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

Вид материалаДокументы

Содержание


3. Internal Policies Affecting Foreign Trade in Goods
Подобный материал:
1   ...   18   19   20   21   22   23   24   25   ...   75

- (a) 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 metals and stones were set-forth in the 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 of Precious Metals, Precious Stones and Commodities Containing Precious Metals" (hereafter in this Section: the Regulations) adopted by the CU Commission Decision No. 132 of 27 November 2009. Pursuant to these Regulations, those products listed in section 2.9 and 2.10 of the Common List attached to Decision No. 132 of 27 November 2009 (see Table 28) were subject to licensing requirements. In addition, the relevant provisions of the Presidential Decree No. 1137 of 20 September 2010 as well as the Agreement on Licensing, continued to apply, as provided in the Regulations on Precious Stones and Metals.
  2. The representative of the Russian Federation further stated 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 was implemented without quantitative restrictions on the basis of the licenses, which had been given out by the Ministry of Industry and Trade (MIT) of the Russian Federation. He explained that Presidential Decree No. 742 of 21 June 2001 "On the Procedure for Importation into and Exportation from the Russian Federation of Precious Metals and Precious Stones" and Presidential Decree No. 1373 of 30 November 2002 "On Regulations on Importation to the Russian Federation and Exportation from the Russian Federation of Natural Diamonds and Cut Diamonds" had been amended. These amendments abolished quantitative export restrictions on natural diamonds, unwrought platinum and metals of the platinum group and raw materials, containing precious stones, and removed bans on the export of certain types of goods, such as wastes and scraps of precious metals; precious metals ores and concentrates.
  3. With regard to procedures for exporting precious stones and precious metals, the representative of the Russian Federation explained that information on the formalities for obtaining an export licence was provided in the Section "Export Licensing Procedures" of this Report. He also explained that all documentation and procedures for exports or imports of these goods were to be completed at specific customs checkpoints (see Sections "Other Customs Formalities (Import)" and "Other Customs Export Formalities" of this Report).
  4. In response to a question from a Member, the representative of the Russian Federation noted that the Russian Federation had eliminated all quantitative restrictions on exports of precious stones and metals, and that it had brought its national legislation on export restrictions for precious metals and stones into accordance with WTO disciplines. Presidential Decree No. 742 of 21 June 2001 "On the Procedure for Importation into and Exportation from the Russian Federation of Precious Metals and Precious Stones" (as amended on 11 January 2007) had abolished quantitative export restrictions and export licensing of articles made of precious stones and meant for industrial-technical purposes; precious metals in the form of products and articles; as well as articles of precious stones and natural pearls and coins. Presidential Decree No. 1373 of 30 November 2002 "On Regulations on Importation to the Russian Federation and Exportation from the Russian Federation of Natural Diamonds and Cut Diamonds" had abolished the need to obtain a licence to export cut diamonds. Under Presidential Decree No. 1373, agents engaged in the manufacturing of cut diamonds were entitled to export and/or remove from customs treatment for processing outside the customs territory up to 15 per cent of the value of natural diamonds, they had purchased within the year from agents of natural diamonds' extraction or the State Fund of Precious Metals and Precious Stones of the Russian Federation. The MIT issued licenses for the exportation of natural diamonds. Presidential Decree No. 26 of 11 January 2007 "On Improvement of State Regulation for Importation into the Russian Federation and Exportation from the Russian Federation of Precious Metals and Precious Stones" had abolished export quota requirements for precious metals, unprocessed natural diamonds, as well as the prohibition for exportation of precious metals ores and concentrates, wastes and scraps of precious metals and unprocessed precious metals.
