Geum.ru

WT/acc/rus/70 wt/min(11)/2

Вид материалаДокументы
Подобный материал:
1   ...   6   7   8   9   10   11   12   13   ...   75

- (c) Goods with Encryption Technology
  1. Some Members noted that the Russian Federation also required an activity licence to engage in production or distribution of certain goods with encryption technology. Moreover, the Russian Federation required that applicants for a licence to import certain goods with encryption technology also had an activity licence to distribute or produce goods with encryption technology (see paragraphs to of the Section "Quantitative Import Restrictions, Including Prohibitions and Quotas, and Import Licensing Systems"). These Members expressed their continued concern that the requirement to have an activity licence as a condition for obtaining an import licence was an unjustifiable restriction on imports.
  2. In response, the representative of the Russian Federation recalled the sensitivity of the goods that were subject to the import licensing requirement and noted that many WTO Members regulated trade in goods with encryption technology. He noted, however, that pursuant to Government Resolution No. 957 "Approving Regulations on Licensing of Specific Types of Activities Related to Encryption (Cryptographic) Products" of 29 December 2007, certain goods containing encryption technology were exempt from the activity licensing requirements contained in those regulations. He further noted that, pursuant to the CU Regulations on the Order of Entry into the Customs Territory of the Customs Union and removal of the Customs Territory of the Customs Union of Encryption (Cryptographic) Means, of 1 December 2009, and as described in paragraphs to of the Section "Quantitative Import Restrictions, Including Prohibitions and Quotas, and Import Licensing Systems" of this Report, many goods containing encryption technology no longer required an import licence.

- (d) Precious stones and metals
  1. The representative of the Russian Federation noted that, as of 1 January 2010, the procedures for the import and export of precious stones and metals were set-forth in the CU Regulations "On the Order of Entry into the Customs Territory of the Customs Union within the Eurasian Economic Community and the Export from the Customs Territory of the Customs Union within the Eurasian Economic Community Precious Metals, Precious Stones and Commodities Containing Precious Metals" ("Precious Stones and Metals Regulations"), adopted by the CU Commission Decision No. 132 on 27 November 2009. Pursuant to these Regulations, those products listed in sections 2.9 and 2.10 of the Common List attached to Decision No. 132 (see Table 28) were subject to licensing requirements. Pursuant to paragraph 14 of the Precious Stones and Metals Regulations, an activity licence to carry out operations with precious metals or stones was required in order to export precious metals and stones (excluding diamonds) from the CU; similarly, under paragraph 24 of the Precious Stones and Metals Regulations, the export for processing of precious metals and gemstones could be carried out only by legal persons or individual entrepreneurs who hold an activity licence. The representative of the Russian Federation further noted, however, that Federal Law No. 128-FZ of 8 August 2001 "On Licensing of Specific Types of Activities" (as last amended on 28 September 2010) had abolished the activity licensing requirement for trade of precious metals, precious stones, and jewellery containing precious metals and precious stones, although an activity licence was required to obtain a licence to export.
  2. Further the representative of the Russian Federation noted that according to Presidential Decree No. 742 of 21 June 2001 "On the Procedure of Importation into and Exportation from the Russian Federation of Precious Metals and Precious Stones" (as amended on 11 January 2007), there were no statutory licensing or quantitative requirements for imports of precious stones and metals to the territory of the Russian Federation. Moreover, precious stones and metals had been removed from the list of currency valuables, pursuant to Federal Law No. 173-FZ of 10 December 2003 "On Currency Regulation and Currency Control" (as last amended on 22 July 2008), excluding data on extraction, transfer, and consumption of precious stones and metals from the list of State Secret Data, in accordance with Federal Law No. 153-FZ of 11 November 2003 "On Amending Article 5 of the Federal Law of the Russian Federation On State Secrets" and Presidential Decree No. 243 of 3 March 2005 "On Amendments to the List of State Secret Data, Approved by Decree of the President of the Russian Federation No. 1203 of 30 November 1995". These amendments simplified the procedure for performing transactions with precious stones and metals, made these transactions more transparent and removed a number of restrictions in the turnover of precious metals and precious stones, such as restricted rights of legal entities with respect to ownership and disposal of this category of goods. In addition, Presidential Decree No. 1137 of 20 September 2010 "On the Adoption of the Regulation on Import to the Russian Federation from the Countries not party to the Customs Union of the EurAsEC and Export from the Russian Federation to such Countries of Precious Metals, Stones, and Raw Materials Containing Precious Metals" abolished quantitative export restrictions for platinum and platinum group metals and raw diamonds; allowed exports of ferrous metals materials containing precious metals and removed the ban for export of scrap and wastes; and permitted the future liberalization of international trade involving these goods, waste of precious metals, ores and concentrates of precious metals, and unprocessed precious metals. These amendments were also aimed at abolishing quantitative restrictions for export of natural diamonds for mining subjects and diamonds of 10.8 carats and more, if these natural diamonds were obtained by foreign persons from mining subjects at the auctions carried out in accordance with the legislation of the Russian Federation. Decree No. 1137 of 20 September 2010 also provided that the exportation from the Russian Federation under the customs regime of export of natural diamonds (except for unique natural diamonds and the natural diamonds of the form "board" and "drilling" regardless of their sizes and degrees of processing, sieve diamonds of "-3+2" classes and lower classes), refined platinum and metals of platinum group in the form of bullions, plates, powder and granules, and also nuggets of the precious metals, the raw precious metals, ores and concentrates of precious metals, the raw goods containing precious metals, scrap and waste products of precious metals could be carried out without quantitative restrictions on the basis of export licences, as provided for in the sections 2.9 and 2.10 of the Common List attached to Decision No. 132 (see Table 28) which were issued by the Ministry of Industry and Trade of the Russian Federation.
