 RESTRICTED  
  
G/VAL/M/71  
 
12 July 2021  
(21-5487) Page: 1/24 
Committee on Customs Valuation    
 
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF 27 MAY 2021  
CHAIRPERSON: MR CARLOS S. GUEVARA (ECUADOR)  
The Chairperson  recalled that the proposed agenda for the meeting had been circulated in 
document s WTO/AIR/VAL/ 12 and WTO/AIR/VAL/1 2/Rev.1 . 
 
The Committee adopted  the agenda as follows:  
 
1   REPORT OF THE WORK OF THE TECHNICAL COMMITTEE ON CUSTOMS VALUATION  ..... 2 
2   INFORMATION ON IMPLEMENTAT ION AND ADMINISTRATION OF THE AGREEMENT  .... 2 
2.1   Notification of national legislation  ................................ ................................ ...................  2 
A. Afghanistan  ................................ ................................ ................................ .................  3 
B. Belize  ................................ ................................ ................................ ..........................  4 
C. Burundi  ................................ ................................ ................................ .......................  4 
D. Colombia  ................................ ................................ ................................ .....................  5 
E. Dominican Republic ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 5 
F. European Union  ................................ ................................ ................................ ............  5 
G. The Gambia  ................................ ................................ ................................ .................  6 
H. Guinea  ................................ ................................ ................................ ........................  6 
I. Honduras  ................................ ................................ ................................ .....................  6 
J. India ................................ ................................ ................................ ...........................  6 
K. Israel  ................................ ................................ ................................ ..........................  7 
L.  Kazakhstan  ................................ ................................ ................................ ..................  7 
M. Kyrgyz Republic  ................................ ................................ ................................ ............  7 
N. Malawi  ................................ ................................ ................................ ........................  8 
O. Mongolia  ................................ ................................ ................................ ......................  8 
P. Namibia  ................................ ................................ ................................ .......................  8 
Q. Nepal  ................................ ................................ ................................ ..........................  8 
R. Niger  ................................ ................................ ................................ ...........................  9 
S. Nigeria  ................................ ................................ ................................ ........................  9 
T. Paraguay  ................................ ................................ ................................ .....................  9 
U. Russian Federation  ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 9 
V. Rwanda  ................................ ................................ ................................ .....................  10 
W. Saint Kitts and Nevis  ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 10 
X. Solomon Islands  ................................ ................................ ................................ .........  10 G/VAL/M/71  
 
- 2 - 
 
  Y. Sri Lanka  ................................ ................................ ................................ ...................  11 
Z. Togo ................................ ................................ ................................ .........................  11 
AA. Tonga  ................................ ................................ ................................ .......................  12 
BB. United Kingdom  ................................ ................................ ................................ ..........  12 
CC. Vanuatu  ................................ ................................ ................................ ....................  12 
3   INFORMATION ON THE APPLICATION OF DECISIONS OF THE COMMITTEE ON 
CUSTOMS VALUATION  ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 13 
4   TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE  ................................ ................................ ............................  13 
4.1   Article  20.3 – Technical Assistance and Trade -Related Technical Assistance  .......................  13 
4.2   Information on Techn ical Assistance by the WCO  ................................ ............................  14 
5   AGENDA ITEM E: PRESHIPMENT INSPECTION  ................................ ............................  14 
5.1   Status of Notifications by Members  ................................ ................................ ...............  14 
5.2   Questions and Responses  ................................ ................................ ............................  15 
5.2.1    China  ................................ ................................ ................................ .....................  15 
5.2.2    Indonesia  ................................ ................................ ................................ ...............  15 
5.2.3    Saint Lu cia ................................ ................................ ................................ ..............  15 
5.3   Information on the PSI  Programme Compiled by the TIC  Council  ................................ ...... 16 
5.4   Fifth Triennial Review of the PSI  Agreement  ................................ ................................ ... 16 
6   OTHER BU SINESS  ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 17 
6.1   Document Symbols for Questions and Responses  ................................ ...........................  17 
7   ELECTION OF CHAIRPERSON  ................................ ................................ ......................  17 
ANNEX  ................................ ................................ ................................ ............................  19 
 
 
1  REPORT OF THE WORK OF THE TECHNICAL COMMITTEE ON CUSTOMS VALUATION  
1.1.  The representative of the World Customs Organization  (WCO), Mr Luximan B abajee , reported 
on the work of the WCO Technical Committee on Customs Valuation (TCCV)  during the 52nd Session , 
which had taken place from 17 to 19  May 2021. His report is contained in Annex  I to this document.  
1.2.  The Chairperson  thanked Mr  Babajee for his report and expressed the Committee 's 
appreciation for the valuable ongoing work of the TCCV.  
1.3.  The representative of China  stated that they were  delighted to ha ve had the opportunity to 
submit a question that ha d been adopted by the TCCV , which had been a great achievement of that 
meeting.  
1.4.  The Committee took note  of the report  and of the statement made . 
2  INFORMATION ON IMPLEMENTATION AND ADMINISTRATION OF THE AGREEMENT  
2.1  Notification of national legislation  
2.1.  The Chairperson  recalled that, pursuant to Article  22 of the Customs Valuation Agreement 
(CVA) and the Decision on "Notification and circulation of national legislation in accordance with 
Article  22 of the Agreement", Members  must submit the complete texts of their national legislation 
on customs valuation in one of  the three  official WTO  languages. They should also inform the 
Committee of any changes in their laws and regulations relevant to the CVA and in the administration 
of such laws and regulations. The notification procedures had been adopted by  the Committee at its 
meeting of 12  May 1995 and were contained in section  B.2 of document  G/VAL/5.  G/VAL/M/71  
 
- 3 - 
 
  2.2.  The Chairperson noted that document  G/VAL/ W/232/Rev.13 summarized  the current status of 
notifications, as well as the status of questions and responses regarding legislation. He also noted 
there had been an encouraging increase in notification activity since the Committee 's previous 
meeting , including the submission of customs legislation notifications by the following six Members: 
Afghanistan ; Colombia ; Mongolia ; Saint Kitts and Nevis ; Solomon Islands ; and the United Kingdom. 
In addition, responses to the checklist of issues had been  notified by the following six Member s: 
Colombia ; Israel ; Namibia ; Paraguay ; Tonga ; and the United Kingdom.  
2.3.  The Chairperson informed the Committee that, since its previous  meeting, he had reached out 
to a number of Members that had yet to submit a notification relating either to their customs  
legislation or their responses to the checklist of issues. He hoped that  his encouraging exchanges 
with several Members  would  soon generate additional notifications.  
2.4.  The Chairperson stated that the Committee was still awaiting responses from Guinea to 
questions raised in 2015, and from Malawi and Nepal to questions raised in 2017. Since the 
Committee 's previous  meeting, responses to questions had been circulated by Honduras, Kyrgyz 
Republic, Rwanda, Solomon Islands, and Togo. Since the agenda 's closure , additional questions and 
responses from the European Union had been received and circulated. He urged Members that were 
in the process of preparing their responses to request assistance from the Secret ariat.  
2.5.  Finally, the Chairperson recalled that the situation regarding the consideration of Chinese 
Taipei 's legislation remained unchanged.  
2.6.  The repr esentative of the  United States  noted that, d espite the pandemic , a significant number 
of Members ha d chosen  to notify their national customs legislation or the application of Committee 
Decisions since the last meeting, and still others ha d responded to the checklist of issues.  The US 
stated that it was  heartening to see the notification trend continue. When Mem bers notified  their 
valuation measures, or changes to their valuation measures, and responses to the checklist of issues, 
it allowed  the rest of the Committee to better understand how the Agreement was being 
implemented and to catch any problems before they became  barriers to trade.  The US commended  
those Members that ha d submitted notifications under the commitments of the CVA and stood ready 
to work with Members that were facing specific notification challenges.  Timely and proper submission 
of notifications continue d to impact the efficient functioning of th e Committee and the negotiating 
function of the WTO more broadly.  The co -sponso rs of document   JOB/GC/204/ Rev.4 -
JOB/CTG/14/Rev.4 , Procedures to Enhance Transparency and Strengthen Notification Requirements 
Under WTO  Agreements, are working to refine the proposal and intend to have an updated version 
ready for the July  meeting of the Council for Trade in Goods.  Meetings with Members had been under 
way for several weeks as the co -sponsors sought  to better understand Members' remaining concerns 
with the proposal.  The US  continue d to welcome all comments and were ready to listen to how to  
address Member s' concerns, balancing benefits with obligations, and seeking ways to reinforce the 
fundamental principle of transparency that was at the core of the WTO.  
2.7.  The representative of Chinese Taipei  thank ed Members for their notifications, which enhance d 
the important WTO principle of transparency. He also wished to provide a brief overview of Chinese 
Taipei's own notification. In 2002, Chinese Taipei had first notified  its Customs Law and 
Implementation Reg ulations of the Customs Law. The notification had been circulated in 
document  G/VAL/N/1/TPKM/1.  To keep Members informed, Chinese Taipei had submitted  to the 
Secretariat , in October  2020, revised versions of these laws , in accordance with Article  22 of the  
CVA. Chinese Taipei  stated that it would continue to update its notification when ever necessary.  
2.8.  The representative of the European Union  stated that they were  very pleased to see that the 
Committee continue d to receive  additional notifications , which were essential to promoting 
transparency. The EU encourage d Members that ha d not yet done so to submit their notifications.  
2.9.  The Committee took note  of the information and of the statements made.  
A. Afghanistan  
2.10.   The Chairperson  drew the Committee 's attention to the notification by Afghanistan of its 
national customs legislation, which had been circulated in document  G/VAL/N/1/AFG/1.  G/VAL/M/71  
 
