 RESTRICTED  
  
G/TRIMS/M/52  
14 December  2022 
(22-9290) Page: 1/10 
Committee on Trade -Related Investment Measures   
 
  
MINUTES OF THE MEETING HELD ON  
12 OCTOBER  2022  
CHAIR : Ms Debora Maria PONCE OGALDEZ (GUATEMALA ) 
1. The Chair started the meeting of the Committee by referring to the proposed agenda circulated 
in WTO/AIR/TRIMS/15 dated 30 September  2022. The Chair said she would make  two brief 
statements under Other Business with respect to the election of the Vice -Chairperson and the 
possible relevance for the Committee of the ongoing consultations regarding WTO reform . After 
amending the proposed agenda to include these two items raised by the Chair under "Other 
Business", t he Committee adopted  the following agenda:  
1  CHINA – DRAFT OF CHINESE RECOMMENDED NATIONAL STANDARD (GB/T) FOR 
OFFICE DEVICES (INFORMATION SECURITY TECHNOLOGY -SECURITY SPECIFICATION 
FOR OFFICE DEVICES)  ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 2 
2  CHINA – THE GOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT LAW OF THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF 
CHINA (THE AMENDMENT DRAFT)  ................................ ................................ ...................  3 
3  INDIA – IMPORT RESTRICTIONS ON AIR CONDITIONERS  ................................ ...........  4 
4  INDONESIA – COMPREHENSIVE REVIEW OF LOCALISATION MEASURES  .....................  4 
5  INDONESIA – IMPORT RESTRICTIONS ON CARPETS AND OTHER TEXTILES  .................  7 
6  INDONESIA – IMPORT RESTRICTIONS ON AIR CONDITIONERS  ................................ ... 8 
7  NOTIFICATIONS UNDER ARTICLE  6.2 OF THE TRIMS AGREEMENT OF PUBLICATIONS 
IN WHICH TRIMS MAY BE FOUND  ................................ ................................ ....................  9 
8  OTHER BUSINESS  ................................ ................................ ................................ .........  9 
9  ANNUAL REPORT TO THE COUNCIL FOR TRADE IN GOODS (ARTICLE  7.3) ...................  9 
10  DATE OF THE NEXT MEETING  ................................ ................................ ...................  10 
2. Following the adoption of the agenda for the meeting, the European Union  requested the floor . 
The European Union condemned Russia's recent actions in Ukraine and expressed support for 
Ukraine. The EU asserted that it does not and will not recognize the referenda and the annexation 
of certain regions of Ukraine conducted by Russia . The EU called upon Russia to cease its aggression 
on Ukraine and stated that cessation of such aggression is th e only way to stop the current global 
economic, humanitarian, and security crisis.  
3. Canada  also condemned Russia's recent actions in Ukraine and expressed support for Ukraine . 
Canada stated that it does not and will not recognize Russia's annexation of Ukra inian territory.  
4. The United Kingdom  echoed the European Union's and Canada's remarks on recent 
developments in Ukraine . The United Kingdom asserted that Russia's annexation of certain regions 
of Ukraine violate s international law and condemned such actions . The United Kingdom stated that 
Russia's actions adversely impact the global economy and called upon Russia to stop such actions.  
5. Australia  asserted that Russia's actions in Ukraine violate international law, i ncluding the 
charter of the United Nations . Australia condemned Russia's annexation of certain regions of Ukraine 
and stated that the referenda conducted by Russia in the occupied regions have no legal effect . 
Australia called upon Russia to stop its actio ns in Ukraine and expressed support for Ukraine.  G/TRIMS/M/52  
- 2 - 
  6. Korea  condemned Russia's actions in Ukraine as a violation of the principles of the 
United  Nations charter . Korea stated that it does not recognize the referenda conducted in and the 
annexation of certain re gions of Ukraine by Russia.  
7. Japan  condemned the announcement by Russia of the incorporation of certain regions of 
Ukraine into its territory . Japan asserted that Russia's actions violate international law, including the 
UN charter . Japan urged Russia to st op the aggression and withdraw its forces from Ukraine . Japan 
stated that together with the international community, Japan will continue to impose sanctions 
against Russia and support Ukraine.  
