WWW.DISSERTATION.XLIBX.INFO
FREE ELECTRONIC LIBRARY - Dissertations, online materials
 
<< HOME
CONTACTS



Pages:   || 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |   ...   | 14 |

«Elimination of Non-Tariff Barriers in CEFTA Elimination of Non-Tariff Barriers in CEFTA This document has been produced with the financial assistance ...»

-- [ Page 1 ] --

CEFTA ISSUES PAPER 4

Elimination

of Non-Tariff Barriers

in CEFTA

Elimination of Non-Tariff

Barriers in CEFTA

This document has been produced with the financial assistance of the European

Commission. The views expressed herein can in no way be taken to reflect the official opinion of the

European Commission.

The information included in this report, and in particular the denomination of territories used in this

document, do not imply any judgment on the part of the OECD on the legal status of territories mentioned in this publication.

This document and any map included herein are without prejudice to the status of or sovereignty over any territory, to the delimitation of international frontiers and boundaries and to the name of any territory, city or area.

Acknowledgements The OECD Investment Compact (OECD-IC) would like to thank all the CEFTA contact points and stakeholders involved in the monitoring of the elimination of NTBs in CEFTA 2006 for their inputs to the assessment process conducted between September and November 2011.

The individual chapters of this report were prepared by Ms. Katarina Djermanovic from the OECDIC, under the supervision of Mr. Antonio Fanelli from the OECD-IC, and with contributions from Mr.

David Norris, an expert in the field of quality infrastructure (Chapter 1), Ms. Tanja Turquin Spicanovic, an expert in the field of quality infrastructure (Chapter 1), Ms. Gordana Ristic, an expert in the field of food safety (Chapter 2), and Mr. Umut Ergezer from the CEFTA Secretariat (Chapter 3). This report was edited by Ms. Emma Beer and Ms. Vanessa Vallée from the OECD.

The OECD-IC intends to continue providing input into the implementation of CEFTA 2006 and contribute to the debate about the benefits of regional trade integration in the broader framework of European economic integration.

The views expressed in this publication are those of the OECD-IC and do not reflect the official position of CEFTA institutions or any of the CEFTA Parties.

The signatories of CEFTA 2006 are: Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, the Republic of Moldova, Montenegro, Serbia, and UNMIK/Kosovo.

Kosovo denomination has been adopted following the signing of the Arrangements Regarding Regional Representation and Co-operation on 23 February 2012, and is used throughout this report.

 “This designation is without prejudice to positions on status, and is line with UNSCR 1244 and the ICJ opinion on the Kosovo declaration of independence”.

Table of contents Acknowledgements

Acronyms and abbreviations

Foreword

Introduction

Executive summary

Part I - Policy findings by category of Non-Tariff Barriers to trade

Chapter 1: Technical barriers to trade

1.1. Introduction

1.2. Institutional framework for standardisation and external co-operation

1.3. Transposition of EU technical regulations in priority sectors

1.4. Adoption of European standards in priority sectors

1.5. Institutional framework for accreditation and external co-operation

1.6. Conformity assessment procedures and infrastructure

1.7. Information and notification mechanisms

1.8. Conclusions and recommendations

Chapter 2: Sanitary and phytosanitary measures

2.1. Introduction

2.2 Institutional framework for SPS measures

2.3 Level of co-operation among SPS agencies at the intra-CEFTA and external levels

2.4 Framework SPS legislation

2.5 Transposition of European SPS measures

2.6 Information and notification mechanisms

2.7 Conclusions and recommendations

Chapter 3: Administrative barriers to trade

3.1. Introduction

3.2 Establishment of a national customs website with quality information provision

3.3 Enquiry points for customs

3.4 Involvement of the Trade Community

3.5 Advance Rulings

3.6 Appeal Procedures

3.7 Fees and Charges

3.8 Formalities - Documents and automation

3.9 Customs procedures and processes

3.10 Domestic and cross-border/international agency co-ordination and co-operation

3.11 Conclusions and recommendations

Part II - Profiles

Chapter 4: Scores

Albania

Bosnia and Herzegovina

Croatia

The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia

Kosovo*

Moldova

Montenegro

Serbia

Annex 1

Annex 2

Bibliography

Figures Figure 1.1 Technical barriers to trade: assessment framework

Figure 1.2 Overall scores for sub-dimension: institutional framework for standardisation

Figure 1.3 Overall scores for sub-dimension: transposition of EU technical regulations……………………….

27 Figure 1.4 Overall scores for sub-dimension: adoption of European standards …………………………………29 Figure 1.5 Overall scores for sub-dimension: institutional framework for accreditation

Figure 1.6 Overall scores for sub-dimension: conformity assessment procedures……………………………… 35 Figure 1.





