Geum.ru

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

Вид материалаДокументы
Подобный материал:
1   ...   11   12   13   14   15   16   17   18   ...   75

- (a) Quantitative Import Restrictions, including Prohibitions and Quotas
  1. The legal authorization for the application of quantitative import restrictions in the Russian Federation was contained in agreements established in the Customs Union (CU) with Kazakhstan and Belarus. By Decision No. 19 of 27 November 2009 of the CU Interstate Council, the Agreement on Common Measures of Non-Tariff Regulation in Respect of Third Countries, signed on 25 January 2008 (hereafter: "CU Agreement on Non-Tariff Regulation"), and the Agreement on the Procedure of Introduction and Implementation of Measures, Concerning Foreign Trade in Goods, on the Common Customs Territory in Respect of Third Countries (hereafter: "Agreement on Measures Concerning Foreign Trade"), signed on 9 June 2009 took effect on 1 January 2010. As a consequence, decisions to impose non-tariff measures on third-country imports into the CU would be taken by the CU Commission. Prior to the establishment of the CU, the imposition of non-tariff measures was governed by Chapter 5 of the Federal Law No. 164-FZ. According to the CU Agreement on Non-Tariff Regulation, non-tariff measures could include quantitative restrictions, exclusive import or export licenses, or automatic licenses (permits) or non-automatic licenses. By its Decision No. 132 of 27 November 2009, the CU Commission approved the Common List of Goods that are Subject to Non-Tariff Measures (see Table 28), which also came into force on 1 January 2010.
  2. The representative of the Russian Federation noted that, in his view, the Russian Federation did not maintain any quantitative import restrictions, prohibitions or quotas within the meaning of Article XI of the GATT 1994, nor was any such measure in place in the CU. Imports of goods were free of any quantitative restrictions imposed previously pursuant to Article 21 of Federal Law No. 164-FZ of 8 December 2003 "On the Fundamentals of State Regulation of Foreign Trade Activity" (as last amended on 7 April 2010). Under the CU, import restrictions could be applied pursuant to Article 7 of the CU Agreement on Non-Tariff Regulation and in accordance with Federal laws and international treaties of the Russian Federation, if those measures: (i) were necessary to maintain public morals or law and order; (ii) were necessary to protect the life or health of citizens, environment, life or health of animals and plants; (iii) were related to the import or export of gold or silver; (iv) were applied to protect cultural valuables and heritage; (v) were required to prevent the exhaustion of irreplaceable natural resources and implemented simultaneously with curtailment of the domestic production or consumption associated with the utilization of irreplaceable natural resources; (vi) were linked to a limitation of export of domestic raw materials to provide sufficient quantity of such materials for the domestic manufacturing industry in periods when domestic prices for such materials were kept lower than world prices as the result of a stabilization plan implemented by the government; (vii) were essential to acquire or distribute goods in case of their general or local shortage; (viii) were essential to comply with the international obligations; (ix) were essential to ensure the defence of the country and security of the state; and (x) were necessary to ensure the observance of regulatory legal acts not contravening international commitments and related to the application of the customs law, preservation of the environment, protection of intellectual property and other legal acts.
  3. In addition, pursuant to Article 3 of the CU Agreement on Non-Tariff Regulation, quantitative import restrictions could be introduced on agricultural or fishery products imported into the CU in accordance with Article XI:2 of the GATT 1994 when such measures were necessary to: (i) reduce the production or sale of similar domestic goods; (ii) reduce the production or sale of domestic goods that could be directly replaced with imported goods unless there was a large-scale production of similar domestic goods; (iii) remove from the market a temporary surplus of similar domestic goods by providing the available surplus of such goods to some groups of consumers either free of charge or at prices inferior to market prices; (iv) remove from the market a temporary surplus of domestic goods that may be directly replaced with imported goods unless there was a large-scale production of similar domestic goods by providing the available surplus of such goods to some groups of consumers either free of charge or at prices inferior to market prices; and (v) limit the production of products of animal origin whose production was dependent upon imported goods, provided the production of similar domestic goods was negligible. In response to a question from a Member, the representative of the Russian Federation explained that "domestic good" in this context meant a good produced in any CU Party.
  4. Referring to the statement of the representative of the Russian Federation in paragraph , a Member enquired whether any import restrictions under Article XI:2(c) of the GATT 1994 had been or were being applied. This Member requested the Russian Federation to enter a commitment to comply with Article 4.2 of the WTO Agreement on Agriculture, which had superseded Article XI:2(c) of the GATT 1994, as from the date of its accession and to remove any measures that could be inconsistent with that Article. In response, the representative of the Russian Federation said no import restrictions under Article XI:2(c) of the GATT 1994 were being applied under either the existing legislation of the Russian Federation or CU Commission Decisions. He further stated that, from the date of accession, the Russian Federation would comply with Article 4.2 of the WTO Agreement on Agriculture.
