RESTRICTED
WORLD TRADE G/ADP/W/399
16September 1996
ORGANIZATION(96-3613)
Committee onAnti-Dumping Practices
NOTE FROM THE SECRETARIAT
Atitsregular meeting on29April 1996, theCommittee decided toestablish anAdHocGroup
toprepare recommendations onissues where agreement seems possible, andreport totheCommittee,
andconsider other issues regarding implementation onwhich Members believe discussion would be
helpful.
TheSecretariat hasreceived thefollowing suggestions ofissues fortheGroup toconsider.
Thesuggestions havebeengrouped intoseveral subject categories, andtheMember submitting each
suggestion isidentified. These categories donotconstrain theCommittee inanyway,theyaremerely
intended toallow theCommittee toconsider suggestions concerning similar orrelated topics together.
Thesuggestions arebeing circulated toMembers fortheirconsideration. Ifnecessary, the
Committee maymeetinformally toconsider thesuggestions, andatthenextregular meeting ofthe
Committee, theitems tobereferred totheAdHocGroup fordiscussion willbedetermined bythe
Committee.
_______________
A. Investigations
1. (EC) Treatment ofconfidential information.
2. (Japan) Theperiod ofdatacollection foradumping investigation
Each Member hasitsowncriteria todetermine theperiod ofdatacollection foradumping
investigation because thereisnoprovision intheAnti-Dumping Agreement regarding thedata
collection period. Could thisissue bediscussed?
3. (Korea) Clarification oftherelationship between Footnote 14andArticle 5.4
Itshould beclarified whether employees ofdomestic producers, ortherepresentatives ofthose
employees, havetherighttovoteunder Article 5.4.Ifso,therelationship between theirrights
andthose ofthedomestic producers should alsobeclarified.
4. (Korea) Sampling method under Article 6.10
Article 6.10indicates thatunder certain circumstances adetermination ofanindividual margin
ofdumping maybeimpractical ifthenumber ofexporters, producers, importers, ortypes of
products involved istoolarge. Thecriteria constituting 'toolarge'should beelaborated upon.
Theterm'statistically valid'should alsobedefined.G/ADP/W/399
Page2
5. (New Zealand) What might constitute "special circumstances" inArticle 5.6oftheAgreement?
6. (USA) Notification ofthegovernment oftheexporting member pursuant toArticle 5.5.
7. (USA) Protection ofbusiness proprietary datasetforth inArticle 6.5.
8. (USA) Theprovision forhearings inArticle 6.2.
9. (USA) Provision ofessential factsunder consideration before making afinaldetermination
under Article 6.9.
B. Dumping
10. (Chile) Advantages anddrawbacks oftaking normal value tomean theexport price toan
appropriate thirdcountry asopposed totheconstructed value (when itisnotpossible touse
thesaleprice inthedomestic market).
11. (Chile) More precise definition ofan"appropriate thirdcountry".
12. (Chile) Precise methods fordetermining "areasonable amount foradministrative, selling and
general costs andforprofits".
13. (Chile) Methods forconstructing theexport price incases where theexporter andimporter
arerelated.
14. (Chile) Precise methods forestablishing thediscounts needed forafaircomparison between
theexport price andthenormal value.
15. (Korea) Establish apriority forapplying 'comparable export price tothird country 'and
'constructed value'under Article 2.2.
When itisimpossible tocompute thedumping margin withtheordinary domestic price inthe
exporting country, Article 2.2permits authorities tousethe'comparable export pricetoathird
country ',orthe'constructed value'.However, itisunclear which method should take
precedence inlieuoftheordinary price.
16. (Korea) Establish apriority insubstituting theordinary domestic price under Article 2.2.2
Again, astandard setofpriorities should beestablished forwhich substitutes touseinplace
ofactual data,taking intoaccount theactual amount ofthesame general category ofproduct,
theweighted average oftheactual amounts incurred byother exporters orproducers, andany
other reasonable methods.G/ADP/W/399
Page3
17. (Korea) Theapplication ofbothweighted average priceunder Article 2.4.2 andthedeminimis
margin under Article 5.8
Theweighted average priceunder Article 2.4.2 isoftenapplied asymmetrically between export
prices andthenormal value, orcalculated ondifferent timebases forinvestigation andreview.
Thedeminimis criteria andnegligibility under Article 5.8is,insome cases, interpreted as
being applied onlytotheinvestigation. Thescope ofapplication ofthese articles needs
clarifying.