8. The United States  expressed its continued support for Ukraine a nd condemned Russia's actions 
in Ukraine . The United States called upon Russia to cease its use of force against  Ukraine . The 
United  States stated that it will continue to work with its allies and partners to ensure that Russia 
pays a severe economic and d iplomatic price for its actions in Ukraine.  
9. The Russian Federation  expressed disappointment with the political interventions of other 
Members . It stated that these interventions were based on unreliable and biased assessments of the 
special operation  in Uk raine. Russia stated that a narrow group of Members focused on pushing 
political interests instead of trade issues in the TRIMs committee . Russia asserted that such issues 
are not within the WTO's mandate and referred the interested delegations to discussions conducted 
in other fora, including the United Nations . Russia stated that political interventions at regular 
WTO meetings damage the multilateral trading system which has been hit by the collapse of the 
basic principles of the WTO . Russia ident ified measures targeting Russia including import bans, 
financial blockade, and transport restrictions as  causes of exacerbation of the energy and food crises 
that started last year during the pandemic . Russia also stated that crisis was aggravated due to t he 
"sanctions" imposed by, and the monetary and budget policies of, the Members who took the floor 
before Russia, as well as the recent attacks on the gas pipeline.  
10. Russia also asserted that the recent Inflation Reduction Act of the United States contains 
provisions inconsistent with the TRIMs Agreement and the SCM Agreement . Russia stated that under 
this Act, certain tax credits up to USD 7500 for the purchase of an electric vehicle will be granted 
only if the vehicle is produced in the United States or No rth America, and the battery's raw materials 
are sourced from the United States or partners of free trade agreements . Russia stated that this 
policy will adversely affect the interests of certain WTO Members and the entire value chain . Russia 
stated that m edia reports show that certain Members have already raised concerns with the 
United  States concerning the WTO -consistency of the tax incentives for electric cars . Russia stated 
that the same law also contains tax incentives aimed at boosting local producti on of equipment for 
renewable energy and that such incentives are linked to the use of US -sourced batteries, solar and 
wind equipment, as well as technologies of carbon capture and hydrogen electrolyzers . Russia also 
asserted that the law contains domestic  sourcing requirements such as mandatory use of domestic 
steel in wind projects . Russia stated that these measures will create trade distortions . Russia 
expressed hope that Members will use the TRIMs committee to discuss measures such as those of 
the Unite d States and their consistency with WTO rules.  
11. Before turning to the agenda of the meeting, the Chair recalled that this was a hybrid meeting, 
in which some participants were joining physically, while other participants were joining online . She 
reminded th e remote participants of the technical arrangements, before moving on to the 
substantive part of the meeting.  
1  CHINA – DRAFT OF CHINESE RECOMMENDED NATIONAL STANDARD (GB/T) FOR OFFICE 
DEVICES (INFORMATION SECURITY TECHNOLOGY -SECURITY SPECIFICATION FOR 
OFFIC E DEVICES)  
12. The Chair noted that this item was on the agenda at the request of Japan.  
13. Japan  stated that it had information that a draft amendment to the Chinese Recommended 
National Standard (GB/T) for office devices was being considered in China  and contained the 
following requirements for devices such  as multifunction peripherals and printers procured inter alia  
by critical information infrastructure operators : (i) that the components of the devices be developed, 
designed and be produced in China, an d (ii) that information proving that the office devices and/or 
their components are developed, designed and procured in China , is disclosed.  G/TRIMS/M/52  
- 3 - 
  14. Japan expressed the concern that if the national standard containing such requirements is 
introduced, the standard could become generally applicable and would be practically enforced as 
mandatory . In such a case, imports of finished products such as multifunction peripherals and 
printers, and the use of imported components, will become impermissible . Japan stated that this 
would inevitably subject foreign products, including Japanese imports, to discriminatory treatment 
inconsistently with Article 2.1 of the TRIMs Agreement and GATT Article III:4 . Japan also stated that 
the actual operation of the national standard woul d effectively force technology transfer s by leaving 
foreign producers no choice but to provide their technology to China for development, design, and 
production in China . Japan asserted that this would be inconsistent with Article 7.3 of China's 
protocol o f accession to the WTO which prohibited technology transfer as a condition for licensing . 