  3. Some Members requested further clarification on whether the Russian Federation maintained any restrictions or requirements other than tariffs on the importation of precious metals and stones, notably whether imports of these products were also restricted by import licensing, or whether it was necessary to import them through customs checkpoints designated for declaration of such goods as was the case with diamond exports. These Members also expressed concerns in relation to export requirements for precious stones and metals.
  4. In response, the representative of the Russian Federation stated that imports of precious stones and precious metals and products containing precious stones and precious metals were subject to customs tariff only. He added that imports of precious metals, precious stones and jewellery must be carried out through custom checkpoints designated for declaration of such goods (Presidential Decree No. 1137). These designated customs checkpoints were properly equipped with specialists qualified in the area of precious metals and precious stones. These checkpoints were part of the customs system of the Russian Federation. He also added that mentioned procedures were in accordance with the International Convention on the Simplification and Harmonization of Customs Procedures (Kyoto 2000), in particular, with its Specific Annex A, Chapter 1, according to which national legislation specified the places at which such goods might be introduced into the Customs territory.

- (e) Other licensing requirements
  1. Some Members expressed concerns in relation to licensing requirements governing access to oil and gas pipelines or other distribution networks for export products which could operate in a manner so as to restrict the volume of oil and gas exported from the Russian Federation, and could be inconsistent with the requirements of Article XI of the GATT 1994. They requested the Russian Federation to provide further information on the operation of these regimes, including on the regime for export licensing of energy products.
  2. Concerning questions on licensing related to import or export of electricity and import of natural gas, the representative of the Russian Federation stated that there were no export/import licenses requirements for these products.
  3. He added that Federal Law No. 117-FZ of 18 July 2006 "On Export of Gas" had established the exclusive right to export natural gas from the Russian Federation to the organization being the owner of the unified gas supply system and its branch companies. He noted that the information of the gas export licensing regime was contained in the Section "Export Licensing Procedures" of this Report.
  4. He added that according to Federal Law No. 128-FZ of 8 August 2001 "On Licensing of Specific Types of Activity" (as last amended on 28 September 2010), there were no licensing requirements for the following types of activity:
  • the operation of oil and gas production facilities;
  • the sale of oil, gas and oil/gas processing products;
  • the processing of oil, gas and oil/gas processing products thereof;
  • the transportation of oil, gas and oil/gas processing products;
  • the storage of oil, gas and oil/gas processing products; and
  • the activity of operating gas networks.
  1. The representative of the Russian Federation recalled his earlier statements on registration requirements, and further stated that such requirements for export contracts had been originally introduced by Government Resolution No. 758 of 1 July 1994 "On Measures to Improve the State Regulation of Export of Goods and Services" (as last amended on 8 December 2010), and had been repealed by Government Resolution No. 300 of 21 March 1996 "On Recognizing as Invalidated Certain Decisions of the Government of the Russian Federation on the Issue of Registering Contracts in the Export of Commodities". Registration of import contracts had never been required in the Russian Federation, and the Russian Federation did not maintain any special mandatory registry of import or export contracts. He also confirmed that his authorities had no plans to introduce such registration in any form in future. He further stated that the subjects of the Russian Federation were not permitted to impose requirements on legal or natural persons that might affect their rights to engage in importation or exportation of goods.
