1. Committee on Budget, Finance and Administration – Report on Meeting of 4 March 2025 

/

2. Incorporation of the Investment Facilitation for Development Agreement into Annex 4 of the WTO Agreement – Draft Decision (WT/GC/W/927/Rev.2)

Statement by the EU Ambassador on behalf of the Co-Facilitators (Cambodia, Cameroon, EU)

Since the last General Council in February, we, the Co-Facilitators for the integration process of the IFD Agreement into the WTO legal framework: the Ambassadors of Cameroon, Cambodia and myself, have met regularly with several delegations in an outreach effort towards non-Members to support the objective of integrating it into Annex 4 of the WTO Agreement. Several meetings have taken place in various configurations and formats, both here in Geneva as well as in capitals and using bilateral and regional contacts and opportunities. The Co-Facilitators debriefed of these efforts in more detail at the informal meeting of all IFD participants on 2 May. 

I would like to reiterate that 126 IFD Member parties - including 90 developing countries – among which 27 are least-developed countries - firmly believe that their request fully observes the letter and spirit of the Marrakesh Agreement. This is an agreement of interest to the vast majority of WTO Members and has a strong potential of leading to increased FDI flows, particularly to developing and least-developed Member countries, helping them to integrate their production into international markets and global value chains, build trade-related infrastructure, and diversify their exports. 

In particular, we recognize that for developing and least developed Member countries, the incorporation of the IFD Agreement into the WTO framework presents a unique opportunity to secure predictable, sustained, and tailored technical assistance and capacity-building support. Anchoring the Agreement within the WTO will strengthen the institutional and financial mechanisms available to support Members in implementing facilitation measures aligned with their national development plans and priorities.

We respect the decision of those Members that choose not to join the IFDA for the reasons they consider to be in their national interest. But it is less understandable and legitimate in our view to prevent the vast majority of Members from benefiting from this Agreement, while it does not impact negatively in any way or form the interests of non-participants and companies, which will also benefit from the agreement when investing abroad.

We would like to recall that plurilateral agreements were envisioned from the inception of the WTO as integral components of the WTO framework. Denying the possibility of new plurilateral agreement would deprive Article X.9 of its purpose, rendering this WTO provision meaningless.

Some Members have questioned the need to bring this agreement into the WTO legal framework and instead take it outside the WTO. Incorporation of the IFD Agreement into the WTO is necessary for IFD Member parties to start their domestic procedures for the Agreement to bear its pro-development benefits as soon as possible and serve as catalyst for international support. 

The incorporation of the Agreement into the WTO will also reinforce the integrity of the global trading system, showing the WTO’s ability to achieve tangible development outcomes for all Members and thereby demonstrate the organization’s continued relevance and resilience. This message is especially important during a time of increasing global uncertainty and challenges to the core of the multilateral trading system that we are currently witnessing. 

Although consensus might not yet - very regrettably for the fifth time - be reached today, we believe that continuous engagement in a solution-oriented, good-faith, reciprocal dialogue, here in Geneva and in the capitals, is essential to fully understand and address the concerns raised.

In this spirit, let me thank all delegations that have engaged with us, the Co-Facilitators. We also thank the Members who are not yet in the position to join the consensus today. We appreciate their availability and engagement. However, while a Member is entitled to have a view that this Agreement does not suit its own interests and thus decides not joining it, it should not deny the wish of 126 Member, including 90 developing countries and LDCs that consider this Agreement instrumental for their economic development. 

Nevertheless, we remain fully committed to deepening the dialogue with those Members who have expressed concerns and stand ready to engage in a meaningful exchange. Together we can pave the way for a prompt and effective resolution in integrating this Agreement into the WTO legal framework. Thank you. 

2. For discussion

3. Report by the Chairperson of the Trade Negotiations Committee and Report by the Director-General

By July we should have a good picture of what is feasible as possible outcomes for MC14 and what is not. Work can continue on all ongoing issues until December when a final decision is taken, but this should not distract us from working on the key issues that Ministers will have to discuss in Cameroon. 

For the European Union, the focus should be on WTO reform for MC14, including the idea of a Ministerial conversation and we should have a Reform Decision or Declaration, laying down the areas of reform and their modalities. 