- 4 - 
 
  2.11.   The representative of Canada  stated that they had reviewed  Afghanistan 's notification and 
had questions  on it. First, in Article 7 of the legislation , the elements for non -application of the 
transaction value method were provided. With respect to points  1 and 3 , under Article 1 of the CVA , 
the transaction value was not applicable where there were such restrictions and where part of the 
proceeds acc rued directly or indirectly. Perhaps the inclusion of the word "no" in these two points 
was an error. Canada sought  clarification in this regard. The second question relate d to Article 8 of 
the legislation  where the application of alternative methods for customs valuation  were listed there 
in descending order , and t he similar value method was listed before the identical value method in 
the list of alternative methods. Art icle 2 of the CVA states that "if the cu stoms value of the imported 
goods cannot be determined under the provisions of Article 1 the customs value shall be the 
transaction value of identical goods". I s Afghanistan applying the transaction value of similar goods  
(Article  3 of the CVA ), prior to the transaction value of identical goods  (Article  2 of the CVA )? Canada 
would circulate these questions and looked  forward to receiving Afghanistan's response.  
2.12.   The representative of the United States  thanked Afghanistan and stated that they were 
reviewing the legislation and would  revert with any questions as needed.  
2.13.   The representative of the Afghanistan  thank ed the Committee for considering its notification 
and th anked  Canada for its interest and valuable questions. They took  note of the questions and 
would  submit them to  Capital before responding to Cana da. 
2.14.   The Committee took note  of the statement s made and agreed  to revert to Afghanistan 's 
notification at its nex t meeting.  
B. Belize  
2.15.   The Chairperson  recalled that it had been agreed at the Committee 's previous meeting to 
revert to the examination of Belize 's notification of its national legislation and responses to the 
checklist of issues as circulated in documents  G/VAL/N/1/BLZ/1 and G /VAL/N/2/BLZ/1. The latest 
questions raised by the United States had been circulated in document  G/VAL/W/330. Since the 
circulation of the agenda, Belize had responded to the US  questions and those  responses  would be 
circulated and reflected in the agenda of the Committee's next meeting.  
2.16.   The representative of the United States  submitted questions to Belize in 
document  G/VAL/W/3 30 asking for an update on the status of passage and  implementation of the 
CARICOM  Harmonized Customs bill , and continued  to look forward to receiving a written response 
and update from Belize.  
2.17.   The Committee took note  of the statement made and agreed  to revert to Belize 's notification 
at its next meeting.  
C. Burundi  
2.18.   The Chairperson  recalled that it had been agreed at the Committee 's previous meeting to 
revert to the examination of Burundi 's notification of its national legislation , which had been 
circulated in document  G/VAL/N/1/BDI/1. The United States had since circulated questions in 
document  G/VAL/W/361.  
2.19.   The representative of the United States  thanked  Burundi for its notification of the 
2008 revision of the East African Customs M anagement Act as its national customs valuation  
legislation. They had  review ed the notification and submitted questions to Burundi in 
document  G/VAL/W/361 , and they looked forward to receiving replies to their questions . They also 
encourage d Burundi to sub mit its responses to the checklist of issues.  
2.20.   The Committee took note  of the statement made and agreed  to revert to Burundi 's notification 
at its next meeting.  G/VAL/M/71  
 
- 5 - 
 
  D. Colombia  
2.21.   The Chairperson  drew the Committee 's attention to the notification by Colombia  of changes 
to its national customs legislation, which had been circulated in document  G/VAL/N/1/ COL/4, and to 
its checklist of issues, which had been circulated in document  G/VAL/N/2/COL/3 . 
2.22.   The representative of the European Union  thanked  Colombia for its notifications  and stated 
that they were  still reviewing them and would  submit any question s they may have in writing . 
2.23.   The representative of the United States  expressed its appreciation for  Colombia 's notifications 
and stated that they were reviewing the m and would  submit their questions before the Committee's 
next meeting.  
2.24.   The Committee took note  of the statement s made and agreed  to revert to Colombia 's 
notification s at its next meeting.  
E. Dominican Republic  
2.25.   The Chairperson  recalled that  it had been agreed at the Committee 's previous meeting to 
revert to the examination of the Dominican Republic 's notification of its amended national legislation, 
which had been circu lated in document  G/VAL/N/1/DOM/2, and its responses to the checklist of 
issues , which had been  circulated in document  G/VAL/N/2/DOM/1. The United States had raised 
questions in document  G/VAL/W/355, and the Dominican Republic had responded to those questions 
in document  G/VAL/W/362.  
2.26.   The representative of the United States  expressed its appreciat ion for the response s that had 
been provided  in document  G/VAL/W/362 , and stated that it was reviewing the replies and would  
submit its questions before the Committee's next meeting.  
2.27.   The Committee took note  of the statement made and agreed  to revert to the Dominican 
Republic 's notification at its next meeting.  
F. European Union  
2.28.   The Chairperson  recalled that it had been agreed at the Committee 's previous meeting  to 
revert to the examination of the European Union 's notification of its amended national legislation, 
which had been circulated in document  G/VAL/N/1/EU/1. The United States had raised questions in 
document  G/VAL/W/374 and, s ince the circulation of the a genda, the EU had responded to those 
questions in document  G/VAL/W/377, which would be reflected in the agenda of the Committee's 
next meeting.  
2.29.   The representative of the United States  expressed its appreciation for the EU 's notification 
and for its continued engagement on specific valuation questions. The US also appreciated the 
responses from the EU to the questions that it had submitted in document  G/VAL/W/374 , and stated 
that they were reviewing  these and would revert back with any additional questions.  
2.30.   The representative of  the Russian Federation  welcome d the submission by the EU of its 
amended legislation and expresse d its interest in receiving  the EU's responses to the checklist o f 
issues. The Russian Federation note d that Council Regulation  1224/8 of May  1980, which was used 
as a basis for the responses to the checklist of issues that had been circulated in October  1981, was 
no longer in force.  
2.31.   The representative of  the European Union  thanked the US and the Russian Federation for 
their interest in the EU 's legislation. The EU had provided a response in writing to the US ' question  
and would also provide a response in due course to the comments raised by the Russian Federat ion. 
2.32.   The Committee took note  of the statement s made and agreed  to revert to the 
European  Union 's notification at its next meeting.  G/VAL/M/71  
 
- 6 - 
 
  G. The Gambia  
2.33.   The Chairperson  recalled that the Committee had agreed at its previous meeting to revert to 
its examination of the Gambia 's notification of its national legislation, which had been circulated in 
documents  G/VAL/N/1/GMB/1 and  G/VAL/N/1/GMB/1/Add.1, as well as its responses to the checklist 
of issues in document  G/VAL/N/2/GMB/1. The United States had raised questions in 
document  G/VAL/W/376.  
2.34.   The representative of the United States  thanked the Gambia for its notification of its legislation 
in document  G/VAL/N/1/GMB/1/Add.1. The US  explained that they had  submitted additional 
questions regarding the seventh  schedule of the Customs Excise Act of 2010 of the Gambia,  in 
document  G/VAL/W/ 376, and looked forward to receiving a written response to these questions as 
soon as possible.  
2.35.   The Committee took note  of the statements made and agreed  to revert to the Gambia 's 
notification at its next meeting.  
H. Guinea  
2.36.   The Chairperson  recalled that the Committee had agreed at its previous meeting to revert to 
its examination of Guinea 's notification of its national legislation, which had been circulated in 
document  G/VAL/N/1/GIN /1. Questions raised by the United States had been circulated in 
document  G/VAL/W/266 , in 2015.  
2.37.   The representative of the United States  explained that they had  submitted two questions in 
document  G/VAL/W/266 that had  requested clarification regarding Guinea 's implementation of 
Article  5 of the CVA . Additionally , they had noted that Guinea had  yet to submit its response s to the 
checklist of issues . The US urged Guinea to respond as soon as possible.  
2.38.   The Committee took n ote of the statement made and agreed  to revert to Guinea 's notification 
at its next meeting.  
I. Honduras  
2.39.   The Chairperson  recalled that the Committee had agreed at its previous meeting to revert to 
its examination of Honduras ' notification of its national l egislation and its responses to the checklist 
of issues, which had been circulated in documents  G/VAL/N/1/HND/1 and G/VAL/N/2/HND/1. The  
United States had submitted questions in document  G/VAL/W/268, and Honduras had responded to 
those questions in documen t G/VAL/W/367 . 
2.40.   The representative of the United States  thanked Honduras for its reply in 
document  G/VAL/W/367 , and stated that they were  reviewing the reply and w ould submit their 
questions before the Committee's next meeting.  
2.41.   The Committee took note  of the statement made and agreed  to revert to Honduras ' 
notification at its next meeting.  
J. India  
2.42.   The Chairperson  drew the Committee 's attention to India 's notification of its revised 
legislation, in document  G/VAL/N/1/IND/4, together with its revised re sponses to the checklist of 
issues, in document  G/VAL/N/2/IND/2. The Committee was awaiting responses from India to 
questions raised by the United States and Canada, which had been  circulated, respectively, in 
document  G/VAL/W/338, and document  G/VAL/W/339 . Since the Committee's previous meeting, 
the European Union had submitted questions in document  G/VAL/W/379 . These questions would be 
reflected in the agenda of the Committee's next meeting . 
2.43.   The representative of  the United States  noted that it had submitted questions to India  and 
stated that it looked forward to receiving written response s from India as soon as possible.  G/VAL/M/71  
 
