Ref. Ares(2016)2812586 - 16/06/2016
Ref. Ares(2017)2872363 - 08/06/2017
EUROPEAN COMMISSION
MAAC 2016-021
Directorate-General for Trade
Directorate G - Trade Strategy and Analysis, Market Access
Market Access, Industry, Energy and Raw Materials
Brussels, 14 June 2016
All redactions marked with "*" are made under Art. 4.1(a)
All redactions marked with "* * " are made under Art. 4.2.
DRAFT MINUTES
MARKET ACCESS ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Conference Centre Albert Borschette, room 1 D
Thursday 26 May 2016, 9:30 – 13:00
1. APPROVAL OF THE DRAFT AGENDA (MAAC 2016 – 017)
The agenda was approved without any additions.
2.
ANNOUNCEMENTS FROM THE CHAIR
The
Chair informed the Committee about the following upcoming WTO Trade Policy
Reviews:
- Tunisia on 13 and 15 July 2016; deadline to send input to DG Trade 20 June;
- China on 20 and 22 July 2016; deadline to send input to DG Trade 24 June;
- Singapore on 26 and 28 July 2016; deadline to send input to DG Trade 17 July.
3. SUCCESS STORIES:
3.1. Brazil: modification of Brazilian CET exceptions
COM explained the background of this case: in 2008 Brazil's Foreign Trade Chamber
(CAMEX) added to its List of Exceptions to the Common External Tariff of Mercosur (CET)
– Peaches, prepared/preserved, sweetening water, incl. syrup (2008.70.10) and Peaches,
otherwise prepared or preserved (2008.70.90). The original tariff was 14% and was then
included in the List of Exceptions with the maximum rate of 55%. In 2011 CAMEX
increased temporarily the tariff for codes 2008.70.10 and 2008.70.90 from 14% to 35%. With
subsequent decisions it extended the validity of the rate 35% until today, but the products
remained in the List of Exceptions with the applicable rate of 55%. On July 4, 2014 CAMEX
removed code 2008.70.90 from the List of Exceptions and the applicable rate became 35%.
The main interesting code for EU exporters 2008.70.10 remained in the List of Exceptions
and was still subject to a 55% import duty. The main affected country is Greece.
The COM
informed that this case was now solved: the CAMEX Resolution 42/2016 of 5
May 2016 (published in the official gazette on 06 June 2016) removed 4 tariff lines (8 digits
level) from the CET exceptions and replaced them by 4 tariff lines. Among the removed
tariff lines was canned peaches (NCM 2008.70.10) for which tariffs were lowered (as of the
day of publication) from 55% to the CET level of currently 35%.
The COM and the Delegation have raised this issue in bilateral contacts and in Joint
Committees since 2011.
thanked the COM for its efforts and mentioned that it expects
*
further tariff lowering, if not liberalization for its exports, in the framework of the on-going
EU-Mercosur FTA negotiations.
Commission européenne, B-1049 Bruxelles / Europese Commissie, B-1049 Brussel - Belgium. Telephone: (32-2) 299 11 11.
3.2. Israel: registration for marketing of pharmaceutical products
The case related to Israel’s refusal to grant market authorization for pharmaceutical products
to EU MS that joined the EU as of 2004 on the grounds that they were not “recognized”
countries as the other MS. The matter was initially raised in May 2013. It was discussed in
the MAAC and since January 2015 listed as a key barrier.
The
COM explained that this barrier was solved. On 15 May the Head of the Pharmaceutical
Division of the Ministry of Health informed that the submission for registration of
pharmaceutical products which were registered in any EU MS would be allowed with
immediate effect. The EU DEL in Tel Aviv and the COM services in Brussels have been
very active and the issue was discussed on several occasions with the Israeli authorities.
COM noted that the EU DEL will continue putting pressure on the Ministry of Health’s
Medical Equipment Division, in order to stop a similar discrimination between so-called
“recognized” and “non-recognized” EU MS for the purpose of imports of medical equipment
in Israel, using the precedent of the pharmaceutical products.
