. /.RESTRICTEDWORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONWT/REG22/10
20 September 2000
(00-3742)
Committee on Regional Trade Agreements
CUSTOMS UNION BETWEEN TURKEY AND THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES
Weighted Average Tariff Rates and Customs Duties Collected
Note by the Secretariat
1. In the context of "[t]he evaluation under pa ragraph 5(a) of Article XXIV of the general
incidence of the duties and other regulations of commerce applicable before and after the formation of acustoms union", paragraph 2 of th e Understanding on the Interpretation of Article XXIV of the
GATT 1994 (the Understanding) directs the Secretariat to calculate "the weighted average tariff rates
and customs duties collected" and elaborates on the approach to be used.
2. As applied to the case of the Customs Union between Turkey and the European Communities
(EC), the outcome of the mandated calculations will consist of two sets of comparable figures:
• Import-weighted average tariff rates: one reflecting the pre-customs union situation and
another reflecting the post-customs union situation.
• The corresponding estimated values of customs duties collected.
3. The Committee on Regional Trade Agreements, through its Chairman, has instructed the
Secretariat to perform those calculations, on the ba sis of information provided by the parties and
according to the methodology described below.
Data and methodology used in the calculations
4. The following data were used in the calculations:
(a) Tariff rates, by tariff line, for the EC(15) and Turkey:
(i) Pre-customs union situation:
- EC(15): bound rates corresponding to the first step of implementation
of Uruguay Round concessions.
- Turkey: applied rates at 1 January 1995.
(ii) Post- customs union situation:
- EC(15): bound rates corresponding to the second step of
implementation of Uruguay Round concessions.
- Turkey: applied rates at 1 January 1996.
(b) Average of imports, in value and quantity and by tariff line, into each of the two
parties, from WTO partners (except those with which the parties maintain contractual
preferences), for the 1992-94 period.WT/REG22/10
Page 2
(c) Concordance table linking Turkey's 1996 tariff with import data at the tariff-line
level.1
5. The calculations were done in accordance with "the methodology used in the assessment of
tariff offers in the Uruguay Round" (see paragr aph 2 of the Understanding) and the following
definitions:
(a) Average tariff rates
(i) Pre-customs union situation : average of EC(15) bound tariff rates and Turkey's
applied tariff rates in 1995, weighted by aggregated 1992-94 import values of
the two parties.
(ii) Post-customs union situation:  average of EC(15) bound tariff rates and
Turkey's applied tariff rates in 1996, weighted by aggregated 1992-94 import
values of the two parties.
(b) Customs duties collected: estimates derived from the average tariff rates obtained under
(a) and annual average import values in 1992-94.
Results of the calculations
6. Major parameters underlying the results are shown below:
National
weighted average
tariff rates **Average customs duties
collected in 1992-94 ***
(Billion ECUs)Average imports
in 1992-94 *
(Billion ECUs)
Pre-CU Post-CU Pre-CU Post-CU
Turkey 5.85 12.3 8.3 0.72 0.49
EC(15) 237.75 7.2 6.7 17.04 15.88
*    Total imports (incl. petroleum), annual averages.  (See paragraph 4(b) above.)
**   Based on rates described in paragraph 4(a) above and 1992-94 import weights.
***  Annual averages.  Estimated on the basis of 1992-94 import values and average tariff rates.
7. The mandated calculations for the EC-Turke y Customs Union, according to the described
methodology and on the basis of available data, brought out the following results:
Pre-Customs Union Post-Customs Union
Weighted average tariff rates 7.3% 6.7%
Average customs duties collected ECU 17.76 billion ECU 16.36 billion
__________
                                                     
1 Trade was distributed according to the trade allocation provided by Turkey for some of the 1995 tariff
lines which have more than one 1996 tariff rates according to the concordance table.  When trade allocation was
not available, trade was distributed equally among the destination tariff lines.