Japan also stated that if it is correctly informed that the amendment to the national standard applies 
to products other than government -procured products, the amendm ent cannot be justified by 
Article  3 of the TRIMs Agreement and GATT Article III:8(a).  
15. Japan expressed hope that the amendment of this national standard and any related systems 
and guidelines would not include provisions that discriminate against foreign p roducers.  
16. China  thanked Japan for its interest in this issue and for bilateral discussions on this issue 
before the meeting . China stated that its recommended national standards for printers and 
photocopiers remain unchanged, and any intended revisions in the future would  be released for 
public comment . China noted that Japan raised similar concerns in the TBT Committee meeting in 
July 2022. China stated that as this issue relates to a recommended national standard, it did not fall 
under the TRIMs Agreement  and the TRIMs Committee was not the appropriate committee to discuss 
this issue.  
17. The Committee took note  of the statements made.  
2  CHINA  – THE GOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT LAW OF THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA 
(THE AMENDMENT DRAFT)  
18. The Chair noted that this item was on the agenda at the request of Japan.  
19. Japan  noted that in July of this year, China published a draft for the revision of the Government 
Procurement Law, Article 23 of which maintains the local content requirement from the original law 
and states the following : "Government procurement shall procure goods, works, and services in the 
home country unless they cannot be procured with in China or cannot be obtained under reasonable 
business conditions" . Japan stated that "other procurement entities" ha d been added to "state 
agencies, business units and organizations" referred to as government procurement entities in 
Articles 2 and 12 of  the revised draft . Regarding "other procurement entities", Article 12 of the 
revised draft refers to "public interest state -owned enterprises that engage in public works and 
operate public infrastructure or public service networks to realize public purpos es" and adds "other 
procurement entities to which this Law applies and their specific scope of procurement shall be 
determined by the State Council".  
20. Japan asserted that if the scope of application of the Government Procurement Law was 
expanded to include entities that could not be considered a "government agency" even if involved 
in public infrastructure or public service networks, any local content requirements therein would 
exceed the scope of GATT Article III:8(a) and may violate Article 2.1 of the TRIM s Agreement and 
GATT Article III:4 . Japan stated that accordingly, the definition of "other procurement entities" under 
Article 12 of the revised bill should not be limitlessly expanded.  
21. Japan also stated that Article 23 of the revised bill, which refers t o "support for domestic 
industries", also added a new local content requirement providing preferential treatment in 
government procurement for products with a high added -value ratio within China . Japan asserted 
that unless it is truly government procuremen t, this local content requirement could not be permitted 
under GATT Article III:8(a) and may also violate Article 2.1 of the TRIMs Agreement and GATT 
Article  III:4. Japan added that these local content requirements were contrary to the substance and 
the sp irit of the Government Procurement Agreement that China was negotiating to accede to.  
22. China  thanked Japan for its interest in this issue and for bilateral discussions on this issue 
before the meeting . China stated that as the draft amendment of China's government procurement G/TRIMS/M/52  
- 4 - 
  law is purely an issue of government procurement, it is not a TRIMs matter and should not be 
discussed in the TRIMs Committee.  
23. The Committee took note  of the statements made.  
3  INDIA – IMPORT RESTRICTIONS ON AIR CONDITIONERS  
24. The Chair noted that this item was on the agenda at the request of Japan.  
25. The delegate of Japan  said that India's import ban on air conditioners including refrigerants, 
based on Notification No. 41/2015 -2020 and int roduced in October  2020, unreasonably imposed a 
restructuring of corporate supply chains . Japan continued to be strongly concerned that this measure 
was likely to be an import ban , inconsistent with GATT Article XI:1 and Article 2.1 of the 
TRIMs Agreement.  
26. He recalled that at the last TRIM s Committee meeting, India had stated that Japan's concerns 
were "not about trade -related investment measures " and this Committee was "not  a good forum to 
deal with this matter" . For Japan , however, this measure required t he localization of the main 
process of refrigerant filling , by prohibiting the import of air conditioners filled with refrigerant and 
was thus a trade -related investment measure.  