  2. Some Members of the Working Party stated that the Russian Federation should undertake the following commitments in this area: the Russian Federation would guarantee that no restrictions would be maintained on the right to trade in goods except as would be consistent with WTO provisions and that all laws and regulations relating to trading rights in the Russian Federation, whether adopted by the Russian Federation or the competent bodies of the CU, and would be applied in a manner consistent with relevant WTO obligations. Specifically, the Russian Federation should confirm that no restrictions would be maintained on the rights of individuals and enterprises, including those with foreign participation, to import and export goods into the customs territory of the Russian Federation except as would be consistent with provisions of the WTO Agreement. Nor would individuals and firms be restricted in their ability to import and export based on their registered scope of business. The criteria for registration and enrolment in the State Register of legal persons would be generally applicable and published in the Official Gazette, along with any further changes. Without prejudice to other relevant provisions of the WTO Agreement, the Russian Federation should ensure that any laws and regulations relating to the right to trade in goods would not restrict imports of goods in violation of the general prohibition on quantitative restrictions under Article XI:1 of the GATT 1994, nor should they discriminate against imported goods in violation of the provisions of Article III:4 of the GATT 1994. Any associated fees, taxes and charges should also be limited to the approximate cost of services rendered and their application should not lead to discrimination in favour of like domestic products. In particular, Members requested that in respect of imports of alcohol, pharmaceuticals, and goods with encryption capability, the Russian Federation eliminate the requirement to obtain an import licence and/or an activity licence as a pre-condition for import or export.
  3. The representative of the Russian Federation confirmed that, from the date of accession, the application of all laws, regulations and other measures affecting importation or exportation of goods, whether by the Russian Federation or the competent bodies of the CU, would be in conformity with relevant provisions of the WTO Agreement, including the Agreement on Import Licensing Procedures and Articles I, III, VIII, and XI of the GATT 1994. Addressing the concerns of some Members about the current regulation of importation of alcohol, pharmaceuticals and products with encryption technology, which required issuance of an import licence and/or activity licence as a pre-condition for importation, as set-out in paragraphs , to , he confirmed that, upon its accession to the WTO, the Russian Federation would ensure that the person who had the right, according to CU Agreements, CU Commission Decisions or Russian legislation, to declare the imported goods would be permitted to pay relevant customs duties, fees and charges in connection with importation of alcohol, pharmaceuticals or products with encryption technology without presenting an import and/or activity license(s) to the customs authorities, and that these goods would be permitted to be withdrawn from the territory of the customs checkpoint for the purpose of free circulation in the territory of the Russian Federation by the holder of the respective import and/or activity licenses. The Working Party took note of these commitments.

1. Import Regulations

- Customs Regulations and Procedures
  1. The representative of the Russian Federation recalled that the Russian Federation had been an active participant at the World Customs Organization (WCO), even before gaining full Membership on 8 July 1993. The Russian Federation had also joined the International Convention on the Harmonized Commodity Description and Coding System on 1 January 1997, as well as the Customs Cooperation Council, the ATA Carnet, and the Nairobi and Istanbul Conventions. His Government had also joined the International Convention on the Simplification and Harmonization of Customs Procedures (Revised Kyoto Convention, 1999).
  2. Members asked the Russian Federation to provide a description of the customs regime in effect in the Russian Federation, including Customs Union legal acts, together with copies of all relevant implementing instruments in a WTO working language.