7 Overall scores for sub-dimension: information and notification mechanism

Figure 1.8 Overall scores for dimension: technical barriers to trade

Figure 2.1 Sanitary and phytosanitary measures: assessment framework

Figure 2.2 Overall scores for sub-dimension: institutional framework for SPS measures

Figure 2.3 Overall scores for sub-dimension: level of co-operation among SPS agencies

Figure 2.4 Overall scores for sub-dimension: framework SPS legislation

Figure 2.5 Overall scores for sub-dimension: transposition of European SPS measures………………….

..........55 Figure 2.6 Overall scores for sub-dimension: information and notification mechanisms………………………..58 Figure 2.7 Overall scores for dimension: sanitary and phytosanitary measures

Figure 3.1 Administrative barriers to trade: assessment framework

Figure 3.2 Overall scores for sub-dimension: national customs website

Figure 3.3 Overall scores for sub-dimension: enquiry points for customs

Figure 3.4 Overall scores for sub-dimension: involvement of the trade community

Figure 3.5 Overall scores for sub-dimension: advance rulings

Figure 3.6 Overall scores for sub-dimension: appeal procedures

Figure 3.7 Overall scores for sub-dimension: fees and charges

Figure 3.8 Overall scores for sub-dimension: formalities-documents and automation

Figure 3.9 Overall scores for sub-dimension: customs procedures and processes

Figure 3.10 Overall scores for sub-dimension: domestic and cross-border agency co-operation

Figure 3.11 Overall scores for dimension: administrative barriers to trade

Figure 4.1 Albania: Scores for technical barriers to trade

Figure 4.2 Albania: Scores for sanitary and phytosanitary measures

Figure 4.3 Albania: Scores for administrative barriers to trade

Figure 4.4 Bosnia and Herzegovina: Scores for technical barriers to trade……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

90 Figure 4.5 Bosnia and Herzegovina: Scores for sanitary and phytosanitary measures

Figure 4.6 Bosnia and Herzegovina: Scores for administrative barriers to trade

Figure 4.7 Croatia: Scores for technical barriers to trade

Figure 4.8 Croatia: Scores for sanitary and phytosanitary measures

Figure 4.9 Croatia: Scores for administrative barriers to trade

Figure 4.10 The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia: Scores for technical barriers to trade

Figure 4.11 The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia: Scores for sanitary and phytosanitary measures

Figure 4.12 The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia: Scores for administrative barriers to trade.

............. 98 Figure 4.13 Kosovo*: Scores for technical barriers to trade

Figure 4.14 Kosovo*: Scores for sanitary and phytosanitary measures

Figure 4.15 Kosovo*: Scores for administrative barriers to trade

Figure 4.16 Moldova: Scores for technical barriers to trade

Figure 4.17 Moldova: Scores for sanitary and phytosanitary measures

Figure 4.18 Moldova: Scores for administrative barriers to trade

Figure 4.19 Montenegro: Scores for technical barriers to trade

Figure 4.20 Montenegro: Scores for sanitary and phytosanitary measures

Figure 4.21 Montenegro: Scores for administrative barriers to trade

Figure 4.22 Serbia: Scores for technical barriers to trade

Figure 4.23 Serbia: Scores for sanitary and phytosanitary measures

Figure 4.24 Serbia: Scores for administrative barriers to trade

Tables

Table 1.1 Membership in international and European standardisation organisations

Table 1.2 Transposition of EU technical regulations in priority sectors

Table 1.3 Adoption of European standards in priority sectors

Table 1.4 Membership in international and European organisations

Table 1.5 Number of accredited Conformity Assessment Bodies (CABs)

Table 1.6 Information and notification mechanisms

Table 2.1 Membership in international organisation in the SPS field

Table 2.2 Transposition of European SPS measures in the food products and beverages area

Table 2.3 Transposition of European SPS measures in the agricultural products area

Acronyms and abbreviations

ACAA Agreement on Conformity Assessment and Acceptance of Industrial Products BOI Binding Origin Information BTI Binding Tariff Information CA Conformity assessment CAC Codex Alimentarius Commission CAB Conformity Assessment Body CEFTA Central European Free Trade Agreement CEN European Committee for Standardisation CENELEC European Committee for Electrotechnical Standardization EA European co-operation for Accreditation EA BLA Bilateral Agreement of the European co-operation for Accreditation EA MLA Multilateral Agreement of the European co-operation for Accreditation EDI Electronic Data Interchange EFTA European Free Trade Association EN European Standard EU European Union GATT General Agreement in Tariffs and Trade IAF International Accreditation Forum ILAC International Laboratory Accreditation Co-operation IEC International Electrotechnical Commission IPPC International Plant Protection Convention IRI Investment Reform Index ISO International Standardisation Organisation MLA Multilateral agreement MRA Mutual Recognition Agreement MMF Multilateral Monitoring Framework NAB National Accreditation Body NSB National Standards Body NTBs Non-Tariff Barriers OIE World Organisation for Animal Health RASFF Rapid Alert System for Food and Feed SME Small- and medium-sized enterprises SPS Sanitary and phytosanitary standards TBT Technical Barriers to Trade WTO World Trade Organization

Foreword

Since the entry into force of the CEFTA 2006, significant accomplishments have been made by the Parties in ensuring proper and efficient implementation of the Agreement and in contributing to the process of integration of the region into the European Union. The implementation of the CEFTA Agreement, by focusing on greater regional trade and investment integration, is an important stepping stone to sustainable long-term growth and improved standards of living.

