RESTRICTED
WORLD TRADE G/AG/R/2
24July1995
ORGANIZATION(95-2114)
Committee onAgriculture
SUMMARY REPORT OFTHE MEETING HELD ON8JUNE 1995
Note bytheSecretariat
1. TheCommittee onAgriculture helditssecond meeting on8June1995under thechairmanship
ofAmbassador Danai Tulalamba ofThailand. Theagenda ofthemeeting, contained inWTO/AIR/93,
wasadopted.
Notification Requirements andFormats
2. TheCommittee adopted, pursuant toArticle 18:2 oftheAgreement onAgriculture, the
notification requirements andformats assetoutintheinformal Secretariat document dated 2June1995
(issued asdocument G/AG/2).
3. Several Members expressed theviewthatthesubmission ofdataontotalexports during the
firsttwoyears ofimplementation within 180instead of120daysshould beexceptional andthatthe
delay inthesubmission ofsuchdatashould bejustified. Regarding thesubmission ofdataontotal
exports byMembers which didnothavespecific export subsidy reduction commitments, itwasnoted
byoneMember thatthere were several points relating totheproduct coverage ofnotifications that
might needtobeclarified attheappropriate stage. Itwasalsosuggested thatanother point requiring
clarification wasthereporting oftriangular foodaidtransactions inthecontext ofTable ES:3.
4. TheChairman noted thatitwould beopen totheCommittee toreview thenotification
requirements andtheiroperation asandwhen appropriate. Asregards thelistofMembers thatare
"significant exporters" forthepurposes ofthenotification requirements inrespect oftotalexports
(paragraph (iii)atpage24ofdocument G/AG/2 refers), theChairman indicated thatthelistconcerned
would bedrawn up,following informal consultations, priortooratthenextmeeting oftheCommittee.
Implementation Dates
5. TheCommittee tooknoteoftheresults offurther work oftheSecretariat onimplementation
dates foreachtypeofcommitment (G/AG/W/2/Rev.1, refers). Itwasagreed thatareminder should
besenttothose Members andsignatories which hadyettospecify implementation dates fortheir
commitments, withaviewtocompleting theinformation indocument G/AG/W/2/Rev.1, onthebasis
thatfailure torespond tothefurther reminder would betaken toimply thattheapplicable datefor
theimplementation ofmarket access commitments would be1January.
Notifications totheCommittee
6. Asagreed attheprevious meeting oftheCommittee (G/AG/R/1, paragraph 15refers), the
Committee reverted tothefollowing notifications:
(i) ontheadministration oftariff andother quota commitments (Table MA:1)
fromCanada (G/AG/N/CAN/1) andtheUnited States (G/AG/N/USA/2 andAdd.1);G/AG/R/2
Page2
(ii) ontrigger prices inthecontext ofthespecial safeguard (Table MA:4)
from theUnited States (G/AG/N/USA/1).
7. TheChairmannotedthatthefollowingnotificationshadbeenreceivedsincethepreviousmeeting:
ontheadministration oftariff andother quota commitments (Table MA:1)
from Japan (G/AG/N/JPN/1), Hungary (G/AG/N/HUN/1) and Thailand
(G/AG/N/THA/1 and2).
8. TheChairman noted thatthefollowing notifications hadbeenreceived since theconvening
airgram wasissued on24May1995 (WTO/AIR/93):
(i) ontheadministration oftariff andother quota commitments (Table MA:1)
fromMalaysia (G/AG/N/MYS/1), theRepublic ofKorea (G/AG/N/KOR/1), Slovenia
(G/AG/N/SVN/1), theCzech Republic (subsequently issued asG/AG/N/CZE/1) and
theSlovak Republic (subsequently issued asG/AG/N/SVK/1).
(ii) ontrigger prices inthecontext oftheprice-based special safeguard (Table MA:4)
from Japan (G/AG/N/JPN/2) andtheRepublic ofKorea (G/AG/N/KOR/2).
9. Specific points raised withrespect tothese notifications (paragraphs 6,7and8above) are
summarized intheAnnex tothisreport.