  5. A Member of the Working Party sought information about matters relating to the Regulations on Precious Stones and Metals, other than measures applied to facilitate the participation of the Russian Federation in the Kimberley Process. Information was sought on: the registration requirements applied to organizations involved in the production, domestic or foreign sale of those products; whether any legal or natural person, domestic or foreign, had the right to freely engage in the exportation, or the domestic purchase for export sale, of precious metals and precious stones produced in the Russian Federation; whether owners of precious metals and precious stones could freely sell any amounts of those products, they owned, to any intending exporter; the re-importation requirement for processed diamonds applied to exports of raw diamonds up to 15 per cent of the value of raw diamonds purchased during the current year; and the date of termination of the export quota provided to Alrosa. The Member also requested the elimination of all quantitative export restrictions and other restrictions on the exportation of precious metals and precious stones without an appropriate WTO justification by the date of accession, including all export bans, export quotas, restrictions on the right to export, export reporting requirements, re-importation requirements in relation to foreign processing of domestic raw diamonds, unjustifiable customs checkpoint requirements and the right of first purchase of Gokhran of precious metals and precious stones produced in the Russian Federation, and sought a commitment by the Russian Federation not to introduce or re-apply such measures after accession and to only apply measures relating to or in connection with the exportation of these products, where justified, under and in conformity with WTO provisions. The Member, moreover, urged the Russian Federation to consider monitoring exports of precious metals and precious stones through the adoption of automatic licensing, as alternative to export registration, reporting requirements, and other restrictions.
  6. The representative of the Russian Federation said that the information concerning persons who had the right to engage in the exportation of precious metals and precious stones produced in the Russian Federation, and the registration requirements for them were contained in the Section "Registration Requirements for Import/Export Operations" of this Report. The Regulations on Precious Stones and Metals, as well as Presidential Decree No. 742 of 21 June 2001 "On the Form of Import and Export on the Territory of the Russian Federation of Precious Metals and Precious Stones" and Presidential Decree No. 1373 of 30 November 2002 "On Approval of the Regulations on Import into the Territory of the Russian Federation and Export from the Territory of the Russian Federation of Natural Diamonds and Brilliants" formed the legal basis for these issues. He added that all organizations, which were involved in operations with precious stones and metals, had to be registered at State inspections of assay (Federal Law No. 41-FZ of 26 March 1998). A mandatory requirement for registration entailed reporting to the fiscal authorities of the Russian Federation.
  7. In accordance with paragraph 14 of the Regulations on Precious Stones and Metals, legal entities and individual entrepreneurs that had legal possession of the precious stones and metals, and were authorised to carry out operations with precious stones or metals, or their agents, may export precious stones and metals (excluding diamonds) from the CU, in accordance with the laws of the Russian Federation. Similarly, under paragraph 24 of the Regulations on Precious Stones and Metals, the export for processing of precious metals and gemstones might be carried out only by legal persons or individual entrepreneurs who held an activity licence. The regulations further established minimum pricing requirements for diamonds as well as raw precious metals, ores and concentrates of precious metals, and prohibited the exportation of raw materials for further processing only upon the finding from the CU Party that the raw materials could not be processed within the CU. In response to the question from some Members, the representative of the Russian Federation explained that the export quota of Alrosa had been eliminated in Presidential Decree No. 1137 of 20 September 2010. He further informed Members, that the prohibition on exports of raw materials for further processing under the condition, that such materials could not be processed in the territory of the CU, applied only to goods, exported under the customs procedure of the processing beyond the CU customs territory. According to the above-mentioned customs procedure, goods were exported from the customs territory without any restrictions and payments under condition that products processed from these raw materials would be re-imported to the customs territory of the CU.
  8. The representative of the Russian Federation added that Federal Law No. 90-FZ of 18 July 2005 "On Amending of Legislative Acts of the Russian Federation", amended Federal Law No. 41-FZ of 26 March 1998 "On Precious Metals and Precious Stones", in accordance with the new legislation, namely, Federal Law No. 173-FZ of 10 December 2003 "On Currency Regulation and Currency Control" and Federal Law No. 164-FZ of 8 December 2003 "On the Fundamentals of State Regulation of Foreign Trade Activity". Under Federal Law No. 173-FZ, precious stones and metals were not recognised as currency valuables. Furthermore, pursuant to Federal Law No. 153-FZ of 11 November 2003 "On Amending Article 5 of the 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 Decree of the President of the Russian Federation No. 1203 of 30 November 1995", data on extraction, transfer, consumption of precious stones and metals had been excluded from the list of State secret data. The amendments simplified the procedure for performing transactions with precious stones and metals, and made these transactions more transparent.