One of the objectives of the CEFTA Agreement is to eliminate barriers to trade and facilitate the movement of goods between the territories of the Parties. Therefore, the main priority of Bosnia and Herzegovina as 2011 Chair of the Subcommittee on non-tariff barriers (NTBs) and technical barriers to trade (TBT) was to support the elimination of NTBs through the use of the Multilateral Monitoring Framework (MMF) developed by OECD. Furthermore, the 2011 Chairmanship was focused on strengthening cooperation in the area of NTBs and TBT within the CEFTA structures, improving transparency and information exchange between the Parties, and promoting CEFTA implementation at national and regional events.

As Chair of the NTBs Subcommittee for 2011, Bosnia and Herzegovina welcomes the publication produced by the OECD Investment Compact for South East Europe on monitoring the elimination of nontariff barriers in CEFTA 2006. The analysis contained in this paper will help the CEFTA Parties understand where progress has been made and where more work needs to be done. This publication would not have been possible without the financial support of the European Commission.

Closer cooperation between the CEFTA institutions, the European Commission and organisations such as the OECD Investment Compact ensure that the benefits of CEFTA 2006 reach their maximum potential.

Midhat Salic Assistant minister for International Trade Relations Ministry of Foreign Trade and Economic Relations Bosnia and Herzegovina

–  –  –

The main objectives of the Central European Free Trade Agreement (CEFTA) 2006 are to expand trade in goods and services; foster investment by means of fair, stable and predictable rules; eliminate barriers to trade between the eight Parties to the Agreement; provide appropriate protection of intellectual property rights in accordance with international standards; and harmonise provisions on modern trade policy issues such as competition rules and state aid.1 The objective to eliminate barriers to trade between the Parties includes provisions for the elimination

of Non-Tariff Barriers (NTBs), which fall within the mandate of certain structures created under CEFTA:

the Subcommittee on Technical Barriers to Trade (TBTs) and NTBs, the Subcommittee on Agriculture and Sanitary and Phytosanitary (SPS) Issues, and the Subcommittee on Customs and Rules of Origin. More specifically, the Terms of Reference for the Sub-Committee on TBTs and NTBs stipulates that “the task of the Sub-committee is to identify, review and propose measures for elimination of technical barriers to trade and non-tariff barriers among the Parties”.



Pages:   || 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |   ...   | 14 |


Similar works:

«Page 1 2016 ELK, MOOSE AND BIGHORN SHEEP PROCLAMATION Pursuant to North Dakota law and the recommendation of the Game and Fish Director, I hereby declare an open season for the issuance of 338 elk, plus additional landowner licenses for elk unit E4, 202 moose and 2-8 bighorn sheep (to be determined on September 1, 2016) licenses. Except as provided hereinafter or otherwise by law, no person shall hunt, kill, take, possess, or so attempt to hunt, kill, take, transport or possess any elk, moose,...»

«The Necessary and Proper Clauses JOHN MIKHAIL* The Congress shall have Power... To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.1 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION.......................................... 1046 I. FOREGOING POWERS VS. ALL OTHER POWERS.............»

«FILED FOR PUBLICATION Nov 21 2011, 8:56 am CLERK ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT: of the supreme court, court of appeals and tax court ANNETTE BIESECKER ABHISHEK CHAUDHARY Indiana Legal Services, Inc. Indianapolis, Indiana IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA JIM NORRIS, ) ) Appellant-Defendant, ) ) vs. ) No. 27A04-1104-SC-183 ) PERSONAL FINANCE, ) ) Appellee-Plaintiff. ) APPEAL FROM THE GRANT SUPERIOR COURT The Honorable Warren Haas, Judge Cause No. 27D03-1003-SC-380 November 21, 2011 OPINION FOR...»

«Copyleft and the GNU General Public License: A Comprehensive Tutorial and Guide c Copyright 2003–2005, 2008, 2014–2015 Bradley M. Kuhn. c Copyright 2014–2015 Anthony K. Sebro, Jr. c Copyright 2014 Denver Gingerich. c Copyright 2003–2007, 2014 Free Software Foundation, Inc. c Copyright 2008, 2014 Software Freedom Law Center. The copyright holders grant the freedom to copy, modify, convey, adapt, and/or redistribute this work (except Appendices B–E) under the terms of the Creative...»