  5. He further stated that, pursuant to Article 8 of the CU Agreement on Non-Tariff Regulation, the CU Commission was authorised to apply quantitative import restrictions and prohibitions to fulfil the obligations of a Party under international sanctions regimes or to protect the external financial situation and safeguard the balance of payments (see Section on "Balance of payments" of this Report). To meet these obligations, the CU Commission was authorised to apply quantitative import restrictions or grant exclusive licenses to import or export based on proposals from the CU Parties. Such measures would be taken in accordance with the Federal Laws of the Russian Federation and the international Agreements to which the Russian Federation was a Party. In response to a question from a Member, the representative of the Russian Federation explained that the list of general exceptions stipulated in Articles 7 and 8 of the CU Agreement on Non-Tariff Regulation was exhaustive and no other document within the CU provided for such exceptions.
  6. The representative of the Russian Federation explained that, as of 1 January 2010, pursuant to Article 9 of the CU Agreement on Non-Tariff Regulation and Article 1 of the Agreement on Measures Concerning Foreign Trade, the authority to impose non-tariff measures in the CU on third-country imports was transferred from the individual Parties to the CU Commission. A proposal to apply a non-tariff measure could be filed by a Party or the CU Commission, and the CU Commission was required to make its determination within 30 days from the date the proposal was submitted, and the decision would come into force within 45 days from the date of publication. Any non-tariff measure was applied to goods originating in third countries, and applied equally to imports from all countries.
  7. In response to a question from a Member, the representative of the Russian Federation explained that under Article 9 of the CU Agreement on Non-Tariff Regulation and Article 8 of the Agreement on Measures Concerning Foreign Trade, and pursuant to the procedures set-forth in the latter Agreement, a CU Party could unilaterally impose temporarily a non-tariff measure if such a measure was aimed at: (i) the observance of public morality, law and order; (ii) defence and security; (iii) protection of life or health of the citizens, environment, life or health of animals and plants; (iv) protection of cultural values and cultural heritage; (v) protection of intellectual property; (vi) prevention of the exhaustion of irreplaceable natural resources; (vii) prevention or reduction of the critical shortage in the domestic market of food or other goods that were essential for the domestic market; or (viii) protection of the external financial position and safeguarding the balance of payments. Furthermore, Articles 6.1 and 7.1 of the Agreement on Measures Concerning Foreign Trade provided further grounds to introduce unilateral non-tariff measures with a view to protecting national interests or external financial position as well as safeguarding the balance of payments. Such a unilateral measure could be imposed for only six months. The CU Parties not imposing the non-tariff measure were to take the necessary steps to prevent the importation of the subject goods into the Party which unilaterally applied the non-tariff measure.
  8. Noting the statement of the representative of the Russian Federation that measures applied on the basis of Article 7 of the CU Agreement on Non-Tariff Regulation were justifiable under Articles XX and XXI of the GATT 1994 and other respective provisions of the WTO Agreement, some Members stated that certain elements of that Article, such as paragraph 6, reached beyond grounds provided for under the GATT, in particular Articles XX and XI. The same Members requested a commitment that Article 7 of the CU Agreement on Non-Tariff Regulation, whether applied by the Russian Federation or the competent bodies of the CU, would be in conformity with the relevant provisions of the WTO Agreement.
  9. In response, the representative of the Russian Federation stated that, in his view, Article 7 of the CU Agreement on Non-Tariff Regulation was in conformity with Article XX (j) of the GATT 1994. He also confirmed that measures applied on the basis of Article 7 of the CU Agreement on Non-Tariff Regulation would be in conformity with the relevant provisions of the WTO Agreement, whether applied by the Russian Federation or the competent bodies of the CU.
  10. In response to a question from a Member, the representative of the Russian Federation recalled that the temporary ban on the importation of ethyl alcohol enforced under Federal Law No. 61-FZ of 31 March 1999 "On Temporary Ban on Ethyl Alcohol Imports" had been terminated on 31 December 2001. He further said, that Article 13 of Federal Law No. 171 FZ of 22 November 1995 "On State Regulation of Producing and Turnover of Ethyl Alcohol, Alcoholic and Alcohol Containing Products", which had restricted imports of distilled spirits to no more than 10 per cent of alcohol sales in the Russian Federation, was repealed on 1 January 2006 by Federal Law No. 102-FZ of 21 July 2005 "On Amending the Federal Law on the State Regulation of Producing and Turnover of Ethyl Alcohol, Alcoholic Products and Alcohol-Containing Products and on Declaring as no Longer Valid Some Provisions of the Federal Law on the State Regulation of Producing and Turnover of Ethyl Alcohol, Alcoholic Products and Alcohol-Containing Products".