10. Therepresentative ofCanada noted thatcertain Members which hadimplemented market access
commitments hadyettosubmit theirMA:1 notifications. Healsoraised anumber ofgeneral points
withrespect tothecontents ofMA:1 notifications already received .Hesuggested thatthesenotifications
should bemore specific inthefollowing areas: thedateofthevalidity ofimport permits, e.g.,whether
thenotified datewasinregard tothedateonwhich goods areintransit, cross theborder orarecustoms-
cleared; theprocedure incaseofunutilized quota allocations; whether ornotnon-nationals wereentitled
tobeallocated partofatariff quota; therulesgoverning tariff quotas oncetheyhavebeenallocated
(e.g., tradeability, possibility ofconsolidation among various tariff quota holders); andmechanisms,
ifany,fortheprotection oftraditional trading relationships.
11. AnumberofMembersexpressedconcernsinrespectofcountry-specificallocationsunderm.f.n.
tariff quotas. Inthiscontext, therepresentative ofArgentina questioned thelegalvalidity ofbilateral
understandings andflagged hisconcerns withrespect totheirimpact ontherights ofother Members.
12. Therepresentative oftheUnited States noted that,inthecaseofseveral Members, thetariff
quota concession wasestablished attheHSfour-digit level, whereas theallocation ofthetariff quota
under theadministration procedures wasmade attheHSsix-digit ormore detailed level. Heregistered
hisconcern thatcountries might allocate tariff quotas inawaywhich would impede trade orimpair
thevalue ofconcessions. Hesuggested thatwhenever theoriginal concession wasatthefour-digit
level, thetariff quota allocation should notbemade atamore detailed levelandexpressed theview
thatitshould belefttothemarket todecide under which product linesimports under theconcession
takeplace.
13. Anumber ofMembers expressed theviewthattheissue ofauctioning import licenses under
tariffquota commitments wasanimportant matter thatwarranted further discussion intheCommittee.
Certain delegations indicated thatanauctioning system might notbecompatible withGATT 1994,
including Articles II,IIIandVIII. Some Members voiced concern overthetransfer ofquota rents
togovernments astheresult ofquota auctions. Therepresentative ofKorea pointed outthattheauction
system wasoneofthemosteffective methods ofgiving practical effect tothem.f.n. principle asprovidedG/AG/R/2
Page3
forinArticle IoftheGATT 1994 andthatitalsoensured transparency andfairness intheoperation
oftariff quotas.
14. TheChairman reminded theCommittee thatMembers proposing toraisematters withrespect
tospecific notifications should dosoinwriting inaccordance withtheWorking Procedures (G/AG/1)
inorder toensure thatthereview process operated inanorderly andefficient manner. Itwasagreed
thatwhere points raised during meetings were tobepursued bilaterally, theCommittee should be
informed oftheoutcome where theissue involved wasoneofgeneral interest. Itwasnoted thatat
theappropriate stage theChairman would organize informal consultations onissues ofgeneral interest
relating totheadministration oftariff andother quota commitments.
Matters Relevant totheImplementation ofCommitments under theReform Programme
15. Anumber ofMembers raised questions regarding theimplementation oftheEuropean
Communities 'market access concessions forcereals (including rice). They indicated thattheywere
following withconcern thedevelopment oftheECregulation governing theimplementation ofthese
concessions. Theviewwasexpressed that,contrary toandpossibly inviolation oftheECconcessions,
theregulation could inadvertently result inaduty-paid import price, forcertain high-quality grains,
inexcess of155percentoftherelevant ECintervention price (orthecorresponding levelforrice).
Therepresentative ofAustralia added thattheECRegulation, while itrecognized freight differentials,
wasdiscriminating against Australia bystipulating theSuez Canal astheshipping route. The
representative oftheEuropean Communities tooknoteoftheconcerns expressed andstated thatthe
Community wasintheprocess ofcompleting theregulations governing theimplementation ofthe
concession inquestion which, onceputintopractice, would becompatible withtheCommunity 's
commitment.