27. Japan recalled India 's statements a t its TPR and at the Council for Trade in Goods , according 
to which  the measure was consistent with India 's obligations under the Montreal Protocol . For Japan, 
however, this import ban was unnecessary and irrational in that it covered a wide range of air 
conditioners that use refrigerants . And und er Indian domestic law, refrigerants were subject neither 
to India's reduction and elimination obligation under the Montreal Protocol nor the regulation of the 
ozone -depleting substance : freon gas.  
28. Japan also recalled that it had submitted a written question naire in September  2021 regarding 
the points on which more explanation  was expected . As a prerequisite for constructive discussions , 
Japan looked forward to a prompt and sincere response from the Indian side, since the written 
questionnaire covered  important matters.  
29. Regarding the IS standard certification system based on the Quality Control Orders for air 
conditioners and their parts, on which Japan expressed its concerns at the last TRIM s Committee 
meeting, the delegate said that Japan was  aware t hat the scheduled enforcement date was 
January  2023. In order to prevent delays in the certification procedure for imported products, Japan 
asked  India to conduct smooth overseas factory inspections by the Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS) 
or to consider al ternative procedures for certification other than overseas factory inspections if 
travelling abroad was difficult.  
30. India thanked Japan for this question and its continued interest in India . India noted that 
Japan had raised this question in other committee s of the WTO.  
31. Like in previous meetings, India responded that the concern raised by Japan was not a TRIM s 
matter and requested that Japan submit it in the appropriate platform.  
32. The Committee took note  of the statements made.  
4  INDONESIA – COMPREHENSIVE REVIE W OF LOCALISATION MEASURES  
33. The Chair noted that this item was on the agenda at the request of Japan , the European Union  
and the United States . 
34. Japan  said it was particularly interested in LCR measures for (i) 4G and 5G LTE mobile devices, 
(ii) TVs, (iii) retailers, and (iv) franchise businesses . As Japan had explained earlier, among the 
LCR measures, those that fell under 1) "government procurement" a ppeared to be limited . In 
addition, it should be pointed out that 2) "fulfilling the needs to maintain their life necessities etc." 
and 3) "securing strategic resources" could not immediately justify LCR measures under the 
WTO agreement . Japan understood t he importance of these objectives but considered that taking 
LCR measures as an easy means to achieve them should not be permitted.  G/TRIMS/M/52  
- 5 - 
  35. The delegate of Japan added that those LCR measures were likely to be inconsistent with GATT 
Article III.4 and Article 2.1 o f the TRIMs Agreement . Japan asked Indonesia to respond appropriately 
to the specific concerns of Members, and to rectify these measures in a manner that consistent with 
the WTO Agreement.  
36. The delegate of the United States  said that the Committee was well aware of the longstanding 
concerns the United States has with Indonesia 's broad and expanding use of local content 
requirements across the telecommunications, mobile technology, energy, retail, and franchising 
sectors . The United States and other Members h ad been raising these concerns for over a decade 
now, and it regretted to have to raise them today.  
37. In past meetings, Indonesia had assured that it was conducting a comprehensive review of 
those harmful policies, with the aim of removing any that may not be fully consistent with the 
TRIMs  agreement and with Indonesia 's own economic interests . The United States was hopeful that 
Indonesia 's decisions to participate in trade agreements such as RCEP and its decision to join the 
trade pillar of the Indo -Pacific Economic Framework discussions signaled an intention to modernize 
their trade policies including by eliminating local content requirements.  
38. The delegate of the United States insisted that Indonesia 's local content requirements ran 
counter to Indonesia 's own interests . Though they may help the government achieve certain 
short-term objectives, they seriously undermined Indonesia 's own long -term competitiveness . This 
was a sentiment heard frequently from U.S. companies interested in entering the Indonesia n market 
but discouraged by such policies.  
39. The United States again wished to call to Indonesia 's attention several reports that supported 
this perspective and highlighted the damaging nature of Indonesia 's local content policies.  Notably:  
‒ The WTO Secretari at Report for Indonesia 's 2020 Trade Policy Review summarized 
Indonesia 's continued use of local content requirements and noted "the long -standing and 
predominantly negative evidence of the impact of LCRs on economic development and 
trade. " 
‒ The World Bank, in a 2020 report on Indonesia, stated that Indonesia 's local content 
requirements in the solar energy sector increase costs and reduce quality.  
