vii
Executive Summary
The first meeting of the Negotiating Group on Trade Facilitation (NGTF) held in
November 2004 highlighted the necessity of identifying trade facilitation needs and
priorities of developing countries (DCs) and least developed countries (LDCs), along with
the need to address the concerns of DCs/LDCs related to cost implications of proposed
measures and in terms of special and differential treatment.1 In that context, this
publication presents the findings and results of an exploratory ARTNeT study on the
need for and cost of implementation of selected trade facilitation measures (TFMs)
related to GATT Articles V, VIII and X. It is based on six ARTNeT working papers issued
between January and April 2006, including five country case studies (available at
www.artnetontrade.org).
Assessment of TFMs implementation
Case studies on TFMs implementation in five Asia-Pacific countries, namely
Bangladesh, China, Indonesia, India and Nepal, reveal that continuous unilateral efforts
have been made by the governments of these countries to facilitate trade, although
countries are often at very different stages of implementation. In many countries, various
trade facilitation systems and measures have been implemented at selected border crossings
or customs offices on a pilot basis, with plans to expand the systems, as resources
become available, to all border crossings and relevant agencies. However, it is often
unclear when these systems will be implemented on a national scale and to what extent
rules and regulations will be implemented uniformly throughout each country’s territory.
In an effort to increase transparency, government agencies responsible for issuing
and enforcing trade rules and regulations often have extensive publication and dissemination
programmes in place, although the amount of publicly available information varies from
country to country. Not all countries have established standard time periods between
publication and implementation, and consultation with stakeholders (e.g., private sector
traders) on new or amended rules remains ad-hoc and informal in most cases. Some form
of binding advance ruling systems are available or being established, but the coverage
(e.g., tariff, valuation, origin) and effectiveness (e.g., time between receipt of the information
and issuance of a ruling) of the systems vary greatly across countries. Appeal systems
and procedures exist but are not always independent from the regulatory authorities. In
addition, appeal processes are often lengthy and costly for the traders.
Fees and charges connected with importation and exportation remain quite numerous
in some countries. Some of the fees and charges are calculated as a percentage of the
value of a shipment, which may not be consistent with the need for the fees and charges
to be charged on the basis of the cost of services rendered. Some Governments have
made an effort to reduce the number and complexity of fees and charges, as well as of
http://www.wto.org/english/news_e/news04_e/tradefac_15nov_e.htm