- Export Licensing Procedures
  1. The representative of the Russian Federation stated that, as with import licensing, as of 1 January 2010, the legal basis for the export licensing system in the Russian Federation was established in: (i) the Agreement on Common Measures for Non-Tariff Regulation in Respect of Third Counties, signed on 25 January 2008 (hereafter: CU Agreement on Non-Tariff Regulation); (ii) the Agreement on the Introduction and Application of Measures Concerning Foreign Trade in Goods on the Common Customs Territory in Respect of Third Countries, signed on 9 June 2009 (hereafter:  CU Agreement on Measures Concerning Foreign Trade); and (iii) the Agreement on Licensing in the Area of Foreign Merchandise Trade of 9 July 2009 (hereafter: CU Agreement on Licensing). The CU Commission Decision No. 132 of 27 November 2009 approved the Common List of Goods that might be subject to non-tariff measures (see Table 28), including those subject to export licensing, which also came into force on 1 January 2010.
  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 amended on 2 February 2006), and 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 export licence or permit.
  3. The most sensitive goods were subject to non-automatic licensing (Table 33). Among the goods subject to non-automatic licenses, were goods with cryptographic capabilities, governed by the Regulations of 27 November 2009 "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", and mineral raw materials, governed by Regulations "On the Order of Exportation of Mineral Raw Materials from the Customs Territory of the Customs Union", adopted by CU Commission Decision No. 132. A limited number of goods were subject to automatic licensing for the purpose of monitoring trade flows (see Table 28). He confirmed that Table 28 was comprehensive and that there were no other exports subject to licensing requirements at this time.
  4. The representative of the Russian Federation explained that according to the CU Licensing Agreement, the Ministry of Industry and Trade (hereafter: authorised state body of executive power in the Russian Federation) issued three types of licenses: (i) one-time; (ii) general; and (iii) exclusive. One-time licenses were issued to applicants on the basis of a foreign trade contract relating to goods subject to export licensing. One-time and general licenses were issued to applicants, upon decision of the authorised body of the Russian Federation. Both types of licenses granted the right to export 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 export certain types of goods. The goods subject to exclusive licenses were to be decided by the CU Commission; the holders of an exclusive licence would be designated by the authorised body of each CU Party. The representative of the Russian Federation noted that, in 2007, prior to the establishment of the CU export licensing regime, Gazprom had been granted an exclusive export licence that was effective in the territory of the Russian Federation. He explained, however, that until now, no CU exclusive export licenses had been issued in the Russian Federation. The territorial application of a CU exclusive export licence was currently being negotiated by the CU Parties.
  5. One-time and general licenses were issued by the Ministry of Trade and Industry, with the exception of licenses for the exportation of military products and goods that could be used to create weapons of mass destruction, means of transportation of such weapons, and other armament and defence technology, which were delivered by the Ministry of Defence of the Russian Federation. Licenses were issued upon receipt of the following documents: (i) an application for the licence; (ii) an electronic version of the application; (iii) a copy of the contract; (iv) a copy of a certificate confirming that the applicant was registered by a regional tax authority as a tax-payer; (v) a copy of the activity licence, if applicable; and (vi) other documents, as required.
  6. The representative of the Russian Federation explained that, if the good in question was subject to a quota, export licenses would be required. Pursuant to Government Resolution No. 1299 of 31 October 1996, tender announcements for quota allocations had to be published in mass media ("Rossiiyskaya Gazeta", "Parlamentskaya Gazeta", etc.), at least 30 days prior to the date of the tender. Information on tenders, auctions and procedures for holding tenders and auctions for the sale of a quota were published on the website of the Ministry of Economic Development (www.economy.gov.ru). Additional information was provided in the Section "Import Licensing Systems" of this Report.
  7. Several Members of the Working Party expressed concerns about the export licensing regime of the Russian Federation, whilst noting that the Russian Federation did not presently apply many export quotas. The same Members considered that a system of non-automatic export licensing, however, applied to a wide range of products and that such measures had the potential to be applied in a manner contrary to the general prohibition of quantitative restrictions on exports, provided for in Article XI of the GATT 1994. In the case of precious stones and metals, the legislation on export licensing was applied to certain products listed in Table 28, as provided for in 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". Pursuant to the Decree, exports of platinum were permitted under licenses within quantitative limits. While a rationale could exist for the application of certain controls on exports under the relevant GATT exception clauses (including Articles XX and XXI of the GATT 1994), for example, in respect of the exports of dual use goods, hazardous products, endangered species, etc., the rationale for such controls on the exports of other goods, particularly pharmaceuticals, precious stones and metals, other than gold and silver, was less clear. Automatic licensing, which was already applied for exports of raw hides and skins, provided a mechanism to monitor export flows, if this was considered desirable. However, as discretionary controls on these particular products were unlikely to meet the relevant criteria of the exceptions clauses of the GATT 1994, it was essential that any licensing regime be genuinely automatic in order to avoid restrictions on trade.
