India on the Mat on Six Quality Based
Non-Tariff Barriers at WTO
New trade concerns
Food and agriculture
·
New Zealand - Consumer information
standards
·
India - Food Safety and Standards Act
·
India – New veterinary certificate for
dairy products
·
European Union - Non-renewal of the
approval of the active substance mancozeb
·
European Union - Botanical species
containing hydroxyanthracene derivatives
Energy efficiency
·
Colombia - Technical regulation for
marketing in Colombia of certain products
·
Russian Federation, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyz
Republic, Armenia - Requirements for energy efficiency of energy-related
devices
·
European Union - Energy labelling of
electronic displays
·
Kingdom of Saudi Arabia - Minimum
energy performance, labelling and testing requirements for air conditioners
IT and electrical equipment
·
Vietnam – Products and goods with
unsafe capability
·
European Union - Revision of the
directive on batteries
·
Colombia - Mobile device packaging
·
India - Expansion of national
certification to plugs, socket outlets and power cords
Chemicals and waste
·
Bangladesh – Hazardous electronic
waste management rules
·
India – Draft chemicals management and
safety rules
·
India - Quality control orders for
chemical and petrochemical substances
Alcohol
·
Australia - Maturation requirements
for imported alcohol
·
Russian Federation - Regulation on
safety of alcoholic beverages
·
Myanmar - Regulation on importation of
alcoholic beverages
Others
·
United States - Guidance on federal
conformity assessment activities
·
India – Toys quality control order
WTO members used a written procedure to raise a record number
of trade concerns at a meeting of the Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT).
In light of the COVID-19 situation, the Committee held its 13-14 May meeting through
a written procedure, allowing WTO members to exchange views on 72 specific trade
concerns (STCs) via a new online platform, eAgenda.
The eAgenda platform allows members to register STCs and to exchange
views on these concerns. Members shared over 270 statements covering environmental
standards and regulations regarding energy efficiency, e-waste and chemicals among
other topics.
WTO members
raised 21 new trade concerns through the written procedure. A full list of the 72 concerns raised overall
is available here.
New trade
concerns covered topics ranging from the dairy sector to tequila production, from
energy efficiency to toys and smartphones.
On agriculture,
a decision to prohibit a specific fungicide widely used in banana and soy production
was challenged. In the dairy sector, a proposed prohibition on the use of animal
rennet in the manufacture of milk products was questioned because of potential effects
on trade in cheese. On phone production, there was an exchange on a requirement
to affix mandatory labels to mobile device packages indicating the cellular network
supported by the mobile device (2G, 3G, 4G, or 5G).
Regarding
energy efficiency, the implementation of various labelling schemes was also a point
of contention. Requirements for alcohol production were also discussed. The COVID-19,
pandemic was cited by various
members in regards to the need for more flexible timeframes to implement or adapt
to new trade measures.
A brief
summary of new STCs is provided below:
The United
States expressed concern about the incomplete notification of India’s new directive
on animal feed, and its insufficient transition period, which would have a significant
impact on trade in feed and possibly on meat and dairy products. On cattle feed,
the United States questioned why India would not allow import of many commonly used
feed ingredients and vitamins.
While
six months was provided to all stakeholders to comply, India replied that it would
consider an extension given the current COVID-19 pandemic. The standard on cattle
feed (IS 2052:2009) was reviewed periodically – most recently in 2019 – and India
welcomed input from the United States on additional feed ingredients.
A proposed
prohibition on the use of animal rennet in the manufacture of dairy products by
India was challenged by the European Union.
Since most EU cheese is made with animal rennet, this could potentially block
entry to the Indian market.
India
argued that the prohibition on animal rennet in the manufacture of cheese was not
new, and had existed since 2011. During a recent revision of its milk and milk products
standards, this requirement was retained.
China
took issue with India's expansion of mandatory certification for plugs, socket outlets
and related products. China asked India to notify the new requirement and for clarification
on the applicable conformity assessment procedures. Citing the difficulties associated
with the COVID-19 pandemic, China said industry would need more time to adapt.
India
replied that the measure was prepared after consultations with stakeholders to protect
public safety and the environment and to prevent deceptive practices. India said
that due to difficulties caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, the implementation date
was extended by six months.
The United
States questioned India's classification of certain chemicals as "priority
substances" without public consultation, which could disrupt trade. The US
called on India to use a risk-based approach and clarify the relationship of the
draft rules with India’s existing regulations. India was requested to accept foreign
conformity assessment procedures and provide an adequate transition period.