‒ And the World Bank, in a separate 2018 report, found that Indonesia 's local content 
requirements for elect ronics "have been associated with stagnating exports, in contrast to 
the high and growing level of exports and imports of regional peers that have maintained 
more open trade and investment regimes " and "negatively affect both foreign and domestic 
investmen ts." 
40. The United States urged Indonesia to give serious consideration to these reports.  
41. The delegate of the United States recalled that, at the last meeting, the United States sought 
updates from Indonesia on three new measures.  Specifically:  
‒ Draft regulati ons announced by Indonesia 's Ministry of Industry in June 2021, which aimed 
to tighten and further expand local content requirements for laptops;  
‒ Formal plans, announced by the Indonesian government in August  2021, which aimed to 
suppress imports, includin g through the use of local content requirements, with the goal of 
"substitut[ing] 35  per cent  of imported products " by 2022;  
‒ Formal plans, announced by Indonesia 's ICT Minister last September, which would expand 
existing local content requirements for 4G c ell phones and apply a 30  per cent  local content 
requirement on 5G devices.  
42. At the meeting, the United States added to those concerns developments relating to local 
content requirements on medical devices . The United States hoped that Indonesia could provi de an 
update on developments in that area that took place in the Summer.  G/TRIMS/M/52  
- 6 - 
  43. The United States requested that Indonesia make a copy of all of these draft measures publicly 
available and hold a notice and comment period to ensure affected parties have the oppor tunity to 
provide input during the drafting process . It strongly urged Indonesia to reconsider moving forward 
with these policies, and to reconsider its use of local content requirements generally . It stood ready 
to work with Indonesia to discuss and devel op alternate policies that encourage rather than mandate 
investment.  
44. The delegate of the European Union  recalled that concerns on the wide -ranging localization 
requirements applied by Indonesia had long been on the agenda of this Committee.  
45. The E uropean Union deeply regretted that, despite some encouraging progress last year with 
regard to the retail sector, no further progress had taken place with regard to similar measures 
applied in the other sectors discussed in the previous meetings of this Committee . The 
European  Union reiterated its serious concerns on this issue and fully supported the interventions 
by Japan and United States . 
46. Regarding the pharmaceutical sector , the EU was interested in the adoption of new Minister 
of Industry Regulation No 16 of 20 20 on the calculation of local content levels for pharmaceutical 
products . The European Union continued to be interested to understand how the regulations would 
apply "to government procurement only ". The European Union noted that the regulation had not ye t 
been notified to the WTO.  
47. The European Union was concerned that the imposition of arbitrary local content percentages, 
to be met under limited time, would create an impossible condition, and would bar most of the 
players from the market in a situation where Indonesia was still importing over 95 % of Active 
Pharmaceutical Ingredients.  
48. The European Union was also concerned by the requirement introduced by Presidential 
Regulation 12/2021 for government hospitals to purchase, when available, medica l devices with a 
Domestic Content Level and Benefit Weight Value of 40 % or more - regardless of available foreign 
products – and the subsequent freezing of several foreign medical devices in the Indonesian 
e-catalogue for public procurement, preventing the ir purchase by government health institutions.  
49. The European Union said it stood ready to support Indonesia's objective on improving 
healthcare and promoting the development of the local industry in the health sector . However, it 
believe d that rather than i mposing local content requirements , the Government should focus on 
policies that incentivize more domestic and foreign investment in the local industry.  
50. The delegate of the European Union continued to be concerned with the local content 
requirements for go ods and services in the energy sector, including mining, oil and gas, electricity, 
and renewables, as stipulated in Decree No 1953/2018.  
51. The European Union was also concerned that – according to the Regulation 34/2017 – the 
license holders were required to  "prioritize the utilization of domestic goods and services according 
to the prevailing laws and regulations " (Art.31) . Given that foreign companies were not regarded as 
providing "domestic services " in this regulation even if they were locally incorporate d, the 
European  Union considered that this measure de facto  created discrimination.  