- 7 - 
 
  2.44.   The representative of the European Union  thanked  India for its notifications and indicated that 
they had submitted question s to India and would welcome  India's response.  
2.45.   The representative of Canada  stated that Canada  had also submitted questions to India and 
was looking forward  to receiving India's written responses as soon as possible . 
2.46.   The representative of India responded t hat the questions from the United States  and Canada  
were under consideration and that India would reply to them in due course. He added that the 
questions from the European Union  had also been sent to Capital , and that, by way of preliminary 
response , the EU might wish to refer to India's notification in document  G/VAL/N/1/IND/4.  
2.47.   The Committee took note  of the statements made and agreed  to revert to India's notification s 
at its next meeting.  
K. Israel  
2.48.   The Chairperson  drew the Committee 's atten tion to the notification by Israel of their responses 
to the checklist of issues, which had been circulated in document  G/VAL/N/2/ISR/1.  
2.49.   The representative of  the United States  thanked Israel for having notified  their checklist of 
issues and stated that they were  reviewing it and w ould revert with any questions before the 
Committee's next meeting.  
2.50.   The Committee took note  of the statement made and agreed  to revert to Israel 's notifications 
at its next meeting.  
L.  Kazakhstan  
2.51.   The Chairperson  recalled that the Committee had agreed at its previous meeting to revert to 
its examination of Kazakhstan 's notification of its national legislation, which had been circulated in 
documents  G/VAL/N/1/KAZ/1 and G/VAL/N/1/KAZ/2. The US had submitted questions in 
documents  G/VAL/W/302 and  G/VAL/W/343 and, s ince the date of the agenda's circulation, 
Kazakhstan had responded to those questions . These responses would be reflected in the agenda of 
the Committee's next meeting.  
2.52.   The representative of the United States  expressed appreciation for  the responses that 
Kazakhstan  had submitted  and stated that they were  reviewing the responses and w ould submit any 
questions before the Committee's next meeting.  
2.53.   The Committee took note  of the statements made and agreed  to revert to Kazakhstan 's 
notification at its next meeting.  
M. Kyrgyz Republic  
2.54.   The Chairperson  recalled that the Committee had agreed at its previous meeting to revert to 
its examination of the Kyrgyz Republic 's notification of its revised legislation, as circulated in 
document  G/VAL/N/1/KGZ/2. He also drew attention to questions that had been raised by the United 
States and circulated in document  G/VAL/W/341 . He noted that, since the Committee's previous  
meeting,  the Kyrgyz Republic had provided its responses , and that those responses had been 
circulated in document  G/VAL/W/371.  
2.55.   The representative of the United States  thanked  the Kyrgyz Republic for its replies in 
document  G/VAL/W/371 and stated that it was  review ing the responses and w ould submit any 
questions before the Committee's next meeting.  
2.56.   The Committee took note  of the statement made and agreed  to revert to the Kyrgyz  Republic 's 
notification at its next meeting.  G/VAL/M/71  
 
- 8 - 
 
  N. Malawi  
2.57.   The Chairperson  recalled that the Committee had agreed at its previous meeting to revert to 
its examination of Malawi 's notification of national legislation and its responses to the checklist of 
issues, which had been circulated in documents  G/VAL/N/1/MWI/2  and G/VAL/N/2/MWI/1. The  
United States had raised questions in document  G/VAL/W/303 in 2017.  
2.58.   The representative of the United States  noted that it had  submitted questions in 
document  G/VAL/W/303 in response to Malawi 's 2017  national customs  legislation , and st ated that 
it looked forward to receiving Malawi 's replies as soon as possible  
2.59.   The Committee took note  of the statement made and agreed  to revert to Malawi 's notification 
at its next meeting.  
O. Mongolia  
2.60.   The Chairperson  drew the Committee 's attention to the notification by Mongolia of its customs 
valuation legislation, which had been circulated in document  G/VAL/N/1/MNG/1.  
2.61.   The representative of the United States  thank ed Mongolia  for notifying its legislation in 
document  G/VAL/N/1/MNG/1. The y stated that they were  reviewing the notification and would  
submit any questions before the Committee's next meeting . They also urged  Mongolia to submit its 
replies to the checklist of issues.  
2.62.   The representative of the European Union  thanked Mongolia for its notification  and stated that 
they were reviewing the notified legislation and w ould submit any questions in writing.  
2.63.   The Committee took note  of the statement s made and agreed  to revert to Mongolia 's 
notification  at its next meeting.  
P. Namibia  
2.64.   The Chairperson  drew the Committee 's attention to the notification by Namibia of their 
responses to the checklist of issues, which had been circulated in document  G/VAL/N/2/NAM/1 . 
2.65.   The representative of the United States  thank ed Namibia for their responses to the checklist 
of issues  and stated that they were  reviewing Namibia's response and w ould submit their questions 
before the Committee's next meeting . 
2.66.   The Committee took note  of the statement made and agreed  to revert to Myanm ar's 
notification  at its next meeting.  
Q. Nepal  
2.67.   The Chairperson  recalled that the Committee had agreed at its previous meeting to revert to 
its examination of Nepal 's notification of its national legislation, which had been circulated in 
document  G/VAL/N/1/NPL/1. The United States had raised questions, in document  G/VAL/W/286, 
to which Nepal had provided its responses in document  G/VAL/W/300. The  United States had raised 
follow -up questions in 2017 in document  G/VAL/W/301.  
2.68.   The representati ve of the United States  urged Nepal to submit its responses to the checklist 
of issues as soon as possible. Additionally , the US noted that it had submitted follow -up questions 
in document  G/VAL/W/301 . The US looked  forward to receiving response s to its fo llow-up questions 
as soon as possible.  
2.69.   The representative of Nepal  thanked  the United States for its continued interest in Nepal 's 
legislation on customs valuation. He noted that the agencies concerned were preparing responses 
to the questions from the US but that, because of the current COVID -19 pandemic situation in Nepal , 
consultation s with relevant agencies could not be held . It would therefore take some time for Nepal 
to submit its responses. In addition, the  agencies concerned (the Ministry of Finance and Department 
of Customs ) were preparing the  annual budget, which meant that the responses could not yet be G/VAL/M/71  
 
