RESTRICTEDWORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONG/RO/M/36
9 July 2001
(01-3409)
Committee on Rules of Origin
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF 18 MAY 2001
Chairman:  Mr. H. Ahn
The agenda proposed for the meeting, contained in WTO/AIR/1540, was adopted by the
Committee on Rules of Origin (CRO) as follows:
I. PRODUCT-SPECIFIC RULES OF ORIGIN (G/RO/41, G/RO/45/ADDS.1-5,
JOB(01)/52).................................................................................................................... ............1
A. C HAPTERS 1-24 ( AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS AND FISH ) ............................................................2
B. C HAPTERS 25-27 ( MINERAL PRODUCTS ).....................................................................................3
C. C HAPTERS 41-43 ( LEATHER ).......................................................................................................4
D. C HAPTERS 44-49 ( WOOD AND PAPER ) ........................................................................................4
E. C HAPTERS 50-63 ( TEXTILE PRODUCTS ) AND OTHER TEXTILE -RELATED CHAPTERS ..................4
F. C HAPTERS 64-67 ( FOOTWEAR AND HEADGEAR ).........................................................................6
G. C HAPTERS 86-89 ( TRANSPORTATION EQUIPMENT ).....................................................................7
H. C HAPTERS 92-97 ( MUSICAL INSTRUMENTS AND OTHER ARTICLES ) ...........................................7
II. ENDORSEMENT OF PROPOSALS ON HARMONIZED RULES OF ORIGIN
(G/RO/W/63) .................................................................................................................... .........9
III. IMPLICATIONS OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE HARMONIZED
RULES OF ORIGIN  ON OTHER WTO AGREEMENTS ................................................11
IV. NOTIFICATIONS UNDER ARTICLE 5 AND PARAGRAPH 4 OF ANNEX II
OF THE AGREEMENT ON RULES OF  ORIGIN (G/RO/32 AND 33)...........................11
V. UNITED STATES INFORMATION ON ASPECTS OF GERMANY'S POLICY
PERTAINING TO CERTIF ICATES OF ORIGIN.............................................................11
VI. ELECTION OF VI CE-CHAIRPERSON .............................................................................12
VII. OTHER BUSINESS............................................................................................................. ...12
- Agenda and date of the next meeting.............................................................................12
I. PRODUCT-SPECIFIC RULES OF ORIGIN (G/RO/41, G/RO/45/ADDS.1-5,
JOB(01)/52)
1.1 The Chairman stated as follows:G/RO/M/36
Page 2
A. CHAPTERS 1-24 ( AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS AND FISH )
Issue No. 1:  No consensus was reached.  Members supporting option A streamlined their positions.
One Member supporting option B stated that the origin of pure-bred breeding animals should be the
country in which the animal was born.  Other Members pointed out that the pedigree issue might not
have a direct relationship with the country of origin.
Issue No. 2:  No consensus was reached.  Members supporting option B streamlined their positions.
Issue No. 3:  There was a consensus on option B.
Issue No. 4:  No consensus was reached.  Based on the discussions in the informal meeting of the
CRO, the Chairman changed his recommendation from option B to A on 4(i) and from option C to A
on issue 4(iv).  There was consensus on option C with regard to HS ex 0712(c), 0713, 0813 and
ex 0814(a).
Issue No. 6:  No consensus was reached.  The Chairman recommended option B for issue No. 6(i).
Issue No. 7:  There was a consensus on option A.
Issue No. 8(i):  There was a growing consensus on option B.
Issue No. 9:  There was a consensus on option A2 (subject to MAL).
Issue No. 10:  No consensus was reached.
Issue No. 11:  No consensus was reached.  Based on the discussions in the informal meeting of the
CRO, the Chairman changed his recommendation from A to CTH.Issue No. 12:  No consensus was reached.  Some Members supporting options A or B stated that this
issue was very sensitive for them.Issue No. 13:  No consensus was reached.  Based on the informal discussions in the CRO, the
Chairman changed his recommendation from option A to option C.
Issue No. 15(1):  No consensus was reached.