  3. The Representative of the Russian Federation noted that, as of 1 July 2010, CU Agreements, CU Decisions and other CU legal documents, in particular the CU Customs Code, as amended by the Protocol on the Amendment, and Addition of the Treaty on the Customs Code of the Customs Union of 27 November 2009, signed on 16 April 2010, had provided the legal framework for the customs regime of the Russian Federation and other CU Parties. Pursuant to these CU legal acts, customs regulation was also provided by the domestic legislation of CU Parties. In the Russian Federation, this domestic legislation was Federal Law No. 311-FZ of 27 November 2010 "On Customs Regulation". These legal acts had replaced the Law of the Russian Federation No. 5003-1 of 21 May 1993 "On Customs Tariff" (as last amended on 3 December 2007) and Federal Law No. 61 FZ of 28 May 2003 "Customs Code of the Russian Federation", which had entered into force on 1 January 2004, as the legal basis for the customs regime of the Russian Federation. He further explained that Article 357.10 of the Customs Code of the Russian Federation and provisions of the Law on Customs Tariff continued to be in effect to the extent that they did not conflict with the CU Customs Code or Federal Law No. 311-FZ. The representative of the Russian Federation explained that the CU Customs Code was based on generally accepted international rules, including the Revised Kyoto Convention. The CU Customs Code was the principal legal document that governed customs administration and customs procedures, including the rights and responsibilities of national customs authorities, importers, and exporters. It contained detailed provisions related to customs control, operations, payments, and various types of customs "procedures" (e.g., release for domestic use, export, re-importation and re-exportation, inward and outward processing, temporary importation or exportation, use of customs warehouses, duty free trade/shops, destruction of goods and rejection in favour of the State). The CU Customs Code also established the right of appeal against customs decisions and addressed WTO rules and disciplines on the protection of intellectual property rights at the border, customs valuation, customs fees, special economic zones, trade in transit, and rules of origin. He noted that additional provisions on these issues were found in other CU Agreements and Decisions (as outlined in the specific Sections of this Report covering these issues). Further details relating to customs issues were set-out in Federal Law No. 311-FZ, notably concerning specific rules for the application of customs procedures in the Russian Federation which were not fully covered in the CU Customs Code.
  4. In response to a question from some Members, the representative of the Russian Federation noted that the customs bodies in the Russian Federation constituted a single Federal system and that their functions were established and authorised by the provisions of the CU Customs Code, Federal Law No. 311-FZ and provisions of previous domestic laws that remained in effect. He noted that, in accordance with Government Decision No. 459 of 26 July 2006 "On the Federal Customs Service" (as last amended on 15 June 2010), the Federal Customs Service (FCS) was the authorised Federal executive body, which carried out the functions of: elaboration of State policy and the implementation of legal regulation (including CU Decisions); control and supervision in the sphere of the customs system; as well as the functions of a currency control agent and special functions of fighting smuggling and other crimes and administrative offences. The activity of the FCS was directly subordinated to the Government of the Russian Federation.
  5. He added that pursuant to Article 4 of Federal Law No. 311-FZ, the Government of the Russian Federation and its executive bodies (e.g., the FCS) could issue, within the limits of their respective competence and in cases clearly defined by the CU Customs Code and related legal acts as well as legal acts of the Russian Federation, normative legal acts pertaining to customs matters. The President could also issue a decree on these matters. The representative of the Russian Federation explained that FCS orders covered procedural issues concerning the activities of customs authorities and the majority of these orders were of an administrative or procedural nature. Other CU legal acts and national laws and measures that directly regulated foreign trade in goods were referred to in other relevant Sections of this Report, including "Registration Requirements for Import/Export Operations", "Other Customs Formalities", and "Customs Valuation". The main functions of the FCS were set-out in the Regulation "On the Federal Customs Service", which had been approved by Government Decision No. 459 of 26 July 2006 "On the Federal Customs Service" (as last amended on 15 June 2010).
  6. The CU Customs Code and Federal Law No. 311-FZ also contained a number of provisions giving the Customs authorities of the Russian Federation the power to issue normative legal acts pertaining to the form of documents to be used in customs affairs, procedures for inter-departmental co operation, co-operation with foreign customs authorities, customs statistics, as well as other matters not related to the imposition of any obligation on participants in foreign trade activities or the definition of their rights. The Customs authorities did not have any power to establish customs administration principles, conditions of customs control or any regulation regarding a question of principle. He added that the vast majority of provisions of the CU Customs Code and other CU Agreements and Decisions relating to customs issues were of direct application, removing the element of FCS discretion from many customs operations.
  7. The CU Customs Code established the right of appeal with regard to customs issues in Article 9. Articles 36-49 of Federal Law No. 311-FZ, contained detailed provisions on the right of appeal, so as to ensure compliance of national customs administrations and their officers with requirements in their decision-making, including action or inaction. Right of appeal could be exercised through lodging a complaint with the hierarchal superior customs administrations and/or through judicial procedures (for further details, see the Section "Framework for Making and Enforcing Policies" of this Report). To ensure transparency, Article 51 of Federal Law No. 311-FZ also required relevant authorities to publish legal acts of customs regulations in the official publications.
