On 20 and 21 May 2026, at the World Trade Organization (WTO) Goods Council meeting, members emphasised the growing strain on the rules-based trading system amid escalating trade tensions and compliance challenges. The delegations in attendance addressed 38 specific trade concerns raised by members, of which nine were raised for the first time.
Use of GATT Article XXVIII rules to modify tariff commitments
The People’s Republic of China (China) stated its 18 May 2026 communication on the use of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) Article XXVIII, which allows WTO members to modify or withdraw tariff and other concessions under specific procedures. China noted that Article XXVIII had been increasingly invoked, with 58 negotiations initiated since the WTO’s creation, 29 concluded, and 18 ongoing.[The WTO circulated a factual report on the status of Article XXVIII negotiations on 26 February, which lists the 58 Article XXVIII negotiations.] Historically, it had been used for purposes such as adjusting tariffs, forming customs unions and making limited changes to commitments, often resolved through negotiation.
China noted that, if used properly, Article XXVIII can help prevent arbitrary and unilateral changes to tariff commitments and act as a “safety valve” to ease members’ trade frictions within the WTO framework. Its proposal to hold technical discussions within the WTO to clarify the rules and procedures would help current and future participating members, especially developing members, develop a common understanding of their application and engage in these negotiations more effectively.
Nine members took the floor to comment. Some expressed concerns about Article XXVIII negotiations, which, in their view, were being used to legitimise protectionist measures that would otherwise be contrary to WTO rules. In contrast, others expressed interest in clarifying the rules. One member recalled that this provision allowed members to modify their tariff concessions through negotiation, and that members were being compelled to utilise Article XXVIII to relieve pressures arising from overcapacity caused by other members’ non-market policies and practices. One member was of the view that such technical discussions were not necessary.
Trade concerns
The Council for Trade in Goods (CTG) reviewed 38 specific trade concerns (STCs), nine of which were raised for the first time, including one raised under another business. The WTO Secretariat presented a report stating that 108 trade concerns had been reported by members as resolved or partially resolved, which represent approximately half of the relevant trade concerns. Detailed information can be found in the WTO’s Trade Concerns Database, the Secretariat added.
The new trade concerns were (in alphabetical order):
- Brazil - Anti-dumping Investigation and Trade-Restrictive Measures Concerning Imported Milk Powder
- Colombia - Decree No. 0170/2026 and the Amending Decree: Trade-Restrictive Measures Adopted by Colombia Against Ecuador, Contrary to its Commitments under the WTO Agreements
- Ecuador - Customs Service Fee for Customs Check of Goods Entering Colombia
- European Union (EU) - Proposed Re-Classification of Tea Tree Oil as a Category 1B Reproductive Toxin by the European Chemicals Agency Committee for Risk Assessment (RAC)
- EU - Proposed Cybersecurity Act
- EU - Proposed Industrial Accelerator Act
- United Kingdom (UK) - Trade Restrictive Measures on Steel Products
- UK - Final Bound Total AMS Apportionment between the European Union (EU) and the UK
- United States of America (US) - Section 301 Investigations and Tariffs
Notifications and members’ non-responsiveness to questions
The CTG considered two reports by the Secretariat on notifications, including its annual report on the status of notifications and a second report updating calculations of notification submission rates in the goods area. The latter showed an improvement of 1.1% in meeting notification requirements, increasing from 77.6% in 2024 to 78.7% by the end of 2025. Following discussions at an informal meeting, members agreed to meet again to discuss possible improvements to these reports and the Notification Portal with a view to enhancing the monitoring of notifications.
The United States introduced two agenda items highlighting transparency and compliance concerns. First, it noted that many written questions in WTO committees had remained unanswered for years, stressing that the issue was the absence of responses rather than their quality, and that replies were essential for transparency and accountability. One member pointed out that several members, including the EU, the US and others, had also failed to respond. Second, the US highlighted that some members had not submitted required notifications for decades, despite many being simple “nil notifications” confirming the absence of relevant measures. It welcomed recent progress by Botswana and Côte d’Ivoire (Ivory Coast) in this area and urged others to follow suit.
Supporting the rules-based multilateral trading system in a changing global economy
Australia, New Zealand, Norway and Switzerland discussed supporting the rules-based multilateral trading system in a changing global economy. They reaffirmed their commitment to the WTO as the cornerstone of global trade governance, emphasising that its rules provide businesses and economies with predictability, stability and fairness. Thirteen (13) delegations then took the floor to comment.
Most delegations that spoke reaffirmed support for the WTO or the multilateral trading system. However, views differed on how to adapt it to current challenges. Many members underlined that the system faced serious pressures, including the rise of unilateral trade measures, protectionism, industrial subsidies, overcapacity and structural imbalances in the global economy. Several members warned that such trends were increasing uncertainty, fragmenting trade and undermining trust in multilateral trade rules. One member emphasised the need to rethink and rebalance the international trading system; in its view, this new system would require a long-term reset to higher average tariff rates, while others would require opening long-closed markets, shifting to greater domestic consumption, and addressing overcapacity.
Adoption of the rules of procedure of the Committee on Fisheries Subsidies
The CTG formally approved the rules of procedure for the new Committee on Fisheries Subsidies (CFS), adopted at the committee’s first meeting on 01 May 2026.
Informal meetings of the Council for Trade in Goods
The CTG chair reported on the outcomes of two informal meetings held on 19 May 2026. At the first of these meetings, the Third (3rd) Informal Session on Digital Tools Used in the CTG and its Subsidiary Bodies, the WTO Secretariat provided an overview of the WTO digital tools relevant to the work of the CTG and its subsidiary bodies.
At the second (2nd) meeting, the chair said that members had discussed the two (2) Secretariat reports on the status of notifications and on notification submission rates as of 31 December 2025.
Appointment of chairs to the CTG subsidiary bodies
The CTG chair reported that members were not yet in a position to put the slate of names forward for adoption and that he would continue consultations with members to find a solution. The exercise involves the new chairpersons of the 15 subsidiary bodies reporting to the CTG, including those on agriculture, market access, trade remedies, Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT), Sanitary and Phytosanitary measures (SPS) and trade facilitation.
The process for determining the next chairperson of the CFS will be implemented next year.
Next meeting
The next formal meeting of the Council for Trade in Goods will take place on 16 to 17 November 2026.
