Council Decision (EU) 2019/1955Show full title

Committee on Agriculture

G/AG/29

31 October 2019

REVIEW OF THE OPERATION OF THE BALI DECISION ON TRQ ADMINISTRATION

REPORT TO THE GENERAL COUNCIL

1.1. At the Ninth Session of the Ministerial Conference, Ministers adopted the Decision on ‘Understanding of Tariff Rate Quota Administration Provisions of Agricultural Products, as defined in Article 2 of the Agreement on Agriculture’ (WT/MIN(13)/39) (‘Bali TRQ Decision’). Ministers instructed the Committee to review and monitor the implementation of Members’ obligations established under the Bali TRQ Decision with the objective that the review will promote a continuing process of improvement in the utilization of tariff rate quotas, commencing no later than 2017, taking into account experience gained up to that time.(1) The Review discussions commenced at the October 2017 meeting of the Committee.(2) At the February 2018 meeting, the Committee agreed to the process and timelines to conduct the Review in document G/AG/W/171.(3) As per the agreed procedure, the review has been conducted through open-ended informal meetings of the Committee scheduled back-to-back with the regular meetings of the Committee.(4) U.K.

1.2. Members discussed the Review in four informal meetings of the Committee in 2018 on 20 February, 11 June, 25 September and 26 November. A thematic session on tariff quota administration and underfill was held during the November informal meeting involving the participation of industry representatives. The review discussions also benefitted from a number of written contributions by Members. Similarly, in response to requests from Members and as per the agreed process and timelines to conduct the review, the Secretariat prepared a background paper(5) on tariff quota administration and fill rates to facilitate the Review. Annex 1 includes a list of all written documents considered thus far in the review. U.K.

1.3. Members have identified the following themes in the review discussions: 1) Effective implementation and follow-up of the substantive obligations arising out of the Bali TRQ Decision; 2) TRQ transparency requirements; 3) Underfill Mechanism. Some elements(6) raised under each of the three themes, including during the thematic discussions in November, are indicated below. U.K.

EFFECTIVE IMPLEMENTATION AND FOLLOW-UP U.K.

i.

Reallocation of unused-licenses within a TRQ;

ii.

Reallocation processes, including regarding country-specific allocations(7);

iii.

Sharing of experiences and best practices on improving TRQ fill, including reallocation of TRQs under RTAs.

TRQ TRANSPARENCY REQUIREMENTS U.K.

i.

Timely and complete TRQ notifications;

ii.

Prompt reporting of changes in TRQ administration;

iii.

Consistent reporting of fill-rates by all Members with TRQ commitments;

iv.

Harmonized notifications practices (e.g. for TRQs not opened or scheduled TRQs with no tariff advantage);

v.

Reporting of reasons of underfill;

vi.

Sharing of national experiences and best practices of TRQ administration;

vii.

Special and differential treatment (Burdensomeness of notification requirements);

viii.

Linkage with notification requirements in the area of import licensing procedures;

ix.

Technical assistance by the Secretariat towards improved notification compliance of Members.

UNDERFILL MECHANISM U.K.

i.

Differing obligations of Members (paragraph 4 of Annex A);

ii.

Special and differential treatment;

iii.

Potential less-than-universal applicability in future;

iv.

Linkage between Annex B and paragraph 4 of Annex A;

v.

Exploration of the causes of underfill;

vi.

Targeted examination of TRQ underfill in some specific sectors;

vii.

Practical applicability of the Underfill Mechanism (exploration of reasons including potential complexity, as to why it has not yet been invoked, sharing of experiences, simplification of procedural requirements);

viii.

Maintenance of list of underfilled TRQs by the Secretariat.

1.4. On the issue of future operation of paragraph 4 of the Underfill Mechanism and the associated S&D provision, Members’ positions were divergent. Some developing Members maintained that S&D provisions in the Bali TRQ Decision should not be diluted; some other Members argued that the S&D treatment for developing countries should not lead to a carve out and that the beneficiary developing countries should rather assume commitments with regard to the management of TRQs taking into account their development status. U.K.

1.5. Several Members considered the scope of this review to be limited to seeking improvement in TRQ administration to distinguish it from the market access negotiations. Some others referred to the possibility of taking up the TRQ-related issues in the market access negotiations. U.K.

Pursuant to paragraphs 13-15 of the Bali TRQ Decision (WT/MIN(13)/39), the Committee at its meeting on 31 October 2019 agrees to the following recommendations as included in Annex 2 to this report for consideration by the General Council.

(1)

Paragraph 13 of WT/MIN(13)/39. No experience with regard to recourse to the Underfill Mechanism has yet been reported.

(2)

Section 2.2.1 of G/AG/R/86 refers.

(3)

Section 2.5.1 of G/AG/R/87 refers.

(4)

At the June 2019 meeting, the Committee agreed to extend the timeline to the October 2019 meeting of the Committee to finalize the report of the Review.

(5)

G/AG/W/183.

(6)

There is no agreement among Members on these elements or their treatment in the recommendations.

(7)

Paragraph 9 of the Bali Ministerial Decision on TRQ refers to the reallocation process. Additionally, footnotes 3 and 5 of Annex A of the Bali Decision refer to the rights of Members holding a country-specific allocation specifically in the context of the underfill mechanism.