  8. Several Members also requested more information on the procedures followed and fees charged in connection with the issuance of export licenses. They requested confirmation that any fees charged on exports were related to the cost of services rendered, in accordance with WTO provisions. Some Members questioned whether the restrictions on precious stones and metals, semi-precious stones, objects made thereof, certain alloys, semi fabricates, ores, concentrates and wastes could be justified under the WTO provisions invoked by the authorities of the Russian Federation. These Members considered that the Russian Federation should provide a more detailed explanation of the measures applied to these products that the Russian Federation was seeking to justify under Article XV:9(b) of the GATT 1994, including: (i) a description of each measure and its legal basis; (ii) the bodies involved in applying those measures, including details of their responsibilities; (iii) the products affected by each measure; (iv) the export licensing procedures applicable, including details of any restrictions on eligibility for export licenses, and other terms and conditions associated with their issuance; (v) the provisions of the exchange arrangements of the Russian Federation with the IMF, which were currently in force and required the Russian Federation to adopt or maintain the measures applied by means of non-automatic export licensing that the Russian Federation was seeking to justify under Article XV:9(b) of the GATT 1994; and (vi) the plans of the Russian Federation to eliminate all measures applied by means of non-automatic export licensing that might be required under those arrangements at the conclusion of their term.
  9. In response, the representative of the Russian Federation stated that the Register of Licensed Goods in the Russian Federation was available on the official website of the MIT (www.minpromtorg.gov.ru), which contained: (i) the code of the goods, according to the Commodity Nomenclature of the Russian Federation; (ii) the basis for licensing; (iii) the Federal enforcement authority responsible for licensing; and (iv) the reference to the normative act defining the order of licensing. According to Government Resolution No. 364 of 9 June 2005 "On the Approval of Regulations about the Order of Licensing in the Sphere of Foreign Trade in Goods and about the Order of Formation and Conducting Federal Bank of the Given Licences in the Sphere of Foreign Trade", the fee for the issuance of the licence was RUB 1,000, the fee for re-issuance was RUB 100 and the fee for the processing of the application for issuance of the licence was RUB 300.
  10. The representative of the Russian Federation explained that work was on-going to bring national and CU export licensing provisions into conformity with WTO disciplines. Federal Law No. 157-FZ "On the State Regulation of Foreign Trade Activity" had been replaced by Federal Law No. 164-FZ of 8 December 2003 "On the Fundamentals of State Regulation of Foreign Trade Activity". This Federal Law, which had been adopted on 8 December 2003, came into force on 15 June 2004. Corresponding amendments would be made to Government Resolution No. 364 of 9 June 2005 "On the Approval of Regulations about the Order of Licensing in the Sphere of Foreign Trade in Goods and about the Order of Formation and Conducting Federal Bank of the Given Licences in the Sphere of Foreign Trade". Further work was required on, inter alia, the Agreement on Non-Tariff Regulation and the Regulations on Precious Stones and Metals.