Issue No. 15(2):  There was a growing support for op tion A.  One Member stated that a definition of
"heavy salting" was needed.
Issue No. 16:  No consensus was reached.
Issue No. 17:  No consensus was reached.  One Member made a proposal for the Chapter Note.
Issue Nos. 18-23:  No consensus was reached.
Issue Nos. 24-25:  No consensus was reached.  Based on the informal discussions, the Chairman
changed his recommendation from option B to option C.
Issue Nos. 27-28:  There was a growing consensus towards option B.
Issue No. 29:  There was growing support for option B.  One Member supporting option A stated that,
as concerns the grinding issue, a package deal for all horizontal issues would be needed.G/RO/M/36
Page 3
Issue Nos. 30-33:  No consensus was reached.  As concerns the compromise proposal, the Chairman
suggested considering a certain origin-conferring threshold for the green bean-producing country.
One delegation pointed out that the de minimis rule would function as a threshold.  Another
delegation stated that since the issue under consideration concerned roasting of coffee, the mixtureapproach was not appropriate.
Issue No. 35:  No consensus was reached.
Issue No. 36:  There was a growing consensus towards option A.  One Member stated that if all
ingredients originated in a single country, origin should be conferred in that country, and that if
ingredients originated in more than one country, the major position rule should be applied.
Issue No. 37:  One Member stated that endorsed rules of Chapter 11 indicated that obtaining flours of
oil seeds should be origin-conferring.  The Chairman changed his recommendation from option B to
option A.
Issue No. 39:  There was consensus on option B.
Issue No. 40:  There was consensus on option B.
Issue No. 65:  There was consensus on option A.
Issue No. 66:  There was consensus on option A.
Issue No. 67:  There was consensus on option A (subject to PHI).
Issue No. 68:  There was consensus on option A (subject to MAL).
Issue No. 69:  Three was growing support for option A.
Issue No. 70:  It was agreed to delete option B.  There was growing support for option A.
Issue No. 71:  There was growing support for option B.
Issue No. 72:  There was growing support for option B.
B. CHAPTERS 25-27 ( MINERAL PRODUCTS )
Issue No.1:  No consensus was reached.
Issue No.7:  There was a consensus on Chapter Note 2 (subject to CAN).
- Delete (such as those) (subject to SG)
- List (a) and (h)
Issue No.8:  No consensus was reached.  One Member expressed its intention to submit a new
proposal for Option B before the next meeting of the CRO.Issue No.9:  Since all proponents of Option C joined consensus on condition that two items should be
deleted, there is a virtual consensus.
- The Chair proposed to delete desalination and obtaining a sulphur content from the list.G/RO/M/36
Page 4
Issue No.10:  There was a consensus on  Option B.
C. CHAPTERS 41-43 ( LEATHER )
Issue No.1: There was a consensus on Option B (subject to NOR)
Issue No.5:  There was a consensus on Option A (subject to ARG)
Issue No.6:  No agreement was reached.  Four Memb ers shifted their positions in order to accept the
Chairman's recommendation.
Issue No.7:  No agreement was reached.  Four Memb ers shifted their positions in order to accept the
Chairman's recommendation.
Issue No.8:  There was a consensus on  Option C.
D. CHAPTERS 44-49 ( WOOD AND PAPER )
Issue No.1:  There was a consensus on Option A for "finger or end-jointing) as well as on "CTH" for
planning or sanding.
Issue No.2:  There was a consensus on Option B (subject to PHI).
Issue Nos.3 and 4: Based on informal discussions the Chairman changed his recommendation to CTH
for heading 4408, surface-covering for headings 4410, 4411 and 4412.  There was a consensus in
principle.  However, the description of split headings (proposed by Japan and the US) will be further
discussed.
Issue No.5:  Thailand requested to split coating issu e into "Kaolin" coating and "other".  Thailand can
join consensus on "Other".
Issue No.6:  There was a consensus on the Chair's recommendation (subject to CAN, IND, THA and
AUS).
Issue No.7:  It was agreed to change Option A from  "CTHS" to CTHS", except from finished staves"
as a compromise proposal (subject to AUS and CAN).
