All WMA restrictions that came into effect on 31 December 1994 would be included in the new agreement and maintained until the restrictions are lifted or the products are incorporated into the GATT. The agreement contains a formula for increasing existing growth rates for products subject to a certain reserve at any stage. Indeed, annual growth in the first phase and for each previous AMF agreement under the 1994 macroeconomic agreements is expected to be 16% higher than the growth rate set for the previous AMF limitation. For Phase 2 (including between 1998 and 2001), annual growth rates are expected to exceed levels 1 by 25%. For Phase 3 (including 2002-2004), annual growth rates are expected to exceed Phase 2 growth rates by 27%. The agreement establishing the World Trade Organization (WTO) calls for a single institutional framework including the GATT as amended by the Uruguay Round, all agreements and arrangements concluded under its auspices, and the full results of the Uruguay Round. Their structure is governed by a ministerial conference that meets at least every two years. A General Council regularly monitors the implementation of the agreement and ministerial decisions. The General Council acts as a dispute resolution body and trade policy review mechanism on all WTO trade issues and has also set up subsidiary bodies such as a Commodity Council, a Service Council and a TRIPS Board. The WTO framework guarantees a „uniform approach“ to the uruguay Round results, which means that WTO membership means that all outcomes of the round will be accepted without exception.
Other provisions include rules on compensation or suspension of concessions in the event of non-implementation. Within a specified period of time, the parties may enter into negotiations to agree on mutually acceptable compensation. In the event of a non-agreement, a party to the dispute may seek authorization from the dispute settlement treaty to suspend concessions or other obligations to the other party concerned. The DSB grants this authorization within 30 days of the end of the agreed implementation period. Differences of opinion on the proposed level of suspension may be referred to arbitration. In principle, concessions should be suspended in the same area as the one at issue in the panel case. If this is not feasible or effective, the suspension may take place in another area of the same agreement. If this is not effective or feasible and the circumstances are serious enough, the suspension of concessions may be made as part of another agreement. The agreement contains obligations regarding recognition requirements (for example. (B) to guarantee authorisations, licenses or certifications in the field of services. It promotes the recognition requirements obtained through harmonization and internationally agreed criteria. Other provisions provide that the parties are required to ensure that monopolies and exclusive service providers do not abuse their positions.
Restrictive business practices should be consulted between the parties for their elimination.