[SAA for WTO Customs Valuation Agreement]
URUGUAY
ROUND
TRADE
AGREEMENT,
STATEMENT
OF
ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION, AGREEMENT ON CUSTOMS VALUATION, H.R.
DOC. NO. 316, 103D CONG., 2D SESS., VOL. 1, 896-897 (27 SEPTEMBER 1994)
The 1979 [Tokyo Round] [A]greement [on the Implementation of Article VII of
the GATT] took the form of a “code” that only some GATT signatories joined. [Fortythree contracting parties, including the United States, were members.] The WTO
Agreement on Customs Valuation (Valuation Agreement) is essentially the same
document as the 1979 code, but the text will be part of the overall WTO Agreement, thus
making it applicable to all WTO members. This means that when the Valuation
Agreement is in effect for all WTO countries (newly joining developing countries may
delay implementation for up to five years) internationally-agreed rules will govern
customs valuation practice in the overwhelming majority of trading countries.
This development should be of considerable advantage to U.S. exporters, who
have been subjected to varying, often arbitrary customs valuation rules around the globe.
The new Valuation Agreement will bring a needed measure of uniformity, transparency,
and fairness to customs valuation procedure in an expanded number of countries.
Among the advantages of the Valuation Agreement are that it:
●
●
●
●
●
●
serves as an internationally-agreed interpretation of the much more general rules
set out in GATT Article VII;
bases valuation, to the greatest extent possible, on transaction value, similar to
longstanding U.S. practice;
eliminates certain protectionist features in foreign customs valuation systems,
including arbitrariness in valuation methods, overvaluation, and the use of
fictitious values;
requires foreign customs services to observe minimum standards of procedural
transparency and fairness;
increases the opportunity for exporters to appeal, both at the national and
international level, improper customs valuation decisions; and
simplifies and streamlines valuation procedures.
The text of the Valuation Agreement departs in substance from the 1979 code solely by
making the Agreement subject to the general dispute settlement procedures of the WTO.
The Agreement is also the subject of three ministerial recommendations that are to be
implemented once the Agreement is in force by the “Customs Valuation Committee,” the
chief oversight body created by the Agreement. They are meant to address certain
concerns raised by developing countries and do not alter the basic obligations of the code.
1.
Dispute Settlement
Article 19 of the Agreement applies the rules of the Dispute Settlement
Understanding to disputes between member governments over the application or
interpretation of the Valuation Agreement. In addition, the “Technical Committee on
Customs Valuation” created by the Agreement, which operates under the auspices of the
Brussels-based “Customs Cooperation Council,” will provide advice and assistance, on
request, to WTO members when they consult under the dispute settlement procedures of
the Agreement.
2.
Value Declarations
A ministerial recommendation on value declarations – to be adopted as a
“decision” of the Customs Valuation Committee – recognizes that customs authorities
may take reasonable steps to guard against questionable declarations of value, but
provides that governments must provide minimum standards of transparency and fairness
in deciding whether to reject an importer’s declaration. The decision balances the need
of importing countries to ensure accurate valuation and the need of legitimate traders to
be protected from unwarranted harassment.
3.
Minimum Values and Sole Concessionaires
Under the existing code, developing country members may continue to assign
minimum – as opposed to transaction – values to their imports to the extent, and for such
time as, agreed by the other members of the code. Once the ministerial recommendation
on minimum values is implemented, that will no longer be the case. Instead, the Customs
Valuation Committee will give “sympathetic consideration” to requests for reservations
of this kind if the developing country in question can show “good cause” for its request.
A further ministerial recommendation recognizes that developing countries have
raised concerns regarding valuations by sole agents, distributors, and concessionaires. It
suggests that such countries may wish to use the five-year grace period before the
Valuation Agreement applies to them to conduct studies on sole concessionaire valuation.
The text also recommends that the Customs Cooperation Council assist developing
countries in conducting such studies.
2