source
stringclasses 1
value | document_id
stringlengths 11
11
| title
stringlengths 4
531
| short_title
stringlengths 0
109
| author
stringclasses 941
values | date
stringlengths 3
10
| type_of_document
stringclasses 5
values | identifier
stringlengths 0
1.19k
| link
stringlengths 54
54
| file
stringlengths 0
25
| folder
stringclasses 157
values | word_count
int64 0
373k
| character_count
int64 0
3.12M
| text
stringlengths 0
3.12M
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GATT Library | zj981vp0040 | Notes of the Twenty-Fifth Meeting : Held on Tuesday, 20 January 1948, at 3.00 p.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 22, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Third Committee: Commercial Policy Sub-Committee A (Articles 16, 17, 18, 19) | 22/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.39 and E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.1-39 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/zj981vp0040 | zj981vp0040_90190466.xml | GATT_146 | 1,054 | 7,095 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.39
ON DU 22 January 1948
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
THIRD COMMITTEE: COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUB-COMMITTEE A (ARTICLES 16, 17, 18, 19)
NOTES OF THE TWENTY-FIFTH MEETING
Held on Tuesday, 20 January 1948, at 3.00 p.m,
Chairman: Dr. G. A. LAMSVELT (Netherlands)
ARTICIE 18 - NATIONAL TREATMENT ON INTERNAL TAXATION AND REGULATION
Purchases for governmental purposes (paragraph 5)
Item 71 - (Ceylon and Mexico)
The Mexican delegate explained that his delegation had proposed the
deletion of paragraph 5 because 1) its scope was not clear; 2) it was not clear
what was meant by purchases for governmental purposes; and 3) because of the
cross-reference to Article 25, and reserved his position with respect to
paragraph 5 pending availability of the final text of Article 25.
In vlew of the Sub-Committee's interpretation that paragraph 5 was an
exception to the whole of Article 18, the Mexican delegate withdrew his
original proposal to delete paragraph 5. He proposed alternatively the
addition in paragraph 5 of a statement to the effect that the provisions of
paragraph 5 of Article 18 could in no way be interpreted as limiting the
rost-favoured-nation obligation under Article 16, to cover the possibility of
governmental discrimination between imports under paragraph 5.
The United Kingdom and Uaited States delegates were of the opinion that
it was not necesarry to insert in Article 18 a reference to Article 16, since
paragraph 5 clearly provided for exceptions only to Article 18, not to
Article 16. The delegate of Cuba felt that the desirability of including in
Article 18 (5) a reference to Article 16 should be investigated.
It was agreed that the Working Party should determine whether a
reference to Article 16 was required in Article 18 (5).
Items 72 (China and 73 (Argentina)
The delegate of China explained that their provisional proposal was made
in Geneva and maintained in Havana because of the difficulty of identifying
purchases for governmental purposes in the sense of paragraph 5.
The Argentinian delegate explained that their amendment was not intended
as an exception for purchases made by governments acting in a commercial or
/state trading E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.39
Page 2
state trading capacity but only in a governmental capacity, particularly
governmental intervention to meet urgent national necessities. Otherwise this
paragraph would constitute an interference with state sovereignty. He could
not agree that a government should be subject to the same restrictions as
private traders or be forced to pay internal taxes to itself.
The delegates of Cuba the Netherlands and the United Kingdom opposed the
Chinese and Argentinian proposals on the grounds that their effect would be
to exclude from the provisions of Article 18 all governmental purchases,
whether for resale or not, thereby providing an opportunity to circumvent
the state trading provisions of the Charter.
The Australian delegate suggested that Article 18 be reexamined in
connection with the articles on state trading and subsidies; that a great
amount of confusion had arisen from attempting to deal in one article with
national treatment on internal taxation and regulation, and that Article 18
should be redrafted so that it would be easier to interpret, particularly in
its practical application.
The Chairman concluded that there was no support in the Sub-Committee for
the Argentinian and Chinese proposals as such. It was agreed, however, that
1. the Working Party should endeavor to define more precisely
governmental purchases for the purposes of paragraph 5 to facilitate
the classification of borderline cases such as those mentioned by the
Chinese delegate, e.g., tractors purchased by the Government for
demonstration purposes but later re-sold to farmers;
2. the Argentinian end Chinese delegates should suggest to the
Working Party wording, other than that proposed in their original
amendments, which could meet the points they had in mind without
excluding from the provisions of Article 18 purchases made by
Governments in a state trading capacity; and
3. the Working Party should examine the latter part of paragraph 5
in relation to Article 25.
The Chinese delegate indicated that if the Working Party was able to
define more satisfactorily what was intended by governmental purchases, his
delegation would withdraw its provisional reservation.
ARTICLE 19 - SPECIAL PROVISIONS RELATING TO CINEMATOGRAPH FILMS
Items 78 and 79 - (United Kingdom)
It was agreed that these amendments involved purely drafting changes
and should be referred directly to the Working Party.
Item 77 . (Czechoslovakia)
The Czechoslovakian delegate referred to the remarks made by the Head of
his delegation in Committee III (E/CONF.2/C.3/SR.13) and indicated that his
delegation wished to maintain its reservation on Article 19 pending
Committee III's consideration of the Sub-Committee's Report. However, he
/wished to make E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W. 39
Page 3
\wished to make a proposal which, if accepted, might enable his delegation to
withdraw its original proposal to delete Article 19 and to provide in
Article 18 that cinematograph films were excluded from the provisions of the
Charter. His proposal was that a distinction be made between feature films
and newsreels, i.e., short films on social, political, sporting, scientific,
etc., subjects, and that films in the latter category be excepted from the
provisions of Article 19.
The delegate of Cuba indicated that he was more inclined to support the
original Czechoslovakian proposal to enclude films from ITO jurisdiction
on artistic ground rather then their new proposal.
The delegate of Norway stated that he would like to support the original
Czechoslovakian amendment to exclude films from ITO's jurisdiction whether
maintained by the Czechoslovakian delegation or not.
The United States delegate considered it neither desirable nor
practicable to make such a distinction between types of films as that
proposed by the Czechoslovakian delegate.
Even though only the Norway delegate supported the original
Czechoslovakian proposal, it was agreed (a) to establish a Working Party,
consisting of the delegates of France, Norway, United Kingdom and
United States, to consider both the original Czechoslovakian proposal (Item 77)
and the suggestion made at this meeting; and (b) that the Working Party should
consult with the delegate of Czechoslovakia, who was not a member of the
Sub-Committee.
Item 80 - (Argentina)
The Argentinian delegate withdrew his amendment in view of the
Sub-Committee's interpretation that the date fixed in sub-paragraph (c)
clearly related only to discriminatory measures as between foreign films, not
as between domestic and foreign films. |
GATT Library | pp818wr4824 | Notes of the Twenty-First Meeting : Held on Wednesday, 14 January 1948, 10.30 a.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 15, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Third Committee: Commercial Policy Sub-Committee A (Articles 16, 17, 18, 19) | 15/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.33 and E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.1-39 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/pp818wr4824 | pp818wr4824_90190458.xml | GATT_146 | 975 | 6,602 | United Nations Nations Unies
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C.3/A/
ON DU W.33 15 January 1948
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL:: ENGLGSMH
H RD COMaITT=: COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUB-COMMITTEE A (ARTICLES 16, 17, 18, 19)
NOTES OF THE TWENTY-FIRST MEETING
Held on Wednesday, 14 January 1948, 10.30 a.m.
Chairmen: Dr. G. E. LAMSVELT (Netherlands)
Reference: E/CONF.2/C.3/6)
ARTICLE 18 - NATIONAL TREATMENT ON INTERNAL TAXATION AND REGULATION
"National Treatment" rule; exceptions thereto (paragraph 1)
Item 7? - (United States)
This proposal was agreed in principle and referred to the Working Party
for redrafting, the following suggestions to be taken into consideration:
(a) substitution of the phrase "applied at the time of importation"
for the phrase "imposed on imports";
(b) clarification of the words "compensate" and "equivalent', e.g.,
a tax and a charge, not exactly equal, could have the same protective
incidence.
Suggested addition to the last sentence of paragraph 1 - (Mexico)
The delegate of Mexico proposed the following addition to Article 18,
discussion of vhich was deferred from the previous meeting pending
availability of the text:
"1....The provisions of this paragraph shall not apply to
exemptions from internal taxes for development purposes which
fulfill the following requirements:
(a) Exemptions which are granted for a maximum period of five
years, and
(b) which are open on equal terms for the unexpired portion
of the period of exemption to all firms, irresoppectivef the
ntionality of the owners, producing or desirous of producing"
any sarticle o exenmmdmpteda
(c) which are grantsed on a non-discriminatory beis exclusively
for the promotion of new industries, and
/(d) which do not E/CONF.2/C.3 /A/W. 33
Page 2
(d)which do not involve an increase of tax rates prior to
the granting of the exemption."
The Mexican delegate explained that the purpose of this amendment was
(a) to permit exemptions from excise taxes on particular products
for development purposes (The Sub-Committee agreed previously that
exemptions from customs duties or income taxes would not come within
the terms of Article 18);
(b) to provide for "national treatment", in accordance with the
provisions of Article 18, with respect to such exemptions by explicit
safeguards.
A majority of the Sub-Committee, while sympathizing with the objective
of promoting economic development, did not favour the Mexican proposal for
the following reasons:
1. In the case of unbound items, an increased tariff duty could be
applied, which would be preferable to the imposition of a differential
internal tax.
2. Exemptions from internal taxes on bound items would result in an
increased margin of protection to domestic producers, thereby impairing
3. The suggested safeguards, with the possible exception of (d),
would provide merely for non-discriminatory treatment as between
industries located within the country permitting the exemptions,
irrespective of nationality, but would not prevent increased.
protection for local as compared to imported products.
4. Exemptions from internal taxes for development purposes should
be subject to the proce e for release from regotiate commitments
provided, under Article 13. * ;.
5. Existing differential internal taxes could be maintained for
dposev elopment presunder sshe ptrovision8ofAdrngdnle 14, peni,
ae Orreiizview by th ganation under Article 13.
The delegates of Colombia aned the Md Cubnaamendmen ,supportexica t the
latter,a sudgffigesting tht iculties, arising out of exemptions from internal
taxes on boud items could be examine--c on a caseunmdeuby se basi `
Art iclMests9ff nd.eem0 o orte Mobrs of tmhte Ss,sub-Coomi,,ie however.
sfrtelt t treles les Ar 90twouic89 tane ad fficient way of 0wdfeiay
is pr haemliem.ng t
The delegate of the Philippines, not a Member of the Simub-Coittee,
su thppMexicoted~ xn pr,opiintingtout anat .oeIthethaPhnes,ilippir having
by law exempted new industrimes fro all local taxes fodr ad perio of five
,/years would E/CONF. 2/C.3/A/W.33
Page 3
years, would like to provide for an exception under Article 18 to permit
the continued operation of this law. It was pointed out that the Mexican
amendment dealt solely with exemptions from excise taxes on products.
The Mexican delegate saw no reason to accept the suggestion that his
proposal be referred to Committee II (Economic Development). Mexico would,
under the existing draft of Article 13, have recourse to the procedure for
releases from negotiated commitments for development purposes provided
therein, and would have freedom with respect to action on rebound items.
Item 48 - (United Kingdom)
It was agreed to refer this item directly to the Working Party since
it involved no substantive change.
Suggestion by International Monetary Fund regarding interpretation of
Article 18 with respect to multiple currency practices
The representative of the International Monetary Fund suggested that
the following interpretation of Article 18, adopted in Geneva but
inadvertently omitted from the Report of the Second Session of the
Preparatory Committee, be inserted into the text of the Charter or included
as an interpretative note:
"The Sub-Committee considered that if such charges are
imposed on or in connection with imports or exports as such,
or are imposed on the international transfer of payments for
imports or exports, they would not be internal charges and,
therefore, would not be covered by Article 15 (18); on the other
hand, in the unlikely case of a multiple currency technique which
takes the form of an internal tax or charge, such as an excise
tax on a particular product, then that technique would be
precluied by Article 15 (18). It may be pointed out that the
possible existence of charges on the transfer of payments
insofar as these are permitted by the International Monetary Fund
is clearly recognized by Article 14 (16)."
It was pointed out that Sub-Committee C of Committee III had agreed to
retain the interpretative note to paragraph 5 of Article 35 which was the
same in substance as the note agreed in Geneva with respect to Article 15 (18).
The Sub-Committee accepted this interpretation and agreed to its
inclusion as a note to the Charter, after appropriate re-wording by the
Working Party. |
GATT Library | hp527mt4650 | Notes of the Twenty-First Meeting : Held on Wednesday, 14 January 1948, 10.30 a.m. Addendum | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 16, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Sub-Committee A (Articles 16, 17, 18, 19) | 16/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.33/Add.1 and E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.1-39 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/hp527mt4650 | hp527mt4650_90190459.xml | GATT_146 | 155 | 1,173 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C. 3/A/W.33/
ON DU 16 January 1948 ENGLISH - FRENCH
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
THIRD COMMITTEE: COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUB-COMMITTEE A (ARTICLES 16, 17, 18 AND 19)
NOTS OF THE TWENTY-FIRST MEETING
Held on Wednesday, 14 January 1948, 10.30 a.m.
ADDENDUM
ARTICLE 18 - NATIONAL TREATMENT ON INTERNAL TAXATION AND REGULATION
"National Treatment" rule: exceptions thereto (paragraph 1)
Item 55 - (Costa Rica)
This proposal received no support on the grounds that it was not necessary.
TROISIEME COMMISSION: POLITIQUE COMMERCIALE
SOUS-COMMISSION A (ARTICLES 16, 17, 18, 19)
NOTES DE LA VINGT-ET-UNIEME SEANCE
qui a eu lieu le mercredi 14 Janrier 1948 a 10 h. 30
ADDENDA
ARTICLE 18 - TRAITEMENT NATIONAL EN MATIERE D'IMPOTS ET DE REGLEMENTATION
Exceptions a la rFgle du "Traitement national" (paragraphe 1)
Point 55 - (Costa-Rica)
Cette proposition n'a rencontrT aucun appui, car on a estimT qu'elle n'est
pas nTcessaire. |
GATT Library | xz633jn6641 | Notes of the Twenty-Second Meeting : Held on Thursday, 15 January 1948, at 10.30 a.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 19, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Third Committee: Commercial Policy Sub-Committee A (Articles 16, 17, 18, 19) | 19/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.34 and E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.1-39 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/xz633jn6641 | xz633jn6641_90190460.xml | GATT_146 | 1,391 | 9,019 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF. 2/C.3/A/W. 34
ON DU 19 January 1948
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
THIRD COMMITTEE: COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUB-COMMITTEE A (ARTICLES 16, 17, 18, 19)
NOTES OF THE TWENTY-SECOND MEETlNG
Held on Thursday, 15 January 1948, at 10.30 a.m.
Chairman: Dr. G. A. LAMSVELT (Netherlands)
ARTIONE 18 - NATIONAL TREATMENT ON INTERNAL TXATION AND REGULATION
1. New paragraph to be inserted after paragraph 3 - (Norway)
In addition to the comments contained in document E/CONF.2/C.3/6/Add.5,
the delegate of Norway made the following points in support of this proposal:
1. Although the internal tax on imported products contemplated
by the Norwegian price stabilization scheme in periods of
deflationary pressure might possibly be contrary to the provisions
of Article 18 as now drafted, he did not consider that from an
overall, long-range point of view, the arrangements proposed would
be contrary to the intention of Article 18.
2. The proposed tax on imported products would involve no
element of protection nor would it be imposed for revenue purposes,
but merely
(a) to help finance the subsidization of imported products
when prices were higher than those of domestic products, and
(b) to prevent or to delay a decline of the price level
of domestic products when prices on imported products were
lower than those of domestic products.
3. Such a system would presumably be permissible under Article 18
if an internal tax were levied both on domestic and imported
products and the domestic product subsidized by a like amount.
This procedure would, however, involve administrative difficulties
which Norway wished to avoid.
4. The Norwegian delegate cited the example of wheat, of which
Norway bas a small domestic production, held at a stable level by
the subsidization of imported wheat. They wished to apply such
/stabilization E/CONF.2/C. 3/A/W. 34
Page 2
stabilization arrangements to other primary commodities as well as
to certain industrial products.
5. To summarize, his delegation regarded their proposed
amendment not as a violation of the principles of Article 18 but
more in the nature of an interpretative amendment.
The delegate of Cuba was of the opinion that the stabilization system
envisaged by the Norwegian amendment would operate clearly to protect
domestic products. Although the dislocation of price relationships
during the war had resulted in high prices on imported goods, in more
normal times, when prices fell, the proposed system would result in the
application of an internal tax on imported products rather than a subsidy.
Domestic industries having a higher cost of production than the exporter
would be protected by the differential internal tax. While not objecting
to such a scheme during the post-war period of adjustment, he would be
opposed to it during normal times when its effect would be purely
protective. He objected further to this proposal on the grounds that
additional provision in the Charter for the use of subsidies would increase
further the balance in favour of the richer, industrialized countries, able
to use subsidies both from an administrative and financial point of view.
The delegate of the United States did not agree with the Norwegian
proposal because (a) while advantageous to Norwegian producers and
consumers, it would not take into account the interests of other countries
and would, therefore, be contrary to the basic idea of the Charter, i.e.,
international economic co-operation; (b) the imposition of an internal
tax on imports would involve a unilateral increase in the level of
protection in the case of items bound in negotiations; (c) so fer as the
post-war transitional period was concerned, he believed Norway was
adequately covered by the provisions of Article 43 and would be covered
by Article 44 in the event of injury.
The delegate of France expressed the view that the Charter was somewhat
unbalanced in that it permitted stabilization schemes for primary producers
and exporters, but not for the stabilization of internal prices in
industrial countries. He considered that the problem raised by Norway
was a general economic problem and that Norway alone would not be able
to isolate itself completely from the effects of business cycles. However,
in order to permit Norway to maintain and extend its stabilization
arrangements, he would not object to such a proposal, if it were redrafted
to provide appropriate safeguards for the protection of the interests of
third parties and in such a way that it would not be likely to reduce the
/flow of world E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W. 34
Page 3
flow of world trade. He could not agree that Article 43 would provide
an adequate solution since this Article would permit such a stabilization
scheme only during a transitional period.
The delegate of the Netherlands suggested that the Norwegian proposal
was beyond the scope of this particular Sub-Committee since it concerned
a number of articles of the Charter. He did not agree that the Charter
as drafted provided no scope for price stabilization arrangements, since his
interpretation was that anything not specifically forbidden by the Charter
was permissible. He felt that the Norwegian proposal would igore the
existing machinery provided for under the Charter in Articles 25, 27, 30
and 31 and Chapter VI. Rather than trying to provide in the Charter for
a general scheme such as contemplated by the Norwegian proposal, he
believed it would be preferable to attack the problem on a product-by-
product, article-by-article basis.
The delegate of Mexico, while sympathizing with the objectives of the
Norwegian proposal, could not support the proposal as such. The long-run
effect, when present high prices had dropped, would be to increase the
level of protection on domestic products by the imposition of heavy taxes
on imports in addition to existing tariffs. He agreed with the
United States delegats that the proposal would have the effect of aggravating
world problems particularly in times of deflationary pressure. While
agreeing with the French delegate that business cycle and price control
schemes were in principle desirable, he concurred in the Netherlands
delegate's view that the machinery provided in the present draft of the
Charter was probably as far as it was possible to go in this direction at
present. The Mexican delegate suggested adding to the Charter a provision
to the effect that internal stabilization schemes, in whatever form, would
be acceptable, provided they did not violate the commercial provisions and
"national treatment" rule of Chapter IV.
The delegate of the United Kingdom agreed with the Netherlands delegate
that a stabilization scheme could be operated under the subsidy articles or
under Chapter VI. He considered that (a) the differential internal tax
contemplated in the Norwegian scheme would have the same effect as an
additional tariff, ad (b) to provide that tariff bindings could be varied,
subject to certain conditions, would constitute a wide loophole to the
provisions of Article 18.
The Chairman concluded that
1. while there was sympathy with the objectives of the Norwegian
proposal, there was no substantial support for the amendment as such;
/2. there was E/CONF.2/C .3/A/W.34
Page 4
2. there was considerabe support for the Mexican suggestion,
and agreed to consult with the Chairman of Committee III as to
the appropriate disposition of the Mexican suggestion, which
was beyond the scope of this Sub-Committee.
Item 57 (Cuba)
The Cuban proposal to delete the word "transportation" in the first
sentence of paragraph 2, and to delete the second sentence, received no
support, on the grounds that these provisions were necessary to prevent
indirect protection to domestic products by means of differential
transportation charges.
Item 58 (Mexico)
There were no objections to the Mexican proposal, but a number of
members of the Sub-Comittee felt that it was not necessary to specify
in the Charter that the Organization shall investigate whether
differential transportation charges are discriminatory.
The Chairmen called attention to the decision to add a new paragraph 8
to Article 32, subject to review if paragraph 2 of Article 18 was amended,
as follows:
"8. Transportation charges on traffic in transit shall not be
considered as falling within the purview of this Article but shall
be subject to the provisions of paragraph 2 of Article 18." (Notes
of the Fifth Meeting of Sub-Committee C, E/CONF.2/C.3/C/W.5).
It was agreed that the Working Party should consider this addition
to Article 32 in connection with Article 18, as well as whether it was
necessary to include the Mexican amendment (Item 58). |
GATT Library | yr477rz5416 | Notes of the Twenty-Third Meeting : Held on Friday, 16 January 1948,at 10.30 a.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 20, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Third Committee: Commercial Policy Sub-Committee A (Articles 16, 17, 18, 19) | 20/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.35 and E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.1-39 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/yr477rz5416 | yr477rz5416_90190461.xml | GATT_146 | 1,341 | 8,984 | RESTRICTED E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.35
United Nations Nations Unies 20 January 1948
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
ON DU
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI
THIRD COMMITTEE: COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUB-COMMITTEE A (ARTICLES 16, 17, 18, 19)
NOTES OF THE TWENTY-THIRD MEETING
Held on Friday, 16 January 1948, at 10.30 a.m.
Chairman: Dr. G. A. LAMSVELT (Netherlands)
ARTICLE 18 - NATIONAL TREATMENT ON INTERNAL TAXATION AND REGULATION
1. Exceptions to national treatment on regulation (paragraph 2)
Item 65 - (Argentina)
On the suggestion of the Argentinian delegate it was agreed to defer
discussion of this proposal pending consideration of amendments to paragraph 4.
Item 70.- (Norway)
The Sub-Committee was of the Opinion that this amendment would not be
necessary because paragraphs 3 (a) and (b) as drafted would permit the use
of internal mixing regulations required to enforce standards and even to
protect one domestic industry against another, provided such regulations did
not have the effect of protecting the domestic as compared to the imported
product.
In reply to a question by the Norwegian delegate, the United States
delegate pointed out that the words "in effect" in sub-paragraph 3 (a) were
intended to cover domestic mixing regulations requiring that no more than a
specific amount or proportion should be of foreign origin, which would, of
course, have the same effect as requiring that a certain amount or proportion
must be of domestic origin.
The Sub-Committee agreed to the interpretation of paragraphs 3 and 4
set forth in the Report of the Sub-Committee on Articles 14, 15 and 24
(16, 18 and 17) in Geneva, as follows:
".....the present draft is aimed at preventing only those internal
quantitative regulations which are clearly directed against imported
products for the purposes of protecting domestic products........
"The Sub-Committee is of the opinion that paragraph 3 as now drafted
would not prohibit the continuance of a tariff system which permits
the entry of a product at a rate of duty lower than the normal tariff
rate, provided the product is mixed or used with a certain proportion
/of a similar E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.35
Page 2.
of a similar product of national origin. The sub-Committee considered
that such a provision would not be regarded as an internal quantitative
regulation in terms of this paragraph for the reason that the use of a
percentage of the local product is not made compulsory nor is the
importation of the product in any way restricted.
"The Sub-Committee was also in agreement that under the provisions of
paragraphs 3 and 4 regulations would be permitted which, while perhaps
having the effect of assisting the production of a particular domestic
product (say, butter) are directed as much against the domestic
production of another product (say, domestic oleomargarine) as they are
against imports (say, imported oleomargarine)."
The Norwegian delegate indicated that he would withdraw his amendment
(Item 70), on the understanding that a satisfactory explanation of the
intention of parangraphs 3 (a) and (b), along the lines of the Geneva
Sub-Committee's Report, would be included in the Sub-Committee's Report.
2. Limitations on "mixing" regulations (paragraph 3)
Item 6o - (Mexico)
The delegate of Mexico explained that this amendment had been submitted
because his delegation considered it unfair that internal quantitative
regulations maintained under paragraph 4 of Article 18 were subject to
negotiation for their limitation, liberalization or elimination, whereas
import restrictions on agricultural or fisheries products permitted under
Article 20 were not subject to negotiation. His delegation had now
concluded from the discussions in Sub-Committee E that quantitative
restrictions under Article 20 (2) (c) would be subject to negotiation,
and would be prepared to withdraw its proposal to delete paragraph 3 of
Article 18 provided the following sentence was added to sub-paragraph 3 (a):
"The provisions of this sub-paragraph shall apply to Article 20 (2) (c)."
The Cuban, French, United Kingdom and United States delegates considered
that the provisions of Article 20 (2) (c) and of Article 18 (4) were in no
way analogous since one referred to restrictions on imports and the other
to mixing regulations an products after importation.
The Mexican delegate insisted that Article 20 (2) (c) was analogous
to paragraph 3 (a) in that any quantitative restriction on imports would
have an effect on the proportions of the domestic and imported products
which could be mixed and therefore would come within the meaning of the
words "formally or in effect" in paragraph 3 (a) of Article 18.
The Cuban delegate was inclined to agree that the Mexican delegate might
have a point with respect to "processing or use" in paragraph 3, since import
restrictions would-automatically affect the "use" of domestic products, if
/the words E/CONF.2/C .3/A/W.35
Page 3
the words "processing and use" were intended to connote something apart
fro "mixing".
The French delegate believed there was an inconsistency in permitting the
retention of interna quantitative restrictions only subject to limitation,
liberalization or elimination by negotiation, whereas under the procedure of
Article 20 a Member could be authorized to retain existing quantitative
restrictions without negotiating.
The delegate of the United States recalled that the United States
originally favoured the elimination of all quantitative restrictions,
including internal, However, internal quantitative regulations were
probably less objectionable than quantitative restrictions because (a) the
number of mixing regulations in existence was small compared to the number
of quantitative restrictions; (b) whereas quantitative restrictions limited
the total quantity of imports, internal mixing regulations regulated only
the proportion of domestic and imported products in relation to total
consumption. With respect to any distinction having been intended between
the words "mixture, processing or use", he felt that these words must be
considered in connection with the modifying phrase "in specified amounts
or proportions".-
The Mexican delegate proposed that
1. The lanua ge of Article 18 (3) be clarified;
2. The relationship, if any, between Article 18 (3) and Article 20
() -(c) be determined. This could be deferred until Sub-ommCitete E
had finished its consideration of Article 20. Meanwhile, he tMexican
delegate reserved his position regarding Article 18 (3) pending
availability of the final text of Article 20.
It wasag ree dthat the Working Party should consider (a) clarification
of the language of Article 18 (3), particularly the words "formally or in
effect "in sub-paragraph 3 (a), and (b) the Mexican proposal to add a
sentence to sub-paragraph 3 (a) (see page 2) in the light of the final text
of Article 20.
Items 61 and 66 - (Ceylon)
It was the sense of the Sub-Committee that Item 61 should be adopted,
since it reflected the original intention of the drafters, but it was
referred to the Working Party for appropriate wording.
The delegate of China expressed full support for the Ceylon proposals
(Items 61 and 66).
Otherwise, there was no support in the Sub-Committee for Item 66. It
was agreed however that the Cuban delegate's suggestion that sub-paragraph
4 (b) might be amended to make it clear that internal quantitative
regulations, E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.35
Page 4
regulations, in particular cases, were less restrictive than quantitative
Restrictions, should be discussed by the Working Party.
The delegate of New Zealand indicated that his delegation would be
prepared to withdraw its reservation to sub-paragraph 3 (b) made in Geneva
if the present draft of Article 18 (3) and (4) of and Article 13 remained
substantially as now drafted. .
Item 62- (Ireland) . . --
rTlyhe delegate of Ireland ezaitethat his delegation was primai.
concernietd t o fmaintain an existing mixing zulation requiring the mIxre.
a certain proporti ndustrial- lcoholmade from domestic potatoes with
imported petro.
Thereno upportso.fr a ,i as rfted,on the grounds that.- t;-it
w consrtiiltu1t. e,a wwie eacpe.case o Aatlce 8_ I as,however, agreed
tacrfr it-te tf eh -pWrki4 Prtyto sea i'te rtcular problem with which
IreldVa co cmer ned rcould-be. e.ude ub-paragraph 4 (b).
The delegate of Ireland ih ndicated tha w3his witv radelegatiooulhdw
tamhnderotpisede eec n it iwereade clear nien the recopr Cof renceedtat
theirpracrti coulaxas e-ould be.cvered by the provisions of sub-paragraph 4 (b).
-Item 6 (Ceylon)
The delegate of Ceylon indicated that his delegation would not press
methmins andet. |
GATT Library | jk483zd3763 | Notes of Thirteenth and Fourteenth Meetings : Held at Havana or Saturday, 7 March 1948 at 6.30 p.m and Monday, 9 March 1948 at 10.30 am. respectively | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, March 10, 1948 | Joint Sub-Committee of Committees II and III: Tariff Preferences | 10/03/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.23/A/W.13, E/CONF.2/C.2/D/W.1-3, C.23/A/W.1-3, and C.26/A/W.1-29 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/jk483zd3763 | jk483zd3763_90180354.xml | GATT_146 | 129 | 847 | United Nations
CONFERENCE
ON
TRDE AND EMPLOYMENT
Nations Unies
CONFERENCE
DU
COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI
RESTRICTED
E/CONF. 2/C. 2&3/A/
W.13
10 March 1948
ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
JOINT SUB-COMMITTEE OF COMMITTEES II AND III ON PREFERENCES
NOTES OF THIRTEENTH AND FOURTEENTH MEETINGS
Held at Havana or Saturday, 7 March 1948 at 6.30 p.m and Monday,
9 March 1948 at 10.30 am. respectively
Chairman: Mr.Jean ROYER (France)
1. At its thirteenth meeting, the Joint Sub-Committee discussed and
approved its Report to Committees III on Article 16 ard 42.
2. At its fourteenth meeting the Joint Sub-Committee discussed and
approved its Report to Committee II on Article 15. The delegate of
Brazil withdrew his reservation on the Article, on condition that the
recommendations of the Beads of Delegations were accepted as a whole. |
GATT Library | wq351fz3594 | Notes of Thirteenth Meeting : Held on Saturday, 3 January 1948m., 10.30 a.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 5, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Third Committee: Commercial Policy Sub-Committee A (Articles 16, 17, 18, 19) | 05/01/1948 | official documents | E/C.2/C.3/A/W.24 and E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.1-39 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/wq351fz3594 | wq351fz3594_90190446.xml | GATT_146 | 827 | 5,501 | United Nations Nations Unies
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE RESTRICTED
ON DU E/CONF.2/C. 3/A/W.24
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI 5 January 1948
ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
THIRD COMMITTEE: COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUB-COMMITTEE A(ARTICLES 16,17 18, 19)
Notes of Thirteenth Meeting
Held on Saturday, 3 January 1948, 10.30 a.m.
Chairman: Dr. G. A. LAMSVELT (Netherlands)
ARTICLE 17 - REDUCTION OF TARIFFS AND ELIMINATION OF PREFERENCES
1. Agends Item 1 - Amendments to Rules for Negotiations
Item 42 - adjustment of customs duties to compensate for internal taxes
or charges reduced or eliminated under Articles 18 and 35 (Venezuela).
The delegate for Venezuela proposed deferring further discussion
pending receipt of instructions from his Government which might make it
possibsle for his delegation to withdraw this amendment. Agreed.
The delegate for Brazil stated that his delegation was still concerned
with the principle of the Venezuelan proposal. It was agreed to defer
discussion of any proposal the Brazilian delegation might wish to submit
regarding Article 18 pending consideration of this Article, and that any
amendment which the Brazilian delegation might wish to suggest with respect
to Article 35 should be referred directly to Sub-Committee C of Committee III
(technical articles).
2. Agenda Item 2 - Failure to Negotiate: Role of Organization
(Tariff Committee)
Item 26 (second sentence) and 38 (Uruguay); Item 39 (Peru);
Item. 43 (Peru and Uruguay).
The Chairman advised Members that the Sub-Committee of Committee VI on
Article 81 (Tariff Committee) had suspended its meeting pending availability
of Sub-Committee A's report on Article 17.
The delegate for Uruguay indicated that he would refrain from
discussing his delegation's proposals, provided others did the same,
pending availability of the proposed redraft of Article 17. If this redraft
was not in fundamental disagreement with the basic ideas of the Uruguayan
proposals, his delegation would be glad to accept it.
The delegate for Peru, in supporting his delegation's proposals,
/stated E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W. 24 Page 2
stated that in their view the present draft Charter would give to the
Tariff Committee excessive power not justified by its proposed composition.
Members of the Tariff Committee, as signatories to the General Agreement,
would be both party and judge in cases arising under paragraph 2. In the
absence of generally accepted standards for judging the adequacy of
concessions to be made by new Members, non-partieu to the General Agreement,
determinations should be made by a third party, i.e., the Organization
through the Executive Board. This was the purpose of the Peruvian
amendments to Articles 17 and 81.
The Mexican delegate supported the statement made by the delegate for
Peru, and referred to his delegation's proposal to establish an Economic
Development Committee whose views should be accorded equal weight with
those of the Tariff Committee.
The delegate for Cuba did not agree that paragraph 2 should be deleted,
and considered that paragraphs 2 and 3 as drafted were necessary, proper
and fair on the grounds that parties to the General Agreement, having
already negotiated pursuant to Article 17, (and since the benefits of such
negotiations would accrue to all Members by virtue of the most-favoured-
nation clause), should be entitled to decide whether concessions made by
new Members in negotiations pursuant to Article 17 were adequate to entitle
them to become parties to the General Agreement.
The delegate for the Netherlands supported the statement made by the
delegate for Cuba, and suggested that Articles 17 and 81 implied the
possibility of an appeal from decisions of the Tariff Committee directly
to the Conference.
The delegate for the United States stated that in the view of his
delegation the basic principle underlying Article 17 was that all Members
should contribute equitably to the objectives of that Article. The Tariff
Committee would providee the only practicable mechanism for assuring that
all Membre did so, at least during the early years when perhaps no more
than one-third of the Members of the Organization would be parties to the
General Agreement.
While agreeing that decisions of the Tariff Committee could not be
reversed (otherwise the Tariff Committee would be an ineffective
enforcement instrument), it was his interpretation that an appeal to the
;,f * . : : : : .! *5 - ; r:-;.~
Conference is could be made under Articles 89 and 90 on the bas of action
taken pursuantto'`d~trmination of the Tariff Committee. The power of
the Tariff Cohamittee would not be exclusive; but would be sbed
independency with the Conference .
/His delegation E/CONF.2/C. 3/A/W. 24
Page 3
His delegation could not agree to the Peruvian proposal that the
Tariff Committee should be merely a reconmndatory body.
The delegate for Uruguay, supported by the Peruvian delegate, was of
the opinion that the United States delegates interpretation made it all
the more important to determine precisely the respective competence of the
Tariff Committee and the Conference. He suggested that this question be
examined and the possibilities of appeal under the existing draft Charter
clarified.
It was agreed to continue the discussion at the next meeting. |
GATT Library | qr979qs7501 | Notes of Thirtieth Meeting : Held on Wednesday, 28 January 1948, 10.30 a.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 30, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Third Committee: Commercial Policy Sub-Committee A (Articles 16, 17, 18, 19) | 30/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.45, E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.40-55, and C.3/A/WHITE PAPERS | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/qr979qs7501 | qr979qs7501_90190474.xml | GATT_146 | 934 | 6,156 | United Nations Nations Unies
RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF. 2/C. 3/A/
ON DU W.45
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI 30 January 1946
ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
THIRD COMMITTEE: COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUB-COMMITEE A (ARTICLES 16, 17, 18, 19)
NOTES CF THIRTIETH MEETING
Held on Wednesday, 28 January 1948, 10.30 a.m.
Chairman: Dr. G. A. LAMSVELT (Netherlands)
1. Consideration in principle, in connection with Article 17, of paragraph 1
of new Article 27 A proposed by Brazil (E/CONF.2/C.3/H/W.6)
1. No Member shall grant, directly or indirectly, any subsidy on the
domestic production of any commodity, in respect of which the tariff has
been reduced or bound by negotiation pursuant to Article 17."
The delegate for Brazil referred to the remarks made in support of this
proposal in Sub-Committee H of Committee III (E/CONF.2/C.3/H/W.6), and
explained, reply to the New Zealand delegate's inquiry, that it was intended
to apply ony to new subsidies.
The delegate for Denmark considered that it was not possible or desirable
to write into the Charter provisions to cover all possible cases and believed
it was preferable to rely upon Articles 89 and 90 in the event of a tariff
concession being impaired,
?e delegate for the United States considered the Brazilian proposal
unnecessary and pointed out that (1) in some instances subsidies were
preferable to increased tariffs because they held prices down, thereby
expanding consumption to the benefit of exporting countries; (2) subsidies
were subject to legislative check; (3) the Geneva negotiations were based
on the assumption that countries were free to use production subsidies;
(4) although subsidies might be used in some cases to nullify tariff
concessions, recourse would be available under Articles 89 and 90 or the
?Ullification and impairment clauses of the General Agreement on Tariffs and
Trade.
The Australian, French, Netherlands and United Kingdom delegates agreed
with the United States delegate that the Brazilian proposal was unnecessary.
The Brazilian delegate felt that (1). it was preferable to preclude
/nullification E/CONF. 2/C. 3/A/W.45
Page 2
nullification and impairment of tariff concessions rather than force
Members to seek redress under ArtIcles 89 and 90 or the nullification
and i?pairment clauses of the General Agreement, and (2) Article 25 did not
include adequate safeguards with respect to the use of subsidies, He
proposed the following revision of his original amendment to meet the point
that negotiations would be based on the assumption that production subsidies
were permissible:
"No Member shall grant, directly or indirectly, a subsidy on the
domestic production of ary commodity if it would have the effect of
nullifying or impairing a concession obtained thri the binding or
reduction of a tariff in negotiations pursuant to Article 17."
The delegate for Cuba, subject to consultation with his delegation, "
considered that it would be extremely useful to emphasize the important
principle that tariff benefits should not be impaired by including in
Section C of the Charter a provision along the lines of the revised Brazilian
proposal, particularly since the existing subsidy provisions were w?k. He
agreed with the United States delegate that the fact that Members were free
to use production subsidies was taken into account during the Geneva
negotiations, but.felt that new negotiations would raise a different question.
The Brazilian delegate made the following additional points:
1. While a case might be made on general economic graounds for the
technique of subsidies as a means of protection as compared to tariffs,
his proposal was not concerned with the merits of subsidies as such, but
with the impairment of benefits through the use of subsidies;
2. It was not the Brazilian interpretation that the Geneva negotiation
were based on the assumption that countries were free to use production
subsidies;
3. While agreeing that subsidies could result in an expansion of the
market this would not necessarily mean that the increase would be
shared equally between the exporting and importing country.
The delegate for Colombia expressed support for the Brazilian amendment.
The delegate for Mexico expressed support with the principle of the
Brazilian amendment.
The delegate for China expressed sympathy in a general way for the
Brazilian amendment and considered that it probably deserved further study.
The delegates for New Zealand and Peru expressed sympathy for the
principle that tariff benefits should not be impaired by the use of subsidies
but could not support the Brazilian proposal as such.
The Chairman concl?ded that a majority of the Sub-Committee believed
/that it was not E/CONF.2/C.3/A/w.45
Page 3
that it was not necassary to write into the Charter the proposed Brazilian
amendment, either in its original or revised form, whereas a minority of
the Sub-Committee supported the Brazilian amendment at least in principle.
It was agreed to advise Sub-Committee H of Committee III accordingly.
2. Proposed addition to Article 18, (Sub-Committee D Working Paper for
Seventh Meeting and E/CONF.2/C.3/D/W.11) referred by Sub-Committee D
(Articles 40, 41 and 43) on the basis of its discussion of new
Article 40 A proposed by Colombia (Item 7, E/CONF.2/C.3/11).
It was agreed that both the Danish and Norwegian delegates should
participate as members of the Sub-Committee during the discussion of this
item.
It was noted that whereas the Working Party of Sub-Committee D had
recommended this proposal, Sub-Committee D, in referring it to
Sub-Committee A, made no recommendation as to its merits,
The delegate for Colombia observed that since he had explained this
proposal at sone length both in Committee III and in Sub-Committee D, he
would be brief. Its main purpose was to provide that high internal taxes
of a purely fiscal character should be subject to negotiations in the manner
provided for in Article 17. |
GATT Library | bn772wx7304 | Notes of Thirty-Eighth Meeting : Held on Monday, 16 February 1948, 5.30 p.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, February 19, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Third Committee: Commercial Policy Sub-Committee A (Articles 16, 17, 18, 19) | 19/02/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.55, E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.40-55, and C.3/A/WHITE PAPERS | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/bn772wx7304 | bn772wx7304_90190486.xml | GATT_146 | 6,997 | 45,977 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE DU E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.55 19 February 1948
ON EP0 DU-nI
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMME E ET DINEL'OEIMINAL PENGLIOI RG:LSH
MITTO mEROMEERCI: MAOL YYPoIC
COMSMMTE T-CO A (ARSSICLE 16, 17, 18, 19)
OF TESTTYHIR HCHIGEE ITMMR
Held on Monday, 16 February 1948., 530 p.m.
Chairman: Dr. G.LA A.MSTVET (Netherlands)
Consideration of Draft Report to the Th irdm Comittee (ONE/CF.2/C.3W/A/-.52
Continued
1 The Unid tenKid om delegate proposed adding to the inptperreiiatve note
to paragraph 2 of Article 18 the following sentence:
"A general tax, imposed for revenue purposes, uniformly applicable
to a considerable number of products, which conformed to the
requirements of the first sentence of paragraph 2 would not be
considered to be inconsistent with the second sentence."
The Sub-Committee considered that it was not necessary to add this
sentence to the interpretative note and agreed to ilncude it in the
Sub-Committee's Repo.rt The Brazilian delegate objected to its inclusion,
either in the interpretative note or in the Sub-Committese' Report.
2. The Austral iaad an giayaur n delegates, supported by the delegate of
eArnina, not a member of the mub-mCio-ttee, proposed the deletion of the
third explanatory paragraph under the heading Annexes A and B and
ragraph 4 on page 2 on the grounds that it was very difficult to find
language in which to describe accurately the note to Annex A which had been
so meticulously drafted. It was agreed to delete this paragraph.
3. The Mexican delegate withdrew all of his delegation's reservations on
Article 18.
4. The delegate for Cuba maintained provisionally his delegation's
reservation on Article 18 recorded in the Geneva draft.
5. The Sub-Committee considered at some length the question raised by the
Venezuelan delegate at the previous meeting relating to the most-favoured-
nation clause. It was the sense of the Sub-Committee that a general exception
to the most-favoured-nation clause to permit the levying of a surcharge on
goods arriving in the country of destination via a third country would not
be acceptable because it would limit the scope of the most-favoured-nation
/clause to the E/CONF. 2/C.3/A/W.55
Page 2
clause to the detriment of the trade of other Members, particularly Member
countries whose exports were regularly transhipped via third countries. A
number of the members of the Sub-Committee suggested, however, that it might
be possible to meet the particular Venezuelan problem in some other way that
by amending Article 16, for example, by a bilateral understanding with the
countries concerned.
The Venezuelan delegate explained that he was not asking for a general
modification of the most-favoured-nation clause, but merely for some formula
which while not interfering with the general scope of the most-favoured-nation
clause would meet his country's difficulty.
It was agreed to establish a Study Group consisting of the delegates for
Colombia, Cuba, Netherlands, United Kingdom, and the United States, which
would examine this problem with the Venezuelan delegate and attempt to find
a solution, and report directly to the Third Committee, since Sub-Committee
meanwhile would have reported. SUB-COMMITTEE A
(Articles 16 and 17) of Third Committee
Article 16
4.The imposition of a margin of tariff preference not in excess of
an amount necessary to compensate for the elimination of a margin of
preference in an internal tax existing on 10 April 1947 exclusively between
two or more of the territories in respect or which a preference is permitted
under paragraph 2 of this Articlee shall not be decsed to be contrary to
the provisions of this Article, it being understood that any such margin
of preference shall be subject to the provisions ofArticle 17.
III A/W.2
1576 SUB-COMMITTEE A (ARTICLES 16, 17, 18 AND 19) OF THIRD COMMITTES
ARTICLE 17- REDUCTION OF TARIFFS AND EXPEDITION OF PREFERENCES
Agenda Item 2, Initiation of and participants in Restrictions,
(Items 25, 26, 27 and 28 of Revised Annotated Agenis - E/CONF.2/C.3/6).
Substantial agreement two reached provisionally upon the following
points:
1. The obligation to negotiate should be monitory.
2.The obligation to negotiate should be from Member to Member
but the Organization riff committee) should be able to
require that negotiations to connected in accordance with
procedures established by the Organisation.
3. Members should not be perceived from entering into bilateral
agreements on their own initiative, but these agreemebts would
not "count" toward fulfilling the requirements of Article 17
until they had been incorporated into the General Agreement by
negotiations with the parties to the Agreement . (The right to
conclude bilateral agreements is set forth in the note to
Article 17. The committee will need to consider whether this
provision should be incorporated in the text or included as a note.)
4. All Members should have a continuing obligation to negotiate
until the objectives of Article 17 have been achieved.
Yor eDzos
(a)Parties to the General Agreement would have an obligation
to negotiate with non- parties upon requestm and non-parties
would have an obligation to negotiate with parties upon request.
(b) Members, non-parties to the General Agreement, would become
parties to the General Agreement upon incorporation of the
results of its negotiations in the General Agreement by
agreement with the parties thereto.
/It was It was suggested that wording among the following since might ??
the points suited, with the ?? of ??
"Each Member shall, upon the request any other Member or Members, t t
under ?? zI & tu.Ls ' pi-iczt --"!I cca;ij i ii.& T.4 o~gioa
iUo ?Uatia gar ColoUbim, LxL',) :to tbyj N a oiuif'u4 to Wl
(2) that sub-paragraph (a) of paragraph1 should be amended to take
(t) thlt 2 LL n> iZ 4it Lw to protwc;t
the intereste of Members, non-parties to the General Agreement.
negotiate. 8; as; t1iu that such a Member would not be required to grant
Organisation, should be able to claim to have fulfilled the obligation to
General bovot~M11a ht w~i*.8iori~s !o 'sta aUi)t1 ;t_:i b.ucson :Qtstwic t edb:sz t;o
duration of each bilateral agreements, without wating further concessions.
He considered that a Member, new-party to the General Agreement, would have
1'sO t i t4a w . if a Member, party to to the General Agreement, refused to
negotiate. H!:t QnWL'r% that such a Member would not be required to grant
additional concessions before being entitled to became a party to the
The delegate for the United States did not agree with the position
that a party to CaduiluG not bilateral agreements could ,iaivoC ;to have negotiatiated
tho Onaart tu A2-t11-i j7 ",e41t ur, t ~ t'*iw of 1~t~e.ba ovthl
In raply through the application of the more-vavoured-nation clause. In
that both A tol.. 17 oIa no-i a3, oait1 s t'_ g-Uto- atitid toae :la
have fulfilled his obligation to negotiate and become entitled to adhere to
the General Agreement, only by incorporating concessions in the General
under bilateral agreement if those ;U *;t;;_J5]were incorporated in the
General Agreement.
The delegate for Cuba suggested that Members would be re likely to
;a-& to negotiate, in order to obtain concessions, rather than to week
exemption from the oligation to negotiate. He pointed out that under
Paragraph 2 a Member not having received t ;aXi :c negotiations could
the Organisation could great a M t to the first Member to withhold
In reply to a question ca- =itjiG by the delegate for Turkey regarding
Points 2 and 3,, the delegated for Cuba and the United States pointed out
that both Article 17 on now drafted and the suggested rewording of
paragraph 1 (para 2) COo4*lz;v only one negtiating procedure, i.e., the Organization would schedule negotiation upon a Member or Members' request.
_w is h at b v ;'u no-C
Oa ,avsal Itroo-.2fi weldc ztill Cof paragraph 1
provided that the results of be incorporated into the
General Agreement only with the agreement of the parties thereto and it
would not be possible morely by bilateral negotiations to become a party to
It was agreed to proceed at the - vmid consideration of
Agenda Item 2,~i toi 'z_:, . .: _;Wt*l ;NXw5u-DO RESTRICTED 8 January 1948
SUB-COMMITTEE A (ARTCLES 16,17, 18, 19) OF THE THIRD COMMITTEE
WORKING PARTY ON ARTICLE 17
Article 17: Suggested Revision of paragraph 2 and New Paragraph 3
(Submitted by the Delegation of Colombia)
2. If any Member considers that any other Member has failed to fulfil
its obligations under paragraph 1 of this Article, such Member may refer
the matter to the Organization, which, after investigation, shall make
appropriate recommendations to the Members concerned. If the Organization
finds that a Member has failed without sufficient Justification, [having
regard to carry to its economic position and the provisions of the Charter
as a whole] out negotiations within a reasonable period of time in
accordance with the requirements of paragraph 1 of this Article, the
Organization may determine that any Member or Members shall, notwithstanding
the provisions of Article 16, be entitled to withhold from the trade of the
other Member any of the tariff benefits which may have been negotiated
pursuant to paragraph 1 of this Article, and embodied in Part 1 of the
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. If such benefits are in fact
withheld, so as to result in the application to the trade of the other
Member of tariffs higher than would otherwise have been applicable, such
other Member shall then be free, within sixty days after such action is
taken, to withdraw from the Organization upon the expiration of sixty days
from the date on which written notice of such withdrawal is received by the
Organization.
3. In making a decision under paragraph 2 of this Article tho Organization
shall have regard to the economic and fiscal position of the countries
concerned and the provisions of the Charter as a whole, and shall
consequently take into account especially the following:
(a) The state of economic development of the countries concerned and
the necessity of a country to grant to its industries a reasonable
degree of protection by means of custom duties with a view to promoting
and diversifying its production.
(b) The relative importance of the custom duties in the national
revenue of the country and the possibility in which it may be of
reforming its system of taxation.
(c) The reduction in the tariffs that may have automatically taken
place on account of devaluation or depreciation of the currency in
which duties had been originally fixed.
/(d) The
2870 -2-
(d) The consequences which the reciprocal concessions under discussion
are likely to have on the economy and future development of each of the
countries concerned.
(e) Any concessions which each country is already extending to the
other as a consequence of previous agreements other than those
contemplated in sub-paragraph (c) of paragraph 1 of this Article.
[3] 4. The provisions of this Article shall operate in accordance with
the provisions of Article 81. .-
z
"4
'-
C~j 0J
94 P.
0 0
2 w
lii0
4" 0
0
t CO
CR V
Es 4
OM C: , _, s
g 0 4-1 _ 14
w
P;~ ,l - H
2 X .
-4
D
r ' 0 4
00 4
:4 P.* 0
0q 1 C d
04.44
q.4 o -.
'o
4) -4
002 4 IC
.w- _uI 4.4
rH 4 0 - C
rl. re
* S-S 404.
*
9.
'- .,-.
- -4 -H
-H -4 1*4
"4 li 4 '-4
(D
"4 44
0 0
)4 4-)
'-44
co s
m Q
m 4.4
0 4.4
O. 94
30 0 ) 4
< a
P. X ,...
0 9. tD4)
o 00
-'4 0 4 o
0 0
as
0
4)3
h04)
Id
04-
04.4
(D
OA o
4J
0
0 -
(D
d
O 4W
:E: :s
4...4 4.4
49~~~~4
0 0
0
o a 0
* ,.0 0
a) H~~~~~~~~~~*4
ca m~
N 40 M
. 0. *s .h g
Q 4 94+' C0 .1.04 U
4 Col A ; A
.0 ~- , 4~ '
o . C_ _ _) 4-4 tO _A.__
. ~ ~ ( * a
0~
rz0
'4 __
0
N
Q
N-)
03
ON
-4
E-i3
4
s'!
"4
H
C?
'a
4)
I0
0
2950 U
m
-Cj -C0 1-0 -0
cu
CM cu CM 0i
cn U
cn -CY') rn Cyl rn en cyli
4Z.
m (Y) fn cn rn m M
a
cli
14 m
43 %-4 43
4->
m
m
4-4 0
Cs
N 4-i -4
10, 14 .6
9 U 0 0
a _4 -1 ?-l co k
4-? 0 0 P4 0. 0 0
k .0 q 0 .14 4.)
0 = 4-) U 4-4 F4 C
;4 P 4J, O O 0 4>
0 ?q
t 1:10,
0 co Cs 03 0 4-3 0
0 O 43 la CO .14 m Cs 0
A to 0 0 -P pq
4-1 0 0 w
I I M 43 4-1
as 0 " 8 4-1 2) PO" - i O
4-2 43 co la -H 0 Pi k 0 CD 4-? W FC-9
9)
0 la)
4-') 43 k 0 4.4
04 Q A 4_, 0
0 k -,q -0 k CD
4-1 - 4-1 00 40 O
14 ?d P. 1.
43 .0 -li 0 0
4) H 11' ? 4-1 13 U 4-)
0 -pH 4-? Cd
41 CD r+4 m 0 -P 1 ?4
9 1) 8 OM 111. ?b ? 1)
P, I" 0 O 0 -,qo O
m 0 4> -4 CD 4-? m
N to m m p 43 CD
.11 v -f 8 14. Ti CD 9 ;O, 0
to 8 . 0 ;- a .0 ?d I 14 m 8
9 m > 0 41 .0 4-? 4- W A 0 8 g
to , 0 ,H I 0 a) O., 1-4 k I 4- 0 4- -H a)
cm 0 ?-q Id ;4 4-')' as PI a -P 0, >1
S (OD -
P,
C6 P, G\ m Il-i
0 t
0
s
0 q)
0 m
0 x
u* \ 9 January 1948
SUB-COMMITTEE A (ARTICLES 16, 17, 18, 19) OF THIRD COMMITTEE
WORKING PARTY ON ARTICILE 17
ARTICIE 17 - REDUCTION OF TARIFFS AND ELIMINATION OF PREFERENCES
Provisional Redraft
1. Each Member shall, upon the request of [the O,]ganization] any other
Member or Members, and subject to procedural arrangements established by
the Organization, enter into and carry out with such other Member or Members
[as the Organization ,.may specif] negotiations directed to the substantial
reduction of the general level of tariffs and other charges on imports and
exports, and to the elimination of the preferences referred to in paragraph 2
of Article 16, on a reciprocal and mutually advantageous basis. [These
negotiations shall proceed in accordance with the following rules:]
2. Negotiations provided for in paragraph 1 shall proceed in accordance
with the following rules:
(a) Such negotiations shall be conducted on a selective, product-by-
product, basis such as will afford an adequate opportunity for
taking into account the needs of individual countries and
individual industries. Members shall be free not to grant a
concession on a particular product and in the granting of
concessions on particular products they may either reduce the
tariff or bind it at its present or at a higher level.
(b) No Member shall be required to grant unilateral concessions, or
to grant concessions to other Members which are not sufficiently
counterbalanced by concessions in return. Account shall be taken
of the value to any Member of obtaining in its own right
concessions which it would otherwise enjoy only by virtue of
Article 16.
[a] (c) In the negotiations.....increased.
[b] (d) The binding.. .preferences.
[c Account.....Article.]
[d] 3. The results of such negotiations shall be incorporated in the
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, signed at. ............. on
.. .. .1948 by agreement with the parties to that
Agreement, and thereupon the parties to such negotiation shall become
contracting parties to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade if
they are not so already.
[2.....] 4. if
2993 -2-
[2] 4. .......if the Organization finds that a member has failed without
sufficient justification, [having regard to its economic position and
the provisions of the Charter as a whole] having regard to all relevant
circumstances including the developmental and other needs and the
fiscal structure of the Member concerned, and to the provisions of
the Charter as a whole, to carry out negotiations.
Interpretative Note to sub-paragraph 2 (d)
In the event of the devaluation of a Member's currency, or of a rise
in prices, the effects of such devaluation or rise in prices should be
considered during negotiations in order to determine, first, the change in
the protective incidence of the specific tariffs, if any, of the Member
concerned and, secondly, whether the binding of any specific duties reduced
by currency devaluation or by a rise in prices represents in fact a
concession equivalent in value to the substantial reduction of high tariffs
or the elimination of tariff preferences. 13 January 1948
SUB-COMMTTEE A (ARTICLES 16, 17, 18, 19) OF THIRD COMMITTEE
COMMUNICATION FROM THE INTERNATIONAL MONETARY FUND TO THE CHAIRMAN OF
SUB-COMMITTEE A
"Article 18 of the Geneva Draft prohibits the imposition of internal
taxes of any kind on imported products in excess of those imposed upon
similar domestic products. In order to avoid a misintepretation of this
provision in connection with the application of various forms of multiple
currency practices, the International Monetary Fund's representative
requested the Preparatory Committee to clarify the meaning of this provision.
Both the respective Sub-Committee and Commission A included their opinions
in their minutes.
The Report of the Sub-Committee (document E/PC/T/174 of 15 August 1947,
page 7), reads:
'The representative of the International Monetary Fund inquired
whether there is anything in Article 15 which could be construed as
preventing a Member from imposing charges in connection with the
international transfer of payments for imports or exports where such
charges are imposed consistently with the Articles of Agreement of
the IMF, having in mind particularly the charges imposed by countries
employing multiple currency techniques consistently with the Articles
of Agreement of the IMF. The Sub-Committee considered that if such
charges are imposed on or in connection with imports or exports as
such, or are imposed on the international transfer of payments for
imports or exports, they would not be internal charges and., therefore,
would not be covered by Article 15; on the other hand., in the unlikely
case of a multiple currency technique, which takes the form of an
internal tax or charge, such as an excise tax on a particular product,
then that technique would be precluded by Article 15. It may be
pointed out that the possible existence of charges on the transfer of
payments insofar as these are permitted by the IMF is clearly
recognized by Article 14.
The Verbatim Report of Forty-Third Meeting of Commission A
(document E/PC/T/A/PV/43, page 50, 18 August 1947) contains the agreed
interpretation of Article 18. The respective passage reads:
(Rapporteur Dr. H. C. Coombs (Australia)):
'And the second point, I think, Mr. Chairman, is on the same
page, in the second paragraph: This is referring to charges on
imports in connection with a point raised by the International Monetary
Fund. The essential part, I think, is the statement that: "The
3253 /Sub-Committee Sub-Committee considered that if such charges are imposed on or in
connection with imports or exports as such, or are imposed on the
international transfer of payments for imports or exports, they would
not be internal charges and, therefore, would not be covered by
Article 15; on the other hand, in the unlikely case of a multiple
currency technique, which takes the form of an internal tax or charge,
such as an excise tax on a particular product, then that technique
would be precluded by Article 15. It may be pointed out that the
possible existence of charges on the transfer of payments insofar as
these are permitted by the IMF is clearly recognized by Article 14.