  11. Noting the statement of the representative of the Russian Federation concerning the lifting of the temporary ban on imports of ethyl alcohol, some Members requested clarification of whether the Russian authorities considered that imports of ethyl alcohol could still be affected by Government Resolution No. 1292 of 3 November 1998 "On the Approval of Rules for the Issuance of Quotas for the Manufacture of Ethyl Alcohol from All Types of Raw Materials and Special Permits for Its Delivery" (as amended on 16 May 2001). As this Resolution seemed to contemplate placing quotas on deliveries by domestic producers, the question remained as to whether the Russian Federation eventually planned to place quotas on imports.
  12. In response, the representative of the Russian Federation stated that the rules of putting quotas on production of ethyl alcohol from all types of raw materials, methylated spirits and alcohol containing solutions had been recognised as invalid by Resolution of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation No. GKPI 2001-783 of 16 May 2001 "On Recognition as Invalid and Inapplicable the Rules on Putting Quotas on Production of Ethyl Alcohol and Alcohol-Containing Solution", approved by Government Resolution No. 1292 of 3 November 1998. The rules of issuance of special permits for delivery (release) of ethyl alcohol produced from all types of raw materials, methylated spirits and alcohol-containing solutions had been recognised as invalid and inapplicable by Resolution of the Supreme Court No. GKPI 00-1251 of 23 November 2000 "On Recognition as Invalid and Inapplicable the Rules of Issuance of Special Permits for Delivery (Release) of Ethyl Alcohol Produced from All Types of Raw Materials, Methylated Spirits and Alcohol-Containing Solutions", approved by the Resolution of the Government of the Russian Federation No. 1292 of 3 November 1998.
  13. He further noted that according to Federal Law No. 102-FZ of 21 July 2005 "On Amending the Federal Law on the State Regulation of Production and Circulation of Ethyl Alcohol, Alcoholic Products and Alcohol-Containing Products and on Declaring as no Longer Valid Some Provisions of the Federal Law on the State Regulation of Production and Circulation of Ethyl Alcohol, Alcoholic Products and Alcohol-Containing Products", the restriction on distilled spirits mentioned in Article 13, Point 2 of Federal Law No. 171-FZ of 22 November 1995 "On the State Regulation of Production and Circulation of Ethyl Alcohol, Alcoholic Products and Alcohol-Containing Products" was no longer valid.
  14. Noting that the Russian Federation did not exclude the possible introduction of a State monopoly on the distribution of alcoholic products, and that CU Regulations provided that the CU Commission could issue an exclusive import licence for such enterprises, some Members requested the Russian Federation to ensure that, in the event of such introduction, it would not create a disguised restriction on imports of alcoholic products into the Russian Federation, nor would it create unduly burdensome procedures for imports. In response, the representative of the Russian Federation referred to paragraph of the Section "Registration requirements for import/export operations" of this Report.
  15. Some Members expressed concerns about measures applied by the Russian Federation that, in their view, restricted trade in beef, pork, and poultry meat and products. These Members requested information on the basis for these measures and on when they would be terminated. In response, the representative of the Russian Federation informed the Members that, for the purpose of ensuring the conditions for the stable development of the Russian production of poultry, beef and pork meat, and products thereof, on the basis of Government Resolution No. 1111 of 24 December 2010 "On Import of Beef, Pork and Poultry Meat in 2011", and taking into account Federal Law No. 164 FZ of 8 December 2003 "On the Fundamental Principles of State Regulation of Foreign Trade Activity" and the Law of the Russian Federation No. 5003-1 of 21 May 1993 "On Customs Tariff" (as last amended on 28 June 2009), the Government had approved the list of goods and volumes of their importation into the Russian Federation from 2010 to 2012. These quotas were administered by issuance of non automatic licenses by the Ministry of Industry and Trade, as described in the Section "Tariff Quotas" of this Report. Earlier safeguard import quotas had been converted into TRQs on 1 January 2006, as described in the Section "Tariff Quotas" of this Report.