52. The delegate of the European Union  also requested  an update on the revision of the Mining 
Law. She noted that the revised law had been adopted in May 2020 and  included obli gations for 
mining license holder s to prioritize the use of domestic goods and services . The European Union said 
it would welcome further information from the authorities in this respect.  
53. Finally, the European Union requested  updates on the ongoing review of the Omnibus Law 
and possible impacts on the current legislations on local content requirements.  
54. Australia  supported the statements made and indicated that it shared the concerns raised by 
other Members on localisation measures applied by Indonesia , which have been a long -standing 
agenda of the TRIMs Committee . It reiterated its  ongoing concerns on Indonesia 's localisation 
measures in the mining, oil and gas sectors  in particular . G/TRIMS/M/52  
- 7 - 
  55. As the Committee ha d previously heard, Australia ha d concerns regarding  local processing 
requirements and the 2020 revisions to the Mining Law . Australia noted that Article 106 of the 
revised Mining Law, require d licence holders to prioritise the utilisation of local goods, services and 
labour, in the country in accordance wi th the provisions of the legislation . Australia said that the 
measure adversely impact ed the ability of Australian companies to obtain inputs of sufficient quality.  
56. Australia was seeking  further information from Indonesia on the consistency of its energy 
regulations with Indonesia 's obligations under the TRIMs Agreement . In that regard, Australia was 
also aware of Indonesia 's new Presidential Regulation on the Acceleration of the Developm ent of 
Renewable Energy for Electricity Supply.  
57. Canada  thanked other Members for their statements . Canada remained concerned that local 
content requirements continued to limit trade and investment, particularly in the areas of agriculture, 
oil, and gas.  
58. Canada welcomed Indonesia 's 2019 regulation on retail and franchising, and looked forward 
to future regulations even more clearly consistent with Indonesia 's WTO obligations.  
59. Indonesia  thanked the Members who took the floor for their interest in Indonesia an d repeated 
that the measures at issue had been implemented first in relation to government procurement, 
second regarding policies aimed at fulfilling the needs of Indonesia's people welfare and necessities 
or in relation to policies on State managed strate gic resources.  
60. Regarding the comprehensive review of its measures, the delegate of Indonesia indicated that 
several reviews had been initiated but were still ongoing.  
61. The Committee took note  of the statements made.  
5  INDONESIA – IMPORT RESTRICTIONS ON CARPET S AND OTHER TEXTILES  
62. The Chair noted that this item was on the agenda at the request of Japan  and the European 
Union . 
63. The delegate of Japan  recalled that in October  2019, the Ministry of Trade Regulation 77/2019 
had introduced an import registration/approval system for textile products, substantially banning 
imports for sales to consumers . As a result, the export volume of textile products from the world to 
Indonesia in 2020 had decreased significantly to about one tenth of the volume in 2019. Though this 
measure seemed to be transferred to the Ministry of Trade Regulation 20/2021, substantial 
regulation ha d not changed practically . Thus, Japan had doubts that this system was consistent with 
the national treatment stipulated in GATT Article III, the general elimination of quantitative 
restrictions stipulated in GATT Article XI, and the national treatment and quantitative restrictions 
stipulated in Article 2 of the TRIM s Agreement.  
64. Japan added that in February  2021, a safeguard measure for c arpets had been imposed . Under 
this measure, however, the period of investigation (POI) was set to 2017 to 2019, which was 
immediately prior to the above -mentioned import decrease . As a result, "increased imports " were 
found by the Indonesian investigating  authority, without considering the drastic decrease in import 
volumes due to the import registration/approval system . Furthermore, this measure imposed about 
150 to 200 % tariffs in ad valorem  conversion . Japan considered that this measure does not meet 
the requirements for imposing safeguard measures such as those to the extent necessary to prevent 
or remedy serious injury.  
65. Japan had serious concerns about those measures and had expressed its concerns on various 
occasions, for example, by submitting a writ ten questionnaire at the Committee in September  2021. 