16. Anumber ofMembers raised concerns regarding theimplementation bytheEuropean
Communities andtheUnited States oftheir Uruguay Round commitments onsubsidized exports
authorized prior to1July1995 buttobeshipped afterthatdatewithout being counted against their
Uruguay Round commitments. Therepresentative ofNewZealand indicated thatthecurrent approval
practice intheperiod priorto1July1995might create potential forinflating thevolumes ofsubsidized
product thatcould beexported inthefirstyearofimplementation. Heasked theCommunity andthe
UStoprovide dataregarding volumes ofproduct approved, orlikely tobeapproved before 1July
1995, forsubsidized export after1July1995and,forthepurposes ofcomparison, volumes normally
approved during thelastmonths ofthemarketing yearforshipment inthefollowing marketing year.
Therepresentative ofNewZealand alsorequested information onthecriteria governing normal export
subsidy authorizations.
17. TherepresentativeoftheUnitedStatesindicatedthattheissueraisedhadbeenoneofconsiderable
concern totheUnited States butthattheseconcerns hadbeendispelled following bilateral consultations
withtheCommunity. Heexplained thattheUnited States export subsidy reduction commitments would
beimplemented onthebasis ofawards (i.e.export licences) through government tenders rather than
onthebasisofactual exports. Certain awards made intherun-up to1July1995 would havevalidity
periods extending intotheimplementation period fortheUnited States export volume subsidy
commitments beginning on1July1995. Exports made under awards issued priorto1July1995would
notbecounted against theUScommitments. Although every award made after1July1995 would
becounted against theUScommitments, there would besome export subsidy awards issued atthe
endofthefirstyearofimplementation where export would occur only inthesecond yearof
implementation, andtheselagsbetween awards andexport shipments would berepeated inthefollowing
years ofimplementation.G/AG/R/2
Page4
18. TherepresentativeoftheEuropeanCommunitiesstatedthattheCommunitywouldbemonitoring
itsexport subsidy reduction commitments onthebasisofexport licences issued. TheCommunity was
currently intheprocess offinalizing thepackage ofmeasures toensure proper monitoring ofits
commitments. Thedetailed rules would bepublished shortly. Therepresentative oftheEuropean
Communities assured Members thattheCommunity would notauthorize product forsubsidized export
atabnormal levels prior totheentry intoforce ofitsUruguay Round export subsidy reduction
commitmentsinanattempttocircumventcommitments.TherepresentativeoftheEuropeanCommunities
proposed thatthisissue bediscussed withinterested Members onabilateral basis. TheCommittee
tooknotethatwithrespect tothedatarequested byNewZealand aswellasbyother Members, the
representatives oftheEuropean Communities andtheUnited States would pursue thematter andprovide
aresponse.
19. Therepresentative ofNewZealand flagged hisdelegation 'sinterest inhaving theCommittee
considerwhetherthelevelofdomesticsupportgrantedtospecificcommoditiesduringthe1992marketing
yearshould benotified totheCommittee (Article 13(b) oftheAgreement onAgriculture refers). He
indicated thathisgovernment considered theissueimportant fortheimplementation ofdomestic support
commitments andtheviability oftheduerestraint clause.
Other Matters
20. TheCommittee hadapreliminary exchange ofviews withregard totheDecision onMeasures
Concerning thePossible Negative Effects oftheReform Programme onLeast Developed andNetFood-
Importing Developing Countries. Inastatement which hasbeencirculated asdocument G/AG/W/5
therepresentative ofEgypt setoutanumber ofsuggestions onhowtomake theMinisterial Decision
operational withrespect to:thedefinition ofnetfood-importing developing countries; themonitoring
ofimplementation oftheprovisions relating tointernational financial institutions; thetypeandamount
oftechnical assistance provided byrelevant international organizations; differential treatment inthe
context ofanagreement onagricultural export credits; andthereview ofthelevel offood aid
commitments under theFood AidConvention.
21. Anumber ofMembers supported theviews expressed bytherepresentative ofEgypt and
expressed theircommitment towork actively towards implementing theDecision. Inthisgeneral
connection oneMember stressed thatitwould alsobeimportant totakeaccount oftheactual effects
oftheUruguay Round reform programme. Astatement byBangladesh hasalsobeencirculated as
G/AG/W/6. TheChairman confirmed thattheCommittee would revert totheMinisterial Decision
attheSeptember meeting prior tothereview foreseen fortheNovember meeting oftheCommittee.