  8. Pursuant to Article 181 of the CU Customs Code, a customs declaration had to be presented at the time of presentation of the goods to Customs authorities at the point of destination in the customs territory of the Russian Federation, i.e., when placed under one of the customs procedures, other than the customs procedure of customs transit, specified in Article 202, or at the day of completion of customs transit procedure, if imported goods were not declared at the point of destination. According to Article 193 of the CU Customs Code, if the goods were not produced to the customs authority, which had registered the customs declaration, or to the other customs authority specified by the customs legislation of the member state within 30 calendar days from the day following the day of its registration or if the prohibitions and restrictions were introduced since then, the customs authority shall refuse to release such goods. Goods placed under the transit procedure were declared in accordance with Article 182 of the CU Customs Code. The representative of the Russian Federation added that Articles 38 to 41 of the CU Customs Code and Articles 85 to 96 of Federal Law No. 311 FZ provided for special simplified customs formalities for "Authorised Economic Operators," i.e., persons who met the requirements listed in Article 39 and Article 87, respectively, including:

- provision of guarantee for the payment of customs duties and taxes (amount varies);

- performance of foreign economic activities for at least one year;

- absence of tax arrears or unfulfilled obligation to pay customs payments, interest, or penalties; absence of repeated (two or more) customs administrative offences during the previous year;

- absence of a record of conviction for economic criminal offenses by the chief officers and employees conducting customs operations under the simplified procedures;

- use of an accounting system in their commercial documents for the foreign trade activity that enabled customs authorities to compare the information contained in such documents with the information presented to customs authorities in the process of customs clearance; and

- if the authorised economic operator exercises temporary storage of goods, compliance with the requirements for this status found in Article 89 of Federal Law No. 311-FZ.
  1. A Member expressed concern that the procedures for registration of importers for the special simplified customs formalities referred to in paragraph were quite cumbersome and that it would take several months to obtain authorization for such registration. The Member requested the Russian Federation to make a commitment to simplify the above procedures and to shorten the period required for issuing the above authorization. In response, the representative of the Russian Federation noted that the Russian Federation would continue its policy for the development of the procedures of special simplified customs formalities with respect to bona fide participants of foreign economic trade in the framework of the requirements established by Article 39 of the CU Customs Code and Article 88 of Federal Law No. 311-FZ with a view to increasing the effectiveness of the procedures of special simplified customs formalities.
  2. The representative of the Russian Federation further explained that the CU Customs Code also provided for the maximum period that goods could be kept in temporary (bonded) storage. According to Chapter 25 of the CU Customs Code and Section 23 of Federal Law No. 311-FZ, goods under customs registration could be placed in temporary storage warehouses, prior to their release by the customs authorities. Temporary storage warehouses were owned by Russian legal persons, possessing operable storage facilities that could be used for ensuring the safety of goods, provided that the warehouse owner could present financial guarantees, and was ready to assume responsibility for the goods in favour of the owner. Customs authorities could also operate such storage facilities. In some cases, goods could also be temporarily stored in the warehouse of the importer (Articles 200 and 201 of Federal Law No. 311-FZ). Temporary storage of goods was limited to two months from the date following the date of registration by the customs authorities, a period that could be extended for a maximum of two more months, if customs clearance had not been concluded. According to Article 170 of the CU Customs Code, the CU Commission was authorised to determine a shorter term of storage for particular categories of goods. Items in the process of international postal exchange and luggage from passenger aircrafts that had not been collected could be held in temporary storage for up to six months. Upon expiration of the temporary storage period, the goods, that had not been placed under the customs procedure, were detained and subject to seizure for sale or destruction, as provided for in Chapter 2 of the CU Customs Code. Nevertheless, the sum resulting from the sale of the goods would be kept for three months after the sale, during which it could be returned to the owner, upon request and after deduction of the customs charges, taxes and other expenses pertaining to the storage and sale of the goods. The representative of the Russian Federation referred Members to the Section "Regulation of Trade in Transit" of this Report for information on customs escort.