- (b) Import Licensing Systems
  1. The representative of the Russian Federation noted that, from 1 January 2010, the legal basis for the import licensing system in the Russian Federation was established in the Agreement on Common Measures of Non-Tariff Regulation in Respect of Third Countries, signed on 25 January 2008 (hereafter: CU Agreement on Non-Tariff Regulation), the Agreement on the Introduction and Application of Measures Concerning Foreign Trade in Goods on the Common Customs Territory in Respect of Third Countries (hereafter: CU Agreement on Measures Concerning Foreign Trade), signed on 9 June 2009, and the Agreement on Licensing in the Area of Foreign Merchandise Trade of 9 July 2009 (hereafter: CU Licensing Agreement) and the Agreement on the Regime and Implementation of Tariff Quotas as of 12 December 2008. The purpose of the licensing regime was to monitor and control imports of goods which, for various reasons, were classified as sensitive by the CU Parties and/or by the international community. By CU Commission Decision No. 132 of 27 November 2009 "On a Single Non-Tariff Regulation of the Customs Union of the Republic of Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation" (hereafter:  CU Commission Decision No. 132), the CU Commission approved the Common List of Goods that might be subject to Non-Tariff Measures (hereafter: Common List, see Table 28), which came into force on 1 January 2010. For the Russian Federation, in addition to the products already subject to such requirements, wines, vitamins and a number of radio-electronic products became newly subject to non-tariff measures as a result of CU Commission Decision No. 132. The procedure for the importation of specific products, such as products with cryptographic capabilities, precious stones and precious metals, and medicines and pharmaceutical ingredients, were set-out in CU Commission regulations. The authorised body of each CU Party was responsible for issuing and monitoring the implementation of non-automatic licenses and/or automatic licenses (permits).
  2. The representative of the Russian Federation explained that in addition to the CU Agreements and Commission Decisions, national legislation of the Russian Federation, including Federal Law No. 164-FZ of 8 December 2003 "On the Fundamentals of State Regulation of Foreign Trade Activity" (as last amended on 7 April 2010) and Government Resolution No. 364 of 9 June 2005 "On the Approval of the Regulations for Licensing in the Area of Foreign Trade in Goods and on Creating and Keeping a Federal Data Bank of Issued Licenses", continued to regulate the application of the licensing regime in the Russian Federation. For example, Federal Law No. 164-FZ established the conditions and procedures for applying supervision of export and/or import of certain kinds of goods. Similarly, Federal Law No. 164-FZ set-forth the procedures for applying for an import licence or permit. In cases where a licence and/or permit application>
  3. Some Members requested information on whether an import licence or permit issued by one CU Party would allow importation of the good into all CU Parties or would importation be limited to the Party issuing the licence or permit.
  4. In response, the representative of the Russian Federation explained that an import licence or permit authorised the licensee or permit holder to import the relevant good into only the CU Party that issued the licence or permit; the licence or permit did not authorize the licensee or permit holder to import the relevant good into other CU Parties. He further explained that the licence or permit did, however, give the licensee/permit holder the right to transit the good through the territory of the other CU Party to the territory of the Party that issued the licence or permit.
  5. According to Article 5 of the CU Agreement on Non-Tariff Regulation, licensing was required: (i) in the event of temporary quantitative restrictions on imports of certain types of goods; (ii) to regulate the importation of certain goods for reasons of national security, health, safety or environmental protection; (iii) to grant an exclusive right to import certain goods; or (iv) to carry out international obligations. Import licenses were also required to regulate the importation of goods subject to tariff rate quotas. The type of non-tariff restrictions and the list of goods subject to these restrictions were established by the CU Commission. The current list of such goods was set-out in Table 28. The CU Commission could decide to add or remove goods from this list upon request of a CU Party or on its own initiative.
  6. The representative of the Russian Federation explained that according to the CU Licensing Agreement, the Ministry of Industry and Trade (the "authorised State body of executive power" in the Russian Federation) issued three types of licenses: one time, general, and exclusive. One time licenses were issued to applicants on the basis of a foreign trade contract relating to goods subject to import licensing. One time and general licenses were issued to applicants upon a decision of the authorised body of the Russian Federation. Both types of licenses granted the right to import certain types of goods subject to licensing in the quantity determined by the licence and were valid for one year or, for goods with respect to which provisional quantitative restrictions had been introduced, until 1 January of the following calendar year. Exclusive licenses gave the applicant the exclusive right to import certain types of goods. The goods subject to exclusive licenses were to be decided by the CU Commission, but until now exclusive import licences had not been issued in the Russian Federation. Under the CU Licensing Agreement, licenses were issued within 15 working days after submission of the complete set of documents. These documents consisted of an application for licence, an electronic copy of the application, a copy of the contract, a copy of a certificate confirming that the applicant was registered with a regional tax authority as a tax-payer, a copy of the activity licence (if applicable) and other documents, as required. The fee charged for the issuance of a licence was reduced from RUB 3,000 to RUB 2,600. Renewal of a licence would be subject to a fee of RUB 200.