22. Onthequestion ofobserver status intheCommittee forinternational intergovernmental
Organizations, theCommittee decided thattheFAO, theOECD, theUNWorld Food Programme and
theInternational Wheat Council (asof1July1995, theInternational Grains Council) would beinvited
toberepresented asobservers atregular meetings oftheCommittee onanadhocbasis, pending adoption
offormal guidelines fortheparticipation ofinternational intergovernmental organizations bytheWTO
General Council. Observer organizations mayspeak under PartIoftheCommittee 'sagenda where
specifically requested sotodobytheChairman andmaythemselves request thefloor under PartII
oftheCommittee 'sagenda. Itwould beopentotheCommittee tomeet, informal orinformal session,
without thepresence ofobservers. Itwasalsoagreed that,priortotheorganizations concerned being
invited toattend meetings oftheCommittee, satisfactory arrangements would firstneedtobemade
forreciprocalWTOobserverstatus,particularlywithregardtodiscussionsonmattersofdirectrelevance
totheCommittee. Therepresentative ofMexico observed thatanyapplication fromother international
intergovernmental commodity organizations should begiven thesameconsideration astheInternational
Wheat Council. TheCommittee agreed thatanyorganization requesting observers status would haveG/AG/R/2
Page5
tobecapable ofmaking auseful contribution tothework oftheCommittee under theAgreement on
Agriculture, aswellasmeeting other criteria considered relevant bytheCommittee.
23. Under "Other Business" therepresentative ofAustralia flagged amatter related tonewor
modified domestic support measures subject toreduction commitments. Under thecurrent notification
requirementsandformats,domesticsupportmeasuressubjecttoreductioncommitmentsaretobenotified
onlyannually under Table DS:1 ofG/AG/2; there wasnorequirement fortheprompt notification
ofnewormodified non-exempt domestic support measures. Bycontrast, details ofnewormodified
"green box" and"blue box" measures aretobenotified promptly (G/AG/2, Table DS:2). The
representative ofAustralia considered thatthisgapinthenotification requirements warranted
consideration bytheCommittee. Inaddition, therepresentative ofAustralia flagged itsinterest in
notification requirements being established withrespect toarrangements forout-of-quota imports.
DateofnextMeeting
24. Thenextmeeting oftheCommittee willbeheldon28-29 September 1995.G/AG/R/2
Page6
ANNEX
Review ofNotifications bytheCommittee onAgriculture atitsMeeting on8June 1995
Summary ofSpecific Points Raised andResponses Thereto
United States G/AG/N/USA/2 andAdd.1 Tariff Quotas (Table MA:1)
Points raised byother Members Response byNotifying Member
Canada -Enquiry about atariff lineomitted from
boththeoriginal andadditional tariff quota
notifications.Tariff linenolonger exists. Theproduct in
question iscovered bytariff quotas already
notified.
Canada -Asregards thecountry allocations for
rawcane andbeetsugar orsyrups, thenotification
refers toanewregulation which isunder
preparation. Ifithasnotalready done so,when
willthisregulation enter intoforce?Theregulation isstillunder preparation. Once the
regulation isready forimplementation, Canada
andother interested Members would beinformed.
Mexico -Does "Other **"intariff quota country
allocations, eg.cheese, mean Mexico isnot
included; ordoes "Other **"mean m.f.n.
including Mexico? Inthelight ofthereply tothis
question therepresentative ofMexico indicated
thatthematter would bepursued bilaterally.Thedouble asterisks in"Other **"means Mexico
isnotincluded inthequantity. tariff quotas under
theNAFTA commitments arelisted inanother
partoftheUStariff schedule, notunder theUS
GATT commitments.