  3. He further stated that Article 70 of the CU Customs Code set-out a list of customs payments (import duty, export duty, value added and excise taxes, customs fees and, as necessary, safeguard, anti-dumping and countervailing duties on imported goods). Article 186 of the CU Customs Code specified those persons who could be responsible for declaration of goods and payment of customs payments, and the legal grounds for exemption of persons or products from such payments was found in Article 80 and 81 (for further information on tariff exemptions, see the Section "Tariff Exemptions"; and on customs fees, see the Section "Fees and Charges for Services Rendered" of this Report). The CU Customs Code also authorised deferment of payments and making payments in instalments. Articles 132 to 136 of Federal Law No. 311-FZ of 27 November 2010 "On Customs Regulation" stipulated the grounds for deferment of payments and provided a list of circumstances in which they were permitted. Articles 89 to 90 of the CU Customs Code set-out the mechanism for remission of overpaid or over-recovered customs payments from the customs authorities, supplemented by Articles 147 to 149 of Federal Law No. 311-FZ. The customs authority was required to inform the payer of the overpaid or over-recovered customs payments within one month of the detection of the overpayment or over-recovery. Articles 91 to 93 of the CU Customs Code provided for the recovery of unpaid customs payments to the customs authorities, and Articles 150 to 160 of Federal Law No. 311-FZ detailed the procedures to be used. Chapter 28 of the CU Customs Code also specified the procedures and time-frames for releasing goods (Articles 195 to 201). Pursuant to Article 196 of the CU Customs Code, the customs authority had to take a decision on release of the goods not later than one working day from the date of registration of the customs declaration, unless specifically provided for elsewhere in the CU Customs Code, e.g., as provided for in Article 331, concerning intellectual property protection. According to Article 186.2 of the CU Customs Code, in case of a preliminary customs declaration, a decision on the release of the goods was required to take one working day from the date of presentation of the goods to the customs authority registering the declaration.
  4. The representative of the Russian Federation also noted that if, when examining a customs declaration and any other documents or data, customs authorities discovered any signs suggesting that the information stated by the declarant might contain fictitious details influencing the amount of dutiable payments or that the declared information had not been properly evidenced, customs authorities could conduct an additional examination to accurately determine the necessary payments. If the examination could not be conducted within the time limits provided for the release of goods from customs control, the goods could be released upon presentation of a guarantee for the duty payments in the amount of the customs payments that might be additionally charged as a result of additional examination (Article 69 of the CU Customs Code).
  5. The declarant, when securing a customs payment, had the right to use any kind of security envisaged by the CU Customs Code (Article 86), provided that the customs authority recognised, depending on the circumstances of each particular case, the reliability of the security used. In such case, the declarant was advised in writing of the amount required. Article 196 further provided that the goods must be released no later than one day following the date of registration of the customs declaration. Article 220 of Federal Law No. 311-FZ stated that this term could be prolonged until a security for customs payment was provided. Article 85 of the CU Customs Code provided for cases in which the security for customs payment was required and Article 86 specified the methods of providing a security for customs payment. The declarant could choose which method to use. These methods included: (i) a personal guarantee, including a surety bond; (ii) a payment in cash at the desk of the cashier or transfer of funds to the account of the customs office at the Federal Treasury (cash deposit); (iii) a bank guarantee; or (iv) a mortgage of goods and other property. Each method was described in detail in Articles 140 to 146 of Federal Law No. 311-FZ (further information on the implementation of Article 13 of the Agreement on the Implementation of Article VII of the GATT 1994 was provided in the Section "Customs Regulations and Procedures" of this Report).
  6. Some Members expressed concern that the one-day time period for examining and clearing goods allowed under Article 196 was subject to exceptions provided by the CU Customs Code and Federal Law No. 311-FZ, stating that this could unnecessarily hold up goods in clearance. In response, the representative of the Russian Federation explained that even before the maximum time period had been reduced from three business days (under Federal Law No. 61 of 28 May 2003 "Customs Code of the Russian Federation") to only one day, as provided for by the CU Customs Code, over 90 per cent of goods were cleared within one day or less.
  7. Some Members expressed concerns regarding possible inconsistencies in the application of customs laws and regulations by regional customs authorities and stressed the need to ensure uniform and transparent implementation of customs regulations throughout the entire territory of the Russian Federation. Many Members also sought a clarification of Customs Order No. 25 of 15 January 2001 "On the Checkpoints for Entry into the Territory of the Russian Federation of Certain Categories of Goods" and other related orders of the SCC, which limited the number of customs land checkpoints for goods imported from 14 countries, including a number of ASEAN countries. Noting that a number of these 14 countries were WTO Members, these Members requested: (i) confirmation from the Russian Federation that this particular order and other related orders had been repealed; and (ii) a commitment that they would not be re-introduced in the future.
  8. In response, the representative of the Russian Federation said that the uniform application of customs procedures was required by Article 7 of Federal Law No. 311-FZ, which provided for the uniform application of customs legislation by all customs bodies in the territory of the Russian Federation. Concerning the authority to limit the numbers of customs checkpoints for goods, pursuant to Article 190 of the CU Customs Code, Articles 10.4 and 205 of Federal Law No. 311-FZ, the customs authorities could designate customs checkpoints for declaration of imports and exports, respectively. He added that Customs Order No. 25 of 15 January 2001 had been abolished by Customs Order No. 517 of 24 May 2002 "On the Invalidation of Certain Legal Acts of the State Customs Committee of Russia". Further information on the designation of certain customs checkpoints for importation and exportation of goods was provided in the Section "Other Customs Formalities" of this Report and in Table 13 and Table 14.