«The Postnuptial Conundrum: Is there a difference between a postnuptial agreement, a separation agreement, and a settlement agreement executed prior to the filing of a divorce action? by Scott Bassett scott@michiganfamilylawappeals.com www.michiganfamilylawappeals.com 248-232-3840 AAML 2014 ADVANCED FAMILY LAW SEMINAR: Deciphering Family Law Myths and Matrimonial Legends Introduction: Until the last two decades, the notion that couples (married or about to be married) could enter into binding...»

«GCR USA The Washington, DC antitrust bar GCR USA Harry Phillips and Pallavi Guniganti 14 April 2015 Washington, DC, is the world’s most competitive and high-profile antitrust law market. In the largest survey ever published in GCR, Harry Phillips and Pallavi Guniganti outline the practices that offer the most innovative and complete legal work in the District. *** Welcome to the world’s most competitive competition law market. Brussels has multi-billion dollar fines. San Francisco,...»

«UNITED STATES SECURIT I ES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION W ASH I NGTON, DC 20549 DIVI S ION OF September 18,2014 TRADIN G AND MAR KETS Nicholas A. Kronfeld Davis Polk & Wardwell LLP 450 Lexington Avenue New York, NY 10017 Re: Banco Santander, S.A. File No. TP 14-15 Dear Mr. Kronfeld: In your letter dated September 18, 2014, as supplemented by conversations with the staff, you request on behalf of Banco Santander, S.A., a bank organized under the laws of the Kingdom of Spain (Santander Spain), an...»

«_ OFFICE OF AD/CVD ENFORCEMENT QUANTITY AND VALUE QUESTIONNAIRE REQUESTER(S): {Insert name of firm} REPRESENTATION: {Insert name of counsel and law firm and contact information} CASE: Hand Trucks and Parts Thereof From the People’s Republic of China (“PRC”) A570-891 PERIOD OF REVIEW: December 1, 2005 through November 30, 2006 DEADLINE FOR SUBMISSION OF CERTIFICATION: March 15, 2007 OFFICIALS IN CHARGE: Robert Bolling Hilary Sadler, Esq. Program Manager Senior Import Compliance Specialist...»

«MINUTES – ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING Thursday, January 21, 2016 Ralph Farley Community Room, Guelph Soccer, 375 College Avenue West Board of Directors: Dave Tack, Chair Michael Vair Rich Lyle Tim Law Kerry Piccolotto Jeff Sands Rupesh Pandey David Ing John Fazari Members in Attendance: Wanda Evans Roberta Casgrande B. Holmes Ludy Carter Haris Galatsidas David Pereira Paul Zonneveld Farid Ashabi Jason Carey Amy Peterananc Kyla McArthur Laurie HalfpennyDavid Woodcock Jakki Prince Harpreet Sandhu...»

«NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY APPELLATE DIVISION DOCKET NO. A-5077-08T2 CHRISTOPHER BASTOS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v.STATE OF NEW JERSEY; ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY; STATE OF NEW JERSEY DIVISION OF STATE POLICE; SUPERINTENDENT OF THE DIVISION OF STATE POLICE; JEFFREY CRAPSER; SALVATOR DiPAOLA, Defendants-Respondents, and JONNY HANNIGAN, Defendant. Submitted December 1, 2010 Decided May 25, 2011 Before Judges...»

«Disciplinary and Other FINRA Actions Reported for August 2009 Firms Fined Alpine Securities Corporation (CRD #14952, Salt Lake City, Utah) submitted a Letter of Acceptance, Waiver and Consent in which the firm was censured, fined $18,500 and required to revise its written supervisory procedures regarding order handling, best execution, trade reporting, FINRA has taken disciplinary actions sales transactions, Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Regulation against the following firms and SHO...»

«Case 3:16-cr-00051-BR Document 527 Filed 05/09/16 Page 1 of 33 LISSA CASEY, OSB #086541 MICHAEL ARNOLD, OSB #011873 lissa@arnoldlawfirm.com mike@arnoldlawfirm.com Arnold Law 401 East 10th Ave. Steric 400 Eugene, OR 97401 Ph: 541-338-9111 Attorneys for Ammon Bundy UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF OREGON Case No.: 3:16-CR-00051 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, DEFENDANT AMMON BUNDY’S Plaintiff, MOTION TO DISMISS FOR LACK OF vs. SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION AMMON BUNDY et al, Oral Argument...»





 
<<  HOME   |    CONTACTS
2016 www.dissertation.xlibx.info - Dissertations, online materials

Materials of this site are available for review, all rights belong to their respective owners.
If you do not agree with the fact that your material is placed on this site, please, email us, we will within 1-2 business days delete him.