,
and
supported the COM and thanked for its efforts.
*
*
*
3.3. China: further opening of Chinese Information Security Standardization Technical
Committee, known as TC260
COM explained the success stories of the opening of the Chinese Technical Committee TC
260 (Chinese Information Security Standardization Technical Committee) to European
companies. This standardisation committee, which develops information security-related
standards at national level, was previously completely closed to foreign industry. Some
progress was noted in July 2015, when the Committee was opened to foreign companies. But
only 4 US companies were able to join (
**
**,
and
). Following
**
**
combined lobbying of the EU DEL in Beijing, DG TRADE in cooperation with DG CNECT
(e.g. EU-China High Tech Working Group in Beijing on 1 March and the Economic and
Trade Working Group in Brussels last month) as well as the
**
, the Committee opened up again to foreign industry and several EU
companies applied. The
has successfully made it into this body
**
and further applications from other EU industry are ongoing and likely to succeed also.
4. PRESENTATION OF AN EU-FUNDED PROJECT ON MARKET ACCESS BARRIERS IN INDIA
COM briefly introduced the project and its objectives. The Team Leader of the project,
, gave a detailed presentation of the project to the Committee.
Art.4.1.(b)
,
,
,
,
,
and
gave their positive feedback and strong support to the
* *
*
*
*
*
*
project as the Indian market is of strategic importance for them. In general, they welcomed
the market access clusters chosen (Local Content Requirements, Compliance Assessment
and Certification Requirements, barriers in India to imports of plants and plant products from
the EU) and the fact that the project will focus not only on the Federal level but also on the
States level.
asked in particular whether issues like import restrictions of apples through
*
one port would also be tackled. COM replied that this would certainly be the case, even
though the issue is currently solved (India opened again the imports through all ports of
interest to European exporters).
All MS asked what would be the format for cooperation with the COM and with the team
leading the project (modalities and deadline to submit information and comments). COM
clarified that the flow of information to/from the members of the Market Access Advisory
Committee would be channelled through the secretariat of the Committee (
Art.4.1.(b)
), while direct contacts with the project team can take place with all other
stakeholders
).
Art.4.1.(b)
2
mentioned their counterpart importer association in Delhi and they draw
**
attention to the fact that there are 28 different states in India and some of them are more
problematic than others; recalled that alcohol is a state competence in India and for those
reasons, it would be wise to make a choice of problematic states. COM replied that of course
specific states will be proposed by the project team in the inception report, according to an
economic criteria and in consultation with MS and industry. COM also specified that
missions to the different states were already foreseen in the project's budget.
The COM asked the Committee
to provide the following information to the MAAC Secretariat (
), by the 10th June 2016: contact details of the trade
Art.4.1.(b)
counsellors of their Embassies in Delhi, the National Chambers of Commerce in India and in
the EU, the trade promotion organisations and local trade delegations in India and in the EU;
about the project and share contact information for relevant people as indicated below;
to disseminate information about the project to the above entities and to industry
engaged in India, located both in the EU and in India;
to share contact information of interested parties that could contribute to the mapping
and inception report.
5. FOLLOW-UP OF PREVIOUS MAAC MEETINGS
Turkey: imports of machinery
The
Chair underlined the complexity of the question, very much related to the operation and
monitoring of the EU-Turkey Custom Union agreement, taking into consideration that there
is no specific mechanism for settlement of disputes there. In any case, this would be the
object of the next activities in the framework of the Custom Union Committee and the TBT
Committee. The Chair recalled the ongoing online public consultation on the future of EU-
Turkey trade and economic relations.
COM explained the background of the activities carried out by DG GROW in the Machinery
sector. In this sense, a specific point was added to the agenda of the Machinery AdCo
meeting on 25-26 May, and the related working documents have been circulated to the
members beforehand, in particular the request from the Commission services, the letter sent
by
and other EU Industry associations to DG GROW which includes a list of
**
examples of problems faced in exporting to Turkey, and a summary presentation prepared by
. At the meeting itself, the representatives of
gave the presentation
**
**
with an "Overview of Engineering Industry's cases related to machinery exports to Turkey",
asking for comments and opinions.