We are committed to making MC14 preparations in Geneva as effective as possible, but we cannot anticipate at this stage how much time Ministers will need for their work in Yaoundé.

On the substantive priorities, we see level playing field issues as a central component of any meaningful WTO Reform discussion. We believe a single track of work covering all relevant aspects of trade and industrial policy, including policy space, would be the most promising approach.

4. Follow-Up to Outcomes of Ministerial Conferences: MC13 (Abu Dhabi); MC12 (Geneva, co-hosted by Kazakhstan); MC11 (Buenos Aires); MC10 (Nairobi) and MC9 (Bali) – Statement by the Chairperson

/

4.1 Work Programme on Electronic Commerce – Report by the Facilitator

The European Union welcomes the discussions in the E-commerce Work Programme under the leadership of Ambassador Brown of Jamaica. 

We see the Work Programme as an important contribution to achieving an inclusive, predictable and rules-based international digital trading environment.

Members participating in the Work Programme concur on the need to deliver concrete outputs and recommendations to Ministers at the next Ministerial Conference, as mandated by the MC13 decision. 

For the European Union, agreeing by MC14 on a stable solution for the moratorium on customs duties for electronic transmissions among WTO Members remains a priority. In this context, we welcome the discussions on the impact of the moratorium that took place on 15 May, with input from both the private sector and international organisations.

We look forward to taking forward discussions with the Facilitator and Members on the possible developments towards MC14.

5. Work Programme on Small Economies – Report by the Chairperson of the Dedicated Session of the Committee on Trade and Development

The European Union welcomes the Secretariat’s note on e-commerce and the digital ecosystem. We participated actively in the first discussion on this note at the CTD’s dedicated session on 27 March.

We were pleased to see the level of engagement of the small economies and other Members on the Secretariat’s note. We hope that the small economies are considering the substantive suggestions made in the note and finding them helpful for their specific situations.

The Secretariat’s note contains useful pointers for good regulatory environments, international cooperation, and joining or implementing relevant agreements at the WTO, including the plurilateral initiatives. The document deserves our full attention.

The European Union will continue engaging with small economies and other Members in the context of the work programme.

6. Statement in Support of the Rules-Based Multilateral Trading System on the Occasion of the 30th Anniversary of the World Trade Organization – Request from Singapore and Switzerland

/

7. Heightened Trade Turbulence and Responses from the WTO – Request from China 

/

8. Fragmentation of Global Trade through Tariffs and the Global Costs

Indeed this follows the exchanges we had yesterday under items 6 and 7. The European Union is extremely interested and committed in engaging on reform. But we are also interested in focusing on the results of the tariffs introduced in the first 3 months of this year.

The WTO is the global organisation with the bodies and mechanisms in place to address tariff measures by Members and their impacts. We can therefore not shy away from our collective responsibility to manage the turmoil created by the US tariffs and initiate a process of dialogue on this most pressing issue for international trade. All WTO Members are severely affected by the US tariffs that are generating enormous uncertainty in the system and economic costs across the globe, reinforcing the fragmentation of global trade. 

This is why we have requested this agenda item for the General Council to focus on tariffs.

Let me also add that we support the Statement in Support of the Rules-based Multilateral Trading System - co-sponsored now by around 50 WTO Members – requested by Switzerland and China under agenda item 6.

Returning to the issue of dialogue, we greatly welcome the first in-depth WTO conversation that took place on Monday, an informal information meeting on US tariffs. This is the start of a process that we must continue with further exchanges before the summer break to keep abreast of the continuously evolving nature of the tariff landscape. 

In our view, the objectives of such a dialogue are three-fold: first, to assess the impacts on Members’ trade flows and on supply chains based on data; second, to monitor shifts in trade patterns and trade diversion and take action if necessary; and third, to consider the overall systemic impact on the trading system and engage in deep WTO reform discussions. The overarching goal of this exercise is to manage the situation in a forward-looking manner, including by supporting Members’ adherence to WTO rules as a key determinant in stabilising and resolving the situation. 

Turning to the economic costs, the IMF estimates that the current uncertainty shock is about 50% larger than during the 2018-2019 economic crisis and downgraded its projections for global growth. Simulations show that the long-term economic costs of global trade fragmentation could be substantial.