Issue No.8:  There was a consensus on Option B. (Subject to THA)
- CAN AND MOR indicated that their agreement was on condition of the application of de minimis
rule.
Issue No.10:  There was a consensus on CTH for sub-headings 4808.20 and 4808.30 as well as on CC
for subheading 4808.90.
E. CHAPTERS 50-63 ( TEXTILE PRODUCTS ) AND OTHER TEXTILE -RELATED CHAPTERS
Issue No. 1:  There was consensus on option A (subject to CR and VEN).G/RO/M/36
Page 5
Issue Nos. 2 and 3:  Based on informal discussions, the Chairman recommended a package deal
(option B for Issue Nos. 2 and 3).  Two Members shifted their positions in order to accept the
Chairman's recommendation.
Issue Nos. 4 and 5:  Based on informal discussions, the Chairman changed his recommendation from
option A to option B.Issue No. 6:  Several Members stated that knopping, looping and corespinning were a part of the
spinning process, while other Members stated that  corespinning was origin-conferring.  One Member
stated that manufacturing of sewing thread by corespinning was origin-conferring.
Issue No. 7:  There was consensus on option B (subject to PAK, SG, DOM and GUA).
Issue No. 8:  One Member supporting option B made a compromise proposal:  CTH, except from
yarns of this Chapter.  Another Member supportin g option B stated manufacturing of sewing thread
by corespinning was origin-conferring.
Issue No. 9:  No consensus was reached.
Issue No. 10:  No consensus was reached.  However there was an agreement on split heading 5704(a):
CTH, except from heading 5602.Issue No. 11:  No consensus was reached.
Issue Nos. 12 and 13:  No consensus was reached.  One Member supporting option A/3 for yarn
withdrew their proposal for the value-added criteria.Issue No. 14:  Option A was changed to CTSH.
Issue No. 15:  Option A was changed to CTSH/CTHS.
Issue Nos. 16 and 20:  It was noted that these issues are closely related to Issue Nos. 12 and 13.
Issue No. 17:  There was consensus on option B (subject to IND, PAK and VEN).
Issue No. 18:  It was agreed to delete option C.
Issue No. 19:  No consensus was reached.
Issue No. 21:  There was consensus on option A.
Issue No. 22:  Based on informal discussions, the Chairman changed his recommendation to "CTH,
except by cutting only".Issue Nos. 23 and 24:  Based on informal discussions, the Chairman recommended a package deal:
option A for Issue No. 23 and option B for Issue No. 24.
Issue No. 25:  There was consensus on option B (subject to GUA).
Issue Nos. 26 and 27:  No consensus was reached.  Based on informal discussions the Chairman
changed his recommendation for Issue No. 27 from option A to option B.Issue No. 28:  There was consensus on option A (subject to ARG).G/RO/M/36
Page 6
Issue No. 29:  There was consensus on option B (subject to GUA).
Issue No. 30:  No consensus was reached.  Two Members shifted their position in order to support the
Chairman's recommendation.
Issue No. 31:  There was consensus on option A.
Issue No. 32:  Based on informal discussions, the Chairman changed his recommendation to "CTH,
except by cutting only".Issue No. 33:  There was consensus on option A (subject to ARG).
Issue No. 34:  There was consensus on option A (subject to ARG).
Issue Nos. 35, 47 and 58:  No consensus was reached.  They were horizontal issues (embroidery).
Issue No. 37:  One Member supporting option E for heading 59.01 made a compromise proposal:
"CTH, provided that the weight of rubber and/or plastics of the good is more than 50% of the weight
of the good".
Issue Nos. 38-43:  No consensus was reached.
Issue No. 44:  It was noted that the issue unde r consideration was a horizontal issue concerning
visible/invisible coating.
Issue Nos. 45, 46, 48-53, 55, 60, 64-67 and 73:  No consensus was reached.
Issue Nos. 54, 59-63, 69 and 71:  Based on informal discussions, the Chairman changed his
recommendation to:  "CC/CTH except by cutting and/or hemming only".Issue No. 56:  There was consensus on option A (subject to ARG, EGY and GUA).