,
,
,
,
and
thanked the COM for its efforts to address the problem and to
*
*
*
*
*
*
seek an urgent solution, and asked for more information on the next steps which could be
taken. In particular,
mentioned the problems related to the national market surveillance
*
database ("TAREKS") implemented in Turkey, and suggested to draft a specific letter from
the Commission services to the competent Turkish authorities, in case no relevant
information is provided within a reasonable time after the Machinery AdCo meeting.
remarked the interest of the EU Industrial associations to tackle the problems
**
with Turkey as soon and as effectively as possible, for the significant troubles they have to
face with their products and the different types of related costs.
The Chair underlined the continuous cooperation between the COM services from DG
TRADE and DG GROW on the question, to try to find a solution involving also political and
economic aspects, going well beyond those legal and technical related to the Custom Union
agreement and the applicable sectorial legislation.
3
6. MARKET ACCESS CASES
6.1. Dominican Republic: Law 173-66 on the Protection of Import Agents of Goods and
Products
The case was discussed in the MAAC meeting of October 2015; it relates to Law 173 of the
Dominican Republic, which makes mandatory the use of local distributors by foreign
providers of goods and services. Foreign supplier who had signed a distribution contract with
a Dominican agent may not terminate it but in exceptional circumstances..
COM explained that following the response of the Dominican Trade Minister to the EU
waiver request, two technical meetings between the EU Delegation and the DR Ministry of
Trade took place in November 2015 and March 2016. In these meetings and during these last
6 months, several issues and actions have been discussed and taken. The Delegation, in
cooperation with the MS based in the DR, have been analysing the real impact of the Law on
EU operators. The EU Delegation is now hopefully in the final phase of clarifying with the
DR Trade Ministry and the DR Central Bank (who administers Law 173) the exact scope of
the application of the Law to EU companies.
referred to the information received from its Embassy, according to which Law 173-66
*
would be revised and replaced by DR Foreign Investment Law 16-95. However, many
companies still rely on the Law 173. COM agreed to check this information.
reiterated its concerns.
*
6.2. Egypt: Rules Governing the Registration of Factories eligible to export their
products into Arab Republic of Egypt
The
COM briefed participants on the latest developments. At political level, there was no
real progress.
*
.
At technical level, both parties agreed to meet on 6th June in Brussels, in order to discuss
trade irritants on both sides. One of the main issues on the EU side will be the mandatory
registration of foreign companies. The COM invited participants to share, prior to the
meeting, latest available information on a number of companies effectively registered and
practical obstacles faced in the registration process.
As a joint initiative of the EU Delegation in Cairo and MS Trade Counsellors, a letter has
been sent to the Chairman of the General Organisation of Export and Import Control
highlighting practical obstacles linked to the registration procedure.
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
reiterated their concerns and
*
*
*
**
**
**
*
* *
**
thanked the COM for its efforts.
asked about a possibility to request discussion on this
*
Egyptian measure in the framework of the upcoming TBT Committee. The COM confirmed
that this item was already on the agenda.
6.3. Algeria: import quotas
The
COM provided an update on import quotas introduced by Algeria at the beginning of
2016. As of today, 3 industrial products are under non-automatic licenses: cement, steel bars
for reinforced concrete and cars. Announcements have been made as to the extension of this
regime to a wider list of products, notably foodstuffs and second-hand vehicles. Following a
note verbale sent in January 2016 and a meeting with the Trade Minister (17th January),
another
note verbale was sent on 3rd March in order to request the opening of technical
dialogue ("
table technique") between the EU and the Algerian authorities and the creation of
a point of single contact for EU businesses affected by the new regime. As there was no
reaction to the note, the COM reiterated this request during the meeting of the EU-Algeria
4
sub-committee on trade in May 2016. Algeria promised to inform in advance the EU and
operators when changes take place as regards the regime of quotas. At the same time, Algeria
ensured the COM that in the distribution of quotas they apply transparent procedures while
respecting historic market shares and traditional markets. Quotas are determined and granted
by an inter-ministerial committee (Ministries of Agriculture, Finances, Industry and Trade)
and importers have the possibility to submit an appeal in case they do not agree with the
received quantities. In order to verify that quota distribution respects existing market share
and historical trade the COM invited MS to inform the COM or the EU DEL in Algiers on
quotas received for the above products.