The factual presentation by the WTO Secretariat on Monday on the modelling of the impacts was extremely helpful to guide policymaking by Members. We saw on the basis of the very useful presentation by the Secretariat how the evolving tariff policies and the ensuing trade policy uncertainty seriously deteriorate the trade and GDP outlook; impacts specific Members more heavily; redirects trade flows; and generally affects the global trading system. 

We noted that least developed countries are particularly affected by the measures. A 10% tariff can be particularly high if you produce commodities, and the exports of many LDCs depend on access to foreign markets for a very limited number of products.

While the tariff situation presents an immediate threat to trade flows and the trading system, the European Union also acknowledges the need for a parallel conversation about the root causes of the WTO crisis and the global macroeconomic imbalances as suggested by the US. As discussed on Monday, there are different root causes for these imbalances and policies to address them. 

In our view, addressing macroeconomic imbalances through microeconomic trade tools like tariffs is not the right solution. Beyond assessing the impacts of the tariffs as we started doing in the informal session, we also see the WTO as a key forum for enhanced transparency. The European Union therefore encourages Members who have raised tariffs above their bound rates, whatever the reason may be, to notify those tariff increases.

With the first bilateral deals and arrangements emerging aimed at correcting the situation, we also encourage Members to ensure that any bilateral deals they conclude are compatible with WTO rules and obligations. 

The serious strains faced by the multilateral trading system also reinforce the need for deep WTO reforms and an updated trade agenda, such as addressing level playing field issues. But this is a different issue that I do not want to address now. 

9. Follow-up to the WTO Retreat on Sustainable Agriculture in the Multilateral Trading System – Request from Brazil

The European Union would like to thank Brazil for having put this on the agenda and thank the General Council Chair for the organisation of the Retreat, during which Members agreed on the urgency to move towards sustainable food systems that call for action at national and multilateral levels.

As underlined in the G20 Delhi Declaration, this urgency requires a “policy mix”, consisting of fiscal, market and regulatory measures. 

The European Union considers that reforming trade distorting domestic support will be key to achieving sustainable food systems, as this kind of support is also often the most environmentally harmful. This call is supported by all studies, from the UN, FAO, OECD or World Bank.

The WTO Agreement on Agriculture gives scope to provide subsidies, which would help the transition towards sustainable agriculture in its three dimensions! The Green Box is an immediately available tool to repurpose agricultural subsidies towards sustainable agriculture and food security.

Trade-related environmental measures and standards, are also crucial to address the triple planetary crisis identified by the United Nations and, in line with WTO rules, provided that certain conditions are met. In that respect, the first guiding principle of the 2024 Brazilian G20 Principles on Trade and Sustainable Development is the right to regulate. 

These measures are necessary to address the environmental and climate objectives to which we all committed.

Individual environmental measures are legitimate and necessary, but of course suboptimal without cooperation. There is therefore a need for coordinated action. And here, the WTO has a crucial role to play. Because even in the absence of consensus, cooperation can make a difference in exchanging best practices, notably on subsidy design, standards, and sustainable practices, such as agro-ecological and other innovative approaches which are central to achieving food security.

In that respect, the need to support developing countries towards sustainable agriculture will, of course, be crucial. As the largest donor of aid in the world, the European Union will continue to support developing countries in the transition to sustainable food systems.

We encourage the entire membership to further reflect on how to take this retreat further, so there is a clear follow-up to the discussions to advance on agricultural negotiations and deliver on sustainable food systems.

The European Union will continue to engage. We are open to working on this with all Members.

10. Global Trust Fund – Situation as at 30 April 2025 – Statement by the Chairperson of the Committee on Budget, Finance and Administration

I would like to thank Ambassador Heidecke, Chair of the CBFA, for her report. The European Union is contributing very significantly to the voluntary budgets of the WTO, including to the Global Trust Fund for technical assistance and training for developing countries, including LDCs. 

Given the essential role of the Global Trust Fund to support technical assistance, it is critical to achieve a broader and more diverse donor base to ensure a more stable functioning of the Global Trust Fund. The European Union therefore warmly welcomes other Members’ intentions to contribute as well to the fund.

3. For information

11. Incorporation of the Agreement on Electronic Commerce into Annex 4 of the WTO Agreement – Communication from the Members Parties to the Agreement on Electronic Commerce (WT/GC/W/955)

/