ofpredictability forMembers andfortheSecretariat.
Itwould alsoallow theholding ofjointorconsecutive meetings ofthisCommittee andtheTokyo Round
Committee, asenvisaged bytheDecision ontheAvoidance ofProcedural andInstitutional Duplication
(WT/L/29). Exceptionally, however, theChairman suggested thatthefirstregular meeting beheld
intheweek of1Mayashehadbeeninformed thatother bodies already hadbooked therequired rooms
forthelastweek ofApril.
100. TheCommittee sodecided.
101. TheChairman stated thattheCommittee haddecided thataspecial meeting toreview legislation
would beheldimmediately following thefirstregular meeting assuming thatenough notifications had
beenreceived. Thisspecial meeting would beheldtowards theendoftheweek of1Mayorinthe
following week.
102. TheCommittee sodecided.