Unfortunately, however, Indonesia had not yet responded to the written questionnaire . Japan 
requested that Indonesia should recognize the aforementioned problems with those measures  and 
abolish them as soon as possible . Japan hoped to receive a sincere response from the Indonesian 
government on this matter.  
66. The delegate of the European Union  took the floor to support Japan's statement . She 
understood  that textile products would  now be subject to the "commodity balance " mechanism G/TRIMS/M/52  
- 8 - 
  established under Government Regulation 5/2021 and Ministry of Trade Regulations 19/2021, 
20/2021 and 25/2022, which not yet applied for textiles.  
67. The European Union  asked  Indonesia to clarify the curren t import regime for finished textiles, 
including carpets and rugs  and further details on the expected timeline and arrangements for the 
application of the commodity balance system to textile products.  
68. The United States  said it share d Japan 's concerns about  the local content requirements in this 
sector introduced in 2019 , as well as the European Union's request for clarifications and an update 
on their current status . At the last meeting it had  called attention to Ministry of Trade 
Regulation  20/2021, which appear ed to revoke and replace the 2019 local content requirements . 
However the current status was far from clear.  
69. The United States  asked Indonesia to confirm that it ha d fully removed the local content 
requirements that previously applied to finished tex tile products classified in 430 HS codes . It looked  
forward to receiving Indonesia 's response and hope d that Indonesia would  similarly consider 
eliminating local content requirements that remain ed in place in other sectors of its economy.  
70. Indonesia  recalle d that Regulation 77/2019 had been revoked and reiterated its previous 
response that the said Regulation was an import measure which did not related to investment . The 
Indonesian delegate noted that the same issue had been raised in the Committee on Import  
Licensing, which is more appropriate to address this question . He stressed that the Regulation at 
issue did not discriminate and was in line with Indonesia's commitments in the area of TRIMs . 
71. The Committee took note  of the statements made.  
6  INDONESIA – IMPORT RESTRICTIONS ON AIR CONDITIONERS  
72. The Chair noted that this item was on the agenda at the request of Japan  and the 
European  Union . 
73. Regarding the import restrictions on air conditioners based on the Ministry of Trade 
Regulation  20/2021, Japan  continued to appreciate that there was an improvement in the degree of 
the approved quantity . However, Japan pointed that the reason for limiting the quantity and the 
judgment criteria were still unclear . Therefore, Japan was concerned that this measure w as still an 
import restriction and may violate both GATT Article XI.1 and Article 2, Paragraph 1, of the 
TRIMs Agreement . Japan expected this measure to be administered in a manner that ensured it did 
not effectively equate to a form of import restriction . In this connection, Japan also expected permit 
standards and procedures to be stipulated more transparently.  
74. Japan recalled that at the last TRIMS Committee meeting Indonesia had claimed that it 
preferred to refer this matter to the Committee on Import Li censing . However, Japan had submitted 
a written questionnaire in September last year regarding the operational status of this measure, and 
expect ed Indonesia to first provide a prompt response at the TRIMs  Committee . If the discussions 
proceed ed constructi vely at the Import License Committee, Japan could afford to limit the discussion 
to that Committee.  
75. Lastly, Japan recalled that Indonesia had stated at the Import License Committee that the 
regulations that Japan referred to were not applied . Japan request ed a clear explanation on the 
matter.  
76. The European Union  supported Japan's statement regarding Indonesia's import restrictions on 
air conditioners and the import licencing regime under Reg ulation  68/2020 in general . The delegate 
of the European Union recal led that she had already made interventions in this context and ha d 
questioned the compatibility of the licensing regime with the WTO legal framework . It looked forward 
to further clarifications from Indonesia on that matter.  
77. Indonesia  responded that Regulation 68/2020 had been revoked and was not related to 
investment . It also noted that the same issue had been raised in the Committee on Import Licensing, 
which was a more appropriate forum to address these questions . The Indonesian del egate stressed G/TRIMS/M/52  
- 9 - 
  that the Regulation at issue did not discriminate and was in line with Indonesia's commitments in 
the area of TRIMs.  