- 9 - 
 
  finalized . He added that his delegation would seek to facilitate the situation and would submit Nepal's 
responses  once the COVID -19 situati on in Nepal had normalized . 
2.70.   The Committee took note  of the statement s made and agreed  to revert to Nepal 's notification  
at its next meeting.  
R. Niger  
2.71.   The Chairperson  recalled that the Committee had agreed at its previous meeting to revert to 
its examinatio n of Niger 's notification of  its national legislation, which had been circulated in 
document  G/VAL/N/1/NER/1. The United States had posed  questions in document  G/VAL/W/358.  
2.72.   The representative of the United States  noted that they had r eviewed Niger 's notification and 
had submitted their questions in document  G/VAL/W/358. The US  looked forward to receiving a 
written response to their questions and encourage d Niger to also respond to the checklist of issues . 
2.73.   The representative of Niger  thanked the US for their interest in their  legislation and stated 
that they were a waiting a response from Capital. They hoped to  be able to share that response  at 
the Committee's next meeting . 
2.74.   The Committee took note  of the statement s made and agreed  to revert to Niger 's notification  
at its next meeting.  
S. Nigeria  
2.75.   The Chairperson  recalled that the Committee had agreed at its previous meeting to revert to 
its examination of Nigeria 's notification of its national legislation and responses to the checkl ist of 
issues, which had been circulated in documents  G/VAL/N/1/NGA/1 and G/VAL/N/2/NGA/1. The 
United States had raised questions in document  G/VAL/W/337, to which Nigeria had responded in 
document  G/VAL/W/352 . The United States had subsequently raised fol low-up questions in 
document  G/VAL/W/356 . 
2.76.   The representative of the United States  thanked  Nigeria for their replies in 
document  G/VAL/W/352 , and noted that it had  submitted questions in document  G/VAL/W/356 , 
seeking further clarification in particular on the revisions to Nigeria 's Customs Service Act of 2013. 
The US stated that it  looked forward to receiving Nigeria 's written replies  to its questions . 
2.77.   The Committee took note  of the statement made and agreed  to revert to Nigeria 's notification  
at its next meeting.  
T. Paraguay  
2.78.   The Chairperson  drew the Committee 's attention to the notification by Paraguay of their 
responses to the checklist of issues, which had been circulated in document  G/VAL/N/2/PRY/1 . 
2.79.   The representative of the United States  thanked Paraguay for  their responses to the checklist 
of issues  and stated that they were reviewing the responses and would revert with any questions 
before the Committee's next meeting.  
2.80.   The Committe e took note  of the statement made and agreed  to revert to Paraguay 's 
notification  at its next meeting.  
U. Russian Federation  
2.81.   The Chairperson  recalled that the Committee had agreed at its previous meeting to revert to 
its examination of the Russian Federation 's notification of legislation, in particular as contained in 
documents  G/VAL/N/1/RUS/4, G/VAL/N/1/RUS/4/Add.1, and G/VAL/N/1/RUS/5. The R ussian 
Federation 's responses to the checklist of issues had been circulated in document  G/VAL/N/2/RUS/1. 
The United States had raised questions in document s G/VAL/W/336 and G/VAL/W/360.  G/VAL/M/71  
 
- 10 - 
 
  2.82.   The representative of the European Union  thanked the Russian Federation  for its notification 
and responses to the EU's questions . The EU stated that they were still reviewing the notification 
and would submit any questions that they may have in writing.  
2.83.   The representative of the United States  noted that they had submitted questions to the 
Russian Federation in document  G/VAL/W/360 and looked forward to receiving a written response.  
2.84.   The representative of the Russian Federation  thanked the EU and US  for the ir interest in its 
legislation on customs valuation  and stated that they were  finalizing internal procedures  prior to 
submit ting their replies to the questions  raised . 
2.85.   The Committee took note  of the statements made and agreed  to revert to the Russian  
Federation 's notification  at its next meeting.  
V. Rwanda  
2.86.   The Chairperson  recalled that the Committee had agreed at its previous meeting to revert to 
its examination of Rwanda 's notification of its national legislation , and its responses to the checklist 
of issues, which had been circulated in documents  G/VAL/N/1/RWA /1 and G/VAL/N/2/RWA/1. The  
United States had raised questions, which had been  circulated in document  G/VAL/W/215 , and 
Rwanda responses to those  questions  had been circulated in document  G/VAL/W/368 . 
2.87.   The representative of the United States  thanked Rwanda for its reply, in 
document  G/VAL/W/368 , and stated that they were reviewing the responses and would submit their 
questions before the Committee's next meeting.  
2.88.   The Committee took note  of the statement made and agreed  to revert to Rwanda 's notificati on 
at its next meeting.  
W. Saint Kitts and Nevis  
2.89.   The Chairperson  drew the Committee 's attention to the notification by Saint Kitts and Nevis 
of their customs valuation legislation, which had been circulated in document  G/VAL/N/1/KNA/1 . 
2.90.   The representative of  the United States  expressed their appreciation for the notification from 
Saint Kitts and Nevis of their legislation , in document  G/VAL/N/1/KNA/1 , and stated that they would 
review it and  submit any questions before the Committee's next me eting. In addition, the US 
encourage d Saint Kitts and Nevis  to respond to the checklist of issues as soon as possible.  
2.91.   The Committee took note  of the statement made and agreed  to revert to Saint Kitts and Nevis ' 
notification  at its next meeting.  
X. Solomon Islands  
2.92.   The Chairperson  recalled that the Committee had agreed at its previous meeting to revert to 
its examination of the Solomon Islands ' national legislation, which had been circulated in 
document  G/VAL/N/1/SLB/1. The United St ates had raised questions, which had been circulated in 
document  G/VAL/W/298. The Solomon Islands had subsequently provided amended legislation, 
circulated in document  G/VAL/N/1/SLB/Add.1 ; it had also provided responses to the US  questions , 
circulated in d ocument  G/VAL/W/366 . The United States had then submitted follow -up questions , in 
document  G/VAL/W/375.  
2.93.   The representative of  the United States  thank ed the Solomon Islands for its replies to the 
questions set out in document  G/VAL/W/366 , and noted that the y had  submitted additional 
questions in document  G/VAL/W /375. The US looked forward to receiving a written response to their 
questions and continued  to urge the Solomon Island s to submit its response s to the checklist of 
issues.  
2.94.   The Committee took note  of the statement made and agreed  to revert to the Solomon Islands ' 
notification  at its next meeting.  G/VAL/M/71  
 
- 11 - 
 
  Y. Sri Lanka  
2.95.   The Chairperson  recalled that the Committee had agreed at its previous meeting to revert to 
its examination of Sri Lan ka's notification of its national legislation and its responses to the checklist 
of issues, which had been circulated in documents  G/VAL/N/1/LKA/1, G/VAL/N/1/LKA/1/Corr.1, and 
G/VAL/N/2/LKA/1. The United States and Sri Lanka had provided questions and resp onses, most 
recently in questions from the United States in document  G/VAL/W/313, and in responses from 
Sri Lanka in document  G/VAL/W/320.  The United States had raised additional follow -up questions in 
document  G/VAL/W/328.  
2.96.   The representative of the United  States  thanked Sri Lanka for  its responses in 
document  G/VAL/W/320. The US noted that they  continue d to have concerns regarding the use of 
minimum prices as permitted by the gazette notification. The US had submitted additional questions 
in document  G/VAL/W/328  and look ed forward to receiving Sri Lanka's written response.  
2.97.   The representative of Sri Lanka  thanked the United States  for its interest and questions 
regarding  Sri Lanka 's notification , including its additional questions. Sri Lanka in dicated that t he 
concerns expressed by the US had been carefully studie d by their national authorities and they 
wished to reiterate the following  points . The provisions of the CVA applied  when the customs 
authorities were required to levy duty or tax which took the form of ordinary  customs duties , 
provide d that they took the form of ad valorem  duties. The term "customs value of imported goods " 
was defined in Article 15.1(a) of the CVA as "the value of goods for the purpose s of levying 
ad valorem  duties of customs o n imported goods ". Sri Lanka considered  that the concerns raised by 
delegations revolve d around a particular provision of the Gazette Notification No. 1971/10 with 
respect to the customs valuation  of used vehicles , which fell under Chapter  87. The tariff structure , 
namely the  applied rates , of this chapter entailed  taxes that took the form of ordinary  custom s 
duties , and also other domestic duties and taxes that were levied under Art icle 8, and service fees 
charged for services provided at the border that fell under Article 8 of the GATT  1994. Further more,  
when one looked into the nature of the tariff structure , these mostly consist ed of specific duties , 
wherein Sri Lanka has introduced the engine  capacity -based  system  on motor vehicles deviating 
from the character of ad valorem  duties. Therefore, the issue of applying Art icle 7 of the GATT  1994 
and the CVA o r application of minimum value criteria for taxes on motor vehicles did not arise . 
Accordingly , the specific provision of the Gazette notification had no applicability for taxation  on 
motor vehicles or any other item in the present context. In light of this, the application of rules 
enshrined  in the CVA could  not be related to this case. T here was no evidence to suggest that there 
was also a de facto  non-compliance. Accordingly , no provision of the Gazette would  be non -compliant 
with Sri Lanka 's obligation s under the CVA. In view of this explanation , Sri Lanka  was of the view 
that further review of Sri Lanka 's notification of its national legislation required  further scrutiny by 
the Committee.  
2.98.   The Committee took note  of the statements made and agreed  to reve rt to Sri Lanka 's 
notification at its next meeting.  
Z. Togo  
2.99.   The Chair perso n recalled that the Committee had agreed at its previous meeting to revert to 
its examination of Togo 's notification o f its national legislation, which had been circulated in 
document  G/VAL/N/1/TGO/1. Canada had raised questions, which had been circulated in 
document  G/GAL/W/340 , to which  Togo had provided its responses in document  G/VAL/W/370. The 
United States had subsequently submitted question s in document  G/VAL/W/372 . 
2.100.   The representative of  the United States  thanked Togo for notifying its national legislation in 
document  G/VAL/N/1/TGO/1 and noted that they had reviewed  the notification and provided 
questions in document  G/VAL/W/372 . The US looked forward to receiving respons es to their 
questions and also encourage d Togo to respond to the checklist of issues . 
2.101.   The representative of Togo thank ed the United States for its interest in their notification  and 
indicated that the  questions ha d been sent to Capital and that they were a waitin g responses.  
2.102.   The Committee took note  of the statements made and agreed  to revert to Togo's notification 
at its next meeting.  G/VAL/M/71  
 