Issue No. 57:  Based on informal discussions, the Chairman changed his recommendation from
option C to option B.Issue No. 70:  There was consensus on option A (CTH) (subject to EC).
F. CHAPTERS 64-67 ( FOOTWEAR AND HEADGEAR )
Issue No.1:  No consensus was reached. : The United States suggested splitting this heading into (a)
"blocked hat" and (b) "other".
Issue No.2  There was a consensus on option A (subject to EGY and KOR)
Issue No.3:  No consensus was reached.  One Member shifted its position in order to accept the
Chairman's recommendation.Issue No.4:  There was a consensus on  Option A.
Issue No.5:  There was a consensus on Option A.G/RO/M/36
Page 7
Issue No.6:  There was a consensus on Option A fo r split heading ex.6701(a) (subject to EGY, NOR,
PHI).  There was a consensus on CTHS for both split headings ex.6701(b) ex.6701(c)
Issue No.7:  No consensus was reached.  At this meeting, the Chairman modified the recommendation
for 67.02(c).Three Members shifted their positions in order to accept the Chairman's proposal.
Issue No.8:  There was a consensus on Option A.
Issue No.9:  No consensus was reached.
Issue No.10:  There was a consensus on Option A.
Issue No.11:  No consensus was reached.
Issue No.12-14:  No consensus was reached.  A compromise recommendation for this issue was
discussed.
G. CHAPTERS 86-89 ( TRANSPORTATION EQUIPMENT )
Issue No.68:  No consensus was reached.  One Member shifted its position in order to accept the
Chairman's proposal. It was agreed to delete option A1 and E1
Issue No.69:  No consensus was reached due to the se nsitivity of the issue.  It was agreed to delete
option A 1.
Issue No.70:  No consensus was reached.  It was noted that Options A-C concerned horizontal
assembly issues, while option E was unique.  One Member supporting option E shifted its position in
order to accept the Chairman's recommendation.  Other Members also expressed its intention to
reconsider its position. It was agreed to delete option A1.
Issue No.71:  No consensus was reached.  Two Members shifted their positions in order to accept the
Chairman's recommendation.  It was agreed to delete options A1 and DIssue No.72:  No consensus was reached.  Based on informal discussions, the chairman changed its
recommendation to "CTH".  Three Members shifted their positions in order to accept the
recommendation.  It was agreed to delete option A1, C and D1.
Issue No.73:  No consensus was reached.  Four Memb ers shifted their positions in order to accept the
Chairman's recommendation. It was agreed to dele te option A1 and E.  (subject to CHI and AUS)
Issue No. 74:  There was a consensus on Option B.
H. CHAPTERS 92-97 ( MUSICAL INSTRUMENTS AND OTHER ARTICLES )
Chapter 92
Issue No.1:  No consensus was reached.
Issue No.2  It was agreed to delete this issue.
Chapters 93-97G/RO/M/36
Page 8
Issue No.1:  No consensus was reached.
Issue No.3:  There was a consensus on Option B (Subject to EGY, PHI and U.S.)
Issue No.5:  There was a consensus on Option B (subject to EGY, THA).
Issue No.6:  No consensus was reached.  Two Member s shifted their positions in order to accept the
Chairman's recommendation.
Issue No.7:  No consensus was reached.
Issue No.10: No consensus was reached.  Based on informal discussions the Chairman proposed a
Chapter Note (CTH resulting from change of use itself is not origin-conferring).Issue No.11:  There was a consensus on Option A (subject to BRA).
Issue Nos.12, 13, 14, 15, 18, 20, 23, 26, 28 and 30:  No consensus was reached (horizontal issue
concerning assembly of parts).Issue No. 19:  No consensus was reached.  Four Members (CH, CAN, EC and the U.S.)were
requested to make a compromise proposal.Issue No. 24:  Based on informal discussions, the Chairman made a compromise recommendations.
(“CTSH, except manufacture of 9608.10 from 9608.60)  Consensus was reached. (Subject to KOR,
MEX, MOR and IND).
Issue No. 27:  Based on informal discussions the Chairman made a compromise recommendation.