India
said that the draft rules were not yet finalized and were circulated among industry
associations as part of an extensive stakeholder consultation exercise. It added
that the draft would be notified once finalized and there would be a reasonable
time period for comments.
Canada,
the European Union and Chinese Taipei asked India to explain the rationale for making
mandatory a range of Indian standards on chemicals and petrochemicals, and why international
standards were not used. This could undermine market access, they said. They urged
India to allow testing and inspection bodies in other members to participate in
the planned conformity assessment process.
India
said that this regulation aims to protect health, safety and the environment and
to prevent deceptive practices, and that the Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS) is
the certifying body for the purpose of conformity assessment.
The United
States, the European Union and Canada said India's proposed new measures on toy
quality control would compound existing difficulties their toy manufacturers face
in accessing the Indian market. Issues with licences,
factory audits, fees and bank guarantees were discussed. They urged India to allow
toy manufacturers to use a supplier's declaration of conformity instead of toy factory
audits by BIS, which would be particularly challenging given the current COVID-19
travel restrictions.
India
explained the purpose was to more strictly monitor toy quality to keep children
safe. Toys covered by the same Indian standard would come under the same licence, and BIS would soon issue grouping guidelines that specify
a minimum number of varieties of toys to be tested.
Canada
recognized New Zealand’s efforts to give consumers accurate information on country
of origin for certain single-ingredient, minimally processed foods but raised a
concern about the costs associated with compliance (for meat and cured pork). Canada
suggested that New Zealand follow relevant CODEX standards.
New Zealand
said the regulations will allow for multiple relevant countries to be indicated
as the country of
origin on the label if it is difficult to trace the supply chain of a product. Due
to COVID-19, the regulations will be ready by June 2021, instead of June 2020.
The European
Union's non-renewal of the approval of the fungicide mancozeb
was raised as an issue by Colombia, Brazil, Costa Rica, the United States, Ecuador,
Paraguay, Guatemala, Indonesia and Nicaragua. This fungicide is used in the cultivation
of more than 70 fruit and vegetable crops, such as bananas and soy as well as seeds
and nuts.
With
the EU already banning chlorothalonil, several members
said this leaves banana-producing countries devoid of phytosanitary
tools for disease control, generating significant economic losses. These members
urged the EU to adopt an internationally accepted risk assessment approach based
on appropriate data and scientific studies, and to postpone this measure given the
current challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic.
The EU
said the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) concluded that mancozeb did not meet the approval criteria as outlined in Article
4 of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 due to reproductive toxicity and endocrine disruption.
The EU said there will most likely be separate future action on maximum residue
levels (MRLs) for mancozeb.
Mexico
argued that the European Union's proposed regulation was more trade restrictive
than necessary since it imposed an absolute ban on the use of aloe vera and its extracts in food and beverage formulas. This would negatively affect Mexican industry,
which produces a variety of products with aloe vera. Mexico
asked the EU to reconsider its proposal and align with CODEX standards.
The EU
said that the proposed draft measure is based on the scientific advice of the EFSA
and extensive consultations with member states and interested parties. All the comments
received will be analysed and considered for possible
amendments to the draft.
Colombia's
new regulation on energy labelling for air conditioners was questioned by Korea
and the United States. Korea voiced concerns about cost and administrative burden
and asked about the effective date of the regulation. The US noted Colombia's reference
to an Air-Conditioning, Heating and Refrigeration Institute (AHRI) international
standard, and urged Colombia to expand the acceptance of international standards
for other covered products.
In response,
Colombia explained the objective was to provide clear energy efficiency performance
ranges for air conditioners. Due to challenges associated with COVID-19, Colombia
was unable to confirm when the regulatory amendment will be issued.
New energy
efficiency requirements adopted by four members of the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU)
for various devices such as televisions and vacuum cleaners were raised as a concern
by Korea. It said the timing of entry into force was premature given the pace of
technological development, and Korea requested that a single common language be
used for labels within the EAEU.
Speaking
on behalf of the four members, the Russian Federation said the technical regulation
had been drafted in close cooperation with the business community, including multinationals
from Korea. In any event, Korea's requests would be conveyed to the Eurasian Economic
Commission for proper consideration.
China
said the implementation timeframe for a new EU regulation on energy efficiency labelling
of electronic displays was creating unnecessary trade barriers. The obligation for
suppliers to provide new labels by November 2020, four months in advance of entry
into force of the regulation, was a source of concern since the corresponding test
standards and methods were not yet available.