  9. He also noted that the Government had the right to carry out the analysis of acts and decisions of customs bodies and abolish them in case they were inconsistent with the requirements of the international treaties of the Russian Federation, including WTO obligations, CU Agreements, other CU legal acts, national legislation and other normative acts of the Russian Federation. He also added that any normative legal act regarding customs affairs could be declared void through a judicial procedure (he referred to the Sub-Section "Right of Appeal" of the Section "Framework for Making and Enforcing Policies" of this Report). The representative of the Russian Federation also explained that, pursuant to Article 104 of the CU Customs Code, Article 25 of Federal Law No. 311-FZ provided that the State would reimburse the losses incurred by persons as a result of damage caused by illegal resolutions, actions (omissions) of officials and other employees of customs authorities within the framework of fulfilment of office or labour duties by them, e.g., the untimely adoption, entry into force, and/or publication of a legal act whose adoption was stipulated by the normative legal acts of the Russian Federation or as a result of inaccurate information circulated by Customs authorities under the procedure set-out by the Federal legislation.
  10. Members asked the Russian Federation to provide information on how the FCS and its regional offices published and/or made their rulings and other information available to importers and exporters. They noted that the FCS had sometimes issued administrative orders or taken decisions which were directly relevant for traders without making their contents known to traders or without publishing them. They asked the Russian Federation to explain how the customs reform would ensure that all legal acts were published and how all other decisions and information relevant to traders would be made publicly available. Members also sought a confirmation that relevant Customs Decisions, e.g. Orders and Letters, and decisions of local customs authorities that traders and other interested parties needed to be able to review and understand, would be made available promptly and at reasonable cost.
  11. In response, the representative of the Russian Federation stated that, pursuant to Article 10 of the CU Customs Code, CU Agreements and other CU legal acts relating to customs issues would be available free of charge and published in its official and other printed publications, as well as through television, radio, information technology, and through other means. Furthermore, all FCS legal acts were to be made public, according to Article 51 of Federal Law No. 311-FZ. The CU Commission, as well as the customs authorities of the CU Parties, were required to ensure free access to information on their official websites on CU legal acts related to customs issues. The customs authorities were also obliged to consult with interested persons on customs matters, and, upon written request of such interested persons, to provide information in written form as soon as possible, but not later than the date fixed in the legislation of the CU Parties. For the Russian Federation, Article 8 of Federal Law No. 311-FZ provided that normative legal acts pertaining to customs had to be formulated in such a way, that a clear understanding by every person of his/her rights and obligations would be ensured. Furthermore, Article 51 also required customs authorities to provide access to draft legal acts, as well as to amendments and supplements to normative legal acts, in the area of customs, to the extent that it did not impede effectiveness of customs control. In addition, Article 15 of Federal Law No. 164-FZ of 8 December 2003 "On the Fundamental Principles of State Regulation of Foreign Trade Activity" provided the possibility of holding consultations and other procedures, aimed at ensuring transparency when carrying out the normative legal regulation of foreign trade activity. In particular, the above mentioned procedures were to be carried out when preparing a draft normative legal act dealing with the right to conduct foreign trade activity. In a limited number of cases, authorities could avoid consultations, if such consultations would entail a delay in the adoption of a normative legal act of the Russian Federation affecting the right to conduct foreign trade activity which might inflict substantial damage to the interests of the Russian Federation.
  12. The representative of the Russian Federation explained that normative legal acts of the FCS (e.g., acts with a binding effect throughout the territory of the Russian Federation) regulated customs procedures and customs requirements, customs rules, and the formats of customs documents. In response to concerns from Members with respect to unpublished documents, such as determinations of the FCS and its regional offices or "secret orders", the representative of the Russian Federation stated that the only time this occurred was in the case of certain legal acts destined for internal use of customs authorities. These acts could only pertain to customs officers' activities in relation to goods imported to or exported from the territory of the Russian Federation illegally, or to internal security of the FCS. In accordance with Article 8.4 of Federal Law No. 311-FZ, such acts could not contradict rules set by laws, presidential or governmental acts, or orders of Federal Executive bodies, nor provide any additional obligations for participants in foreign trade activities. These acts were also meant to ensure the proper implementation of customs legislation. Issued in the form of orders, briefings, letters, telegrams, teletype letters, these acts were not considered as normative legal acts, but as acts, which could only have a recommendatory character and be used internally for the sole purpose of a State body. In particular, "customs letters" containing recommended import valuations were sent to customs posts, to assist officials in assessing the value of certain imports. Such recommendations were not mandatory, were not published and were not intended to be used as substitutes for the transaction value. The representative of the Russian Federation also noted that, pursuant to Government Decision No. 1009 of 13 August 1997 "On the Approval of the Rules for Preparing the Normative Legal Acts of the Federal Bodies of the Executive Power and their State Registration" (as last amended on 15 May 2010), a Federal Executive authority was prohibited from issuing normative legal acts in the form of letters. Further information on the operation of the risk management system and on the nature and scope of risk profiles were given in the Section "Customs Valuation" of this Report.