(CTSH, except from wood or plastic forms prepared  for assembly)  Growing consensus was made on
this recommendation.
Issue No. 31:  There was a consensus on Option B.
Issue No. 32: There was a consensus on Option A.
1.2 The representative of Venezuela stated that Venezuela had on various occasions informed the
Committee of its interest in discussing alternatives to the options under consideration with regard to
chemical reactions and the physical processes that should confer origin for goods under Chapter 27.Specifically, Venezuela had expressed interest in revi ewing the content of Note 2 to Chapter 27 with a
view to evaluating the desirability of including th erein criteria such as ownership of production inputs
and value added for the determination of origin.  In other words, this would be a case where the rule
of substantial transformation whereby refining ope rations conferred origin would not be followed.
The complexity of production arrangements was a reality in many industries, as was the scenario ofproduction on a commission or contract basis.  The criterion of ownership of production inputs was
recognized as a key element in the framework of the Central Product Classification (CPC) which was
used as the nomenclature for negotiations on trade in services.  Hence, the production or finishing of
goods on a commission or contract basis, using raw material owned by another party, was classified
as a service and not as a manufacture.  Accordingly, it could be argued that the rules of origin to beused for production or manufacture on a contract basis would be governed by criteria different from
those applied to goods.  In the petroleum industry, this procedure was used frequently.  The country of
origin of the product – crude petroleum – commissi oned a third party to carry out refining and/or
downstream processes.  In many cases, the same country had made substantial foreign investments inG/RO/M/36
Page 9
order to establish facilities for effecting such a tr ansformation.  In those circumstances, the origin of
the petroleum product manufactured outside the national territory on a commission or contract basis
should be agreed in the light of the origin of the petroleum used as an input.  In other words, the
determination of origin should take such particularities into account.  Venezuela did in fact use crude
oil refining facilities abroad, which it owned, and in relation to the processing of Venezuelan crudeoil, had succeeded in having these criteria accepted as conferring origin in a series of regional trade
agreements within the framework of the LAIA and the Andean Community.  They nevertheless
considered that these points deserved more extensive discussion, having been raised at a time when
they were moving closer to a consensus within the Committee.  Consequently, Venezuela had decided
not to submit specific proposals on this issue, but they wished to place on record before the
Committee the fact that this matter was one of concern to them and one on which they would continue
working at the technical level.  Naturally, Venezuela reserved the right to raise this matter again in the
forums they considered most appropriate.
1.3 The CRO took note of the statements made.
1.4 The representative of Canada suggested that a list of issues on which consensus was reached
ad referendum to further confirmation be circulated before the next meeting of the CRO1.
1.5 The CRO so agreed.
II. ENDORSEMENT OF PROPOSALS ON HARMONIZED RULES OF ORIGIN
(G/RO/W/63)
2.1 The CRO agreed to endorse:
- Chapters 28-40 – Issue No. 12:  to be deleted
- Chapters 28-40 – Issue No. 17:  to endorse option A (the primary rule of heading 37.07 should
read "CTH")
- Chapters 28-40 – Issue No. 19:  to endorse option B (the primary rule of heading 38.08 should
"CTH")
- Chapters 28-40 – Issue No. 20:  to endorse option B (the primary rule of heading 38.09 should
read "CTH")
- Chapters 28-40 – Issue No. 21:  to endorse option B (the primary rule of heading 38.11 should
read "CTH")
- Chapters 28-40 – Issue No. 29:  to endorse option A (each primary rule of heading 39.20 and
heading 39.21 should read "CTH or change within the heading following the vacuum
deposition of metal on the surface of plastics")