United States G/AG/N/USA/1 Trigger Prices (Table MA:4)
Points raised byother Members Response byNotifying Member
Canada -Why isthere adifference between
notified trigger prices andthose applied bytheUS
Customs?Inevery case, applied trigger prices arelower
thannotified trigger prices duetothefactthatthe
additional dutyistriggered onlyonce thegap
between thecifimport price andtrigger price
exceeds a10percentthreshold (Article 5:5ofthe
Agreement, refers). Trigger prices asapplied by
UScustoms equal notified trigger prices minus
threshold level.
Canada -Follow-up onpreceding response: Why
isthedifference between notified trigger prices
andapplied trigger prices variable between
products rather thanbeing constant?Answer tobeprovided.
Canada -Isthelevying ofanyadditional duty
automatic ordiscretionary?Additional duties under theprice-based SSGwill
belevied automatically onalltariff lines notified,
notonacase-by-case basis.
New Zealand -What mechanism does theUS
have inplace toensure thatprice-based SSGisnot
triggered ontariff quota quantities?Instructions toCustoms officials provide thatthe
mechanism isnottobeused before thetariff
quota isfilled.
Argentina -Follow-up onprevious answer: How
does price-based SSGoperate inthecaseof
simultaneous 1,000 tonne shipments when the
tariff quota is1,000 tonnes short ofbeing filled?Tobereverted to.G/AG/R/2
Page7
Canada G/AG/N/CAN/1 Tariff Quotas (Table MA:1)
Points raised byother Members Response byNotifying Member
United States -Regarding thetariff quota forfluid
milk, howdoes Canada verify that"theglobal
access quantity willbeentirely accounted for
under theGeneral Import Permit"
(G/AG/N/CAN/1, p.6,refers) ?Canada willcontinue tomonitor, onthebasis of
regular surveys, theimportation offluid milk for
personal use. Thetariff quota wasestablished on
thesame basis.
European Communities/Argentina -Clarification
sought withrespect toNew Zealand country
reserve of27,600 tonnes forbeefandveal. Was
thiscountry reserve reflected intheCanadian
Schedule (G/AG/N/CAN/1, p.5,refers) ?Theglobal access quantity forbeefandvealinthe
Canadian Schedule represents anm.f.n. tariff
quota. Within theglobal quantity, onthebasis of
understandings notreflected intheSchedule,
certain quantities have been reserved forAustralia
andNew Zealand. These country shares for
traditional suppliers were established onthebasis
ofbaseperiod imports.
Japan G/AG/N/JPN/1 Tariff Quotas (Table MA:1)
Points raised byother Members Response byNotifying Member
Canada/European Communities -Clarification
sought regarding twotariff quotas formilk
powder andcondensed milk which appear tobe
missingConfirms thatthetwoitems mentioned, towhich
tariff quota systems arenotapplied, arenot
included inthenotification. Import quantities for
theproducts inquestion areunlimited, provided
thattheproducts areforconsumption by
international maritime vessels orinternational
airlines.
Canada -Certain tariff quotas have been allocated
forhalfofthefiscal year. Aretheimport permits
valid onlyforthathalfofthefiscal year? Canthe
importer obtain apermit foreach halfofthefiscal
yearordoes ithave towaituntil thesecond half
ofthefiscal year? How does thequota allocation
system work?Tariff quotas areallocated twice annually inorder
tocope withfluctuations indemand. Tariff quota
quantities forthesecond halfoftheyearwillbe
announced induecourse. Theimport permits are
valid onlyforthathalfofthefinancial year.
Argentina -What does "business plans of
applicants" mean inthecontext ofquota allocation
toimporters?Thequalification isdesigned toallow fornew
applicants ormarket entrants. Since newentrants
have nohistorical record, their business plans
would beconsidered forquota allocation
purposes.
Thailand -Whether theinformation published in
the"MITI Official Bulletin" andthe"Jetro Daily
Tsusho Koho" referred tointhenotification is
available inEnglish?No,onlyinJapanese.G/AG/R/2
Page8
Hungary G/AG/N/HUN/1 Tariff Quotas (Table MA:1)
Points raised byother Members Response byNotifying Member
United States/Canada -Thenotification includes
country allocations which were notincorporated in
Hungary 'sMarrakesh Schedule, although
reference tothematter ismade inafootnote in
theSchedule, (G/AG/N/HUN/1, e.g.p.2refers).