I wish to submit to the consideration of the Sub-Committee to make
explicit in its Report to Committee III that it adopted the Geneva
interpretation .of Article 18 as contained in the above-quoted text. It
would be useful to indicate this interpretation also either in the text or
in a footnote of the final document of the I.T.O, Conference." RESTRICTED
16 January 1948
SUB-COMMITTEE A (ARTICLES 16, 17, 18, 19) OF COMMITTEE III
WORKlNG PARTY 2 (ARTICLE 17)
The Working Party proposes that the following paragraph be included
in the Sub-Committee's report to Committee III:
"Consideration was given to the criteria which should be taken into
account by the Organization in determining whether a Member had failed
to fulfil its obligations under Article 17. The conclusion was reached
that it would be impracticable and unwise to attempt to set out in the
Charter itself detailed descriptions of all the specific criteria
necessary to cover all possible future situations. Accordingly, it was
agreed that the Organization should be instructed, broadly, to have
regard to 'all relevant circumstances'.
"The specific language recommended by the Sub-Committee is 'all
relevant circumstances, including the developmental and other needs and
the fiscal structure of the Member countries concerned and the
provisions of the Charter as a whole. It was not felt necessary to
refer specifically to the balance of reciprocal concessions offered by
the countries concerned, and the probable effect or value of these
concessions, since it was obvious that these elements would comprise
the very foundation of any case before the Organization, which would
inevitably take them into account. With regard to the suggestion that
language should be included recognizing the need of countries to
maintain reasonable tariff protection, it was felt that (a) in general
it is implicit in Article 17 that reasonable tariff protection is
consistent with the principles of the Charter, since the objectives of
the Charter are in terms of the reduction of tariffs and not of their
elimination, and (b) the needs of under-developed countries in this
respect is recognized in paragraph 1 of Article 13 and would be given
further specific recognition by the inclusion of the reference to
'developmental needs' in Article 17.
"It was understood that the term 'other needs' would cover,
inter alia, a Member's need for reconstruction."
3468 RESTRICTED
16 January 1948
SUB-COMMITTEE A (ARTICLES 16, 17, 18, 19) OF COMMITTEE III
WORKING PARTY 2 (ARTICLE 17)
The Working Party, not having discussed paragraph 3 of Article 17,
recommends that a Joint Working Party of Sub-Committee A of Committee III
and of the Sub-Committee of Committee VI on Article 81 be established with
the following membership an. terms of reference:
Membership
Sub-Committee A of Committee III should be represented by the
members of Working Party 2 (Article 17), i.e., Australia, France,
Mexico, Peru and the United States. The Chairman of the Sub-Committee
on Article 81 should be requested to name five members.
Terms of Reference
To consider, in the light of previous discussion in Sub-Committee A
of Committee III and in the Sub-Committee of Committee VI on Article 81,
(a) ?? functions and composition of the Tariff Committee; (b) what
body shall be competent to determine whether a Member has failed to
fulfil its obligation under Article 17 to enter into and carry out
negotiations directed to the substantial reduction of tariffs and other
charges and to the elimination of preferences; and (c) if it is agreed
that the Tariff Committee shall be the competent body, whether the
right of appeal against Tariff Committee decisions shall be specifically
provided, e.g., to the Executive Board and/or Conference, under the
procedures of Chapter VIII or otherwise, or to a specially constituted
body.
3472 RESTRICTED
16 January 1948
SUB-COMMITTEE A (ARTICLES 16, 17, 18, 19) OF COMMITTEE III
DRAFT REPORT OF WORKING PARTY 2 (ARTICIE 17)
ARTICLE 17 - REDUCTION OF TARIFFS AND ELIMINATION OF PREFERENCES
1. Each Member shall, upon the request of [the organizations any other
Member or Members, and subject to. procedural arrangements established by the
Organization, enter into and carry out with such other Member or Members [as
the Organization may specify] negotiations directed to the substantial
reduction of the general levels of tariffs and other charges on imports and
exports, and to the elimination of the references referred to in paragraph 2
of Article 16 on a reciprocal and mutually advantageous basis. [These
negotiations shall proceed in accordance with the following rules]
2. Negotiations provided for in paragraph 1 shall proceed in accordance with
the following rules:
(a) Such negotiations shall be conducted on a selective, product-by-
product, basis which will afford an adequate opportunity to take into
account the needs of individual countries and individual industries..
Members shall be free not to grant a concession on a particular product
and in the granting of concessions on particular products they may
either reduce the tariff or bind it at its present or at a higher level.
(b) No Member shall be required to grant unilateral concessions, or to
grant concessions to other Members which are not sufficiently
counter-balanced by concessions in return. Account shall be taken of
the value to any Member of obtaining in its own right and by direct
obligation the indirect concessions which it would otherwise enjoy only
by virtue of Article 16. .
147c) In the negotiations relating to any specific product
t) when a reduction is negotiated only in the most-favoured-
nation rate, such reduction shall opera?te tomatically to
reduce orm eliinate the margin of preference applicable to
that product;
(ii) when a reduction is negotiated only in the preferential rate,
the most-favoured-nation rate shall automatically be reduced
to the extent of such reduction;
(iii) when it is agreed that reductions will be negotiated in both
the most-favoured-nation rate and the preferential rate, the
reduction in each shall be that agreed by the parties to the
negotiations;
(iv) no margifn 2 preference s hallbe increased.
*(d/Ic)he
3469 -2-
[b] (d) The binding of low tariffs or of tariff-free treatment shall in
principle be recognized as a concession equivalent in value to the
substantial reduction of high tariffs or the elimination of tariff
preferences.
[c. Account shall. be taken of any concession which either Member is already
extending to the other Member by virtue of previous negotiations regarding
tariffs and preferences pursuant to this Article.]
(e) Prior international obligations shall not be permitted to stand in
the way of negotiations with respect to preferences, it being understood
than agreements which result from such negotiations and which conflict
with such obligations shall require the modification or termination of
such obligations only (i) with the consent of the parties to such
obligations, or, in the absence of such consent, (ii) by modification
or termination of such obligations in accordance with their terms.
[d] ?. The results of such negotiations shall be incorporated in the
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, signed at ........ on.
1948 [by agreement] on terms to be agreed wish the parties to that
Agreement, and thereupon the parties to such negotiations shall become
contracting parties to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade if
they are not so already.
[2] 4. If any Member considers that any other Member has failed to fulfil
its obligations under paragraph 1 of this Article, such Member may
refer the matter to the Organization, which, after investigation, shall
made appropriate recommendations to the Members concerned. If the
Organization finds that a Member has failed without sufficient
justification, [having regard to its economic position and the provisions
of the Charter as a whole,] having regard to all relevant circumstances,
including the developmental and other needs and the fiscal structure of
the Member countries concerned, and to the provisions of the Charter as
a whole, to carry out negotiations within a reasonable period of time
in accordance with the requirements of paragraph 1 of this Article,
the Organization may determine that any Member or Members shall,
notwithstanding the provisions of Article 16, be entitled to withhold
from the trade of the other Member any of the tariff benefits which
may have been negotiated pursuant to paragraph 1 of this Article, and
embodied in Part I of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. If
such benefits are in fact withheld, so as to result in the application
to the trade of the other Member of tariffs higher than would otherwise
have been applicable, such other Member shall then be free, within
sixty days after such action is taken, to withdraw from the Organization
upon the expiration of sixty days from the date on which written notice
of such withdrawal is received by the Organization.
/Interpretative Interpretative Note to Sub-Paragraph 2 (d)
In the event of the devaluation of a Member's currency, or of a rise
in prices, the effects of such devaluation or rise in prices would be a
matter for consideration during negotiations in order to determine, first,
the change in the protective incidence of the specific duties, if any, of
the Member concerned and, secondly, whether the binding of such specific
duties represents in fact a concession equivalent in value to the substantial
reduction of high tariffs or the elimination of tariff preferences. 20 January 1948
SUB-COMMITTEE A (ARTICLE 16, 17, 18 AND 19) OF COMMITTEE III
DRAFT REPORT OF WORKING PARTY 2 (ARTICLE 17)
Working Party 2, consisting of the delegates of Australia, France,
Mexico, Peru and the United States, having consulted with a number of the
other Members of the Sub-Committee, reports as follows:
I. REVISED TEXT OF ARTICLE 17 -
REDUTION OF TARIFFS AND ELIMINATION OF PREFERENCES
"1. Each Member shall, upon the request of [the Organization,] any
other Member or Members, and subject to procedural arrangements
established by the Organization, enter into and carry out with such
other Member or Members [as the Organization may specify]
negotiations. directed to the substantial reduction of the general
levels of tariffs and other charges on imports and exports. and
to the elimination of the preferences referred to in paragraph 2
of Article 16, on a reciprocal and mutually advantageous basis.
these negotiations shall proceed in accordance with the following
rules:]
"2. The negotiations provided for in paragraph 1 shall proceed in
accordance with the following rules:
(a) Such negotiations shall be conducted on a selective,
product-by-product, basis which will afford an adequate
Opportunity to take into account the needs of individual
countries and individual industries. Members shall be free
not to grant a concession on a particular product and in
the granting of concessions on particular products they may
either reduce the tariff bind it at its present level, or
fix it at a higher level.
(b) No Member shall be required to grant unilateral concessions,
or to grant concessions to other Members without receiving
adequate concessions in return. Account shall be taken of the
value to any Member of obtaining in its own right and by direct
obligation the indirect concessions which it would otherwise
enjoy only by virtue of Article 16.
[a] (c) In the negotiations relating to any specific product
(i) when a reduction is negotiated only in the most-favoured-
nation rate, such reduction shall operate automatically
to reduce or eliminate the margin of preference applicable
3679 to that product;
/(ii) when a -2-
(ii) when a reduction is negotiated only in the preferential
rate, the most-favoured-nation rate shall automatically
be reduced to the extent of such reduction;
(iii) when it is agreed that reductions will be negotiated in
both the most favoured-nation rate and the preferential
rate, the reduction in each shall be that agreed by the
parties to the negotiations;
(iv) no margin of preference shall be increased.
[b] (d) The binding of low tariffs or of tariff-free treatment shall
in principle be recognized as a concession equivalent in value to
the substantial reduction of high tariffs or the elimination of
tariff preferences.
Account shall be taken of any concession which either Member is
already extending to the other Member by virtue of previous
negotiations regarding tariffs and preferences pursuant to this
Article.]
(e) Prior international obligations shall not be permitted to
stand in the way of negotiations with respect to preferences,
it being understood that agreements which result from such
negotiations and which conflict with such obligations shall not
require the modification or termination of such obligations
except (i) with the consent of the parties to such obligations,
or, in the absence of such consent, (ii) by modification or
termination of such obligations in accordance with their terms.
[d The results of such negotiations shall be incorporated in
the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, signed at.....
on . .1947 by agreement with the parties to that
Agreement, and thereupon the parties to such negotiations shall
become contracting parties to the General Agreement on Tariffs
and Trade if they are not so already.]
"3. The negotiations leading to the General Agreement on Tariffs and
Trade concluded at Geneva on October 30, 1947, shall be deemed to be
negotiations pursuant to this Article. The concessions agreed upon
as a. result of all other negotiations completed by a Member pursuant
to this Article shall be incorporated in the General Agreement on
terms to be agreed with the parties thereto. If any Member enters
into any agreement relating to tariffs or prefe ences which is not
concluded pursuant to this Article, the negotiations leading to such
agreement shall nevertheless conform to the requirements of
paragraph 2 (c) of this Article.
/[2] "4. If any Member -3-
[2] "4. If any Member considers that any other Member has failed to fulfil
its obligations under paragraph 1 of this Article, such Member may refer
the matter to the Organization, which, after investigation, shall make
appropriate recommendations to the Members concerned. If the
Organization finds that a Member has failed without sufficient
justification, [having regard to its economic position and the provisions
of the Charter as a whole] having regard to all relevant circumstances,
including the developmental and other needs and the fiscal structure of
the Member countries concerned, and to the provisions of the Charter as
a whole to carry out negotiations within a reasonable period of time
in accordance with the [requirements] provisions of paragraphs 1 and 2
of this Article, the Organization may [determine that any] waive the
requirements of Article 16 to the extent necessary to permit the
complaining Member or Members [shall, notwithstanding the provisions of
Article 16, be entitled] to withhold from the trade of the other Member
any of the tariff benefits which may have been negotiated pursuant to
paragraph 1 of this Article, and embodied in Part I of the General
Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. If such benefits are in fact withheld,
so as to result in the application to the trade of the other Member of
tariffs higher than would otherwise have been applicable, such other
Member shall then be free, within sixty days after such action [is taken,
to withdraw] becomes effective, to give written notice of withdrawal
from the Organization. The withdrawal shall take effect upon the
expiration of sixty days from the [date] day on which [written] such
notice [of such withdrawal] is received by the Organization."
II. INTERPRETATIVE NOTE TO
SUB-PARAGRAPH 2 (d) TO BE INCLUEDED IN CHARTER
"In the event of the devaluation of a Member's currency, or of a
rise in prices, the effects of such devaluation or rise in prices would
be a matter for consideration during negotiations in order to determine,
first, the change in the protective incidence of the specific duties, if
any, of the Member concerned and, secondly, whether the binding of such
specific duties represents in fact a concession equivalent in value to
the substantial reduction of high tariffs or the elimination of tariff
preferences ."
III. EXPLANATORY PARAGRAPHS TO BE INCLUDED
IN THE SUB-COMMITEE'S REPORT TO COMMITTEE III
"Consideration was given to the criteria which. should be taken into
account by the Organization in determining whether a Member had failed to
fulfil its obligations under Article 17. The conclusion was reached that
it would be impracticable and unwise to attempt to set out in the Charter
/itself detailed -4-
itself detailed descriptions of all the specific criteria necessary to
cover all possible future situations. Accordingly, it was agreed that
the Organization should be instructed, broadly, to have regard to 'all
relevant circumstances.
"The specific language recommended by the Sub-Committee is 'all
relevant circumstances, including the developmental and other needs and
the fiscal structure of the Member countries concerned and the provisions
of the Charter as a whole.' It was not felt necessary to refer
specifically to the balance of reciprocal concessions offered by the
countries concerned, and the probable effect or value of these
concessions, since it was obvious that these elements would comprise
the very foundation of any case before the Organization, which would
inevitably take them into account. With regard to the suggestion that
language should be included recognizing the need of countries to maintain
reasonable tariff protection, it was felt that (a) in general it is
implicit in Article 17 that reasonable tariff protection is consistent
with the principles of the Charter, and (b) the needs of under-developed
countries in this respect is recognized in paragraph 1 of Article 13 and
would be given further specific recognition by the inclusion of the
reference to 'developmental needs' in Article 17. This obvious means
that the Organization appreciating the total value of the concessions
which a Member may be willing to grant to another Member is bound to take
into account the needs resulting from the different general conditions
in which different Members can maintain or develop their industries.
"It was understood that the term other needs' would cover, inter
alia, a Member's need for reconstruction."
IV. REL ATION OF GENERAL AGREEMENT
ON TARIFFS AND TRADE TO THE CHARTER
As regards any difficulties which might arise from a possible conflict
between the provisions of the Charter and the general provisions of the
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, the Working Party is of the opinion
that the best method of eliminating such difficulties would be for the
Governments signing the Final Act adopted at the conclusion of the Second
Session of the Preperatory Committee of the United Nations Conference on Trade
and Employment to hold a meeting before the signing of the Final Act of the
Havana Conference in order to agree with respect to the supersession of the
general provisions of the General Agreement by the corresponding provisions
of the Charter. Members of the Conference would then be in a position to know
the provisions of the final text of the General Agreement on Tariffs and
Trade, reformed to in paragraph 3 of the revised text of Article 17, prior to
signing the Final Act in Havana. The desirability of amending the unanimity
/requirement with -5-
requirement with respect to agreement on the terms of accession to the General
Agreement might also be considered at such a meeting.
V. JOlNT WORKING PARTY OF SUB-COMMITTEE A
AND THE SUB-COMMITTEE ON ARTICLE 81
The Working Party, not having discussed paragraph 3 of Article 17,
?? that a Joint Working Party of Sub-Committee A of Committee III and
of the Sub-Committee of Committee VI on Article 81 be established with the
following membership and terms of reference:
Sub-Committee A of Committee III should be represented by the members
of Working Party 2 (Articlel 17), i.e., Australia, France, Mexico, Peru and
the United States. The Chairman of the Sub-Committee on Article 81 should
be requested to name five members.
Terms of Reference
To consider, in the light of previous discussions in Sub-Committee A
of Committee III and in the Sub-Committee of Committee VI on Article 81,
what organizational machinery would be required to implement the
provisions of Article 17. 20 January 1948
SUB-COMMITTEE A (ARTICLES 16, 17, 18, 19) OF COMMITTEE III
DRAFT REPORT OF WORKING PARTY 1 (ARTICLE 16, ANNEX A)
The Working Party, consisting of the delegates of Australia, Denmark,
Netherlands, New Zealand, United Kingdom, United States and Uruguay, having
examined the Danish proposal to amend Annex A, pertaining to paragraph 2 (a)
of Article 16, (Item 5, E/CONF. 2/C .3/6), recommends amending Annex A and
paragraph 5 of Article 23 as follows:
1. Delete paragraph 2 of the note to Annex A. (Internal tax preferences
are now dealt with in Article 16.)
2. Amend paragraph 3 of the note to Annex A as follows:
"The preferential arrangements referred to in paragraph 5 (b) of
Article 23 are those existing in the United Kingdom on 10 April 1947,
under contractual agreements with the Governments of Canada, Australia
and New Zealand, in respect of chilled and frozen beef and veal,
frozen mutton and lamb, chilled and frozen pork, and bacon [and
hams]. It is the intention, without prejudice to any action taken
under sub-paragraph (h) of Part 1 of Article 43, that these
arrangements shall be eliminated or replaced by tariff preferences,
and that negotiations to this end shall take place as soon as
practicable among the countries substantially concerned or involved]
Without prejudice to any action taken under sub-paragraph (h) of
Part 1 of Article 43, negotiations shall be entered into when
practicable among the countries substantially concerned or involved
in accordance with the procedure of Article 17 for the elimination of
these arrangements or their replacement by tariff preferences. If
after such negotiations have taken place a tariff preference is created
or increased it shall not be considered to contravene Articles 16 and
17".
3, Amend paragraph 5 of Article 23 as follows:
"5. The provisions of this Section shall not preclude:
(a) restrictions with equivalent effect to exchange restrictions
authorized under Section 3 (b) of Article VII of the Articles of
Agreement of the International Monetary Fund; or
(b) restrictions under the preferential arrangements provided
for in Annex A of this Charter, [subject to the conditions set
forth therein] pending the outcome of the negotiations referred
to therein."
3673 |
GATT Library | zq527gd9064 | Notes of Thirty-Fifth Meeting : Held on Wedesday, 11 February 1948, 3.00 p.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, February 12, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Third Committee: Commercial Policy Sub-Committee A (Articles 16, 17, 18, 19) | 12/02/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.51, E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.40-55, and C.3/A/WHITE PAPERS | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/zq527gd9064 | zq527gd9064_90190481.xml | GATT_146 | 289 | 1,945 | United Nations
CONFERENCE
ON
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT
Nations Unies
CONFERENCE
DU
COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI
RESTRICTED
E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.51
12 February 1948
ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
THIRD COMMITTEE: COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUB-COMMITTEE A (ARTICLES 16, 17, 18, 19)
NOTE OF THIRTY-FIFTH MEETING _~
Held on Wededay, 11 February 1948, 3.00 p.m.
. Ca. ira: MNMDrE, A(. LArlRnSVLTNethe.l
eport of Working Party 3 (ArtEcE/le 18) (ZONF.2/C.3/A/W.47)
ANATORY PD AGOMPIEAkTO TES GIMALUDED IN THE -COSUBMEE'S MEPIRTTmmmmT
TOMITTEE CO-M Continuation of discussion
The fifth, sixth, seventeEhnd eighteh xplanatory paragraphsere wagreed
as drafted. -
Report of Working Par 3 (Articlb 8 and Working Party 4 (Article 19)
/CQ 3/A/ 47) :
A EID TBMT FARLE 19 - ajee
'B. EPOR EETOM BTTEEE IINCLUDD INTEP SB-CTTFTS R10T CMI3II
oThne note was age with the follvwigaddition:
"Thae delegate for Norway fundamentlly agreed in the view expressed by the
Czechoslovakian delegation However, as this view had not been sufficiently
supported, he did not maintain a reservation."
The Cuban delegate inquired whether the Sub-Committee should reach a
decision on his proposal to amend paragraph 4 of the revised text of Article 17
hich had been referred to the Joint Working Party on Articles 17 and 81,
since that Working Party was not now meeting (See Notes of Thirty-second
Meeting, E/COF. 2/C .31/W 48) .
On the sueesion of the United States delegate, it was agreed to include
in the Sub-CoitteetsRport to Committee III a note to the effect that
Swub-Committee A might ish to make some further recommendations in the light of
the Report of the Tripartite Working Party of Sub-Committee A of the
Thmird Committee, Sub-Comittee D of the Sixth Committee and the Joint
Sub-Committee of the Second and Sixth Committees. It was felt that this
uu cover the Cuban amendment. |
GATT Library | sn953km7111 | Notes of Thirty-First Meeting : Held on Thursday, 29 January 1948, 3.00 p.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, February 4, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Third Committee: Commercial Policy Sub-Committee A (Articles 16, 17, 18, 19) | 04/02/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.46, E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.40-55, and C.3/A/WHITE PAPERS | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/sn953km7111 | sn953km7111_90190476.xml | GATT_146 | 1,152 | 7,526 | United Nations Nations Unies
RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C. 3/A/W.46
DU 4 February 1948
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI
ORIGINA:t EGILISH
HIND COMMITTEE: COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUB-COMMITTEE A (ARTICLES 16, 17, 18, 19)
NOTES OF TEIRTY-FIRST MEETING
Held on Thursday, 29 January 1948, 3.00 p.m.
Chairman: Dr. G. A. LAMSVELT (Netherlands)
Proposed addition to Article 18, (Sub-Committee D Working Paper for Seventh
Meeting and E/CONF.2/C.3/D/W.11) referred by Sub-Committee D (Articles 40, 41
and 43) on the basis of its discussion of new Article 40A proposed by Colombia
(Item 7, E/CONF.2/C.3/11).
1. Paragraph 1 - Continuation of discussion.
The delegate for Cuba strongly supported this proposal on the grounds that
high taxes levied for fiscal purposes which had the effect of restricing trade
and reducing consumption, contrary to the aims of Chapter I, should be subject
to negotiation for their reduction or elimination. He did not believe this
provision would constitute a limitation on the taxing power of Member
Governments since it did not provide for outright elimination of such taxes,
but only through negotiations on a selective basis.
The delegates for Australia, Denmark and Norway felt that this was a
substantive proposal of considerable importance which would have the effect
of widening considerably the scope of Articles 17 and 18. The Australian
and Danish delegates stated that they would have to consult their Governments.
The Danish delegate, while sympathizing with the principle that tariff bindings
should not be nullified, doubted the necessity of adding any such provision to
the Charter. He pointed out that it would be difficult to ascertain the
effect of such existing taxes and that technical and administrative
difficulties would arise from handling them in the same way as tariffs.
Recourse would be available under Articles 89 and 90 in any event if the
provisions of the Charter were circumvented. The Australian and Norwegian
delegates considered that this provision would impose certain limits on the
taxation powers and policies of Member Governments.
The delegate for the United States, as a member of Working party which
had recommended this proposal to Sub-Committee D, considered that it was not
/intended E/CONF.2/C .3/A /W.46
Page 2
intended to deal with the impairment of tariff concessions, but sought merely
to bring internal taxes so high as to reduce consumption within the scope of
negotiations pursuant to Articie 17. He suggested that this proposal be
referred to the Working Party for redrafting in consultation with the
Danish delegate.
The delegate for Colombia explained that this proposal was meant to
apply both to existing and future internal taxes. As for the objections
raised with respect to technical and administrative difficulties, or the
effects of such taxes, these could be examined on a case-by-case basis during
negotiations as in the case of tariffs. He supported the United States
suggestion that the proposal be referred to the Working Party for redrafting.
The delegate for Brazil supported the Colombian proposal.
The delegates for New Zealand and the United Kingdom were awaiting
instructions from their Governments, but meanwhile did not object to this
proposal being referred to the Working Party.
The delegate for Mexico, supported by the delegate for Peru, while
expressing sympathy with the objectives of this proposal, did not agree that
the taxing power of governments should be bound. He suggested that this
proposal be referred to the Working Party which should seek scme alternative
wording for the phrase "such tax.....shall be treated as a tariff for the
purposes of Article 17".
The delegate for China was unable to support the proposal in its present
form, but was not adverse to its being referred to the Working Party for
examination. Meanwhile, he would reserve his opinion.
The delegates for France, Netherlands and Turkey were of the opinion
that the proposal should be referred to the Working party without a decision
as to its merits for the time being. .
The Chairman concluded that it was difficult to ascertain the sense of
the Sub-Caittee with respect to paragraph 1 of this proposal since at least
fr members of the Sub-Committee gwere awaitinHinsHtru tions. Rwever,the
majority of spepakers had suport ed it, and aminority of speakers, while
opposoed to the prposal in its present form, were not adverse to referring
it to he Wo rking Party.or examination pending receipt of instruction.
It was eagreed to1rfer poaragraph l f the proposal referred by
Sub-Coamittee D to Working Party 3 for redrafting, and that members of the
Sub-Coittee shoultd inWwform. e, oking Party of ntheir nviews upo receipt
of instructions from their gov0000ernmes.
2 The Chairman informed the Sub-Committee that he had consulted the
Chopmaireman f cettc eIIIc witht ropeo to se Mexsican suggeeion (made after
i0the Norwen proposal (E/CONF.2/C.3/6/Add.5) bad failed to obtain any
substantial support) that a provision be added to the Charter to the effect
/that price E/CONF.2/C. 3/A,/W .46
Page 3
that price stabilization schemes, In whatever form, would be acceptable
provided they were not contrary to the commercial policy provisions of
Chapter IV. (See Notes of the Twenty Second Meeting, 15 January 1948,
E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.34). The Chairman of Committee III had replied as follows:
"There is nothing in the Draft Charter which would preclude
the operation of internal price stabilization schemes that do not
conflict with the provisions of Chapter IV. Consequently, it is
implicit in the Charter that internal price stabilization schemes
can be operated so long as they do not conflict with the commercial
policy provisions of Chapter IV."
It was agreed that no further action by the Sub-Committee was necessary.
3. Paragraph 2 of the proposal referred by Sub-Committee D
The delegate for Colombia said that he had had occasion to explain this
proposal in Sub-Committee D, which had referred it to Sub-Committee A.
The United States delegate pointed out that the Colombian delegate had
withdrawn his original proposal (Item 7, E/CONF.2/C.3/11) in favour of the
more reasonable undertaking recommended by the Working Party of
Sub-Committee D. He supported the Working Party's proposal on the grounds
that it was a point of principle that should be covered somewhere in the
Charter.
The delegate for Norway inquired in what kind of case it was contemplated
this proposal would apply, and suggested that it be referred to a special
Working Party, along with the Norwegian proposal relating to price
stabilization schemes (E/CONF.2/C.3/6/Add.5) previously discussed in the
Sub-Committee.
The Chairman recalled that the Norwegian proposal had received no
substantial support when discussed by the Sub-Committee.
The delegate for Colombia replied that this provision would apply in
the case of a country establishing a maximum control price for a commodity
of which that country was such an important consumer that its price was
likely to became the effective world price. If such a price were too low,
it would be prejudicial to the interests of exporting countries.
It was agreed to continue the discussion of paragraph 2 of the proposal
referred by sub-Coommittee D at the next meeting. |
GATT Library | ry991hv7003 | Notes of Thirty-Fourth Meeting : Held on Tuesday, 10 February 1948, 6.00 p.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, February 11, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Third Committee: Commercial Policy Sub-Committee A (Articles 16, 17, 18, 19) | 11/02/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.50, E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.40-55, and C.3/A/WHITE PAPERS | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/ry991hv7003 | ry991hv7003_90190480.xml | GATT_146 | 1,181 | 7,833 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.50
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE 11 February 1948
ON DU ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI
THIRD COMMITTEE: COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUB-COMMITTEE A (ARTICLES 16, 17, 18, 19)
NOTES OF THIRTY-FOURTH MEETING
Held on Tuesday, 10 February 1948, 6.00 p.m.
Chairman: Dr. G. A. LAMSVELT (Netherlands)
1. Proposed amendment to paragraph 2 of revised text of Article 18 (Ecuador)
(E/CONF.2/C.3/6/Add.6)
The delegate of Ecuador explained that there were a number of state
monopolies in Ecuador which both produced and were the sole importers of
certain products. The imported products were subject both to an import duty
and a differential sales tax. The latter, however, was imposed not for
protective purposes but for fiscal reasons. Paragraph 2 of Article 18, which
would require the elimination of the differential between the tax on the
domestic and on the imported product, would have seriously prejudicial effects
on Ecuador's fiscal economy.
The delegate of Turkey stated that if state monopolies which imported
products for commercial resale were subject to the provisions of Article 18,
and not excepted under paragraph 8, he wished to support Ecuador's amendment.
It was the sense of the Sub-Committee that state monopolies importing products
for commercial resale were not excepted from the provisions of Article 18.
The delegates of Australia, Cuba, France, the Netherlands, the
United Kingdom and the United States were of the opinion that the differential
internal tax described by the Ecuadorian delegate could be converted to a
monopoly margin so that Article 31 rather than Article 18 would be relevant.
The total state trading margin was the difference between the landed price of
the product and the internal sale price. Ecuador could meet the conditions
of Article 31 by combining the existing internal tax and import duty to
constitute a protective or monopoly margin which Members were permitted to
levy under paragraph 3 of Article 31. The total import duty or monopoly
margin, as published or negotiated, would come under paragraph 4 of
Article 31.
/The delegate E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.50
Page 2
The delegate of Ecuador indicated that his misgivings had not been
entirely dispelled but that he believed it might be possible to adapt their
existing tax structure as suggested so that Article 31 and not Article 18
would apply. He would notify the Sub-Committee whether or not his
delegation was prepared to withdraw its proposed amendment to Article 18,
in view of this suggestion.
The delegate of New Zealand suggested that the term "maximum import
duty" as used in paragraph 2 of Article 31 should be clarified. Several
members of the Sub-Committee considered that the term "maximum import duty"
included botn the import duty proper as contemplated in Article 17 and the
monopoly margin of profit, and that it would therefore be preferable to use
the term "protective margin" rather than the term maximum import duty".
It was felt, however, that this suggestion could more appropriately be
discussed in connection with Article 31 and it was agreed to include it in
the Sub-Committee's Report to Committee III.
2. Report of Working Party 3 (Article 18) (E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.47) -
Continuation of Discussion.
B. RECOMMENDED CONSEQUENTIAL CHANGES
Article 16, Paragraph 1 - agreed
Article 22, Paragraph 2 - agreed
Article 30, Paragraph 2
In response to a question by the Netherlands delegate, the
United States delegate, supported by the delegates of Cuba, France, and the
United Kingdom, explained the reasons for the Working Party's recommendation
as follows: Paragraph 8 (a) of Article18 (corresponding to the first part
of paragraph 5 of the Geneva text) has the effect of excepting procurement
by Government agencies or Government departments of supplies for
governmental use (other than supplies purchased with a view to commercial
resale or to use in the production of goods for commercial sale) from the
rule of national treatment in Article 18 and most-favoured-nation treatment
in Article 16. Paragraph 2 of Article 30 similarly exempts purchases of
such supplies, when carried out on behalf of Governments by State trading
enterprises, from the rules laid down in paragraph 1 of that Article, but
provides that in making such purchases fair and equitable treatment should
be accorded to foreign suppliers. The Working Party had recommended the
proposed change in paragraph 2 of Article 30 so that the fair and equitable
treatment rule would apply to any laws, regulations or requirements relating
to procurement of supplies for governmental use by Government agencies or
departments as well as to purchases of such supplies by State trading
enterprises.
/The Sub-Committee E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.50
Page 3
The Sub-Committee approved the change in paragraph 2 of Article 30
recommmended by the Working Party.
C. INTERPRETATIVE NOTES
Article 17
The Danish delegate stated that his delegation could not support the
inclusion in the Charter of this note.
The Australian delegate, while making no formal reservation on this
note, indicated he might have to revert to it later.
The Norwegian and United Kingdom delegates maintained their temporary
reservations pending instructions from their respective Governments.
Article 18 - agreed
Article 18, Paragraph 1
On the suggestion of the Cuban delegate, it was agreed to request the
Central Drafting Cmmittee to consider whether this note, which explains
the provisions of Article 99, should relate to Article 18 or to Article 99.
The United Kingdom and United States delegates considered that it should
be retained as a note to Article 18 since the taxes referred to were a
technical violation of Article 18, not Article 99.
Article 18, Paragraph 2 - agreed
Article 18, Paragraph 5 - agreed
D. EXPLANATORY PARAGRAPHS TO BE INCLUDED IN
THE SUB-COMMITTEE'S REPORT TO COMMITTEE III
On the suggestion of the delegate of the Netherlands it was agreed
to include in the Sub-Committee's Report the following explanatory paragraph
which had been included in the Geneva Sub-Committee's Report and had been
noted in Committee III by the Netherlands delegate:
"Since the present paragraph 4 related solely to the question
of differential treatment between imported and domestic goods, the
inclusion of the last sentence in that paragraph should not be
understood to give sanction to the use of artificial measures in
the form of differential transport charges designed to divert traffic
from one port to another."
The Brazilian delegate proposed the following addition to the first
explanatory paragraph:
"The above, however, are neither exclusive nor necessary criteria
to distinguish an additional import duty from an internal tax under
Article 18".
While unable to accept the Brazilian proposal, the Sub-Committee agreed
to re-write as follows the second sentence of the first explanatory paragraph
in order to meet the Brazilian pooint:
"The Sub-Committee, while not attempting to give a general
definition of internal taxes, considers that the particular charges E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.50
Page 4
referred to are import duties and not internal taxes because, according
to the information supplied by the countries concerned, (a)....."
The second and third explanatory paragraphs were agreed as drafted.
on the suggestion of the United Kingdom delegate, it was agreed to
insert in the next to last line of the fourth explanatory paragraph after
the word "oleomargarine" the words "of which there was a substantial
domestic production". |
GATT Library | bh676mk3015 | Notes of Thirty-Second Meeting : Held on Friday, 30 January 1948, 3.00 p.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, February 9, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Third Committee: Commercial Policy Sub-Committee A (Articles 16, 17, 18, 19) | 09/02/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.48, E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.40-55, and C.3/A/WHITE PAPERS | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/bh676mk3015 | bh676mk3015_90190478.xml | GATT_146 | 1,302 | 8,564 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF. 2/C .3/A/W.48
9 February 1948
ON DU ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI
THIRD COMMITTEE: COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUB-COMMITTEE A (ARTICLES 16, 17, 18, 19)
NOTES OF THIRTY-SECOND METTING
Held on Friday, 30 January 1948, 3.00 p.m.
Chairman: Dr. G. A. LAMSVELT (Netherlands)
The Sub-Committee stood for a few minutes of silence in honour of the
memory of the late Mahatma K. Gandhi.
1. Paragraph 2 of proosed addition to Article 18. (Sub -Committee D
Working Paper for Seventh Meeting and E/CONF.2/C.3/D/W .11) referred
by Sub-Ccmmittee D (Articles 40, 41 and 43) on the basis of its
discussion of new Article 40 A proposed by Colombia (Item 7,
E/CONF.2/C.3/11) - continuation of discussion.
The delegates of Brazil, Cuba, France, Mexico and Peru supported the
present draft of this proposal which they considered would extend to exporters
of basic commodities no more than minimum guarantees without causing
difficulties for others.
The delegates of Australia, Denmark, the Netherlands and New Zealand
were of the opinion that this provision was not necessary because exporting
countries whose intereets were prejudiced could seek recourse under
Articles 41, 89 and 90, and that in its present form this proposal was so
general as to cast doubts on internal price control systems as a whole.
However, if the Sab-Committee decided to refer this proposal to the Working
Party, the Australian and New Zealand delegates suggested that the language
be clarified.
The delegate of Norway stated that he could not accept this proposal as
now drafted since it covered only a part of the problem. If an provision
on price stabilization schemes was inserted in the Charter, it ought to enable
Member countries to adopt both deflationary and iflationary control measures.
Importing as well as exporting countries should have the possibility of
protecting themselves; particularly during deflationary periods. He suggested
that Working Party 3 on Article 18 consider the problem as a whole.
The delegate of Colombia said that he could not accept the Norwegian
suggestion that the Working Party consider the whole problem of price
/stabilization E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.48
Page 2
stabilization scheme, pointing out that the Norwegian proposal on this
subject (E/CONF.2 /C.3/6/Add.5) had already been considered and received no
support in the Sub-Committee.
The United Kingdom delegate stated that he was awaiting instructions
from his Government.
The Chairman concluded that seven members of the Sub-Committee supported
the proposal; six members did not favour the proposal, at least in its present
form, but would nevertheless not object to its being referred to the Working
Party; one member preferred that it be referred to the Working Party without
a decision as to its merits, and one member was awaiting instructions. It
was agreed to refer this proposal to the Working Party for examination and
redrafting.
2. Inclusion in Article 16 of a provision safeguarding against the
circumvention of the most-favoured-nation clause by means of tariff
descriptions. (Report of Working Party V, Article 35, of Sub-Committee
III, G.C.P./W.P./13).
The Chairman called the Sub-Committee's attention to the following new
paragraph 6 which Sub-Committee C had recommended to Committee III be inserted
in Article 35, unless the substance thereof was later incorporated in
Article 16:
"6. The Members recognize that tariff descriptions based on
distinctive regional or geographical names should not be used in such a
manner as to discriminate against products of Member countries.
Accordingly, the Members shall oo-operate with each other and through
the Organization, with a view to eliminating at the earliest practicable
date practices which are inconsistent with this principle."
The Chairman also called the Sub-Committee's attention to the following
statement by the Chairman of Committee III:
"It is my view that some provision should be included in the Charter to
provide for safeguards against the circumvention of the most-favoured-
nation clause by means of tariff descriptions. Since Article 35 of the
Draft Charter deals with Formalities connected with Importation and
Exportation, I do not think that this Article is a very appropriate
place for the disposition of such a provision. I also believe that
study should be given to the desirability of broadening the provision
beyond the scope of that considered by Working Party No. 5 of
Sub-Committee C, viz tariff descriptions based an distinctive regional
or geographical names. Accordingly, I should be glad if your
Sub-Committee could give consideration to this whole problem in the
light of the Report of Working Party No. 5 of Sub-Committee C, and
the possibility of including a provision on tariff descriptions in
Article 16 of the Draft Charter."
/The delegate E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.48
page 3
The delegate of Cuba favoured the retention of the proposed paragraph 6
in Article 35, and objected to re-opening a discussion on the substance of
this proposal on the grounds that it had already been agreed in Sub-Committee C.
The United States delegate considered it unwise to insert this provision
in Article 16 on the grounds that it would tend to narrow the existing scope
of that Article, particularly since there were same cases in which tariff
descriptions clearly were violations of the most-favoured-nation clause, for
exmple, "Havana" cigars.
The French delegate explained that during the discussion of this proposal
in Sub-Committee C, he had argued that logically it should be inserted in the
Article dealing with most-favoured-nation treatment. Tariff descriptions based
on distinctive regional or geographical names represented only one type of
discrimination resulting from tariff descriptions, and he had felt that the
Organization should undertake the study of all possible forms of such
discrimination. He had suggested that this proposal be brought to the
attention of Sub-Committee A dealing with Article 16 because of its importance,
but had no strong feelings as to its location. He would, however, reserve
his position with respect to its substance pending instructions from his
Government.
The United kingdom delegate stated that although he had suggested in
Sub-Committee C that this proposal be referred to the Sub-Committee dealing
with Article 16, he had now concluded that this provision could more
appropriately be retained in Article 35.
The Chairman noted that the French and United Kingdom delegates, having
suggested in Sub-Committee C that this proposal be referred to Sub-Committee A,
had now withdrawn this suggestion, and that there was no support for inserting
this provision in Article 16. It was agreed to inform Committee III
accordingly.
3. The delegate of Cuba, with the Chairman's permission, proposed that the
following words be inserted in paragraph 4 after the words "Article 16" in the
thirteenth Line of the text of Article 17 already adopted by Sub-Committee A
(E/CONF.2/C.3/A/18): "and/or the provision of the General Agresment on
Tariffs and Trade". He explained that this addition would not alter in
any way the substance of paragraph 4, but would correct what he regarded as
an omission in the text adopted by the Sub-Committee.
The delegate of Mexico stated he was prepared to support this proposal
on the understanding that it referred only to paragraph 1 of Article I of the
General Agreement relating to most-favoured-nation treatment.
The delegates of Cuba, the United Kingdom and the United States pointed
out that provision should be made somewhere in the Charter for setting aside
/the provisions /CONF.2/C. 3/A/W.48
Page 4
the provisions of Article II of the General Agreement as well as Article I.
The United States delegate pointed out this statement was linked with the
Working Party's suggestion, approved by the Sub-Committee, that the
desirability of amendlng the unanimity requirement with respect to agreement
on the terms of accession to the General Agreement might also be considered
as a meeting of representatives of the governments signing the Final Act
adopted at the conclusion of the Second Session of the Preparatory Committee.
It was agreed to refer the Cuban proposal to the Joint Working Party on
Articles 17 and 81. |
GATT Library | nj729vv4908 | Notes of Thirty-Seventh Meeting : Held on Monday, 16 February 1948, 10.30 a.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, February 18, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Third Committee: Commercial Policy Sub-Committee A (Articles 16, 17, 18, 19) | 18/02/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.54, E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.40-55, and C.3/A/WHITE PAPERS | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/nj729vv4908 | nj729vv4908_90190485.xml | GATT_146 | 710 | 4,703 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.54
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE 18 February 1948
ON DU
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
THIRD COMMITTEE: COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUB-COMMITTEE A (ARTICLES 16, 17, 18, 19)-
NOTE OF THIRTY-SSEVETNH MEETING TRTYS NEEPING
Hld. Monday 116 February. 94, 10.30 a.m.
C.hairman: Dr GLT . A. LAMSVEs)(Netherland
cnsideration of Draft Report to the Third Committee (E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.52) -
Cntinuedl : ..
fSUL t Oo teCuban eegate it was agreed to refer,to the
Cuendment to paragraph 4 of Article ban am17 whichhad beern reoriginallyfered yibakknt to paragraph 4 of Artcle hh orig l
ihhad. been referred. r n.3
to the int Working Party of this Sub-Comittee and Sub-Committee D of the
Sixth teut .whi now being considered by the Tripartite Working
Party Te. ban delegate reserved his position pending the outcome of the
consideration of tis.psal and of the Tripartite Working Party's suggestion
o amend.Article II of the General Agreement on Tariff and Trade, and. tted.
thate had been instructed by his delegation to say that this was a
reservation on the Cuban delegation's whole position with respect to the
acceptance of the Charter by its Government.
, m p 8, in the General comments referring to Article 18, it was
n the suggestion of the United States delegate, to delete the
explan of- npaagraph 3 on the grounds that such a brief description
adin, ~dt_ toadd t"ongoodfter "internal taxes".
ne, as suggested in tte hex t~l4dJ as tsumn lee.
3. O the UnKingdom ited e's legateSuggestion it was agreed to exphltaain tb
althouNorwghian proposal (thgew1eg pae 0) received no substantial support, the
mSub-Coixttee ep ryeps hed-maty wilh the objecti ves opf.his roposale
4 On page 11, the second explanatory paragraph under paragraph 6 referring
to an Irish mixing regulation was revised, at the suggestion of the delegate
for Ire land,to state that the regulation in question "clearly contemplated"
instead of "specifically provided for" certain changes which would not be
precluded by paragraph 6 of Article 18.
5. It was agreed, on the suggestion of the United States delegate, to delete
from the text of sub-paragraph 8 (b) of Article 18 the words "not inconsistent
/with the provisions E/CONF .2/C. 3/A/W.54
Page 2
with the provisionas of Section C of this Chapter" and, on the suggestion of
the Mexican delegate, to add to the explanation under sub-paragraph 8 (b)
on page 12, the following:
"... At the same ano time the Sub-Committee wishes to record its view that
nothing in this sub-paragraph or elsewhere in Article 18 would oiverwde
the provisions of Section C of Chapter IV."
6. The delegate for Ecuador, not a member of the Subm-Comittee, proposed the
following addition to paragraph 8 (a) of Article 18:
....nor to monopoly margins or internal taxes on products subject to
state Monopoly, when these monopolies operate for revenue purposes."
There was no support for this amendment, but, in order to meet the point
raised by Ecuador, the Subm-Comittee agreed to delete paragraph 3 under
Recommended Consequential Changes on page 12 and to substitute (a) an
explanation roginardg the charges imposed on imported prcoduts by - states
monopolies in Ecuador, to which, with certain modifications, the Subm-Comittee
considered Article 31 and-not Article 18 would apply, and (b) a recommendation
t-he Third Committee that the following interpretative note be added to
Article 31:
"The term' maximum import duty' would cover the monopoly margin
which has ben enegotiated or which has been published or notified t othe
Organization, whether or not collected at the customs as an ordinary
customs duty."
The delegate for Ecuador said that he could accept this explanation and
the interpretative note, but reserved his delegation's position provisionally
pending action by the Third Committee.
7. The delegate for Venezuela, not a member of the Sub-Committee, explained-
a particular problem relating to the most-favoured-nation clause of Article 16
with which his Government was concerned. Venezuela, as a standard commercial
practice for-the past eight) years, had imposed a surcharge on products
imported into Venezuela which had been re-exported via the Conloial Antilsle
and the Guianas. The Venezuelan delegate asked the Sub-mComittee to consider
whether or not this practice would be contrary to the provisions of Article 16.
it was agreed to consider this problem further at the next meeting. |
GATT Library | pj683hx2375 | Notes of Thirty-Sixth Meeting : Held an Saturday, 14 February 1948, 3,00 P.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, February 18, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Third Committee: Commercial Policy Sub-Committee A (Articles 16, 17, 18, 19) | 18/02/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/A/53, E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.40-55, and C.3/A/WHITE PAPERS | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/pj683hx2375 | pj683hx2375_90190484.xml | GATT_146 | 868 | 5,626 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.53
ON DU 18 February 1948
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL: ENGLISH Ug
TMMMMERCIAL POEOMTTEE: COWCTAL
ES-COMAIT A (ARTICLES 16, 17, 18, 19)
THIRTY-NOTEH S EOINGFSIXTMER
Held a Saturday, 14 February .194p8, 3,0 Pm.
Chair. G. A. LA,man: DMSVELT (Netherlands)
Consideration of Draft Report to the Third Committee (E/CONF.2./.C.3/A/W52)
oubCommittee considered the draft report, paragraph by paragraph,
and made t hefoowlling changes:
1 It wa srgreed thatthe S SmarymtRecord.of the Thirty-First meeting
of the Third Cmomittee (E/CONF.2C/.3SR./31), should be corrected rather
tha nrevising the explanation relating to paragraph 5 on page 3, as
suggested b ythe Australian delegate. TheSu mmary Record states
"Sub-Cmomittee A recommended that Article 16 should not be altered and
that the new paragraph 6 be included in Article 35" whereas
Su-bommiCttee ,A after considering both the new paragrap 6h relating
ti tariff descriptions based on distinctive regional or geographical
amea recommended by Sub-Committee C for inclusion in Article 35 unless
incorporated in Article 16 and the suggestion made by the Chairman of
the Third Committee to include in Article 16 a provision of even broader
scope, had informed the Third Committee that there was no support for
inserting such a provision in Article 16.
2. Page 4, sub-paragraph 2 (a) - on the suggestion of the Colombian
delegate it was agreed to delete the words "did not imply that a Member
might be entitled to increase its tariffs generally, but" and to insert
the word "mean" after the word "merely" in the fourth line.
The Colombian delegate suggested the addition of a further sentence at
the end of the second explanatory paragraph relating to sub-paragraph 2 (a)
but after some discussion it was agreed instead to delete the two
sentences at the top of page 5.
3. Page 5, sub-paragraph 2 (b) - it was agreed to delete this explanatory
paragraph and to substitute the following:
/"Former E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W .53
Page 2
"Former sub-paragraph 1 (c) has been expanded to assure
that concessions incorporated in the General Agreement on
Tariffa and Trade which were previously provided for in
bilateral agreements would be considered. as concessions under
Article 17 in the same way as concessions already granted by
original Members of the G.A.T.T. for which compensation could
be asked."
4. Page 5, paragraphs 2 and 4 - on the suggestion of the United Kingdom
delegate, it was agreed to delete the sentence "The Haitian proposal
(Item 28) received no support" under paragraph 1 on page 3 and to amend
the third paragraph on page 6 as follows:
"The amendments proposed by Haiti (Item 28) and El Salvador
(Item 41) to the effect that Members should be re?ased from the --
obligation to negotiate because of their economic development and
revenue needs were met in part by the addition to paragraph 4 of
the phrase and the general fiscal structure s o Mftheer
countries concerned".
6. Page 7, General comment s- on the suggestion of the United Kingdom
delegate it wasagr eed to ad dthe words "in view of the provisions of
Section C of Chapter IV" after the word "that" in the first line of
the second paragraph.
. 7,. Page 8 - on the suggestion of the United States delegat et'.was
agreed to delete the remainder of the second. paragraph after the words
"paragrap h 3"on the grounds that such a brief descrlip otionf new
pragraph 3 might be misleading.
The Mexican and Peruvian delegations each reserved, its position
provisionally on paragraph 5 of the new text of Article. 17
The Peruvian delegate reserved his delegation's position on Arxticle 16,
paragraphs 2, 3 and 4 and the interpretative note, pending final settlement
of Article 15 and made the. following statement:
"Our attitude towards existing preferences depends on the decision
regarding the establishment of new ones. Although this Sub-mComittee
has not studied paragraphs 2 and 3, we wish tako me this statement in
order to make our position very clear, especially as thew ne text of
Article 16 before us Includes a new paragraph 2 (?/c )isand paragraph 4,
and the Interpretative note, which are closely related to the matter of
preferences."
TUreguayan uh delegate maintained his delegations reservation on Annex A
of Article 16 and made the following statement:
/"Althouh it E/CONF.2/C .3/A/W..53
Page 3
"Although it recognizes that the formula contained in the Annex
has been improved to same extent, Uruguay considers it advisable to
maintain the reservation made in Ccmmittee III during the consideration
of amendments on first reading.
Supporting, as it does, the unconditional most-favoured-nation
clause, Uruguay has always been opposed to the benefits of this
formula being impaired by preferences in the form of tariffs or
quota restrictions, and has even more reason to be so in the case
provided for in Annex A regarding meat, since these preferences are
not at present applied, having been suspended since the beginning
of the war.
In Committee III, Uruguay proposed as a fair solution that, at
least, these preferences should not be applied in future to the
detriment of those countries that have sacrificed the consumer needs
of their population and supplied the United Kingdom with all their
available exports of this product." |
GATT Library | ps720js9141 | Notes of Thirty-Third Meeting : Held on Monday, 9 February 1948, 10.30 a.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, February 10, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Third Committee: Commercial Policy Sub-Committee A (Articles 16, 17, 18, 19) | 10/02/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.49, E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.40-55, and C.3/A/WHITE PAPERS | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/ps720js9141 | ps720js9141_90190479.xml | GATT_146 | 1,137 | 7,420 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE COMFERENCE E/CONF. 2/C.3/A/W 49
ON DU 10 February 1948
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
THIRD COMMITTEE: COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUB-COMMITTEE A (ARTICLES 16, 17, 18, 19)
NOTES OF THIRTY-THIRD MEETING
Held on Monday, 9 February 1948, 10.30 a.m.
Chairman: Dr. G. A. LAMSVELT (Netherlands)
Reports of Working Party 3 (Article 18) and Working Party 4 (Article 19)
(E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.47)
I. Report of Working Party 3 (Article 18)
A.REVISED TEXT OF ARTICLE 18 - National Treatment on Internal Taxation
and Regulation
The French delegate, Chairman of Working Party 3, explained that while
the proposed new text differed considerably in form from the Geneva text,
there was only one substantive change. The second sentence of paragraph one
on the Geneva draft had provided that existing internal taxes which afforded
protection to directly competitive or substitutable products in cases in
which there was no substantial domestic production of the like product
could be maintained, subject to negotiation for their elimination or
reduction in the manner provided for in Article 17. The Working Party had
concluded that it would be preferable to provide for the outright elimination
of such taxes. Mambers would, of course, be free to convert the protective
element of such taxes into customs duties, in the case of unbound items.
In the case of bound items, the Working Party had recommended a transitional
period during which a Member could postpone the application of the provisions
of paragraph 2 pending a release from its trade agreement obligations in
order to permit the increase of the tariff to the extent necessary to
compensate for the elimination of the protective element of the tax. The
new form of Article 18 emphasized more than had the Geneva text the
intention of the Conference that internal taxes should not be used as a
means of protection. The details had been relegated to Interpretative notes
so that it would be easier for Members to ascertain the precise scope of
their obligations under Article 18.
Paragraph 1 - no comment.
Paragraph 2 - no comment.
/Paragraph 3 E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.49
Page 2
Paragraph 3
It was agreed to substitute the word "it" for the words "the Member" in
the sixth line.
Paragraph 4
The Chairman of the Working Party explained that the word "internal"
had been inserted to make it clear that differential transportation charges
did not refer to international shipping.
Paragraph 5 - no comment.
Paragraph 6 - no comment.
Paragraph 7
The Norwegian delegate felt that allocation by internal quantitative
regulation should be dealt with in Articles 20 and 22.
The Mexican delegate, while not objecting in principle, felt that
paragraph 7 represented a considerable change from the Geneva text.
The delegate of France, supported by the delegates of Australia, Cuba
and the United States, explained that in the Working Party's view it would
not be feasible or desirable to allocate between foreign sources of supply
by internal quantitative regulations, as implied by paragraph 5 of
Article 22. Article 18 was concerned with allocation between domestic and
foreign sources of'supply and the word "external" had been inserted before
"sources off supply" to ensure most-favoured-nation treatment. For this
reason the Working Party had recommended new paragraph 7 and the deletion
of the reference to Article 18 in paragraph 5 of Article 22.
Paragraph 7 was agreed as drafted, the Mexican and Norwegian delegates
reserving their position pending availability of the text of Articles 22
and 22.
Paragraph 8
In response to a question by the New Zealand delegate, the French
delegate explained that the Working Party had tried to clarify the wording
of sub-paragraph (b). This provision had been added to the Geneva draft
because it was felt that if subsidies were paid on domestic and not on
imported products, it might be construed that Members were not applying
the "national treatment" rule.
The object of this sub-paragraph, in the view of the United Kingdom
delegate, was to make it clear that internal taxes could be entirely
non-discriminatory and that subsidies could be paid quite separately to
domestic producers from the exchequer.
The delegate of Mexico felt that since subsidies could take many forms
the deletion of the words "subsidies provided for under Article 25"
constituted a considerable broadening of the scope of this sub-paragraph.
It was agreed (1) to retain sub-paragraph (b) as drafted, although the
Cuban delegate favoured the deletion of the entire sub-paragraph and the
/Mexican and E/CONF.2/C. 3/A/W.49
Page 3
Mexican and Peruvian delegates favoured the dele?ion of the words beginning
with "including payments" to the end of the paragraph, and (2) to insert
the words "not inconsistent with the provisions of Section C of this Chapter"
after the word "subsidies" in the second line of sub-paragraph (b).
The Mexican delegate reserved his delegation's position pending
availability of the text of Section C of Chapter IV on Subsidies.
Paragraph 9 and the Norwegian proposal to redraft this paragraph as new
Article 19 A. (Working Paper)
It was agreed to retain paragraph 9 in Article 18 rather than as a
separate Article on the grounds that "internal maximum price control
measures" were internal regulations within the terms of paragraphs 1 and
4 of Article 18.
In view of the Committee's decision to retain paragraph 9 in Article 18,
the Norwegian delegate withdrew his ?iginal proposal and suggested the
addition to paragraph 9 of the following language: "without interfering
with the legitimate purpose of the regulations".
This proposal received no support; the Norwegian delegate maintained
his delegation's reservation on paragraph 9 and the United Kingdom delegate
maintained his delegation's reservation on paragraph 9 for the time being.
Revision of paragraph 9 proposed by Australia (Working Paper)
The delegates of Denmark, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway and
the United Kingdom supported the Australian proposal. The Colombian and
Cuban delegates opposed it. The Colombian delegate proposed that
paragraph 9 as recommended by the Working Party be retained and that the
Sub-Committee's Report explain that it was not considered necessary to
adopt the Australian proposal because the words "to the fullest practicable
extent" in the Working Party text had the same intent as the words "having
due regard for the legitimate purposes of a particular price control
measure and the legitimate interests of the prejudicially affected Member
or Members" proposed by Australia would have.
The Australian delegate indicated that he would not insist on his
proposal and was prepared to accept the Colombian compromise suggestion.
The United Kingdom delegate indicated that the Colombian suggestion
to include an explanatory note in the Sub-Committee's Report might make it
easier for his delegation to withdraw its reservation.
The delegate of Brazil reserved his delegation's position for the time
being with respect to (1) existing internal taxes as treated in
paragraphs 2 and 3 and (2) paragraph 6, pending instructions from his
Government. |
GATT Library | hk440yq0094 | Notes of Tweleth Meeting : Held at Havana on Saturday, 5 March 1948 at 10.30 a.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, March 6, 1948 | Joint Sub-Committee of Committees II and III: Tariff Preferences | 06/03/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.23/A/W.12, E/CONF.2/C.2/D/W.1-3, C.23/A/W.1-3, and C.26/A/W.1-29 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/hk440yq0094 | hk440yq0094_90180352.xml | GATT_146 | 491 | 3,460 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C.2&3/A/
ON DU w.12
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI 6 March 1948
JOINT SUB-COMMITTEE OF COMMITTEES II AND III ON TARIEF PREFERENCES
NOTE OF TWELFTH MEETING
HeLd at Havana saturday, 5 March 1948 at 10.30 a.m.
Chairman M. Jean ROYER (France)
Article 15
Discussion of Article 15 as approved. by the Co-ordnating Comittee
(E/CONF.2/45/Rev.1)was continued,
Paragraph 4.
Further discussion tootplace on the preamble to paragraph 4. This
was approved subject to revision of the French text.
Pragraph 5
The informal Wonking Group set up at the Eleventh Meting, to clarify
the text of this paragraph, recommended that no change be made. The
Paragraph was approved subreect to minor drafting changes in the French
text. Two delegations wished their view recorded that margins of
pieferences approved by the Organization under the terms of the paragraph
would be regarded ai bound. Other delegations expresses contrary views.
Paragraph 6
Sub-paragraph (a) was approved. subject to replacement of the words
"injure substantially the interests of Members not parties" by "cause
Substantial injury to the external trade of a Member not party".