  13. In response to further questions from Members of the Working Party concerning "secret orders", the representative of the Russian Federation added that the procedure for publication and making effective regulatory legal acts of Federal Executive Authorities was governed, in particular, by Presidential Decree No. 763 of 23 May 1996 "On the Procedure for the Publication and the Entry into Force of the Acts of the President of the Russian Federation, the Government of the Russian Federation and the Normative Legal Acts of the Federal Executive Bodies"; Government Decision No. 1009 of 13 August 1997 "On the Approval of the Rules for Preparing the Normative Legal Acts of the Federal Bodies of the Executive Power and their State Registration"; and Order No. 88 of 4 May 2007 "On the Approval of Explanations on the Application of Rules for Preparing the Normative Legal Acts of Federal Executive Power Bodies and on their State Registration" of the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation.
  14. In regard to normative legal acts of the FCS, such acts were subject to mandatory publication pursuant to Article 15.3 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation with the exception of acts or parts thereof constituting State secrets. An exhaustive list of such information had been approved by the Law of the Russian Federation No. 5485-1 of 21 July 1993 "On State Secrets". The official organs for publication were Rossiiskaya Gazeta and the Bulletin of Regulatory Acts of Federal Bodies published by Yuridicheskaya Literatura publishing house of the Administration of the President, issued monthly since 1998. Normative legal acts of the FCS subject to State Registration with the Ministry of Justice became enforceable only after they had been registered and officially published.
  15. The FCS, in addition to official government publication, was required to publish all of its normative legal acts in its own official publications, the Customs Bulletin and Customs Gazette, as provided in Article 51 of Federal Law No. 311-FZ. He added that the FCS had its own internet website where the necessary information related to its activity, adopted normative legal acts and comments formulated on these texts were available (www.customs.ru). The FCS also published the explanatory documents. Legal information reference systems were also easily accessible on the internet. Further information on legal requirements for the publication of legal acts was given in paragraphs to of the Section on "Transparency" of this Report.
  16. The representative of the Russian Federation further stated that, as provided for in Article 52 of Federal Law No. 311-FZ, customs authorities were responsible for providing advisory services to all interested persons with regard to customs issues such as classification and valuation and other issues within their competence. Such services were to be delivered as quickly as possible, and no later than one month from the date of receipt of the enquiry.
  17. A Member invited the Russian Federation to make available an English-language version of its customs website (www.customs.ru) as a means of facilitating access to information on the customs system of the Russian Federation to Members. In response, the representative of the Russian Federation informed Members that documents in English could be found on ms.ru/.
  18. In response to a question from a Member concerning the possibility for a foreign entity to import goods into the Russian Federation, the representative of the Russian Federation noted that Chapter 27 of the CU Customs Code (in particular, Articles 186 to 194) specified the rights and obligations of persons, including foreign persons not registered as a Russian juridical entity or individual entrepreneur, to import goods, into the Russian Federation and perform all necessary customs procedures, including payment of customs duties and charges. Additional provisions were contained in Article 210 of Federal Law No. 311-FZ. Further discussions on this issue could be found in the Section "Registration requirements for import/export operations" of this Report. He also stated that a foreign person, importing goods into the Russian Federation, could also place the goods under the regime of a bonded warehouse. In that case, customs duties were to be paid at the moment of releasing the goods to free circulation in the territory of the Russian Federation by the person who would pick up the goods and take the legal responsibility for them.
  19. The representative of the Russian Federation confirmed that no law, regulation, or administrative rulings of general application, including customs measures, giving effect to the Agreement on Implementation of Article VII of the GATT 1994 (Customs Valuation Agreement), would be enforced before it was published. The Working Party took note of these commitments.