- Chapters 28-40 – Issue No. 34:  to endorse option B (the primary rule of heading 40.05 should
read "CTH")
- Chapters 28-40 – Issue No. 38:  to endorse option B (the primary rule of subheading 4012.90
should read "CTH")
                                                     
1 Contained in document G/RO/W/67.G/RO/M/36
Page 10
- Chapters 68-70 – Issue No. 5:  to endorse as  follows:  the primary rule of subheading 7019.51
should read "CTSH, except from subheadings 7019.52 or 7019.59;  the primary rule of
subheading 7019.52 should read "CTSH, except from subheadings 7019.51 or 7019.59;  and
the primary rule of subheading 7019.59 should read "CTSH, except from subheadings
7019.51 or 7019.52"
- Chapters 68-70 – Issue No. 6:  to endorse option A (the primary rule of subheading 7019.90
should read "CTSH")
- Chapters 74-81 – Issue No. 2:  to endorse option A (the primary rule of split subheading
ex 78.04(b) should read "CTHS")
- Chapters 74-81 – Issue No. 3:  to endorse option A (each primary rule of split headings
ex 81.01(ij), ex 81.02(ij), ex 81.03(ij), ex 81.04(ij), ex 81.05(ij), ex 81.06(ij), ex 81.07(ij),
ex 81.08(ij), ex 81.09(ij), ex 81.10(ij), ex 81.11(ij), ex 81.13(d) should read "CTHS";  each
primary rule of split subheadings ex 8112.19(e), ex 8112.20(ij), ex 8112.30(ij), ex 8112.40(ij),
ex 8112.99 (e) should read "CTSHS")
- Chapters 74-81 – Issue No. 5:  to endorse option A (the primary rule of split heading
ex 80.05(b) should read "CTHS")
- Chapters 74-81 – Issue Nos. 6 and 7:  to endorse option A (each primary rule of headings
74.07 and 76.04 and split subheadings ex 79.04(a) and ex 80.03(a) should read "CTH";  each
primary rule of subheading 7505.11 and 7505.12 should read "CTSH")
- Chapters 74-81 – Issue No. 12:  to endorse option A (the primary rule of split heading
ex 80.05(a) should read "CTHS")
- Chapters 74-81 – Issue No. 22:  to endorse option A (the primary rule of split heading
ex 78.04(d) should read "CTHS")
- Chapters 74-81 – Issue No. 23:  to endorse option A (the primary rule of split heading
ex 78.04(c) should read "CTHS, except from split heading ex 7804(b))
- Chapters 82-83 – Issue No. 7:  to endorse option B (the primary rule of heading 82.13 should
read "CTH")
- Chapters 82-83 – Issue No. 8:  to endorse option B (the primary rule of subheading 8215.91
should read "CTH")
- Chapters 82-83 – Issue No. 14:  to endorse option C (the primary rule of subheading 8306.21
should read "CTH")
- Chapters 84-90 – Issue No. 9:  to be deleted- Chapters 84-90 – Issue No. 10:  to endorse option B (Note for chapters 84-90 should read "a
change of classification which results from the recertification or retesting of the good shall not
be considered as the change required by the rule set out in the matrix")
- Chapter 91 – Issue No. 6:  to endorse option B (the primary rule of subheading 9113.90
should read "CTH")G/RO/M/36
Page 11
2.2 The representative of Thailand suggested that Issue No. 5 of Chapters 44-49 be split into two:
"kaolin-coating" and "other".  Thailand coul d join the consensus on "other" but not on
"kaolin-coating".
2.3 The CRO took note of the statement.
III. IMPLICATIONS OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE HARMONIZED RULES
OF ORIGIN ON OTHER WTO AGREEMENTS
3.1 The Chairman recalled that, with respect to  this agenda item, there had been nine submissions
on the table:  from India (G/RO/W/28/Rev.1, G/RO /W/30, 42 and 50);  from the United States
(G/RO/W/32 and 48);  from the Dominican Republic  and Honduras (G/RO/W/33);  from El Salvador
(G/RO/W/34);  and from Korea (G/RO/W/38).  The Secretariat had also circulated a new submission
from the United States as document G/RO/W/65.
3.2 The representative of the United States stated that the new US paper was intended to build on
previous submissions by Members related to this subject.  A significant impediment to achieving
more meaningful progress towards completion of the Work Programme on harmonizing rules of
origin was the absence of a common understanding among Members as to the implications of the
prospective obligation to "apply rules of origin equally for all purposes as set out in Article 1 of the
Agreement on Rules of Origin".  The last paragrap h of the US submission contained some suggestions
to make further progress on the issue.