C. Injury
18. (Chile) Precise guidelines forthedefinition ofa"like product".
19. (Chile) With regard to"injury" and"causal link", discussion ofaccounting, statistical and
economic methods for:
a. Determining thedistorting effect ontheprices andvolumes oftheimports complained
ofandthose from other origins (cumulative assessment);
b. Determining thedistorting effect onthedomestic industry caused bytheprices and
volumes ofimports;
c. Measuring the"likelihood" ofasubstantial increase inimports intheevent ofathreat
ofinjury;
d. Determining the"margin ofinjury";
e. Assessing thepublic interest andtheeffects ofanti-dumping measures onusers and
consumers.
20. (Korea) Criteria of'significance 'under Article 3.2.
21. (Korea) Methodology inevaluating theeconomic indices under Article 3.4.
22. (Korea) Criteria indetermining 'material 'inboth'material 'injury and'material 'retardation
under Footnote 9
Authorities shall consider, under Article 3.2,the'significance 'oftheincrease indumped
imports, thepriceundercutting bythedumped imports, andthedegree ofthedepressive effect
bythedumped imports, respectively. Definite criteria should beestablished forthesakeof
clarity oftheauthorities determination.
Article 3.4exemplifies fourgroups ofrelevant economic factors andindices tobeevaluated
byauthorities inexamining theimpact onthedomestic industry ofthedumped imports. An
objective methodology should beestablished forthesamereason asagenda item3.Forinstance,
itcanbeconsidered whether eachindices ofthesamegroup havevaried collectively, orwhether
theweighted average ofthegroup canfunction asageneral index.
Inthesame context, definite criteria should beoffered indetermining both'material 'injury
and'material 'retardation under Footnote 9.G/ADP/W/399
Page4
D. Public notice
23. (EC) Disclosure offindings.
24. (Hong Kong) Public notices (Article 12)
Article 12setsoutrequirements ofpublic notices andexplanation ofdeterminations, which
arenotprovided forintheTokyo Round Code. Members administer different anti-dumping
systems andmayadopt different practices inthisrespect. Itwould beuseful toconsider if
someguidelineswouldbehelpfultoMembersinimplementationand,ifso,whatsuchguidelines
should be.
25. (USA) Public notice ofdeterminations under Article 12.2, including explanations forfinal
determinations under Article 12.2.2.
E. General
26. (EC) Minimum standards inprovisional measures.
27. (Hong Kong) Format ofsemi-annual report (Article 16.4)
Article 16.4provides thatsemi-annual reports shallbesubmitted onanagreed standard form.
Atitsmeetingon30October1995,theCommitteeadoptedaformatwhichisessentiallyidentical
tothatusedbytheTokyo Round Code Committee. Itappears appropriate toreview theformat
toseeifanymodifications arenecessary tobring itinlinewiththerequirements oftheWTO
Agreement.
28. (Japan) Dateofstarting export byexporters orproducers eligible foranewshipper review.
Thefollowing issues could bediscussed.
a. Who would beeligible fortheinvestigation ofanew shipper review:
exporters/producers whostarted exports aftertheendoftheperiod oftheoriginal
investigation, orthose whostarted exports afterthedatewhen thedecision toimpose
duties wasmade?
b. Canwemake consensus ontheunderstanding thatthose whoexported before the
beginning oftheperiod ofthedatacollection oftheoriginal investigation, butdidnot
export during theperiod ofthedatacollection, andresumed exports aftertheendof
theperiod ofthedatacollection should beregarded aseligible foranewshipper review?
c. Inaddition, howdowedescribe theinvestigation ofanewshipper review inthe
notification format ofthesemi-annual report?
29. (Korea) Standard ofthepanel review under Article 17.6
Bymeans ofthecontextual interpretation ofArticle 17.6, thestandard ofthepanel review
onanti-dumping matters seems toberelatively restricted compared withtheUnderstanding
onRules andProcedures Governing theSettlement ofDisputes. Thestandard ofthepanel
review should therefore beclarified, andorbrought intoconformity withtheDSU.G/ADP/W/399
Page5
30. (USA) Judicial reviews outlined inArticle 13.
31. (USA) Duty assessments under Article 9.
32. (USA) Termination ofinvestigations inwhich thevolume ofdumped imports isnegligible
inArticle 5.8.