  11. He further noted that work was also being conducted to bring the export licensing regime for precious stones and metals of the Russian Federation in accordance with WTO disciplines. Specifically, 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" and Presidential Decree No. 1373 of 30 November 2002 "On Regulations on Importation to the Russian Federation and Exportation from the Russian Federation of Natural Diamonds and Cut Diamonds" had been amended, taking due account of other international commitments, relevant for trade in natural and cut diamonds. In this regard, the Russian Federation had replaced the licensing restrictions on exports of precious stones, diamonds, and metals with an automatic licensing regime. These amendments reduced the number of licensed goods and removed bans and other quantitative restrictions on the export of certain types of goods, as well as providing for future liberalization of international trade involving this category of goods. The representative of the Russian Federation also noted, that documents required for the issuance of a licence included: (i) for exports of precious stones and metals, a certificate of special registration in the State Assay Chamber of the Ministry of Finance (Federal Law No. 41-FZ of 26 March 1998 "On Precious Metals and Precious Stones") and for crediting organizations, an authorization of the Central Bank or of a credit institution, licensed by the Central Bank to perform operations with precious metals (Federal Law No. 395-1 of 2 December 1990 "On Banks and Banking Activities", as amended on 27 July 2010); and (ii) for exports of ores of non-ferrous metals containing precious metals, a decision of the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of Industry and Energy regarding the practicability and feasibility of commercial recovery of precious metals (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"). Concerning queries by Members of the Working Party on export licensing of medicines and pharmaceuticals, the representative of the Russian Federation explained that, previously, under Federal Law No. 86-FZ of 22 June 1998 "On Medicines" (as amended on 18 December 2006), pharmaceuticals, which included raw materials for the manufacture of pharmaceuticals, could be exported only by legal persons having a licence for the production or wholesale trade of these goods, and pursuant to Government Resolution No. 854 of 6 November 1992 (as amended on 27 November 2006), exports of raw materials for the manufacturing of medicines had been subject to an export licence issued by the MIT, in coordination with the Federal Service for Supervision in the Sphere of Healthcare and Social Development of the Russian Federation. Under the CU Agreement on Non-Tariff Regulation, export licensing was permitted, in accordance with national legislation, for only those pharmaceuticals listed in section 2.12 of Table 28. Raw materials for manufacturing pharmaceuticals were not included in the list, and thus, export licensing of these materials>
  12. In response to questions regarding licensing requirements in the field of energy, the representative of the Russian Federation clarified that Federal Law No. 117-FZ of 18 July 2006 "On Export of Gas" applied to the gas (Commodity Classification of Foreign Economic Activity of the Russian Federation codes: 2711210000 and 2711110000) produced at all types of fields of hydrocarbon raw materials and transported in the gaseous or liquefied state. Federal Law No. 117-FZ established that the exclusive right to export gas (and respective licenses) would be granted to the organization being the owner of the unified gas supply system or to its 100 per cent subsidiary. The MIT was responsible for issuing the licence for the export of gas.
  13. The representative of the Russian Federation confirmed, that, from the date of accession, quantitative restrictions on exports or restrictions on the sale for export of goods, such as quotas, bans, permits, prior authorization requirements, licensing requirements (including the requirements listed in Table 33), domestic market supply requirements or measures having equivalent effect that could not be justified under the provisions of the WTO Agreement, would be eliminated and not introduced, re introduced or applied, whether by the Russian Federation or the competent bodies of the CU. He further confirmed that discretionary authority to temporarily ban exports or otherwise restrict exports, including under provisions of the Agreement on Licensing, the Precious Stones and Metals Regulations, or Federal Law No. 164-FZ of 8 December 2003 "On the Fundamentals of State Regulation of Foreign Trade Activity" whether exercised by the Russian Federation or the competent bodies of the CU, would be applied from the date of accession in conformity with the provisions of the WTO Agreement. He also confirmed that, if the Russian Federation took recourse to Article XX(i) of the GATT 1994, with respect to any measures, whether applied by the Russian Federation or the competent bodies of the CU, restricting exports of domestic materials necessary to ensure essential quantities of such materials to a domestic or CU processing industry, such measures would not operate to increase the exports of or the protection of such industry. The Working Party took note of these commitments.
  14. The representative of the Russian Federation explained that the conditions that had led to the need to protect its exchange position had significantly improved and that the IMF arrangements had terminated. In light of these developments, the Russian Federation would ensure, from the date of accession, that the export licensing regime for precious stones and metals, semi-precious stones, objects made thereof, certain alloys, semi-fabricates, ores, concentrates and wastes, whether adopted and applied by the Russian Federation or the competent CU body, was consistent with WTO requirements. The Working Party took note of this commitment.

- Other Customs Export Formalities
  1. Members of the Working Party expressed concern about the practice of the Russian Federation of maintaining only a very limited number of customs checkpoints designated for declaration and exportation of certain products, for example, timber products such as logs, and metal scrap, and also the practice to close promptly certain customs checkpoints, thus creating serious impediments to trade. Some Members requested further clarification on the State Customs Committee (SCC) Order No. 1002 of 19 October 2001 "On Appointing Exportation Checkpoints" which stipulated the customs clearance checkpoints (now referred to as "customs checkpoints for declaration") that might be used for exportation of certain timber products by rail or road. A Member noted that this Order had been provisionally amended on 14 January 2002 to include customs checkpoints for declaration at its country borders with the Russian Federation and asked whether the Russian Federation intended to make a definitive amendment to SCC Order No. 1002, so as to avoid possible trade distorting effects. Another Member asked for information on the sorts of timber products covered by measures of the Russian Federation and a clarification on whether the restricted use of customs checkpoints for declaration of exports would also cover additional products. Members also raised concerns about SCC Order No. 1219 of 27 December 2000 "On Defining Places for the Customs Formalization and Export of Ferrous and Non-Ferrous Metals Scrap and Wastes", which provided that non-ferrous and ferrous metal scrap could be declared and exported only through the seaports of the Russian Federation. These Members were concerned that, in addition to creating potential delays and bottlenecks and adding to shipment costs, such restrictions could also act as de facto trade barriers. They asked the Russian Federation to provide additional information on these and other restrictions on which customs checkpoints could be used to declare and to export these products, to update the Working Party on steps being taken to increase the number of customs checkpoints authorised for the declaration and export of specific products such as metal scrap and timber products, and to ensure that these and other measures related to exportation would be brought in full conformity with WTO provisions upon accession.