How canHungary justify country-specific
allocations ofm.f.n. quotas? IsHungary claiming
thatthese allocations areinconformity with
Article XIIIofGATT 1994? Clarification sought
regarding those cases where thenotification
indicates thatthere willbecountry allocations but
noquantities arelisted, eg.HS0206.Countries referred tointhenotification are
countries withwhich Hungary hasentered into
freetrade agreements. Thequantities concerned
arestipulated inthese agreements.
Hungary would provide answers toallpoints
raised onthebasis ofwritten questions.
United States -Clarification sought regarding
notified tariff quotas forproducts including
soybean oil,icecream, soups, frozen vegetables,
which were notincluded inHungary 'sMarrakesh
Schedule. Why were these products included in
theHungarian notification ontheadministration of
tariff quotas?Matter tobereverted to.
United States -Clarification sought astowhether
almonds areincluded inthetariff quota under
heading HS0802?Foralmonds, aswellassome other products,
Hungary eliminated allnon-tariff measures butdid
notincrease tariffs tothebound level.
United States -Confirmation requested thatthere
willbenorequirement thatimports under tariff
quota areexclusively forfurther processing.Thisisnotbelieved tobethecasebutthiswillbe
confirmed.
Canada -Why areimport allocations limited toa
maximum of10percentofthequotas, andhowis
thisprovision tobeimplemented? Does thismean
thatthere would have tobe10importers tofillthe
tariff quota?Amaximum share of10percentofquota
allocations willapply onlyinthefirstround of
allocations inorder toforestall any
monopolization ofquota entitlements. Thereafter
afirst-come-first-served system would apply.
Canada -Clarification sought onanumber of
tariff quotas which might have been omitted from
thenotification, inparticular atariff quota for
frozen berries (HS0811).InHungary 'sSchedule there isnosuch tariff
quota concession. Requests clarification from
Canada.
Canada -Information requested onthedateofthe
validity ofimport permits, egwhether thenotified
daterelates tothedateonwhich thegoods arein
transit, cross theborder orarecustoms-cleared;
theprocedure incaseofunutilized quota
allocations; whether ornotnon-nationals canbe
allocated partofthetariff quota; therules
governing tariff quotas once theyareallocated (eg
tradeability, possibility ofconsolidation among
various tariff quota holders), andmechanisms, if
any,fortheprotection oftraditional trading
relationships.Unused quota allocations arecarried overtothe
following semester, asquotas areallocated twice
annually. Legal persons incorporated inHungary
andnatural persons based inHungary are
considered asnationals forquota allocation
purposes. Tariff quota entitlements arenot
tradeable.G/AG/R/2
Page9
Hungary G/AG/N/HUN/1 Tariff Quotas (Table MA:1)
Points raised byother Members Response byNotifying Member
Mexico -Same points asthose raised bythe
United States andCanada withrespect tocountry
allocations, inparticular forprocessed fruit,
vegetables andbeer. Clarification alsosought asto
whether Hungary willprovide additional quota
allocations onanm.f.n. basis.Tobereverted to.
Argentina -How arepriorities assigned within the
tariff quotas including thecountry- allocated
quotas? How dotheHungarian authorities
distribute theimport licences?Tobereverted to.
New Zealand -Arethecountry allocations
reviewed annually oraretheallocations
determined once andforall?Tobereverted to.
Thailand G/AG/N/THA/1 and2Tariff Quotas (Table MA:1)
Points raised byother Members Response byNotifying Member
Australia/United States/European Community -No
notification hasbeen made forSMP, milk and
cream. Canitbeassumed thatthetariff quota
administration notification inrespect ofthese
products willbemade soon?Notification willbeforthcoming.
United States -Noted thatThailand 'stariff quota
concession forricewasestablished attheHSfour-
digit level, whereas theallocation ofthetariff
quota hasbeen made atthesix-digit level.Tariff quota allocation atthesix-digit level is
based onactual trade asreflected intheThai
import statistics.