3.3 The representatives of Brazil, Canada , Colombia , the European Communities , Hong Kong,
China, India , New Zealand  and the Philippines  thanked the United States for their submission and
stated that they needed more time to study it.
3.4 The Chairman stated that he would undertake further informal consultations with Members on
this matter before the next meeting of the CRO.
3.5 The CRO took note of the statements and agreed  to revert to this issue at the next meeting.
IV. NOTIFICATIONS UNDER ARTICLE 5 AND PARAGRAPH 4 OF ANNEX II OF THE
AGREEMENT ON RULES OF ORIGIN (G/RO/32 AND 33)
4.1 The Chairman recalled that since the last meeting the Secretariat had circulated two
documents informing delegations of notifications submitted by Burundi, Oman and Papua New
Guinea.  To date, 76 Members had made notifications of non-preferential rules of origin and 77
Members had made notifications of preferential rules of origin.
4.2 The Chairman expressed concern that a number of Members had not yet complied with the
notification requirements.  He urged Members who had not yet notified to do so as early as possible..
4.3 The CRO took note of the statement.
V. UNITED STATES INFORMATION ON ASPECTS OF GERMANY'S POLICY
PERTAINING TO CERTIFICATES OF ORIGIN
5.1 The representative of the United States stated that in the non-preferential realm the use of
certificates of origin could be problematic, both for practical reasons as well as with regard toG/RO/M/36
Page 12
consistency with obligations under the Agreement on Rules of Origin.  The US authorities had been
getting increasing reports of difficulties being presented by requirements by German customs
authorities for certificates of origin as a condition of entry for certain goods.  Release of those goods
was not available unless certain requirements and other formalities with regard to the certificate of
origin issued by a Chamber of Commerce were followed.  These formalities could range from writtenphrases and stamps and so forth.  The US Government had no mechanism for certifying origin
determinations made by its local Chambers of Commerce, and therefore did not give any legal
recognition to those certificates, nor did they sanction their issuance.  The US had some questions as
to the intent of this requirement, and with rega rd to its consistency with the obligations of the
Agreement.  This also reflected the situation in volving inconsistent treatment among Member states
within the EC.  The US was disappointed and indeed surprised by this situation presented by German
customs authorities, given that in their view such a requirement might not be an efficient regime andconsistent with the needs of the 21
st century economy.  Indeed, it was their understanding that this
view tended to be shared by the EC as a whole.   The US had had some informal and constructive
consultations on this question with the EC.  These were constructive and they looked forward to
resolution of this situation.
5.2 The Chairman thanked the U.S. and stated that for purposes of transparency, the CRO would
benefit from the report to the CRO on the outcome of those consultations.
5.3 The CRO took note of the statements made.
VI. ELECTION OF VICE-CHAIRPERSON
6.1 The CRO elected Mr. S. Moser (Switzerland) as Vice-Chairperson for 2001.
VII. OTHER BUSINESS
- Agenda and date of the next meeting
7.1 The Chairman suggested that the next meeting of the CRO take place on Monday,
23 July 2001, preceded by informal meetings starting from 9 July 2001 on the basis of the following
agenda:
Informal Meetings
9 - 11  July Chapters 84, 85 and 90 (machinery)
12-14 July Chapters 28-40 (chemicals), 68-70 (ceramics), 71 (precious stones), 72-73 (iron and
steel), 74-81 (non-ferrous metals), 82-83 (articles of metals), 91 (watches)
16-18 July Chapters 1-24 (agricultural products and fish)19-20 July Chapters 50-63 (Textiles) and related chapters
23 July -  Reporting of the informal meetings;
- Endorsement of the proposals on the harmonized rules of origin;
-  Implications of the implementation of the harmonized rules of origin on other WTO
Agreements;
-  Notifications;-  Agenda for the next meeting of the CRO;  andG/RO/M/36
Page 13
-  Other business
Formal Meeting
23 July (12 noon)
Note :   Members interested in Chapter 88 (aircraft) should expect to attend a Working Party meeting
on the Chapter, to be organized by Brazil on the margins of the informal meetings.
__________