An annex to the agreement contains a “joint declaration” on the application of rules of origin for products benefiting from preferential treatment. Part V of the Agreement contains institutional provisions, including consultation and dispute settlement, as well as the establishment of a Services Council. The powers of the Council are defined in a ministerial decision. Gatt and its successor, the WTO, have succeeded in reducing tariffs. Average tariffs for the main GATT participants were about 22% in 1947 and 5% after the Uruguay Round in 1999.  Experts attribute some of these customs changes to GATT and the WTO.    The Final Act covers all the areas of negotiation mentioned in the Punta del Este Declaration, with two exceptions. The first is the outcome of the “market access negotiations”, in which some countries made binding commitments to the elimination or elimination of specific tariffs and non-tariff barriers. Such concessions shall be recorded in national timetables which shall form an integral part of the Final Act. The second is the “initial commitment” to liberalize trade in services. These liberalisation commitments are also reflected in national timetables.
Part III of the Agreement sets out the obligations of member governments to provide procedures and remedies in accordance with their domestic law to ensure that intellectual property rights can be effectively respected, both by foreign right holders and by their own nationals. Procedures should allow effective measures to be taken against infringements of intellectual property rights, but should be fair and equitable, not unnecessarily complicated or costly and should not lead to undue delays or unjustified delays. They should allow for judicial review of final administrative decisions. There is no obligation to create a judicial system that is generally separate from the application of legislation or to give priority to the enforcement of intellectual property rights in the allocation of resources or personnel. The agreement establishing the World Trade Organization (WTO) calls for a single institutional framework that encompasses gatt as amended by the Uruguay Round, all agreements and arrangements concluded under its auspices and the full results of the Uruguay Round. Its structure is chaired by a ministerial conference which meets at least every two years. A General Council regularly monitors the implementation of the agreement and ministerial decisions. This General Council acts as a dispute settlement body and trade policy review mechanism, dealing with all trade issues covered by the WTO, and has also established subsidiary bodies such as a Goods Council, a Services Council and an Ad Hoc Council. The WTO framework ensures a “one-size-fits-all approach” for the results of the Uruguay Round – therefore, WTO membership means that all outcomes of the Round will be accepted without exception. The package is part of an ongoing process to ensure significant incremental cuts in aid and protection. In this context, it calls for the continuation of negotiations in the fifth year of implementation, which, together with an assessment of the first five years, would take into account non-trade-related issues, special and differential treatment of developing countries, the objective of creating a fair and market-oriented agricultural trading system and other concerns and objectives set out in the preamble to the agreement. However, their most important achievement at that time was seen as the adoption of Part IV of the GATT, which freed them from reciprocal reciprocity with industrialized countries in trade negotiations.
In the view of many developing countries, this was a direct result of UNCTAD I`s call for a better trade deal for them. The agreement aims to harmonise rules of origin in the long term, with the exception of rules of origin for the granting of tariff preferences, and to ensure that these rules do not themselves create unnecessary barriers to trade. . . .