Argentina -Why isthetariff quota administration
forrice(first-come-first-served) different from
thatforsoybeans?Asregards rice, allocations aremade onafirst-
come-first-served basis, whereas forsoybeans
allocations aremade totheprocessing industry on
thebasis ofpastperformance.G/AG/R/2
Page10
Malaysia G/AG/N/MYS/1 Tariff Quotas (Table MA:1)
Points raised byother Members Response byNotifying Member
United States/Argentina -Noted thatforanimal
products thevalidity period ofimport permits is
onemonth onlyandraised concerns about the
unusually short validity period involved.Preliminary response: theitems inquestion are
perishable products, anditwasconsidered thatthe
validity period wassufficient forgenuine traders.
United States -Onwhat basis areimport licenses
allocated, first-come-first-served, lottery, auction
etc.?Afirst-come-first-served basis system applies to
allproducts.
Switzerland -How willMalaysia ensure thatthe
tariff quotas willbefilled, given thatthevalidity
ofimport licences islimited toonemonth inmost
cases?Thecommitment istoprovide market access
opportunities. There isnoobligation tofilltariff
quotas.
Argentina -Noted thatmaritime transport from
Argentinean ports toAsian countries would takeat
least 45days, which would leadtopractical
problems given theshort validity period ofimport
licences.Indicated thatMalaysian authorities mayexercise
flexibility ontheissue.
Korea G/AG/N/KOR/1 Tariff Quotas (Table MA:1)
Points raised byother Members Response byNotifying Member
United States/European Community -Point raised
thatinmost, ifnotallcases, producer and/or
processor groups were involved inthe
administration oftariff quotas, withconsequent
potential forimpairment oftheconcessions.Thefactthataproducer group hasbeen
designated asatariff quota management authority
isnotinviolation ofGATT provisions. Note
taken oftheconcerns ofdelegations. Korea to
ensure transparency andfairness inorder toavoid
potential problems andseetoitthatprovisions of
WTO Agreement arenotviolated.
United States -Point raised thatKorea 'stariff
quota concession forcorn, which wasestablished
attheHSsix-digit level, should beadministered
soastoprovide import opportunities forspecific
users ofeach oftheproducts covered bythe
concession.Forcollectively bound items, such ascorn,
collective import opportunities aretobeprovided
asindicated intheSchedule. Aslongasfull
performance isensured, importing countries '
tariff quota allocation tosub-items should be
respected andrecognized. Historical performance
should beconsidered intariff quota allocation to
thesub-items.
Australia/European Community/New Zealand -
Concerns raised regarding Korea 'sauction system
forcertain tariff quotas.AsfarastheKorean system isconcerned the
quota auction system hasbeen introduced dueto
difficulties related tothelarge price gapbetween
domestic markets andinternational markets, for
internal distribution oftariff quota licences, andas
amethod totransfer quota rents from importers to
thegovernment without anyadditional burden on
theexporter. Market access opportunities willbe
fully provided under thissystem. There areno
restrictions regarding access tothetariff quota
auctions.G/AG/R/2
Page11
Japan G/AG/N/JPN/2 Trigger Prices (Table MA:4)
Points raised byother Members Response byNotifying Member
Canada/New Zealand/European Community -
Noted thattheSSGwasnotified andtriggered
only7weeks after theopening ofthetariff quota.
Confirmation sought astowhether theentire
quantity under thetariff quota concession
(157,000 mt)wasimported during the7week
implementation period.Thenotified price-based SSGwillbeinvoked in
thecaseofover-quota imports onlyandwillbe
triggered automatically. Thisdoes notmean that
thetariff quota hasbeen filled, butlicenses for
thefirstsixmonths have been issued. The
imports concerned were out-of-quota imports. In-
quota imports were unaffected.
Korea G/AG/N/KOR/1 Trigger Prices (Table MA:4)
Points raised byother Members Response byNotifying Member
United States -Noted thatthelistofproducts for
which trigger prices have been notified isashort
one. Canitbeassumed thatinthecaseofother
products, forwhich Korea hasreserved theright
toinvoke theSSG, thevolume-based SSGapplies.
Orcanoneexpect further trigger price
notifications?Forthetime being Korea isonlyconsidering the
useoftheprice-based SSGonthe12items as
notified.