The EU
said that an information campaign is foreseen to explain to consumers the transition
to the new labels. Nevertheless, considering the COVID-19 emergency and its impact
on supply chains in many countries, the EU was exploring how to provide additional
flexibility, potentially giving manufacturers up to four extra months to comply.
China
noted that its air conditioners were found to be not conforming with Saudi Arabia's energy efficiency requirements in random
checks conducted by Saudi Arabian customs. China asked that testing data be provided
to its manufacturers so that they could correct these problems, and that more time
be given to renew certificates.
Saudi
Arabia said it followed international practice, and that it was possible to obtain
detailed data on the testing which included the reasons for non-conformity. The
Saudi Standards, Metrology and Quality Organization (SASO) allowed for renewal of
energy efficiency certificates three months prior to expiry, which was enough time
in Saudi Arabia's view.
The United
States took issue with the short timeframe for the implementation of Viet Nam's
proposed regulations for IT products, bearing in mind the lack of qualified laboratories
in Viet Nam to test some of the products. It was suggested that Viet Nam continue
recognizing the validity of existing certificates until their expiration and provide
an adequate transition period.
Viet
Nam said that the notification of the draft circular was made with a 60-day comment
period, and that it did not receive any comments from WTO members. More than six
months had been provided for the transition period. Viet Nam clarified that it would
designate and recognize the competent testing laboratories prior to entry into force.
Japan
asked that a planned revision to EU rules on batteries (including for electric cars)
be carried out transparently and not create unnecessary trade barriers. Parallel
work in the United Nations World Forum for Harmonization of Vehicle Regulations
(WP29) ought to be considered. Japan also asked the European Union to provide a
timely TBT notification, and an adequate transition period.
The EU
explained the aim was to improve environmental performance and sustainability across
the whole life cycle of batteries, including responsible sourcing of raw materials
for battery manufacturing, and their associated carbon footprint. The EU will notify
the proposal to the TBT Committee for comments and provide sufficient time for economic
operators to adapt.
The United
States quizzed Colombia about its plan to require mandatory labels on mobile device
packaging, indicating the cellular network supported by the device (2G, 3G, 4G,
or 5G), which seemed overly burdensome and without benefit for consumers. The US
asked for a delay of at least six months to allow producers, suppliers and retailers
to adapt.
Colombia
said it was still reviewing and analysing the comments
submitted by the US. Colombia said some decisions of its authorities were delayed
due to the COVID-19 emergency and that information will be transmitted as soon as
possible.
Canada,
the United States, the Russian Federation and the European Union were concerned
about the lack of clarity of Bangladesh's proposed regulation on the management
of electronic waste. In their view, the classification of certain substances, such
as nickel, as hazardous,
did not seem well supported, and the policy could block trade in valuable
products, including critical medical devices and equipment.
Bangladesh
said that members’ concerns were being reviewed by the competent authorities and
that replies would be provided in due course. In the meantime, the comment period
for the notification had been extended
Brazil
questioned Australia's requirement for some alcoholic beverages to be matured in
wood for a minimum of two years, and the impact on trade in cachaça. Maturation
did not relate to any quality standard or sanitary requirement for cachaça. Brazil
asked about implications on labelling for cachaça, and the timeframes for the publication
of the final regulation.
Australia
was reviewing how to enable imports of unmatured spirits,
such as cachaça, without breaching the maturation requirement for whisky, brandy
or rum. Australia committed to advance these amendments as quickly as possible and
that a draft for public comment will be published when available.
Mexico
asked Russia to confirm whether a new technical regulation introduced by the Eurasian
Economic Community will apply to tequila. Mexico also requested updated information
on the date of entry into force as well as any information regarding the implementation
process.
Russia
said that the technical regulation covers all alcohol products, including tequila.
It enters into force on 9 January 2021 with a transition period until 2024. During
the transition period certificates of conformity issued before entry into force
will be valid until 2024.
Mexico
said Myanmar's 12-year ageing requirement could block tequila imports, since no
class of tequila complies with such a requirement. Mexico asked for clarification
on the product scope of the regulation and reminded Myanmar to notify it to the
WTO.
The European
Union questioned why proposed revisions to US guidance on conformity assessment
for government agencies removed illustrative references to international conformity
assessment standards, such as those of ISO and IEC. The EU was also concerned that
the guidance did not sufficiently encourage mutual recognition of conformity assessment
results at state level.
In response,
the United States said this was neither a technical regulation nor a conformity
assessment procedure and was therefore inappropriately listed as a specific trade
concern in the TBT Committee. The US said it would address substantive comments
in the final guidance, and that this would be notified to the WTO.