- 12 - 
 
  AA. Tonga 
2.103.   The Chair perso n drew the Committee 's attention to the notification by Tonga  of their 
responses to the checklist of issues, which had been circulated in document  G/VAL/N/2/ TON/1. The 
US had raised questions in document  G/VAL/W/372.  
2.104.   The representative of  the United States  thanked Tonga for submitting their replies to the 
checklist o f issues in document  G/VAL/N/2/TON/1. The US reviewed Tonga 's national legislation 
notification and replies to the checklist of issues and submitted questions in document  G/VAL/ W/373. 
The US stated that they looked forward to receiving Tonga 's written repl y. 
2.105.   The Committee took note  of the statement made and agreed  to revert to Tonga 's notification 
at its next meeting.  
BB. United Kingdom  
2.106.   The Chairperson  drew the Committee 's attention to the notification by Israel of its customs 
legislation in document  G/VAL/N/1/GBR/1 , and its responses to the checklist of issues, which had 
been circulated in document  G/VAL/N/2/GBR/1.  The European Union had presented questions that 
had been  circulated in document  G/VAL/W/378 ; these questions would be reflected in the agenda 
of the Committee's next meeting.  
2.107.   The representative of the United Kingdom  stated that they had  now left the European Union  
and had notified their national  customs legislation and che cklist of issues on 31 December  2020. The 
UK thanked  the Secretariat for its support throughout  this process. The UK was  pleased to be 
submitting  their notification alongside so many  other Members given the importance of transparency 
and notification. The UK value d the CVA and the work of the C ommittee  and looked forward to 
working with  all Members of the Committee on the  important i ssues on the Committee's agenda.  
2.108.   The representative of  the European Union thank ed the United Kingdom for its notification 
and intervention.  The EU stated that they had submitted questions and would welcome the UK's 
response.  
2.109.   The representative of  the United States  thanked the United Kingdom for its notification of 
its national CV  legislation , and for its replies to the checklist of issues . The US was reviewing the 
notification and would  follow  up with questions before  the Committee's next meeting.  
2.110.   The representative of  the United Kingdom  thanked the United States for its interest in their 
customs legislation and thanked the European Union for its questions. The UK stated that they were 
reviewing the questions and would submit their written responses as soon as possible.  
2.111.   The Committee took note  of the statement s made and agreed to revert to the United 
Kingdom 's notification at its next meeting.  
CC. Vanuatu  
2.112.   The Chairperso n recalled that the Committee had agreed at its previous meeting to revert 
to its examination of Vanuatu 's notification of its national legislation, which had been circulated in 
document  G/VAL/N/1/ VUT/1. The United States had submitted questions in 
document  G/VAL/W/3 59. 
2.113.   The representative of  the United States  thanked  Vanuatu for notifying its legislation  in 
document  G/VAL/N/1/VU T/1 and noted that they had submitted questions in 
document  G/VAL/ W/359. The US  looked forward to receiving a written response to its question s and 
urged Vanuatu to submit  its response s to the checklist of issues.  
2.114.   The Committee took note  of the statement made and agreed  to revert to Vanuatu's  
notification at its next meeting.  
  G/VAL/M/71  
 
- 13 - 
 
  Concluding Agenda Item B 
2.115.   The representative of  China  stated that it had wished to intervene before this agenda item  
had ended . China thanked the Secretariat for arranging this meeting and the Members for notifying 
their legislation , which would definitely promote  transparency and trade facilitation. China also 
wished to thank those Members that had submitted questions in reviewing the notifications ; it 
appreciated this hard work and Members' professional observations. China also indicated that some 
of these notifi cations had been submitted by some of China's largest trading partners , and that China 
would be providing its written observations and perhaps questions in due course. Further more, China 
noted that the Committee had concluded the review of China 's legislat ion at its previous meeting. 
Finally, China noted that this year marked the 20th anniversary of China 's accession to the WTO. 
China  had been implementing the CVA during this period and had gained valuable experience ; this 
experience  would enable them to be  more involved in the work of the Committee , as well as in the 
work of the TCCV in Brussels.  
2.116.   The Chairperson  updated the Committee by noting that, t o date, 108  Members ha d notified 
their national legislation on customs valuation, and 75  Members ha d provided responses to the 
checklist of issues (both numbers count ed the European Union as one). Therefore , there remain ed 
29 Members that had not yet made either of these notifications . The Chairperson noted that he had  
reached out to a number of delegati ons and welcome d the new notifications that ha d been received 
since the Committee's previous  meeting. He thank ed delegates for their work in preparing these  
notifications. He concluded by urging  Members that ha d not yet notified their legislation, or 
amend ments to their legislation, to make every effort to do so , and emphasized that they could  
request from the Secretariat any technical assistance that they might require . 
2.117.   The Committee took note  of the informatio n and the statement made . 
3  INFORMATION ON THE A PPLICATION OF DECISIONS OF THE COMMITTEE ON CUSTOMS 
VALUATION  
3.1.  The Chairperson  recalled that the Committee took note of any new notifications concerning the 
application of two of the Decisions adopted at its meeting of 12  May 1995, and contained in 
document  G/VAL/5, which are the Decision on the "Treatment of Interest Charges in the Customs 
Value of Imported Goods",  and the Decision on "Valuation of Carrier Media Bearing Software for 
Data Processing Equipment". Since the Committee 's previous  meeting, notifications relating to these 
two decisions ha d been received from the following five Members: Colombia ; Russian Fed eration ; 
Solomon Islands ; Trinidad and Tobago ; and the United Kingdom. T he Chairperson noted that t he 
most recent  status report, which covered  all notifications, had been circulated in 
document  G/VAL/W/5/Rev.3 3. 
4  TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE  
4.1  Article  20.3 – Technical Assistance and Trade -Related Technical Assistance  
4.1.  The Chairperson  recalled that the Committee 's Work Programme on Technical Assistance for 
Capacity Building as Regards the Implementation and Administration of the WTO  Agreement on 
Customs Valuatio n was incorporated in the overall technical assistance program me of the WTO. The  
WTO was currently implementing its 2020-2021 biennial TA  Plan. The Chairperson also noted that 
no specific technical assistance had been requested of the Secretariat since the Committee's previous 
meeting . In this context, he remind ed Members that requests for technical assistance could be made 
at any time , and that a national activity could be designed to meet the specific needs of its recipient. 
He ur ged Members to consider whether it would be helpful to request assistance with their 
notification s and encourage d Members to take advantage of the assistance being provided by t he 
WTO Secretariat via virtual session s. 
4.2.  The representative of  the United State s remarked that US federal agencies ha d been active in 
supporting trading partners in the area of customs valuation.  US Customs and Border Protection, 
with the help of the US  Department of Commerce Commercial Law Development Program , had been 
carrying out a number of training activities around the work on advance rulings, including rulings on 
customs valuation.  Since the Committee's previous meeting, some of these training activities had 
taken place in Kosovo and Ukraine.  Additionally, the US had noted  a multipart, pre -recorded series G/VAL/M/71  
 
- 14 - 
 
  on Advance Ruling Best Practices , where the second  part of the program was focused on Customs 
Valuation.  The recordings could not replace person -to-person engagement, but they nevertheless 
helped to set the stage w ith a best practice overview before commercial law experts work ed directly 
with counterparts in Ukraine, Central America, Egypt,  and Sri Lanka,  to address discrete obstacles. 
The recordings continue d to develop the human and institutional capacity of these  trading partners ; 
they also  promote d transparency, cooperation, and coordination on valuation issues.  
4.3.  The Committee took note  of the information  and of the statement made . 
4.2  Information on Technical Assistance  by the WCO  
4.4.  The Chairperson  recalled that , as reflected in section  B.4 of document  G/VAL/5, the Committee 
agreed that greater transparency in technical assistance activities would be ensured if information 
documents prepared for the WCO  TCCV were also made available as WTO  document s. 
Document  G/VAL/8/Add.41 contained the most recent information by the TCCV concerning technical 
assistance activities carried out by the WCO  Secretariat.  
4.5.  The representative of  China  noted that they had recently  participated in technical assistance 
activit ies conducted by the WCO , including one for Turkey Customs that had been listed in a 
document prepared by the Secretariat for the current  meeting. That workshop had taken place in 
March  2021 and had focused on valuation rulings . It had been warmly welcomed and well received 
by colleagues from Turkey Customs . China thanked the WCO and looked forward to further 
cooperation.  
4.6.  The representative of  Japan  thank ed the WCO for its report. As explained in that report, the 
Sub-Regional Cust oms Valuation Workshop for the Southern  Africa region had been a joint  project 
of the WCO and JICA. Two  experts had been assigned to the region from Japan Customs, and under 
the pandemic, this project had continued online until April  2021.  The program me had been  aimed 
at training Master Trainers in the field of Customs Valuation to assume a leading role in training and 
capacity -building in the Africa region. In the last session, to complete the program me, the 
fifteen  participants had tested their training skills, and all of them had been recognized as competent 
Master Trainers.  Japan believed that  this kind of program me was meaningful in the sense that a 
self-sustainable human resource development cycle would  be established in the reci pient countries.  
4.7.  The Committee  took note  of the information  and of the statements made . 
5  AGENDA ITEM E: PRESHIPMENT INSPECTION  
5.1  Status of Notifications by Members  
5.1.  The Chairperson  drew the Committee 's attention to the compilation of notifications pursuant 
to Article  5 of the Agreement on Preshipment Inspection. Since its previous meeting, the Committee  
had received notifications from the following four Members: Afghanistan ; Central African Republic ; 
Montenegro ; and Ukraine. The current status of al l preshipment inspection ( PSI) notifications was 
contained in the updated document  G/PSI/N/1/Rev.5, which incorporate d all of the information that 
had been contained in the fourth  revision of that document , plus subsequent addenda . 
5.2.  The representative of the United States  thank ed Montenegro, Egypt,  and the Central African 
Republic,  for notifying updates to their preshipment inspection regimes.  In the case of Montenegro, 
the US  welcomed the information that Montenegro had no preshipment in spection measures  in place . 
As for Egypt and the Central African Republic, the US  had appreciate d receiving the updated 
information about each Member 's use of preshipment inspection to certify that certain imported 
products met with the applicable standard s and requirements.  In addition, both Egypt and the 
Central African Republic had designated Article  10.5 of the WTO  Trade Facilitation Agreement on 
preshipment inspection as category  A. The US stated that it would be helpful, either at the current 
meeting or in response to upcoming written questions, for both Members to confirm that their 
notified PSI  programs were not being used in relation to tariff classification or customs valuation.  
5.3.  The Committee  took note  of the information  and of the statement made . G/VAL/M/71  
 
- 15 - 
 
  5.2  Questions and Responses  
5.2.1   China  
5.4.  The Chairperson  recalled that t he U nited States  had raised questions in 
document  G/VAL/ W/353 regarding China 's 2019  notification, to which China had responded in 
document  G/VAL/ W/369.  
5.5.  The representative of the United States  thanked China for its reply in document  G/VAL/W/369. 
China 's responses to the two initial US  questions had indicated that China had notified all 
PSI measures directed at importers. However, Article  5 of the PSI  Agreement required Members to 
notify any laws or regulations that relate d to preshipment inspection. This was because many  
Agreement provisions involve d commitments on the part of Members to ensure that their 
preshipment inspection entities operate d in the prescribed manner.  Therefore, measures relating to 
the operation of preshipment inspection entities were just as important to notify as measures relating 
to importers. The US asked that China notify the full range of its PSI measures, including its General 
Administration of Customs Announcement No.  48 of 2018.  
5.6.  The representative of  China  thanked the United States for its questions regarding China's 
notification and indicated that they would study the additional request from  the US.  
5.7.  The Committee took note  of the statement s made and agreed  to revert to this issue at its next 
meeting.  
5.2.2   Indonesia  
5.8.  The Chairperson  recalled that the Committee had agreed at its previous meeting to revert to 
this issue. The United States  had previously raised questions in document s G/VAL/W/314  and 
G/VAL/W/357.  
5.9.  The representative of the United States  noted that they had submitted questions to Indonesia 
in 2018 and 2020, and that they looked forward to Indonesia 's written responses to both sets of 
questions.  The US stated that their  questions had relate d to Indonesia 's assertion that the 
procedures at issue did not constitute a PSI  requirement , and noted that Indonesia 's single window 
website included a link to a page entitled "Regulations related to preshipment inspections ". The US 
looked forward to Indonesia 's notification of these measures to this Committee.  
5.10.   The representative  of Indonesia  stated that it was  fully aware o f the importance of notification 
in terms of transparency. However, Indonesia did not consider these to be  PSI activities for the 
following reasons . The verification was not only carried out in the country of origin of goods 
(exporting country), but also applied domestically in Indonesia's Free Trade Zone area. Overall, the 
verification provisions also applied  for e xport, import, and even domestic inter -island trade.  
Moreover, Indonesia reaffirm ed that  the verification applie d to documentation and technical aspect s 
for certain product s and was conducted to fulfil the duty and responsibility of the Indonesian 
governme nt to preserve health, safety, the e nvironment, public morals, national security , and the 
national interest. The surveyor verifie d the conformity of import documents , including such 
documents as company legal documents, import licence documents, and/or shipping and technical 
documents. While it was not a substitute for  customs inspection, it might  serve as a reference for 
customs officers to release the consignee at the destination port. Therefore, the technical verification 
could hel p to expedite the importation process by avoiding the possibility of illegal importation 
caused by any discrepancy in import and technical documents. Hence, this procedure reduce d 
clearance  time considerably.  Indonesia  noted that it  always sought for its regulation s to function in 
the most effective, efficient, proper , and suitable manner.  
5.11.   The Committee took note  of the statement s made and agreed  to revert to this issue at its 
next meeting.  
5.2.3   Saint Lucia  
5.12.   The Chairperson  recalled that the United States had raised questions in 
document  G/VAL/W/354 regarding Saint Lucia 's 2019 notification of legislation relating to PSI.  G/VAL/M/71  
 
- 16 - 
 
  5.13.   The representative of the United States  thank ed Saint Lucia for having notified its preshipment 
inspection measures for vehicles.  The United States had submitted questions in 
document  G/VAL/W/354  and looked  forward to receiving Saint Lucia 's written response.  
5.14.   The Committee took note  of the statement made and agreed  to revert to this issue at its next 
meeting.  
5.3  Information on the PSI Programme Compiled by the TIC Council  
5.15.   The Chairperson  recalled that, in a letter dated 10  May 2021, the Testing, Inspection and 
Certification  (TIC) Council had provided the most recent information from its members regarding 
the existence of PSI  programmes. This information had been circulated to Members in 
document  G/VAL/W/63/Rev.26 . 
5.16.   The Committee took note  of the information.  
5.4  Fifth Triennial  Review of the PSI  Agreement  
5.17.   The Chairperson  recalled that, in  accordance with Article  6 of the PSI  Agreement, the 
Committee on Customs Valuation was required to carry out a triennial review of the PSI  Agreement 
to review the provisions, implementation , and operation of the Agreement, tak ing into account its 
objectives and the experience gained in its operation. He noted that the  Secretariat had previously 
circulated a background note , in document  G/VAL/ W/363 , which had been intended to assist 
Members in considering matters in the context of this review, and to provide certain information on 
the PSI  Agreement, including sources of information regarding the use of PSI and information 
pertaining to prior reviews of the PSI  Agree ment. The Committee had launched the fifth  review  at 
its previous meeting  and Members had been  asked to provide any written statements regarding the 
review, should they wish to do so, by 30  March  2021. In March, the Chairperson  had also reached 
out to Memb ers of the Committee to indicate his availability to hold informal consultations with any 
interested Member. To date, no Member ha d provided a written statement although some Members 
had indicated that they were considering whether to do so in the context of the current meeting.  
5.18.   The representative of the United States  thanked  the Chair person  for conducting the 
fifth triennial review of the PSI  Agreement , and the Secretariat for preparing a helpful background 
note on previous triennial reviews.  The US  applaud ed the progress made by Members in 
implementing Article  10.5.1 of the WTO  Trade Facilitation Agreement, which provided that " Members 
shall not require the use of preshipment inspection in relation to tariff classification and customs 
valuation ", and Article  10.5.2 which discouraged Members from introducing new tariff classification 
or customs valuation preshipment inspection measures.  As TFA  Article  10.5 phased out the use of 
PSI for customs classification and valuation purposes, it appear ed that  some Members were 
beginning to turn to PSI  requirements for verifying quality and conformity with product standards.  
These types of PSI  requirements could create confusion for traders, in part because they were often 
promulgated by a government agency or dep artment other than customs.  Further more, these types 
of requirements could add costs and burdens that disproportionately affect ed MSMEs at a time when 
many were struggling to recover from the impact of the COVID -19 pandemic.  Greater transparency 
and clarit y with respect to conformity -related PSI  regimes could have a significant positive benefit 
for all exporters.  The theme of US  interventions throughout meetings of the Committee had long 
been transparency , which, as they had said many times, was a window fo r understanding the full 
implementation of WTO  commitments.  Transparency was especially important for this Committee 
because it was monitoring two  agreements whose disciplines influence d the operation of many other 
agreements , such as the Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade and the Agreement on the 
Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures.  There was a great deal of synergy between the 
provisions of the PSI, TBT, and SPS  Agreements, especially with respect to transparency, 
notifications, disciplines on inspection requirements, delays, complaints/appeals, protection of 
confidential business information, and non -discrimination.  The TBT and SPS  Agreements also 
positively augment ed disciplines in the PSI  Agreement providing for notice and comment periods, a 
reasonable interval between publication and entry -into-force, enquiry points, equitable fees, 
selection of samples, and encouragement to allow PSI  companies from any country to  conduct 
inspections.  In the context of the triennial review, the United States suggest ed a continued focus on 
transparency and notification of any PSI  requirements to this Committee.  If each Member commit ted 
to notify any PSI  requirement it implemented , other Members and this Committee c ould use that G/VAL/M/71  
 
- 17 - 
 
  information to evaluate the benefits and drawbacks of the practice and see whether further 
adjustments were needed resulting in improved trade facilitation and transparency for all exporters.  
5.19.   The Chairperson  proposed that the Committee take note of the statements made and agree 
to revert to this matter at its next meeting. In addition, as had been done in past reviews, the 
Secretariat w ould be requested to produce a factual report for the Committee 's considerat ion at its 
next meeting. Unless there were additional substantive contributions from Members warranting 
further consideration by the Committee, the Chairperson anticipate d that the fifth  review of the 
PSI Agreement would be concluded at the next meeting.  
5.20.   The Committee took note  of the information and statements made and agreed  to revert to 
the triennial review at its next meeting.  
6  OTHER BUSINESS  
6.1  Document Symbols for Questions and Responses  
6.1.  The Chairperson  remarked that the G/VAL/W document series was used to circulate a wide 
variety of documents, including draft reports, Secretariat notes , information papers, and , 
increasingly, questions and answers regarding notified customs legislation and PSI  programmes. In 
order to limit the risk of any confusi on, and to assist Members in identifying and distinguishing the 
content of exchanges regarding these notifications, he had asked the Secretariat to look into the 
possibility of circulating questions and responses regarding notified legislation through two new 
document series , namely  G/VAL/Q and G/PSI/Q. This was a practice that had been used for some 
time in the Import Licensing Committee, for example. The Chairperson then requested the 
Secretariat to make a short presentation to illustrate how this new doc ument series would be 
implemented by using a sample document regarding customs legislation.  
6.2.  The representative of the European Union  thanked the Chairperson for this initiative , and the 
Secretariat for its explanation. The EU support ed the proposal . 
6.3.  The representative of the United States  appreciate d the presentation by the Secretar iat, and 
the proposal , but sought clarity regard ing next step s, including an implementation timeline to be  
decided upon.  
6.4.  The Chairperson  stated that he was  seeking support for th e proposal at that meeting , and if it  
were possible and acceptable to Members the new  series would be introduced as of this meeting.  
6.5.  The representative of the United States  appreciate d the further explanation , but stated that in 
the future it would be useful for delegations to have advance notice of issues requiring decisions , 
and that issues requiring decisions  should in any case not be raised under  "Other Business ". 
6.6.  The Chairperson  thanked the European Union and the United States for their interventions and 
acknowledged their comments . He noted that there appeared to be no objections to having the 
Committee proceed with the changes to the document symbols , and indicated that the new 
document series would be implemented for relevant M ember communications beginning as of that 
meeting . 
6.7.  The Committee agreed . 
7  ELECTION OF CHAIRPERSON  
7.1.  The Chairperson  stated that the Chair of the Goods Council was still holding consultations with 
Members on a slate of names to chair the CTG 's subsidiary bodie s, including the Committee for 
Customs Valuation. As a result, he propose d to proceed as follows: as soon as the CTG had agree d 
upon the proposed chairpersons for its subsidiary bodies, the Secretariat would send an email to 
Members with the name of the proposed chairperson for the Customs Valuation Committee. If no 
objection was received within the time -frame indicated in the email, the candidate would  be deemed 
to have been elected by the Committee  by acclam ation. 
7.2.  The Committee agreed . G/VAL/M/71  
 
- 18 - 
 
  7.3.  The Chairperson  recalled that the Committee's next formal meeting would be held on Monday, 
25 October.  
7.4.  The meeting was adjourned . 
_______________  
 
 
  G/VAL/M/71  
 
- 19 - 
 
  ANNEX  
REPORT TO THE W TO COMMITTEE ON CUSTOMS VALUATION   
ON THE WORK OF THE TECHNICAL COMMITTEE ON CUSTOMS VALUATION  (52ND SESSION)  
The 52nd Session of the Technical Committee on Customs Valuation (Technical Committee) was held 
from 5 April to 19  May 2021. The period from 5 to 23  April was devoted to the online discussion 
phase  followed by the consultation phase from 26  April to 14  May 2021. The virtual part of the 
meeting was held from 17 to 19  May 2021. Delegations from eighty -four (84) Member countries and 
observers from Algeria, Belarus, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Comoros, Iraq , Kosovo and Serbia, as well 
as the World Trade Organization (WTO) and the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) 
registered for the Session.  
 
Specific Technical Questions  
 
The Technical Committee examined six (6) technical questions submitted by Members.  
 
- Sale for Export to the Country of Importation under Article  1: Request by Canada . The 
Technical Committee concluded the examination of this case by putting it in Part III of 
the Conspectus of Technical Valuation Questions. The Technical Committee could not 
agree consensually on the conclusion proposed by Canada.  
 
- Royalties and licence fees under Article  8.1(c) of the Agreement: Request by Uruguay. 
The Technical Committee decided to continue examining this issue at its 53rd Session.  
 
- Royalties and licence fees under Article  8.1 (c) of the Agreement (Royalty – Income 
Tax): Request by China. The Technical Committee reached consensus on this question 
and adopted a new instrument, which will be sent to the Council for approval (see 
Annex  1 to this Report).  
 
- Valuation treatment of imported goods bearing the buyer 's own trademark: Request by 
Uruguay. The Technical Committee reached consensus on this question and adopted a 
new instrument, which will be sent to the Council for approval (see An nex 2 to this 
report).  
 
- Valuation treatment of charges paid related to an Inventory Protection Program: 
Request by Mauritius. The  Technical Committee decided to continue examining this 
issue at its 53rd Session.  
 
- Valuation treatment of cost of transpor t for the return of carriages used in the 
transportation of imported goods: Request by North Macedonia. The Technical 
Committee decided to continue examining this issue at its 53rd Session.  
 
Theme meeting  
 
The Technical Committee held a Theme Meeting (postponed since the 50th Session) at its 
52nd Session with two  topics: (a) Post Clearance Audit, and (b) the issues in the application of 
Article  7 of the WTO  Customs Valuation Agreement.  
 
Côte d 'Ivoire, Japan,  and the ICC made presentations on th e first  topic, and Japan, China,  and the 
ICC delivered presentations on the second one. The presentations on the two  topics were followed 
by a Question and Answer session.  
 
Technical Assistance  
 
Technical assistance activities undertaken by the Secretariat  since the  last session is in Annex  3 to 
this report.  
 G/VAL/M/71  
 
- 20 - 
 
  Dates of the 53rd TCCV Session  
 
- The dates of the 53rd Session of the Technical Committee has been provisionally set for 
18 – 20 October  2021, assuming a virtual session.  
 
  G/VAL/M/71  
 
- 21 - 
 
  Annex  1 
 
Advisory Opinion  4.18 
 
Royalties and license fees under Article  8.1(c) of the Agreement  
 
1. Importer/buyer/licensee  B of country of importation  I enters into a license agreement with 
supplier/seller/licensor  S of country of exportation  X for the use of a patent. As part of this 
arrangement, the parties  agree that:  
 
- The royalty payable by B to S for the commercial use of the patent licensed in the 
agreement will be calculated by applying a rate of five  per cent (5%) of the net sale 
price of the patented goods in the country of importation;  
 
- In addition to the royalty payment, B must pay the royalty income tax on behalf of S to 
the Tax Authority in the country of importation in accordance with the domestic tax 
rules;  
 
- the royalty  payment must be made without any deduction.  
 
Accordingly, the royalty payment of five per cent (5 %) agreed between licensee  B and licensor  S is 
a tax-exclusive royalty, otherwise known as a net royalty. In other words, licensee  B must pay both 
the royalty payment of f ive per cent (5 %) to licensor S, and the royalty income tax obligation of S 
to the Tax Authority.  
 
2. Subsequently, S and B enter into a contract for the international sale of product  P at a price 
of one thousand (1000) currency units. Under the contract,  the patent has been incorporated in 
product  P, such that the corresponding royalty may be considered to be related to the goods. In 
addition, the price does not include the royalty, which is paid as a condition of sale of the goods. 
Accordingly, all the r equirements provided for in Article  8.1(c) of the Agreement are met.  
 
3. Given that the net sale price of product  P in country  I is two thousand (2000) currency units, 
the net royalty  which B owes S for use of the patent is one hundred (100)  currency units.  
 
4. In accordance with the domestic tax rules in force in the country of importation  I, the income 
derived from the royalty payment is subject to income tax, which is referred to as a "non-resident 
income tax ". The income tax amount is calc ulated by applying a nominal rate of ten percent (10%) 
of the total royalty income. The taxpayer is licensor  S, and licensee  B is the withholding agent who 
pays the  income tax on behalf of licensor  S under a requirement to withhold tax at source. The tax 
base for calculating the royalty income tax is the total royalty income generated by licensor  S in the 
country of importation, which is known as gross royalty inclusive of income tax.  
 
5. Therefore, the royalty income subject to income tax shall be the sum of the net royalty 
received by licensor  S and the royalty income tax paid to the Tax Authority by licensee  B; with the 
royalty income tax as part of the licensor 's gross royalty income. According to the calculation method 
established by the  domestic tax ru les: the  withholding royalty income tax = net royalty / (1 -income 
tax rate %) × income tax rate%. Based on the information above, the royalty income 
tax = 100/ (1- 0%) ×10%≈11.11 currency units.  
 
6. Accordingly, B pays out a total of one thousand one hundr ed and eleven and 
eleven -hundredths (1111.11) currency units: one thousand (1000) currency units corresponding to 
the price of product  P, one hundred (100) currency units for the net royalty remitted to S, and eleven 
and eleven -hundredths (11.11) currency units for the income tax payment remitted to the Tax 
Authority. However, S receives only one thousand and one hundred (1100) currency units, including 
one thousand (1000) currency units for product  P, and one hundred (100) currency units for the net 
royalt y. 
 
7. The issue brought before the Technical Committee is whether 11.11 currency units of income 
tax paid by buyer/licensee  B is part of the Customs value for the imported goods under Article  8.1(c).  
 
  G/VAL/M/71  
 
- 22 - 
 
  The Technical Committee on Customs Valuation expressed the following view:  
 
8. Based on the facts, the royalty fees (paid by buyer/licensee  B under the license agreement) 
are related to the imported goods, have been paid as a condition of sale of the impo rted goods and 
have not been included in the price actually paid or payable. Therefore, the royalty payment should 
be added to the price actually paid or payable under Article  8.1(c) of the Agreement.  
 
9. In accordance with the domestic tax rules in force in country of importation  I, the income 
derived from the royalty payment is subject to income tax, with the taxpayer being the licensor and 
the licensee being the withholding agent. Additionally, the license agreement also requires B to pay 
the income tax on behalf of S to the Tax Authority and the net royalty payment should be made 
without any deduction. As a result, buyer/licensee B pays 11.11 currency units to the Tax Authority 
together with 100  currency units to S, the sum of  which form the licensee 's gross royalty payment.  
 
10. Therefore, in satisfying its gross royalty obligation, inclusive of income tax, the 
buyer/licensee  B makes two payments for the commercial use of the patent. The first is in the 
amount of 100  currency units for the net royalty ca lculated by applying the fixed rate of the net sale 
price of the patented goods as set out in the license agreement. The second is in the amount of 
11.11  currency units for the withholding royalty income tax. Both payments are made for the right 
to use the  patent under the license agreement. The 11.11  currency units are paid by the licensee to 
the Tax Authority on behalf of the licensor, and this royalty income tax is considered as part of the 
licensor 's royalty income for tax purposes. Consequently, as the  11.11  currency units form part of 
the licensor 's gross royalty income, they likewise form part of the licensee 's gross royalty payment 
for Customs valuation purposes.  
 
11. Article  8.1(c) of the Agreement provides that, in determining the Customs value, there shall 
be added to the price actually paid or payable royalties and license fees "that the buyer must pay, 
either directly or indirectly ". Given that all the requirements provide d for in Article  8.1 (c) of the 
Agreement are met in this case, the entire gross royalty payment, inclusive of income tax, total ling 
111.11  currency units should be added to the Customs value of the imported goods.  
 
12. Similar to the conclusion in paragra ph 12 of Advisory Opinion  4.16, which addresses a gross 
royalty payment inclusive of income tax, the solution proposed in this case does not involve including 
in the Customs value of the goods the amount of a tax of the type referred to in Paragraph  3(c) o f 
the Interpretative Note to Article  1, i.e. duties and taxes of the country of importation, but rather 
the total amount of royalty  payments inclusive of income tax  agreed between the licensor and the 
licensee.  
 
13. According to Article  8.1(c) of the Agree ment, the 11.11  currency units paid by the 
buyer/licensee to the Tax Authority on behalf of licensor should be regarded as part of the royalty 
payment, and thus the total gross payment of royalty inclusive of income tax – in the amount of 
111.11  currency u nits – should be added to the Customs value. Therefore, the Customs value for 
the imported goods in this case is 1111.11  currency units.  
 
  G/VAL/M/71  
 
- 23 - 
 
  Annex  2 
 
Advisory Opinion  24.1 
 
VALUATION TREATMENT OF IMPORTED GOODS BEARING  
THE BUYER 'S OWN TRADEMARK  
 
1. The question was raised whether a price for imported goods bearing the buyer 's own 
trademark can be accepted for the purposes of applying Article  1 of the Agreement in a situation  
where:  
 
(a) The trademark is owned by the buyer, and no royalty or licence fee has been paid to 
another entity for its use.  
 
(b) The trademark was provided free of charge by the buyer in the form of an image sent 
to the seller, e.g. electronically via the  Internet, so that it might then be used in the 
production of the goods being imported.  
 
(c) The cost of reproducing the trademark 's image or logo on the imported goods is included 
in the price actually paid or payable to the seller.  
 
(d) The price of good s bearing the buyer 's trademark is different from the price of the same 
goods bearing the seller 's trademark when they are sold by the same seller to the same 
buyer or to other buyers from the same country of importation, and which have also 
been:  
 
(i) produced in the same country;  
 
(ii) exported at or about the same time; and  
 
(iii) sold at the same commercial level and in the same quantities.  
 
2. The Technical Committee on Customs Valuation considered this issue and reached the 
conclusion that the mere  fact that a price is different to the prices of goods which are apparently the 
same but have different trademarks should not be grounds for its rejection under Article  1, albeit 
without prejudice to the provisions in Article  17 of the Agreement.  
 
3. The G eneral Introductory Commentary of the Agreement stipulates that the basis for valuation 
of goods for Customs purposes should be the transaction value of the goods being valued, and that 
the Customs value should be based on simple and equitable criteria con sistent with commercial 
practices. Therefore, each importation of goods should be examined on its own merits and 
characteristics.  
 
4. Based on the facts, there is no indication that special circumstances exist as set out in 
subparagraphs (a) to (d) of Article  1 of the Agreement that would prevent the use of transaction 
value. In particular, the provision in Article  1.1(b) of the Agreement is met; and it therefore cannot 
be construed that the existence of different trademarks on goods which are apparentl y the same 
constitutes some condition or consideration for which a value cannot be determined with respect to 
the goods being imported.  
 
5. Additionally, although the definition of "similar goods " under Article  15.2(b) of the Agreement 
applies only in inst ances where the transaction value method is rejected, this definition does provide 
insights into the conclusion why the mere fact that a price is different between two  similar goods 
bearing different trademarks is not a reason for rejecting the transaction  value. Namely, two of the 
factors to be considered in determining whether two  goods are similar include their reputation and 
the existence of a trademark. These factors demonstrate how the goods may not be similar and 
could explain a difference in the pri ces in the present case.  
 
6. Furthermore, Article  8.1(c) of the Agreement would not be applicable, as the trademark is 
owned by the buyer, and no royalty or licence fee has to be paid to another entity for its use.  
 
  G/VAL/M/71  
 
- 24 - 
 
  Annex 3  
 
Technical assistance activities on Customs valuation  
organized by the WCO  Secretariat  
 
Due to the prevailing conditions caused by the COVID -19 pandemic, it was not possible to carry out 
all the missions planned for the period. Necessary arrangements have been made to continue 
supporting Members with the use of technology.  
 
Since the 50th/51st virtual sessions of the Technical Committee on Customs Valuation (TCCV), which 
was held from 12 to 14  October  2020, three  virtual workshops, as detailed in the table below, have 
been held. The sub -regional workshop mentioned in the table has been jointly organized by the WCO 
and Japan for five  countries of the Southern Africa Region.  
 
 
 Period  Recipient 
Countries  Subjects  Location  
1 1-5 March  2021 Turkey  National Workshop on 
Advance Rulings in respect 
of Customs Valuation  Virtual Workshop  
2 22-26 March  2021 Lao (People 's 
Democratic 
Republic)  National Training Workshop 
on Customs Valuation  Virtual Workshop  
3 - 15, 22 and 
29 October  2020 
- 5, 12 and 
19 November  2020 
- 17-19 March  2021 
- 26-30 April 2021 Botswana, Malawi, 
Mozambique, 
Zambia, Zimbabwe  Sub-regional Master Trainer 
Programme on Customs 
Valuation organized jointly 
with Japan (JICA).  Virtual Workshop  
 
It may be noted that a regional workshop on Customs Valuation and Transfer Pricing, jointly 
organized by the WCO and the OECD in favour of countries belonging to the WCO  Middle East and 
Northern Africa Region, is scheduled for 31  May–3 June 2021.  
 
Additionally, for the information of the  Committee, a national virtual workshop on Customs Valuation 
and Transfer Pricing was organized and delivered in September  2020 for Panama.  
 
__________  