  2. One Member expressed concern about the limitation of customs checkpoints for exit and for declaration of certain products, specifically for wood. This Member asked about the implementation of Federal Customs Service (FCS) Order No. 1327 of 10 December 2002 "On Import Duty Rates". This Member noted that those measures must be based on justifiable reasoning and impede rightful trade flows as little as possible by ensuring a sufficient number of designated customs checkpoints relative to the importance of the trade flows, taking into account the geographic situation.
  3. The representative of the Russian Federation explained that the policy of his Government was to base identification of designated customs checkpoints on the provisions of the International Convention on the Simplification and Harmonization of Customs Procedures (Revised Kyoto Convention, 1999), in particular, its Specific Annex A, Chapter 1. He further stated that, pursuant to Article 190 of the CU Customs Code, Articles 10.4 and 205 of Federal Law No. 311-FZ of 27 November 2010 "On Customs Regulation", the FCS was authorised to designate specific customs checkpoints for the declaration of specific types of goods for export for the purpose of ensuring the effectiveness of control over the implementation of customs legislation. The grounds for establishing such points were the same as those for imports, which were specified in paragraph of the Section "Other Customs Formalities for Imports". He also noted that a comprehensive list of categories of goods currently subject to measures requiring declaration at designated customs checkpoints was reflected in Table 13 and Table 14.
  4. In response to the specific concerns expressed by some Members, the representative of the Russian Federation said that the selection of designated customs checkpoints for the declaration of wood for export, listed in FCS Order No. 1327 of 10 December 2002 "On Import Duty Rates", was based on the following criteria: (i) availability of equipment necessary for customs control in respect of specified goods; (ii) conditions of transport infrastructure; and (iii) existing flows of trade in specified goods. He added that the said Order had been amended by FCS Order No. 362 of 2 April 2008, and the list of designated customs checkpoints for export declaration had been extended, based on the same criteria, up to 139 checkpoints. He further stated that the FCS Order No. 1327 was superseded by the FCS Order No. 801 of 20 April 2010 "On Checkpoints for Declaration of Certain Types of Goods", which also envisaged the list of 139 authorised checkpoints for declaration of wood for export.
  5. He added that SCC Order No. 1002 of 19 October 2001 "On Appointing Exportation Checkpoints" for certain types of timber products (Codes of Commodity Nomenclature of Foreign Economic Activity of Russia: from 4401 10 0000 fuel wood in the form of logs and lumber; 4403; from 4404 chopped wood, piles and spiles, sharpened but not length sawed; 4406; 4407; 4409) had been invalidated by Order of the Ministry of Economic Development (MED) No. 105 of 25 May 2005 "On the Invalidation of some Legal Acts of the State Customs Committee of Russia". In addition, SСС Order No. 1219 of 27 December 2000 "On Defining Places for the Customs Formalization and Export of Ferrous and Non-Ferrous Metals Scrap and Wastes" had been invalidated by SСС Order No. 98 of 28 January 2004.