Sub-paragraph (b) was approved. subject to replacement of the phrase "the
members contemplating the agreement may be enter "by "the Organization shall
inform the interested. Members of its finding and shall require Members
contemplating the. agreement to enter". It was agreed to insert a note in
the Sub-committee's Report t othe effect that the compnasation provided for
in sub-paragraph (b) might be of either a negative or positive character;
that is to say, the Organization might, in appropriate circumstances, allow
ocmpensation to take the form of withdrawal of concessions by an injured
Member, and not only of the establishment of new concessions in favour of
such Member.
Sub-paragraph (c) was approved.
Sub-paragraph (d) was approved. subject to replacement of the word.
/"procedure by E/CONF.2/C.2&3/A/W/12
Page 2
"procedure" by "provisions". It was agreed.to add. a note in the Sub-
Commitee's Report to explain that this change had been made in order to
make it clear that ,he provisions of sub-paragraph (c) were not applicable
to sub-paragraph (d). The delegation or Iraq had proposed deletion of the
last sentence of sub-paragraph (d). An alternative proposal was discussed
by whch the "substantial injury" provisions of this sentence would be limited
to Members having most-favoured-nation treaties with the parties to the
proposed ageement Neither proposal, however, was acceptable to the Sub-
committee, the latter proposal being supported by three members and opposed
by five with several abstentions, The representative of Iraq reserved his
right to re-open the question in Committee.
Interpretative Notes
The interpretative notes of paragraphs 4 (a) and 6 (d) were approved.
Consequential amendment of Article 13
The consequential amendment of Article 13 recommended by the
Co-ordinating Committee received the support of the Sub-Committee-after
Considerable discussion.
General Reservations
The delegations of Haiti and Turkey reserved their position on-
Article 15 pendg a final decision on Article 16. |
GATT Library | px355xh5365 | Notes of Twenty-Eighth Meeting : Held on Monday, 26 January 1948, 3.00 p.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 28, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Third Committee: Commercial Policy Sub-Committee A (Articles 16, 17, 18, 19) | 28/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.43, E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.40-55, and C.3/A/WHITE PAPERS | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/px355xh5365 | px355xh5365_90190472.xml | GATT_146 | 939 | 5,983 | United Nations
CONFERENCE
ON
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT
Nations Unies
CONFERENCE
DU
COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI
RESTRICTED
E/CONF .2/C .3A/
W. 43
28 January 1948
ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
THIRD COMMMITTEE: COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUB-COMMITTEE A (ARTICLES 16, 17, 18, 19)
NOTES OF TWENTY-EIGHTH MEETING
Held on Monday, 26 January 1948, 3.00 p.m.
Chairman: Dr. G. A. LAMSVELT (Netherlands
REPORT OF WORKING PARTY 2 (ARTICLE 17)
Revised Text of Article 17 - Reduction of Tariffs and Elimination of
Preferences - Continuation of discussion
At the suggestion of the Brazilian delegate it was agreed to revert to
paragraph 2(c).
1. Paragraph 2 (c)
The Brazilian delegate proposed the inclusion in the Sub-Committee's
Report of an explanatory note regarding sub-paragraph 2 (c) (iii) and agreed
to submit a draft at the next meeting.
The Chairman pointed out that the Sub-Committee had agreed previously
to recommend to Committee III, including as an interpretative note in the
Charter, the note to Article I of the General Agreement (Volume 1, Annex 1,
page 75) which defines the term "margin of preference as the absolute
difference between the most-favoured-nation rate of duty and the
preferential rate of duty for the like product, and not the proportionate
relation between these rates.
The delegate of Brazil supported by the delegate of Peru, proposed
that sub-paragraph 2 (c) (iv) be amended to read "No margin of absolute or
relative preference shall be increased".
The delegate of Denmark said that he would support any definition which
would result in a decrease in margins of preference.
The delegate of Cuba, supported by the delegate of New Zealand, objected
to 'the Brazilian delegate's proposal on the grounds that the absolute margin
of preference was the only valid basis on which to negotiate. He pointed out
that the only purpose of sub-paragraph 2 (c) (iv) was to provide that a
margin of preference should not be increased, Whereas
sub-paragraph 2 (c) (i), (ii), (iii) established rules for the reduction
of margins of preference.
/The delegate of the E/CONF.2/C 3/A/W.43
Page 2
The delegate of the United Kingdom observed that his delegation had
agreed to sub-paragraph 2 (c) (iv) on the understanding that a margin of
preference was defined in absolute terms.
The delegate of Australia indicated that if sub-paragraph 2 (c) (iv)
wers rewritten, his delegation would probably have to reserve its position.
The majority of the Sub-Committee confirmed the Sub-Committee's previous
decision to add to the Charter as an interpretative note the General Agreement
definition of a margin of preference in absolute terms, whereas the
Brazilian delegate maintained his objections.
2. Paragraph 2 (d) - agreed,
3. Paragraph 2 (e) and United- Kingdom amendment to Working Party text
(E/CONF.2/C .3/A/W.40)
The Brazilian delegate considered that in both the Working Party and
United Kingdom texts the commitment set forth in the first line was
contradicted by the latter part of the paragraph.
The Colombian delegate pointed out that if either of these texts were
accepted, the elimination of preferences would be dependent upon the good will
of the parties to preferential arrangements.
It was agreed to adopt the United Kingdom amendment to the Working Party
text, but to include the proposed interpretative note to paragraph 1 in the
explanatory paragraphs of the Sub-Committee's Report rather than recommending
it as an interpretative note to the Charter.
4. Paraqraph 3 - agreed.
5. Paragraph 4
The delegate of New Zealand, supported by the delegate of Ausltralia,
suggested that paragraph 4 be redrafted to make it clear that a complaining
Member could withhold tariff benefits under agreements not incorporated in
the General Agr?ement, but accruing to other Members under Article 16, as well
as benefits n?tiated pursuant to Article 17.
The deie?te of Me?i?o, supported by the delegates of Cuba,
United King? and the ?tnited States, was of the opinion that an affected
Member should be entitled to withhold only those concessions negotiated
under the Article itself.
The delegate of Bz?l incuired whether, if the Member benefitting
from preferential arrangements refused to release the other party to the
preferential arrangements to grant a requested reduction, such a case
would come under paragraph 4 or whether such a refusal. could be Justified
under the "selective" basis of negotiations established in paragraph 2 (a).
/The delegate of Cuba E/CONF.2/C .3/A/W. 43
Page 3
The delegate of Cuba pointed out that it had been agreed at a previous
meeting that a Member could not refuse to negotiate on a particular item
without an explanation and that the Organization would determine whether
such a refusal was justified on the basis of the criteria established in
paragraph 4.
The United Kingdom delegate pointed out that paragraph 4 did not provide
a procedure for complaints with respect to single items, but was meant to
apply to the whole scope of negotiations. A Member could complain under
Paragraph 4 not only with respect to refusal to negotiate, but with respect
to inadequate concessions. The Organization's decision would relate to the
bargain as a whole, but it was possible that if one product was of great
importance, refusal to negotiate on that particular item might be determined
by the Organization to constitute refusal to negotiate.
The Brazilian delegate inquired whether it would be necessary to pay for
the elimination of preferences by concessions both to the party according
the preference and to the party benefitting therefrom.
The United K?gdom delegate indicated that in his view the price paid
would not be a double price, but would be divided between the parties to the
preferential arrangements.
Paragraph 4 was agreed, with the addition of the word "general" between
"the" and "fiscal structures" in the eighth and ninth lines. |
GATT Library | kt474pj4138 | Notes of Twenty-Fourth Meeting : Held on Monday, 19 January 1948, 3.00 p.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 22, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Third Committee: Commercial Policy Sub-Committee A (Articles 16, 17, 18, 19) | 22/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.38 and E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.1-39 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/kt474pj4138 | kt474pj4138_90190465.xml | GATT_146 | 1,219 | 8,010 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
ON DU E/CONF. 2/C.3/A/W. 38
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E CONF.2/C.3/A/W.38
ON DU 22 January 1948
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLO1 ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
THlRD COMMITTEE: COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUB-COMMITTEE A (ARTICLES 16, 17, 18, 19)
NOTES OF TWENTY-FOURTH MEETING
Held on Monday, 19 January 1948, 3.00 p.m.
Chairman: Dr. G. A. LAMSVELT (Netherlands)
ARTICLE 18 NATIONAL TREATMENT ON INTERNAL TAXATION AND REGULATION
Exemption for Certain Internal Quantitative Regulations (Paragraph 4)
1. Item 64 - (Meixco)
The Mexican delegate explained that for constitutional reasons the
Mexican Parliament could not be bound retroactively, but only as of the
date on which the Charter would come into force. He, therefore, suggested,
in lieu of the proposal to delete paragraph 4 (b), deletion only of the
dates in sub-paragraph 4 (b) and substitution of language similar to that
of Article 14. Meanwhile, the Mexican delegation reserved its position
regarding the dates in sub-paragraph 4 (b).
It was agreed that the Working Party should endeavour to find a
solution for this problem.
2. The Cuban delegate submitted a new proposal regarding the dates set
forth in paragraph 4 (b), as follows:
(a) the addition, after "1 July 1939 or 10 April 1947", of the
words "or at any time between the two dates", or alternatively;
(b) that a third date be added.
He explained that Cuba wished to reinstate during the present gasoline
shortage a mixing regulation, instituted in 1942, requiring the mixture of
alcohol and gasoline. This regulation had been re?cinded in 1945 and
therefore could not be retained under the 10 April 1947 date. Nor did his
delegation feel that this emergency situation was adequately covered by
Article 43. The Cuban delegate was also concerned that the words "in effect"
in paragraph 3 (a) might preclude the proposed mixing regulation, even
though domestic alcohol was not stipulated, because in practice the alcohol
would be domestic.
/The United States E/CONF. 2/C.3/A/W. 38
Page 2
The United States delegate was of the opinion that
1. Article 43 II (a) would permit the use of mixing regulations with
respect to products in short supply;
2. the mixing regulation Cuba proposed to institute would not be
precluded by the provisions of Article 18 (3) (4) unless it required that a
specific proportion of domestic alcohol be mixed with imported gasoline;
3. the phrase "in effect" had been inserted in paragraph 3 (a) to avoid
describing in dell an alternative type of regulation which would have
the same effect as that precluded by sub-paragraph 3 (a) (See Notes of
the Twenty-third Meeting, E/CONF. 2/C.3/A/W. 35, page 1) and would not
preclude the proposed Cuban mixing regulation.
The Cuban, French and New Zealand delegates were inclined to agree that
paragraph 3 (a) would not be applicable in the Cuban situation. The
United States delegate felt that both 3 (a) and (b) would apply in the sense
that (a) would prevent a mixing regulation requiring a specific proportion
of domestic alcohol, and sub-paragraph (b) would prevent protection of the
domestic alcohol industry against imported gasoline. So long as the Cuban
mixing regulation did not stipulate domestic alcohol, and was not intended
to protect the domestic alcohol industry, it would not be precluded by
Article 18. The United States delegate did agree, however, with the
New Zealand delegate that there was some inconsistency between the language
of paragraphs 2 and 3, in that paragraph 2 refers only to "like" products
whereas it was not the intention of the drafters that paragraph 3 should be
restricted to "like" products. He suggested that the reference to paragraph 2
at the beginning of paragraph 3 might be deleted.
The Cuban delegate accepted the United States delegate' s interpretation
that the proposed Cuban mixing regulation would not be contrary to Article 18
so long as it did not require the mixture of a specific proportion of
domestic alcohol with imported gasoline. If this interpretation was agreed
by the Sub-Committee, his delegation would probably submit to amendment, but
would meanwhile reserve its position regarding the dates stipulated in
sub-paragraph 4 (b), subject to a satisfactor explanation being included in
the Sub-Committee's Report. The Cuban delegate, with the support of the
Argentinian and Brazilian delegates, did indicate, however, that unless the
language of sub-paragraphs 3 (a) and (b) could be clarified satisfactorily,
his delegation might prefer to revert to its original proposal to amend
sub-paragraph 4 (b).
3 Items 65 (a) (Argentina) and 69 (Brazil) , , * -
T Argentinian delegate explained that his delegation had submitted this
/amendment because E/CONF. 2/C.3/A/W. 38
Page 3
amendment because it felt there were commodities of greater importance than
films which deserved to be exempted from the provisions of paragraph 3 on the
rounds of national interest, for example, coal and sulphur in Argentina's
case. This was not an emergency problem of short supply, but 4 continuing
one of ensuring sufficient supplies of these commodities, to protect the
national interest by developing domestic sources. He would not inside on the
language of his amendment, provided Argentina's needs were adequately covered,
and would support the Brazilian amendment if it were extended to include all
products of national importance.
The Brazilian delegate explained that his delegation had proposed
exempting basic foodstuffs and fuels from the provisions of paragraph 3 for
reasons of national security, not to afford protection. As for the possible
alternatives, Article 43 (II) (a) was inadequate; subsidies were not
practicable in Brazil; nor would it be practicable to wait for permission
under Article 13 to use mixing regulations for protective purposes with respect
to these comnodities. He believed his delegation's amendment was less
susceptible of abuse than the Argentinian amendment since it was more limited
in scope, but he would be willing to add a phrase similar to that used in
Article 13, i.e., "....if it is established........ that such measure is
unlikely to be more restrictive of international trade than any other
pracricable and reasonable measure permitted under this Charter......."
The French and Norwegian delegates felt that the Argentinian and Brazilian
proposals would contraene the provisions of Article 18 (3) and, if adopted,
would provide to countries normally exporting industrial products an
opportunity to expand their agricultural production by means of protective
mixing regulations to the detriment of exporters of primary products.
The French delegate suggested that there would be no point to the
Brazilian amendment if the measures contemplated therein were required to be
lees restrictive than other measures permitted under the Charter. He also
regarded emergency cases as fullIy covered by Article 43.
The Chairman concluded that there was no substantial support in the
Sub-Committee for the Argentinian proposal (Item 65) (a) or the Brazilian
proposal (Item 69).
4. Item 65 (b) - (Argentina)
There was some support expressed for the proposal to substitute
21 November 1947 for 10 April 1947 in sub-paragraph 4 (b) on the understanding
that 1 July 1939 would be retained. It was agreed that the Working Party should
examine the feasibility of this proposed substitution.
?5. Item 67 - (Sweden) E/CONF .2/C.3/A/W.38
Page 4
5. Item 6 - (Sweden)
The Swedish proposal to substitute the word "system" for the words
"measures" and "measure" in sub-paragraph 4 (b) was accepted in principle
- sub- gaph 4fr (b)t we e domprnrup
and referr to thQ prk2S up, |
GATT Library | wn882gx6954 | Notes of Twenty-Ninth Meeting : Held on Tuesday, 27 January 1948, 3.00 P.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 29, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Third Committee: Commercial Policy Sub-Committee A (Articles 16, 17, 18, 19) | 29/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/W.44, E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.40-55, and C.3/A/WHITE PAPERS | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/wn882gx6954 | wn882gx6954_90190473.xml | GATT_146 | 583 | 3,860 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C.3/W .44
ON DU 29 January 1948
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGIAL: ENGLISH
THIRD COMMITTEE: COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUB-COMMITTEE A (ARTICLES 16, 17, 18, 19)
NOTES OF TWENTY-NINTH MEETING
Held on Tuesday, 27 January 1948, 3.00 P.m.
Chairman: Dr. G. A. LAMSVELT (Netherlands)
REPORT OF WORKING PARTY 2 (ARTICLE 17) (E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.37/Add.l) -
Continuation of discussion.
1. Interpretative Note to sub-paragraph 2 (d) to be included in the
Charter - agreed.
2. Explanatory paragraphs to be included in the Sub-Committee's Report to
committee III and addition proposed by Brazil (E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.37/Add.l).
The delegate for Brazil explained that the purpose of this proposed
addition was to preclude the possibility of a Member refusing to negotiate on
a particular duty on the grounds that it was a revenue duty, even though it also
had a substantial protective or preferential effect. This had happened during
the Geneva negotiations. He did not believe that the reference to a Membe?'s
"fiscal structure" would cover the point since this was one of the criteria
to be taken into account by the Organization in judging the overall balance
of concessions.
The delegate for Colombia recalled that the Sub-Committee had previously
agreed that whereas the "fiscal structure" of a Member country should be taken
into account by the Organization in determining whether a Member had complied
with its obligations under paragraph 1, revenue tariffs in themselves would
not Justify a refusal to negotiate. In his view both protective and fiscal
duties have a restrictive effect on trade and neither should constitute adequate
Justification for refusal to negotiate. He believed this principle could be
accepted if it were kept in mind that every Member was obliged to negotiate, but
not to grant concessions on every item.
The delegate for Cuba, supported by the delegates for France and the
Netherlands, regarded the Brazilian proposal as unnecessary.
The Chairman concluded that there was no support for the Brazilian proposal.
The delegate for Colombia proposed the following as an alternative to the
Brazilian proposal:
/"It was understood E/CONF. 2/C. 3/A/W,44
Paige 2
"It was understood that the fiscal nature of a customs duty cannot be
invoked as a motive for refusing to negotiate, and that it is the general
fiscal structure of the country which must be taken into consideration
when the Organization is called upon to give a decision under Article 17."
The delegate for the United Kingdom, supported by the delegate for the
Netherlands, had no objection to the second part of the Colombian proposal but
felt that the first part raised a different point than that raised in the
Brazilian proposal.
The delegate for Mexico believed that the Colombian proposal was not
necessary if it was clearly accepted that no Member could refuse to negotiate
on a particular Item but could refuse to grant concessions on particular items
if a satisfactory explanatoin was offered.
The delegate for Cuba made the following alternative suggestion:
"It was understood that it is not the fiscal nature of a given
customs duty, but the general fiscal structure of a Member which must be
taken into consideration when the Organization is called upon to give
decisions under Article 17."
It was agreed that the delegate for Brazil. Colombia, Cuba and the
United Kingdom should agree a draft for consideration by the Sub-Cormittee.
3. Relation of General Agreement of Tariffs and Trade to the Charter - agreed.
4 Joint Working Party of Sub-Connittee A and the Sub-Comiittee on Article 81
agreed. |
GATT Library | mm493bz0169 | Notes of Twenty-Seventh Meeting : Held on Saturday, 24 January 1948, at 19.30 a.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 26, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Third Committee: Commercial Policy Sub-Committee A (Articles 16, 17, 18, 19) | 26/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.42, E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.40-55, and C.3/A/WHITE PAPERS | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/mm493bz0169 | mm493bz0169_90190470.xml | GATT_146 | 944 | 6,290 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
E/CONF.2/C.3/A/
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE W.42
ON DU 26 January 1948
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
THIRD COMMITTEE: COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUB-COMMITTEE A (ARTICLES 16, 17, 18, 19)
NOTES OF TWENTY-SEVENTH MEETING
Held on Saturday, 24 January l948, at 19.30 a.m.
Chairman: Dr. G. A. LAMSVELT (Netherlands)
REPORT OF WORKING PARTY 2 (ARTICLE 17)
1. Revised Text of Article 17 - Reduction of Tariffs and Elimination of
Preferences
1. Pararaph 1 - agreed.
2. Paragraph 2 (a)
On the suggestion of the delegate of France, it was agreed to explain in
the Sub-Committee's Report that the words "undertake not to raise it above a
specified. higher level" do not imply that a Member might be entitled to
increase its tariffs generally, but merely that in certain cases it might be
advantageous to another Member to obtain a tariff binding, even though at a
higher level. It was felt that such an explanation would dispel any
impression that the provisions of paragraph 2 (a) were contradictory to those
of paragraph 1. .
The delegate of Brazil stated that he could accept the selective basis of
negotiations provided for in paragraph 2 (a) with respect to tariffs, but
not with respect to preferences. Unless different procedures were established
for negotiations with respect to tariffs, which a Member has the right to
maintain subject to substantial reduction, and preferences, which it was
intended to eliminate, a Member might be able to evade the latter aim.
The Brazilian delegate reserved his right to revert to this point.
The United Kingdom delegate was of the opinion that if the right to
negotiate only. on particular tariff items. was recognized, it would. be unfair
not to extend this right to preferences. Moreover, he believed that a Member
should. be entitled to refuse to negotiate on particular items if a protective
element was involved.
The delegate of Denmark inquired as to the precise meaning in this
context of the word "selective". If it implied that Members could refuse
/to negotiate on E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.42
Page 2
to negotiate on particular items, he proposed that the word "selective" be
deleted.
The delegate of Cuba considered that "selective" and "tproduct-by-poOduct"
had different connotations in this context and should both be retained. For
example, "selective" meant that a Member could reduce teh general level of its
tariffs while rataniing the right not to negotiate on a particular item.
"Product-by-product" meant that instead of reducing all tariff items by an
overall flat percentage, the duties on particular products would be examined
in negotiations.
The delegate of Colombia recalled that the Australian delegate had
outlined. in Committee III the procedure followed. during the Geneva negotiations.
Article 17 had been redrafted to incorporate some of those rules of procedure.
He believed that the word. "selective" should be retained. Its deletion would
imply that negotiations would have to proceed on a product-by-product basis
with respect to all products rather than on the basis of lists of requests
and offers of concessions on items in which there was mutual interest.
This did not mean a Member could refuse to negotiate on a particular item
without offering any explanation. If the reasons for refusing to negotiate
on a particular item were not regarded as satisfactory by the interested
Member, the procedure of paragraph 4 and Articles 89 and 90 would apply.
The delegate of Dnemark agreed to the retention of the word "selective"
provided a satisacftory explanation along the lines of the Coolmbia: delegate's
remarks was nciluded in the Sub-Committe'es Report.
The delegate of Brazil was preparedt o accept the principle that the
elimination of preferences was subject to negotiations and that a price would
have to be paid for such elimination, provided negotiations were compulsoryon
all items.H e reiterated the reservation on Articles 16 and 17 made by the
Brazilian delegate at the Seventeenth Meeting of Sub-Committee A, pending teh
outcome of the discussions in the Joint Sub-Comimttee of II and III on new
Preferential arrangements,
It wasagrgeed
1. to retain the word "selective", and include in the Sub-Committee's
Report an explanation along the lines of that made by the Colombian
delegate;
2. to substitute the words "then existing" for the word "present" in
the next to last line of paragraph 2(a).
Paragraph 2 (a) was agreed as amended.
3. Paragraph 2 (b)
The delegate of New Zealand asked for an explanation of the second
sentence. -
Itw as graeed to include in the Sub-Committe'es Report the following
/explanation offered E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.42
Page 3
explanation offered by the delegate of Mexico as a member of the Working Party;
"When a Member negotiates with other Members Eho ar-asigatorio sof
the Gernarl Asreement on Tariff s and Trade, account shell be taken of
the indirect comnssisons %hich the Maenbr is arleady Srwating to such
asigntories tlrouhg the most-favoured-nation clzuse, and of the e
cOZ;ereionce which egni tories of the Gea mePrnemlenAgt on Ts16tfisad
rdnayYr bee amlready extening tod the The tran fo£mt.o of
indfft conciressions under the most-favore%-ation ucdlai_3o duseir ect
corCOnmce grctessdto 14anzs inMem their owright ohalnl 'e csonsidered
a nerotiable concession."
Paraeph2 (b) vgraaerced
J~ ra~-i~a~hphC)
Ve delegate of BT--z tressedrazil concern with respect to (iii) which he
felt destroyed the autcac action to oemijnstreferencl;emis esatablished in
(i) and (ii). If (iii) were deleted a Maar to';l emrequ.1rwed.to negotiaite
under (i) or (ii) or appeal to the Qrnzation. If Or(giii) were retained,
appeal to the Orgaization would notn be feasible because a Meber could
always indlte its vllinnesao negwoilltiateg uwler (l)or (il)
It Ws pointe;.out thaw~he prodcedure of t(itio vold on2l raite wbtr
agree-nt between tae armties conorrnhd.
P-- - aaaragraphs a5eed, the Brazilian goctiona uiviabeted. |
GATT Library | ys056cn4340 | Notes of Twenty-Sixth Meeting : Held on Friday, 23 January 1948, 6.00 p.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 26, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Third Committee: Commercial Policy Sub-Committee A (Articles 16, 17, 18, 19) | 26/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.41, E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.40-55, and C.3/A/WHITE PAPERS | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/ys056cn4340 | ys056cn4340_90190469.xml | GATT_146 | 962 | 6,331 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.41
ON DU 26 January 1948
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLO1 ORIGINAL:. ENGLISH
THIRD COMMITTEE: COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUB-COMMITTEE A (ARTICLES 16, 17, 18, 19)
NOTES OF TWENTY-SIXTH MEETING
Held on Friday, 23 January 1948, 6.00 p.m.
Chairman: Dr. G. A. LAMSVELT (Netherlands)
It was agreed ?at the delegate of Cuba would replace the delegate of
Peru as a member of Working Party 3 (Article 18).
2. Report of Working Party 1 (Article 16, Annex A) (E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.36).
The United States delegate, Chairman of the Working Party, explained that
the Geneva text of the note to Annex A had been redrafted to meet two main
objections: (1) quota preferences could have been converted into tariff
preferences immediately with the possibility that the tariff preference might
have been established at an unduly high level for the purpose of future
negotiations; (2) it was not clear how long the restrictions under the
preferential arrangements provided for in Annex A could be maintained. Both
of these points had been met in the redraft.
The Chairman mentioned the reservation to Article 23 (5) (b) made by the
Brazilian delegation in Geneva and maintained in Havana in Committee III and
in the Sub-Committee on Article 23.
The delegate of Brazil explained that his delegation objected to
Article 23 (5) (b) and Annex A largely as a matter of principle. The
implication of the text was that the elimination of a discriminatory
quantitative restriction would have to be paid for by other Members in
negotiations. He believed this was contrary to the spirit of the Charter which
provides for the outright elimination of quotas. He believed further that it
was contrary to the principles of the Charter to sanction a new tariff
preference without the Organization's approval since new preferences were not
contemplated at all in Article 16 and in Article 15 only subject to-certain
safeguards. He recognized, however, that the Working Party draft was some
improvement on the Geneva draft in that it contemplated negotiations. The
Brazilian delegate inquired. whether, in the event the negotiations contemplated
/in the new draft /in the nev raft E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.41
Page 2
in the new draft of Annex A failed, the Member concerned would be permitted
nevertheless to maintain the existing quota preference.
The delegate of Australia, supported by the delegate of New Zealand,
felt that the preferential arrangements referred to in Annex A should be
treated specially because of the special circumstances which applied, i.e.,
the quantitative restrictions involved had been agreed during Ottawa
negotiations in which they had been paid for by reductions in import tariffs.
The Australian delegate believed that both the conversion from a quota to a
tariff preference and the level of the latter would have been agreed during
the Geneva negotiations had the principal suppliers been present. Australia
was prepared to negotiate whenever the principal suppliers were present,
but meanwhile was not prepared to give up a quota preference, paid for in
previous negotiations, until given an opportunity to negotiate tariff
reductions which would enable Australia to recover her European markets lost
because of increased duties on meat.
The delegate of Denmark stated that his delegation did-not approve of
the retention of any quantitative restrictions and would prefer to see Annex A
deleted. They were prepared, however, to accept the Working Party's Report
because it would give theme an opportunity to find a common solution in
negotiatitons. He wished to make it clear that his delegation, by agreeing
to this new draft, did not prejudice its position with respect to the-possible
outright elimination of all quantitative restrictions if this larger issue
presented itself later in the Conference.
The delegate of the United States was sympathetic to the views expressed
by the Brazilian and Denish delegates on grounds of principle. However, he
believed that the present draft was fair in the light of the background of
these particular arrangements, which involved both quotas and preferences.
As quotas, they should be eliminated outright under Article 20; as preferences,
their elimination would be subject to negotiations in the manner provided for
in Article 17. He believed, however, that the new draft safeguarded the
interests of those primarily concerned better than had the previous draft by
providing for negotiations.
The Netherlands delegate while disagreeing in principle, indicated his
willingness to accept the new draft which was somewhat more satisfatory that
the previous one.
The Sub-Committee agreed.
1. to adopt the Working Party's Report, with the addition of the
words "to replace these arrangements such action" after the word
"increased", the word "it" to be deleted, in the next to last line of
paragraph 3 of the Note to Annex A;
2. to recommend the retention of the exception for these preferential
/arrangements E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.41
Page 3
arrangements in paragraph 5 (b) of Article 23 rather than referring to
the Central Drafting Committee the question of its location;
3. to state in its Report the Sub-Committee's understanding that a
new tariff preference created or an existing tariff preference increased
as a result of the negotiations provided for in Annex A would come within
the scope of paragraph 3 of Article 16 and would, therefore, be subject
to negotiations in the manner provided for under Article 17;
4. to include in its Report the Sub-Committees understanding that if
the negotiations provided for in the new text of Annex A were to break
down, there would nevertheless be a commitment to convert immediately
the quota preferences involved into tariff preferences.
The delegate of Brazil indicated that his delegation would maintain its
reservation to paragraph 5 (b) of Article 23, at least until the
Sub-Committee's Report was considered by Committee III, but that meanwhile
he would, ask his Government to consider the proposed new text of Annex A. |
GATT Library | xm449zm4639 | Notes on Eighteenth Meeting : Held 26 January 1948, 10.30 a.m., in Conference room B | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 27, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Sub-Committee C: General Commercial Provisions (Articles 32 - 39) | 27/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/C/W.19 and E/CONF.2/C.3/C/W/17-20/E/CONF.2/C.3/C/WHITE PAPERS | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/xm449zm4639 | xm449zm4639_90190517.xml | GATT_146 | 858 | 5,618 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C.3/C/W.19
ON DU 27 January 1948
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
THIRD COMMITTEE: COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUB-COMMITTEE C - GENERAL COMMERCIAL PROVISIONS
(ARTICLES 32 - 39)
NOTES ON EIGHTEENTH MEETING
Held 26 January 1948, 10.30 a.m., in Conference Room B
Chairman: Mr. C. E. MORTON (Australia)
ARTICLE 32 - FREEDOM OF TRANSIT
1. The representative of Australia introduced the Report of Working Party IV
dealing with the Afghanistan amendment relating to improvement of transport
facilities for traffic in transit (G.C.P/W.P./14). As this report had been
fully discussed. at a previous meeting, the discussion was confined to a
few principal points.
After the discussion the CHAIRMAN advised that the Sub-
Committee approved of the Report and of the proposed new paragraph
to Article 32. The incorporation in the Report to Committee III of the
statement by the Working Party on the proposed new paragraph was also approved.
2. The representative of Chile wished to reserve the position of his
government concerning the inclusion of the new paragraph to Article 32 as
given in the Report of Working Party IV (G.C.P/W.P./14).
3. The representative of the United States suggested that the report of
this Sub-Committee should contain an agreed statement to the effect that the
reservation of coastwise trade cabotage) for national vessels was not
inconsistent with the principles of Article 32. In the light of the
discussion which followed the suggestion was withdrawn.
4. At the suggestion of the representative of Chile (not a member of
the Sub-Committee) the Sub-Committee agreed to mention in the Report that
when goods were being transported from one part of a country to another part
of the same country through the territory of a second country, such traffic
would be considered as "traffic in transit".
ARTICLE 38 - INFORMATION, STATISTICS AND TRADE TERMINOLOGY
5. The representative of Australia who acted as Chairman, presented the
Report of Working Party VI (G.C.P/W.P./15). The Report was approved.
/The representative E/CONF.2/C .3/C/W.19
Page 2
The representative of Norway withdrew his amendment to this Article.
6. The Sub-Committee then discussed the text of Article 38 as given in
the Geneva Draft and approved the whole Article. The Report of the
Sb-Committee to Committee III will contain certain parts of the Report
of the Working Party.
ARTICLE 36 - MARKS OF ORIGIN
7. At the request of the representative of Chilo discussion was reopened
on paragraph 7 of Article 36. The Sub-Committee agreed to insert in its
Report to Committee III that:
"the text of paragraph 7 should not have the effect of pre iudicing
the present position as regards certain distinctive names of products,
provided always that the names affixed to the products cannot
misrepresent their true origin; this is particularly the case when
the name of the producing country is clearly indicated. It will rest
with the governments concerned to proceed to a joint examination of
particular cases which night arise if disputes occur as a result of
the use of distinctive names of products which may have lost their
original significance through constant use permitted by law in the
country where they are used."
The representative of Chile advised that the inclusion of this
statement might enable his Government to withdraw its reservation.
ARTICLE 33 - ANTI-DUMPING AND COUNTERVAILING DUTIES
8. The representative of the Netherlands stated that his delegation had
withdrawn its reservation to Article 33. He stressed, however, that
countries using measures under this Article should not do so to the
detriment of other countries whose economies depend on their external trade.
ARTICTE 35 - FORMALITIES CONNECTED WITH IMPORTATION AND EXPORTATION
9. The CHAIRMAN informed the Sub-Committee that, after having communicated
the content of the Report of Working Party V (G.C.P/W.P./13) on the
Cuban proposal to the Chairmen of Committee III and Sub-Committee A, he
had received a letter fran the Chairman of Committee III suggesting that
Sub-Committee C should not definitely accept or reject the recommendation
of Working Party V, but merely refer it to committee III to be considered
by that Committee in the light of the views which will be obtained later
from Sub-Committee A on the inclusion of same similar provision in Article 16.
10. The Sub-Ccmmittee approved the principle as embodied in the text
proposed by Working Party V and referred it to Committee III in order that
an appropriate place for this or some similar provision should be found in
Chapter IV of the Charter. Should Sub-Committee A not desire to include
/this provision E/CONF.2/C.3/C/W.19
Page 3
this provision in Article 16 the Sub-committee would then wish to insert
it in Article 35.
11. The representative of France stated. that he had not yet received
instructions from his Government on the proposed wording of the new
Paragaph to Article 35, and that he therefore wished to continue to
reserve the position of his Government.
12. The Sub-committee agreed to the re-arrangement proposed by Working
Party V, contained in sub-paragraphs (a) and (b) of paragraph 7 of
G.C.P/W.P./13. The situation of the new paragraph would be determined
after Committee III had decided on its appropriate place in Chapter IV. |
GATT Library | tj866tw2281 | Notes on Eighteenth Meeting : Held at the Capitol, Havana, Cuba, 15 January 1948 at 3.00 p.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 15, 1948 | Joint Sub-Committee of Committees II and VI | 15/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.26/A/W.20, E/CONF.2/C.2/D/W.1-3, C.23/A/W.1-3, and C.26/A/W.1-29 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/tj866tw2281 | tj866tw2281_90180375.xml | GATT_146 | 136 | 867 | United Nations
CONFERENCE
ON
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT
Nations Unies
CONFERENCE
RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C.2&6/
DU A/W.20
COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPL0I 15 January 1948
ORIGINAL : ENGLISH
JOINT SUB-COMMITTEE OF COMMITTEE II AND VI
NOTES ON EIGHTEENTH MEETING
Held at the Capitol, Havana, Cuba, 15 January 1948 at 3.00 p.m.
Chairman: Dr. H. C. COOMBS (Australia)
1. The Sub-Committee continued discussion of paragraph 3 (a) of new
Article 11 A proposed by Chile (pages 12 and 13 of E/CONF.2/C.2/9). It
was agreed to refer paragraph 3 (a) to Working Party No. 3 with terms
of reference to consider the possibility of disposing of the paragraph
by either an addition to the Charter or of a resolution of the Conference.
2. The Sub-Committee commenced a consideration of paragraphs 1 and 2
of new Article 11 A proposed by Chile. |
GATT Library | gv827xt5104 | Notes on Eighth Meeting : Held on 5 January 1948 at 5.45 p.m. in Committee room K | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 6, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Sub-Committee C: General Commercial Provisions (Articles 32 - 39) | 06/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/C/W.8 and E/CONF.2/C.3/A/WHITE PAPERS/C.3/B/W.1-7/C.3/C/W.1-16 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/gv827xt5104 | gv827xt5104_90190506.xml | GATT_146 | 627 | 4,092 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
E/CoN.2/C .3/C/W .8
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE 6 January 1948
ON DU ORIGINAL : ENGLISH
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI
THIRD COMMITTEE: COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUB-COMMITTEE C ON GENERAL COMMERCIALPROVISIONS
(ARTICLES 32 - 39)
NOTES ON EIGHTH MEETING
Held on 5 January 1948 at 5.45 p.m. in Committee Room K
Chairman: Mr. C. E. MORTON (Australia)
ARTICLE 33 - ANTI-DUMPING AND COUNTERVAILING DUTIES (E/CONF.2/C.3/10 and
E /CONF.2/C .3/C/8)
Upon the invitation of the CHAIRMAN the representative of Czechoslovakia
stated the views of his delegation on Articlo 33. The Chairman -requested
the Working Party, consisting of the representatives of Cuba, Lebanon,
United Kingdom end the United States, to take into consideration the views
expressed by the representative of C##choslovakia when preparing their Report
to the Sub-Committee.
Paragraph 1
Item 16 - The Sub-Committee discussed the question of "hidden dumping'' by
associated houses (Note to paragraph 1 of the Geneva Draft).
The CHAIRMAN stated that there was a body of opinion in the Sub-
. Comittee that the. content of this Note should be retained and he requested
the Working Party to consider whether a case of "hidden dumping" resulting
from sales below landed cost by a firm in an importing country directly
associated with the exporting firm, can be considered to be covered by the
text of paragraph 1, and if It is not so considered whether the Note or
the text should be so amended as to determine the extent of the protective
action which may be taken by the importing country.
Paragraph 2
ltem 17 - The Sub-Comittee discussed the Note to paragraph 2 in the Geneva
Draft dealing with multiple currency practices and. agreed to retain this
Note. Paragraph 3
The Sub-Comittee approved the text of paragraph 3 as given in the
Geneva Draft.
/Paragraph 4 E/CONF.2/C.3/C/W.8
Page 2
The Sub-Committee approved the text of paragraph 4 as given in the
Geneva Draft.
Paragraph 5
First Sentence
In the discussion of the first sentence of' paragraph 5 there was a
body of opinion in the Sub-Committee that the Note to this paragraph, as
Given in the Geneva Draft, expressing the apprehension of the delegates
of Belgium-Luxembourg, Czechoslovakia,. rance and the Netherlands, lest the
provisions of this paragraph be abused, was unnecessary and should be deleted.
It was felt that this Note had neither an explicativo nor an interpretative
value, and that Article 89 could be invoked in defence against any abuse.
On the suggestion of the representative of France, it was agreed to
incorporate in the Report of the Sub-Committee, a statement to the effect
that the Sub-Committee considered that the general provisions of the
Oharter, and especially Article 89, presented adequate means of dealing
with any abuses by a Member levying anti-dumping or countervailing duties.
Second Sentence
The Sub-Committee discussed the proposal of Denmark (Item 18) to insert
a new sentence requiring an allegedly offending Member to enter into
negotiations regarding anti-dumping or countervailing duties imposed. The
representative of Denmark withdrew the second sentence of his amendment.
The CHAIRMAN stated that the Sub-Committee was of the opinion t hat the
amendment suggested by Denmark was already covered in the Charter, implicitly
in Article 37:3 (b) and explicitly in Article 41, and that there was no
support in the Sub-Committee for this amendment.
The Sub-Committee discussed the second amendment of Denmark (Item 19) to
delete the second sentence of paragraph 5.
The CHAIRMAN stated that the Sub-Committee was of the opinion that some
protection should be afforded to a third country whose export trade was
injured by dumping by another Member country, and that there was no support
for the second amendment of Denmark.
The Sub-Committee adopted the first and second sentence of paragraph 5
as given in the Geneve Draft. |
GATT Library | mv666hp5608 | Notes on Eighth Meeting : Held on Saturday, 17 January 1948, at 3.00 p.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 19, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Sub-Committee F (Articles 21, 23 and 24) | 19/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/F/W.17 and E/CONF.2/C.3/F/W.1-31/REV.2 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/mv666hp5608 | mv666hp5608_90190578.xml | GATT_146 | 623 | 3,996 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C.3F/W.17
ON DU 19 January 1948
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
THIRD COMMITTEE: COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUB-COMMITTEE F (ARTICLES 21, 23 AND 24)
NOTES ON ENGLISH MEETING
Held on Saturday, 17 January 1948, at 3.00 p.m.
Chairman: J. MELANDER (Norway)
(Reference: E/CONF.2/C.3/7)
WORKING GROUP ON ARTICLE 23
The CHAIRMAN said that he had reconsidered the position of the Working
Party on Article 23 established at the Seventh Meeting and proposed the
addition of Canada. This was agreed.
On the suggestion of the delegate of Czechoslovakia it was also agreed
to add Australia to the Working Party on Article 23. The composition of
the Working Party with the above additions is as follows: Australia,
Belgium, Canada, Czechoslovakia, France, Norway, the United Kingdom and
the United States of America.
ARTICLE 23 - EXCEPTIONS TO THE RULE OF NON-DISCRIMINATION
The delegate of the unitedd States made a statement opposing the
Norwegian amendment to paragraph 5 of Article 23. (See C.3/F/W.14).
His statement is being separately circulated to the Sub-Committee. The
delegate of Norway replied. The amendment in question had been referred at
the Seventh Meeting to the Working Party on Article 23.
PROPOSED NEW ARTICLE 23 A
The delegate of Greece made a statement in support of the amendment
contained in Item 78 (Greece). He stated that it was his present view
that a new Article to deal with this problem was not necessary and that
the purpose of the proposed amendment could be met by a provision in Article 23,
After discussion it was agreed to refer the Greek proposal to the Working Party
on Article 23 and to include the delegate of Greece in the Working Party when
this item came under consideration.
ARTICLE 24 - EXCHANGE ARRANGEMENTS
The delegate of Liberia called attention to the fact that his country
did not use its own national currency and therefore suggested an amendment
to paragraph 6 of Article 24 to meet the position of countries in this
/situation, E /CONF .2/C.3/F/W.17
Page 2
situation. It was agreed to refer this problem to a Working Party to be set
up on Article 24.
The text of the proposed Liberian amendment is being circulated
separately as document C.3/F/W.15.
There being no support for Item 83 (Argentina), it was agreed to
proceed with the consideration of Article 24 on the basis of the Geneva text.
Item 79 (New Zealand) found little support, and it was rejected by the
Sub-Committee.
Item 80 (Australia) was referred to the Working Party.
Item 81 (Geneva Draft Note) was referred to the Working Party.
The Sub-Committee discussed Item 82 (Mexico) and several Members asked
for clarification of the proposals. It was the sense of the Sub-Committee
that in view of the difficulties which appear to be connected with the
Mexican proposal, it would be desirable if a more specific amendment could
be submitted by Mexico for consideration by the Working Party.
The delegate for Belgium stated that ltem 84 (Reservation cf Belgium)
was disposed of the Belgian amendments to Articles 21 and 23.
The delegate of Cuba suggested that it might be preferable for purposes
of clarity to split Article 24 into two Articles consisting respectively of
paragraphs 1 to 5 inclusive, and paragraphs 6 to 9 inclusive. The
Sub-Committee referred this suggestion to the Working Party.
On the suggestion of the CHAIRMAN it was agreed that amendments to
Article 24 should be referred to the Working Party already established for
Article 21, which should be augmented by Australia for the purpose of
considering amendments to Article 24.
It was also agreed that the Working Party on Articles 21 and 24 should
report its recommendations on Article 21 before starting on Article 24. |
GATT Library | sw591tm7801 | Notes on Eighth Meeting : Held on Tuesday, 6 January 1948 | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 5, 1948 | Joint Sub-Committee of Committees II and III on Tariff Preferences and Joint Sub-Committee of Committees II and III: Tariff Preferences | 05/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.23/A/W.8, E/CONF.2/C.2/D/W.1-3, C.23/A/W.1-3, and C.26/A/W.1-29 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/sw591tm7801 | sw591tm7801_90180347.xml | GATT_146 | 237 | 1,692 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2&3/A/
ON DU 5 January 1948
TRADE AND EPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI
SECOND AND THIRD COMMITTEES
JOINT SUB-CMMITTEE ON TARIEF PREFERENCES
NOTES ON EIGHTH MEETING
Held on Tuesday, 6 January1948
Chairman: Mr. SAHLIN (Sweden)
Article 16
The delegates of Haiti, United States, Cuba and France participated in
the discussion of the proposals of the Dominican Republic and Haiti
concerning the existing preferences between the United States and Cuba and
new preferences in the Caribbean area. The delegate for El Salvador
supported the proposal off Central American countries that new preferences
among those countries should be allowed, and the delegate for eTurkey
supported his delegation' s proposal that preferences which may be granted
by Turkey to countries which formed part of the Ottoman Empire prior to
1923, In terms of a special clause contained in Tukey's commercial
treaties concluded since 1923, should be accepted under Article 16.
The delegate for Brazil suggested that the negotiation of preferences
should. be compulsory, and that those at present in force should be eliminated
by a certain date or should be referred to the Organization for its decision
as to their maintenance, reduction or removal. To this the delegate for the
United Kingdom replied that a death warrant an existing preferences could
not be accepted, by his delegation.
The general discussion of the proposals on Article 16 will be concluded
at the next meeting. |
GATT Library | th112db2772 | Notes on Eighth Meeting : Held Wednesday, 28 January 1948 | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 28, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Sub-Committee D (Articles 40, 41 and 43) | 28/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/D/W.13 and E/CONF.2/C.3/D/W/1-13/E/CONF.2/C.3/E/W/1-23 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/th112db2772 | th112db2772_90190533.xml | GATT_146 | 348 | 2,363 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C.3/D/W.13
ON DU 28 January 1948
TRADE AND EMPOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
THIRD COMMITTEE: COMMERC IAL POLICY
SUB-COMMITTEE D (ARTICLES 40, 41 AND 43)
NOTES ON EIGHTH MEETING
Held Wednesday, 28 January 1948
Chairman: Mr. R. J. SHACKLE (United Kingdom)
The Sub-Committee Discussed the Draft Report Contained in Document
E/CONF.2/C.3/D/W/12.
1. For the text of the footnote to Article 40, the principle of which had
been agreed previously, a somewhat simplified version of Alternative B was
adopted.
2. The last part of the final paragraph of Article 43, the amendment of
which had in principle also been agreed previously, was replaced by
Alternative 1 with sane minor changes.
The Belgian delegate thought it was desirable to maintain a definite
date. He would have preferred to leave the present text unchanged and to
add a provision empowering the Organization to authorize the application of
particular measures in respect of particular products after that date, if
it should consider that circumstances then ruling warranted such measures.
He did not, however, insist on this proposal.
The representative of the Argentine reserved the position of his
delegation provisionally.
3. Points 1 to 9 of the Draft Report were approved without major change.
4. A new paragraph was approved giving the reasons which had prompted
the Sub-Committee to insert the footnote to Article 40.
5. Paragraph 10 was approved without change.
6. Paragraph 11 was replaced by a slightly altered version.
7. Paragraphs 12 to 24 were approved without change.
8. In paragraph 25 a minor change was made. The delegate of Argentina
recorded a reservation in respect of the proviso to sub-paragraph 1 (b) (i)
of Article 43.
9. Paragraphs 26 and 27 were approved without change.
/10. To paragraph E/CONF.2/C.3/D/W.13
10. To paragraph 28 an addition was made stating the views of the
representative of Belgium and recording a reservation by the delegate
of Argentina in respect of the last part of paragraph 2 of Article 43.
11. The text of Articles 40, 41 and 43 was approved without further change. |
GATT Library | sz621yn4491 | Notes on Eleventh Meeting : Held on 9 January 1948, at 5.45 p.m., in room K | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 10, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Sub-Committee C: General Commercial Provisions (Articles 32 - 39) | 10/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/C/W.11 and E/CONF.2/C.3/A/WHITE PAPERS/C.3/B/W.1-7/C.3/C/W.1-16 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/sz621yn4491 | sz621yn4491_90190509.xml | GATT_146 | 311 | 2,053 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
E/CONF. 2/C .3/C/W.11
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE 10 January 1948
ON DU ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI
THIRD COMMITTEE: COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUB-COMMITTEE C ON GENERAL COMMERCIAL POLICY
(ARTICLES 32 - 39)
NOTES ON ELEVENTH MEETING
Held on 9 January 1948, at 5.45 p.m., in Room K
Chairman: Mr. C. E. MORTON (Australia)
ARTICLE 33 - ANTI-DUMPING AND COUNTERVAILING DUTIES
The CHAIRMAN introduced the Report of the Working Party I (White Paper
No. 2836, 7 January).
The representative of the United States stated that while his delegation
supported fully the amended draft of Article 33, as given in Annex A of the
White Paper, this support was conditioned on (a) that certain amendments
to the Geneva Draft, especially those to Article 43, would not be accepted
by the Conference, and (b) that, in the case of the deletion of paragraph 6,
the Report of the Sub-Committee to Committee III will contain a clear
statement of the findings of the Working Party I, as given in Item (iv) of
the White Paper.
The representatives of Cuba and the United Kingdom indicated their
support of the Report of the Working Party I.
During the discussion the representative of the Netherlands presented
an amendment to the text of paragraphs 1 and 2 as given in Annex A of the
White Paper of the Working Party, and a new draft of paragraph 7.
The representative of Argentina proposed the deletion of paragraph 6
of the Geneva Draft and presented a new draft of this paragraph.
The representative of Brazil (Non-Member of the Sub-Committee)
presented a new draft of paragraph 6.
The CHAIRMAN proposed, and the Sub-Committee agreed, to give new
consideration to the Report of the Working Party I, in the light of the
above amendments, and the discussion of this Article was accordingly
adjourned until Monday, 12 January. |
GATT Library | hs237ww5938 | Notes on Eleventh Meeting : Held on Monday, 9 February 1948 at 3.00 p.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, February 10, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Sub-Committee F (Articles 21, 23 and 24) | 10/02/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/F/W.26 and E/CONF.2/C.3/F/W.1-31/REV.2 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/hs237ww5938 | hs237ww5938_90190589.xml | GATT_146 | 263 | 1,830 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CONEFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C.3/F/W.26
ON DU 10 February 1948
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMRCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
THIRD COMMITTEE: COMMERCAL POLICY
SUB-COMMITTEE F ON ARTICLES 21, 23 AND 24
NOTES ON ELEVENTH MEETING
Held on Monday, 9 February 1948 at 3.00 p.m.
Chairman: J. MELANDER (Norway)
CONSIDERATION OF THE PROPOSAL OF NEW ZEALAND (E/CONF.2/C.3/F/W.23)
Mr. NASH (New Zealand) explained the purpose of the footnote to
Article 21 proposed by his delegation.
It was agreed that this footnote should be included as an interpretative
note to the text of Article 21.
CONSIDERATION OF THE PROPOSAL OF BRAZIL (E/CONF.2/C.3P/ A.24)
The delegate for Brazil explained the purpose of his proposed drafting
amendment to Article 21.
The proposal was agreed.
The Sub-Committee agreed to a suggestion by the delegate for Australia
that a consequential change should be made in the last line of
sub-paragraph (c) of paragraph 4 of Article 21, in order to make it clear
that prior approval granted by the Organization as provided in paragraph 4 (c)
would apply only to sub-paragrapbs 2(0) and 2(b) of Article 21. Accordingly
the last sentence of sub-paragraph (c) of paragraph 4 would read:
"To the extent to which such approval has been given, the
requirements of sub-paragraph (a) of this paragraph shall be deemed
to have been fulfilled, and the action of the Member applying the
restrictions shall not be open to challenge under sub-paragraph (d)
of this paragraph on the ground that such action is inconsistent
with the provisions of sub-paragraphs 2(a) and 2(b) of this Article."
(Note: Additions underlined). |
GATT Library | jp691xc8838 | Notes on Fifteenth Meeting : Held at the Capitol, Havana, Cuba, Monday, 12 January 1948, at 10.30 a.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 12, 1948 | Joint Sub-Committee of Committees II and VI | 12/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.26/A/W.17, E/CONF.2/C.2/D/W.1-3, C.23/A/W.1-3, and C.26/A/W.1-29 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/jp691xc8838 | jp691xc8838_90180372.xml | GATT_146 | 505 | 3,507 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF. 2/C. 2&6/A/ W.17
ON DU 12 January 1948
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
JOINT SUB-COMMITTEE OF COMMITTEES II AND VI
NOTES ON FIFTEENTH MEETING
Held at the Capitol, Havana, Cuba,
Monday, 12 January 1948, at 10.30 a.m.
Chairman: Mr. H. C. COOMBS (Australia)
1. The Sub-Committee first of all gave consideration to the Peruvian
Amendment to add an additional paragraph between present paragraphs 2 and 3
of Article 11. After discussion it was agreed to add a sub-paragraph on
the lines of that stated below in paragraph 3 of Article 11. The
sub-paragraph in question is underlined in the text below. The rest of
the text is as contained in E/CONF. 2/C. 2&6/A/W. 3 as amended by the Joint
Sub-Committee at its ninth (E/CONF.2/C.2&6/A/W. 6) and fourteenth (E/CONF.2/
C.2&6/A/W.13) meetings.
"3. The Organization may, in such collaboration with other
inter-govenmental organizations as may be appropriate,
(a) make recommendations for and promote bilateral or
multilateral agreements on measures designed:
(i) to assure just and equitable treatment for the
enterprise, skills, capital, arts and technology
brought from one Member country to another;
(ii) to avoid international double taxation in order
to stimulate the flow of foreign private investments;
(iii) to maximise the benefits to Members from the
fulfilment of the obligations under this Article.
(b) formulate and promote........... investment."
It was decided to refer the proposed sub-paragraph (iii) to Working
Party No. 3 in order that they should consider and recommend to the
Joint Sub-Committee regarding the exact wording.
2. The Joint Sub-Committee then considered the report of Working Party No. 3
concerning the Mexican amendment to the second sentence of paragraph 1 of
Article 11 (E/CONF.2/C.2&6/A/W.12) and approved the report.
/3. The Joint E/CONF. 2/C .2&6/A/W. 17
Page 2
3. The Joint Sub-Committee then gave consideration to the Report of
Working Party No. 3 regarding the Turkiah Amenendment to paragraph 2 of
Article 10 (E/CONF.2/C.2&6/A/W.14). After discussion it was agreed that
a new paragraph 3 should be inserted in Article 10 as follows:
"3. [With a view to promoting industrial and general economic
development especially of those countries which are still
relatively undeveloped] the Organiration shall co-operate fully
with the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations and
appropriate inter-governmental Organigations on all phases of
economic development within their special competence and
in particular in respect of finance, equipment, technical
assistance and managerial skills."
It was agreed further that the preamble should remain in square
brackets pending consideration of this amendment by Sub-Committee D of
Committee II on the footnote to Chapter III on reconstruction.
4.The Joint Sub-Committee took up next the subject of approval of
paragraph 2 of Article 11 and examined a proposal of the United States
delegation that the paragraph be approved but that an interpretative text
be inserted in the records. It was decided that Working Party No. 3 should
examine this interpretative text and that the matter would be reconsidered
at the next meeting of the Joint Sub-Committee. |
GATT Library | vg023rw1930 | Notes on Fifteenth Meeting : Held on 15 January 1948, at 10.30 a.m. in Conference room B | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 5, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Sub-Committee C: General Commercial Provisions (Articles 32 - 39) | 05/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/C/W.15 and E/CONF.2/C.3/A/WHITE PAPERS/C.3/B/W.1-7/C.3/C/W.1-16 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/vg023rw1930 | vg023rw1930_90190513.xml | GATT_146 | 1,116 | 7,370 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C. 3/C/W.15
ON DU 5 January 1948
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
THIRD COMMITTEE: COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUB-COMMITTEE C ON GENERAL COMMERCIAL PROVISIONS
(ARTICLES 32 - 39)
NOTES ON FIFTEENTH MEETING
Held on 15 January 1948, at 10.30 a.m. in Conference Room B
Chairman: Mr. C. E. MORTON (Australia)
ARTICLE 34 - VALUATION FOR CUSTOMS PURPOSE
1. The Sub-Committee discussed the Report of Working Party II (G.C.P/W.P/4).
The representative of Chile proposed the following addition to the Note to
paragraph 3 as drafted by the Working Party:
"In future, the continuance of the system referred to in this Note
shall be permitted, provided that, on the request of interested parties
or Members, periodically established values for a specified, product will
be adjusted according to actual value".
He pointed e pointed out that the system in force in Chile did not eef?at thecinsent
of this Article and that his Delegation wa s prepared to accewt rirgxn
which would guarantee that periodical establishment of values of merchandise,
at present in force in Chile, be equitably operated. He maintained that this
syst emwas a simplification of customs procedure and prevented fictitious
valuation of imports.
After full discussion the CIRMAAAN stated that there was no support in
the Sub-Coimmttee for the Chilean proposal.
The Sub-Committee accordingly approved the Report and adopted the text of
the Note to be appended to paragraph 3, proposed by Working Party II as given
in. GPC..P/W/4.
The representative of Chile (not ambemer of the Sub-Committee) reserved
the position of his Delegation on paragraph 3 although he recognized that the
Note granted certain new facilities in the case of countries operating systems
of fixevad luelis nked with ad valorem duties.
2. The Sub-Cmomittee discussed the Report of the United Statges Deleation
(G.C.P/W.P/3/Re1v.) on the amendment proposed by the representative of Ugruuay
(Im te36) and agreed on the deletion of the word 'substantial' in the first
/ine of E/CONF.2/C. 3/C/W.15
Page 2
line of the suggested Note to be appended to paragraph 5. The delegate of
Uruguay then agreed to accept the Note as covering the situation referred to
in his proposal (Item 36).
The Sub-Committee approved of the text of the Note and also
of changes proposed by the United States Delegation in G.C.P/W.P.3/Rev.1).
ARTICLE 35 - FORMALITIES CONNECTED WITH IMPORTATION AND EXPORTATION
The Sub-Committee discussed the Report of Working Party III (G.C.P/W.P/8).
3. Paragraph 2 of this Report dealing with the amendment of Turkey (Item 39)
was approved and the CHAIRMAN advised that the Delegation of Turkey had
withdrawn its amendment.
The Sub-Committee suggested that, in preparing translations into official
languages, special attention should be paid to the exact equivalent expressions
for the expression for 'fees and charges'. The representative of Cuba suggested
that it should be made sufficiently clear in all translations that the intent
was to cover all 'fees and charges' other than import and export duties and
taxes dealt with in Article 18, as indicated in paragraph 2 of G.C.P/W.P./3.
4. The Sub-Committee considered paragraphs 4, 5 and 6 of the Report of the
Working Party concerning the proposal of Haiti (E/CONF.2/C.3/10/Add.1) and
approved the content of those paragraphs. It was decided to include in the
Report to Committee III a statement to the effect that, "although Article 35
establishes the principle that the fees and charges of the type covered by
the Article should not represent a taxation of imports or exports for fiscal
purposes, adequate provision is made in other arts of the Charter for the
raising of revenue by duties on exports and imports or by non-discriminatory
internal taxes collected on imports at the time of importation".
The representative of Haiti (not a Member of the Sub-Committee) maintained
his reservation with regard to his amendment, and the representative of Chile
(not a member of the Sub-Committee) also reserved the position of his delegation
on this matter.
5. The Sub-Committee considered and adopted the last paragraph of the
Deport of Working Party III concernirg the proposal of Peru (E/CONF.2/C .3/10/Add.2)
The Delegation of Peru indicated that it was prepared to withdraw its amendment.
The representative of Peru proposed a change in the Note to paragraph 5
of the Geneva Draft to the effect that the words 'with the approval of the
International Monetary Fund' should be replaced by the words 'without the
International Monetary Fund raising objections'. The representative of Peru
was requested to consult with the representative of the International Monetary
Fund on this change, and the representative of the Fund agreed to submit a
report at a later date on the matter, to the Sub-Committee.
6. The Sub-Committee considered the Report of the Drafting Group I (G.C.P/W.P/6)
concerning the proposal of Uruguay (Item 42).
/The Sub-Committee E/CONF. 2/C.3/C/W.15
Page 3
The Sub-Committee approved the addition to paragraph 3 of Article 35 as
proposed by the Drafting Group in G.C.P/W.P/6.
ARTICLE 37 - PUBLICATION AND ADMINISTRATION OF TRADE REGULATIONS
7. The Sub-Committee discussed the proposal of Uruguay (Item 37). The
CHAIRMAN proposed and the Sub-Committee agreed to establish Drafting Group II,
composed of the representatives of France, United Kingdom and the United States
with the representative of Australia acting as Chairman, to consider the
proposal of Uruguay and to draft a form of words to cover it.
8. The Sub-Committee considered the proposal of the Delegation of Argentina
(Item 50) for the deletion of the reference to the determination by the
Organization from paragraph 3 (c).
After discussion the CHAIRMAN stated that there was no support in the
Sub-Committee for the proposal of Argentina.
9. The Sub-Committee discussed the proposal of New Zealand and United Kingdom
(Items 51 and 52) to delete the words 'and those of sub-paragraph (b)' at the
end of paragraph 3 (c). This proposal was accepted by the Sub-Committee.
10. The Sub-Committee discussed the words, `officially published' at the end
of paragraph 2 of the Geneva Draft. It was pointed d out by the representative
of the United States that the word `published' might be interpreted. as meaning
solely 'printed'. The representative of Cuba suggested that the interpretation
of the word 'published' might vary according to the administrative practices
of different countries.
The CHAIRMAN proposed and the Sub-Committee agreed to establish
Drafting Group III consisting of the representatives of the United Kingdom
and the United States to consider this matter in the light of the discussion.
ARTICLE 38 - lNFORMATION, STATISTICS AND TRADE TERMlNOLOGY
The CHAIRMAN proposed and the Sub-Committee agreed that the revised text
of the proposal of the Delegation of Norway (Item 53) and the background paper
issued by the Statistical Office of the United Nations (G.C.P/W.P/5) be produced
as an official document. |
GATT Library | kr385fm1504 | Notes on Fifth Meeting : Held at Havana on Saturday, 6 March 1948 | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, March 8, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Sub-Committee B (proposed new Article 18A) | 08/03/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/B/W.7 and E/CONF.2/C.3/A/WHITE PAPERS/C.3/B/W.1-7/C.3/C/W.1-16 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/kr385fm1504 | kr385fm1504_90190497.xml | GATT_146 | 293 | 1,993 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C.3/B/W.7
ON DU 8 March 1948
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI 8 March 1948
OBIGINAL: ENGLISH
THIRD COMMITTEE: COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUB-COMMITTEE B (PROPOSED NEW ARTICLE 18 A)
NOTES ON FIFTH MEETING
Held at Havana on Saturday, 6 March 1948
Chairman: Dr. J. E. HOLLOWAY (Union of South Africa)
The CHAIRMAN announced that official confirmation had now been
received that the text of Section 3 of Article II of the International
Maritime Convention as contained in document E/CONF.2/C.3/B/W.6/Corr.l,
was correct.
The delegate of the United Kingdom stated that in view of the
purposes of Article 18 A now being covered by the functions of the
Inter-governmental Maritime Organization, the establishment of which had
just been agreed in Geneva, the insertion of Article 18 A would only cause
an over-lapping of functions and a possible conflict of activities between
the ITO and the Maritime Organization. The same applied also to the Chapter
on Restrictive Business Practices insofar as it related to shipping, and
he would therefore suggest that Article 18 A should not be inserted in the
Charter, and that shipping should be excluded from the scope of Chapter V.
He was supported by the representatives of India, Norway and France.
The delegate of Venezuela considered that countries not members of
the Maritime Organization would be deprived of the possibility of complaining
about restrictive practices in relation to shipping which was possible under
the present Article 50, and he reserved the position of his delegation
upon this matter.
It was agreed to recommend to Committee III that Article 18 A should
not be included and that a new paragraph should be added to Article 50,
reading:
"The provisions of this Chapter shall not apply to shipping." |
GATT Library | bv630gh2709 | Notes on Fifth Meeting : Held Friday, 23 January 1948, at 10.30 a.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 23, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Sub-Committee J (State Trading) | 23/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/J/W.5, E/CONF.2/C.3/H/W.9/C.3/J/W.1-8, and C.3/J/WHITE PAPERS | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/bv630gh2709 | bv630gh2709_90190631.xml | GATT_146 | 371 | 2,527 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C.3/J/W.5
ON DU 23 January 1948
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
THIRD COMMITTEE: COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUB-COMMITTEE J (STATE TRADING)
NOTES ON FIFTH MEETING
Held Friday, 23 January 1948, at 10.30 a.m.
(Reference: E/CONF.2/C.3/9)
Chairman: Right Hon. Walter NASH (New Zealand)
1. Item 3 (Note): The draft text recommended by the Working Party not being
acceptable to all members, the Working Party was requested to give it further
consideration.
2. Items 7 and 8 (a) (New Zealand proposal and Note): The Sub-Committee
adopted a recommendation by the Working Party to insert, after Article 30,
a new Article as follows:
"If a member establishes or maintains a marketing board, commission
or similar organization it shall:
(a) be subject to the provisions of paragraph 1 of Article 30 with
respect to purchases or sales if such bodies; and
(b) with respect to any regulations of such bodies governing the
operations of private enterprises, be subject to the other relevant
provisions of the Charter."
3. Item 8 (b) (Note): The Sub-Committee agreed to a recommendation of the
Working Party to retain the principle in the form of a footnote, but to
change the text to read:
"Different prices for sales and purchases of products in different
markets are not precluded by the provisions of this Article, provided
that such different prices are charged or paid for commercial reasons
to meet the conditions of supply and demand in such markets".
4. Item 13 (United States): It was decided to adopt a recommendation
by the Working Party to amend the last three lines of sub-paragraph 1 (b)
of Article 31 as follows:
"or designed to reduce any limitation of imports which is comparable
with a limitation made subject to negotiation under other provisions of
this. Chapter".
5. Item 16 (Note): The Sub-Committee adopted the recommendation of the
/Working Party E/CONF.2 /C .3/J/W.5
Page 2
Working Party that this footnote be retained without change.
6. Item 19 (Mexico): The representative of Mexico declared his readiness
to withdraw the amendment if a statement by his delegation relating to the
interpretation of paragraph 6 were included in the Report of the Sub-Committee.
The matter was deferred for further examination. |
GATT Library | qy866pf1359 | Notes on Fifth Meeting : Held Friday, 23 January 1948, at 6.00 p.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 23, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Sub-Committee G (Swiss Proposal) | 23/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/G/W.5 and E/CONF.2/C.3/F/W.31/REV.2-32/G/W.1-13/H/W.1-9 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/qy866pf1359 | qy866pf1359_90190608.xml | GATT_146 | 468 | 3,182 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C.3/G/W.5
ON DU 23 January 1948
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
THIRD COMMITTEE: COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUB-COMMITTEE G (SWISS PROPOSAL)
NOES ON FIFTH MEETING
Held Friday, 23 January 1948, at 6.00 p.m.
Chairman:Mr.L..P. THOMPSON-McCAUSLAND (United.KIngdom)
The delegate of France, referring to the evaluation of factors agreed
on at the third meeting thought that a situation corresponding to those
factors was not covered in the Charter.
The delegate of Switzerland stated that according to latest information
the deficit in the Swiss trade balance was rapidly increasing. In reply to
the United States delegate he insisted that the question of imports of
essential materials was not relevant because there was no need or intention
to apply restrictive measures to them. There was no difference, Lowever
between imports of non-essentials which competed with similar domestic
products, and non-essentials not produced domestically, in regard to both of
which it was equally important that restrictive measures should be available.
It was not possible completely to eliminate the protective element, one among
many, from the application of such measures. In the view of his government,
tariffs or anti-dumping duties did not offer a solution of the problem.
Several speakers considered not without relevance the fact that an
economy subjected to import pressure from large countries was itself small..
The Chairman summing up stated that there seemed to be a measure of
agreement that there was a case to allow a country in the situation described
to defend itself (1) in an emergency resulting in a threat to employment from
a sudden flood of imports, (2) by applying such powers as are necessary for
bilateral arrangements.
The discussion then turned to the second point on the agenda, the limit
of measures to be envisaged.
The delegate of Switzerland made it clear that, to be acceptable to his
Government, it was indispensable that any such measures could be applied on
a discriminatory basis. He further stated that the right to use such measures
was required as a weapon for bilateral negotiations, as well as a possible
instrument for implementing bilateral agreements.
/The representative of E/CONF.2/C.3/G/W.5
Page 2
The representative of the United States asked whether ouch measures might
be used to discriminate against countries which had a convertible currency and
did not apply restrictions themselves. The delegate of Switzerland replied
that he did not envisage the use of such measures in this way, but he could
not exclude the posibility that this could happen, for instance, in order
to enable a debtor country to settle its debt which could not otherwise be
paid,
The chair summing up the discussion concluded that the proposal of any
measures would be.to serve as an instrument (1) in an emergency, (2) in
negotiating bilateral agreements ,(3) in implementing bilateral arrangements. |
GATT Library | kg408kv5448 | Notes on Fifth Meeting : Held on 31 December 1947, 4.00 p.m. in room K | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 2, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Sub-Committee C: General Commercial Provisions (Articles 32 - 39) | 02/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/C/W.5 and E/CONF.2/C.3/A/WHITE PAPERS/C.3/B/W.1-7/C.3/C/W.1-16 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/kg408kv5448 | kg408kv5448_90190503.xml | GATT_146 | 293 | 2,001 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
E/CONF.2/C.3/C/W.5
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE 2 January 1948
ON DU ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI
THIRD COMMITTEE: COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUB-COMMITTEE C ON GENERAL COMMERCIAL PROVISIONS
(ARTICLES 32 - 39)
NOTES ON FIFTH MEETING
Hold on 31 December 1947, 4.00 p.m. in Room K
Chairman: Mr. C. E. MORTON (Australia)
Article 32 - Freedom of Transit (E/CONF.2/C.3/l0 and E/CONF.2/C.3/C/5)
New Paragraph
1. Items 8 and 9 - The Sub-Committee discussed the proposal of Costa Rica
to limit the time during which transit facilities should be permitted for
grazing livestock and the additional proposal of Afghanistan to exempt
"seasonal nomads" from this limitation.
In the opinion of the Sub-Committee the case of grazing livestock as
described by the delegation of Costa Rica was not considered as coming within
the ambit of this Article, therefore the Sub-Committee decided that there
was no necessity to amend the Article to incorporate the proposal of
Costa Rica, and consequently no need to include the proposal of Afghanistan.
2. Item 6 - The Sub-Committee adopted tentatively the proposal of the
Working Party consisting of Czechoslovakia, Netherlands and United States
which reads as follows:
"(a) Delete in paragraph 3, line 3 from the end, the words 'for
transportation or those'.
(b) Delete Note to paragraph 5 of the Geneva Draft.
(c) Add a new paragraph 8 as follows:
8. Transportation charges on traffic in transit shall not be
considered as falling within the purview of this Article but
shall be subject to the provisions of paragraph 2 of Article 18."
Should Sub-Committee A of Committee III decide to amend paragraph 2 of.
Article 18 (E/CONF.2/C.3/6 - Items 57 and 58), the Sub-Committee will again
review Article 32 in the light of any such changes. |
GATT Library | cc912vy1266 | Notes on Fifth Meeting, held on Friday, 2 January 1948 | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 2, 1948 | Joint Sub-Committee of Committees II and III on Tariff Preferences and Joint Sub-Committee of Committees II and III: Tariff Preferences | 02/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.23/A/W.5, E/CONF.2/C.2/D/W.1-3, C.23/A/W.1-3, and C.26/A/W.1-29 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/cc912vy1266 | cc912vy1266_90180343.xml | GATT_146 | 326 | 2,241 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C.2&3/A/
ON DU 2 January 1948
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
SECOND AND THIRD COMMITTEES
JOINT SUB-COMMITTEE ON TARIFF PREFERENCES
Notes on Fifth Meeting, Held on Friday, 2 January 1948
Chairman: Mr. S. SAHLIN (Sweden)
Article 15
The delegates for Canada, Haiti, Poland and Iran gave their views on
the proposals regarding prior approval for new tariff preferences for
development purposes. The Chairman in summing up the discussion recalled that
the proposal of Argentina and Chile to dispense entirely with control by
the Organization had been supported by El Salvador; the proposal of Venezuela
to substitute some subsequent approval for prior approval had received the
sympathy of Haiti, Iran and Syria; and the other eight members of the
Sub-Committee (with the exception of the delegate of Turkey who had not
participated ) had expressed the view that the condition of prior approval
should be upheld. The delegate for Turkey then stated that his delegation
favoured the deletion of the provision for prior approval. The Chairman stated
that, in summing up the discussion, he had not intended to imply that any
decision was being reached; he had only wished to record, in order to clarify
the progress made by the Sub-Committee, the opinions that had been expressed
thus far in the discussion; there would of course be further opportunities to
discuss Article 15 after Articles 16 and 42 had been reviewed by the
Sub-Committee, and the amendments proposed, particularly those of Chile and
Venezuela, would be examined in detail at a later stage.
The Committee then agreed in principle that the proposals of Chile and
Venezuela (Items 3 and 5 in the Agenda, E/CONF.2/C.2&3/A/6), and possibly the
proposal of Ecuador on the question of voting, should be referred to a
Working Party after the Sub-Committee has discussed Articles 16 and 42.
The Sub-Committee decided to proceed with the examination of Article 16
at the next meeting. |
GATT Library | gw396vt2430 | Notes on Fifth Meeting : Held on Wednesday, 14 January 1948, at 6.00 p.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 15, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Sub-Committee D (Articles 40, 41 and 43) | 15/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/D/W.9 and E/CONF.2/C.3/D/W/1-13/E/CONF.2/C.3/E/W/1-23 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/gw396vt2430 | gw396vt2430_90190529.xml | GATT_146 | 402 | 2,758 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C.3/D/W.9
ON DU 15 January 1948
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
THIRD COMMITTEE: COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUB-COMMITTEE D (ARTICLES 40, 41 and 43)
NOTES ON FIFTH MEETING
Held on Wednesday, 14 January 1948, at 6.00 p.m.
(Reference: E/CONF.2/C.3/11 and. Corr. 1 and C.3/D/W.5)
Chairman: Mr. R. J. SHACKLE (United Kingdom)
ARTICLE 43
Item 24 (Cuba): The delegate of Cuba having stated that the proposal was
mainly intended to allow restrictive measures in defence against so-called
"social dumping", it was pointed out that it was covered for short term
purposes by paragraph 1 of Article 40, and for long term purposes by
Article 4 in combination with Articles 89 and 90 of the Geneva draft. The
delegate of Cuba declared he would not insist on the amendment, if this
view of the Sub-Committee would be included in the Report of the
Sub-Committee. This was agreed.
New Item (Netherlands): The Netherlands delegate pointed out that it was
not proposed expressly to include the rights of plant and livestock breeders
in sub-paragraph (d). He merely wished the Sub-Committee to note that these
rights were not nullifiled by the provisions of Chapter IV. The
representative of FAO stated that his organization could not recommend the
adoption of the proposal. The Sub-Committee considered that to grant the
Netherlands reguest would amount to a Judgment as to whether or not certain
national laws and practices were consistent with the provisions of Chapter IV
which was a matter for the Government concerned, but not for the
Sub-Committee.
Item 25 (Australia): The Australian delegation advised that its reservation
which was cortingent upon the final wording of Article 94 would be withdrawn
when the wording now contemplated for that Article was approved in Committee.
Item 28 (Argentine): The delegate of Argentine asked for the discussion
to be deferred so as to be able to consider a suggested amendment to the
proviso. This was agreed. /New Item (Netherlands): E/CONF.2/C.3/D/W.9 Page 2
New Item (Netherlands): The Netherlands delegate accepted the view of the
Sub-Committee that sub-paragraphs (b) and (c) of paragraph II should only
refer to the second world war. It was decided. to request the Contral
Drafting Committee to examine these provisions with a view to establishing
complete clarity and precision on this point.
Item 29 (Argentine): No support being forthcoming for the deletion of the
provisos the present text was maintained. |
GATT Library | zs171tm0360 | Notes on First Meeting : Held Friday, 9 January 1948, at 10.30 a.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 9, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Sub-Committee G (Swiss Proposal) | 09/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/G/W.1 and E/CONF.2/C.3/F/W.31/REV.2-32/G/W.1-13/H/W.1-9 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/zs171tm0360 | zs171tm0360_90190602.xml | GATT_146 | 124 | 876 | United Nations
CONFERENCE
ON
TRDE AND EMPLOYMENT
Nations Unies
CONFEREENCE
DU
COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI
RESTRICTED
E/CONF.2/C.3/G/W.1
9 January 1948
ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
THIRD COMMITTEE: COMMERRCIAIL POLICY
SUB-COMMITTEE G (SWISS PROPOSAL)
NOTES ON FIRST MEETING
Held Friday, 9 January 1948, at 10.30 a.m.
(Reference: E/CONF.2/C. 3/G/1)
Chairman: Mr. L. P. THOMPSON-MCCAUSLAND (United Kingdom)
1. Mr. L. P. Thompson-McCausland (United Kingdom) was unainously
elected Chairman of the Sub-Committee.
2. The delegate of Switzerland, in reply to questions and suggestions,
made it clear that the proposal was not prompted in any way by balance
of payments reasons, but was solely concerned with external trade and
the danger of unemployment. Its purpose was to enable Switzrland to
counteract restrictions applied to Swiss exports under Articles 21 and 23. |
GATT Library | sm042mw2189 | Notes on First Meeting : Held Monday, 12 January 1948, at 6.00 p.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 13, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Sub-Committee J (State Trading) | 13/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/J/W.1, E/CONF.2/C.3/H/W.9/C.3/J/W.1-8, and C.3/J/WHITE PAPERS | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/sm042mw2189 | sm042mw2189_90190627.xml | GATT_146 | 344 | 2,312 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C.3/J/W.1
ON DU 13 January 1948
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
THIRD COMMITTEE: COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUB-COMMITTEE J (STATE TRADING)
NOTES ON FIRST MEETING
Held Monday, 12 January 1948, at 6.00 p.m.
(Reference: E/CONF.2/C.3/9 and C.3/J.2)
Chairmen: Hon. Walter NASH (New Zealand)
1. The Hon. Walter Nash (New Zealand) was unanimously elected Chairman.
2. Item 2 (United Kingdom): The proposed drafting change was approved,
the wording in lines 8 and 9 of paragraph 1 (a) to be amended to read:
"....... treatment [applied] prescribed in this Charter [to] for
governmental measures......"
3. Item 3 (Note to Geneva draft): Several delegates having declared in favour
of retaining the Note or incorporating all or part of its substance
in the text, a Working Party consisting of the representatives of
Czechoslovakia, Mexico and the United States was appointed to examine
the Note and report to the Sub-Committee.
4. Item 5 (United Kingdom): The drafting change, substituting, in line 7
the word "price" for "prices", was agreed. -
5, Item 6 (Note to Geneva draft): It was provisionally agreed that the Note
referring to "tied loans" should be deleteda as superflous.
6, Items 7 and 8 (a) (New Zealand proposal and Note relating to Marketing
Boards): A Working Party consisting of the representatives of the
Netherlands, New Zealand and the United Kingdom was appointed to consider
both itssin relation to each other and the desirability and form of
their inclusion in the Charter.
7. Item 8 (b) (Note to Geneva draft): The delegate of Switzerland wished
to see purchases as well as sales included in the Note, the substance
of which several delegates preferred to see incorporated in the text.
It being pointed out that threre might be at conflic with the proposed
text of Article 33 at present under discussion, it was agreed to hold
the question over and to refer it to the next Working Party to be
established.
8. M<xico)I Thtem 9 e:e representative of Mexico withdrew the proposal for
the deletion of paragraph 2. |
GATT Library | zt725dv7252 | Notes on Fourteenth Meeting : Held at the Capitol, Havana, Cuba, Saturday 10 January at 10.30 a.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 10, 1948 | Joint Sub-Committee of Committees II and VI | 10/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.26/A/W.13, E/CONF.2/C.2/D/W.1-3, C.23/A/W.1-3, and C.26/A/W.1-29 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/zt725dv7252 | zt725dv7252_90180368.xml | GATT_146 | 297 | 2,109 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF. 2/C. 2&6/A/
ON DU 10 January 1948
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
JOINT SUB-COMMITTEE OF COMMITTEES II AND VI
NOTES ON FOURTEENTH MEETING
Held at the Capitol, Havana, Cuba, Saturday 10 January at 10.30 a.m.
Chairman: Mr. H. C. COOMBS (Australia)
1. The Sub-Committee continued discussion of the amendment proposed
by Mexico for the deletion of paragraph 2 of Article 11 and the substitution
of a new text referring to the substance of present paragraph 3 (top of
page 8 in E/CONF.2/C.2/9).
2. With respect to the Mexican proposal referring to the substance of
present paragraph 3, it was agreed that the text shown below should replace
the text contained in E/CONF.2/C.2&6/A/W.3 as amended by the Joint
Sub-Committee at its ninth meeting when it was agreed to delete the words
"and discriminatory tax burdens" which appeared between "double taxation"
and "in order to stimulate". The additions indicated in the text by
underlining refer to additions to the afore-mentioned amended text.
3. The Organization may, in such collaboration with other
inter-governmental organizations as may be appropriate,
(a) make recommendations for and promote bilateral or multilateral
agreements on measures designed:
(i) to assure Just and equitable treatment for the enterprise,
skills, capital, arts and technology brought from one Member
country to another;
(ii) to avoid international double taxation in order to
stimulate the flow of foreign. rivate investments;
(b) formulate and promote the adoption of a general agreement or
statement of principles as to the conduct, practices and treatment
of foreign investment."
3. With regard to the Mexican proposal to delete paragraph 2 of Article
11 it was decided to postpone consideration of this proposal until further
progress had been made in Sub-Committee B on Article 12. |
GATT Library | rd058rp5853 | Notes on Fourteenth Meeting : Held on 14 January 1948 at 6.00 p.m. in Conference room B | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 15, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Sub-Committee C: General Commercial Provisions (Articles 32 - 39) | 15/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/C/W.14 and E/CONF.2/C.3/A/WHITE PAPERS/C.3/B/W.1-7/C.3/C/W.1-16 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/rd058rp5853 | rd058rp5853_90190512.xml | GATT_146 | 190 | 1,324 | United Nations Nations Unies
RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C.3/C/W.14
ON DU 15 January 1948
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
THIRD COMMITTEE: COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUB-COMMITTEE C ON GENERAL COMMERCIAL PROVISIONS
(Articles 32 - 39)
NOTES ON FOURTEENTH MEETING
Held on 14 January 1948 at 6.00 p.m. in Conference Room B
Chairman: Mr. C. E. MORTON (Australia)
ARTICLE 36 - MARKS OF ORIGIN
1. Paragraphs 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 were approved by the Sub-Committee
Paragraph 7
2. In the discussion of this paragraph the representative of Argantina
stated that his delegation did not wish to delete this paragraph but
supported the proposal made by the dalegation of Chile (Item 49). After
a very thorough discussion of the Chilean proposal the CHAIRMAN took the
sense of the Sub-Ccmmittee and stated that the support which the Chilean
proposal had in the Sub-Committee did not warrant further action.
The representatives of Argentina and Chile wished to reserve the
wished to reserve the position cn paragraph 7.
The representative of Cuba presented a redraft of his amendment
(E/CONF.2/C.3/6 - Item 3) which was referred to the ?orking Party No. V. |
GATT Library | kk461mz6289 | Notes on Fourth Meeting : Held on Wednesday, 21 January 1948, 10.30 a.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 21, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Sub-Committee G (Swiss Proposal) | 21/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/G/W.4/Rev.1 and E/CONF.2/C.3/F/W.31/REV.2-32/G/W.1-13/H/W.1-9 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/kk461mz6289 | kk461mz6289_90190607.xml | GATT_146 | 375 | 2,544 | United Nations Nations Unies E/CONF. 2/C. 3/G/
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE W.4./Rev.1
ON DU 21 January 1948
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
THIRD COMMITTEE:: COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUB-COMMITTEE G (SWISS PROPOSAL)
NOTES ON FOURTH MEETING
Held on Wednesday, 21 January 1948, 10.30 a.m.
Chairman: Mr. L. P. THOMPSON-McCAUSLAND (United Kingdom)
The delegate of Venezuela stated that the situation of his country
resembled that of Switzerland in that it had a convertible currency, monetary
reserves and a very unfavourable balance of trade. He did not consider oil
as coming under exports, because apart from royalties the country derived no
benefit from it. When the oil was exhausted the country would be faced with
ruin, since it did not produce and, consequently, did not export anything.
The delegate of Uruguay stated that all Latin-.American countries were
in the same situation. Those which had no oil were entirely dependent upon
the production of one, two or three commodities.
In the debate which followed several delegates expressed the view
that Article 21 in its present form hardly covored any of the factors which
had been agreed to be relevant. The delegate of Switzerland insisted that
his country could not accept any solution which would take care of the
Swiss situation in Article 21 and 23; even if they were amended, or in
Article 40. The delegate of Belgium thought it should. be recognized that
since considerations deriving from the fundamental conditions of trade at
the present time had led to allowing restrictions to be applied in most
cases, notably that. of countries in balance-of-payments difficulties,
Switzerland should be entitled to use similar measures to solve her problems.
The Chairman simmed up the opinion of the Sub-Committee
1. that a country with a sound curency, which has no recourse to
Article 21, may find itself in difficulties resulting from restrictive
measures being applied by other countries and may require to be
permitted to defend itself;
2. that the import aspect of the problem might in same instances,
be taken care of under the Emergency Provisions;
/3. that the case E/CONF.2/C .3/G/W.4/Rev. 1
Page 2
3. that the case presented by Venezuela differed from that of
Switzerland in at least one respect, namely that exports were not a
relevant factor. |
GATT Library | ht216kf1603 | Notes on Fourth Meeting : Held on Wednesday, 21 January 1948, 10.30 a.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 21, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Sub-Committee G (Swiss Proposal) | 21/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/G/W.4 and E/CONF.2/C.3/F/W.31/REV.2-32/G/W.1-13/H/W.1-9 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/ht216kf1603 | ht216kf1603_90190606.xml | GATT_146 | 365 | 2,473 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C.3/G/
.ON DU W.4
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI 21 January 1948
ORIGINAL:ENGLISH
THIRD COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI
SUB-COMMITTEE G (SWISS PROPOSAL)
NOTES ON FOURTH MEETING
Held on Wednesday, 21 January 1948, 10.30 a.m.
Chairman: Mr. L..P. THOMPSON-MCCAUSLAND (United Kingdom)
The delegate of Venezuela stated that the situation of his country
resembled that of Switzerland in that it had a convertible currency, monetary
reserves and a very unfavourable balance of trade. He did not consider
oil as coming under exports, because apart from royalties the country
derived no benefit from it. When the oil was exhausted the country would
be faced with ruin, since it did not produce and, consequently, did not
export anything.
The delegate of Uruguay stated that all Latin-American countries
were in the same situation. Those which had no oil were entirely dependent
upon the production of one, two or three commodities.
In the debate which followed several delegates expressed the
view that Article 21. in its present form hardly covered any of the factors
which had been agreed to be relevant. The delegate of Switzerland
insisted that his country could not accept any solution which would take
care of the Swiss situation in Articles 21 and 23, even if they were amended,
or in Article 40. The delegate of Belgium thought it should be recognized
that since most European countries were allowed to apply restrictions,
Switzerland should be entitled to use similar measures. This view was
opposed by the representative of the United States.
The Chairman summed up the opinion of the Sub-Committee
1, that a country with a sound currency may find itself in
difficulties resulting from restrictive measures being applied by other
Countries and may require to be permitted to defend itself;
2. that bilateral arrangements were among the measures suited to
maintain exports in that situation;
3. that the import aspect of the problem might in some instances,
be taken care of under the Emergency Provisions;
/4. that the case R/CONF.2/C. 3/G/W.4. page 2
4. that the case presented by Venezuela differed from that of
Switzerland in at least one respect, namely that exports were not a
relevant factor. |
GATT Library | px240vh1540 | Notes on Fourth Meeting : Held on Wednesday, 21 January 1948, at 6.00 p.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 22, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Sub-Committee J (State Trading) | 22/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/J/W.4, E/CONF.2/C.3/H/W.9/C.3/J/W.1-8, and C.3/J/WHITE PAPERS | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/px240vh1540 | px240vh1540_90190630.xml | GATT_146 | 459 | 3,075 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C.3/J/W.4
ON DU 22 January 1948
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
THIRD COMMITTEE: COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUB-COMMITTEE J (STATE TRADING)
NOTES ON FOURTH MEETING
Held on Wednesday, 21 January 1948, at 6.00 p.m.
Chairman: Right Hon. Walter HASH (New Zealand)
1. Consideration of Items 3, 7 and 8 (a), 8 (b), 13 and the New Item
(liquidation of stockpiles) was deferred, the working group dealing
with these items not having concluded their work.
2. Item 10 (Note): The representative of Pakistan withdrew the
reservation made in Sub-Ccmmittee. It was agreed to delete the note
attached to paragraph 2 as superfluous.
3. Item 14 (Cuba): The decision taken provisionally at a previous meeting
that the present text of Article 31, paragraph 2 (b) should be
maintained was unanimously confirmed.
4. New Item (Czechoslovakia): The representative of Czechoslovakia
withdrew his proposal to add a new sub-paragraph to paragraph 3 of
Article 31.
5. New Item (Canada): The proposal to substitute, in the seventh line of
paragraph 4, the words "exclusive of" for the words "after due
allowance for" was approved.
6. Item 16 (Note): It was agreed to retain the principle contained in the
Note and to include it, if possible in the text. Working Party I was
asked to consider in what way this decision could best be implemented.
7. Item 17 (Denmark): The proposal for addition to paragraph 5 of a new
proviso finding no support, it was decided to leave the present text
unchanged. The representative of Denmark made withdrawal of the
amendment dependent on the remarks which would be included in the
Report.
8. Item 18 (Switzerland): It was pointed out that even if the amendment
were adopted in this context, at least a major part of its purpose
would not be achieved. The Sub-Committee also considered that the
/monopolies mentioned E/CONF.2/C.3/J/W.4
Page 2
monopolies mentioned in paragraph 6 did involve some trade aspects
and should not be entirely excluded from Article 31. It was decided
that Working Party II would give the representative of Switzerland
and opportunity of discussing the matter.
9. Item 19 (Mexico): The Sub-Committee expressed the view that paragraph 6
was deliberately worded vaguely since its purpose was mainly to serve
as a guide for judging whether a Member had fulfilled its general
obligations under the Charter. The representative of Mexico having
stated that he was considering the withdrawal of the proposal, discussion
was deferred.
10. Item 20 (Note and New Zealand reservation): The Chairman, as
representative of New Zealand, stated that the fate of the reservation
depended on the final shape of Article 20 at present under discussion
in another Sub-Committee. In view of this, consideration was deferred
for the time being. |
GATT Library | ff138zz5806 | Notes on Fourth Meeting : Held Saturday, 10 January 1948, 5.45 p.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 12, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Sub-Committee D (Articles 40, 41 and 43) | 12/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/D/W.8 and E/CONF.2/C.3/D/W/1-13/E/CONF.2/C.3/E/W/1-23 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/ff138zz5806 | ff138zz5806_90190527.xml | GATT_146 | 513 | 3,525 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
E/CONF.2/C .3/D/W. 8
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE 12 January 1948
ON DU
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL: ENGLISHINL: LI
TMMITTEE: COMMERCIAL HID CO1: COKMICT.AI- POLICY
LEST0-COMT'NDTE D 'Ax.WICLEPi 43)
NOTWM NN FC0ITT MEETIUG
Held Saturday, 10 January 1948, 5.45 p.m.
fRefersnce:ONFoc/ment11 /aI:N.2PC.3/j.1WendaCorr/W.7D/2.6 end DA!.t)
ChairmaHACKLE. R. J. SEACXEE (United Kingdom)
ARTICLE 43, PARAGRAPH I
New Item (Turkey): The representative of the International Monetary
Wound made a statement to the effect that in his view under Section 3 of
Article VI of the Articles of Agreement of the Fund and paragraph 9 (b)
of Article 24 of the Charter, quantitative restirictions on goods including
platinum were permitted as part of legitimate exchange control arrangements,
The delegate of Turkey stated that he would raise the matter in connection
with the balance of payments provisions.
Item. 24 (Cuba): The delegate of Cuba not being present, discussion
was deferred.
New Item (Netherlands): The deeegate of the Notherlands having
explained the amendment, it was pointed out that the protection of plant
and livestock breeders' rights, insofar as royalties were concerned, was
a matter for an international convention, and that the authorization of
export prohibitions, if this was the aim of the proposal, would not be
achieved by its inclusion in sub-paragraph (d). The delegade of Netherlan.s
having entered a provisional reservation, it was decided to defer discussion
until the next meetFng at which a PAO representative would be asked to attend.
Item 25 (Australia): No representative of Australia attended.
New Item (Committee V): Following the recommmndation of Comtittee V,
it was decided to insert, after sub-paragraph (g), a new subparagraph as
follows r
"undertaken in pursuance of any inter-governmental agreement
relating solely to the conservation of fisheries resources,
migratory birds and wild animals; Provided, that these
measures comply with the requirements of paragraph 1 (d) of
Article 67."
/and to include E/CONF.2/C .3/D/W.8
Page 2
and to include a notei n the report to the effect that the Central Drafting
committee ttee should examine the drafting as well as the question whether the
purpose of the provihsion ad to be expressed in a separat-e subparagraph
or might be incorporated in the present sub-paragraph (h).
New Item (Committee The recgV): omm ended drafting change was adopted,
sub-paragraph (h) to rsead a follows:
"(h). unden in prrsutake of uobliancligsatindero hhe t /o.'ligatimis under the terms of
inter-governmental coodity agreements conc....lu..d in accordance with.,.
It was agreed to include in the Report a note making this change subject
to review by the Central Drafting Committee.
Ntioew Items (Ipraq): In cnnn with bubaragraph (d), the delegate of
Iraq sugmgested that the Subm-Comittee make a recomendation for a provision
to be included in the Charter, authorizing the Organization to ask members
to co-operate in respect of measure.s to prevent smteuggling The Sub-Commite
felt that it was not competent to deal with the proposal which was outside
the scope of Section F. The delegate of Iraq did not insist on the proposal,
but reserved the right to raise it in relation to the appropriate Section
of the Charter. |
GATT Library | dr162ys9194 | Notes on Fourth Meeting : Held Thursday, 26 February 1948 | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, February 26, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Sub-Committee B (proposed new Article 18A) | 26/02/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/B/W.5 and E/CONF.2/C.3/A/WHITE PAPERS/C.3/B/W.1-7/C.3/C/W.1-16 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/dr162ys9194 | dr162ys9194_90190494.xml | GATT_146 | 416 | 2,886 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE B/CONF.2/C.3/B/W.5
ON DU 26 February 1948
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOL ORIGINAL:ENGLISH
TEIRD COMMITTEE: COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUB-COMMITTEE B (PROPOSED NEW ARTICLE 18A)
NOTES ON FOURTH MEETING
Held Thursday, 26 February 1948
Chairman: Dr. J. E. HOLLOWAY (Union of South Africa)
The CHAIRMAN explained that no reconciliation of views in the
Sub-Committee had taken place and as time was getting short a Report stating
the actual position had been prepared as a basis for discussion.
The delegate for France stated that whilst it was regrettable that the
Sub-Committee could not make any recommendation in the Report, he would have
wished it at least to contain a recognition of the importance of the problem.
The delegate for Norway, supported by the delegates for the
United Kingdom and Greece, pointed out that according to newly received
information the Maritime Conference at present in session at Geneva had
arrived at certain decisions bearing on the problem under discussion. This
might make it possible for the Sub-Committee to produce an agreed solution
instead of a purely negative report a consequence of which would be prolonged
discussions in full Committee. The information available so far was
inadequate and it was suggested that the Sub-Committee should adjourn for a
few days whilst the Secretariat obtained the relevant texts from the
Maritime Conference.
The representative of Argentina thought it would be better to transfer
the entire problem to the Shipping Organization.
The representative of India insisted that an early decision would
facilitate settlement of major outstanding issues. The decisions taken so
far by the Maritime Conference would not provide sufficient guidance for
the considerations of the Sub-Committee nor would the mere texts allow
drawing satisfactory conclusions.
The delegate for Venezuela also wished to proceed with the discussion
of the Report.
The representative of South Africa had no objection to adjournment
for a few days if this was so desired by other delegations.
/The Sub-Committee E/CONF .2/C.3/B/W.5
Page 2
The Sub-Committee decided by a majority to request the Secretariat to
obtain by cable all resolutions taken by the Maritime Conference with such
extracts of the committee reports which would be of Use for authoritative
interpretation of the texts, and also the voting lists on each decision.
The committee reports should be requested by airmail. This material should
as soon as possible be made available to the Conference in document form
and it was agreed that the Sub-Commmittee should adjourn pending the receipt
of the information requested. |
GATT Library | cc031df5937 | Notes on Nineteenth Meeting : Held 28 January 1948, at.6.00.p.m. in Conference room A | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 29, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Sub-Committee C: General Commercial Provisions (Articles 32 - 39) | 29/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/C/W.20 and E/CONF.2/C.3/C/W/17-20/E/CONF.2/C.3/C/WHITE PAPERS | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/cc031df5937 | cc031df5937_90190518.xml | GATT_146 | 17,093 | 109,929 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C.3/C/
ON DU 29 January 1948 W.20
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE El DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
THIRD COMMITTEE: COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUB-COMMITTEE C - GENERAL COMMERCIAL PROVISIONS
(Articles 32 - 39)
NOTES ON NINETEENTH MEETING
Held 28 January 1948, at.6.00.p.m. in Conference Room A.
Chairman: MR. C. E. MORTON (Australia)
DRAFT REPORT OF THE SUB-COMMITTEE T( COMMITTEE III (E/CONF.2/C.3/C/W,l8)
The CHAIRMAN introduced the Draft Report consisting of Part I
General Observations; Part II - conclusions reached by the Sub-Committee
in respect of each of the Articles 32 - 39 inclusive of the Geneva Charter;
Part III - the amended text of the Articles together with the Interpretative
Notes.
The Sub-Committee discussed the Draft Report page by page and. made
certain minor drafting changes. It was agreed that all reservations to
the proposed text of the Articles should be stated in Part II and not as
Notes to the text of the Articles in Part III.
The representative of France, while wishing to retain in the Report
the reference to his proposal (item 7) with regard to the requirements of
"direct consignment" in paragraph 6 of Article 32 (page 5 - 6 of the Draft
Report), withdrew his reservation.
The Sub-Committee with no dissentients approved the Draft Report and
the Secretariat was instructed to prepare the Report for Committee III, as
an unrestricted document, taking into consideration the decisions and changes
made during the discussion.
The CHAIRMAN informed the Sub-Committee that the Spanish translation
of the Report was being prepared by the Secretariat.
The representative of Argentina wished that his position as regards
the Report should be considered as being in abeyance until he is in
possession of the Spanish translation. He will then advise the Secretariat
as to his agreement or otherwise with the substance of the Report.
The CHAIRMAN congratulated the members of the Sub-Committee on the
/successful termination E/CONF.2/C. 3/C/W.20
Page 2
successful termination of their work and on the co-operative spirit which
they had at all times displayed.
The Sub-Committee thanked the CHAIRMAN for the efficient and impartial
manner in which he had conducted the discussions.
The CHAIRMAN declared the last meeting of the Sub-Committee closed. G.C.P/W.P/16
23 January 1948
SUB-COMMITTEE C OF COMMITTEE III
Article 32
In the meeting of Sub-Committee C on 21 January 1948, the representative
of the United States (Mr. H. M. Catudal) made a statement concerning some
aspects of Article 32 - Freedom of Transit. The Sub-Committee decided to
make the full text of the statement available to its members.
STATMEMT OF THE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE UNITED STATES
The United States fully supports the recommendations of the Working Party
(contained in document 3648 - G.C.P./W.P./14 of 20 January 1948) to include
a new paragraph in Article 32 and to include a statement in the Committee
Report on this matter, in order to meet the points raised by the proposal
of Afghanistan (item 46 of the Annotated Agenda, document E/CONF.2/C.3/10),
The original amendment proposed by Afghanistan, and the remarks made
by the delegate of that country and by other delegations, both in this
Sub-Committee and in the Working Party, have been carefully considered by
my delegation. We feel that the recommendations of the Working Party will
be acceptable to all the members of the Conference.
The proposed new paragraph would specifically authorize the ITO to
make studies and recommendations and promote international agreement concerning
measures designed to promote the broad objectives of the freedom of transit
provisions of the Charter and provides that Members agree to co-operate
directly and through the Organization to this end.
This matter is of importance to the United States delegation because
the Charter is a World Charter and hence must cover, in an equitable way,
the trade problems of all countries, the large countries and the small
countries, those fortunately situated geographically and those which are at
a disadvantage because of their geographic situation.
If countries which are at a disadvantage because they have no direct
access to the sea - and there are a number of such countries in the world -
are to participate fully in the expansion of world trade, the Charter must
recognize their situation and provide what reasonably can be provided by a
Charrter for an International Trade Organization in order to enable them to
do so.
In the foregoing general remarks, I have attempted merely to recognize,
as the proposed Statement for the Committee Report recognizes, that the
Freedom of Transit provisions of the Charter are of outstanding importance
to a number of countries which we all went to participate in the 1TO.
3824 /May I now -2-
May I now turn to several specific points regarding the proposed new
paragraph to Article 32 and the suggested Statement for the Committee
Report.
I. First of all, the proposals recognize, with respect to transit matters,
the necessity of direct negotiation between the countries concerned. The
new paragraph contains a specific obligation by Members to co-operate
directly in furthering the objectives of the Article. The Organization may
make studies and recommendations and promote international agreement, but
the ITC cannot itself conduct the negotiations.
II. Secondly, the new paragraph employs the phrase "equitable use of
facilities required for such transit." What does "equitable use" mean?
This is a flexible term, which means different things in different
circumstances. If there is any single word which expresses the underlying
principles of all of Chapter IV, it is this word "equitable". We find it
underlying the most-favoured-nation provisions of Article 16, the national
treatment provisions of Article 18, the provisions requiring the
allocation of quotas on the basis of a previous representative period, and
in many other provisions of the Charter.
It has always been the understanding of my delegation - and, I believe,
the understanding of the other members of the Preparatory Committee - that,
while the Freedom of Transit provisions of the Charter do not require a
Country to build a new railroad, construct a new port; buy new locomotives
or otherwise provide new construction or equipment for transit purposes,
it does obligate Members to permit the equitable use of facilities which
the transit country already possesses.
In my opinion, therefore, the term "equitable use" in the new
paragraph in Article 32 means, broadly speaking, fair and reasonable in the
particular circumstances - that is, equitable to the country which needs the
transit facilities, equitable to the country through which the transit
passes, and equitable to third countries.
III. The suggested Statement for the Committee Report speaks of studies,
recommendations, and co-operation concerning "special arrangements" for
transit to and from countries which do not have direct access to the sea.
What is meant by "special arrangements"?
As in the case of "equitable", the term "special arrangements" is a
flexible term designed to cover many different situations, but it must be
read in the light of Article 32 as a whole, including the text of the new
paragraph. It is clear that this term "special arrangements" in no way
conflicts with or overrides any provision of Article 32. For example, it
certainly does not mean that a country may discriminate against a third
country, in violation of paragraph 5 of Article 32.
/What this 43-
What this term does do, in my opinion, is to recognize the fact that
countries which do not have access to the sea are in a "special" position -
they have a special disadvantage - and hence may need particular facilities
to enable them to fully participate in international trade. These "special
arrangements" will be obtained by direct co-operation between Members, in the
framework of the equitable principles of the ITO.
HMCatudal:PJ 31 January 1948
COMMITTEE III
WORKING PARTY NO. 1 ON ARTICLE 32
Proposal of the delegation of Chile to append the following Interpretative
Note to paragraph 9:
"If as a result of negotiations for special arrangements carried
out, in accordance with paragraph 9 of Article 32, with a country which
has no direct access to the sea, a Member State grants more ample
facilities than those already provided for in other paragraphs of said
Article, such special facilities could be asked for only by countries
which are in the same geographic situation."
Terms of Reference:
To consider the advisability of adding an Interpretative Note to
Article 32, or altering the text of the Article, to take account of the
proposal of the delegation of Chile and to consider this proposal in relation
to any other Article of the Charter as may be considered necessary.
Members:
Afghanistan China
Australia Netherlands
Bolivia United Kingdomom
Chile United States
Word$ G.C.P/W.P/14
20 January 1948
SUB-COMMITTEE C OF COMMITTEE IIIIh' C OF COMMlTEE III
TY IVT OF WM= G PARTY IV
ARTICLE 32
Working Party IV, composed of the representatives of Afghanistan, France,
Lebanon, Pakistan, United Kingdom and the United States, with the
re'Osentative of Australia as Chairman, had the following terms of reference:
to consider whether there was any need to include in the Charter the
content of the Afghanistan proposal, Item 46 in the Annotated Agenda
(document E/CON.2/C.3/10) and if so, whether ists proper place wa in
Article 69 or Article 32.
DuLring the discussion in the Working Party the representatives of Bolivia
and Netherlands made statements to the Working Party.
After very careful consideration the Working Party unanimously recommends:
(a) the addition of a new paragraph to Article 32 in the following terms,
viz.:
"The Organization may undertake studies, make recommendations
and promote international agreement relating to the simplification of
customs regulations concerning traffic in transit, the equitable
use of facilities required for such transit and other measures
designed to promote the objectives of this Article. Members shall
co-operate with each other directly and through the Organization to
this end."
(b) the inclusion in the report of Sub-Committee C of a statement in the
following terms:
The new paragraph recommended for inclusion in Article 32
specifically authorizes the Organization to make studies and
recommendations and promote international agreement concerning
measures designed to further the broad objectives of the freedom of
transit provisions of the Charter and Members agree to co-operate
with each other directly and through the Organizations to this end.
While there is no doubt that the general functions of the Organization
as set forth in Article 69 are sufficiently broad to authorize the action
contemplated by the new paragraph, the Sub-Cormittee felt, in view of the
great importance of this matter to many countries, Particularly to those
countries which have no access to the sea, that it was desirable to make
specificprovision for the matter as has been done with regard to other
matters of outstanding importance in other Articles of the Charter.
/While the
3 ,4 -2-
While the implementation of this paragraph must be left to the Organization
and to the Members directly concerned, it is the Sub-Committee's understanding
that these provisions would afford a specific basis for studies and
recomendations by the Organization, and for one Member to seek the co-operation
of another, concerning measures to fatilitate traffic in transit generally, as
well as concerning special arrangements for transit to and from countries
which do not have access to the sea. The Sub-Committee believes that in the
case of such countries special arrangements regarding transport, loading and
unloading, storage and warehousing et ceiera may be necessary to enable such
countries full to participate in and promote the expansion of international
trade envisaged by the Charter. 7 January l948
SUB-COMMITTEE C OF COMMITTEE IIIII
REPORT OF WORNGDD PARTY ON ARTICLE 33
1. The following points were referred to the Working Party, which was
composed of representatives of Cuba, Lebanon, thUnited t Kingdom and United
States:
(i) To consider a form of words which should be placed as a preamble to
Article 33 and which would, in effect, constitute a general
condemnation of the practice of dumping;
(ii) to consider the question of a definition of dumping, particularly as
to whether the present definition of the 'margin of dumping' could
not be so amended byo mre drafting of changes as to be, in effect,
a definition of 'price dumping';
(iii) to consider whether this Article should, as it does at present, be
restricted to relate solely to so-called 'price dumping';
(iv) to consider whether paragraph 6 should be deleted or amended in the
event that it could be interpreted so as to limit action permitted
under Articles 13 and 14.
(v) to consider footnote to paragraph 6;
(r) to consider whether 'hidden dumping' as described in the footnote to
paragraph 1 is covered by the text of paragraph 1 and in the event
that it is not so covered to consider whether the note or the text
should be amended;
2. Items (i) and (ii)..
After examining the first two points in the light of the discussions in
the Tcohnical Sub-Cmmiottee, the Working Party was able to reach agreement
on a form of words which would provide a general condemnation of the practice
of dumping, together with a definition of price dumpin.g The text proposed
by the Working Party, which would replace paragraph 1 of the present Article,
is shown as Annex A to this report. With reference to the word 'industr'y
in paragraph 1 of the text, the Working Party wish to make it clear that
in their intention teh word 'industry' includes such forms of economic
activity as agriculture,f orestry, mining, etc., as well as manufacturing.
3. Item (iii)
It was the unanimous oinuion of the Working Party, after full
consideration of the discussocs- in tei Sub-Committee, that Article 33 should
be restricted to price dumping.
4. Item (iv).
Tho Working Party was evenly divided as to whether the terms of
paragraph (6) could be construed as limiting the rights of Members under
2836 /Articles -2-
Articles 13 and 14. It was in agreement, however, that paragraph (6) is
unnecessary and that its deletion would not effect any change in substance.
The Working Party therefore recommends that Sub-Committee C suggest the
deletion of paragraph (6) with a clear statement in its report to Committee III
that the deletion is not to be understood as meaning that measures other than
anti-dumping or countervailing duties may be applied in cases of dumping or
subsidization except as such other measures are permitted under various
provisions of the Charter.
5. Item (v)
If the foregoing suggestion is adopted, the Geneva footnote will no
longer be necessary.
6. Item (vi)
After careful consideration the Working Party concluded that the case
of hidden dumping as described in the terms of reference, is covered by the
text of paragraph 1, but that the note requires clarification as to the basis
for calculating the margin of dumping. It is therefore suggested that the
following addition should be made to the note:
"in which the margin of dumping may be calculated on the basis of the
price at which the goods are re-sold by the importer."
Further the Working Party suggests that the slight verbal changes in
this note as it appears in the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade might
be adopted by the Sub-Committee, so that the note would appear as follows:
Hidden dumping by associated houses (that is, a sale by an importer
at a price below that corresponding to the price invoiced by an exporter
with whom the importer is associated, and also below the price in the
exporting country) constitutes a form of price dumping in which the
margin of dumping may be calculated on the basis of the price at which
the goods are re-sold by the importer.
7. In their proceedings the Working Party have taken into full consideration
the amendments tabled by Argentina, China, Cuba, India, Pakistan, Mexico,
Syria and Lebanon, insofar as they lay within their terms of reference.
8. The Working Party feels that if its proposals are adopted Article 33
will appropriately cover the case of dumping.
9. The text of paragraphs 1 and 2 is given in Annex A. -3-
ANNEX A
ARTICLE 33
ANTI-DUMPING AND COUNTERVAILING DUITES
1. The Members recognize that dumping, by which products of one country are
introduced into the commerce of another country at less than the fair value
of the products, is to be condemned if it causes or threatens material
injury to an industry in a Member country or materially delays the
establishment of such an industry. For the purposes of this Article, a
product is to be considered as being introduced into the commerce of an
importing country at less than its fair value, if the price of the product
exported from the one country to the other:
(a) is less than the comparable price, in the ordinary course of trade,
for the like product when destined for consumption in the exporting
country, or,
(b) in the absence of such domestic price, is less than either
(i) the highest comparable price for the like product for export
to any third country in the ordinary course of trade, or
(ii) the cost of' production of the product in the country of
origin plus a reasonable addition for selling cost and profit.
Due allowance shall be made in each case for differences in conditions
and terms of sale, for differences in taxation, and for other differences
affecting price comparability.
2. In order to offset or prevent dumping, a Member may levy on any
dumped product an anti-dumping duty not greater in amount than the margin
of dumping in respect of such product. For the purposes of this Article,
the margin of dumping is the difference determined in accordance with the
provisions of paragraph 1 of this Article.
[Paragraphs 2, 3, 4, 5 [and 6] of Geneva. text would follow, renumbered] G.C.P/W.P/9
15 January 1948
SUB-COMMITTEE C OF COMMITTEE III
REPORT OF WORKING PARTY I
ARTICLE 33
members
1. The Working Party I consisted of the original/appointed on 2 January
namely Cuba, Lebanon, United Kingdom and United States of America, with
the addition of the representatives of the Netherlands and Brazil and
with the representative of Australia as-Chairman. It had the following
terms of reference:
"to consider all proposals submitted during the discussion of the
Sub-Committee on 9 and 12 January of the report of the Working Party
dated 7 January 1948,"
2. With the exception of the delegate for the Netherlands the members
of the Working Party recommend the adoption of the text of paragraph 1
contained in the Working Party's report of 7 January, with the following.
alterations:
(a) the word "fair" is to be changed to. "normal" in two places.
The word "normal" is considered to express more accurately
the type of value; concerned
(b) The wording of the phrase relating to material injury to
a domestic industry which appears in this paragraph and in
paragraph 5 should be brought into line. The following wording
is recommended for paragraph 1:
"causes or threatens material injury to an established
industry in a Member country or materially retards the
establishment of a domestic industry"
It is considered that in paragraph 5 the words "prevent or"
appearing before "materially retard" are redundant and
therefore should be deleted.
The delegate of -the-Netherlands maintains his objection to the inclusion
of the word "condemned" in this paragraph.
3. With the exception of the delegate for the Netherlands the members
of the Working Party agree to adopt the previous working party's text
of paragraph 2 with the addition of the word "price" inserted before the
word "difference" in the second last line. This is purely a drafting
amendment. The delegate for the Netherlands objects to the words
"or prevent" appearing in this paragraph.
/4. After considering
3354 -2-
4. After considering the new paragraph proposed by the representative
of Brazil at the Sub-Committee meeting on 9 January, together with a
modification of this proposal suggested by the representative of Pakistan
at the Sub-Committee meeting on 12 January, the Working Party recommends
unanimously the inclusion of a Note to paragraph 2 of Article 33 in the
following terms:
"As in many other cases in Customs administration, a Member
may require reasonable security (bond or cash deposit) for the
payment of anti-dumping or countervailing duty pending final
determination of the facts in any case of suspected dumping or
subsidisation."
The representative of Brazil stated that a footnote in these terms would
meet the position of his delegation.
5. In connection with the new paragraph proposed by him in the paper
submitted to the Sub-Committee on 9 January the representative of the
Netherlands pointed out that the proposal is intended to:
(a) provide facilities for consultation between members in
cases of suspected dumping before anti-dumping duties are
actually brought into operation
(b) to provide facilities for consultation between two
countries, where one of them is considered by the other to
be dumping in a third country, before recourse is made to the
Organization in accordance with the second sentence of
paragraph 5.
(c) to bring Article 33 into line with Article 25 where
provision is made for consultation with regard to subsidies
The other members of the Working Party consider however that the position
with regard to consultation is adequately dealt with in Article 41and
Article 89 and they feel that their opinion reflects the opinion of the
majority of the members of Sub-Committee C in view of the decision of
the Sub-Committee when dealing with the proposal of the Danish delegation
(contained in Item 18 of the E/CONF.2/C.3/10).
6. The representative of Argentine proposed to replace the text of
Paragraph 6 with the following paragraph:
"In exceptional circumstances in which the anti-dumping
measures envisaged in this article prove inadequate the
country affected may adopt any other defensive measures
provided for in its legislation and shall inform the
Organization thereof".
/As it affected -3-
As it affected several of them this proposal was considered in relation
to the various issues raised. None of the Members of the Working Party
favour the inclusion of a provision on the lines of the Argentine
amendment and therefore the Working Party recommends against the adoption
of the Argentine proposal.
7. When each of the issues referred to above was before the Working Party
consideration was given to the remarks to the Sub-Committee by the
representative of Czechoslovakia. His references to "social" dumping
were discussed separately but the Working Party unanimously recommends the
maintenance of its previous recommendation (contained in item (iii) of
the report of 7 January) that Article 33 should be restricted to price
dumping.
8. The Working Party desires to point out that this report is a
supplemeniary one to that dated 7 January 1948. None of the recommendations
made by the Working Party in its present report varies the terms of the
previous report except f'or the alterations in the text previously proposed
(shown as Annex A to the report of 7 January 1948) to replace paragraph 1
of Geneva draft of Article 33.
The amended text now proposed by the Working Party is set out as an
Annex to this report. -4-
ANNEX ARTICIE 33
ANTI-DUMPING AND COUNTERVALLING DUTIES
1. The Members recognize that dumping, by which products of one country are
introduced into the commerce of another country at less than the normal value
of the products, is to be condemned if it causes or threatens material
injury to an established industry in a Member country or materially retards the
establishment of such a domestic industry. For the purposes of this Article, a
product is to be considered as being introduced into the commerce of an
importing country at less than its normal value, if the price of the product
exported from the one country to the order:
(a) is less than the comparable price, in the ordinary course of trade,
for the like product when destined for consumption in the exporting
country, or,
(b) in the absence of such domestic price, is less than either
(i) the highest comparable price for the. like product for. export
to any third country in the ordinary course of trade, or
(ii) the cost of production of the product in the country of
origin plus a reasonable addition for selling cost and profit.
Due allowance shall be made in each case for differences in conditions
and terms of sale, for differences in taxation, and for other differences
affecting price comparability.
2. In order to offset or prevent dumping, a.Member may levy on any
dumped product an anti-dumping duty not greater in amount that the margin
of dumping in respect of such product. For the purposes of this Article,
the margin of dumping is the price difference determined in accordance with the
provisions of paragraph 1 of this Article.
[Paragraphs 2, 3, 4, 5 [and 6] of Geneva text would follow, renumbered] 9 January 1948 G.C.P/W.P.2
SUB-COMMITTEE C OF COMMITTEE IIICC1-aTh2S III
ARTCLE 33
The Delegation of Brazil presented the following
8pfengdtto arerph Meeting of the Sub-at the-Commiteef the ttoo
on 9 January 1948:
"6. - h.l;<aeviduct is nmporteyndinto a:y
vzbr cry under such conditions as to jfustiiy thebelief
that is tinbeing imported at less than its fair value,
alhhgthu thae exarct mgin of dumping or sdubsiization cannot
be promptly rtasceai ned,Memberthe croedcnce may ddeman that
the importer shall dsepWit aon amwhunt ich apspear sufficient
to cover the anti-dumping or countervailing duty whmich ay
beme xde. hT 'xeecess of the deposit over the duty, as
nally determined,lyohall be immend.aely returned. 9 January 1948
C.C.P./W.P./1. SUB-COMMITTEE C OF COMMITTEE IIIT III
A3RTIME 3M
NDS: AMENDMdENT X5JD2
gaioel of Netherlads peZatioatherlands presented, at the meeting of the
Suaeet9, a Jafnuwiryf theolw-it to the namendenhL totie xt of this
ed Aportiycle aWs agpo Party xn W hitethapere,orking I,hite aper 2836, 7
January, Aex A).
1.gh eThe emberg recoizothat dumping by a country may cause
serious prejudsds iceMemb to the intertof er countries.
ir the purpose of this Asdrticle dumsing ito be considered as
intrommducing to the coerce of an importing country ar product rat a pice
which (a) is less than the comparable price, in the ordinary course of
terrade for te likproduct when destined for consumption in
the exporting country, or,
(b) in the absence of such dosmestic price, i less than either
c(i) ge hi &omparblelpricee pri r the like product for
xport to any third counrdinubary ttry inhd ary course of trade, or
(U) the cost of production of the product in the country of
oronaigin plus a reasble addition for selling cost and profit.
Due allowance shall be made in each case for differences in
conditions and terms of sale, for dxcifferences in tation, and for other
differences afmpfraecting price coability.
2 Member Leayfset duasmnping by levni- nanti-dumping duty
on any dumped product provided otnhat the amut of such duty shall not exceed
the margin of dumping. For the purpose of this Article the ummargin of dp-
ing is to be determined in accordance with the provisasions of pagraph 1 of
this Article.
7.Ii any case in which the interests of anotherM!mber or other
embersray be seriously prejudiced either by dumping or by the application
of anti-dumping duties, Members shall, upon request, discuss with the Memberabtr
or embers concer the ned or withOr ganization,*he possibilities of a
satisfactory solution. G.C .P/W.P/4C
12 January 198u
THIRD CMMITTEE: COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUB-COMMITTEE C
(Article 34, paragraph 3)
Report of Working Party II
The Working Party, consisting of the representatives of Australia,
France, the United Kingdom, the United States of America and Uruguay, was
set up to investigate the possibility of systems providing for the temporary
binding or periodical establishment of the value of merchandise as proposed
by the delegations of Uruguay (Item 28 of the Annotated Agenda,
E/CONF.2/C.3/10) and Chile (Item 29) being regarded as compatible with the
provisions of Article 34, paragraph 3, regarding valuation for customs
purposes.
After discussion, it was recognized that neither the letter nor the
spirit of the present Article 34 is compatible with the establishment, on
a more or less long-term basis, of schedules of valuation of merchandise
and that in the light of the discussions which have taken place in the full
Committee and in Sub-Committee C, it is not possible to contemplate any
alteration of the principles established by that Article.
However, the members of the committee were of the unanimous opinion
that temporary stabilization of the value of particular merchandise subject
to ad valorem duties in effect gives the latter all the characteristics of
specific duties, and that such stabilization, while conforming to the
principles of the Charter, would thus allow certain countries to maintain
their present regulations provisionally and take the necessary legislative
steps to comply with Article 34 at a later date.
The Working Party considered that the following text would answer this
purpose. It would be submitted as a note to Article 34, paragraph 3:
"If on the date of signature of this Charter a Member has in
force a system of applying ad valorem rates of duty to established
values which remain fixed for a period of time, the provisions of
this Article requiring the determination of actual value shall not
apply so long as the value established for a particular product
remains unchanged."
The delegate for Chile, who attended the meeting as an observer,
recognized that the above text granted certain new facilities, but considered
that it did not meet the request made by his delegation and reserved his
position.
3187 G.C.P/WP.3/Rev.1
13 January 1948
SUB-COMMITTEE C OF COMMITTEE III
PARAGRAPH 5 OF ARTICLE 34
SECOND REPORT OF THE UNITED STATES DELEGATION
The United States Delegation now proposes that:
(a) Paragraph 5 (d) be redesignated as paragraph 6 and old paragraph
6 be renumbered paragraph 7.
(b) In line 1 of the new paragraph 6 the word "paragraph" be replaced
by "Article".
(c) The following interpretative note be appended to paragraph 5.
"If compliance with paragraph 5 would result in substantial
decreases in amounts of duty payable on products with respect to
which the rates of duty have been bound by an international
agreement, the term 'at the earliest practicable date' in
paragraph 2 allows the Member concerned a reasonable time to obtain
adJustment of the agreement".
3264. 10 Januay 1948
G.C.P/W.P./3
SUB-COMMITTEE C OF COMMITTEE IIII
Pargraphn 5 of Article 34
Report of the United States Delgsate
The CHAIMANM asked the United States Delegate prepare for
consideration by the Sub-Comizttee a redraft of sub-paragraph (d)
in paragraph 5 of Article 34, which would:
(1) protect aMRmuber from any requirement that, in making
a necessary change in itsmeothod of covnerting currencies for
custosm purposes, it decrease generally the amounts of duty payable
and
(d) eliminate any possible construction of the su-bparagraph
as authorizing any indefinite postponement of compliance with sub-
paragraph (a) or (b).
The discussion of this matter in the Sub-Cm-mittee indicated
a conennsus of opinion that the cases contemplated by su-bparagraph
(d) and the desired redraft aer those in which the only reasonable
solution of the problem is to change ad valorem rates of duty to
compensate for the change in the method of converting currencies.
However, changes in rates of duty are subjectoanm any cases to limitations
because of bindings ni existing commercial agreements.
The point as to indefinite postponement is amply covered by
paragraph 2 of Article 34, if no exception to the provisions of that
paragraph is indicated.
On the basis of the foregoing it is suggested haths u-b
aragraph (d) sof paragraph 5bke deleted and thatfollowing hi'oflongri
interpretative note be appended to paragraph 2 of Article 34. Note to paragraph 2 of Article 34:
The term "at the earliest practicable date" means that the
Members must adjust their laws and practices to conform with the
stated principles as soon as is reasonably possible. Where the
application of the principles would involve substantial increases
or decreases in amount of duty payable, Members are allowed a
reasonable period to make compensatory adjustments in rates of duty.
Where the application of the principles would cause a substantial
reduction in amounts of duty payable on products with respect to
which the rates of duty have been bound by an international agree-
ment, a reasonable period is allowed for the Members to obtain
adjustment of the international obligation.
- 2 - 31 January 1948
COMMITTEE III
WORKING PARTY NO. 2 ON ARTICLE 34
Terms of Reference:
To consider the proposal of the delegation of Chile to add the
following sentence to the Interpretative Note (ii) of paragraph 3 (b)
of Article 34;
"In future, the continuance of the system referred to in
this Note shall be permitted, provided that, on the request of
interested parties or Members, periodically established values
for a specified product will be adjusted according to actual
value."
Members:
Afghanistan India
Belgium United Kingdom
Chile United States
4200 22 December 1947
SUB-COMMITTEE C OF COMMITTEE IIIII
Article 35
The Chairman of Sub-Committee C of Committee III has received the
following communication from the delegation of Brazil with regard to its
observations an paragraph 5 of Article 35 (E/NFOW.2/C.3/10, item 47):
"The delegation of Brazil has the nhoour to inform the Chairman
of Sub-Committee C of Committee III that it wishes to submit its views
on paragraph 5 of Article 35, as expressed in the following statement
made by the delegation at the meeting held on 19 December:
The delegation of Brazil does not maintain the reservation
mentioned under item 47 of the annotated Agenda, in connection
with Article 35, paragraph 5, sub-paragraph (d). The problem
which the Brazilian delegation had in mind was that of charges
imposed on the transfer of funds for a particular class of
international payments, in order to reduce a disequilibrium in
the balance of payments. After a closer study of the problem,
the Brazilian delegation considers that the case provided for in
Brazilian legislation is already dealt with in the explanatory note
to Article 35, and hopes that this note will either be retained in
its present form or inserted in the text. The problem raised by
charges on the transfer of funds has been submitted by the Brazilian
authorities to the International Monetary Fund, in view of the
transitional provisions of the Bretton Woods Agreement, and the
Brazilian Government will abide by the decision of the Monetary Fund
on this matter. The Brazilian delegation withdraws its reservation
regarding Article 35, it being understood that the Brazilian
delegation interprets this Article as meaning that charges connected
with exchange control may be maintained under the terms and conditions
approved by the International Monetary Fund."
2030 G.C.P/W.P/6
13 January 1948
SUB-COMMITTEE C OF COMMITTEE III
ARTICLE 35
REPORT OF DRAFTING GROUP I
Sub-Committee C in its twelfth meeting instructed the Drafting Group I
composed of the representatives of the United Kingdom, the United States and
Uruguay, to consider the proposal of Uruguay (Item 42), and to endeavour to
find a form of words to be written into paragraph 3 of Article 35 to cover its
content. Agreement was reached on the wording of the following addition at
the end of paragraph 3 of Article 35 to replace the amendment contained in
Document E/CONF.2/C.3/10, Item 42:
", including those relating to advertising matter and samples for use
only in taking orders for merchandise".
SOUS-COMMISSION C DE LA TROISIEME COMMISSION
ARTICLE 35
RAPPORT DU GROUPE DE TRAVAIL n? g\ 1
A sa sd?ouim?e sance, la Sous-Commission C a in?vit le groupe de travail
lno1comp?osTdes re?prTentants des Etats-Unis, du Royaume-Uni et de l 'Uruguay
a examiner la proposition de 1'Uruguay (point 42) et? s'efforcer de? rdiger
un texte qui serait i?3?nr au paragraphe 3 de l'article 35 pour repondr?e
l'objet dee ct amendeemnt. Le groupe de travail s 'est mis d 'accord sur le
texte suivant dest?i?n? tre ajo?ut au paragraphe 3 de l'article 35 et qui
remplace l'amendment qui figure au point 42 du document E/CONF.2/C.3/ 10:
", y compris celles qui ont trai?t la public?it et au??xTchantillons
uti?liss uniquement pour prendre des mcomandes de marchandises".
3210 GC.P/W.P/8
14 January 1948
SUB-COMMITTEE C OF COMMITTEE III
Report of Working Party III on Paragraph One of Article 35
1. Working Party III, composed. of the representative of Lebnon,
United Kingdom and the.United States with the representative of Australia
acting as Chairman and the delegates of Haiti, Turkey and Peru. as observers,
had the following terms of reference:
"consider paragraph 1 of Article 35 in relation to the amendments
proposed by the delegations of Haiti, Peru and Turkey, particularly
with a view to clarifying whether Article 35 should, and in fact does,
refer only to fees and charges imposed by Governments in payment for
services rendered, and to redraft this paragraph to distinguish such fees
and charges from Tariffs end other imposts, such as internal taxes".
2. The working party recommends unanimously that the following amendments
to Article 35, paragraph 1 be adopted., viz.:
In the flrst sentence, delete "feen and charges, other than duties",
and substitute:
"all fees and charges of whatever character (other than import and
export duties and other than taxes within the purview of
Article 18"
The amendment recommended is not one of substance but is a drafting amendment
to make it clear that Article 35 covers all charges and fees imposed by
governmental authorities on or in connection with importation or exportation
other than import and export duties and other than taxes within the purview
of Article 18.
3. The delegate of Turkey considers that this amendment meets the
point raised by the Turkish proposal contained in Item 39 of the annotated
agenda (Paper E/CONF.2/C.3/10) and his delegation will withdraw its
proposal.
4. The delegate of Haiti inormed the Working Party that the purpose
of Haitian proposal (contained in document E/CONF. 0.3/1C/Add.l) is to
provide that:
Where fees and charges of the type covered by Article 35 are at
present used as a taxation for fiscal purposes by any member that
member can continue to use such fees and charges for such a purpose
and it would not be under any obligation to take action at any
time to limit the amount of the fees and charges to the approximate
cost of the services rendered.
5. There was no support in the working party for the proposal of Haiti and
3289 /the Working -2-
the Working party therefore reconmends against any change in the text to give
effect to that proposal. The delegate of Haiti wishes to maintain his position
in relation to the amendment submitted by his delegation.
6. In view of the fact that the delegate for Haiti, during the discussion
of the Haitian proposal, stressed the importance to his country of taxation
on imports and exports as a source of revenue, the working party desires clearly
clearly to express its opinion that, although Article 35 establishes the
principles that the fees and charges of the type covered by the article
should not represent a taxation of imports or exports for fiscal purposes,
adequate provision is made in other parts of the Charter for the raising
of revenue by duties on exports and imports or by non-discriminatory internal
taxes collected on imports at the time of importation.
After discussion the delegate of Peru is satisfied that the problem
the amendment suggested by his delegation (contained in paper .
E/OOC102/C.3/lQiAddnd2d :nteeedea tol mt is aready cowsred by the
footnote to paragraph 5 of Article 35 and his delegation is thpreparederefore renared
to ggested the su-,2.ate& amendment, G.C .P/W.P/100
17 January 1948
SUB-CMMIITTEE C OF COMMITTEE III
ARTICLE 35
1. In the fifteenth meeting of the Sub-Committee (E/CONF.2/C.3//W.15,C
paragraph 5) the representative of Peru was prepared to withdraw his
amendment (E/OCNF.2/C.3/0O.Add.2) on the grounds that his proposal was covered
by the Note to paragraph 5 of the Geneva Draft.
2. He suggested, however, a change in the wording of the Note. He was
requested by the Sub-Committee to consult with the representative of the
International Monetary Fund and to report to the Sub-Committee.
3. The representatives of Peru and the International Monetary Fund have
agreed upon the following change in the Note:
replace the words in the sixth line ". ... with the approval of the
International Monetary Fund" by the words "not inconsistently with the
Articles of Agreement of the International Monetary Fund."
3502 G.C.P/W.P./13
20 January 1948
SUB-COMMITTEE C OF COMMITTEE III
REPORT OF WORKING PARTY V
ARTICLE 35
1. The Working Party V composed of the representatives of Cuba. France,
United Kingdom and United States, with the representative of Australia as
Chairman had the following terms of reference:
To consider what action should be taken with regard to the proposal of
the delegation of Cuba contained in Item 3 in the document E/CONF.2/C.3/6.
2. The proposal of the delegation of Cuba was referred to Sub-Committee C
at the direction of the Chairman of Committee III.
3. The delegate of Cuba stated, during the discussion of the matter in
Sub-Committee C, that the Cuban amendment contained in document E/CONF.2/C.3/6
was intended to be added to the first paragraph of Article 16 and it was
necessary to adjust the wording of the amendment to facilitate its inclusion
in Section E of the Chapter IV. The Cuban delegate-then proposed the following
wording:
"The Members undertake not to include in their tariff classifications
based on types named after distinctive regional or geographical names.
of products of a Member- country. When classifications of the kind
referred to in the previous sentence are in existence, Members undertake
to take action at the earliest -practicable date-with a view to eliminating
from their tariff such classifications".
4. The Working Party after careful consideration of the matter unanimously
agreed upon a provision in the following terms:
The Members recognize that tariff descriptions based on distinctive
regional or geographical names should not be used in such a manner as to
discriminate against products of Member countries.. Accordingly, the
Members shall co-operate with each.other and through the Organization
with a view to eliminating at the earliest practicable date practices
which are inconsistent with this principle.
5. It was agreed to recommend the inclusion of this provision as a new
pararaph to Article 35. As they consider the matter is closely related to the
principle of general most-favoured-nation treatment set out in Article 16, both
the' representative of France and the representative of the United Kingdom
have some doubts as to whether Article 35 is the appropriate place for this
provision. The representatives of France and the United Kingdom stated that
they will, if their delegations consider it advisable, take up the question
3632 ./of the position -2-
of the position in the Charter of this provision when the report is before
Committee III. To avoid any delay in drawing the attention of the
Sub-Committee A, which is dealing with Articles 16 to 19, to the matter, the
Working Party requested to Chairman to forward a copy of this report to the
Chairman of Sub-Committee A.
6. The Working Party recognizes that discrimination against the products
of member countries by tariff descriptions can take forms other than through
the use of distinctive regional or geographical names. It is not considered
practicable at this time either to list all these discriminatory practices or
to formulate a general provision covering them. The matter is undoubtedly one
which the-Organization will study, in relation to the whole question of Tariff
descriptions, under the authority to undertake studies which is already
included in the Charter. The Working Party desires, however, to make it clear
that in recommending the inclusion in the Charter of a provision directed
against the use of distinctive regional or geographical names to discriminate
against products of member countries, it is not intended to imply that other
discriminatory practices in tariff descriptions are thereby sanctioned.
7. In its examination of Article 35 with the object of finding the
most appropriate place for the new provision the Working Party agreed that a
rearrangement of the existing paragraphs of Article 35 would improve the whole
article. It therefore recommends:
(a) that the existing paragraphs be rearranged in the following order:
Paragraphs 1, 2, 5, 3, and 4.
(b) that in paragraph' 5 the words "of paragraphs 1 and 2" be inserted
after the word "provisions", appearing as the second word in the paragral.-
(c) that the provision set out in paragraph 4 of this report be
inserted as a new paragraph 6. G.O.P./W.P./7
9 January 1948
SUB-COMMITTEE C OF COMMITTEE III
ARTICIE 38 - INFORMATION, STATISTICS AND TRADE TERMINOLOGY
The delegation of Norway proposed a redreft of this Article
(E/CONF.2/C.3/10 - Item 53).
After consultation with the StatistIcal Office of the United Nations,
the delegation of Norway now wiishes to present a revised draft of its
previous proposal, for discussion in the Sub-Committee.
The text of the new version is given below. The language deleted from
the original Norwegian proposal is in equare brackets and the language added
is underlined.
Article 38
1. The Members shalI communicate [the statistics of their external trade a6]
promptly [and inasmuch detail as is reasonably practicable to the
Organization or to such agency as may be agreed upon by the Organization in
consultation with the [appropriate orgsans of the] United Nations, the
statistics relating to their exerrnal trade (imports, exports, re-exports,
governmental revenue from duties and other taxes levied on imports and
exports, and payments of subsidies directly affecting such trade). Such
statistics shall be as detailed as is reasonably practicable and shall
reveal the operation of restrictions on trade under each tariff item.
2. The Members shall publish regularly and as promptly as possible the
statistics [of their external trade.] referred to in paragraph 1 of this
Article.
3. The Members shall give careful consideration to any recommendations which
the Organization and other appropriate organs of the United Nations may make
with a view to improving the statistical information furnished regarding their
external trade.
4. The Organization shall arrange to obtain such other statistical
information as it may require for its operations through the statistical
services of the United Nations and the Specialized Agencies in accordance
with the agreements negotiated with the United Nations under Article 84 of
this Charter.
[3. The Organization, taking into account the needs of all international
agencies and in order to avoid all unnecessary duplication shall arrange in
consultation with the appropriate organs of the United Nations, for the
collection, exchange and publication of such statistics of external trade
as are appropriate to the needs of international agencies.]
[6]. 5. The Organization, in co-operation with the organs of the United Nations
/may study
2970 may study the question of adopting standards, nomenclatures, terms and forms
to be used in international trade and in the official documents and statistics
of Members relating thereto, on the basis of agreements reached with the
appropriate organs of the United Nations may recommend the general
acceptance by Members of such standards, nomenclatures, terms and forms. G.C.P/W.P/5
12 January 1948
SUB-COMMITTEE C OF COMMITTEE III
ARTICLE 38
BACKGROUND PAPER PREPARED BY THE STATISTICAL OFFICE OF THE UNITED NATIONS
CONCERNING THE REDRAFT OF ARTICLE 38 AS PROPOSED BY THE DELEGATION OF
NORWAY (E/C0NF. 2/C.3/10) AND AMENDED BY THE STATISTICAL OFFICE OF THE
UNITED NATIONS (G.C.P/W.P/7)
SCOPE AND ACTIVITIES OF THE STATISTICAL COMMISSION
AND THE STATISTICAL OFFICE OF THE UNITED NATIONS IN
THE FIELDS RELATED TO INTERNATIONAL STATISTICS AND
TRADE TERMINOLOGY
General Responsibilities
1. The Statistical Commission, having the general responsibility for
advising the Economic and Social Council on statistical matters, has been
given broad terms of reference including,
(a) promoting the development of national statistics and the
improvement of their comparability;
(b) the co-ordination of the statistical work of the Specialized
Agencies;
(c) the development of the central statistical services of the
Secretariat;
(d) advising the organs of the United Nations on general questions
relating to the collection, interpretation and dissemination of
statistical information;
(e) promoting the improvement of statistics and statistical methods
generally. (E/30, 22 February 1946 and E/76 Rev.l, 1 July 1946)
2. The responsibility of the Statistical Office of the United Nations
organized by the Secretary-General as a part of the Department of Economic
Affairs, is derived from several general recommendations of the Economic
and Social Council, end of the General Assembly. These recommendations
relate to
(a) the organization of a central statistical unit in the Secretariat
of the United Nations;
(b.) the collection, analysis and evaluation of statistics from
Member Governments, Specialized Agencies and other sources;
(c) the publication of statistics;
(d) the co-ordination of statistical activities of the Specialized
Agencies;.
/(e) the Promotion
3225 -2-
(e) the promotion of development and improvement of statistics in
general;
(f) the maintenance of an international center for statistics;
(g) the maintenance of close contact and close co-ordination with
national governments on programmes of statistical research,
submission of statistical data, analysis and publication.
(E/76 Rev.1, 1 July 1946)
3. A central statistical unit having been authorized within the United
United Nations Secretariat, the Economic and Social Council recommended
to the General Assembly that the responsibility for the statistical
activities of the League of Nations be transferred to the United Nations.
(E/76 Rev.1).
4. The General Assembly authorized the Secretary-General "to assume and
continue the non-political functions and activities of the League of Nations
previously performed by the League of Nations Secretariat". (A/64 Add.1/
50/(1), 14 December 1946). Under this authority the statistical
activities previously performed by the League of Nations Committee of
Statistical Experts, as well as those of the Economic, Financial and
Transit Department of the League of Nations Secretariat, and the
statistical work of the Economic and Financial Committees, were assumed
by the Statistical Commission of the Economic and Social Council and the
Statistical Office in the Secretariat, respectively.
Specific Responsibilities Relating to International Trade and Trade
Terminology
5. In continuing the collection and publication programme of the League
of Nations, the Statistical Office has collected and published current
international trade statistics in the Monthly Bulletin of Statistics. In
the statistical yearbook now in preparation the Statistical Office will
continue the statistical series on international trade previously published
in the Statistical Yearbook of the League of Nations. The preparation of
statistics for the continuation of such publications of the League of Nations
as the Network of World Trade, Europe's Trade, and the World Economic Survey
are now under way.
6. The Economic and Social Council has approved the program of work
for the development of an international standard industrial classification
for the statistics relating to branches of economic activity. (E/437/40 (iv),
29 March 1947). Similarly, a programme of work directed toward the
standardization of the classification of commodities entering into external
trade, a classification by personal status, and the classification of
/occupations -3-
occupations has been undertaken by the Statistical Commission and the
Statistical Office. (E/577, 23 September 1947). A Committee of the
Statistical Commission, assisted by the staff of the Statistical Office
is at work on a draft proposal for the standardization of the classification
of commodities entering into external trade. A group of expert consultants
in this field is being organized to supplement the staff of the
Statistical Office.
7. The General responsibility for studies leading toward the promotion
of international comparability of statistics of external trade, along
with other branches of statistics, has been assumed by the Committee on
Statistical Classification of the Statistical Commission of the Economic
and Social Council. G.C .P/W.P./11
19 January 1948
ARTICLE 38, INFORMATION, STATISTIC AND TRADE TERMINOLOGY
The revised draft of the proposal of the deletion of Norway after
consultation with the Statistical Office of the United Nations
(E/CONF.2/C.3/10/Add.3) as compared wth the wording of Article 38 of the
Gcneva Draft. The language deleted from the revised Norwegian proposal is
shown in square brackets, the language added is underlined.
Article 38
1. The Members shall communicate [to the Organization, or to such agency
as may be designeted for the purpose by the Organization, as] promptly [and
inasmuch detail as is reasonably practicable:] to the Organization or to such
agency as may be agreed upon by the Organization in consultation with the
United Nations, the statistics relating to their external trade (imports,
exports, re-exports, governmental revenue from duties and other taxes levied
on imports and exports, and payments of subsidies directly affecting such
trade). Such statistical shall be as detailed as is reasonably practicable
and shall reveal the operation of restrictions on trade under each tariff
item.
[(a) Statistics of their external trade in goods (imports, exports, and,
where applicable, re-export:, transit and transshipment and goods in
warehouse or in bond;
(b) Statistics of governmental revenue from import and export duties
and other taxes on goods moving in international trade and, insofar as
readily ascertainable, of subsidy payments affecting such trade.
2. So far as possible, the Statistics referred to in paragraph 1 of this
Article shall be related to tariff classifications and shall be in such
form as to reveal the operation of any restrictions on importation or
exportation which are based on, or regulated in, any manner by quantity or
value or amounts of exchange made available.]
[3.] 2. The Members shall publish regularly and as promptly as possible
the statistics referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article.
[4.] 3. The Members shall give careful consideration to any recommendations
which the Organization and other appropriate organs of the United Nations
may make [to them] with a view to improving the statistical information
furnished [under paragraph 1 of this Article.] regarding their external trade.
[5. The Members shall make available to the Organization, at its request
and insofar as is reasonably practicable, such other statistical information
as the Organization may deem necessary to enable it to fulfil its functions,
provided that such information is not being furnished to other
inter-governmental Organizations from which the Organization can obtain the
3607 /required -2-
required information.
6. The Organization shall act as assentor for collection, exchange and
publication of statistical information of the kind referred to in paragraph
1 of this Article. The Organization, in collaboration with the Economic
and Social Council of the United Nations, and with any other Organization
deemed appropriate, may engage in studies with a view to improving the
methods of collecting, analyzing and publishing economic statistics and
may promote the international comparability of such statistics, including
the possible international adoption of standard tariff and commodity
classifications.]
4. The Organization shall arrange to obtain such other statistical
information as it may require for its operations through the statistical
services of the United Nations and the specialized agencies in accordance
with the agreements negotiated with the United Nations under Article 84
of this Charter.
[7.] 5. The Organization, in co-operation with the [other organizations
referred to in paragraph 6 of this Article] organs of the United Nations
may [also] study the question of adopting standards, nomenclatures,
terms and forms to be used in international trade and in the official
documents and statistics of Members relating thereto, and on the basis of
agreements reached with the appropriate organs of the United Nations may
recommend the general acceptance by Members of such standards, nomenclatures,
terms and forms. G.C .P/W.P./15
22 January 1948
SUB-COMMITTEE C OF COMMITTEE III
ARTICLE 38
REPORT OF WORKING PARTY VI
1. The representative of the Statistical Office of the United Nations
informed the Working Party of the scope and activities of the Statistical
Commission and the Statistical Office of the United Nations in connection
with international statistics and also pointed out some instances which have
occurred of duplications of requests by Specialized Agencies of the
United Nations for statistics from various countries.
2. The Working Party recognized the need for an international centre for
statistics and for the co-ordination of statistical activities of Specialized
Agencies and were impressed with the work which the Statistical Office is
doing in these fields.
3. The representative of the Statistical Office made it clear that his
office expects the Organization to have a primary responsibility for
collection of statistics relating to external trade of Members and that it
would look to the Organization for statistical data related to that field.
4. The Members of the Sub-Committee who were members of the Working Party
considered that the proposed Norwegian redraft of Article 38 touches upon
one aspect only of detailed particulars which would have to be included in
any agreement made between the Organization and the Statistical Office. The
proposed redraft makes it mandatory for the Organization to obtain statistical
information, other then that relating to external trade, through the
statistical services of the United Nations and the Specialized Agencies.
5. Article 84 of the Geneva Draft provides that the Organization shall
make arrangements with other inter-governmental organizations which have
related responsibilities, to provide for effective co-operation and avoidance
of unnecessary duplication in the activities of the organizations. This
provision clearly is intended to deal with such matters as an agreement
between the Organization and the United Nations regarding statistics. It
is obviously undesirable to write into the Charter any details of the
agreement which should be entered into. These will have to be worked out
between the Organization and the Statistical Office when the full scope of
each other's requirements and working machinery are known, and will
presumably be altered from time to time as conditions alter.
6. With regard to the point raised by both the representatives of Norway
and the Statistical Office that instances have occurred of a duplication
of requests for statistics from countries, the Members of the Sub-Committee
3791 /on the -2-
on the Working Party consider that the following:
(a) The reference to unnecessary duplication in the activities of the
organizations set out in Article 84;
(b) The specific provision in 38:5 that Members shall make available to
the Organization at its request statistical information other than that
related to external trade, provided such information is not being
furnished to other inter-governmental organizations from which the
Organization can obtain the required information;
(c) The reference in 38:6 to collaboration by the Organization with the
Economic and Social Council and other organizations in studies with a
view to improving the methods of collecting, etc. economic statistics;
are definite and sufficient provisions on this aspect of the matter.
7. The Working Party considered the difference of substance between
paragraph 1 of the Geneva Draft of Article 38 and paragraph 1 of the Norwegian
redraft. Paragraph 1 of the Geneva Draft places an obligation on Members to
furnish to the Organization statistics of their external trade in goods, but
the redraft prepared by Norway would broaden this obligation to include
statistics of external trade relating to "services". The Working Party did
not consider such a broadening to be desirable. If the Organization requires
such statistical information it can request the information from Members under
the power given to it by the provisions of paragraph 5. Other Specialized
Agencies may be set up to deal with these services and their Charters may
require that statistical information relating to the services may be
communicated to them; it is therefore very desirable to avoid Members having
obligations to two Specialized Agencies in relation to the same statistical
information.
8. As some members of the Working Party did not consider that the position
was clear in paragraph 5, the Working Party desires to express its opinion
that the Organization has an obligation to satisfy itself that the statistical
information it requires cannot be obtained from other inter-governmental
organizations before requesting such information from Members.
9. The Working Party considered the inter-relation of paragraphs 4 and 7
of the Geneva draft. In its opinion paragraph 4 relates to the obligation
of Members to give careful consideration to recommendations made to them by
the Organization, while paragraph 7, on the other hand provides for the
Organization to co-operate in studies and make consequent recommendations to
Members.
10. It is suggested that the Sub-Committee include in its report
(a) a statement on the following lines:
/"During -3-
"During the course of its discussions of Article 38 the Sub-Committee
had the opportunity of hearing from a representative of the Statistical
Office of the United Nations particulars of the types of activities which
are being carried out by that Office in the fields of international
statistics. Members of the Sub-Committee were impressed by the work
being undertaken by the Statistical Office with the object of providing
an international centre for statistics and avoiding duplication of
demands, made by various Specialized Agencies of the United Nation to
countries for statistical information, and considered the need for the
Organization to collaborate with the United Nations and other inter-
governmental agencies in ensuring that the statistics of external trade
of Members are available in a form that will enable the statistical
information to fit into the general pattern of international statistics.
They accordingly considered it important that contact be established as
early as possible between the Organization and the United Nations
(Economic and Social Council) with a view to suitable arrangements being
made for co-operation in the fields related to international statistics."
(b) the interpretations of paragraphs 4, 5 and 7 which are given above
in paragraphs 8 and 9 of this report. G.C.P/W.P/12
20 January 1948
SUB-COMMITTEE C OF COMMITTEE III
REPORT OF DRAFTING GROUP II
ARTICLE 37
The Drafting Group, composed of representatives of France,
United Kingdom and the United States with the representative of Australia
as chairman, was instructed to consider the proposal of Uruguay contained
in item 37 of the anotated agenda (document E/CONF.2/C.3/10) and draft
a form of words to cover it.
The Drafting Group unanimously recommends the inclusion in
sub-paragraph (a) of paragraph 3 of Article 37 of an additional sentence in
the following terms:
"Suitable facilities shall be afforded for traders directly affected
by any of these matters to consult with the appropriate Governmental
authorities.
SOUS-COMMISSION C DE LA TROISIEME COMMISSION
RAPPORT DU COMITE DE REDACTION N¦ II
ARTICLE 37
Le Comité de rédaction, composé du représentant de l'Australie, pré-
sident, et des représentants des Etats-Unis, de la France et du Royaume-Uni,
a été charge d'étudier la proposition de l'Uruguay, figLrant au point 37 de
l'ordre du jour annoté (Document E/CONF.2/C.3/10) et d'établir à ce sujet
un project de rédaction.
Le Comité de rédaction A l'unanimité recomnande d'inclure à l'alinéa
(a) du paragraph 3, une phrase additionnelle ainsi libellée
"Il accordera aux commertants directement intéressés en ces matiFres
les facilités voulues pour consulter les autorités gouvernementales
compétentes."
3628 ANNEX I
CONVENTION AND STATUTE ON FREEDOM OF TRANSIT signed at BARCELONA,
20 APRIL 1921 (in force since 31 OCTOBER 1922), by the following countries:
Albania, Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Chile, Czechoslovakia,
Danzig, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France (and Syria and Lebanon),
Germany, Great Britain (and Federated Malay States, Non-Federated
Malay States, Newfoundland), Greece, Hungary, India, Iran, iraq,
Italy, Japan, Latvia, Luxembourg, the Netherlands (and the
Netherlands Indies, Surinam, Curacao), New Zealand, Norway, Poland,
Roumania, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Thailand, Turkey, Yugoslavia.
STATUTE ON FREEDOM OF TRANSIT
Article 1
Persons, baggage and goods, and also vessels, coaching and goods stock,
and other means of transport, shall be deemed to be in transit across
territory under the sovereignty or authority of one of the Contracting States,
when the passage across such territory, with or without transhipment,
warehousing breaking bulk, or change in the mode of transport, is only a
portion of a complete journey, beginning and terminating beyond the frontier
of the State across whose territory the transit takes place.
Traffic of this nature is termed in this Statute "traffic in transit."
Article 2
Subject to the other provisions of this Statute, the measures taken by
Contracting States for regulating and forwarding traffic across territory
under their sovereignty or authority shall facilitate free transit by rail
or waterway on routes in use convenient for international transit. No
distinction shall be made which is based on the nationality of persons, the
flag of vessels, the place of origin, departure, entry, exit or destination,
or on any circumstances relating to the ownership of goods or of vessels,
coaching or goods stock or other means of transport.
In order to ensure the application of the provisions of this Article,
Contracting States will allow transit in accordance with the customary
conditions and reserves across their territorial waters.
Article 3
Traffic in transit shall not be subject to any special dues in respect
of transit (including entry and exit). Nevertheless, on such traffic in
transit there may be levied dues intended solely to defray expenses of
supervision and administration entailed by such transit. The rate of any
such dues must correspond as nearly as possible with the expenses which they
are intended to cover, and the dues must be imposed under the conditions of
equality laid down in the preceding Article, except that on certain routes
such dues may be reduced or even abolished on account of differences in
/the cost
2685 -2-
the cost of supervision.
Article 4
The Contracting States undertake to apply to traffic in transit on
routes operated or administered by the State or under concession, whatever
may be the place of departure or destination of the traffic, tariffs which,
having regard to the conditions of the traffic and to considerations of
commercial competition between routes, are reasonable as regards both their
rates and the method of their application. These tariffs shall be so fixed
as to facilitate international traffic as much as possible. No charges,
facilities or restrictions shall depend, directly or indirectly, on the
nationality or ownership of the vessel or other means of transport on which
any part of the complete journey has been or is to be accomplished.
Article 5
No Contracting State shall be bound by this Statute to afford transit
for passengers whose admission into its territories is forbidden, or for
goods of a kind of which the importation is prohibited, either on grounds
of public health or security, or as a precaution against diseases of animals
or plants.
Each Contracting State shall be entitled to take reasonable precautions
to ensure that persons, baggage and goods, particularly goods which are
the subject of a monopoly, and also vessels, coaching and goods stock and
other means of transport, are really in transit, as well as to ensure that
passengers in transit are in a position to complete their journey, and to
prevent the safety of the routes and means of communication being
endangered.
Nothing in this Statute shall affect the measures which one of the
Contracting States may feel called upon to take in pursuance of general
international Conventions to which it is a party, or which may be concluded
hereafter, particularly Conventions concluded under the auspices of the
League of Nations, relating to the transit, export or import of particular
kinds of articles, such as opium or other dangerous drugs, arms or the
produce of fisheries, or in pursuance of general Conventions intended to
prevent any infringement of industrial, literary or artistic property, or
relating to false marks, false indications of origin, or other methods of
unfair competition.
Any haulage service established as a monopoly on waterways used for
transit must be so organised as not to hinder the transit of vessels.
Article 6
This Statute does not of itself impose on any of the Contracting States
a fresh obligation to grant freedom of transit to the nationals and their
/baggage -3-
baggage, or to the flag of a non-Contracting State, nor to the goods, nor
to coaching and goods stock or other means of transport coming or entering
from, or leaving by, or destined for a non-Contracting State, except when
a - valid reason is show for such transit by one of the other Contracting
States concerned. It is understood that for the purposes of this Article,
goods in transit under the flag of a Contracting State shall, if no
transhipment takes place, benefit by the advantages granted to that flag.
Article 7
The measures of a general or particular character which a Contracting
State is obliged to take in case of an emergency affecting the safety of
the State or the vital interests of the country may in exceptional cases,
and for as short a period as possible, involve a deviation from the
provisions of the above Articles; it being understood that the principle
of freedom of transit must be observed to the utmost possible extent.
Article 8
This Statute does not prescribe the rights and duties of belligerents
and neutrals in time of war. The Statute shall, however, continue in force
in time of war so far as such rights and duties permit.
Article 9
This Statute does not impose upon a Contracting State any obligations
Conflicting with its rights and duties as a Member of the League of Nations.
Article 10
The coming into force of this Statute will not abrogate treaties,
conventions and agreements on questions of transit concluded by Contracting
States before May 1st, 1921.
In consideration of such agreements being kept in force, Contracting
States undertake, either on the termination of the agreement or when
circumstances permit, to introduce into agreements so kept in force which
contravene the provisions of this Statute the modifications required to bring
them into harmony with such provisions, so far as the geographical, economic
or technical circumstances of the countries or areas concerned allow.
Contracting States also undertake not to conclude in future treaties,
conventions or agreements which are inconsistent with the provisions of this
Statute, except when geographical, economic or technical considerations.
Justify exceptional deviations therefrom.
- Furthermore, Contracting States may, in matters of transit, enter into
regional understandings consistent with the principles of this Statute.
Article 11
This Statute does not entail in any way the withdrawal of facilities
which are greater than those provided for in the Statute and have been
/granted granted, under conditions consistent with its principles, to traffic in
transit across territory under the sovereignty or authority of a Contracting
State. The Statute also entails no prohibitions of such grant of greater
facilities in the future.
Article 12
In conformity with Article 23 (e) of the Covenant of the League of Nations,
any Contracting State which can establish a good case against the application
of any provision of this Statute in some or all of its territory, on the
ground of the grave economic situation arising out of the acts of devastation
perpetrated on its soil during the war 1914-1918, shall be deemed to be
relieved temporarily of the obligations arising from the application of such
provision, it being understood that the principle of freedom of transit must
be observed to the utmost possible extent.
Article 13
Any dispute which may arise as to the interpretation or application of
this Statute which is not settled directly between the parties themselves
shall be brought before the Permanent Court of International Justice, unless,
under a special agreement or a general arbitration provision, steps are taken
for the settlement of the dispute by arbitration or sone other means.
Proceedings are opened in the manner laid down in Article 40 of the
Statute of the Permanent Court of International Justice.
In order to settle such disputes, however, in a friendly way as far as
possible, the Contracting States undertake, before resorting to any judicial
proceedings and without prejudice to the powers and right of action of the
Council and of the Assembly, to submit such disputes for an opinion to any
body established by the League of Nations, as the advisory and technical
organisation of the Members of the League in matters of communications and
transit. In urgent cases, a preliminary opinion may recommend temporary
measures intended, in particular, to restore the facilities for freedom of
transit which existed before the act or occurrence which gave rise to the
dispute.
Article 14
In view of the fact that within or immediately adjacent to the territory
of some of the Contracting States there are areas or enclaves, small in extent
and population in comparison with such territories, and that these areas or
enclaves form detached portions of settlements of other parent States, and
that it is impracticable for reasons of an administrative order to apply to
them the provisions of this Statute, it is agreed that these provisions shall
not apply to them.
/The same The same stipulation applies where a colony or dependency has a very long
frontier in comparison with its surface and where in consequence it is
practically impossible to afford the necessary Customs and police supervision.
The States concerned, however, will apply in the cases referred to above
a regime which will respect the principles of the present Statute and facilitate
transit and communications as far as practicable.
Article 15
It is understood that this Statute must not be interpreted as regulating
in any way rights and obligations inter se of territories forming part or
placed under the protection of the same sovereign State, whether or not these
territories are individually Members of the League of Nations. ANNEX II
CONVENATION IN STATUTE ON THE REGIME OF NAVIGABLE WATERWAYS ON INTERNATIONAL
CONCERN, Signed at BARCELONA, 20 APRIL 1921 (in force since 31 OCTOBER 1922),
by the following countries:
Albania, Austria, Bulgaria, Chile, Czechoslovakia, Denmark,
Finland, France, Great Britain (and Federated Malay States,
Non-Federated Malay States, Palestine, Newfoundland), Greece,
Hungary, India, Italy, Luxemburg, New Zealand, Norway, Roumania,
Sweden, Thailand and Turkey.
Article 1
In the application of the Statute, the following are declared to be
navigable waterways of-international concern:
1. All parts which are naturally navigable to and from the sea of a
waterway which in its course, naturally navigable to and from the sea,
separates or traverses different States, and also any part of any other
waterway naturally navigable to and from the sea, which connects with
the sea a waterway naturally navigable which separates or traverses
different States.
It is understood that:
(a) Transhipment from one vessel to another is not excluded by the
words "navigable to and from the sea';
(b) Any natural waterway or part of a natural waterway is termed
"naturally navigable" if now used for ordinary commercial navigation, or
capable by reason of its natural conditions of being so used; by
ordinary commercial navigation" is to be understood navigation which,
in view of the economic condition of the riparian countries, is commercial
and normally practicable;
(c) Tributaries are to be considered as separate waterways;
(d) Lateral canals constructed in order to remedy the defects of a
waterway included in the above definition are assimilated thereto.
(e) The different States separated or traversed by a navigable waterway
of international concern, including its tributaries of international
concern, are deemed to be 'riparian States".
2. Waterways, or parts of waterways, whether natural or artificial,
expressly declared to be placed under the regime of the General Convention
regarding navigable waterways of international concern either in
unilateral Acts of the States under whose sovereignty or authority these
waterways or parts of waterways are situated, or in agreements made with
the consent, inaparticular, of such States.
/Article 2
2686 - 2 -
Article 2
For the purpose of articles 5, 10, 12 and 14 of this Statute, the
following shall form a special category of navigable waterways of
international concern:
(a) Navigable waterways for which there are international Commissions
upon which non-riparian States are represented;
(b) Navigable waterways which may hereafter be placed in this category,
either in pursuance of unilateral Acts of the States under chose
sovereignty or authority they are situated, or in pursuance of
agreements made with the consent, in particular, of such States.
Article 5
As an exception to the two preceding Articles, and in the absence of
any Convention or obligation to the contrary:
1. A riparian State has the right of reserving for its own flag the
transport of passengers and goods loaded at one port situated under its
sovereignty or authority and unloaded at another port also situated
under its sovereignty or authority. A State which does not reserve
the above-mentioned transport to its own flag may, nevertheless, refuse
the benefit of equality of treatment with regard to such transport to
a co-riparian which does reserve it.
On the navigable waterways referred to in Article 2, the Act of
Navigation shall only allow to riparian States the right of reserving the
local transport of passengers or of goods which are of national origin or
are nationalised. In every case, however, in which greater freedom of
navigation may have been already established, in a previous Act of Navigation.
this freedom shall not be reduced.
2. When a natural system of navigable waterways of international
concern which does not include waterways of the kind referred to in
Article 2 separates or traverses two States only, the latter have the
right to reserve to their flags by mutual agreement the transport of
passengers and goods loaded at one port of this system and unloaded
at another port of the same system, unless this transport takes place
between two ports which are not situated under the sovereignty or
authority of the same State in the course of a voyage, effected without
transhipment on the territory of either of the said States, involving
a sea-passage or passage over a navigable waterway of international
concern which does not belong to the said system.
Article 8
The transit of vessels and of passengers and goods, on navigable
waterways of international concern shall, so far as customs formalities are
/concerned, concerned, be governed by the conditions laid down in the Statute of
Barcelona on Freedom of Transit. Whenever transit takes place without
transhipment the following additional provisions shall be applicable:
(a) When both banks of a waterway of international concern are,
within one and the same State, the customs formalities imposed on
goods in transit after they have been declared and subjected to a
summary inspection shall be limited to placing them under seal or
padlock or in the custody of customs officers;
(b) When a navigable waterway of international concern forms the
frontier between two States, vessels, passengers and goods in transit
shall while "en route" be exempt from any customs formality, except
in cases in which there are valid reasons of a practical character
for carrying out customs formalities at a place on the part of the
river which forms the frontier, and this can be done without interfering
with navigation facilities.
The transit of vessels and passengers, as well as the transit of goods
without transhipment, on navigable waterways of international concern, must
not give rise to the levying of any duties whatsoever, whether prohibited
by the Statute of Barcelona on Freedom of Transit or authorised by Article 3
of that Statute. It is nevertheless understood that vessels in transit may
be made responsible for the board and lodging of any customs officers who
are strictly required for supervision.
Article 22
Without prejudice to the provisions of paragraph 5 of Article 10, any
dispute between States as to the interpretation or application of this
Statute which is not settled directly between them shall be brought before
the Permanent Court of International Justice, unless under a special
agreement or a general arbitration provision steps are taken for the
settlement of the dispute by arbitration or some other means.
Proceedings are opened in the manner laid down in Article 40 of the
Statute of the Permanent Court of International Justice.
In order to settle such disputes, however, in a friendly way as far as
possible, the Contracting States undertake before resorting to any judicial
proceedings and without prejudice to the powers and right of action of the
Council and of the Assembly to submit such disputes for an opinion to any
body established by the League of Nations as the advisory and technical
organisation of the Members of the League in matters of communications and
transit. In urgent cases a preliminary opinion may recommend temporary
measures intended in particular to restore the facilities for free navigation
which existed before the act or occurrence which gave rise to the dispute. ANNEX III
CONVENTION AND STATUTE ON THE INTERNATIONAL REGIME OF RAILWAYS,
signed at GENEVA, 9 DECEMBER 1923 (in force since 23 MARCH 1926),
by the following countries:
Austria, Belgium, Danzig, Denmark, Estonia, Ethiopia, Finland,
France, Germany, Great Britain (for colonies, protectorates, mandates,
etc.), Greece, Hungary, India, Italy, Japan, Latvia, the Netherlands,
New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Roumania, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland,
Thailand, Yugoslavia.
EXCERPT FROM THE PREAMBLE
Recognising that international agreement in respect of railway transport
has already been the subject of many special conventions between States and
between railway administrations, and that it is precisely by means of such
special conventions that international co-operation in this domain can make
the most effective progress in the practical application of principles
established by a general convention;
Considering, however, that, so far from limiting the effect and scope
of such special conventions or interfering with direct relations and
negotiations between railway administrations, or in any way affecting the
rights of sovoreigaty or authority of States, it is, on the contrary, by a
concise and systematic codification of recognized international obligations in
respect of international railway traffic that the principles already 1
established between certain States or certain administrations can be given the
widest possible extension, and that in the future the conclusion of new
special conventions, to suit the requirements and developments of
international traffic, can be facilitated in the greatest possible measure;
STATUTE.
Article 4
Recognising the necessity of granting sufficient elasticity in the
operation of railways to allow the complex needs of traffic to be met, it is
the intention of the contracting States to maintain unimpaired full freedom
of operation while ensuring that such freedom is exercised without detriment
to international traffic.
They undertake to give reasonable facilities to international traffic.
and to refrain from all discrimination of an unfair nature directed against
the other Contracting States, their nationals of their vessels.
The benefit of the provisions of the present article is not confined to
traffic governed by a single contract; it extends also to the traffic dealt
with in Articles 21 and 22 of the present Statute subject to the conditions
specified in the said articles.
/Article 19
2687 -2-
Article 19
As regards international traffic, the railways may not levy, over and
above the charges fixed in the tariffs applicable to any particular traffic,
any charges other than those which constitute an equitable remuneration for
services which are not covered by the charges fixed in the tariffs.
Article 20
The Contracting States, recognising the necessity in general of leaving
tariffs sufficient flexibility to permit of their being adapted as closely as
possible to the complex needs of trade and commercial competition, retain full
freedom to frame their tariffs in accordance with the principles accepted by
their own legislation, provided that this freedom is exercised without
detriment to international traffic.
They undertake to apply to international traffic tariffs which are
reasonable both as regards their amounts and the conditions of their
application, and undertake to refrain from all discrimination of an unfair
nature directed against the other Contracting States, their nationals or their
vessels.
These provisions shall not prevent the establishment of combined rail and
sea tariffs which comply with the principles laid down in the previous
paragraphs.
Article 35
Should a dispute arise between two or more Contracting States as to the
interpretation or the application of the present Statute, and should it prove
impossible to settle such dispute either directly between the Parties or by
any other method of amicable settlement, the Parties to the dispute may, before
resorting to any procedure of arbitration or to a judicial settlement, submit
the dispute for an advisory opinion to the body established by the League of
Nations as the advisory and technical organisation of Members of the League
for matters of communications and transit. In urgent cases, a preliminary
opinion may be given recommending temporary measures, including measures to
restore the facilities for international traffic which existed before the
act or occurrence which gave rise to the dispute.
Should it prove impossible to settle the dispute by any of the methods
of procedure enumerated in the preceding paragraph, the Contracting State
shall submit their dispute to arbitation unless they have decided, or shall
decide, under an agreement between them, to bring it before the Permanent
Court of International Justice.
/Article 36 -3-
Article 36
If the case is submitted to the Permanent Court of International
Justice, it shall be heard and determined under the conditions laid
down in Article 27 of the Statute of the Court.
If arbitration is resorted to, and unless the Parties decide otherwise,
each Party shall appoint an arbitrator, and a third member of the arbitral
tribunal shall be elected by the arbitrators, or, in case the latter are
unablo to agree, shall be selected by the Council of the League of Nations
from the list of assessors for communications and transit cases mentioned
in Article 27 of the Statute of the Permanent Court of International Justice;
in such latter case the third arbitrator shall be selected in accordance
with the provisions of the penultimate paragraph of Article 4 and the
first paragraph of Article 5 of the Covenant of the League.
The arbitral tribunal shall judge the case on the basis of the terms
of reference mutually agreed upon between the Parties. If the Parties
have failed to reach an agreement, the arbitral tribunal acting unanimously
shall itself draw up terms of reference after considering the claims
formulated by the Parties; if unanimity cannot be obtained, the Council
of the League of Nations shall decide the terms of reference under the
conditions laid down in the preceding paragraph. If the procedure is
not determined by the terms of reference, it shall be settled by the
arbitral tribunal.
During the course of the arbitration the Parties, in the absence of
any contrary provision in the terms of reference, are bound to submit
to the Permanent Court of International Justice any question of
international law or question as to the legal meaning of this Statute the
solution of which the arbitral tribunal, at the request of one of the
Parties, pronounces to be a necessary preliminary to the settlement of
the dispute. ANNEX IV
CONVENTION AND STATUTE ON THE lNTERNATIONAL REGIME OF MARITIME PORTS, RGIYM ? MRAT'I1, PORT,
sig1ed at GENEA, 9 D3CEOMER U923 (in force since 26 JMLY 1926), by the
fofloving countries:
Australia, Austria, Belgium, Czechoslovakia, Denmark, Estonia,
France, Germany Great Britain (for colonies, protectorates,
Hmandates, etc.,$ Greece, ungary, India, Iraq, Italy, Japan, Mexico,
the Netherlands, (and the Netherlands Indies, Six.rinam, Curacao),
NameaAew Zewayaland (and wWWestern ), Nor, Sweden, itzerland,
Thailand, Yugoslavia).
Artire 5
In assessing and applying Customs and other analogous duties, local
octroi or consumption duties, or incidental charges, levied on the
importation or exportation of goods through the maritime ports situated
under the sovereignty or authority of the Contracting States, the flag
of the vessel must not be taken into account, and accordingly no
distinction may be made to the detriment. of the flag of any Contracting
State whatsoever as between that flag and the flag of the State umder
whose sovereignty or authority the port is situated, or the flag of any
other State whatsoever.
Article 6
In order that the principle of equal treatment in maritime ports
laid down in Article 2 may not be rendered ineffective in practice by the
adoption of other methods of discrimination against the vessels of a
Contracting State ueing such ports, each Contracting State undertakes to
apply the provisions of Articles 4, 20, 21 and 22 of the Statute annexed
to the ConventioTn on the international Rgime of Railways, signed at
Geneva on Dorbe 9, 1923, so far as they are applicable to traffic to
or frome a martitime port, whther or not such Contractine State is a party
to the said Convention oTn mthe Intelrnational Rgie of Raiways. The
aforesaid Articles are to be interpreted in conformity with the provisions
of the protocol of Signature of the said Convention.
Article 7
Unless there are special reasons justifying an exception, such as
those based upon special geographical, economic, or technical conditions,
the Customs duties levied in any maritime port situated under the
sovereignty or authority of a Contracting State may not exceed the duties
levied on the other Customs frontiers of the said State on goods of the same
kind, source or destination.
If, for special reasons as set out above, a Contracting State grants
2688 /special -2.
special Customs facilities on other routes for the importation or exportation
of goods, it shall not use these facilities as a means of discriminating
unfairly against importation or exportation through the maritime ports
situated under its sovereignty or authority.
Article 17
No Contracting State shall be bound by this Statute to permit the
transit of passengers whose admission to its territories is forbidden,
or of goods of a kind of which the importation is prohibited, either on
grounds of public health or security, or as a precaution against diseases
of animals or plants. As regards traffic other than traffic in transit,
no Contracting State shall be bound by this Statute to permit the
transport of passengers whose admission to its territories is forbidden,
or of goods of which the import or export is prohibited, by its national
laws .
Article 20
This Statute does not entail in any way the withdrawal of facilities
Which are greater than those provided for in the Statute and which have
been granted in respect of the use of maritime ports under conditions
consistent with its principles. This Statute also entails no prohibition
of such grant of greater facilities in the future.
Article 21
Without prejudice to the provisions of the second paragraph of
Article 8, disputes which may arise between Contracting States as to the
interpretation or the application of the present Statute shall be settled
in the following manner:
Should it prove impossible to settle such dispute either directly
between the Parties or by any other method of amicable settlement, the
Parties to the dispute may, before resorting to any procedure of
arbitration or to a Judicial settlement, submit the dispute for an
advisory opinion to the body established by the League of Nations as the
advisory and technical organisation of Members of the League for matters
of communications and transit. In urgent cases a preliminary opinion
may be given recommending temporary measures, including measures to
restore the facilities for international traffic which existed before
the act or occurence which gave rise to the dispute.
Should it prove impossible to scttle the dispute by any of the methods
of procedure enumerated in the preceding paragraph, the Contracting States
shall submit their dispute to arbitration, unless they have decided or
shall decide, under an agreement between them, to bring it before the
Permanent Court of International. Justice.
/Article 22 -3-
Article 22
If the case is submitted to the Permanent Court of International
Justice, it shall be heard and determined under the conditions laid
down in Article 27 of the Statute of the Court.
If arbitration is resorted to, and unless the Parties decide otherwise,
each Party shall appoint an arbitrator, end a third member of the arbitral
tribunal shall be elected by the arbitrators, or, in case the latter are
unable to agree, shall be selected by the Council of the League of Nations
from the list of assessors for Communications and Transit cases mentioned
in Article 27 of the Statute of the Permanent Court of International
Justice; in such latter case, the third arbitrator shall be selected in
accordance with the provisions of the penultimate paragraph of Article 4
and the first paragraph of Article 5 of the Covenant of the League.
The arbitral tribunal shall Judge the case on the basis of the terms
of reference mutually agreed upon between the Parties. If the Parties
have failed to reach an agreement, the arbitral tribunal, acting
unanimously, shall itself draw up terms of reference after considering
the claims formulated by the Parties; if unanimity cannot be obtained,
the Council of the League of Nations ations shall decide the terms of reference
under the conditions laid down in the preceding paragraph. If the
procedure is not determined by the terms of reference, it shall be
settled by the arbitral tribunal.
During the course of the arbitration the Parties, in the absence of
any contrary provision in the terms of reference, are bound to submit
to the Permanent Court of International Justice any question of
international law or question as to the legal meaning of this Statute
the solution of which the arbitral tribunal, at the request of one of
the Parties, pronounces to be a necessary preliminary to the settlement
c the dispute. ANNEX V
INTERNATIONAL CONVENTION CONCERNING THE TRANSPORT CONOODS K;C RAIL THE TRA3PCORT OF Gcors BY ]RAM1
(counonly known as t.M.he BMW CNMIO, abbrevon - C.I..) signed a
ROME, 23 November 1933 (in force since 1 October 1938) by the following
countries:
Austria, BelgiDaniigIGzeum) Bulgaria, Czechoslovak, Denmark,
Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Latvia,
LiechtetTnstein, Lithuania, Luxemburg,he Netherlands, Norway, Poland,
Portugal, Rounnia, Spain, Sweden, Swritzerland, Turkey, Yugoslavia.
Article 1
Railvys and Traffic to be Governed by the Convention
1. The present Convention shall apply to all consignments of goods
despatched under a through way-bill for transport over the territory of at
least ti of the contracting States, when such transport is entirely confined
to lines included in the list drawn up in accordance with Article 58 of the
present Convention.
2. The present Convention shall not, however, apply to:
(1) Cases in which the stations of departure and arrival are both
in the territory of the same State, the territory of another State
only being crossed in transit:
(a) When the lines over which transit is effected are operated
by a railby of the State of departure;
(b) When the railways concerned have concluded special agreements
in virtue of which such transport is not to be regarded as
international even if the lines over which transit is effected
are not operated by a railway of the State of departure.
(2) Transport between stations of two adjacent States, if entirely
effqtd over the railways of one of those States, provided always
that the consignor, by his choice of way-bill form, claims the
application of the intergnal regulations governin; such railways,
and that neirnther of the States conceed objects thereto.
Article 2
Provisions Concerning Combined Transport
1. On the list referred to in Article 1 may be entered, in addition to
railways, regular motor transport or boat services which are complementary to
railway services, and carry international traffic under the responsibility
of the contrawcting State or of a railay included in the list.
2. Such undertakings shall be subject to all the obligations, and shall
/be entitled
2769 be entitled to all the rights, imposed or conferred on railways by the
present Convention, subject to any modification necessitated by differences
in methods of transport. Such modifications shall not, however, in any way
affect the rules as to liability laid down in the present Convention.
3. Any State desiring to have one of the services referred to in
Paragraph 3. included in the list shall take the necessary steps to have the
modifications contemplated in Paragraph 2 published in the same manner as
the tariffs.
4. For international traffic utilising both railways and transport services
other than those defined in Paragraph 1 above, the railways may, in ,
conjunction with the transport undertakings concerned, lay down tariff
conditions differing, in their legal bearings, from those of the present
Convention, so as to allow for the peculiarities of each mode of transport.
They may, in that event, provide for the use of a transport document other
than that prescribed by the present Convention.
Article 9
Tariffs - Prohibition of Private Agreements
1. Transport charges and subsidiary charges shall be calculated according
to the tariffs legally in force and duly published in each State.
Nevertheless, the publication of international tariffs shall only be
compulsory in the States whose railways are concerned in such tariffs as
lines of departure or arrival,
Increases in international tariffs and other measures calculated to
render the conditions of transport therein laid down more onerous shall
not become effective until fifteen days at the earliest after their -
publication.
The tariffs shall contain all necessary information for the calculation
of transport charges and subsidiary charges and specify to what, if any,
extent allowance is to be made for rates of exchange.
2. The tariffs shall indicate all the special. conditions attaching to the
transport of variuso classes of goods and more particularly the freight
speed to which they refer. If for all or certain classes of good, or over
certain routes, a railway applies a tariff providing for only one freight
speed, such tariff may be applied to goods transported under either the
vite way-bill or the way-bUll with red bands, subject to the conditions
in the matter of time of delivery resulting for each category of way-bill
from the provisions of Article 6, Paragraph 4, and Article 11.
The tariffs shall be uniformly applied to all persons concerned. The
conditions laid down therein shall be valid unless contrary to the present
/Convention, in -3-
Convention, in which case they shall be regarded as null and void,
3. Any private agreement purporting to grant a reduction in the tariff
rates to one or more consigners is strictly forbidden and shall be null
and void. I
Nevertheless, reductions in rates shall be permissible if duly published
and equally open to all; redumctions ay likewise be made for the benefit of
the railway service, public services or charitgable oranisations.
4.ums No s shall be collected on behalf of the railways, over and above
the transport charges and various subsidiary charges provided for in the
tariffs, other than sums disbursed by them, such as Customs duties, octroi
and police charges, cost of cartage from one station to another not included
in the tariff, cost of repairs to the outer or inner packing of goods
necessary for their preservation, and other similar disbursements. Such
disbursements shall be duly certified and separately detailed own the ay-bill
to which the vouchers shall be attached. If the sums disbursed are to be
charged to thgne consior, the vouchers shall not be handed over to the
consignee with the way-bill, but shall be sent -to the consignor with an
account of the sums paid out, as provided in Article 17.
The amount of any surcharges, together wigth the rounds for their
collection, shall be mentioned in the way-bill.
Article 10
Calculation of Transport Charges - Routes
The following rules shall be observed in the calculation of charges
and the choice of routes:
(a) If the consignor has indicated on the way-bill that a certain
route is to be followed, the transport charge shall be calculated
for that route.
Designation of the stations at which formalities required by
the Customs, octroi, fiscal, police or other administrative authorities
are to be completed shall be equivalent in an indication of the route.
(b) If, in the waybill, the conhsignor as only stated which tariffs
are to be applied, the railway slhall aply such tariffs in so far as
the instructions are sufficient efor detrmining the statiweeons betn
which the tariffs claimed are to be appleied. Th railway shall choose
from among the various routes on which such tariffs are in force on
the day of the concolusion f the transport contract that route which
appears to it to be most advantageous for the consignor.
(c) Should the consignor state on the waybill, in the manner
prescribed in Article 17, Paragraph 2, that transport charges shall
/be paid in be paid in advance as far as an intermediate station, the railway
shall choose from among the routes passing through the said
intermediate station that which appears to it to be most
advantageous for the consignor. Transport charges shall be calculated
at for the route chosen by the railway.
(d) If, in the circumstances provided for in (a) and (c) above, there
is a through international tariff between the station of despatch and
the station of destination over the route requested as under (a) or
between the station of despatch and that referred to under (c), such
tariff shall be applied, provided that at the time of despatch its
application is not subject to conditions which are not fulfilled
in the case concerned.
(o) Should the particulars given by the consignor be insufficient to
determine the route or tariffs or should they be contradictory, the
railway shall choose the route of tariffs which appear to it to be
most advantageous for the consignor. The railway shall, in every
case, comply with the indications given on the why-bill in respect
of the stations referred to in the second paragraph of (a), and as
far as possible with the consignor's other instructions.
Nevertheless, should there be-a through international tariff
between the station of despatch and the station of destination, such
tariff shall be applied, provided that the route which it involves
complies with the instructions, if any, on the way-bill with regard
to the stations referred to in the second paragraph of (a), and that
its application is not subject to other conditions which are not
fulfilled in the case concerned.
(f) In all the cases referred to above, the delivery period shall
be reckoned in accordance with the route indicated by the consignor
or chosen by the railway.
(g) The railway shall not transport goods by a route.other than that
indicated by the consignor, save in the cases referred to in Article 5,
Paragraph 5 and Article 23, Paragraph 1, unless:
(1) The transport charges and the time required for delivery
do not exceed those for the route indicated by the consignor;
(2) The formalitics required by the Custums, octroi, fiscal,
police and other administrative authorities, as woll as the feeding
of live animals, are invariably carried out at the stations
mentioned by the consignor.
The consignor shall be notified that transport is taking place by
a route other than that which he indicated.
/(h) In the cases -5-
(h) In the cases referred to in (b), (c) and (e), the railway shall
not be liable for any prejudice caused by its choice of route or
tariffs, except in the case of wilful miscondut or gross negligence.
(1) Should the railway, in applying the provisions of (d) and the
second paragraph of (e) above, apply a through international tariff
providing for a higher charge than that which would result, on the
same route, from the combination of other tariffs, when the conditions
for the application of such tariffs are fulfilled, the railway shall
at the request of the person entitled thereto, refund the balance. |
GATT Library | vb189xm0647 | Notes on Ninetenth Meeting : Held at the Capitol, vana, Cuba, 17 January 1948, at 3.00 p.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 17, 1948 | Joint Sub-Committee of Committees II and VI | 17/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.26/A/W.21, E/CONF.2/C.2/D/W.1-3, C.23/A/W.1-3, and C.26/A/W.1-29 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/vb189xm0647 | vb189xm0647_90180376.xml | GATT_146 | 125 | 976 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE W.21 2
~~~~~~~~~~~~17 January 1948
ON ENGLI FRENCH DU LISH -
TRADEOANALEPMLLOENGOISHOYM NAL ENG ISHCOMMERCE gEDE L'PI RIGI: L
JOINT VI SIMOITTFCITTUS II AND
NOTES ON NIETEHTHETING
HeldHa at the Capitol, vana, Cuba, 17 January 1948, at 3.00 p.m.
ChairmanB: Dr. E Ci.) COOMS (Austral-
The Sub-Comittee commnenced discussit paragraphs 1 and 2 of new
Article 11 A Proposed .by Chile (pages 12 a.nd 13 of E/CONF2/C.2/9).
S¢SMIXTCOISSIONEU IEME E DES DPXE
MMLSI IEC04QIONS
NOTE DENEU LAM SEANCEDIX VIEE
tenue au CapitHolae, La avne, Cuba, le 17 Janvier 1948 15 heures.
Preident: M. H.M C.aCOOBS (Aeustrali)
-cLa Sosimmmiomsaoce l'examnne corndes paragraphes 1 et 2
du novelc artcle 11 A pTropos par le Chili (page 11 du Document
FE/COX2/C.2/9). |
GATT Library | yd622bb7594 | Notes on Ninth Meeting : Held on 7 January 1948 at 10.30 a.m. in Conference room B | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 8, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Sub-Committee C: General Commercial Provisions (Articles 32 - 39) | 08/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/C/W.9 and E/CONF.2/C.3/A/WHITE PAPERS/C.3/B/W.1-7/C.3/C/W.1-16 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/yd622bb7594 | yd622bb7594_90190507.xml | GATT_146 | 482 | 3,356 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C.3/C/W.9
ON DU 8 January 1948c48
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET D'ENPMELLOI R INALOIGENGLISHI: GLY
TI CITTOOMMEE MMER CO4ICL POLICY
S-COMMITTEE C ON ENEGvOL CMMO1kLCIAL PROVISIONS
(Articles 32 - 39)
NOTES ON NINTd MEETING
Held on 7 January 1948 at 10.30. a.m. in Conference Room B
Chairman: Mr C. E. MORTON (Australia)
ARTICLE 33 - ANTI-DUMPING AND COUNTEVALING DUTIES
Paragraph 5, third sentence
1. In the course of the discussion of this third sentence the representative
of Cuba withdraw his amendment (Paragraph 7 - Item 10) and the Sub-CmMmittee
accepted the last sentence of this paragraph as given in the Geneva Draft.
ARTICLE 34 - VALUATION FoA CUSTOMS PURPOSES (E/CONF.2/C.3/10 and
E/CONF.2/C.3/C/9)
Paragrph 1
2. The Sub-Committee approved paragraph 1 as given in the Geneva Draft.
Paragraph 2
First sertene
3. The Sub-Cmomittee discussed the Note in the Geneva Draft (Item 26).
The CHAIRMAN stated that, in the opinion of the Sub-Committee, this Note adh
neither an explicative nor an interpretative value. It should therefore be
deleted, and its content included in the Report of the Sub-Committee.
The Sub-Ccnmittee approved the first sentence as given in the Geneva
Draft.
Second sentence
4. Te Sub-Cmomitte ediscussed the proposal of Argentina (Item 27) to
delete the words "upon a request by another Member". This amendment was
replaced by the representative of Argentina during the discussion by a
suggestion for the insertion of the words "directly affected" after the
words "another Member" in the Geneva Draft. The Sub-Committee agreed,
and consequently the words "directly affected" were inserted after the
words "another Member". The second sentence thus amended was approved.
/Third sentence E/CONF.2/C. 3/C/W.9
Page 2
Third sentence
5. The Sub-Committee approved the third sentence as given in the
Geneva Draft.
Paragraph 3 (a) and 3 (b)
6. The Sub-Committee discussed the amendments to these sub-paragraphs
presented by the Delegations of Uruguay (Item 28) and Chile (Item 29),
It was agreed to establish a Working Party consisting of the
representatives of France, United Kingdom, United States and Uruguay, with
the representatives of Chile as observer, to examine these two amendments
with the following terms of reference:
'To consider whether any temporary provision for existing
customs systems utilizing arbitrarily fixed values should be
agreed by means of an interpretative Note, or by inclusion in the
text. "
Item 30
7. The Sub-Committee discussed the amendment proposed by the
Delegation of Uruguay dealing with customs valuation of primary products
when sold under government contracts. In the course of the discussion
the representative of Uruguay amended his proposal by replacing the word
"shall" by "may". The Sub-Committee accepted the proposal of Uruguay
and. agreed to incorporate it in the Note of the Geneva Draft (Item 31) by
inserting after the words "invoice price", the following language in
brackets "(in the case of government contracts in respect of primary
products, the contract price)". |
GATT Library | zw724rr7461 | Notes on Ninth Meeting : Held on Friday, 23 January 1948, at 10.30 a.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 24, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Sub-Committee F (Articles 21, 23 and 24) | 24/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/F/W.20 and E/CONF.2/C.3/F/W.1-31/REV.2 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/zw724rr7461 | zw724rr7461_90190582.xml | GATT_146 | 401 | 2,830 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C. 3/F/W.20
24 January 1948
ON DU
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
THIRD COMMITTEE: COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUB-COMMITTEE F (ARTICLE: 21, 23 AND 24)
NOTE ON NINTH MEETING
Held on Friday, 23 January 1948, at 10.30 a.m.
Chairman: J.MELANDER (Norway)
CONSIDERATION OF REPORT OF WORKING PARTY ON ARTICLE 21 (C.3/F/W.19)
Mr. J. A. GUERRA. (Cuba), Chairman of the Working Party on Articles 21
and 23, presented a report dealing with amendments to Article 21 submitted
by the delegations of Belgium (C.3/F/W.6) and Australia. (Items 28 and 33)
of the Annotated Agenda).
After general discussion the Sub-Committee considered the proposed
new paragraph 1 of Article 21, section by section. It was agreed that the
principle of paragraph 1 sub-paragraph. (a) was acceptable, subject to
drafting changes which might be made in sections (iii) and (iv) for the
purpose of bringing out clearly the intention of the provisions. The
CHAIRMAN asked the delegates for Belgium, Cuba, Czechoslovakia, Norway,
the United Kingdom and the United States to meet informally to suggest
such changes if necessary and to report to the next meeting of the
Sub-Committee.
The Sub-Committee agreed to the text of paragraph 1 sub-paragraph (b)
as submitted by the Working Party.
The Sub-Committee agreed on the redraft of present paragraph 2 (b) of
Article 21 as recommended by the working Party. In connection with this
paragraph it was pointed out that the French translation was inconsistent
with the English text and on the suggestion of the delegate for Belgium
it was agreed that the first sentence of the French text should read as
follows:
"Un Etat Membre appliquant des restrictions en vertu de
l'alinTa (a) devra lee attTnuer progressivement Jusqu'a suppression
complFte, au fur et a mesure que sa position financiFre extTrieure
s'amTliorera, conformOment aux dispositions du dit alinTa."
The Sub-Committee agreed with the recommendation of the Working Party
/to amend E/CONF.2/C.3/F/W.20
Page 2
to amend present paragraph 3 (c) (iii) by adding the following phrase at
the end of the paragraph: "including interests under Articles 3 and 9".
After discussion, the Sub-Committee approved the following sentence
to be inserted as the first sentence of paragraph 4 (a) of the Geneva text:
"In consultations between a Member and the Organization
under this paragraph, there shall be full and free discussion
as to the various causes and the nature of the Member's
balance-of-payments difficulties." |
GATT Library | qy285xy4573 | Notes on Ninth Meeting, held on Wednesday, 7 January 1948 | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 7, 1948 | Joint Sub-Committee of Committees II and III on Tariff Preferences and Joint Sub-Committee of Committees II and III: Tariff Preferences | 07/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.23/A/W.9, E/CONF.2/C.2/D/W.1-3, C.23/A/W.1-3, and C.26/A/W.1-29 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/qy285xy4573 | qy285xy4573_90180348.xml | GATT_146 | 233 | 1,720 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C.3&3/A/
ON DU 7 January 1948
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI E
SE.ND AND ITTEES COMUM
JOMMIIFEESB-COBRrFFITMREFERENeEN TAP P'CS
Notes on Ninth Meeting, Held on Wednesday, 7 January 1948
Chairman: Mr. S. Sahlin (Sweden)
The delegatges af Belium, Canada, Poland end Sweden stated their views
on the proposals to pereit new preferential arrangcments under Article 16.
Other delegates joined in the discussion and the Sub-Committee then agreed to
proceed at the next meeting with the discussion of the proposals on
Article 42.
The delegate of Portugal addressed the Sub-Committee in support of his
proposal (Item 7 in the Revised Annotated Agenda E/CONF.2/C.3/6) that a new
Annex be inserted with reference to paragraph 2 (b) of Article 16 exempting
from most-favoured-nation treatment the preferences in force exclusively
beteeen Portugal and Portugueso overseas territories. The Sub-Committee agreed
to recommend that the proposed Annex be inserted in the Charter.
At the conclusion of the meeting, the Chairman proposed that the
Working Party, to examine the details of the proposals which had been
submitted to the Conference, should be established without further delay,
and he suggested that it should be composed of the delegates of Chile, France,
Poland, Turkey, United Kingdom and United States. Five other delegates
expressed their desire to serve on the Working Party, and the Chairman
decided to defer its appointment until the next meeting. |
GATT Library | gw000qr1790 | Notes on Second Meeting : Held Monday, 12 January 1948 at 10.30 a.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 13, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Sub-Committee B (proposed new Article 18A) | 13/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/B/W.1/Rev.1 and E/CONF.2/C.3/A/WHITE PAPERS/C.3/B/W.1-7/C.3/C/W.1-16 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/gw000qr1790 | gw000qr1790_90190489.xml | GATT_146 | 320 | 2,238 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C.3/B/
ON DU W.1/Rev.1
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI 13 January 1948 ORIGINAL: ENGLISH :
HTIRD CMMOTTEE: CMMERRCIAL POLICY
US-=COMMITEE B (PRPOOESDNE W ARTICLE 18A)
NOTE ON SCEOND MEETING
aAld Monday, 12 January 1948 at 10.30 a.m.
(Reference:E C/NFO .2/C.3/6 Item 76)
Chairman: Dr. J. E. HLOOLWAY (Union of South Africa)
The delegate of Sweden made a statement supporting the proposal.
After final statements by the delegate of India on behalf of the
countries opposing the proposal,aAnd of the delegate of Norwy aon behalf
of those supporting it, the general debate was closed.
The Chairman-summing up the position stated that the Norwegian
amenmdent was a proposali n definite terms to add new obligations on
Members and to ban practices not banned by the existing draft of the
Charter. .sA such it admitted only of a positive or negative report.
As the proposal involved the assumption by prospective Members of new
obligations he was of the opinion that a substantial preponderance of
support for the Norwegian proposal was required before the Sub-Committee
could reocmmend its acceptance by Comittee III. In his opinion such
preponderant support was not forthcoming. The Committee was equally divided
on the desirability of its inclusion, and of the six delegations, not members
of the Sub-ommCittee, which had expressed views on the subject four opposed
its inclusion.
In the absence of any other proposal before the Sub-oCmmittee the
Chair was of the opinion that the Sub-Cmomittee could only report that it
could not recommend the inclusion of the proposed Article 18A.
The representatives of the United Kingdom and Norway stated that they
were preparing a compromise proposal. Its terms, however, depended on the
final text of the Chapter on Restrictive Practices and would be submitted
immediately after Committee IV had completed its work. They suggested,
therfoere, that the Sub-ommCittee should ajdourn for a short period. This
was agreed to. |
GATT Library | zd924fs4614 | Notes on Second Meeting : Held Monday, 12 January 1948 at 1O.30 a.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 12, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Sub-Committee B (proposed new Article 18A) | 12/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/B/W.1 and E/CONF.2/C.3/A/WHITE PAPERS/C.3/B/W.1-7/C.3/C/W.1-16 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/zd924fs4614 | zd924fs4614_90190488.xml | GATT_146 | 189 | 1,403 | RESTRICTED
United Nations Nations Unies E/CONF.2/C.3/B/W.1
12 January 1948
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE
ON DU ORIGINAL ENGLISH
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI
THIRD COMMTTEE: COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUB-COMMITTEE B (PROPOSED NEW ARTICLE 18A)
NOTES ON SECOND MEETING
Held Monday, 212 January 1948 at 1O.30 a.m.
(Reference: E/CONF.2/C.3/6, Item 76)
Chairman: Dr. J. E. HOLLOWAY (Union of South Africa)
The Delegate of Sweden made a statement supporting the proposal.
After final statements by the Delegate of India on behalf of the
countries opposing the proposal, and of the Delegate of Norway on behalf
of these supporting it, the general debate was closed.
The Chairman summing up the position stated that the Sub-Committee
would have to report the failure of its task, unless new amendments were
submitted with a view to a compromise solution.
The representatives of the United Kingdom and Norway pointed out that
their delegations were preparing such amendments. These depended, however,
on the final text of the Chapter on Restrictive Practices and would be
submitted immediately after Committee IV had completed its work, They
suggested, therefore, tbat the Sub-Ccmmittee should adjourn for a short
period. This was agreed to. |
GATT Library | wn208yw2413 | Notes on Second Meeting : Held on Friday, 2 January 1948, at 10:30 a.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 2, 1948 | Second Committee: Economic Development and Sub-Committee B (Article 12) | 02/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.2/B/W.4, E/CONF.2/C.2/B/W.1-14, and C.2/C/W.1-13 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/wn208yw2413 | wn208yw2413_90180304.xml | GATT_146 | 107 | 783 | United Nations
CONFERENCE
ON
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT
Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C.2/B/W.4
CONFERENCE 2 January 1948
DU
COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
SECOND COMMITTEE: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
SUB-COMMITTEE B (ARTICLE 12)
NOTES ON SECOND MEETING
Held on Friday, 2 January 1948, at 10:30 a.m.
Chairman:Mr. J. G. TORRES (Brazil)
(Reference: E/CONF.2/C.2/9)
ARTICLE 12
1. The general discussion was concluded.
Paragraph 2
Page 17 - United States Amendment
2. After a lengthy discussion in which several delegates expressed
dissatisfaction both with the present wording of the paragraph and with
the draft of the United States amendment, Mr. RUBIN (United States)
offered to redraft his amendment. This was agreed. |
GATT Library | ck784wz6467 | Notes on Second Meeting : Held on Thursday, 15 January 1948, at 6.00 p.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 16, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Sub-Committee G (Swiss Proposal) | 16/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/G/W.2 and E/CONF.2/C.3/F/W.31/REV.2-32/G/W.1-13/H/W.1-9 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/ck784wz6467 | ck784wz6467_90190604.xml | GATT_146 | 196 | 1,267 | United Nations
CONFERENCE
ON
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT
Nations Unies
CONFERENCE
DU
COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI
RESTRICTED
E/CONF.2/C.3/G/W.2
16 January 1948
ORIGINAL:ENGLISH
THIRD COMMITTEE: COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUB-COMMITTEE G (SWISS PROPOSAL)
NOTES ON SECOND MEETING
Held. on Thursday, 15 January 1948, at 6.00 p.m.
Chairman: Mr. L. P. THOMPSON-McCAUSLAND (United Kingdom)
The CHAIRMAN submitted a working draft stating that he had prepared.
it in an attempt at balancing, on the one hand, the specific difficulties
of a country in the particular situation which the original proposal had.
in mind, and on the other hand, the claim to consideration which such a
country had by reason of the advantages it offered to the rest of the
world as a result of that situation.
In the ensuing debate several delegates welcomed the draft as a
useful basis for discussion, while to others it appeared too narrow.
The CHAIRMAN suggested that the Sub-Committee should first examine
which significant economic factors, if any, would appear to justify a
Provision of the type proposed, and to limit the discussion at the next
meeting to this point, before proceeding to consider the scope, wording
and location of the provision, This was unanimously agreed to. |
GATT Library | yg858pp4142 | Notes on Second Meeting : Held Thursday, 15 January 1948 at 10.30 a.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 15, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Sub-Committee J (State Trading) | 15/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/J/W.2, E/CONF.2/C.3/H/W.9/C.3/J/W.1-8, and C.3/J/WHITE PAPERS | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/yg858pp4142 | yg858pp4142_90190628.xml | GATT_146 | 326 | 2,223 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
E/CONF.2/C.3/J/w.2
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE 15 January 1948
ON DU
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
THIRD COMMITTEE: COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUB-COMMITTEE J (STATE TRADING)
NOTE ON SECOND MEETING
Held Thursday, 15 January 1948 at 10.30 a.m.
(Reference: E/CONF .2/C .3/9)
Chairman: Right Hon. Walter NASH (New Zealand)
1. Item 13 (United States): After prolonged debate tho representative of
the United States suggested that an alternative amendment of the last
phrase of paragraph 1 (b), to read: ....... imports, which is comparable
with a limitation that is subjeuct to negotiation in the case of private
enterprises elsewhere in the Charter, might be genrally acceptable.
It was decided to refer this proposal to working Group I dealing with
the Note on "privileges" (Item 3), consisting of the representatives of
Czechoslovakia, Mexico and the United States, and to add to it as further
members the representatives of Switzerland and the United Kingdom.
2. Item 8 (b): Thu note on different prices in different markets" was
also referred to Working Group I.
3. Item 14 (Cuba): The delegate of Cuba explained the proposal and
stated that there was no objection to it being redrafted. He undertook to
submit a written statement. The discussion was accordingly deferred until
the next meeting.
4. A question raised by the delegate of Czechoslovakia relating to the
final paragraph of paragraph 2 was referred to Working Group I.
5. Items 7 and 8 (a) (New Zealand proposal and Note): The delegate of the
United Status was added to the Working Group II which is considering this
question.
6. New Item (Joint Sub-Cmmittee V and VI)- The Sub-Committee discussed
the recommendation for insertion in Section D of a new provision concerning
the liquidation of stock piles. The principle having been agreed, the
question of the location and wording of the provision was referred to a
third Working Group consisting of the representatives of the Netherlands,
United Kingdom and United States. |
GATT Library | gr003vv3065 | Notes on Second Meeting (Reference: Document E/CONF.2/C .3/11, Corr. 1 and Rev. 1) : Held Saturday, 3 January 1948. 4.00 p.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 5, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Sub-Committee D (Articles 40, 41 and 43) | 05/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/D/W.4 and E/CONF.2/C.3/D/W/1-13/E/CONF.2/C.3/E/W/1-23 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/gr003vv3065 | gr003vv3065_90190523.xml | GATT_146 | 572 | 3,742 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C .3/D/W.4
ON DU 5 January 1948
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMECE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
THIRD COMMITTEE: COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUB-COMMITTEE ? (ARTICLES 40, 41 and 43)
NOTES ON SECOND MEETING
(Reference: Document E/CONF.2/C .3/11, Corr. 1 and Rev. 1)
Held Saturday, 3 January 1948. 4.00 p.m.
Chairman: Mr. R. J. SHACKLE (United Kingdom)
1. Item 1 (Peru)
The previous decision to suspend discussion of this amendment until
Sub-Committee E had reached a decision on the Peruvian proposal to delete
paragraph 2 (c) of Article 20, was maintained in respect of the revised
proposal (C .3/11Rev.1).
2. Item 2 (Cuba)
The following draft Note for inclusion in the Sub-Committee Report was
submitted by the Delegates of the United States and Cuba:
"The question was raised whether, in taking action under
paragraph 1 of Article 40, Members would be limited to the reimposition
of measures which had been in effect prior to the entry into force of
the Charter.
It was agreed that the text as drafted does not limit the measures
which Members might take, For example, it would be possible, under
this paragraph, for a Member to impose a quantitative restriction on
imports of a particular product, if such a restriction were in fact
necessary to prevent or remedy serious injury to domestic producers in
the face of increased imports, even though a quantitative restriction
had not been applied prior to the adoption of the Charter. There would,
however, have to be a relationship of cause and effect between (a) the
increase in imports resulting in injury, and (b) the obligations assumed
by Members under Chapter IV. Such a relationship might exist in the
following cases, among others:
(i) The granting of a tariff concession (either the reduction of
a duty or the binding of a duty against increase) might lead
to injurious imports.
/(ii) The elimination F./CONF. 2/C.3/D/W. 4
Page 2
(ii). The elimination of a qantitative restriction existing prior
to the adoption of the Charter might lead to injurious
imports. This might happen even though the restriction in
question had never been actually applied but had merely been
provided for under the laws or regulations of a Member,
In view of the broad scope of paragraph 1 of Article 40, as
illustrated above, the amendment proposed by the Delegation of Cuba
(C.3,/1/Add.22) was withdrawn"'.
The Note was unanimously approved. The Delegate of Cuba thereupon
withdrew his proposal.
3. Item 3 (Italy)
A Working Party, consisting of the Delegates of France, Italy and the
United States was appointed to prepare a text and to report to the
Sub-Committee.
4 . Item 5 (Argentina)
The Sub-Committee agreed unanimously to recommend the last sentence
of paragraph 2 to read:
"In circumstances of special urgency where delay would cause damage,,,."
5. Item 6 (Argentina)
The Delegate of Argentina requested that discussion on this amendment
which was one of a series of proposals concerned with one larger issue,
be postponed. This was agreed to.
6. item 7 (Colombia)
Upon the suggestion of the Colombian Delegate it was aageed to-divide
the discussion on the proposal into two parts: paragraphs (a) and (b) dealing
with rationing and maximum prices, and paragraph (c) dealing with internal
taxation.
On the first part of the proposal, a Working Party was appointed
consisting of the Delegates of the United States and Colombia.
The discussion of the second part was adjourned until the-next meeting. |
GATT Library | cc838kz3019 | Notes on Seventeeenth Meeting : Held on 21 January 1948, at 10.30 a.m. in Conference room B | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 22, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Sub-Committee C: General Commercial Provisions (Articles 32 - 39) | 22/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/C/W.17 and E/CONF.2/C.3/C/W/17-20/E/CONF.2/C.3/C/WHITE PAPERS | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/cc838kz3019 | cc838kz3019_90190515.xml | GATT_146 | 1,387 | 9,593 | United Nations Nations Unies .RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C. 3 /C/W. 17
ON DU 22 January 1948
TRADE AND EMPOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
THIRD COMMITTEE: COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUB-COMMITTEE C ON GENERAL COMMERCIAL PROVISIONS
(ARTICLES 32 - 39)
NOTES ON SEVENTEEENTH MEETING
Held on 21 January 1948, at 10.30 a.m. in Conference Room B
Chairman: Mr. C. E. MORTON (Australia)
ARTICLE 32 - FREEDOM OF TRANSIT
1. The representative of Australia introduced the report of Working
Party IV (G.C.P/W.P/14) concerning the Afghanistan proposal originally
pres?nted to Article 35, dealing with improv?ment of transport facilities
etc.
The representative of the United States stated that his delegation
supported vory warmly all matters which would tend toward improvement in
transport facilities and was especially aware of the difficulties of
land-locked countries in regard to transport to the sea. It was true, he
stated, that Article 69 provided for studies in the field of transport, but
his delegation thought that the question of transport facilities was of
such outstanding importance to some countries that it should be mentioned
specifically in an Article dealing with traffic in transit, which was the
only Article suitable for such a subject. He explained that the term
`Equitable use of facilities' was a broad ierm meaning that fair and
reasonable facilities should be afforded to meet specific circumstances in
individual countries. The term 'special arrangement' was a general and
flexible expression and did not mean that such special arrangements would
contain any discrimination in violation of Article 32. He stated that
nothing in Article 32 could be Interpreted to mean that a country through
which the transport of goods to another country was being effected should
necessarily be required to build new railways, locomotives or roads, etc.
to Provide facilities greater than existing at present.
At the request of the representative of Pakistan the CHAIRMAN
indicated that the statement of the representative of the United States would
be circulated .n full among the Members of the Sub-Committee.
/The representative E/CONF . 2/C .3:/C/W. 17
Page 2
Thu representative of Argentina, while not wishing to delay
discussions on this matter, requested and the Sub-Comittee agreed, that
the final decision on the Report of Working Party IV be postponed until the
next meeting.
ARTICLE 35 - FORMALITIES CONNECTED WITH IMPORTATION AND EXPORTATION
2. The representative or the International Monetary Fund introduced
the report (G.C.P/W.P/10) on his discussions with the representative of
Peru concerning a suggested change in the Note to paragraph 6 of the
Geneva Draft. The Sub-Conmittee adopted the change proposed in the report.
3. The representative of Australia introduced the Report of Working
Party V (G.C.P/W.P/13) concerning the Cuban amendment with regard to the
Practice of using distinctive regional or geographical names in tariff
classifications. The representative of the United States called attention
to paragraph 6 of G.C.P/W.P/13 which should be included in the report of
the Sub-Committee, The CHAIRMAN advised that, in accordance with the wishes
of the Working Party, he would forward a copy of this report to the Chairman
of Sub-Committee A of Committee III.
At the request of the delegations of Argentina and France the
Sub-Committee decided to postpone the final discussion of this Report until
the next meeting.
ARTICLE 37 - PUBLICATION AND ADMINISTRATION OF TRADE REGULATIONS
4. The representative of Australia introduced the Report of Drafting
Group II (G.C.P/W.P/12) on the proposal of the delegation of Uruguay
concerning consultations with customs authorities.
The Sub-Committee unanimously approved of the Report and the proposed
additional sentence to paragraph 3 of Article 37.
5. The Sub-Committee agreed unanimously to the proposal made by the
representatives of the United Kingdom and the United States to replace the
word "published" at the end of paragraph 2 by the words "made public". The
Sub-Committee agreed to include in its report a statement that "it was the
opinion of the Sub-Committee that t?is change would make clearer the
intentions of the original wording that the term 'published' originally
used should cover not only the public issue of official documents, but
also an official announcement made in the legislature in the country
concerned".
ARTICLE 38 - INFORMATION, STATISTICS AND TRADE TERMINOLOGY
6. The CHAIRMAN introduced the redraft of this Article proposed by the
delegation of Norway (E/CONF.2/C.3/10/Add.3) in collaboration with the
Statistical Office of the United Nations and the amendments presented by the
/delegations of E/CONF.2/C.3/C/W.17
Page 3
delegations of Czechoslovakia (E/CONF.2/C.3/1O/Add.3/Rev.1) and Australia
(E/CONF . 2/C 3/10/Add. 4).
The representative of Norway, in stating the reasons for his
delegation's redraft of Article 38, said that the United Nations Economic
and Social Council, having the responsibility for the co-ordination and
development of statistics of International organizations, had established
a Statistical Commission as a central organ for these purposes. The
statistical work of the League of Nations had been transferred to the
United Nations, including the responsibility for the collection and
dissemination of external trade statistics under the International
Convention Relating to Economic Statistics (1928).
The ITO will require extensive statistical information in its
operations, but the details of these requirements were not clear at this
time, and therefore no attempt should be made to write detailed requirements
regarding the furnishing of statistics into the Charter.
The Norwegian amendment would first impose upon Members a general
obligation to supply statistics needed by the Organization. The second
principle underlying the amendment would specifically relate the statistical
activities of the Orga?ization to those of the United Nations and other
international organizations in order to insure, not only the co-ordination
of statistics, but also the utilization of all available international
sources of information. International trade statistics, the representative
of Norway stated, were a part of the more comprehensive plan of economic
statistics and should be organized according to generally recognized
standards. By requiring the Organization to co-ordinate its statistical
services with those of other international organizations, the statistical
work of Member Governments, when supplying data to international
organizations, will be facilitated.
The representative of the Statistical Office of the United Nations,
in supplementing the statement of the representative of Norway, explained
the responsibility of the United Nations to develop a system of comparable
statistics suitable to the needs of international organizations. There
was an overall responsibility for developing statistics and statistical
services in various specialized fields, but emphasis must be laid upon
the larger obligation to insure that such specialized parts fit into a
coherent whole. Because statistics of external trade were only one section
of an international pattern of economic statistics it was important that
the Organization recognize the obligation to relate its statistical activities
to those of other international organizations through the United Nations.
/There was E/CONF.2/C.3/C/W.17
Page 4
There was a body of opinion in the Sub-Committee that the requirements
and obligations stated by the representatives of Norway and the
Statistical Offico were provided for in the Geneva Draft of Article 38,
and that under Article 84 the Organization was called upon "to provide for
effective co-operation and the avoidance of unnecessary duplication in
activities of the Organization".
The representative of the United States expressed doubts whether
the Organization could require the Statistical Commission to serve the
Organization. The relationship between all bodies concerned with
statistics would be regulated by special agreements.
The CHAlRMAN proposed, and the Sub-CommIttee agreed, to establish
Working Party No. VI, composed of the representatives of Norway,
United Kingdom, United States and the Statistical Office of the
United Nations, with the representative of Australia acting as Chairman,
and any other delegates who may wish to participate in the discussions
of the Working Party, to consider the Norwegian redraft and the amendments
proposed to it, in the light of the discussion.
In document E/CONF.2/C.3/C/W.15, page 2, add a new third paragraph in
Item 3 (Article 35) as follows:
"The representative of Argentina requested that in the
Spanish translation of Article 35 the expressions "'tasas y cargas"
(fees and charges) be used, and not "derechos y cargas" (duties and
charges) since in his country the term "derecho" is used as an
equivalent of "impuesto" and would thus be contrary to the terms
used in paragraph 1 which define "tasas" as understood in Argentina.
The representative of Uruguay supported this request. The
CHAIRMAN stated that the suggestions just made by the representatives
of Cuba and the United States were also relevant to translations
into any official language." |
GATT Library | cn692fz8725 | Notes on Seventeenth Meeting : Held at the Capitol, Havana, Cuba, on 14 January 1948 at 3.00 p.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 14, 1948 | Joint Sub-Committee of Committees II and VI | 14/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.26/A/W.19, E/CONF.2/C.2/D/W.1-3, C.23/A/W.1-3, and C.26/A/W.1-29 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/cn692fz8725 | cn692fz8725_90180374.xml | GATT_146 | 163 | 1,128 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
E/CONF.2/C.2&6/
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE A/W. 19
ON DU 14 January 1948
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
JOINT SUB-COMMITTEE OF COMMITTEES II AND VI
NOTES ON SEVENTEENTH MEETING
Held at the Capitol, Havana, Cuba,
on 14 January 1948 at 3.00 p.m.
Chairman: Mr. H. C. COOMBS (Australia)
1. The Draft Report of Working Party No. 3 of the Joint Sub-Committee of
Committees II and VI concerning paragraph 2 of new Article 12 A proposed by
Colombia was discussed. (3/CONF.2/C.2&6/A/W.16). The Sub-Committee agreed
with the Working Party that the substance of paragraph 2 of the new article
was already covered in Article 10 as amended and in the resolution contained
in Annex C of E/CONF.2/C.2&6/A/W.2. It was decided not to amend the resolution
but to leave it as set out in Annex C.
2. The Sub-Conmmittee began discussion of paragraph 3 (a) of the new
Article 11 A proposed by Chile (pages 12 and 13 of E/CONF.2/C.2/9). |
GATT Library | zr515nn1492 | Notes on Seventh Meeting : Held on 3 January 1948, 4:00 p.m. in room K | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 3, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Sub-Committee C: General Commercial Provisions (Articles 32 - 39) | 03/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/C/W.7 and E/CONF.2/C.3/A/WHITE PAPERS/C.3/B/W.1-7/C.3/C/W.1-16 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/zr515nn1492 | zr515nn1492_90190505.xml | GATT_146 | 245 | 1,771 | United Nations Nations Unies
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE RESTRICTED
ON DU E/CONF.2/C.3/C/W.7
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE El DE L'EMPLOI 3 January 1948
ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
THIRD COMMITTEE: COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUB-COMMITTE C ON GENERAL COMMERCIAL PROVISIONS
(Articles 32 - 39)
NOTES ON SEVENTH MEETING
Held on 3 January 1948, 4:00 p.m. in Room K
Chairman: Mr. C. E. MORTON (AUSTRALIA)
ARTICIE 53 - ANTI-DUMPING AND COUNTERVAILING DUTIES (E/CONF.2/C.3/1O and
E/CONF.2/C. 3./C/7).
Paragraph 6 - Items 10, 21, 22, 23 and 24
The Sub-Committee considered the question whether measures other than
anti-dumping and countervailing duties should be permitted under Article 33.
The Chairman stated that there was a body of opinion in the Sub-Committee that
measures other than anti-dumping and countervailing duties should be
permissible. Some delegates expressed the opinion that paragraph 6 might
render Articles 13 and 14 ineffective, but the Sub-Committee, generally, felt
that the deletion of paragraph 6 would not have the effect of authorizing the
employment of measures to counteract dumping which were not elsewhere
permissible under the Charter.
The Chairman therefore, with the concurrence of the Sub-Committee, added
to the terms of reference of the Working Party consisting of the representatives
of Cuba, Lebanon, United kingdom and United States, the following item:
"To consider whether paragraph 6 of Article 33 should be deleted or
amended in the event that it could be interpreted so as to limit action
permitted under Articles 13 and 14".
Mr. ASHFORD (United Kingdom) was elected Chairman of the Working Party. |
GATT Library | kx897db7837 | Notes on Seventh Meeting : Held on Friday, 16 January 1948, at 3.00 p.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 19, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Sub-Committee F (Articles 21, 23 and 24) | 19/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/F/W.18 and E/CONF.2/C.3/F/W.1-31/REV.2 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/kx897db7837 | kx897db7837_90190580.xml | GATT_146 | 407 | 2,733 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF. 2/C.3/F/W.18
ON DU 19 january 1948
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE E DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL:ENGLISH
THIRD COMMITTEE: COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUB-COMMITTEE F (ARTICLE 21, 23 AND 24)
NOTES ON SEVENTH MEETING
Held on Friday, 16 January 1948, at 3.00 p.m
Chairman: J. MELANDER (Sweden)
(Reference: E/CONF.2/C. 3/7)
ARTICLE 23 - EXCEPTIONS TO THE RULE OF NON-DISCRIMINATION
On the invitation of the CHAIRMAN the delegate of Czechoslovakia
explained the redraft of Article 23 proposed by Czechoslovakia (see
C.3/F/W.14). The text of his statement is being circulated to the
Sub-Committee as a separate document.
The Meeting proceeded to consider the remaining amendments to
Article 23, paragraph by paragraph.
Item 66 (Italy) found no support.
Items 67 (Denmark), 68 (Merico) and 69(Italy) were referred to the
Working Party, as were the Czechoslovak amendments to paragraph 3,
sub-paragraphs (a) and (c).
Item 71. (Geneva Draft Note) was deferred for consideration in
connection with Article 24.
The Norwegian amendment proposing a new sub-paragraph under paragraph 5
(document C.3/F/W.4) was explained by the delegate of Norway. The
delegate of the United States noted the relationship of this amendment to
the provisions of Section D of Chapter IV of the Geneva text but it was
agreed to refer the Norwegian amendment to the Working Party on Article 23
in the first instance.
The delegate of Brazil maintained the reservation of Brazil on paragraph 5,
sub-Paragrph (b) (Item 73) pending the report by the Working Party of
Sub-Committee A of Committee III on Article 16.
The CHAIRMAN stated. that he assumed that the Working Party on
Article 16 would take into account the provisions of Article 21,
paragraph 5 (b) and that after notification of the report of that
/Working Party E/CONF.2/C.3/F/W.18
Page 2
Working Party the Sub-Committee could decide what action, if any, was.
necessary.
After discussion it was agreed to refer the French proposal for a
near paragaph 6 (Item 74) to the Working Party on Article 23.
With reference to Item 77 (Reservations by Belgium and Chile) the
delegate of Chile said that he had. no comment to make and the delegate
of Belgium stated that Belgium's reservation was replaced by its amendments
to Articles 21 and 23.
On the suggestion of the CHAIRMAN it was agreed to establish a
Working Party to consider amendments to Article 23, consisting of the
delegates of Belgium Czechoslovakia, France, Norway, the United Kingdom
and the United States of America. |
GATT Library | bm802sj4552 | Notes on Seventh Meeting : Held on Monday, 5 January 1948 | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 5, 1948 | Joint Sub-Committee of Committees II and III on Tariff Preferences and Joint Sub-Committee of Committees II and III: Tariff Preferences | 05/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.23/A/W.7, E/CONF.2/C.2/D/W.1-3, C.23/A/W.1-3, and C.26/A/W.1-29 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/bm802sj4552 | bm802sj4552_90180345.xml | GATT_146 | 122 | 869 | United Nations
CONFERENCE
ON
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT
Nations Unies
CONFERENCE
DU
COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI
RESTRICTED
E/CONF.2/C.2&3/A/
W.7
5 January 1948
ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
SECOND AND THIRD COMMITTEES
JOINT SUB-COMMITTEE ON TARIFF PREFERENCES
NOTES ON SEVENTH MEETING
Held on Monday, 5 January 1948
Chairmen: Mr. S. SAHLIN (Sweden)
Article 16
The Delegates of Turkey, Greece, Egypt and Iraq supported their
proposals for permission to establish new preferential arrangements among
the countries of the Near and Middle East, and the Delegates of Chile,
Colombia, Ecuador and Argentine similarly supported new preferential
arrangements among countries of Latin America. The Delegate of Dominican
Republic supported his proposal that preferences between the United States
and Cuba should be extended to include other territories in the Caribbean
area. |
GATT Library | dm745qq4471 | Notes on Seventh Meeting : Held on Thursday, 22 January at 3.00 p.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 23, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Sub-Committee D (Articles 40, 41 and 43) | 23/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/D/W.11 and E/CONF.2/C.3/D/W/1-13/E/CONF.2/C.3/E/W/1-23 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/dm745qq4471 | dm745qq4471_90190531.xml | GATT_146 | 503 | 3,403 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CNFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C.3/D/W.11 23 January 1948
ON DU ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI
THIRD COMMITTEE: COMMERCAL POLICY
SUB-COMMITTEE D (ARTICLES 40, 41 AND 43)
NOTES ON SEVENTH MEETING
Held on Thursday, 22 January at 3.00 p.m.
(Reference: E/CONF.2/C.3/11)
ARTICLE 40
1. Item 1 (Peru): The present text was maintained, the amendment
receiving no support. The representative of Peru reserved the
position of his delegation.
2. Item 3 (Italy): Acting on the recommendation of the Working Group
consisting of the delegates of Italy and the United States, the
Sub-Committee agreed unanimously to insert, in the sixth line of
paragraph 1, between the words "such" and "increased" the word
"relatively".
3. Item 4 (Denmark): Sub-paragraph 1 (b) was maintained, the proposal
for its deletion finding no support.
4. Item 6 (Argentina): The proposal for deletion of the last part of
sentence of sub-paragraph 3 (a) was not approved by the Sub-Committee,
the delegate of Argentina recording a reservation.
5. New Item (United Kingdom): The Sub-Committee agreed with the purpose
underlying the proposal and decided to adopt it in the form of an
interpretative note to be attached to this Article. The formulation
was made subject to approval alongside with the Report and, if
necessary, to examination by the Central Drafting Committee.
6. ARTICLE 40. (Colombia): The Working Party consisting of the delegates
of Colombia and the United States having presented its Report, it was
decided to refer its first recommendation to the Sub-Committee dealing
with Articles 16 - 19 for consideration in the context of Article 18,
without expressing a view on the merits of the case.
/ARTICLE 41 E/CONF.2/C. 3/D/W.11
Page 2
ARTICLE 41
7. The second recommendation of the Working Party, namely to insert
in the eighth line of Article 41, following upon quantitative
and exchange regulations", the words "internal price regulations"
was unanimously -adopted.
8. Item 8 (Afghanistan): It was decided to insert the words "practices
and regulations affecting the freedom of transit" previously agreed
upon (D/W/7) after the word "subsidies" in the eighth line.
ARTICLE 43
9, New Item (Sub-Committee I of Committee VI): It was decided to
insert the new sub-paragraph concerning "public safety" previously
agreed upon, after sub-paragraph (a) of paragraph I.
10 Item 26 (Argentina): The present text of sub-paragraph (i) of
paragraph I was maintained, the proposal for the deletion of its
last part finding no support. The representative of Argentina
recorded a reservation.
11. Item 28 (Argentina): It was agreed to substitute "general
inter-governmental" for the word "multilateral" in the fifth line
of sub-paragraph II (a), the present text remaining otherwise unchanged.
12. Item.30 (Norway): It was provisionally agreed to retain the part of
sentence the deletion of which was proposed, but to accept the
principle that the precise date should not be laid down in the
Charter, but should be left to the Organization to determine later.
The precise formulation was deferred for discussion, together with
the draft Report, at the final meeting of the Sub-Committee. |
GATT Library | dh729vn8743 | Notes on Seventh Meeting : Held on Tuesday, 27 January 1948., at 6.00 p.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 28, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Sub-Committee G (Swiss Proposal) | 28/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/G/W.7 and E/CONF.2/C.3/F/W.31/REV.2-32/G/W.1-13/H/W.1-9 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/dh729vn8743 | dh729vn8743_90190610.xml | GATT_146 | 619 | 4,083 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE
ON DU E/CONF.2/C.3/G/W.7
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI 28 January 1948
ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
THIRD COMMITTEE: COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUB-COMMITTEE G (SWISS PROPOSAL)
NOTES ON SEVENTH MEETING
Held on Tuesday, 27 January 1943., at .6.00 pm.
Chairman: Mr. L. P. THOMPSON-McCAUSLAND (UNited Kingdom)
The delegate for Venezuela said that his country was faced with both
economic and financial problems. The economy of his country as entirely
based on oil, whicn was an exhaustible Vatural resource and from which had
to be obtained the funds necessary to carry out a plan of economic
development. All the products for domestic consumption had to be imported.
Article 13 provided no solution to the problems of his country and the
necessity of maintaining relatively substantial monetary reserves precluded
the use of Article 21. The present draft of the Charter gave no liberty
and no advantages to his country and it would, therefore be necessary to
insert a provision to meet this particular special case which was parallel
to, though in some respects different from, that of Switzerland.
The delegate for Uruguay said that special consideration should be
given to cases where (1) .a country sold a product vital to it to another
country which was within a preferential system permitted by the Charter;
(2) a country exported basic products to soft currency countries; and (3)
the capacity of a country to import depended on the production and export
of a single product. Neither Article 13 nor Article 21 nor Article 23 was
sufficient; the procedure which would have to be undertaken in order to
protect and establish a new industry was complicated and laborious.
The CHAIRMAN summarized the following similarities of the case of
Switzerland on the one hand and the cases of Venezuela and Uruguay on the
other hard: (1) The countries were not eligible to operate under Article 21;
(2) the exports of these countries went to countries with economies larger
than their own; (3) the exports from these countries went largely to other
countries which were imposing restrictions under Article 21; and (4) dependen.
on imports for essential goods.
The dissimilarities were as follows: (1) The Latin-American countries
made no claim that they exported luxury goods; (2) the Latin-American
countries were "mono-producers"; (3) the Latin-American countries were faced
/with the task E/CONF .2/C .3/G/W.7
Page 2
with the task of carrying out a policy of national development; (4) in the
case of Venezuela and certain other Latin-American countries, the mono-
production was of a natural exhaustible resource.
The delegate for the United States pointed out that many of the points
raised by the delegates for Venezuela and Uruguay related to the general
financial difficulties which Article 21 was desired to cover. It was clear
that a mono-producing country would need larger reserves than a more
diversified economy. The procedure under Article 21 was not laborious as
consultation was only required before action if practicable; Members,
therefore, had the right to protect themselves in conditions of emergency.
Many of. the real dangers were. covered, by Article 21 and there was no need
to insert a special provision in the Charter. The delegate for Poland noted
that Article 21 contained both financial aspects and economic planning
aspects. The problem of the Latin-American countries could be resolved if
this distinction were kept clear.
The Sub-Committee agreed (the delegates for Venezuela and Uruguay
dissenting) with the summing up of the CHAIRMAN that whatever fault might
be found with Articles 13 and 21, they were designed to cover the points
raised by the delegates for Venezuela and Uruguay and that there was no gap
in the Charter in these respects which required the insertion of a special
provision. |
GATT Library | hj771yt7245 | Notes on Seventh Meeting : Held Tuesday, 3 February, 1948 | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, February 4, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Sub-Committee J (State Trading) | 04/02/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/J/W.8, E/CONF.2/C.3/H/W.9/C.3/J/W.1-8, and C.3/J/WHITE PAPERS | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/hj771yt7245 | hj771yt7245_90190634.xml | GATT_146 | 2,271 | 14,428 | RESTRICTED
United Nations Nations Unies E/CONF.2/C.3/J/W.8
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE 4 February l948
ON DU ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
TRADE AND EMPLOMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI
THIRD COMMIITTEE: COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUB-COMMETEE J (STATE TRADING)
NOTES ON SEVENTH MEETING
Held Tuesday, 3 February, 1948
Chairman: Right Honourable Walter NASH (New Zealand)
1. The Sub-Committee considered a memorandum from Sub-Committee A to the
effect that the Working Party 3 (Article 18) of that Sub-Committee had
recommended an amendment to paragraph 5 of Article 18, and requesting
consideration. of an analogous amendment to paragraph 2 of Article 30. The
Sub-Committee did. not feel such an amendment was warranted until a final
decision was reached in Sub-Committee A.
2. It was decided to apply throughout Section D the term "primary commodity"
rather than "primary product" and to mention in the Report that in doing so
the Sub-Committee had in mind the definition contained in paragraph 1 of
Article 53.
3. The Sub-Committee agreed to note in the Report that in its understanding
the term "state enterprise" includes any government agency engaged in
purchasing or selling.
4. It was agreed to state in the Report that Article 31 A did not provide
or an exemption from the other provisions of Section D, and further, that
it was understood that the Organization would advise Member Governments of any
notice received regarding the proposed liquidation of non-commercial stocks.
5. After some minor drafting change the draft Report was approved. 2 February 1948
COMMITEE III: COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUB-COMMITTEE J STATE TRADING
Addendum to Draft Report
The following should be inserted in the Draft Report after Item No. 24:
The representative of Mexico made the following statement:
'The delegation of Mexico has noted the views of the Sub-Committee
that it was not intended in the drafting of paragraph 6 of Article 31
to define in any narrow sense that term 'social purposes', and further
that it would be unwise for the Sub-Committee itself to decide that a
particular interpretation should have greater force than any other.
The responsibility placed on the Members and the Organization is
simply that they should pay 'due regard' to the fact. that same
monopolies may be established mainly for sociall purposes' and, to
that extent, general economic considerations would not be the sole
Factor to be taken into account in any negociations.
In these circumstances, the delegation of Mexico considers that
this term would appropriately include, amongst other aspects of
monopolies established and operated mainly for social purposes, such
state monopolies as are set up under specific legeslation to supply
the necessary elements for the people's subsistence and to foster the
social development of the nation".
The representative of Mexico withdrew his amendment.
4265 COMMEETTEE THREE: COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUB-COMMITTEE J (STATE TRADING)
WORKING PAPER
Item 3
The Working Party has suggested to add a new provision to Article 30,
replacing the footnote to sub-paragraph 1 (a), as follows:
"Governmental measures imposed solely:
(a) to ensure standards of quality and efficiency in the
execution of foreign trade; or
(b) to grant privileges for the exploitation of National
natural resources,
do not constitute exclusive or special privileges within the meaning
of Article 30 provided that such measures do not result in effective
control by the Government of the trading activities of the enterprises
in question. "
Thie United States delegation alternatively proposes to replace the present
footnote by a footnote reading as follows:
"Paragraphs 1 (a) and (b) of this Article shall not be construed as
applying to the trading activities of enterprises to which a Member
has granted licenses or other special privileges.
(A) solely to ensure standards of quality and efficiency
in the conduct [execution] of [fforeian trade] its export
trade, or
(B) for the exploitation of [national] natural resources within
its territories.
Provided that the Member does not thereby establish in effect a
monopoly or exercise effective control over the trading activities of
the enterprises in question ."
Item 19
The delegation of Mexico has declared its readiness to withdraww its
amendment to paragraph 6 of Article 31, if the report of the Sub-Committee
would include interpretation by the delegation of Mexico of this paragraph
in the following terms:
"The delegation of Mexico has been endeavouring to find a
suitable interpretation of the term 'social purposes' as used in
paragraph 6 of' Article 31. It has failed to find any such interpretation
in the available document of the Second Session of the Preparatory
Committee; it considers, lacking such interpretation, that said
/term is designed
3810 -2-
term is designed to include activities of. state monopolies
established, in accordance with specific legislation, among other
purposes, for the welfare of the country and its people, and which
operate, in this connection, to supply the necessary elements for
the people's subsistence and development of important economic
and social aspects." 2 February 1948
THIRD COMMITTEE: COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUB-COMMITTEE J (STATE TRADING)
WORKING PAPER
1. The following memorandum has been received from the Secretary of
Sub-Comittee A of Committee III:
"Working Party 3 (Article 18) of Sub-Commiitte A (Articles 16,
17, 18 and 19) of Committee III is of the opinion that, in order co
avoid difficulties of interpretation, the wordinG of paragraph 5 of
Article 18 and of paragraoh 2 of Article 30 should be comparable,
and that the rule of equitable treatment should apply to both.
The Working Party is therefore recormending to Sub-Conmittee A.
that paragraph 5 of Article 18 be revised as follows:
Revised Paragraph 5 of Article 18
[5] 8. (a) The provisions of this Article shall not apply to laws,
registrations or requirements governing the procurement by governmental
agencies of products purchased for governmental purposes and not
[for] with a view to commercial resale or with a view to use in the
production of goods for commercial sale [.]:
and that Sub-Committee A recommend to Sub-Committee J that paragraph 2 of
Article 30 be revised as follows:
Revised paragraph 2 of Article 30
2. The provisions of paragraph 1 of this Article shall not apply to
imports of products [for immediate or ultimate consumption in
governmental use, and not ptherwrise for resale or for] purchased for
governmental purposes and not with a view to ccmmercial resale or with
a view to use in the production of goods for commercial sale. With
respect to such imports, and with respect to the laws, regulations
and requirements referred to in paragraph 2 of Article 18, the Members
shall accord to the trade of the othur Members fair and equitable
treatment. "
It should be pointed out that the Report of Working Party 3 has not
yet been approved by Sub-Committee A.
2. The Central Drafting Committee has requested that the attention of this
Sub-Committee should be given to the definition of the term "primary commodity"
given in paragraph 1 and/or 2 of Article 53.
In view of the Central Drafting Committee it would be desirable that
Sub-Committee J should consider whether the term "primary product" as used in the
second proviso of paragraph 4 of Article 31 is intended to be interpreted in the
same way in that case whether Article 31 should include a reference to that
definition.
243 COMMERCIAL III COMMERCIAL POLICY SUB-COMMITTEE ? Report o Working article ?? ?? 1 Meetingd 2 ?? held 23 January 194the capital at ?? ?? Annotated Agenda Items 2 and 3. Paragraph 1 (??)
It eis ultimatly ? t ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? the
Sub-paragraphs 1 (a) and (b) of the Article Shall not be construed
activitiesrt applying to the trading f ??to which a Member ??ranted licenses or other special ??
(a) to ensure standards of quality and efficiency in the ?? of s ?? ??
,provided thtta(b) For the exploitation of the si cwfo - ~ct-j
theto tot 1^C 'L:#';7 it~'Ztwpw"3,t
enterprises in questions ior dr ot4.Ci c± a C o thi;c : t j::- t-
ties are subject to effectiveor creatt is ioWyJ, G t!- ,:iv-i o fulaot4vYu
Aot4af Qjo3d£ I- "
-12f
ed to dif: the Geneva textX& \r <;fM t3L -.e i f-. ot.m
r tEtt by i±o du1lo.-tv
Th dct~i= r ic > <¢ -t'v. -r~os: o' t~ja Suo-m~tte
,of article 31hf it %i,ot atcs la io tc'tttS a .4Niioe 31
nd rahther &lefiio in iay ;rniv csoe h tozt's c - :-
th aecide t t t avuld, e umvo3 fr thSLb4!it t-- .i. Hito,~d- 1~
force than any otherprticl2r :Lrt-ratat eub k; C :tu-rza ,
e some mesiyt1vt ey eLos k Nd &I" t tS 'L t Zh
to that extent may . ,3tb1l8 zad f i'trr vr-.3 Vzw b:
nsiders that thjisl tt circumta~co, hodoltpdlcnof O',--W a dsre
opoliesten ouid *p rpri&ely±sw1zmxwt;rtheu ur ot alooUl
tabL4monopolisse cau& oe ra for t.oola1 cpwu tsh e wi]olea
a plare ennecessary elementsot up umde? speo2c 3Aloato b.y th ZoeOr 1Uwt
fthe social development of i or the &Ap1 t8c S& t eool&l dave1o t of the
'w , security. After full it was
"Any Member helding :tDr ; . - y t' f ullCw> for
Member which K o t~.seuu '.- v>t- G ~.r;. s *X'2y ~. _;~o = i orws o? to the
Bub-Gk&~tt, 'Or'. ltku~t.i~L ~ I
to la & such ;uala>(b) prier to the
In either case, the lryc) l.d lr request of any
best of avoiding w( t i to _ ;iu y . of.ato the t ,4 t h Cinterests Wtuof C, o t o
not apply to disposal of f fOs l I-at i of Q
necessary for the of t 3Nr-Li"lVd.L vi r.^; :'^
At the meeting of the Parey on 29 January, the delegate for
Begium reported that the reservation in the footmote of the second
to the footmote with different prices at the bottes of the first column
of the page. He advised that having the new th.3-> noWol l 1w te:LL e 'tl Jc~M 3nZC-s
The know text reads as follows:
"Difforunt prices for and of products is different1 txcta ta d~frorcixt
uat~ z are not uioa by the provisions of this Article, provided that
such different prices are charged or paid for commercial having
rowt to vdrc-w wXltCVs supply and demand". M E M O R A N D U MJ
To Mr.W.r Nash, Chairman of the sub-Committee J of
Committee III, Section D - State Trading
The Cuban Delegation, having explained the
object of its Ammen(documamendent C.3/11d.52) will
be satisfied if paragraph 2(b) is altered in any of
the following we-
.' ........... or Awo"uld not wholly effectnot ive for
the achievement of...."
) ........... or wouBl"d not be snisfactorily effectaive
for the achievement of ...
Provided that a record should also be kept with the
Committee with an explanation of the interpretation
we gave to sub-paragraphs a) and b) in paragraph 2,
to the effect, that if the negotiation of the maximum
import duty should not be entirely or partially ef-
fective in attaining the objects mentioned in sub-
paragraph 1(b), any other agreement which is reached
in accordance with sub-paragraph 2(b) does not ex-
clude the agreement regarding the maximum import du-
ties mentioned in sub-pararaph a) COMMITTEE III - COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUB-COMMITTEE J (STATE TRADING)
RECOMMENDATION BY JOINT SUB-COMMITTEE OF COMMITTEES V AND VI
FOR INSERTION IN SECTION D OF CHAPTER IV OF A PRIVISION
REGARDING LIQUIDATION OF NON-COMMERCIAL STOCK PILES
The Joint Sub-Committee of Committees V and VI has been considering the
substance and the location of an exception to be made in respect of agreements
made by or for military establishments for the purpose of meeting essential
requirements of national security. The Sub-Committee has decided to recommenda end
the inclusion of the appropriate provision in Article 94. However, in pgtting
forward this recommendation the Sub-Committee is of the view that a related
provision should be introduced elsewhere in the Charter concerning the need
for consultation on the liquidation of any stock piles accumulated under
such a provision in Article 94. The Sub-Comittee considers that the insertion
of a provision on liquidation might best be considered in Section D of
Chapter IV. Accordingly, the Joint Sub-Committee would be grateful if
Sub-Commitee J of the Third Committee would give consideration to this
question.
The Joint Sub-Committee has instructed me to communicate this request to
you, and at the same time to transmit for possible consideration by
Sub-Committee J two alternative versions of such a provision which the Joint
Sub-Committee had before it:
(1) That following the word "sale" at the end of the first sentence
in paragraph 2 of Article 30 a proviso might be added to the following
effect:
Provided that,a upon complaint that substantial injury is being
caused or is anticipated, a Member shall accord sympathetic
consideration to, and shall afford adequate opportunity for,
consultation regarding such representations as may be made by
any other Member with respect to disposal of reserve stocks co
acquired."
(2) That any provision to be made in Section D might be along the
following lines:
"Any Member accumulating non-commercial reserves of primary
commodities for military purposes under an inter-governmental
ageement... shal no- make arragement for the commercial
liquidation of such reserve stocks in such a way as to injure
the commercial interests of producers of the commodities in
3314 /question, question, and shall consult with the Organization as to the best
means to that end."
While the Joint Sub-Committee was agreed in recommending that
Sub-Committee J consider the inclusion of some provision for consultation on
the liquidation of such stock piles, the Joint Sub-Communittee has not examined
the merits of either of the texts reproduced above and is merely transmittingittinr
them for information and to provide a possible basis for discussion. |
GATT Library | zg830tm3285 | Notes on Sixteenth Meeting : Held at the Capitol, Havana, Cuba, Tuesday, 13 January at 3.00 p.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 13, 1948 | Joint Sub-Committee of Committees II and VI | 13/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.26/A/W.18, E/CONF.2/C.2/D/W.1-3, C.23/A/W.1-3, and C.26/A/W.1-29 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/zg830tm3285 | zg830tm3285_90180373.xml | GATT_146 | 373 | 2,609 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C. 2&6/A/
ON DU W.18 13 January 1948
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
JOINT SUB-COMMITTEE OF COMMITTEES II AND VI
NOTES ON SIXTEENTH MEETING
Held at the Capitol, Havana, Cuba, Tuesday, 13 January at 3.00 p.m.
Chairman Mr. H. C. COOMBS (Australia)
1. The representative of Mexico stated that he reserved his position on the
whole of Article 11 until he had seen the text of Article 12.
2. The Sub-Committee gave consideration to the Report of Working Party No. 3
on the Chilean amendment to paragraph 2 of Article 11, the Afghanistan amendment
to paragraph 3 of Article 11 and the Pakistan amendment to paragraph 2 of
Article 10 (E/CONF.2/C.2&6/A/W.15).
The following text was approved in the place of that appearing in
paragraph 2 of E/CONF.2/C.2&6/A/W.15:
"3. The Organization may in such collaboration with other inter-
governmental organizations as may be appropriate
(a) make recommendations for and promote bilateral or multilateral
agreements on measures designed
(i) to assure just and equitable treatment for the enterprise,
skills, capital, arts and technology brought from one
country to another;
(ii) to avoid international double taxation in order to
stimulate the flow of foreign private investments;
(b) make recommendations and promote agreements designed to
facilitate an equitable distribution of skills. arts, technology,
materials and equipment with due regard to the needs of all Members;
(c) formulate and promote ..... investment."
The additions indicated in the above text by underlining refer to changes
from the text contained in E/CONF.2/C.2&6/A/W.3 as amended by the Joint
Sub-Committee at its ninth (E/CONF.2/C.2&6/A/W.6) and fourteenth
(E/CONF.2/C.2&6/A/W.13) meetings.
3. Attention was drawn to difficulties in the French translation of the
English words "skills" and "materials" which arose both in the above new text
and in the present draft of the Charter. The Chairman stated that the English
word "materials" as used in Article 11 should be interpreted to mean "raw and
partly processed materials", and asked the Secretariat to draw the attention
/of the E/CONF.2/C.2&6/A/W.18
Page 2
of the Central Drafting Committee to this problem. It was decided that
the question of of interpretative text with regard to the above addition
to Article, 11 (3) be considered at the next meeting. |
GATT Library | mm420pm2741 | Notes on Sixteenth Meeting : Held on 16 January 1948, at 6.00 p.m. in Conference room A | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 17, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Sub-Committee C: General Commercial Provisions (Articles 32 - 39) | 17/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/C/W.16 and E/CONF.2/C.3/A/WHITE PAPERS/C.3/B/W.1-7/C.3/C/W.1-16 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/mm420pm2741 | mm420pm2741_90190514.xml | GATT_146 | 683 | 4,447 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE
ON DU E/CONF.2/C.3/C/W.16
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI 17 January 1948
THIRD COMMITTEE: COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUB-COMMITTEE C ON GENERAL COMMERCIAL PROVISIONS
(ARTICLE 32 - 39)
NOTES ON SIXTEENTH MEETING
Held on 16 January 1948, at 6.00 p.m. in Conference Room A
Chairman: Mr. C. E. MORTON (Australia)
ARTICLE 33 - ANTI-LUMPING AND COUNTERVAILING DUTIES
The representative of Australia introduced the second report of the
Working Party I, (G.C.P/W.P/9) which consists of the representatives of
Australia, Brazil. Cuba, Lebanon, Netherlands, United Kingdom and the
United States and explained the changes which appear in the second report as
affecting the first report No. 2836 of 7 January.
paragraph 1
The new wording of this paragraph as given in G.C.P/W.P/9 was unanimously
accepted by the Sub-Committee.
The Sub-Committee unanimously agreed to incorporate the Note on Hidden
Dumping in the form stated in White Paper 2836 of 7 January.
Paragraph 2
This paragraph was unanimously approved as set out in Annex to
G.C.P/W.P/9.
The Sub-Committee unanimously approved the Note to paragraph 2 as given
in G.C.P/W.P/9, page 2, paragraph 4, which relates to the collection of
bonds and/or cash deposits pending determination of the "margin of dumping"
in cases of suspected or apparent dumping.
Paragraph 3, 4 and 5 of the Geneva text, now renumbered 4, 5 and 6,
were unanimously approved. In lines 7 and 8 of paragraph 5 the words
"to prevent or" were deleted and the word "to" was placed between
"materially" and "retard" in line 8.
Paragraph 6 - Geneva Draft - and Note
The Sub-Committee agreed to delete paragraph 6 and the Note to this
paragraph as stated in the Geneva Draft. The representative of Argentina,
although not opposed to the deletion or paragraph 6, reaffirmed his proposal
/to replace the E/CONF.2/C/W.16 Page 2 to replace the paragraph by the text given in G.C.P/W.P/9, page 2.
The Sub-Committee discussed the proposal of the Phillippines delegation
(Item 25) to rearrange the order of the paragraphs of Article 33. In view
of the change to the Geneva Draft, proposed by this Report of the Working
Party, it was decided that the preset order of the paragraphs was perhaps
the most satisfactory one.
The representative of the United States proposed and the Sub-Committee
agreed to publish as an official document both white papers No. 2836 of
7 January and G.C.P/W.P/9 of 15 January, containing the Reports of the
Working Party on paragraphs 1 and 2 of Article 33.
ARTICLE 35 FORMALITIES CONNECTED WITH IMPORTATION AND EXPORTATION
The CHAIRMAN stated that agreement was reached between the
representatives of Peru and of the International Monetary Fund on the
amendment to the Note to paragraph 5 of the Geneva Draft which will be
published in due course for consideration by the Sub-Committee.
ARTICLE 38 - INFORMATION, STATISTICS AND TRADE TERMINOLOGY
The CHAIRMAN stated that the new redraft of the Norwegian proposal to
amend this Article his been published as an official paper, and will be
discussed at the next meeting.
ARTICLE 39 - BOYCOTTS
The representative of the United States, after reviewing the changes
successively made in this Article as compared with the form in which it was
initially presented in the United States proposals, stated that the Article
in its present from was entirely ineffective and should not be icorporated
in the Charter. He therefore proposed the deletion of this Article.
After having taken the sense of the Sub-Committee, the CHAIRMAN stated
that the deletion of Article 39 was unanimously approved.
NOTES:
(i) In document E/CONF.2/C.3/W.13, paragraph 6 on page 2 should
read:
"The representative of Brazil dealing with the reservation
of his delegation (Item 47) stated that If the content of the
Note to paragraph 5 of Article 35 of the Geneva Draft (Item 44)
was to be retained, his delegation would withdraw its reservation.
The CHAIRMAN proposed and the Sub-Committee agreed to retain this
Note.
(ii) In document E/CONF.2/C.3/W.15, page 2, the third sentence of
paragraph 3 should read:
"The representatives of Cuba and the United States suggeted
that it should be made sufficiently clear ........". |
GATT Library | bv824zt8057 | Notes on Sixth Meeting : Held Friday, 16 January, 3.00 p.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 17, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Sub-Committee D (Articles 40, 41 and 43) | 17/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/D/W.10 and E/CONF.2/C.3/D/W/1-13/E/CONF.2/C.3/E/W/1-23 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/bv824zt8057 | bv824zt8057_90190530.xml | GATT_146 | 496 | 3,352 | RESTRICTED
United Nations Nations Unies E/CONF.2/C.3/D/W.10
17 January 1948
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
ON DU
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET D'EMPLOIMu -v
MMITTEED COMMERCIALOM1RCIVL POLICY
ITTEE M EEaRTICLE(AIp us N40, 41 AD 43)
NOIXTH MEETINGT ON S3 IEXING
Held Fry,ridaY 16m.> Januax3.00 p.-:
F(Refere1ce: E/CON.2.1.3/U1 and Corrol and D/W/5)
ChaiHmCK: Mt. R. J. SEAHCLE (United Kingdon)
- uR 40
1 New Item: The Chairman, speaking os representativeof the United Kingdom,
stated that his delegation, after further examination of Article 40, had found
that its provisio1ns in paragraphs and 3 (c) might be liable to
misinterpretation. There was no doubt in his mind that thed action permitte
under twese provisions vas intended to be non-discriminatory and to make this
perfectly clear, his delegation proposed a new paragraph to be inserted after
paragraph 3. It was agreed to discuss this proposal at .he next meeting
2. Item 3 (Italy): TheWReport of the Working Group not being ready,
discussion was deferred.
PROPAOSD 'RICLE 40;L
3. Item 7 (Colombia): It was noted that the Wormakingking Group was iscing
progress and would report at the next meeting.
ARTICLE 43
i. Itemw28 (Argentina): It Was provisionally agreed to substitute "general
inter-governmental" for "multilateral" in the fifth lIIe of sub-paragraph 11 (a),
the delegate ofcAmgentina reserving tozment for the next meeting.
5. Item 31 (Argentina): The delegate of Argentina pointed out that his
proposal involved the deletion not only of the proviso, but of the last part
of the final paragraph beginning with the words "and in any event..." in the
fifth line. If this were unacceptable, an obligation for Members to inform
the Organization of measures taken under paragraph II might be added in place
of the deleted phrase.
The delegate of the Netherlands withdrew the reservation (D/W/5) in view
of a provision at present under miscussion in Sub-Comiittee J.
/He support E/CONF .2/C .3/D/W.10
Page 2
No support being forthcoming for the proposed deletion, the retention
of the present text was agreed, the Argentine delegation reserving its
position.
6. New Item (Sub-Committee I of Committee VI): It was agreed to insert,
in paragraph I, a new sub-paragraph as follows:
"necessary to the enforcement of laws and regulations relating
to public safety"
and to note in the Report that in the view of the Sub-Committee the term
"public safety" included "public order".
7. With regard to a question of the delegation of Iraq as to whether the
reference in Article 41 to "operation of customs regulations and formalities"
included prevention of smuggling, the Sub-Committee expressed the view that
since Article 41 was only concerned with matters dealt with in Chapter IV,
that reference related only to measures which a Member might consider to
have an adverse effect upon its trade.
8. The Chairman announced that when the Agenda of the Sub-Committee would
be exhausted, decisions would be taken on all outstanding points, even though
other Sub-Committees might not yet have reached a decision on related issues,
from which the amendments concerned depended. |
GATT Library | tr259ht2564 | Notes on Sixth Meeting : Held on 2 January 1948, 4.00 p.m., in room K | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 2, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Sub-Committee C: General Commercial Provisions (Articles 32 - 39) | 02/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/C/W.6 and E/CONF.2/C.3/A/WHITE PAPERS/C.3/B/W.1-7/C.3/C/W.1-16 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/tr259ht2564 | tr259ht2564_90190504.xml | GATT_146 | 358 | 2,450 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C.3/C/W.6
ON DU 2 January 1948
TRADE AN EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
THIRD COMMITTEE: COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUB-COMMTTEE C ON GENERAL COMMERCIAL PROVISIONS
(ARTICLES 32-39)
NOTES ON SIXTH MEETING
Held on 2 January 1948, 4.00 p.m. in Room K
Chairman: Mr. C. E. MORTON (Australia)
Article 32 - Anti Dumping and Countervailing Duties (E/CONF.2/C.3/10 and
E/C0NF.2/C.3/C/6.
Items 10, 11, 12, 13. 14, 15, 16 and 17
1. The Sub-Committee continued discussion of the Cuban proposal (item 10)
and other amendments dealing with condemnation and. defiinition of dumping.
The delegate for Cuba expressed his willingness to modify his proposal by
eliminating from its terms:
(a) the case of 'high price dumping' (reverse dumping), and
(b) the definition of dumping, on the understanding that the text
of this Article will cover all important cases of 'price dumping'.
He maintained his proposal regarding the condemnation of dumping and the
change of the wording of paragraph 1 from a negative to a positive form..
Some delegates felt that the Sub-Committee should take care, in
considering any changes in the present text, lest any important element
of paragraph 1 of the Geneva Draft be omitted.
2. The Chairman proposed, and the Sub-Committee agreed, to constitute a
Working Party composed of the representatives of Cuba, Lebanon, United
Kingdom and the United States to examine Article 33, with the following
terms of reference:
"To consider a form of words which should be placed as a
preamble to Article 33 and which would, in effect, constitute a general
condemnation of the practice of dumping;
to consider the question of a definition of dumping, particularly
as to whether the present definiton of the 'margin of dumping' could
not be so amended by mere drafting changes as to be, in effect, a
definition of 'price dumping';
/further, to E/CONF.2/C.3/C/W.6
Page 2
further, to consider whether this Article should, as it does
at present, be restricted to relate solely to so-called 'price
dumping ' .
In its deliberations of these matters the Working Party should
give full consideration to the various relevant amendments and notes
as listed in E/CONF.2/C .3/10." |
GATT Library | pt307xm1605 | Notes on Sixth Meeting : Held on Monday, 26 January 1948, at 3.00 p.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 26, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Sub-Committee G (Swiss Proposal) | 26/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/G/W.6 and E/CONF.2/C.3/F/W.31/REV.2-32/G/W.1-13/H/W.1-9 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/pt307xm1605 | pt307xm1605_90190609.xml | GATT_146 | 561 | 3,774 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C.3/G.W.6
ON DU 26 January 1948
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL:ENGLISH
THIRD COMMITTEE:COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUB-COMMITTEE G (SWISS PROPOSAL)
NOTES ON SIXTH MEETING
Hold on.Monday, 26 January 1948, at 3.00 p.m.
Chairman:Mr.L.P.THOMPSON-McCAUSLAND (United Kingodom)
1.The Sub-Committee agreed to proceed with the discussion on the basis
of the draft prepared by the Chairman and of the amendment to that draft
submitted by the delegation of Poland.
2. Paragraph 1
The Sub-Commiittee agreed that the criterion of inconvertibility
introduced in the Polish amendment,. though it was in many ways a significant
one, was not of primary importance in connection with the. problem of
Switzerland. The delegate for Switzerland said that it had been agreed in
an earlier meeting not to speak of "external receipte".The Sub-Committee
also agreed that this paragraph should take into account the following
points:
(1) A relatively hjgh proportion of the total production. of a
country depending on export markets;
(2) .a high proportion of the total exports consisting of of goods
or ser?ices considered inessential;
(3) a high proportion of the total exports directed to countries
larger than the exporting country.
The delegate for Switzerland said that it was imperative to introduce
the element of employment into paragraph 1 (b) and that the phrase "domestic
economy" in the draft did not cover the point. The delegate for Sweden
suggested that the phrase "especially its employment situation" be added
after the words "domestic economy". The delegate for Switzerland said he
would have to reserve his position if the word "agriculture", which appeared
in his original amendment, were deleted.
/3. Paragraph 2 Page 2
3.Paragraph 2
The delegate for Switzerland said that paragraph 2 covered certain parts
of his case but it was not clear how paragraph 1 of Article 40 could. fully
meet the points he had raised since it merely permitted a Member to suspend
its obligations under Chapter 1V in emergency conditions with regard to a
single product. Further, if other countries were similarly to abstain from
their obligations under Chapter IV, which they were in certain circumstances
entitled to do under the other paragraphs of Article 40, that would not be a
solution of the problem. Switzerland sought to obtain complete freedom of
action to impose quantitative rectrictions subject to negotiations with other
countries and also freedom of section with regard to the rest of Chapter IV.
'he CHIRMAN drew attention to the fact that the trend of discussion
in the Sub-Committee which was dealing with Article 40 was to permit
discrimination under the latter paragraphs of that Article but not under
paragraph 1. He pointed out that this was the opposite of what Switzerland
wanted since the representative of Switzerland had asked for negotiating
power power to enforce threats made in the course of negotiations and power
to enforce any agreements reached. These powers, of course, included a
discriminatory element.
The CHAIRMAN, in summing up, said that there had been provisional
agreement as to the substance of paragraph 1 but that. in view of the
difficulty of drafting a satisfactory provision for paragraph 2 it might be
useful for the Sub-Committee to defer further consideration of the case of
Switzerland for a few days.
It was agreed that the Sub-Committee would consider at their next
meeting factors other than those which apply to the case of Switzerland. |
GATT Library | ns391jn7239 | Notes on Sixth Meeting : Held Thursday, 29 January 1948, at 6.00 p.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 31, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Sub-Committee J (State Trading) | 31/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/J/W.6, E/CONF.2/C.3/H/W.9/C.3/J/W.1-8, and C.3/J/WHITE PAPERS | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/ns391jn7239 | ns391jn7239_90190632.xml | GATT_146 | 519 | 3,623 | United Nations Nations Unies
RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C.3/J/
ON DU w.6
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI 31 January 1948
ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
THIRD COMMITTEE: COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUB-COMMITTEE J (STATE TRADING)
NOTES ON SIXTH MEETING
Held Thursday, 29 January 1948, at 6.00 p.m.
1. ITEM 3 (Note): Following a recommendation of the Working Party, it
was decided to retain the footnote to sub-paragraph 1 (a) of
Article 30 as follows:
"Sub-paragraphs 1 (a) and (b) of this Article shall not be
construed as applying to the trading activities of enterprises to
which a Member has granted licenses or other special privileges
(a) solely to ensure standards of quality and efficiency in the
conduct of its external trade;
(b) for the exploitation of its natural resources;
provided that the Members do not thereby establish or exercise effective
control or direction of the trading activities of the enterprise in
question, or create a monopoly whose trading activities are subject to
effective governmental control or direction."
2. ITEM 8 (b) (Note): The Sub-Committee adopted the recommendation of
the Working Party to retain the second footnote to paragraph 1 of
Article 30, its text to read:
"Different prices for sales and purchases of products in
different markets are not precluded by the provisions of this
Article, provided that such different prices are charged or
paid for commercial reasons having regard to differing conditions,
including supply and demand, in such markets."
3. ITEM 18 (Switzerland): In accordance with the Report of the Working
Party, the Sub-Committee confirmed its previous decision to retain the
present text without change.
4. ITEM 19 (Mexico): The Sub-Committee agreed to include in its Report
a statement by the delegation of Mexico. The representative of
Mexico withdraw his amendment.
5. NEW ITEM (Joint Sub-Committee V and VI): The Sub-Committee agreed,
following -the recommendation of the Working Party, to insert, after
/Article 31, E/CONF.2/C.3/J/W.6
Page 2
Article 31, a new Article 31 A as follows:
"LIQUIDATION OF STOCKS"
1. Any Member holding stocks of any primary commodity accumulated
for non-commercial purposes shall
(a) give not less than four months public notice of its
intention to liquidate such stocks; or
(b) give four months prior notice to the Organization of
such intention.
In either case, the Member concerned shall, at the request of
any Member which considers, itself substantially interested, consult as
to the best means of avoiding substantial injury to the economic
interests of producers and consumers of the primary commodity in
question. - ' i
2. The provisions of paragraph 1 shall not apply to routine
disposal of supplies necessary for the rotation of stocks to avoid
deterioration. .
The delegatd for Mexico recorded a reservation, but state4dthat
he would withdraw it, if the words,'preventing avoidable injury"
were substituted for "avoiding substantial injury". .
6. It was decided to change the title of Section D to "State Trading and
Related Matters", and to give the new Articie 30 A the heading:
"Marketing Organizations"
7. The representative of Ecuador stated that-he was provisionally
reserving the position: of'his delegation to all provision$ concerning
monopolies. He would consider withdrawing the reservation in Committee. |
GATT Library | wt607dc0764 | Notes on Tenth Meeting : Held on 8 January 1948 at 10.30 a.m. in Conference room B | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 8, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Sub-Committee C: General Commercial Provisions (Articles 32 - 39) | 08/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/C/W.10 and E/CONF.2/C.3/A/WHITE PAPERS/C.3/B/W.1-7/C.3/C/W.1-16 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/wt607dc0764 | wt607dc0764_90190508.xml | GATT_146 | 621 | 4,323 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE 8 January 1948
ON DU ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
TRADE NDE EMPLENT COMMERET DEOIE L'LEIMPO L
MERHIRLD COaClE:CO1CIA PLIY
SUB- ON GENERAL COCO C MMERPROVCSIAL ON GM1ELN
(ARTICLES 32-39)
TENTH NTHMEETINGNOT O EETDM
y Held on 8 Janua1948 at 10.30 a.m. in Conference Room B
C E. hMOairman: Mr. C. RTON (Australia)
ARTICLE 3O4 - VALUATIURON FR CUSCOTO.MS PPOS0ES (E/NF2/C.3/1 and
E/CONF.2/C.3/C/10)
Parah.
1. Upon the request of the representative of the United States,
the Chairman agreed to accept the Chairmanship of the Working
Party II, composed of the representatives, of France United Kingdom,
United States and Uruguay, to consider aimendments n relation to
sub-paragrap hs (a) mitted by and(b) subUruguay by uaM. and Chile.
2. The Sub-Committee discussed the Notes in the Geneva Draft (Items 31, 32,
33 and 34). Itmm was agreed to recoend that the text of these Notes as
drafted in Geneva should be retained.
The representative of Chile stated that if the Report of the Working
Party II was foud to be satisfactory to his Delegation, the reservation
entered by his country in Geneva (Item 29) would be withdrawn.
Par 4 ..
3. The atedC the Sub-ommittee approved. paragraph4 as given
in the Geneva Draft.
Paragph 5
the dis4. In cussion of paragraph 5, the CHAIRMAN stated that there was no
support for the proposal of the Delegation of Argentina (Item 35) todelete
this paragraph.
The Sub-Committee accepted sub-paragraphs (a), (b) and (c) as given in
the Genev.a Draft
5. The Sub-Committee was of the opinion that sub-paragraph (d) should be
rdrafted and.the CHAIRMAN requested :he representative of the
United St ates topresent a redraft in the light of the discussion and
the amendment proposed by Uruguay (Item 3 6), forconsideration by the
mmi/Sueb-Ctte. E/CONF.2/C.3/C/W.102104316J1C,1
Page
Sub-Committee.
6. Paragraph 6
mThe Sub-Cittee accepteed the tox of paragraph 6 as given in the
Geneva Draft,
No Paragraph 7
7. During the discussion of the proposal of Uruguay, (Item 37), the
representative of this country stated that he wish to amend the words
in his proposal to read "7. T raders,before importing merchandise,..".
Themmi Sub-Cittee agreed to this proposal, but was of the opinion that
any such amendment should preferaibly be nceorporatd in Article 37. It
was resolved to revert to the proposUalgu yof rua when discussing
Article 37,
ARTICLE 3MmL5 - FOAITNECIEES CONTD WITH IMPORTATIEXPOON AND RTATION
(E/CONF10.2/C.O3/. E/CNF10.2/C.3/. ADD.1 AND 2).
Paragraph 1
8. The Sub-Committee discussed the amendment of HaitNni (E./CF.2/C3/l0/Add.l).
Attention wa s drawnto a similar proposal of the Delegation of. .Venezuela
to Article 17. TCommccche Sittee requested the CHAIRMAN to ? consultthe
Chairman of. mSub Co mittee A m,off Coittee III regarding the outcome off the
discussion of the amendment of Venezuela and to prop osmande, ifde.
appropriate, to delete Mem:bers of thiomms Sub to -Citetee t inak part
the work of.m Sub-Comittee A when dealing with the amendmet of Ven.ezuela.
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 3 -
9 . Thetexto fw theseto paragraphs was accepted by the mSub-Comiwttee a
given inn th e GeevaDraft.
Paragraph 4,
10. The representative of Uruguay withdrew his amesniment (I tems 40 and 41).
The teaxt of pragraph 4 was accordingly accepted, as given in the - -
Geneva Daft. -
Paragrah 5
1 TheSb-Camittee discussed. the amendment of. the Delegation of Argentina
(Items 43, and. lo 38). The verbal changes as proposed by Argentina-fr
tihe Enighnd the Freench texts met with no support In te Sub-Committea
ai.e representative. o Argentina was -reested to present an. -
int.erpretative Note for discussion, if he so wished --
It was suggested. that, n preparing the translation-of the text of
paragraphs and.5 into official languags,- pecial attention-shoullbeaid
to' the. eqivalent expressions for the terms tees' a+d chagest., |
GATT Library | sb873yq7153 | Notes on Tenth Meeting : Held on Friday, 6 February 1948 at 6.00 p.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, February 9, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Sub-Committee F (Articles 21, 23 and 24) | 09/02/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/F/W.25 and E/CONF.2/C.3/F/W.1-31/REV.2 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/sb873yq7153 | sb873yq7153_90190588.xml | GATT_146 | 856 | 5,660 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C. 3/F/W.25
ON DU 9 February 1948
TRADE AND EMLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL ENGLISH
THIRD COMMITTEE: COMERCIAL POLICY
SUB-COMMITTEE F ON ARTICLES 21, 23 AND 24
NOTES ON TENTH MEETING .
Held on Friday, 6 February 1948 at 6.00 p.m.
Chairman: J. MELANDER (Norway)
CONSIDERATION OF THE REPORT OF THE INFORMAL WORKIG PARTY ON ARTICLIE 21
(E/CONF.2/C.3/F/W.21)
Mr. J. A. GUEIRA (Cuba), Chairman of the Informal Working Party on.
Article 21 appointed at the ninth meeting, presented the Working Party's
report.
The delegate for Czechoslovakia proposed that sub-paragraph (i) of the
proposed paragraph 1 (a) should read "It is in the interests of each members..."
As an alternative to amending paragraph 1 (a), the representative of the
United States suggested the deletion of the proposed paragraph 1 (b) of.
Article 21 (see document E/CONF.2/C.3/F/W..l9).
The delegate for the Philippines suggested several drafting changes to
paragraph 1.(a).
After discussion, it was agreed to drop sub-paragraph (b) of the proposed
new paragraph 1 of Article 21, and to approve the text of paragraph 1 (a) as
recommended by the Informal Working Party. The text of the proposed new
paragraph 1, as agreed, included the drafting changes proposed by the.
delegate for the Philippines:
"1. (a) The Members recognize that
(i) it is primarily the responsibility of each Member to.
safeguard its external financial position and to achieve
and maintain stable equilibrium in its balance of
payments;
(ii) an adverse balance of payments of one Member may have
important effects on the trade and balance of payments
of other Members, if it results in, or may lead to, the
imposition by the Member of restrictions affecting
international trade;
(iii) the balance of payments of each Member is of concern to
/other Members, E/CONF.2/C.3/F/W.25
Page 2
other Members, and therefore it is desirable that the
Organization should promote mutual consultations and,
where possible, agreed action consistent with this Charter
for the purpose of correcting a maladjustment in balance
of payments; end that
(iv) action taken to restore stable equilibrium in the balance
of payments should, so far as the Member or Members
concerned find possible, employ methods which expand rather
than contract international trade".
The delegate for Argentina. stated that his Government maintained its
reservation on Article 21.
The CHAIRMAN informed the Sub-Committee that the had received a
communication from the delegation of New Zealand, proposing that an
interpretative footnote be added to Article 21. It was agreed to consider
this proposal at the next meeting after the text had been circulated.
The delegation of Brazil suggested that paragraphs (ii) and (iii) of
paragraph 3 (c) of Article 21 should be transferred to paragraph 2 of the
Article. It was agreed to consider this proposal at the next meeting after
it had been circulated.
CONSIDERATION. OF TEE REPORT OF THE WORKING ARTY ON ARTICLE 24
(E/CONF.2/C.3/F/W.22) .
Mr. J. A. GUEERA (Cuba), Chairman of the Working Party on Article 24
presented its report.
The Sub-Committee considered the report paragraph by paragraph.
Recommendation on paragraph 2 of Article 24 (paragraph 2 (a) of the Report)
The Sub-Committee approved the recommendation on paragraph 2 of Article 24
The delegation of France stated that he had not had time to examine the
French Text as revised by the Working Party, and reserved the right to revert
to the French Text.
Amendments to paragraph 6 of Article 24 (paragraph 2 (b) of the Report)
The Sub-Committee considered the recommendations in paragraph 2 (b) of
the Working Party's report, which proposed an additional paragraph to
Article 6 and certain consequential drafting changes.
The delegate for the Philippines proposed that the following changes
should. be made in the suggested new paragraph 6 (d):
The word "Member" should replace "country" in line 2, and the word "has"
would replace "have" in line 4.
After discusion, the Sub-Committee approved the recommendation contained
in paragraph 2 (d) of the Working Party report, including the amendments
proposed by the delegate of the Pilippines.
Footnote to Article 24. E/CONF.2/C . 3/F/W.25
Page 3
Footnote to Article 24 (paragraph 2 (c) of the Report)
The Sub-Committee approved the recommendation to retain the footnote to
paragraph 4 of Article 24, referring to "frustration" (Item 81 of the Annotated
Agenda).
Amendment of Mexico Item 82 of the Annotated Agenda (paragraph 2 (d) of
the Report)
The Sub-Committee approved the Working Party's recommendation on Item 82
of the Annotated Agenda, contained in section 2 (d) of the Working Party's
report. In this connection the delegation of Mexico was invited to make a
statement by the Sub-Committee and said that his Government reserved its
position in respect to Article 24.
Title of Article 24 - Section B of Chapter IV (paragraph 2 (e) of the
Report)
The Sub-Committee approved the recommendation that changes be made in the
titles of Article 24 of Section B of Chapter IV.
Reservations on Article 24.
The delegate for Czechoslovakia stated that his Government reserved its
position on Article 24, pending the determination of the text of Article 23.
The delegate forArgentina stated that his Government reserved its position
On Article 24. |
GATT Library | pf049gp4810 | Notes on Tenth Meeting, held on Thursday, 6 January 1948 | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 9, 1948 | Joint Sub-Committee of Committees II and III on Tariff Preferences and Joint Sub-Committee of Committees II and III: Tariff Preferences | 09/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.23/A/W.10, E/CONF.2/C.2/D/W.1-3, C.23/A/W.1-3, and C.26/A/W.1-29 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/pf049gp4810 | pf049gp4810_90180349.xml | GATT_146 | 313 | 2,193 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C.2&3/A/
ON DU W.10 9 January 1948
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
SECOND AND THIRD COMMITTEES
JOINT SUB-COMMITTEE ON TARIEF PREFERENCES
Notes on Tenth Meeting, Held on Thursday, 6 January 1948
Chairmaman:Mr. S. SAHLIN (Sweden)
Article 42
The Sub-Committee discussed briefly all the proposals on Article 42 which
are contained in the Revised Annotated E/CONF/.2/C.3/11. It was agreed
that all those proposels shoued bs referred for detailed study to the proposed
Working Party. With the concuereecegaoef the delegate for Chile it was agreed
that the Note in the Geneva Report need not retained.
Article 15
A Revision of Article 15 proposed by thev delgate for Poland was submitted
to the Sub-Committee and after a brief discussion it was agreed that this should
also be referred to the proposed Working Party.
Appointment of Working Party
At the conclusion of the meeting, the Chairman suggested that a Working
Party should be established with the following terms of reference and
membership:
Terms of Reference
To examine the details of the proposals on Articles 15 and 42 and
those relating to tariff preferences on Article 16 with a view to submitting
recommendations te the Sub-Committee so as to enable the Sub-Committee
to reach agreement on the matters referred to it.
Membership
Belgium
Chile
France
Syria
United Kingdom
United States
Venezuela
with the delegate for France as Chairman.
/The Chairman E/CONF.2/C. 2&3/A/W.10
Page 2
The Chairman suggested that the Working Party should consult with other
Members of the Sub-Committee when questions of particular interest to them
were under consideration. The Delegate of Turkey proposed that on each such
occasion the other Member of the Sub-Committee should join the Working Party
with the status of a member.
The establishment of the Working Party as proposed by the Chairman and
the proposal of the Delegate of Turkey were approved. |
GATT Library | xs419nx9517 | Notes on the Eighth Meeting : Held on Wednesday, 4 February 1948, at 6.00 p.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, February 7, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Sub-Committee G (Swiss Proposal) | 07/02/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/G/W.8 and E/CONF.2/C.3/F/W.31/REV.2-32/G/W.1-13/H/W.1-9 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/xs419nx9517 | xs419nx9517_90190611.xml | GATT_146 | 883 | 5,729 | United Nations Nations Unies
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF. 2/C.3/G/W.8
ON DU 7 February 1948
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL ENGLISH
THIRD COMMITTEE: COMERCIAL POLICY
SUB-COMITTEE G (SWISS PROPOSAL)
NOTE ON THE EIGHTH MEETING
Hold on Wednesday, 4 February 1948, at 6.oo p.m.
Chairman: Mr. L. P.THOMPSON-McCAUSLAND (United Kingdom)
The representative of SWitzerland said that the discussion had so far
been inconclusive, and he requested that the Sub-Committee should make a
definite decisionn as to whether they wished to adopt the amendment proposed
by his delegation or not. The Sub-Committee decided against the adoption of
the amendment of the representative for Switzerland by four votes to three,
with two abstentions; one member of the Sub-Committee was not present.
The CHAIRMAN, in summing up the discussion to date, said that the
Sub-Committee had come to the following four conclusions: it had agreed
(1) that a country in the situation of Switzerland would be subject to serious
pressure if its principal customers were applying Article 21; (ii) that it
would be regrettable if such prussure undermined the convertibility of the
country's currency; and (iii) that the Charter did not include provisions
which would cover fully the requirements of Switzerland, as set forth by the
representative of Switzerland; further, that it was reasonable that such a
country should went to attain a position from which it could negotiate
bilateral agreements, and that if the pressure were severe such a country
would have to take emergency action either if its exports were seriously
curtailed, or if for one reasons or another it were flooded with Imports
which competed with its domestic industries. The Sub-Committee had not
agreed (iv) on, any specific exemption which would meet the case of
Switzerland.
The representative of Switzerland repeated his previous contention that
not only must the threat to convertibility be taken into account, but also
the danegr of widespread unemployment.
The representative of Belgium suggested that a solution to the problem
might be found if a country, a substantial part of whose exports went to
countries applying Articles 21 and 23, were allowed to apply such restrictions
as would enable it to reach suitable agreements to ensure that those other
countries might increase their imports from that particular country under
/Article 23. E/CONF.2/C.3/G/W.8
Page 2
Article 23. The representative for Switzerland said that he had, on previous
occasions, already rejected attempts to fit the case of Sw1itzerland into
Articles 21 and 23; he had no authority to accept any proposal other than the
one which his delegation had submitted. He thought, therefore, that the
Sub-Committee would be ill advised to proceed along the lines suggested by
the representative for Belgium.
The CHAIRMAN said that it was essential to draw a distinction between
the concept of a commercial system is laid down in the Charter and other
concepts of a commercial system. If the Charter system came into force
countries would accept certain limitations on their freedom of unilateral
action in order that the use of restrictions might be reduced to a minimum.
Within this system a country which was having Article 21 operated against it
had defences, as well as those countries which were in balance of payment
difficulties.Those difficulties could be more easily overcome if no country
imposed quantitative restrictions until compelled to do so by its balance of
payment situation. It must be noted that a country applying the provisions
of Article 21 was obligated to avoid unnecessary damage to the commercial
or economic interests of other members.
If, however, a country had in the past built up a system different from
that laid down by the Charter, its future policy would have to be determined
by whether or not it felt able to place sufficient reliance on the Charter
system coming into force to enable it to abandon its existing system. The
solution of the present problem must be concerned with this passage from one
system to another.
If the Sub-Committee accepted this approach to the problem, the
CHAIRMAN stated that he was willing to prepare a draft report on the lines
set out above. It would be difficult to draft a specific amendment embodying
the suggestions he had made, since any such proposal might have to appear in
a different part of the Charter from that which was within the terms of
reference of the Sub-Committee.
The representative of Switzerland stated that he did not agree with the
procedure suggested by the CHAIRMAN, on the ground that it would
unnecessarily prolong the debate. The issue vas straightforward and simple:
Switzerland desired freedom from the obligations of Chapter IV, and the
Sub-Committee should say explicitly whether it was prepared to grant such
freedom wholly, not at all, or in part. If they wore prepared to grant a
limited release, he wished to 21Know what particular limitations were envisaged.
He was opposed to the idea of giving a release for a specified period of
time; it was the general economic situation which would determine
Switzerlands ability to accept the provisions of Chapter, IV, and it was
/impossible to E/CONF.2/C.3/G/W.8
Page 3
impossible to tell if when the general economic situation would change.
The Sub-Comittee agreed that the chairman should prepare a draft
resorts, as he had himself suggested, and submit it to the next meeting of
the Sub-Committee. |
GATT Library | bf405kf4797 | Notes on the Eleventh Meeting : Held at the Capitol, Havana, Cuba, on Saturday, 7 February 1948 at 6.00 p.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, February 11, 1948 | Second Committee: Economic Development and Sub-Committee C (Articles 13 and 14) | 11/02/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.2/C/W.11, E/CONF.2/C.2/B/W.1-14, and C.2/C/W.1-13 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/bf405kf4797 | bf405kf4797_90180328.xml | GATT_146 | 943 | 6,529 | RESTRICTED
United Nations Nations Unies E/CONF.2/C.2/C/W.11
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE 11February 1948
ON DU ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI
SECOND COMMITTEE: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
SUB-COMMITTEE C ON ARTICLES 13 AND 14
NOTES ON THE ELEVENTH MEETING .
Hital, HvvUna Cube, on Satte' oatl-7 Februaryau 8 a 6.00 p.m..y 8 . .6tio.
The Sub-Committee considered the amendments submitted to paragraph 1 of
tQdedelegatitiy.ulou aCb and New ZlaaOlFEFaOnFd- (/2/9/
agee 32aed 4)f an ff Uruguay (E/CONF.2C.2//6/Add.23).
The representative for Uruguay stated that t he mainpurpose of the
amendmestoff hsi delegation wsa to clarify the meaning of the Geneav text.
Therepresentative f o Cuba estated that his delegation proposed to
extend the application of rAticle 13 to include maintenance of partiuclar
industries or branches of agriculture. In his opinion already establihsed
industriesmigh t require protection fo mire eextnded periodse of ime int
nord er tomaintain thememeslves. For example here ifwp rotctton wer
withd rawn faom thn srap indutry in Cuba, theesresl tingfshif ofn factors =f
production and especially of labour might create painful social dislocations.
The representative for New Zealand stated that his amendment, which also
iproposed to include maintenance of industries among the purposes for which
protective measures under Article 13 were allowed, was aimed at industries
which heve been established during the war. Such industries might for
certain time benefit from protection on balance of payments grounds, but it
was entirely possible that after certain time balance of payment considerations
would not any more apply; in these cases a country should be anabled, to apply
the measures of protection envisaged under Article 1 .
The representative of India supported the a mendmeants ofCuba nd of
.New Zealand Hecited o this e examplef hcountry wshed a Tariffstabliriff
Board to e xamineof thecases iestabries 'ta lished duri ang in the warnd
th ero needofpotehoction. Suld ited be adeci ydthe prior ay theal-'
Organization woul ne beeederp provnisios ought t madbewde he in tCharter to
such salss to consideration of the Onfthization.:'
$erepresentative for the Unite dgdomKoniopiod that hirnopin.oeiin
theUrugueye amendm centouId nout be dealtthwuntil thihte text of whothele
Article 13 had been disposed of. Concergnin the amendments submid tteby
/Cuba E/CONF.2/C2/C/W.11
Page 2
Cuba and New Zealand, she stated that the word "maintenance." could be
interpreted in different ways, If the word "maintenance" implied that the
measures contemplated under Article 13 did not only apply to the first stages
of economic development but to somewhat more advanced stages, then it was
covered by the present text of the Article or could be covered by a drafting
which would clearly bring out the fact. If what was meant by "maintenance"
referred to industries established during the war, these industries should be
regarded as being in a special category and should be dealt with according
to the criteria suggested by the Colombian delegate in the Working Party. If,
however, "maintenance" meant protection of the industry at any stage of
its development, then all countries could claim the right to impose
quantitative restrictions.
The Colombian delegate pointed out the difficulty for the Organization
to decide between cases of maintenance and of development.
The delegate for Australia pointed out that the word "maintenance"
implied action of a more permanent nature then that required for development.
Under those circumstances the nature of the decisions of the Organization
under Chapter III would be transformed into allowing the uses of protective
measures permanently.
The representative for Brazil thought that if it was meant to include
"maintance" within the scope of Chapter III, the position of under-developed
countries would made more difficult by the fact that developed countries
would also profit from measures allowed under Arictle 13,
The representative for India stated that Member under Article 9
undertook not only to develop and reconstruct their economic resources, but
also to raise standards of productivity. This last phrase implied
modernization adn rationalization of both industry and agriculture. During
the period when this transformation was taking place, countries should be
allowed to impose protective measures otherwise the industry or branch of
agriculture could not survive the critical period of transformation.
Chapter III and more particularly Article 13, should be interpreted in a
very broad sense to include these cases. In his opinion, it was unlikely
that countries would go on unnecessarily protecting their industries,
because they wouldh have the interest of their consumers before them and
consequently limit the time during which protection was accorded.
The representative of Norway stated that public opinion in his country
would certainly welcome the inclusion of the word "maintenance" due to the
fact that his word safeguarded existing investments. He thought, however,
that from the long run point of view this would no be advantageous, He,
therefore, opposed the amendment.
/THE representative E/CONF.2/C.2/C/W.11
Page 3
The representative for Iraq stated that insofar as the word "maintenancee"
applied to industries which had reached their fall expansion, he could not
support the amendment because in that case all industries in all countries
would come under the provisions of Article 13.
The representative for Argentina supported all three amendments. In his
opinion the Uruguayan amendment clarified a great deal the text of the Charter.
The representative for the United States for reasons already stated by
the representative for Norway, did not support the Cuban and New Zealand
amendments.
The representative for China stated that in his opinion Chapter III
should be limited to the underdeveloped countries and to the countries to be
reconstructed because the other parts of the Charter dealt adequately with
the problems of more developed countries.
On the suggestion of the Chairman it was decided to refer the Uruguayan,
New Zealand and Cuban amendments to Working Party No. 3. |
GATT Library | ct954xd7872 | Notes on the Eleventh Meeting : Held on Thursday, 12 February, at 3.00 p.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, February 13, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Sub-Committee E (Articles 20 and 22) | 13/02/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/E/W.23 and E/CONF.2/C.3/D/W/1-13/E/CONF.2/C.3/E/W/1-23 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/ct954xd7872 | ct954xd7872_90190558.xml | GATT_146 | 1,150 | 7,286 | Unted Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C.3/E/W.23
ON DU 13 February 1948
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
THIRD COMMITTEE: COMMERCIAL CO.CIAL POLICY
TEE E O ~ CUBS-CORTED E EN ARTIE] 20 ANW 22
NOES ONNG THE ELVETH MEETIM
H -i sduay, 12 F.00rUarm.y,at 3 p..
.Chairman:RJ.E.( HOLLOWAY Jouth Africa)
CNSDROAT HANDRAF CFREPORT TE UBUCOT MITLM-MTTEE CONUTEEE E TO COMTTEI III,
PART 1
1 Part I of the report was approved with the alteration of the word "elect"
to "elected" in paragraph 3.
PART II - - Article 20 General Elimination of Quantitative Restrictions
The Sub-ommniteoe hagreed that te following changes should be made in
Part II of the Report:
2. Paragraph 3 should read as follows:
"A Working Party set u p to considerthe amendments proposed by Chile
and Argentina (Items 1 and 2) reported that its work had not been
completed as it depended on a proposed amendment to Article 21 and a
Proposed interpretative statement by a delegate on the text of that
-E Article. The representative of Chile reserved his position until the
proposals mentioned above had been accepted and pending the final text
of Article 13. The representatives of Argentina (who was not a member
of the Sub-Committee) and Ireland also reserved the positions of their
delegations pending the final text of Aricles 13 and. 21."
3 The first eenteof paragraph 4 should read:
"The representative of China reserved his position until the general
situation became clearer."
4. At the end of paragraph 16, add, in parentheses, the words "see
paragraphs 17 and 19 below".
5. In the last line of paragraph 17, delete "paragraph 16" and substitute
paragraphh 15."
gr6p. In thnee seconiie of "para ah22, iisr the words "introduced during
mendmthmenf dmeome discomussion" af"a c=nenoColcnbia".
/7. Paragraph 24 E/CONF.2/C.3/E/W.23
Page 2
7. Paragraph 24 should read as follows:
"The Sub-Committee cannot recommend the adoption of the amendments
of Uruguay (Items 14 and 20) and Ireland (Item 18 and E/CONF.2/C.3/E/W.6)
8. In the last line of paragraph 31, delete the word "Sub-Committee" and
substitute "Committee".
9. Paragraphs 33,34 and 35, should read:
"33. The word "utilization" refers to the ultimate use of the products
and is not used in a technical sense. For example, wheat and flour are
so closely related as regards utilization that flour is to be regarded
as a processed form of wheat such as is referrod to in the interprotative
note.
34, The Sub-Committee took note that paragraph .3 (a) was not intended
to and did not establish any new exception permitting the use of
quantitative restrictions on imports. It is to be-understood that the -
basic requirement of the effective operation of restrictions on domestic
production or marketing remains as a condition precedent for all cases
in which import restrictions may be imposed under paragraph 2 (c) (i).
35. With regard to the interpretative note on "special factors" the
Sub-Committee agreed that it was desirable to make clear that changes
in relative productive efficiency between the home producers and foreign
producers should be taken into consideration in determining the size of
import quotas under Articles 20 (2) (c) (i). The Sub-Committee
recommends that -;he note to Article 20 (2) (c) of the Geneva text on
"special factors" should -be retained as an interpretative note to
sub-paragraph 3 (d) in the form set out in Part III of this Report."
It was further agreed that the first sentence of paragraph 35 in the
Report should be inserted in paragraph 5, under Article 22, where it proper
belonged.
10. Paragraph 37 should read:
"The Sub-Committee agreed that the use of the words "inter alia"
in the footnotes to Articles 20 and 22 on "special factors"
(see pages 13 and 16) should be brought to the notice of the Central
Drafting Committee.........
11. In paragraph 38, delete "in terms of" and substitute "under".
12. In paragraph 39, delete the words "procedure for establishing
Quantitative Restrictions under" and insert the wording of paragraph 39 as
thus revised in paragraph 1 of Part II also.
Article 22 -' Non-discriminatory Administration of Quantitative Restrictions
13. In paragraph 5 for "paragraph 36" read "paragraph-37".
/PART III - Text o E/CONF.2/C. 3/E/W. 23
Page 3
PART III - Text of Article 2O
14. The second line of sub-paragraph 3 (a) should read "measures referred to
in sub-paregraph 2 (c) are in force; and, when applied ...."
15. In the Interpretative Note to sub-paragraph 2 (c) delete the words
"to the" which appear in the third line.
16. Delete the Interpretative Note to paragraph 3, the wording of which, with
some minor alterations, should replace paragraph 34 of Part II. (see above).
Text of Article 22
17. The representative of Colombia referred to paragraph 2 (a) of Article 22,
and enquirer whether the import licensing system in force in Colombia would
be considered to conform to the requirements of this paragraph. He explained.
the practice of the Colombian authorities was to divide all imports which
were subject to restriction into a few broad categories (e.g. raw materials
and machinery) according to essentially and to permit traders to import any
goods they chose within each category up to a fixed maximum value. There was
no discrimination between different foreign sources of supply, but he wondered
whether the use of such broad categories would be permissable under
paragraph 2 (a).
The representative of the United Kingdom said that in his view the system
described by the representative of Colombia was fully in conformity with
Paragraph 2 (a). This paragraph did not specify what was to be regarded as
a "product", and, where this was practicable for the exporting country, there
was some advantage from the point of view of international trade in applying
import restrictions to wide rather than narrow categories, since this allowed
importers a. wider degree of choice as to the particular types of goods they
could import.
18. In response to a question by the representative of Colombia, it was the
concensus of the Sub-Committee that a Member which had allocated a quotas
might, during the quota period, reallocate it to other countries if adequate
supplies were not in fact entered under the original allocation.
19. The Sub-Committee took note of a letter from the Chairman of
Sub-Committee A of Committee III to the Chairman of Sub-Committee E of
Committes III. This letter stated that Sub-Committee A was recommending LG to
Committee III the addition of a newparagraph 7 to Article 18, and npoited
out that if this recommendation were adopted a consequential amendment to
delete the words "and to any internal regulation or requirements under
paragraph 2 of Article 18" in paragraph 5 of Article 22 would be necerssay.
20. In the end of the second Interpretative Note to Article 22 on page 16,
the format and wording should be changed as follows:
..a.blic notification of the change. This no way affects. |
GATT Library | tk406wd2709 | Notes on the Fifth Meeting : Held on Friday, 9 January 1948 at 5.45 p.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 12, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Sub-Committee E (Articles 20 and 22) | 12/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/E.7 and E/CONF.2/C.3/D/W/1-13/E/CONF.2/C.3/E/W/1-23 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/tk406wd2709 | tk406wd2709_90190540.xml | GATT_146 | 494 | 3,172 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CONFERNCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C.3/E .7
ON DU 12 January 1948
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE 'EMPLOI ORIGINAL: ENGLISHS
THIRD COMMITTES: CO1MMERCIAL POLICY
SUB-CO MITTEE E (ARTICLES 20 AND 22)
NOTES ON THE FIFTH MEETING
HELD on Friday, 9 January l948 at 5.45 p.m.
Chairman: Mr. J. E. HOLLOWAY (South Africa)
(Reference: E/CONF.2/C. 3/7)
ARTICLE 20 - GNERAL ELIMINATION OF QUANTITIVE RESTRICTIONS
1. Item 17 (Sweden)
The delegate of Sweden said he would withdraw his amendment if the records
included a statement that the case was covered by the existing draft of the
Article. The delegate of Cclombia reserved his position both as to the present
wording of sub-paragraph 2 (c) (ii) and the proposed explanatory statement.
It was agreed that the delegates of Sweden and the United, Kingdom should draft
an Explanatory note to meet the request of the delegate of Sweden.
2. Item 19 (Norway)
The delegate o. Norway said he would withdraw this amendment if the
present wording were interpreted in such a way as to permit a country to
impose quantitative restrictions on the import of any one product used in the
production of a given animal product. He feared that the word "mainly" might
mean that if, for example, a country imported both maize and oil cake, it would
have to restrict the import of both or of neither.
After a lengthy discussion on the meaning of the word "restrict" in
sub-paragraph (c), it was agreed that the delegates of Mexico and the
United Kingdom should draft a note on this point. Further consideration of the
amendment of Norway was deferred until this note had been submitted to the
sub-committee.
3. Item 8 (China)
There was substantial support for drafting a provision which would
incorporate the substance of the propose. of China. It was agreed that a
Working Group composed of the delegates of China, and the United States the United States
should consult together to draft such a proposal.
i. Item 13 (Norway)
There was no support for this amendment.
/5, Item 15 (Egypt) E /CONF. 2/C. 3/E N .7
Peg 2
5. Item 15 (Egypt)
The delegate of Egypt withdrew this amendment.
6. Item 23 (Chile)
There was support for the principle of this amendment but some delegates
expressed doubt as to the present wording. It was agreed that a Working Party
composed of the delegations of Chile, the Netherlands, Peru, the United Kingdom
and the United States should submit a new draft.
7. Item 16 (United Kingdom)
This amendment was accepted.
8. Item 24 (Geneva Draft Note).
It was agreed that this note must be retained in some form. The delegate
of Chile pointed out that the amendment of his delegation to Article 53 was
relevant to this issue and further consideration by the sub-committee was
therefore postponed.
9. Item 25 (Geneva Draft Note)
Consideration was deferred as the delegate of Peru announced that he would
submit an amendment to sub-paragraph (c). |
GATT Library | tf422bk1912 | Notes on the Fifth Meeting : Held on Tuesday, 13 January 1948 at 6.00 p.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 14, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Sub-Committee F (Articles 21, 23 and 24) | 14/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/F/W.13 and E/CONF.2/C.3/F/W.1-31/REV.2 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/tf422bk1912 | tf422bk1912_90190574.xml | GATT_146 | 261 | 1,816 | United Nations Nations Unies / RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C.3/F/W.13
ON DU 14 January 1948
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI 14 January 1948
ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
THIRD COMMITTEE: COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUB-COMMITTEE F (ARTICLE 21, 23 AND 24)
NOTES ON THE FIFTH MEETINGFT E
Hed ouns Te dayn 13nuy Jary 8 1940t00 6.. pm.
irman: J. >aELA DN (R. oay)±
(efcrfnce: E/COONF. 2W/C./37)
ARTILCE 21I- RSERICTTION TO SSA FEUGADR TE BALANCEE O PAYMENTST PA
ube SmmittumCoee concluded its gal dienericus ofsioe nath,roposed
Baelageinm mndent to Article 21 (See/F//F./W C.3.n6) urnedad e to consideration
gpararabph ya pargraph meof andments to Article 21 notvi preousy disposed of
After discussion of the Belgian ammendent for a new paragraph 1 to
Article See 21 (/C/W.,. 36) it agreedwas to refer the proposal tWwow rking
Group to be set upd to eal wite reh thmng ainiamentdmens to Article 21.
s 28 aItned3 e eaustralia) were fdrradrrfvocor ideration at nscoreanior.t the
next eent.g
After discussion d the proposeBemlgian ampendents to ara) (graphs 3 (bi)
a 3 (b) (iii) werd fe rerkfer dr Wa ngoGoup.r
VeIte 4Ve ezuela)i ding nnot ndgii ay suppSubort in th b-Comuittee, it
sVageer ithatl d b shoulai eropped.,
Item 46 (Venezuela) was withdrawn by the Venezveanl delegate in the
lgiht of the previous rejection by thoe Sub-Cmmittee of Iteme 39e eVnezula.)
COn theN HApIRMA's rioposal t ewas agred to esablish a Worikng Group
cnsioing ofs lehe dleaets ogf BelCiumf Indn,uban,C, UiridemdKn nidna the
Uiedt States to dewal i th,dmen mndt to Artilce 21whi ch had been referred
to a Worknig Group at this meet.ing |
GATT Library | qx218hb2811 | Notes on the Fifth Meeting : Held on Wednesday, 14 January 1948 at 10.30 a.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 14, 1948 | Second Committee: Economic Development and Sub-Committee B (Article 12) | 14/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.2/B/W.10, E/CONF.2/C.2/B/W.1-14, and C.2/C/W.1-13 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/qx218hb2811 | qx218hb2811_90180312.xml | GATT_146 | 220 | 1,597 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C.2/B/W.10
ON DU 14 January 1948
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
SECOND COMMITTEE: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
SUB-COMMITTEE B ON ARTICLE 12
NOTES ON THE FIFTH MEETING
Held on Wednesday, 14 January 1948 at 10.30 a.m.
The Sub-Committee continued consideration of the proposed redraft of
Article 12 submitted by the Australian delegation (see C/2/B/W.7). The
Chairman stated that certain corrigenda should be made in document C.2/B/W.7.
These corrigenda have now been circulated in document C.2/B/W.7/Corr.1.
The Sub-Committee discussed the Australian redraft in detail and a number
of amendments were suggested.
The Sub-Committee than considered paragraph 3 of Article 12 of the Geneva
text .The Chairman called attention to the amendments to this paragraph
appearing in the Annotated Agenda of Committee II (C.2/9). There being no
support for these amendments, it was agreed to retain paragraph 3 of the Geneva
text in its present form.
On the suggestion of the Chairman it was agreed to establish a Working Group
consisting of the delegates of Australia, India, Mexico, Netherlands and the
United States of America with the following terms of reference:
"To prepare an agreed text of Article 12 on the basis of the
Australian redraft, taking into account the proposed amendments to this
redraft and other relevant amendments proposed to Article 12." |
GATT Library | hm523bs4822 | Notes on the First Meeting : Held at Capitolic, 13 January 1948, at 6.00 p.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 14, 1948 | Joint Sub-Committee of Committees V and VI | 14/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.56/W.2 and E/CONF. 2/C. 5/W. 1-6 C. 56/W. 1-3 WHITE PAPERS | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/hm523bs4822 | hm523bs4822_90200079.xml | GATT_146 | 703 | 4,735 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C .5&6/w.2
ON DU 14 January 1948
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
JOINT SUB-COMMITTEE OF COMMITTEES V AND VI
NOTES ON THE FIRST MEETING
Held at Capitolic, 13 January 1948, at 6.00 p.m.
Chairman: Mr. TINCCO (Costa Rica)
The Sub-Committee elected. Mr. TINOCO(Costa Rica) as Chaiman..
The Sub-Committee proceeded to the consideration of Part B of
E/CONF.2/C,o5&6/W.1 th Add. 1. The Sub-Committee agreed that the matter
covered by the propose of the United States Delegation in Add.,1 should be
deait with in Article 94. It was ated. that if a provision on the subject
vere to appear as sub-paragraph (c), the present sub-pararaph (c) would
be retained as sub-paragraph (d).
On the precise text of any such provision the following suggestions
vere 'made for amendmetns to the text of the United States proposal: -
(1) That the mord "inter-goverrmental" might be added. between "eny'
and agreement".
(2) That the word. "commodity" might be added between "inter-Governments
and "agreement".
(3) That the word "solely" might be added before "for the purpose
of.,. '
(4) That the word. 'its" might be added before "national security, or
alternatively hat the words "of one or more of the members participating
in the agreements might be added at the end.
A Working Party consisting of the representatives of Chile the
Netherland. the United Kingdom and the United. States was. established to
consider these proposed changes.
It was agreed also that if a paragraph on these lines was to be-*
included in Article.94 some provision should be introduced in an appropriate
article concerning consultation on the liquidation of any stocks accumilated
under this paragraph. One delegation in particular indicated that its
willingness to accept such a paragraph in Article 94 depended on the inclusion
elsewhere of some satisfactory provision concerning stock-pile liquidation.
/There was some E/CONF.2/C.5&6/W.2
Page 2
There was some suggestion that such a provision might be inserted in
connection with Article 43 paragraph Il (c), but on consideration it was
concluded that since that paragraph in Article 43 was concerned with the
transitional period following the war, it would not be an appropriate place
f or a provision concerning an indefinite period.
The representative 'of the United States indicated the willingness of
his Delegation to insert a provise following. the word "sale" at the end of
the first sentence in paragraph 2 of Article 30 to the following effect:
"Provided that, upon a comlaint that substantial injury is being
caused or is anticipated a Member shalll accord sympathetic consideration
to, and shall afford adequate opportunity for, consultation regarding
such representations as. may be made by any other Member with respect to
disposal of reserve stocks so acquired"'.
The Sub-Committee agreed to recommend to the Sub-Committee dealing with
Section D of Chapter IV that provisions De made in that section for
consultation on the liquidation of stock piles accumulated pursuatn to the
new paragraph in Article .94 and to tranmit that Sub-Committee for its
consideration the above provise proposed by the representative of the-
United. States, together with the following alternative text from the report
of Sub-Committee A of the Fifth Committee (E/CONF.2/C.5&6/W.1, Annex)s
- "Any Member aci,i;atomg mpm-commercial reserves of primary
commodities for military purposes under an inter-governmental agreemant.,.
.. shall not make arrangemets for the commercial liquidation of such
reserve stocks in such a way as to injure the commercial interests of
producers of, the commodities in question, and shall consult with the
Orginization as to the best means to that end".
The. representative off Iraq felt that. the point raised -previcusly by his
*Delegation ,concerning Article 94 might be covered by inserting in the present
text of the proposed new paragraph (c) the words "or taking any other action"
between military. establishment" and. "for the purpose of... 'The
Sub-Committee was of *.the view that this question -as not within its compatance
and could be dealt with only by the Sub-Committee concerned with the whole of
Article- 94 and particularly with paragaph (b). The representative. of Iraq
indicated that his Delegation could. not agree. to the, inclusion of the proposed
new pararaph (c), until its own amendment to Article 94 had been dealt with
satisfactorily, |
GATT Library | df184cr5418 | Notes on the First Meeting : Held at the Capitol, Havana, Cuba, on Tuesday, 6 January 1948, at 3.00 p.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 7, 1948 | Second Committee: Economic Development and Sub-Committee C (Articles 13 and 14) | 07/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.2/C/W.2, E/CONF.2/C.2/B/W.1-14, and C.2/C/W.1-13 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/df184cr5418 | df184cr5418_90180319.xml | GATT_146 | 347 | 2,500 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CONFERECE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C.2/C/
ON DU W. 2
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI 7 January 1948
ORGINAL: ENGLISH
SECOND COMMITTEE: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
SUB-COMMITTEE C ON ARTICLES 13 AND 14
NOTES ON THE FIRST MEETING
Held at the Capitol, Havana, Cuba, on
Tuesday, 6 January 1948, at 3.00 p.m.
The Sub-Committee was called to order and proceeded to the
election of its Chairman. The representatives of Norway and Cuba were
nominated to the post of Chairman, and their nominations seconded, but due to
the absence of the Cuban representative, it was decided to postpone
the election of the Chairman until the next meeting.
It was unanimously agreed that Mr. ADARKER (India) should take
the Chair provisionally.
Called upon by the temporary Chairman, the Secretary of the
Sub-Committee explained the general lines of the amendments submitted
to Articles 13 and 14. The Sub-Committee then commenced discussion
of its plan of work.
The Chairman explained that at the present time, Sub-Committee E
of the Third Committee, concerned with Articles 20 and 22, still had under
discussion amendments proposing that, for the purpose of economic
development, some exceptions be allowed to the obligation to eliminate
quantitative restrictions. He suggested, therefore, that it would be
advisable for this Sub-Committee not to discuss amendments to Article 13
which applied to obligations incurred under the provisions of Chapter IV,
other than those assumed through negotiations.
After a short debate, it was agreed to start with consideration
of the amendments to Article 13 concerning negotiated commitments.
It was further decided to limit the discussion at this stage to the
general principle implied in the respective amendments and to avoid
discussion of specific phraseology.
The representatives of Uruguay, Mexico, China and Argentina explained
their amendments, which aimed at permitting the adoption of measures
conflicting with negotiated commitments for the purpose of economic
development without the prior approval of the Organization.
/The representative E/CONF . 2/C. 2/C/W. 2
Page 2
The representative of Cuba reserved his position concerning all
the amendments, pending the decision of the Sub-Committee on the
Cuban amendment. |
GATT Library | ns387wm9313 | Notes on the First Meeting held at the Palais des Nations, Geneva, at 10:00 a.m. on 8 September, 1948 | General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, September 9, 1948 | General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (Organization) and Committee of Contracting Parties on Special Exchange Agreements | 09/09/1948 | official documents | GATT/CEA/2 and GATT/CEA/1-9 GATT/CEA/W.1-6 GATT/CEA.2/W.1-11 GATT/CEA/N.1-4 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/ns387wm9313 | ns387wm9313_90310149.xml | GATT_146 | 386 | 2,391 | -
RESTRTCTED
LIMITED B
GATT/CEA/2
9 September, 1948
ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
GENERAL AGREEMENT ON TARIFFS AND TRADE
Committee of Contracting Parties on Special
Exchange Agreements
Notes on the First Meeting held at the
Palais des Nations, Geneva, at 10:00 arm.
on 8 September, 1948.
Election of Chairman
Mr. George BRONZ, representative of the United States,
was appointed as temporary Chairman to conduct the pro-
ceedings at this first meeting.
Draft of Special Exchange Agreement
The representative of the International Monetary Fund
stated that they had prepared a draft agreement, and the
Chairman mentioned that a draft had also been prepared by
the Secretariat of the Interim Commission for the Inter-
national Trade Organization. It was agreed that copies of
these drafts should be distributed to provide a basis for
discussion at the second meeting of the Committee and that
it would not be possible to begin a consideration of
questions of substance at this meeting,
The Committee considered whether they should prepare a
master draft or a draft agreement for each contracting party
which is not a member of the Fund; it was decided that a
master draft should be prepared and that this should then be
adapted to suit the circumstances of individual countries.
It was noted that several of the four contracting parties
which are not at present members of the Fund may become
members in the near future, in which case a part of the
Committee's task would fall away, but further, that even
though all these contracting parties should become members
of the Fund, the Committee would nevertheless be required
to prepare a master agreement in view of the fact that two
or three of the governments which intend to participate in
tariff negotiations with the Contracting Parties in April,
1949, are not members of the Fund and it would then be
necessary to conclude special exchange agreements between
them and the CONTRACTING PARTIES.
The Next Meeting of the Committee
The Committee decided that its second meeting should
be held in London in Octooer or November, the exact time to
be determined by the Executive Secretary of the ICITO in
consultation with the Government of the United Kingdom and
the representatives of the International Monetary Fund; the
members of the Committee to be given at least one month's
notice of the time fixed. |
GATT Library | fv738qg3031 | Notes on the First Meeting : Held on Tuesday,6 January 1948 at 5.45 p.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 7, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Sub-Committee F (Articles 21, 23 and 24) | 07/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/F/W.1 and E/CONF.2/C.3/F/W.1-31/REV.2 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/fv738qg3031 | fv738qg3031_90190559.xml | GATT_146 | 302 | 2,122 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF. 2/ C.3/F/W.1
ON DU 7 January 1948
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
THIRD COMMITTEE: COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUB-COMMITTEE F - (ARTICLES 21, 23 AND 24)
NOTIES ON THE FIRST MEETING
Held on Tuesday, 6 January 1948 at 5.45 p.m.
Chairman: Mr. J. MELANDER (Norway)
(Reference: E/CONF.2/C.3/7)
1. Mr. MELANDER UR (Norway)swao unrousously elected Chairman of the
sub-committee.
2. The sub-committee decided to proceed with discussion of the amendments
to Article 21 but to reserve its final decision until the revised texts now
being prepared by the delegations of Belgium and Czechoslovakia were ready for
circulation as working papers.
Article 21 - Restrictiona to Sauegmard the Balance of Payments
3. Item 27
The sense of the sub-committee was that the proposal of Ceylon had not
received sufficient support and that, the Geneva Draft should be provisionally
maintained.
4. eItoms 29, a0 end 31
Little support was given to the amendmenty bv Argentina, Venezueaa end
Chile and it was decided that further discussion should be based on the Geneva
Draft.
The delegation of Chile wishes to reserve its position on sub-paragraph
2 (a).
5. Items 28 and 33
After some discussion further consideration of these Australian
amendments was deferred until the revised text being prepared by the Belgian
delegation was completed.
6. Item 35
The following revised wording of the Danish amendment was proposed by the
delegate of the United Kingdom and received support:
"A high level of demand for imports or for products which would
otherwise have been available for export".
/,There was E/CONF.2/C.3/F/W 1
Page 2
There was some opposition to the suggestion that the point in the
amendment was adequately covered by Article 43; further discussion was deferred
until the revised text being prepared by the Belgian delegation was
completed. |
GATT Library | nn374zn6017 | Notes on the Fourteenth Meeting : Held on 15 March 1948, at 9.45 p.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, March 16, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Sub-Committee F (Articles 21, 23 and 24) | 16/03/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/F/W.32 and E/CONF.2/C.3/F/W.31/REV.2-32/G/W.1-13/H/W.1-9 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/nn374zn6017 | nn374zn6017_90190600.xml | GATT_146 | 618 | 3,999 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
E/CONF.2/C.3/F/W.32
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE 16 March 1948
ON DU
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
THIRD COMMITTEE: COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUB-COMMITTEE F (ARTICLES 21, 23 AND 24)
NOTES ON THE FOURTEENTH MEETING
Held on 15 March 1948, at 9.45 p.m.
Chairman: Mr. J. MELANDER (Norway)
1. The representative of the United Kingdom said that an account of certain
of the proceedings of the Working Party which had been considering Article 23
had appeared in the press. It was generally understood that Working Party
proceedings were of a private nature, and in any case, some of the statements
had been inaccurate. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~- .. -
e:E 41C G
The CHAIR ofthe Working Party made it clear that although he had --
been approached by the press on more than one occasion he had reluctantly
declined to reRMeasof any information. The CHAIMAN fthe Sub-Committee
expressed his regmeret at the irregularity of the thod in which this information
~~~~ 4ncHe poit in nrtgaed ou~ ~ o the Fourteenth
ng ofMeeti the Smmitube,-Cooevte, hhaw the rer tteport under discussion would
be published, as an Unrestricted document.
DERATION OF CTH REPORT OF THE EONSKING PARIKnoN RARTILECIM 2(DcuComeEn
/CNF.2/C.3/F/W.31/.Rv.21 and Do umen E/tMONF.2/C.3///F.W1//Re.v2/Corr1).'
Text of the Article
. Paragraphs 1 and 2 were approved.
3. On the suggestion of the representatives of the United Kingdom and the
United States, it was argeed that paragarph4 of the Geneva text should be
reproduced in its entirety as paragraph 3 of the text of the Article. As a
conseuqence it w as agree dthat paragraph 2 of the Annex should be deleted.
Paragarph 3w as approved.
4 Paragraph4 was approved. The words in square brackets were provisionally
retained in the text pending further discussion by the full Committee.
5. Paragraph 5 was approved.
6. The deletion of the Interpretative Note otpparagraphs 1 4- and the
nsertion of a new interpretati-e Note to sub-paragraph 1 (g) were approved.
Text of the Annex
7. Paragraph 1 was approved.
/8. It was
htprgah1o h eeatx hudb E/CONF.2/C.3/F/W.32
Page 2
8. It was agreed that paragraph 3 should be renumbered to conform with the
amendment approved above in paragraph 3 and that the first sentence should be
amended to read: "Any Member taking action under paragraph 1 of this Annex...".
This paragraph was approved.
9. A similar renumbering was approved in the case of paragraph 4. It was
also agreed that the third and fifth lines of the paragraph should be amended
to Include only a reference to paragraph 1 of the Annex
This paragraph was approved.
10. The Interpretative Note to the Annex was approved.
11. The delegation of Argentina reserved its position on the Article on the
grounds that his country wished to maintain freedom of action in regard to
its system of controls and that the functions and powers of the ITO should
not be of an executive nature.
12. The delegation of Brazil expressed no opinion on the Article.
Report of the Working Party
13. It was agreed that paragraph 11 of the Report should be altered to conform
with the amendment approved above in paragraph 3.
The Report was approved.
Other Business
__ __ .in. ~th Sub.C~mtt i J;u*<d
14. It w the Sub-Committee would becas agreed that, since the Chairman o
leaving Havana before the full Committee considered Articles 23 and 24 in
secmond reading, the Report of the Sub-Comittee should be presented to
Committee III by Mr. Phillips (Australia).
15. It was agreed that the Sub-Committee should not hold a meeting to approve
its Draft Report and that any delegations would have the right to submit
statements on ths Report as Published by the Secretariat. |
GATT Library | zg560qh6813 | Notes on the Fourth Meeting : Held at the Capitol, Havana, Cuba, on Monday, 12 January 1948 at 6.00 p.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 13, 1948 | Second Committee: Economic Development and Sub-Committee C (Articles 13 and 14) | 13/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.2/C/W.5, E/CONF.2/C.2/B/W.1-14, and C.2/C/W.1-13 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/zg560qh6813 | zg560qh6813_90180322.xml | GATT_146 | 1,344 | 8,738 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C. 2/C/W. 5
ON DU 13 Janaury 1948
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI
ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
SECOND COMMITTEE: ECONOMIC DEVELOPEMENT
SUB-COMMITTEE C OF COMMITTEE II ON ARTICLES 13 AND 14
NOTES ON THE FOURTH MEETING Held at the Capitol, Havana, Cuba, on Monday, 12 January 1948 at 6.00 p.m.
Chairman: Mr. GUTIERREZ (Cuba)
The CHAIRMAN said that he had conferred with Mr. Holloway the CHAIRMAN
of Sub-Committee E of Committee III on Articles 20 and 22 in particular as
to the adviseability of a joint meeting. However, the work ofm Sub-Comittee E
had not yet reached the stage where such a meeting would be useful.
Mr. BRUDZINSKI (Poland) on the invitation of the Chairman discussed
four types of measures:
(a) consistent with both negotiated and non-negotiated commitments,
(b) consistent with negotiated commitments, inconsistent with
(c) consistent with non-negotiated commitments, inconsistent with
negotiated commitments,
(d) inconsistent with both negotiated and non-negotiated commitments.
Measures of type (a) were not and did not need to be prohibited by the
Charter. Measures of type (b) were covered in paragraphs 2 and 4 of
Article 13. Measres of types (c) and (d) were both covered in the same way
in paragaphs 2 and 3 of Article 13, but in fact the two types were different,
Measures of type (c) should be subJect of direct negotiations without
the intervention of the Organ.ization Such measures did not differ greatly
from those of type (a) which could be freely imposed.
Mr. SHACKLE (United Kingdom) opposed any proposal that negotiations
between the parties directly concerned would be sufficient and that the
Organization should not intervene in the case of measures of type (d). But
even in the case of measures of type (c) at least other countries with a
substantial interest in the question should be consulted. The Organization
should sponsor the negotiations because of their primarily multilateral
character. E/CONF.2/C.2/C/W.5
Page 2
Mr. VIRATA (Philippines) agreed with the representative of Poland as
regards measures of type (c). He had no objection to the Organization
examining the situation, but was opposed to the idea of its having to concur
in principle prior to re-negotiations. The Organization should automatically
sponsor all re-negotiations. He supported the Chilean amendment to substitute
"shall release" for "may release" in paragraph 3 (c).
Mr. DE LEON BELLOC. (Argentina) felt that none of the arguments concerning
sovereignty, speed and secrecy had been aswered. With reference to
sovereignty, his country had just emerged from conditions of colonial economy.
It wished to be politically sovereign, economically free and socially just.
He realized that when a state ratified a treaty, by so doing it relinquished
a part of its sovereignty. An agreement between two equal parties, however,
was quite different to the handing over of national sovereignty to an
international organization. The Charter had to be so drafted that it could
be implemented by all Members. Not many countries would be able to fulfill
the requirements of Article 13 as it now read. It should be left to
Articles 89 and 90 to provide the solution to any problems that might arise.
Mr. VALDES RODRIGUEZ (Cuba) said that to achieve a just compromise
between the highly developed and under-developed countries, both groups would
have to make certain sacrifices, but at the present time, Article 13 was
weighted in favour of the highly developed countries. He did not feel that
national sovereignty would be jeopardized through signing the ITO Charter.
He shared the views of the Mexican representative that there was no
Justification for the intervention of the Organization, when two parties to
an agreement decided to re-negotiate that agreement. To allow
non-participating countries to intervene in such re-negotiations would be to
give them an advantage over the countries, which had originally signed the
agreement.
Mr. STEWART (Uruguay) explained that he had a legal concept of the word
"sovereignty". Sovereignty was "auto-limitation", that is, it could only be
violated by imposition from outside.
Mr. TORRES (Brazil) could see no reason why the short-comings of
Article 13, which had been pointed out could not be met. It had been
suggested that agreements might be modified simply by re-negotiation, that
the process of consultation could be simplified and that secrecy must be
assured. He then outlined proposals now available in document
E/CONF.2/C.2/C/5. In the case of negotiated commitments it should not be
necessary to consul, all Member of ITO, but only the principle suppliers and
/also those with E/CONF.2/C.2/C/W.5
Page 3
also those with a secondary interest, as suggested by the Norwegian
representative. The Organization should establish a time-schedule for the
negotiations. The Organization should sponsor the negotiations and this
Might even be of advantage to the countries which had opposed its
intervention. It had not been made clear whether Article 40 could be applied
in a case in which a request for the right to apply restrictive measures
resulted in a flooding of the market of the country in question. It ought
to be made clear that the position of a country could be protected during the
period before a decision was taken by the Organization.
Mr. LIEU (China) felt that there was no need to consult the Organization
in connection with the modification of a negotiated commitment, though its
good offices could be used if necessary. He supported the Brazilian view
that participation in re-negotiations should be limited to those affected by
such a move. Even with a system of direct negotiations, a leakage of
information could result in the flooding of markets and some provision to
meet this would have to be included in Article 13.
Mr. HAWKINS (United States of America) agreed with the distinction
between measures of types (c) and (d). The latter case was clearly one
concerning which the Organization should take action. With regard to the
former he was inclined to agree with the Brazilian representative that
something could be done to make for greater speed and secrecy. The Mexican
representative had raised the question of the need for speed as an argument
against the intervention of the Organization. The procedure in Article 13 (3)
was such as it was so that all Members could be informed of any contemplated
restrictive measures. The argument that it would not be necessary to consult
the Organization as only a few countries would be concerned in the matter,
had been met by the Norwegian representative in his statement on the indirect
benefits which accrued to countries with lesser volumes of trade. Despite
that argument, It might be preferable to shorten the procedure as suggested
by the Brazilian representative, Article 40 did appear to him to provide
sufficient flexibility and protection during the period before a decision
was reached by the Organization, for action could be taken with reference
to a threatened as well as to an actual danger.
Mr. NOVOA (Mexico) emphasized the need for a time-limit to negotiations
and Supported the Chilean amendment to paragraph 3 (c).
Mr. HEWEIT (Australia) was in favour of a draft along the lines of that
suggested by the Brazilian representative.
Mr. REISMAN (Canada ) accepted the idea that the intervention of the
/Organization could E/CONF.2/C.2/C/W.5
Page 4
Organization could be limited in the case of measures of type (c). But the
Organization would have to play some part in determining which countries
were interested. In his opinion, the Brazilian proposal provided a
satisfactory starting point for a discussion on these questions. He agreed
with the United States representative with respect to Article 40.
Mr. ARAUJO (Colombia) asked to what extent a Member, which had signed
the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, could be denied a part in any
negotiations, After discussion it was agreed that a Working Party should be
set up to stated, as clearly as possible, the issues which had emerged from
the general discussion and to consider in particular the proposals of the
Brazilian delegation and that it should consist of the representatives of
Australia Brazil, China, Mexico, United Kingdom and the United States of
America presided over by the Chairman of the Sub-Committee. |
GATT Library | wr778zb5227 | Notes on the Fourth Meeting : Held on Monday, 12 January 1948 at 3.00 p.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 13, 1948 | Second Committee: Economic Development and Sub-Committee B (Article 12) | 13/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.2/B/W.9, E/CONF.2/C.2/B/W.1-14, and C.2/C/W.1-13 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/wr778zb5227 | wr778zb5227_90180311.xml | GATT_146 | 162 | 1,189 | United Nations Nations Unies
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF. 2/C.2/B/W.9
ON DU 13 January 1948
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL:ENGLISH
SECOND COMMITTEE: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
SUB-COMMITTE B ON ARTICLE 12
NOTES ON THE FOURTH MEETING
Held on Monday, 12 January 1948 at 3.00 p.m.
1. The delegates of the United States and Australia made general statements
on the attitude of their delegations toward the provisions of an Article on
international investments.
2. At the conclusion of his statement the Australian delegate offered a
redraft of paragraph 1 and 2 of Article 12 as a basis for discussion.
(This redraft is circulated separately as document E/CONF.2/C.2/B/W.7). After
discussion, in the course of which several types of amendments to the
Australian redraft were suggested, it was agreed unanimously to use the redraft
as a basis of discussion, without prejudice to returning to the Geneva Draft
of Article 12 in the event that agreement could not be reached on the basis of
the suggested redraft. |
GATT Library | hw908gx4991 | Notes on the Ninth and Eleventh Meetings : Held Saturday, 27 December 1947, 10.30 a.m. and Tuesday, 30 December 1947, 10.30 a.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 2, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Third Committee: Commercial Policy Sub-Committee A (Articles 16, 17, 18, 19) | 02/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.18 Rev.2 and E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.1-39 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/hw908gx4991 | hw908gx4991_90190440.xml | GATT_146 | 813 | 5,492 | United Nations Nations Unies RESRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF 2/C. 3/A/W.18
ON DU 2 January 1948
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL 1948
THIRD COMMITTEE: COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUB-COMMITTEE A (ARTICLS 16, 17, 18, 19)
NOTES ON THE NINTH AND ELEVENTH MEETINGS
Held Saturday, 27 December 1947, 10.30 a.m. and
Tuesday, 30 December 1947, 10.30 a.m.
Chairman : Dr. G. A. LAMSVELT (Netherlands)
ARTICLE 17 - REDUCTION OF TARIFFS AND ELIMINATION OF PREFERENCE
1. It was agreed to adopt the New Zealand delegate's suggestion to revise
numbered paragraph 1 of the Notes of the Seventh Meeting, 22 December 1947
(E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.11) as follows:
"There are no exceptions to the obligation to enter into
negotiations directed to the elimination of the preferences referred.
to in paragraph 2 of Article 16."
2. It was agreed, on the suggestion of the Peruvian delegate, to add to
the Notes of tbe Eighth Meeting, 23 December 1947 (E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.15) in
paragraph 3, after the words "The Peruvian delegate withdrew his delegation's
proposal" the following: "because it appeared from the discussion that its
objective was already sufficiently covered by Article 13".
Agenda Item 1 - amendments to rules for negotiations; exemptions from
requirement to negotiate; criteria for determining failure
to negotiate.
3 Items 28 and 40 - economic development (Haiti) (Chile)
It was agreed that these proposals had been covered in principle by the
discussion at the previous meeting regarding special consideration in
negotiations for under-developed countries.
4. Items 31 (iv), -32 and 33 (i) - ad valorem basis (Mexico) and automatic
tariff reductions through or readjustment subsequent to currency depreciation
(Colombia) (Peru).
NOTE: References are to items in the Revised Annotated Agenda (E/CONF.2/C.3/6).
* This document replaces the documents issued as E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.18 and
W.18/Rev.1 which should be destroyed.
/The Sub-Committee E/CONF. 2/C. 3/A/W.18/Rev. 2
Page 2
The Sub-Committee reached substantial agreement that
(a) It is not necessary to write the Mexican proposal (Item 31 (iv))
into Article 17 because nothing in this Article would preclude the
conversion of specific into ad valorem duties prior to negotiations.
The Mexican delegate reiterated that his position regarding the
necessity for additional rules of negotiations would depend upon the
balance of Article 17 as a whole.
(b) There is no need to write the Peruvian proposal (Item 31 (i)) into
Article 17 because
(1) prior to negotiations, any Member country would be free to
increase the specifc duty on any unbound item for any reason
since Article 17 does not provide for a general binding of all
items. It would, however, remain to be determined during
negotiations whether a readjustment of specific duties to
compensate for the devaluation of a Member's currency had had
the effect of increasing their protective incidence or was
merely equivalent compensation.
(2) Subsequent to negotiations, should a Member's currency be
devalued consistently with the Articles of Agreement of the
International Monetary Fund by more than twenty percent, the
General Agreement (Article II, 6 (a)) permits the readjustment
of specific duties to take account of the devaluation, subject
to certain safeguards.
(c) Regarding the Colombian proposal (Item 32),
(1) the effects of devaluation of a Member's currency, or of a rise
in prices, would have to be considered during negotiations in
order to determine, first, the change in the protective
incidence of the Member's specific tariffs and, secondly,
whether the binding of any specific duties reduced by currency
devaluation or a rise in prices represented in fact a
concession equivalent in value to the substantial reduction
of high tariffs or the elimination of tariff preferences
warranting like concessions.
(2) If it were agreed during negotiations that devaluation had in
fact resulted in law specific duties, most Members of the
Sub-Committee felt that this factor could be taken into
account under the rules of negotiations as now drafted without
any amendment thereto. The Colombian delegate preferred that
some reference be made in Article 17 to low tariffs resulting
from currency devaluation or a rise in prices.
/It was agreed E/CONF . 2/C. 3/A/. 18/Rev. 2
Page 3
It was agreed to refer the 0olomb?an proposal to the draft group.
5. Items 28, 34, 40 and 41 - revenue tariffs (Haiti) (Ceylon) (Chile)
(El Salvador)
The discussion of these items was continued to the next meeting.
6. The Chairman proposed that the delegates of Australia, France, Mexico,
Peru and the United States constitute a drafting group; that the notes of
Sub-Committee meetings, together with the proposals listed below (which
should be referred directly to the drafting group) serve as a guide to
the drafting group in their preparation of a text of Article 17 for
consideration by the Sub-Committee:
Suggested revision of paragraph 1 (c) (France) (E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.13)
Suggested new sub-paragraph 1 (e) and new paragraph 4 (United States)
(E/CONF. 2/C ,3/A/W .7)
Suggested additions to rules for negotiations (Mexico)
(E/CONF.2/C.3/A/W.l3)
Suggested redraft of Article 17 (Australia) (E/CWF.2/C.3/A/W.9)
The Chairman's proposal was agreed. |
GATT Library | nv803rr4596 | Notes on the Ninth Meeting : Held on Monday, 9 February 1948 at 3.00 p.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, February 11, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Sub-Committee E (Articles 20 and 22) | 11/02/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/E/W.21 and E/CONF.2/C.3/D/W/1-13/E/CONF.2/C.3/E/W/1-23 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/nv803rr4596 | nv803rr4596_90190556.xml | GATT_146 | 340 | 2,314 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
E/CONF.2/C .3/E/W.21
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE 11 February 1948
ON DU ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
THIRD COMMITTEE: COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUB-COMMITTEE E (ARTICLES 20 and 22)
NOTES ON THE NINTH MEETING
Held on Monday, 9 February 1948 at 3.00 p.m,
Chairman: Mr. J. E. HOLLOWAY (South Africa)
1. CONSIDERATION OF THE REPORT OF WORKING PARTY NO. 1 (E/CONF.2/C.3/E/W.18)
The Sub-Committee provisionally agreed that the substance of
paragraphs I, II, III and. IV of the report of Working Party No. 1 should be
included in the report of the Sub-Committee to the Third Committee, together
with that part of paragraph V which referred to the Swedish amendment, and.
that part of paragraph VI which referred to the Norwegian amendment.
The Sub-Committee approved the text of paragraphs 2 (c) and 3 (b) and
of the interpretative note which refers to prion consultation as set forth
in the Working Party Report. It approved the text of paragraph 3 (c) with
the alteration of the word "specific" to "specified". In regard to the
interpretative note on "special factors" the representative of Cuba requested
that the words 'but not changes artificially.... representative" be deleted.
The Sub-Ccmmittee agreed to this and the represertative of the United Kingdom
was requested to draft an explanatory note for inclusion in the Sub-Commiittee
report.
The representative of the United States Proposed and the Sub-Committee
agreed, that the words "Inter alia" should be inserted after the word
"includes" and that the insertion of these words be brought to the notice
of the Central Drafting Committee. It was further agreed that this
interpretvative note should not be incorporated in the text.
The delegate of Mexico agreed to withdraw the reservation which he made
in the first section of paragraph IX if the following note were inserted in
the Sub-Committee report:
"The Sub-Cnmittee agreed that the freedom given to a Member to
apply restrictions in terms of Article 20 (2) (c) did. not free
such Members from a prior obligation to any individual Member". |
GATT Library | bq166dm5317 | Notes on the Ninth Meeting : Held on Wednesday, 25 February 1948 at 10.30 a.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, February 26, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Sub-Committee G (Swiss Proposal) | 26/02/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/G/W.10 and E/CONF.2/C.3/F/W.31/REV.2-32/G/W.1-13/H/W.1-9 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/bq166dm5317 | bq166dm5317_90190613.xml | GATT_146 | 409 | 2,661 | United Nations Natio Unies RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE 26 February 1948
ON DU
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMRECE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
THIRD COMMITTEE: COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUB-COMMITTEE G (SWISS PROPOSAL)
NOTES ON THE NINTH MEETING
Held on Wednesday, 25 February 1948 at 10.30 a.m.
The Chairman, in presenting the draft report of the Sub-Committee
(document E/CONF.2/C.3/G/W.9), said that it had seemed preferable to write
a brief report in view of the fact that the solution to the problem
recommended in it called for further study by the Interim Commission. A
more lengthy report would have constituted only a partial study.
The representative of Switzerland referred to an earlier draft of the
report which had not been published. This had been complex and had gone into
much greater detail but it had mentioned many important factors which he
considered should be included in the Sub-Committee report - more particularly
the import as well as the export aspects of the Swiss problem and the
bargaining powers which Switzerland felt were necessary if its interests
were to be protected. He requested that the report be expanded so as to
include a mention of such factors.
The representative of France supported the recommendation in the draft
report that further study of the Swiss problem be made by the Interim
Commission but also considered that the report of the Sub-Committee should
contain a reference to those factors which discussion in the Sub-Committee
had shown to be relevant to the case. He suggested that a Working Party be
set up to redraft the report along these lines. The report should, however,
be both short and simple and care must be taken not to prejudge questions
which would cane before the Interim Commission.
It was agreed that a Working Party should be set up in order to compose
a text that would be generally acceptable, basing their work on the texts of
the two drafts already drawn up. On the proposal of the Chairman, it was
agreed that the Working Party should consist of the representatives of France,
Switzerland and the United States with the Chairman of the Sub-Comitted
/assisting in the E/CONF.2/C.3/G/W.10:
Page 2
assisting in, the deliberations.
The representative of Venezuela said that the reservation of his
delegation would be withdrawn if certain points in Article 21 were clarified.
It was agreed that this matter could also be dealt with by the Working Party
and the representative of Venezuela was, therefore added to its Membership. |
GATT Library | bd556rf4561 | Notes on the Second Meeting : Held at the Capitol, Havana, Cuba on Thursday, 8 January 1948, at 10.30 a.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 8, 1948 | Second Committee: Economic Development and Sub-Committee C (Articles 13 and 14) | 08/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.2/C/W.3, E/CONF.2/C.2/B/W.1-14, and C.2/C/W.1-13 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/bd556rf4561 | bd556rf4561_90180320.xml | GATT_146 | 194 | 1,290 | United Nations
CONFERENCE
ON
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT
Nations Unies
CONFERENCE
DU
COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI
RESTRICTED
E/CONF. 2/C.2/C/
W. 3
8 January 1948
ORIGNAL: ENGLISH
SECOND C0MMITTEE: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
SUB-COMMITTEE C ON ARTICLES 13 AND 14
NOTES ON THE SECOND MEETING
Held at the Capitol, Havana, Cuba on
Thursday, 8 January 1948, at 10.30 a.m.
Temporary Chairman:
Chairman:
Mr. ADARKER (India)
Mr. GUTIERREZ (Cuba)
Mr. SKAUG (Norway) withdrew his name as candidate for Chairman in
favour of the temporary Chairman, who had been nominated and seconded by
the Canadian and United Kingdom representatives respectively. The temporary
Chairman withdrew his candidature and, therefore, Mr. GUTIERREZ (Cuba)
was elected Chairman.
The discussion of the principles of amendments relating to negotiated
commitments was continued. On the question being raised, as to whether
this procedure should be continued, the sense of the meeting was found to
be strongly in favour and the discussion was resumed.
Mr. ARAUJO (Colombia) requested the Chairman to consult with the
Chairman of Sub-Committee E of the Third Committee, on Articles 20 and 22,
as provided for in the terms of reference. The Chairman announced that he
would do so at the earliest opportunity. |
GATT Library | zz850wm3719 | Notes on the Second Meeting : Held on Tuesday, 6 January 1948, at 10.30 a.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 6, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Sub-Committee E (Articles 20 and 22) | 06/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/E/W.2 and E/CONF.2/C.3/D/W/1-13/E/CONF.2/C.3/E/W/1-23 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/zz850wm3719 | zz850wm3719_90190535.xml | GATT_146 | 208 | 1,429 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C.3/E/W.2 6 January 1948
ON DU ORIGlNAL: ENGLISH
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI
THIRD C0MMITTEE: COMMERCIAL. POLICY
SUB-COMMITTEE E (ARTICLES 20 and 22)
NOTES ON THE SECOND MEETING
Held on Tuesday, 6 January 1948, at 10.30 a.m.
Chairman: Dr. J. E. HOLLOWAY (South Africa)
1. Items 1 and 2
After further discussion Mr. ROYER (France) suggested that the
interpretation of Article 21 and its relation to these amendments could
best be elucidated at an informal meeting of a few delegations. This
was agreed and further discussion was deferred.
2. Item 12
The consideration of this item was deferred owing to the absence
of the delegate of Mexico.
3. Item 3
Mr. LING (China) stated that this item was closely aligned with
Items 1 and. 2; discussion was therefore deferred.
4. Item 4
The proposal of Cuba was discussed. The meeting did not favour the
inclusion of the proposal in Article 20 on the ground that Articles 33
and 40 already covered the case, but at the request of the delegate of
Cuba a final conclusion - as deferred.
5. Items 21 and 22
The Sub-Committee commenced consideration of these proposals and
will continue the discussion at the next meeting. |
GATT Library | ds478ts5280 | Notes on the Second Meeting : Held on Wednesday, 7 January 1948, at 4.45 p.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 8, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Sub-Committee F (Articles 21, 23 and 24) | 08/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/F/W.2 and E/CONF.2/C.3/F/W.1-31/REV.2 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/ds478ts5280 | ds478ts5280_90190561.xml | GATT_146 | 391 | 2,593 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/NTERENFE
ON F /F/W.2 DU E/CON . 2/C .3/W,
TRADE AND8 EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE LUMPLOI January 1948
ORIGINAL ZGLSH
THIRD COIqAITTEE: COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUB-COGITTEE F (ARTICLES 21, 23 ANU 24)
NOTES ON 'IE SECOND KEEhING
Held on Wednesdcy, 7 January 1948, at 4.45 p.m.
Chairman: Mr. J. MELANDER (Norway)
(Refor-nce: E/CONF.2/C.3/7)
Article 21 - Restrictions to Safeaffrd the Balance of Payments
1. Item 36 - A proposal by the United States delegate, that the
introductory words of eub-paragraph 3 (b) (ii): "notwithstanding tho
provisions of paragraph 2 of this Article" as well as the note to the
Geneva Draft should be deleted, found considerable support. Final decision,
however, was deferred until discussion of the Belgian draft.
2. Item 37 - In the absence of the delegate of Ceylon discussion was
deferred.
3. h Item i8 - The Argentine delegate suggested tie last phrase of
sub-paragraph 3 (c) (ii) to read: "or prevent t he elements necessary for
the registration or the commencement and continuation of the exploitation of
patents, trademarks or cogyriGhts". The delegates of the Argentine and
United States were requested to prepare an agreed draft for study by the
Sub-Comaittea.
A proposal by the delegate of Brazil to insert the word "unreasonably"
a.ter "prevent" in the seventh and ninth lines was not adopted.
3. Item 39 - Little support being forthcoming for the deletion of
sub-paragraph 4 (a) it was decided to retain it. It was agreed that
the delegate of Ceylon who was not present would be given an opportunity
at a later meeting I present his proposal.
4. Items 40, 41 and 42 - The amendments submitted by Argentina, Italy and
Uruguay not finding approval, the present text was maintained.
5. Items 43 end 45 - No support forthcoming, the amendments of Uruguay
were not adopted.
6. Items 44 and -4 - In the absence of the delegate of Venezuela discussion
was deferred. /
/T Item 47 - E/CONF. 2/C. 3/F/W. 2
Page 2 ; ' i .!..
7. Item 47 - The Italian amendment founi no support.
8. Items 48 and. 49 - There being no support for either proposal,
sub-paragraphs 4 (d) and 'e) were maintained without change.
9. Item 50 - The Belgian reservation was left in abeyance pending submission
of the new 3elgjon draft text |
GATT Library | sf901qw3558 | Notes on the Seventh Meeting : Held at the Capitol, Havana, Cuba, on Friday, 23 January 1948, at 10.30 a.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 23, 1948 | Second Committee: Economic Development and Sub-Committee C (Articles 13 and 14) | 23/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.2/C/W.7, E/CONF.2/C.2/B/W.1-14, and C.2/C/W.1-13 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/sf901qw3558 | sf901qw3558_90180324.xml | GATT_146 | 431 | 2,931 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
E/CONF.2/C.2/C/W.7
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE 23 January 1948
ON DU
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORGINAL: ENGLISH
SECOND COMMITTEE: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
SUB-COMMITTEE C ON ARTICLESN 13 AND 14
NOTES ON THE SEVENTH MEETING
Held at the Capitol, Havana, Cuba, on Friday, 23 January 1948,
at 10.30 am.
Chairman: Mr. GUTIERREZ (Cuba)
The Sub-Committee continued its consideration of the draft text proposed
by Working Party I, but was unable to reach agreerment concerning the words in
brackets in paragraph 2 (c).
The representative of China proposed the following amendment to the final
proviso of the text:
"It is recognized that such contractual relationships generally
involve reciprocal advantages, and therefore any other Member with
whose contractual rights such action conflicts, and whose trade is
materially affected by the action, may suspend the application to the
trade of such Member of such substantially equivalent obligations or
concessions under Chapter IV the suspension of which the Organization
does not disapprove. Any Member intending to suspend such application
shall consult the Organization before doing so."
The representative of Cuba proposed the following addition to
paragraph 2 (a) (ii) referred to in document E/CONF.2/C.2/C/W.6.
"If an agreement is not reached among the Members concerned,
the Organization, within a period not exceeding days beginning from
the expiration of the terms fixed by its time schedule and in case it
would have chosen to intervene in the negotiation, may decide whether
or not the applicant Members is released of its obligations and, in
the affirmative case, the opportunity, nature and degree of the
release. In case the Organization had been requested to take a decision
formulated at said opportunity, it shall decide on the release on the
form before mentioned."
The Sub-Committee agreed to establish a second Working Party, the terms
of reference of which would be to try to reconcile the different views which
had been expressed in relation to the phrases in brackets in paragraph 2 (c)
/of the draft E/CONF.2/C.2/C/W.7
Page 2
0f the draft text proposed by Working Party I and to the Chinese and Cuban
amendments. It was agreed that Working Party 2 would be composed of the
representatives of Australian Brazil, China, Mexico, the United Kingdom and
the United States.
After a short discussion, the Sub-Committee decided to proceed with
the consideration of the procedure concerning all measures inconsistent with
non-negotiated commitments.
It was agreed that the Secretary would provide a brief statement
concerning the progress which was being made by the Sub-Committee of the
Third Committee on Articles 20 and 22.
The meeting rose at 1.00 p.m. |
GATT Library | np374dy6719 | Notes on the Seventh Meeting : Held on Tuesday, 13 January 1948 at 3.00 p.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 14, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Sub-Committee E (Articles 20 and 22) | 14/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/E/W.12 and E/CONF.2/C.3/D/W/1-13/E/CONF.2/C.3/E/W/1-23 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/np374dy6719 | np374dy6719_90190546.xml | GATT_146 | 228 | 1,611 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERNCE E/CONF.2/C.3/E/W.12
ON DU 14 January 1948
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI
ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
THIRD COMMITTEE: COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUB-COMMITTEE E (ARTICLES 20 AND 22)
NOTES ON THE SEVENTH MEETING
Held on Tuesday, 13 January 1948 at 3.00 p.m.
Chairman: Dr. J. E. HOLLOWAY (South Africa)
(Reference: E/CONF.2/C.3/7)
1. Items 55 and 57 (India) and 56 (Czechoslovakia)
It was agreed to set up Working Party No. 9 composed of the delegates
of Ireland, Mexico, Netherlands, Peru and the United Kingdom to consider
these amendments.
2. Item 59 (Geneva Draft Note)
This item was referred to Working Party No. 8.
3. Item 51 (Uruguay)
After discussion the Sub-Committee agreed to refer this amendment to
Working Party No. 8.
4. Amendment of Peru (Reference: E/CONF.2/C.3/E/W.5)
There was discussion as to the exact scope of this amendment. Several
delegates pointed out that subsidies did not always stimulate production.
There was general feeling that further progress in the discussion could not
be made until the word "restrict" had been more precisely defined and the
Sub-Committee therefore agreed to refer both the Peruvian amendment and the
question of the definition of the word "restrict" to Working Party No. 1.
The delegates of Mexico and Peru were added to the membership of this
Working Party in view of their particular interest in the problems it is
discussing. |
GATT Library | mp178zs6776 | Notes on the Sixth Meeting : Held at Havana on Wednesday, 11 February 1948 at 10.30 a.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, February 12, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Sub-Committee H (Section C) | 12/02/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/H/W.8 and E/CONF.2/C.3/F/W.31/REV.2-32/G/W.1-13/H/W.1-9 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/mp178zs6776 | mp178zs6776_90190624.xml | GATT_146 | 259 | 1,758 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C.3/H/W .8
ON DU 12 February 1948
TRADE AND EMPLOYMET COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL: ENGLISHIH
IRD COMMITTEE: COMMERCIAL mmL: CO*WCK POLICY
E 'H' SMl-C0aOO4aThON SECTIIN C - SUBSIDES
NONSENTH MEETING ON THE SEVoET M
Held at Havana on Wednesday, 11 February 1948 at 10.30 a.m.
ChcairTHYmen: Mr. BMoCRH (Australia), followed by
Mr. G. WARWICK SMITH (Australia)
I. Further discussion took place on document E/CONF.2/C.3/H/6, and it was
agreed to make the following changes:
ARTICI 6
Paragraph 3
Addition of the words "and if so on what terms" after "whether" in
line 9.
ARTICLE 27
Paragraph 3
Replacement of the word "procedure" by "provisions" in line 8.
Paxgraph 5
(a) Replacement of the words "if no agreement is appropriate" by
thea words "if n agreement is inappropriate".
: (b) Replacement of the word "itself" in line 5 by the words
"that its interests are".
ARTICLE 28
Paragraph 2
(a) The words "The Members" in line 5 to read "The Member".
(b) Replacement of the words "themselves likely to be materially
affected." by the words "that serious prejudice to their interests
is caused or threatened".
Paragraph 4
(a) Sub-paragraph (c) to read: "whether the subsidizing country's
share of world trade in the commodity is so small...."
(b) Reversal of order of sub-paragraphs (b) and (c).
2. It was agreed to make certain changes in the Draft Report.
3. In the course of the meeting the Chairman had to leave for Washington
and Mr. G. Warwick Smith (Australia) was elected Chairman in his place. |
GATT Library | mz398kc3569 | Notes on the Sixth Meeting : Held at the Capitol, Havana, Cuba, on Thursday, 22 January 1948 at 10.30 a.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 23, 1948 | Second Committee: Economic Development and Sub-Committee C (Articles 13 and 14) | 23/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.2/C/W.6, E/CONF.2/C.2/B/W.1-14, and C.2/C/W.1-13 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/mz398kc3569 | mz398kc3569_90180323.xml | GATT_146 | 726 | 5,011 | United Nations Nations Unies
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C.2/C/W.6
ON DU 23 January 1948
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI 0RIGINAL: ENGLISH
SECOND COMITTEE: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
SUB-COMMITTEE C ON ARTICLES 13 AND 14
NOTES ON THE SIXTH MEETING
Held at the Capitol, Havana, Cuba, on Thursday, 22 January 1948 at 10.30 a.m.
Chairman. Mr. GUTIERREZ (Cuba)
The CHAIRMAN suggested that after the Sub-Committee had approved the text
concerning negotiated commitments which did not conflict with the provisions
of Chapter IV, it should refer the question of negotiated commitments which
did conflict with the provisions of Chapter IV to a Working Party. The
Sub-Committee could then begin its consideration of the question of
non-negotiated commitments.
The Sub-Committee then proceeded to discuss in detail the draft text
prepared by Working Party 1.
After an exchange of views, the preamble to paragraph 2 (s) and
sub-paragraph (i) were approved.
"2. (a) If a Member in the interest of its programme of economic development
or reconstruction considers it desirable to adopt any non-discriminatory
measure which would conflict with any obligation which the Member has
assumed through negotiations with any other Member or Members pursuant
to Chapter-IV, but which would not conflict with the provisions of that
Chapter, such Member
(i) shall enter into direct negotiations with all the other Members
which have contractual rights with a view to obtaining
agreement.
The Members shall be free to proceed in accordance with the terms of any
such agreemento, provided that the Organization is informed of the
results of the negotiations; or.
After a shorst discusion it was agreed that the following sentence should
be inserted at the end of the fourth sentence:
"At the request of a Member, the Organization may, where it concurs in
principle with the preposed mesaure, assist thamt Member in the
negotiations."
/It was E/CONF. 2/C .2/C/W/. 6
Page 2
It was agreed that the adoption of the procedure concerning negotiated
commitments proposed by the Working Party, would not establish any legal-
precedent with respect to the question of prior approval by the Organization
in connection with the procedure on non-negotiated commitments.
The letter "s" was added to the word "Member" in the thirteenth line
of sub-paragraph (ii).
Sub-pararaph (ii) as amended, was approved provisionally, subject to
consideration of an amendment proposed by the representative of Cuba at the
following meeting.
"(ii) shall initially or may in the event of failure to reach agreement
under sub-paragraph (i) above apply to the Organization. The
Organization shall determine, from among Members which have
contractual rights, the Member or Members materially affected by
the proposed measure and shall sponsor negotiations between the
applicant Member and these Members with a view to Obtaining..
expeditions and substantial agreement.
The Orgianeizat ion shall establish and communicate to the Members
concerned a time schedule fo r such negotiations, following as far
as practicable any time schedule which may have been proposed by
the applicant Member. The Members shall commence and proceed
continuously with such negotiastions in accordance with the time
schedule laid. downby the Organization. At the request of -
Member the Organization may, where it concurs in principle with
the proposed measure, assist that Member in the negotiations.
Upon substantial agreement being reached, the applicant Member may
be released. by the Organization from the obligation referred to
in this paragraph, subject to such limitations as may have been
agreed upon in the negotiations between the Members concerned,"
Paragaph 2 (b) was approved without comment.
"(b) The Organization and. the Members concerned. shall preserve the
utmost confidence in respect of matters arising under this paragraph."
No conclusion was reached concerning paragraph 2 (c).The discussion
revolved. around the desirability of maintaining or deleting the words "or
threatened increase" in the second.line; the phrase "pending a determination
by the Organization that such an emergency action is justified"; and the
final provison of the paragraph which reads as follows:
"Any other Member with whose contractual rights such action conflicts
may, if the balance of reciprocal advantage resulting from that
contractual relationship is materially impaired, suspend the application
/to the trade ECONF.2/C.2/C/W.6
Page 3
to the trade of such Member of such substantially equivalent obligations
or concessions under Chapter IV the suspension of which the Organization
does not disapprove. Any Member intending to suspend such application
shall consult with the Organization before doing so."
The meeting rose at 1.00 p.m. |
GATT Library | rh632qv4879 | Notes on the Sixth Meeting : Held on Saturday, 10 January. 1948 at 5.45 p.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 12, 1948 | Third Committee: Commercial Policy and Sub-Committee E (Articles 20 and 22) | 12/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.3/E/W.8 and E/CONF.2/C.3/D/W/1-13/E/CONF.2/C.3/E/W/1-23 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/rh632qv4879 | rh632qv4879_90190542.xml | GATT_146 | 489 | 3,157 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF. 2/C.3/E/w.8
ON DU 12 January 1948
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORGINAL: ENGLISH
THIRD COMMITTEE: COMMERCIAL POLICY
SUB-COMMITTEE E (ARTICLES 20 AND 22)
NOTES ON THE SIXTH MEETING
Held on Saturday, 10 January. 1948 at 5.45 p.m.
Chairman: Dr. J. E. HOLLOWAY (South Africa)
(Reference: E/CONF.2/C.3/7)
ARTICLE 20 - GENERAL ELIMINATION OF QUANTATIVE RESTRICTIONS
1. Item 15 (Egypt)
This amendment was withdrawn at the Fifth Meeting but the Sub-Committee
agreed to a suggestion of the delegate for Egypt that the substance of his
amendment should be considered by the Working Party dealing with Items 21
and 22.
ARTICLE 22 - NON-DISCRIMINATORY ADMINISTRATION OF QUANTITATIVE RESTRICTIONS
2. Item 63 (Argentina)
There was no support for the proposal of the delegation of Argentina
to delete paragraphs 2, 3, 4 and 5 of this Article.
3. Items 52 (Mexico), 54 (Turkey) and 60 (Syria and Lebanon)
Soma delegates were strongly opposed to the use of a "representative
period" as the basis for allocating quotas. Others sympathized with the
spirit of the Turkish amendment but felt that its provisions should be
carefully limited. The problem of a country with a shortage of a particular
currency, which the amendment of Syria was destined to meet, was acknowledged
to be a serious one but there was some feeling that it could be more
properly dealt with by Sub-Committee F (Articles 21, 23 and, 24). It was
finally agreed that a Working Party composed of the delegations of Mexico,
New Zealand, Peru, the United Kingdom and the United States should be set
up to revise sub-paragraph 2 (d) of Article 22, with authority to consult on
matters of common concern with a Working Party of Sub-Committee F. It was
also agreed that a representative of the International Monetary Fund should
be requested to assist in the deliberations of the Working Party.
4. Parragraphs 31, 2 (a), 2 (b) and 2 (c) of Article 22 were accepted by the
Sub-Committee.
/5. Items 55 and E/CONF. 2/C. 3/E/W8
Page 2
5.- Items 55 and 57 (India) and 56 (Czechoalovakia)
There was some support for the amandmants of the delegation of India
which would make more elastic the requirement to give public notice of the
details of quotas. There was, however, also some opposition to any
loosening of the present provisions. It was suggested that the words
"wherever practicable" in the amendment of India might be replaced by the
phrase "unless serious prejudice to the Member would result from such action'.
It was agreed to consider this suggestioin at the next meeting.
6. Item 58 (Mexico)
The delegate for Mexico said that this amendment should be considered
in conjunction with his amendment to subparagraph 2 (d). It was, therefore,
agreed to refer considerations of this item to the Working Party dealing
with items 52, 54, and 60.
7. Item 59 (Geneva Draft Note)
Discussion of this note was deferred. |
GATT Library | fb654rd6576 | Notes on the Tenth Meeting : Held at the Capitol, Havana, Cuba, on Wednesday, 28 January 1948 at 3.00 p.m | United Nations Conference on Trade and Employment, January 28, 1948 | Second Committee: Economic Development and Sub-Committee C on Articles 13 and 14 | 28/01/1948 | official documents | E/CONF.2/C.2/C/W.9, E/CONF.2/C.2/B/W.1-14, and C.2/C/W.1-13 | https://exhibits.stanford.edu/gatt/catalog/fb654rd6576 | fb654rd6576_90180326.xml | GATT_146 | 901 | 6,202 | United Nations Nations Unies RESTRICTED
CONFERENCE CONFERENCE E/CONF.2/C.2/C/W.9
ON DU 28 January 1948
TRADE AND EMPLOYMENT COMMERCE ET DE L'EMPLOI ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
SECOND COMMITTEE: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT SUB COMMITTEE C ON ARTICLES 13 AND 14
NOTES ON THE TENTH MEETING
Held at the Capitol, Havana, Cuba, on Wednesday,
28 January 1948 at 3.00 p.m.
Chairman: Mr. GUTIERREZ (Cuba)
The Sub-Committee considered the report of Working Party 2 contained
in document E/CONF.2/C.2/C/W.8.
The United Kingdom representative proposed the following sentence to
be inserted at the end of the third sentence of paragraph 2 (c): "Such
measures shall in any case be terminated as soon as the re-negotiations are
completed or discontinued."
The representative of Mexico proposed that the words "the Organization
determines that" be inserted before the words "the re-negotiations" in the
United Kingdom amendment.
The representative of China proposed the substitution of the phrase
"preceding the date on which the Member initiated action under this
paragraph" for the words "preceding the date on which the Member's original
notification was made under sub-paragraph (a) of this paragraph" in
paragraph 2 (c).
The United States representative proposed that the words "sub-paragraph (a)
of" be inserted before the words "this paragraph" in the Chinese amendment.
Paragraph 2 (c) as amended by the representatives of the United Kingdom,
Mexico, China and the United States was approved by the Sub-Committee.
The Sub-Committee also agreed with the conclusion reached by the
Working Party that the decision of the Sub-Committee established by the
Sixth Committee to consider Chapter VIII of the Charter, as set out in
document E/CONF.2/C.6/49, met the purpose of the Cuban proposed amendment
to paragraph 2 (a) (ii).
Paragraph 2 (a) and (b) of Article 13, as approved by the Sub-Committee
at its Sixth Meeting, with the addition of paragraph (c), would thus read
as follows:
/"2. (a) If a E/CONF.2/C.2/C/W.9
Page 2
"2. (a) If a Member in the interest of its program of economic
development or reconstruction considers it desirable to adopt
any non-discriminatory measure which would conflict with any
obligation which the Member has assumed through negotiations
with any other Member or Members pursuant to Chapter IV, but
which would not conflict with the provisions of that Chapter,
such Member
(i) shall enter into direct negotiations with all the other
Members which have contractual rights with a view to
obtaining agreement. The Members shall be free to
proceed in accordance with the terms of any such
agreement, provided that the Organization is informed
of the results of the negotiations; or
(ii) shall initially or may in the event of failure to reach
agreement under sub-paragraph (i) above apply to the
Organization. The Organization shall determine, from
among Members which have contractual rights, the Member
or Members materially affected by the proposed measure
and shall sponsor negotiations between the applicant
Member and these Members with a view to obtaining
expenditious and substantial agreement.
The Organization shall establish and communicate to the Members
concerned a time schedule for such negotiations, following as far
as practicable any time schedule which may have been proposed by
the applicant Member. The Members shall commence and proceed
continuously with such negotiations in accordance with the time
schedule laid down by the Organization. At the request of a
Member the Organization may, where it concurs in principle with
the proposed measure, assist in the negotiations. Upon substantial
agreement being reached, the applicant Member may be released by
the organization from the obligation referred to in this paragraph,
subject to such limitations as may have been agreed upon in the
negotiations betweeen the Members concerned.
(b) The organization and the Members concerened shall preserve the
utmost confidence in respect of matters arising under this paragraph.
(c) If as a result of action initiated under this paragraph, there
should be an increase in the importations of the product o? products
concerned, including products which can be directly substituted
therefor, which if continued would be so great as to jeopardize
/substantially E/CONF.2/C.2/C/W.9
Page 3
substantially the plans of the applicant Member for the establishment,
development or reconstruction of the industry, industries or branches
of agriculture concerned, and if no preventive measures consistent
with this Charter can be found which seem likely to prove effective,
the applicant Member may, after informing, and when practicable
consulting with the Organization, adopt such other measures as the
situation may require provided that such measures do not restrict
imports more than necessary to offset the increase in imports
referred to in this sub-paragraph. Except in unusual circumstances
such measures shall not reduce imports below the level obtaining
in the most recent representative period preceding the date on
which the Member initiated action under sub-paragraph (a) of this
paragraph. The Organization shall determine, as soon as
practicable, whether such measures should be continued, discontinued
or modified. Such measures shall in any case be terminated as soon
as the Organization determines that the re-negotiations are
completed or discontinued. It is recognized that the contractual
relationships referred to in sub-paragraph (a) of this paragraph
involve reciprocal advantages, and therefore any other Member with
whose contractual rights such action conflicts and whose trade
is materially affected by the action, may suspend the application
to the trade of such Member of ouch substantially equivalent
obligations or concessions under Chapter IV, the suspension of
which the Organization does not disapprove. Any Member intending
to suspend such application shall consult the Organization before
doing so." |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.