  7. A Member requested clarification regarding the respective powers of the CU Commission and national level governments in relation to general and exclusive licenses. The representative of the Russian Federation explained that in accordance with paragraph 1 of Article 3 of the CU Licensing Agreement, exclusive licenses were issued by authorised bodies of the CU Parties in cases stipulated by the Decision of the CU Commission. He further explained that, in accordance with the CU Commission Decision No. 168 of 27 November 2009, the competent national authority (the Ministry of Industry and Trade, in the case of the Russian Federation) issued exclusive licenses for import or export to foreign trade participants, and the CU Commission, consistent with a Decision of the CU Interstate Council, issued general licenses. In accordance with CU Decision No. 168, until the CU Parties ratify the "Procedure of Licence Suspension and Expiration", the CU Commission was to base its decisions regarding suspension and expiration of licenses on the national legislation of each CU Party.
  8. In response to a question from a Member, the representative of the Russian Federation confirmed that proprietary and/or confidential information contained in an import licence application would be protected under the applicable laws of the Russian Federation.
  9. The authorised body of the Russian Federation had the right to terminate or suspend an import licence in the case of a change in the constituent documents of the licensee registered as a legal entity (a change of the organizational-legal form, name, or its location) or a change in the passport information of the licensee being a natural person. In such circumstances, the CU Licensing Agreement provided that the licensee was to request that the authorised body terminate the existing licence, and register a new licence. In order to register a new licence, the licensee was required to submit a new application and documents confirming the above mentioned change(s). In case of loss of the licence, the licensee was entitled to a duplicate licence, which would be issued within five calendar days from the date of submission of the request explaining the causes and circumstances of the loss of the licence. The licence holder wishing to renew a licence had to submit a new application, along with the full set of required documents.
  10. The representative of the Russian Federation explained that according to the CU Licensing Agreement, permits were issued by the authorised body of the Russian Federation without restriction to all applicants. Permits were issued within three working days from the date of the submission of the draft permit in a format approved by the Commission, and remained valid until the end of the calendar year in which they were issued. No other documents were required for issuance of a permit.
  11. A Member requested clarification of whether a CU Party must apply automatic import licenses to all goods on the Common List of Goods across the CU. The representative of the Russian Federation explained that automatic licensing was carried out in respect of goods whose export/import was subject to supervision. The list of goods subject to supervision was stipulated by the CU Commission. Goods subject to supervision were included into the Common List of Goods, but not all goods included into the Common List were subject to automatic licenses. In some cases, the requirement for permit was stipulated in the Regulations on the procedure for import/export attached to each section of the Common List of Goods.
  12. In response to a question from a Member, the representative of the Russian Federation responded that no goods were currently subject to automatic-licensing except for goods containing encryption technology, as described in paragraph .
  13. Import licenses were generally issued by the Ministry of Industry and Trade of the Russian Federation, based on "conclusions" issued by the relevant competent authorities following an "expert examination" of the good. In the case of weapons, ammunitions and dual-purpose goods, however, licenses were issued by the Ministry of Defence of the Russian Federation. The licensing regime was applied to imports from all non-CU countries, including imports from CIS countries without discrimination as regards to the country of origin.
  14. Several Members of the Working Party expressed concern regarding the justification of the Russian Federation for the application of non-automatic import licenses pursuant to Article XX of the GATT 1994 for products listed in Table 28. These Members requested additional explanation to understand how the provisions in the chapeau of Article XX of the GATT 1994 would be met. They noted that, while import licensing might be an appropriate mechanism to administer certain controls, the justification for these controls, as well as the specifics of the import licensing procedures used to administer them, needed in all cases to be fully in accordance with WTO provisions, including those on non-discrimination.
  15. In response, the representative of the Russian Federation said that neither the Russian Federation, nor the competent bodies of the CU intended to limit the quantity and value of imports by means of import licenses, except as provided for in international conventions such as the Montreal Protocol or the Basel Convention or for the implementation of other measures justified under the WTO Agreement. He added that, in his view, the application of non-automatic import licenses for the products listed in Table 28 was in conformity with Articles XX and XXI of the GATT 1994.
  16. Several Members replied that the current application of licensing requirements to products such as pharmaceuticals, sugar, goods with encryption technology and alcoholic beverages clearly operated to restrict imports. They requested the Russian Federation to describe the legal basis for these measures and to explain how these restrictions would be modified or eliminated to meet WTO requirements.