  6. Pursuant to Law of the Russian Federation No. 4730-1 of 1 April 1993 "On the State Border of the Russian Federation" (as last amended on 31 January 2010), State border checkpoints were established by international agreements of the Russian Federation or by the Government, upon proposal of Federal executive bodies; or upon proposal of the subjects of the Russian Federation, as approved by the border guard agencies and frontier troops and the other Federal executive bodies concerned, taking into account the interests of adjacent and other foreign states. According to Article 162 of the CU Customs Code and Article 195 of Federal Law No. 311-FZ, goods and vehicles could depart from the territory of the Russian Federation at State border checkpoints or at other places established in compliance with the legislation on the State border of the Russian Federation during the customs bodies' working hours. The provisions of Article 162 of the CU Customs Code, however, did not extend to goods carried by sea (river) vessels and aircraft crossing the CU customs territory without stopping at a port or an airport located in the CU customs territory, as well as to the goods transported by pipeline and power lines/electricity transmission lines. Each exit checkpoint from the territory of the Russian Federation had a customs office responsible for accepting notifications of departure of goods and means of transport (such as vessels, lorries, or railway cars) from the CU customs territory, formalizing the completion of customs transit procedure, accepting customs declarations, and performing customs operations necessary for the departure of goods and means of transport and other customs operations.
  7. With regard to the designated customs exit checkpoints, the representative of the Russian Federation added that, according to Article 195 of Federal Law No. 311-FZ, the Government of the Russian Federation had the right to designate customs exit checkpoints for certain categories of goods and could establish certain places for exit at the border in compliance with the legislation of the Russian Federation regarding the State border.
  8. The representative of the Russian Federation confirmed that Table 13 and Table 14 were comprehensive lists of the categories of goods currently subject to measures requiring their declaration and/or exit at designated customs checkpoints. He further confirmed that, if any such measures were contrary to the WTO Agreement, they would be eliminated as of the date of accession of the Russian Federation to the WTO and that future measures concerning the declaration and/or exit of specific categories of goods at designated customs checkpoints, whether introduced, re-introduced or applied pursuant to national legislation, or CU Agreements or other CU Legal Acts, would be consistent with the WTO Agreement. Furthermore, he confirmed that from the date of accession all laws, regulations, decrees, decisions, judicial decisions and administrative rulings of general application connected with the exportation of goods, including those related to statistical control, customs clearance, documentation, and any changes to these laws, regulations, decrees, decisions, judicial decisions and administrative rulings of general application, whether introduced, re-introduced or applied by the Russian Federation or the competent bodies of the CU, would be published promptly and posted on the official websites of the responsible governmental bodies in such a manner as to enable governments and traders to become acquainted with them and that the Russian Federation would also publish the names of the governmental bodies responsible for administering them. Further, he confirmed that the Russian Federation would administer these laws, regulations, decrees, decisions, judicial decisions and administrative rulings of general application in a uniform, impartial and reasonable manner throughout its territory as required by the WTO Agreement. The Working Party took note of these commitments.

3. Internal Policies Affecting Foreign Trade in Goods

- Industrial policy, including subsidy policies
  1. The representative of the Russian Federation stated that the provision of subsidies in the Russian Federation was regulated by budget, tax, customs, and anti-monopoly (competition) legislation. Under the relevant legislation, the following types of State support (financial contributions) were available to a recipient: (i) direct transfers of budgetary funds, including those under Federal-targeted and investment programmes; (ii) budgetary loans, credits, and guarantees; and (iii) postponements of payments of or exemptions from taxes and customs duties. Subsidies were being provided both at the Federal and Sub-Federal levels. In response to questions from Members, the representative of the Russian Federation stated, that, except as otherwise stated in the Working Party Report, his authorities had not identified any subsidies prohibited under Article 3 of the WTO Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures provided at any level of government in the Russian Federation. The Russian Federation had submitted a "Notification on Industrial Subsidies Granted from the Federal Budget of the Russian Federation" and a "Notification of Industrial Subsidies Allocated from the Budgets of the Subjects of the Russian Federation" for the year 2002 circulated to Members of the Working Party in WT/ACC/RUS/52 of 25 May 2005 and WT/ACC/RUS/51 of 23 May 2005, respectively, and additional information in documents WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/31 of 20 February 2003, and WT/ACC/RUS/57 of 27 June 2008.
  2. State support to the industrial sector of the Russian economy was mainly provided under Federal-targeted programmes. Direct transfers from the Federal budget or a regional budget to industries were also available. For details, he referred to Notifications on Industrial Subsidies Granted within the Territory of the Russian Federation, provided to Members in documents WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/31 and WT/ACC/RUS/57. In response to questions of some Members about support to the coal industry, the representative of the Russian Federation explained that under the Resolution of the Government of the Russian Federation No. 1523 of 3 December 1997 "On State Financing of Restructuring of the Coal Industry" there were RUB 595.6 million (US$20 million) provided in the years 2001 to 2005. This Governmental Order was replaced by the Resolution of the Government of the Russian Federation No. 840 of 24 December 2004 (as amended on 22 October 2007) "On the List of Measures for the Coal Industry Restructuring". Under this Governmental Resolution, State support to the coal industry had been provided mainly to enhance social security of employees, secure safe work conditions in coal mining and liquidate major loss making mines. No prohibited subsidies of any kind within the definition of Article 3 of the WTO Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures were available to the coal industry.