78. The Committee took note  of the statements made.  
7  NOTIFICATIONS UNDER ARTICLE  6.2 OF THE TRIMS AGREEMENT OF PUBLICATIONS IN 
WHICH TRIMS MAY BE FOUND  
79. The Chair recalled that the WTO Secretariat had circulated a reminder  regarding Article 6.2 
notifications on 29 September  2022, in document G/TRIMS/W/17 2 and that the Committee had 
received a new notification from Djibouti which was reflected in document G/TRIMS/N/2/Rev.32 . 
The Chair urged Members that had not yet notified to do so promptly.  
80. The Committee took note  of the information provided . 
8  OTHER BUSINESS  
81. The Chair made two brief statements with respect to the election of the Vice -Chairperson and 
the possible relevance for the Committee of the ongoing consultations regarding WTO reform.  
82. With respect to the issue of the Vice Chair's election, the Chair recalled that the Committee 
had decided at its meeting in March  2022 that once the  Chair took office, she would conduct the 
necessary consultations with Members with respect to the election of the Committee's Vice -Chair. 
The Chair indicated that she had started these informal consultations, but they had not yet been 
finalized . The Chair  informed the Committee that once she finalizes her consultations, she w ould 
send the usual communication to the Membership proposing a candidate and providing Members 
with the opportunity to indicate any objections, absent which she would send the usual 
communication confirming the Vice -Chair's election.  
83. On the issue of the ongoing consultations regarding WTO reform, the Chair indicated that she 
had been following the discussions in the General Council concerning the Chair's consultations . The 
Chair noted that a number of delegations at the recent GC meeting had raised improving the 
operation of WTO Committees as an area for potential work . The Chair recalled that the GC Chair in 
his closing remarks also emphasized that in parallel with the formal an d informal  conversations in 
the General Council, each Subsidiary Body should be tasked to see what has been done and explore 
ways to improve their daily functioning and better deliver on their respective mandates . The Chair 
recalled that the GC Chair also encouraged the Subsidiary Bodies that have already started such 
discussions to continue to do so.  
84. The Chair noted that the Chair of the CTG would convene an informal session of that Council 
on Friday, 1 4 October  to report on his consultations concerning MC 12 implementation issues, 
including the issue of improving the functioning of the different Committees under the auspices of 
the CTG . The Chair indicated that she would follow those discussions closely and would stay in touch 
with Members of the Committee in respect of any relevant outcomes of that meeting.  
85. The Chair took note that no Member had requested to raise any issue under "other business"  
or comment on the issues raised by the Chair under this agenda item . 
86. The Committee took note  of the statements  made. 
9  ANNUAL REPORT TO THE COUNCIL FOR TRADE IN GOODS (ARTI CLE 7.3) 
87. The Chair recalled that the draft Annual report for 202 2 had been placed for Members' 
consideration as a room document on "Documents for Meetings" on 30 September  2022 as 
RD/TRIMS/34 . The Chair noted that the Secretariat had not received any written comments from 
any Member on the draft report, and the Chair opened the floor for comments on the report and its 
annexes . In the absence of any comments in this regard, the Chair adjourned the me eting for a few 
minutes to provide the Secretariat with some time to update the draft and make sure that it reflected 
what took place during the meeting . Upon reconvening, the Chair opened the floor for comments on 
the updated draft . In the absence of comm ents, the Chair moved to adopt the Annual Report of the G/TRIMS/M/52  
- 10 - 
  Committee for the year 2022 and noted that the report would be circulated in the usual "G/L/…" 
document series.  
10  DATE OF THE NEXT MEETING  
88. In accordance with past practice, the Chair suggested schedulin g the next meeting in the 
Spring of 2023 , in order to enable participants to plan their work . The Chair proposed a meeting on 
23 March  2023. 
89. In order to provide Members with ample opportunity to prepare for this meeting, the 
Secretariat would issue the ann otated draft agenda several days  in advance of the meeting, namely 
on 28 February  2023. Members' requests to place items on the annotated draft agenda should be 
communicated in writing to the Secretariat at the latest by COB on 27 February  2023. The annota ted 
draft agenda would be open to Members' comments until close of business on 9 March  2023. The 
airgram convening the meeting would be issued on 13 March  2023. 
90. The Committee took note  of the information provided.  
91. The meeting was adjourned . 
__________  
 