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
and
expressed their concerns with regard to
*
*
*
*
* * *
*
**
*
the Algerian measure heavily affecting MS' industries and thanked the COM for the support
and activities undertaken.
6.4. Canada: crafted alcoholic beverages
raised concerns with draft law No. 88 promoting the development of the artisanal
*
alcoholic beverage industry in Quebec, which would authorise the sale of wines produced by
local artisanal producers, in supermarkets and retail outlets, without being subject to the
mark-up by the alcohol monopoly. They considered it discriminatory against imports and
contrary to the bilateral agreement and WTO rules, as well as inappropriate as it was being
introduced following the conclusion of the CETA negotiations.
,
,
, and
supported
.
**
*
*
*
*
COM indicated it had raised this issue systematically, inter alia, during the bilateral meeting
under the Wines and Spirits Agreement in January 2016. In addition, Commissioner Hogan
had raised it with the Canadian Minister for Agriculture. CETA includes a joint declaration
whereby the EU and Canada will discuss such issues once CETA comes into force. Also, the
bilateral agreement will become part of CETA, which will give additional leverage to
address issues concerning the provincial monopolies. Although the provincial monopolies
are independent, at the federal level, Canada has indicated it is addressing the issues with the
provinces. COM is working together with other affected countries such as the
and
*
*
and in some cases, joint letters have been addressed to Canada. Provincial issues
have also been raised in the WTO framework.
indicated they hoped the actions would cover all types of alcoholic
*
beverages.
6.5. Eastern African Community: standards on alcoholic beverages
requested an update on the issue related to the East African Community
**
drinks standard.
Following
COM’s request for clarification regarding the countries affected by the issue,
industry and MS confirmed that Kenya was the most problematic country but that was not
the only country presenting problems (e.g. Tanzania).
The COM briefed MS and BU on the developments that took place since the last TBT
Committee: the COM discussed the issue with Tanzania in a bilateral meeting on the sides of
the TBT Committee in March, but unfortunately, despite of several reminders and an official
enquiry through the TBT Enquiry point, COM had not received any feedback. The COM
explained that, on grounds of the above, it is bringing the issue to the TBT Committee in
June. The content of the intervention still needs to be defined, but at least procedural issues
will be raised: lack of notification - the COM will request suspension of the implementation
of the measures until they have been notified and WTO members are given the opportunity
to provide comments. Additional information on the revision of the EAC standards on
5
alcoholic beverages will also be requested. The COM noted that it hopes to influence this
process.
7. PREPARATION OF THE TBT COMMITTEE, 15-16 JUNE, GENEVA
The
COM informed that the EU will be raising 22 previously raised specific trade concerns
and 4 new issues, namely the following:
China – three mandatory standards for furniture (G/TBT/N/CHN/1094-1095-1096)
China – Formula Registration Regulation for Infant and Follow-Up Formula
(G/TBT/N/CHN/1165)
Egypt – Registration of importers (G/TBT/N/EGY/114 and G/TBT/N/EGY/115)
Kenya – East African East African Community (EAC) alcoholic beverage standards.
Several
MS and
BU took the floor and reiterated their concerns.
COM also provided an update on Indonesia’s SNI certification, and noted that during the
bilateral meeting with Indonesia in the margins of the TBT Committee meeting in March, the
EU reminded Indonesia that compulsory standards (SNI) have to be based on international
standards and shall be notified. Indonesia confirmed that there were no changes on standards
for baby clothing and that there will be mandatory standards for towels and adult garment.