  3. He added that the principles and mechanisms for granting export credits and export credit guarantees were foreseen in the Concept of Development of Financial Support (Guarantees) of Export of Industrial Products in the Russian Federation, adopted under Order of the Government of the Russian Federation No. 1493-r of 14 October 2003. The Concept envisaged procedures for granting:

- state guarantees against political and commercial risks arising during implementation of export contracts with foreign importers. State guarantees could only be provided if the Government of the foreign importer had provided counter-guarantees, or the contract was concluded with a sovereign buyer or the bank-creditor had provided credit to the foreign country. Under certain circumstances, counter-guarantees were not obligatory, e.g., if the foreign buyer had an investment-grade rating and was a resident of a country with an investment-grade sovereign rating;

- export credits including supplier credit; and

- partial compensation of interest rates of export credits including supplier credits.

  1. Funding of export credits, guarantees, and partial compensation of credit stakes were envisaged in the Federal Budget. The total sum of the State export guarantees issued in 2005 to 2009 was US$990 million, of which US$282 million was issued in 2009. Also in 2009, export credits were provided in the total amount of RUB 55 billion (US$1.8 billion) and partial compensation of credit stakes for the total amount of US$300 million. A mechanism for granting credits and guarantees compliant with the rules and norms of the WTO Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures, which incorporates by reference the OECD Arrangement on Officially Supported Export Credits, was being elaborated in furtherance of the Concept.
  2. A Member asked about more recent developments with respect to this mechanism. This Member also inquired how premiums were determined and if there was mechanism to ensure that the premiums were sufficient to cover long term operating costs and losses of the programme.
  3. In response, the representative of the Russian Federation noted that "Eximbank of Russia" (Joint-Stock Company) had been designated as an agent for the Government of the Russian Federation in providing State financial (guarantee) support for industrial exports, and the terms of its functioning were stipulated in the Agreement between the Ministry of Finance and Eximbank of Russia No. 01-01-06/04-28 on Performing the Functions of an Agent of State financial (guarantee) Support for Industrial Exports of 22 April 2006, which was replaced by the Agreement No. 01-01-06/04-102 of 28 May 2009. The possibility of issuing State guarantees was examined by the Committee of Directors of JSC "Eximbank of Russia" based on the ability of the exporter to meet repayment commitments, financial performance and sufficiency of the loan coverage. Positive findings of the bank in respect of exporters were not directed by the authorities of the Russian Federation. Commission rates for bank guarantees were estimated on the basis of an agreement between JSC "Eximbank of Russia" and a principal. In accordance with the tariff of commission rates of the Bank, the minimum level of commission rate for bank guarantees was set at the level of 0.15 per cent of the guarantee amount, but the actual rate, which was charged, depended on a risk assessment that was carried out for each recipient.
  4. In response to requests from some Members for information on prohibited subsidies, both at the Federal and Sub-Federal levels of governments, the representative of the Russian Federation replied that, according to the Budget Code of the Russian Federation, budget funds were provided to recipients with the purpose specified in the drafts of both Federal and regional budgets, which were also examined and approved by Federal authorities. The Federal Service for Financial and Budget Surveillance and Federal Treasury, subordinated to the Ministry of Finance, ensured that budget funds were properly allocated. Provision of State aid within the entire territory of the Russian Federation was regulated by Federal Law No. 135-FZ of 26 July 2006 "On Protection of Competition" (as amended on 5 April 2010). According to this Federal Law, funds could be granted in accordance with a relevant Federal law; a relevant regional law establishing the regional budget for the corresponding financial year; or a local law of the same kind. Funds also could be granted from a reserve fund (federal, regional, or local) in case of emergency situations, armed conflicts, or execution of anti-terrorist operations. In all other cases, State aid could only be granted upon a preliminary written permission of the anti-monopoly authority, for the following goals, as provided by the Federal Law: