World Trade
Organization WT/REG113/4
15 November 2012 (12-6284) Committee on Regional Trade Agreements Original: English


Trade development and cooperation agreement between the European Union and South Africa (goods)

Questions and Replies


The following communication, dated 15 November 2012, is being circulated at the request of the delegations of the European Union and South Africa.
_______________

This document reproduces the questions addressed to the Parties and the responses submitted.

Questions from the delegation of the Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen, and Matsu

Background information

Paragraph 13, pages 6-7, as indicated, South Africa had to request formal concurrence for its bilateral agreement with the EU from the other four members of SACU, i.e. Botswana, Lesotho, Namibia and Swaziland. Although Botswana, Lesotho and Swaziland formally gave their concurrence and began to apply the Agreement with respect to im

World Trade
Organization WT/REG306/2
14 November 2012 (12-6277) Committee on Regional Trade Agreements Original: English


free trade agreement between New Zealand and Malaysia
(goods and services)

Questions and Replies


The following communication, dated 14 November 2012, is being circulated at the request of the delegations of New Zealand and Malaysia.
_______________

This document reproduces the questions addressed to the Parties and the responses submitted.

Questions from the delegation of Australia

Paragraph 62-63, Australia notes that the scope of the Chapter on trade in services is wider than the GATS as it explicitly includes ground handling services.
Could Malaysia please explain how it is able to include ground handling in the scope of this Agreement, when it has not done so in previous free trade agreements?

The provisions of the Agreement reflect the negotiated outcome arrived at between the Parties. Inclusion of ground handl

World Trade
Organization WT/REG304/2
14 November 2012
(12-6266) Committee on Regional Trade Agreements Original: English/
Spanish


FREE TRADE AGREEMENT BETWEEN PERU AND Chile(GOODS AND SERVICES)

Questions and Replies


The following communication, dated 9 November 2012, is being circulated at the request of the delegations of Peru and Chile.

_______________


This document reproduces the questions addressed to the Parties and the responses submitted.

Questions from the Delegation of Australia

Scope and definitions

1. Paragraph 61, Australia notes that an annual review of nonconforming measures are foreseen by Chile and Peru.

We would be interested to understand why it is necessary to have a mechanism to clarify nonconforming measures?

Article 11.14 states that the Parties shall consult annually, or otherwise agreed, in order to review the implementation of the Investment Chapter, and shall consider issues of mutual benefit for

World Trade
Organization WT/REG294/2
13 November 2012 (12-6257) Committee on Regional Trade Agreements Original: English


free trade agreement between Turkey and Jordan (goods)

Questions and Replies


The following communication, dated 8 November 2012, is being circulated at the request of the delegations of Turkey and Jordan.
_______________

This document reproduces the questions addressed to the Parties and the responses submitted.

Question from the delegation of Colombia

With regards to paragraphs 9 through 14 of the Factual Presentation drafted by the Secretariat, Colombia would like to know how the Parties to this Agreement understand that the requisites set forth in Article XXIV of the GATT 1994, in particular, the requirement of eliminating duties and other restrictive regulation with respect to substantially all trade, is fulfilled by the Agreement.
Response from the delegation of Turkey

According to GATT XXIV:8, a free-trade area me

World Trade
Organization WT/REG177/4
7 November 2012 (12-6133) Committee on Regional Trade Agreements Original: English


euro-mediterranean association Agreement between the European Union and Egypt (goods)

Questions and Replies


The following communication, dated 25 October 2012, is being circulated at the request of the delegations of the European Union and Egypt.
_______________

This document reproduces the questions addressed to the Parties and the responses submitted.
Questions from the Delegation of Canada


Paragraph 21, page 7, Table II.2: The Secretariat Report provides a table of EU tariff elimination under the Agreement, by HS section. Two products in HS Section VI – Chemicals and chemical products – remain subject to duties. Could Egypt please explain what two products lines within Section VI (Chemicals and chemical products) remain subject to duties and why?

The two product codes are HS 3824.60 (sorbitol) and HS 3302.10 (odorife

World Trade
Organization WT/REG260/1/Corr.1
2 November 2012 (12-6028) Committee on Regional Trade Agreements


FACTUAL PRESENTATION

Free Trade Agreement between the United States and Peru
(Goods and Services)

Report by the Secretariat

Corrigendum


Page 50, Annex I, Table AI.1 should be replaced by the following table:

Table AI.1
USA: Indicators of MFN tariff rates and preferential rates for imports from Peru
Origin of goods Year ALL PRODUCTS Agricultural products a Non-agricultural products Average applied tariff Share of duty-free tariff lines (%) Average applied tariff Share of duty-free tariff lines (%) Average applied tariff Share of duty-free tariff lines (%) Overall (%) On dutiable (%) Overall (%) On dutiable (%) Overall (%) On dutiable (%) MFN 2009 4.8 7.5 36.4 8.8 11.3 22.4 4.1 6.7 39.1 Peru 2009 0.5 37.9 97.9 3.0 40.3 88.2 0.1 26.1 99.7 2010 0.5 35.5 97.9 2.8 38.0 88.2 0.1 23.3 99.7 2011 0.4 33.2 97.9 2.6 35.8 88.2 0.1 20