COM explained that during the TBT thematic session, Indonesia made a presentation on its
Conformity Assessment System, explaining the new Law on standards and conformity
assessment. In principle, SNIs are basically voluntary, but when it relates to health and
safety, they may be made compulsory. In this case the Indonesian government has to make
sure that SNIs are complied with, by default the conformity assessment procedure includes
certification by Conformity Assessment Bodies (CABs), which shall be accredited by KAN
(the national accreditation body) and designated by the respective regulators. For example,
for the SNI on toys, CABS that comply with it have to be designated by the Indonesian
Ministry of Industry. In order for CABs for exporting countries to be recognised in Indonesia
they have to be (a) accredited by KAN, or (b) by an accreditation body under a government-
to-government mutual recognition agreement – no such agreement exists between the EU
and Indonesia.
COM also mentioned that the EU will seek again clarification on the new system foreseen in
China for new cosmetics ingredients (registration for high-risk ingredients and notification
for other ones). Regarding the Indian tyres case and the Russian measure on children and
adolescent products, as there were no new developments, the EU will raise the same
concerns as before. On the Russian mandatory certification on cement, COM informed that
the Commission is preparing written comments on the TBT notification RUS/49, following
the written comments sent to Russia on RUS/48. No response has been received from Russia
so far. The EU will raise the issue both in the TBT Committee and in a bilateral meeting with
Russia on the margins of the Committee.
8. AOB
Russia - new rules for cement certification:
raised the recent Russian certification obligation issue asking about the actions taken by
*
the Commission vis-à-vis Russia.
The
COM replied by recalling the actions undertaken since March 2016 (information request
from the EU TBT contact point to its Russian counterpart, issue raised at the March WTO
TBT Committee and bilaterally with Russia in the margins of the meeting, issue raised
bilaterally in Moscow on 14 April, comments sent in reaction to the notification of these
measures to the WTO, recent letter of Commissioner Malmström to two Russian ministers).
6
The Commission also mentioned that it is carrying out a technical and legal analysis of this
case.
,
,
asked for urgent action.
thanked the Commission for its actions.
* *
*
*
Belarus – market access restrictions for construction material:
COM recalled its request for Belarus to amend recently introduced measures which create
trade barriers for EU businesses and which are not compatible with the WTO/ international
principles. COM noted that the sides agreed to address the issue of trade irritants under the
Trade Dialogue. The first meeting of the Dialogue will take place in July 2016. Responding
to the request of the Belarussian side, interested in concrete examples of the difficulties
faced by the EU business resulting from the Belarussian regulations, COM encouraged the
MS to provide details about such problems by 24 June (COM stressed that names of the
companies will not be shared with the Belarussian side).
FOLLOW-UP ACTIONS:
EU-funded project on market access barriers in India
MS to provide contact details of the trade counsellors of their Embassies in Delhi, the
National Chambers of Commerce in India and in the EU, the trade promotion organisations
and local trade delegations in India and in the EU; share contact information for relevant
people by the 10th June 2016; disseminate information about the project to the above entities
and to industry engaged in India, located both in the EU and in India; share contact
information of interested parties that could contribute to the mapping and inception report.
Egypt: Rules Governing the Registration of Factories eligible to export their products
into Arab Republic of Egypt
MS and
BU are asked to share latest available information on a number of companies
effectively registered and practical obstacles faced in the registration process
Algeria: import quotas
MS to inform the COM or the EU DEL in Algiers on quotas received in order to verify that
quota distribution respects existing market share and historical trade.
Belarus – market access restrictions for construction material:
MS and
BU are asked to provide concrete examples of the difficulties faced by EU
businesses resulting from the Belarussian regulations by 24 June 2016.
FOR MEMBER STATES ONLY
9.
APPROVAL OF THE DRAFT MINUTES OF THE MAAC MEETING OF 21 APRIL 2016
(MAAC 2016-016)
The minutes of the MAAC meeting in March 2016 were distributed on 10 May 2016.
Revised minutes were sent on 20 May following comments from
. The minutes were
*
adopted.
DG TRADE, Unit G.3
7