RESTRICTEDWORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONG/ADP/AHG/W/84
6 April 2000
(00-1402)
Committee on Anti-Dumping Practices
Ad Hoc Group on ImplementationOriginal:  Spanish
PRACTICAL ISSUES AND EXPERIE NCE IN APPLYING ARTICLE 2.4.2
TERMINATION OF INVESTIGATIONS UNDER ARTICLE 5.8 IN
CASES OF DE MINIMIS IMPORT VOLUME
PRACTICAL ISSUES AND EXPERIENCE IN CASES INVOLVING
CUMULATION UNDER ARTICLE 3.3
PRACTICAL ISSUES AND EXPERIENCE WITH RESPECT TO QUESTIONNAIRES
AND REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION UNDER ARTICLES 6.1 AND 6.1.1
PRACTICAL ISSUES AND EXPERIENCE IN PROVIDING OPPORTUNITIES FOR
INDUSTRIAL USERS AND CONSUMER ORGANIZATIONS TO
PROVIDE INFORMATION UNDER ARTICLE 6.12
Paper by the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela
The following communication, dated 27 March 2000, has been received from the Permanent
Mission of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela.
_______________
PRACTICAL ISSUES AND EXPERIENCE OF VENEZUELA WITH RESPECT TO THE
TOPICS OF THE AD HOC GROUP ON IMPLEMENTATION OF THE
COMMITTEE ON ANTI-DUMPING PRACTICES
Practical issues and experience in applying Article 2.4.2 (methods for calculating the dumping
margin)
Venezuela decides on the method of calculating dumping margins in investigations according
to the specific circumstances of each case.  As a rule, in all the anti-dumping investigations conducted
by the Venezuelan authority, the dumping margin has been determined by means of a comparison of
weighted average normal values with weighted average export prices.  The methodology of
comparison between the normal value and the transaction-to-transaction export price would only beused in those cases where there is a very low volume of sales to Venezuela, in which case it would be
more appropriate and fair to compare those sales with the most similar domestic sales in terms of
clients, dates and volumes, among other factors.
In this connection, in both the transaction-to-transaction calculation of the dumping margin
and in the case of weighted averages, the authority compares previously adjusted ex-factory sales
effected on the closest possible dates, also taking account of the most similar volumes and clients.G/ADP/AHG/W/84
Page 2
Nevertheless, when prices are compared by the transaction-to-transaction method, the sales used are
those occurring on even closer dates than in the cases of weighted averages.
Practical issues and experience in applying Article 5.8 ( de minimis  import volumes)
Since the entry into force of the WTO Agreements, the Venezuelan authority has considered
as "de minimis " a dumping margin lower than 2 per cent expressed as a percentage of the export price
and as negligible any volume of exports lower than 3 per cent of imports of the product under
investigation or less than 7 per cent in the event of cumulation.  In actual fact, the Venezuelan
authority has terminated two dumping investigations  without imposing definitive duties in either case,
as the margin was lower than 2 per cent expressed as a percentage of export price.  No investigations
have been terminated on account of negligible impor ts.  In practice, to determine injury, the authority
ascertains the significance of the imports in the light of Article 5.8.  The practice is to determine
significance for each year of the period covered by the investigation of injury (normally the
three years preceding the initiation of the investigatio n).  However, it is the volume of imports taking
place during the period covered by the dumping investigation (normally the year immediately
preceding the start of the investigation) that will be taken as the basis for determining the relevantsignificance.
Practical issues and experience in case s involving cumulation under Article 3.3
Since the entry into force of the WTO Agreements, the Venezuelan authority has been
conducting cumulative assessments of the effects of imports from more than one country only when
(i) the dumping margin determined in relation to the imports from each supplier country is higher than
de minimis  and the volume of imports from each country is not negligible and;  (ii) the cumulative
assessment is justified in the light of the conditions of competition between the imported products
among themselves, and between them and the like domestic product.  In this latter regard, thecomparison criteria used are those provided for under Venezuelan law for determining likeness
between the imported and the domestic product, namely the nature, physical characteristics,
components, technical specifications, origin, prov enance, utilization, functi on, market behaviour,
quality, trade mark and reputation, among other factors.
Question from Venezuela
With respect to the cumulation of imports for the purposes of assessing their effects on the
domestic industry, Venezuela believes that Articles 3.3 and 5.8 could lead to confusion.  Indeed,
under Article 3.3, the cumulative assessment of the effects of imports on the domestic industry would
only be justified in the event of the simultaneous occurrence  of the three conditions prescribed in
that Article (margin of dumping higher than de minimis , volume of imports from each country not
negligible  and conditions of competition between the imported products and like domestic product).
With regard to the significance of imports, Article 5.8 in turn establishes that imports representing less
than 3 per cent will be considered to be negligible, except where they collectively account for more
than 7 per cent.  On the one hand therefore, Article 5.8 allows imports that individually account for
less than 3 per cent but collectively represent more than 7 per cent to be considered as significant,while Article 3.3 only allows cumulative assessment of the effect of such imports when individually
they are not negligible (less than 3 per cent).  Hence, where certain imports individually represent less
than 3 per cent but collectively more than 7 per cent, the literal application of Article 3.3 would seem
to imply that the effects of such imports may not be assessed cumulatively.
In the light of the above, we would like to know how the authorities of other countries
interpret the cumulative assessment of the effect of imports that are individually negligible but
collectively account for more than 7 per cent.G/ADP/AHG/W/84
Page 3
Practical issues and experience with respect to questionnaires and requests for information
under Articles 6.1 and 6.1.1
Under the law, the regulations establish that for information-gathering purposes, the authority
may supply questionnaires and forms to the interested  parties, who will be required to furnish the
requested information within the time-frame establ ished.  For that purpose, the authority normally
grants a period of no less than 30 calendar days for the submission of replies to the questionnaires.
The refusal to reply to a questionnaire or the submission of false or misleading information entitles
the authorities to take preliminary or definitive decisions based on the best available information.
(a) Date chosen for delivery of the questionnaires:  the questionnaires are normally sent
out immediately following the start of the investigation in question.
(b) To whom they are sent:  the questionnaires are sent to the parties involved in the
investigation, namely domestic producers, importers and exporters and/or foreign
producers, as well as to the government of the country under investigation in cases
involving subsidies.
(c) How they are distributed:  the questionnaires are delivered to representatives of the
parties to the investigation or are sent by post directly to the companies involved.
(d) Availability of a standard questionnaire:  the authority has designed three types of
standard questionnaires which, if necessary, are adapted to the particular features of
each investigation.  Thus, there are three model questionnaires, depending on the
party to whom they are being addressed:  (i) questionnaire for domestic producers,requesting information pertaining to the evolution and performance of the economic
variables of the domestic industry for the period covered by an investigation of the
effects of injury;  (ii) questionnaire for importers, requesting information concerning
the performance and evolution of the volume and prices of imports and;
(iii) questionnaire for foreign producers and/or exporters, requesting informationregarding domestic and export sales for the period under study.
(e) Format of replies:  the parties are allowed ample freedom as to the presentation of the
information, provided that they answer all the questions and furnish all the
information requested.  In the case of voluminous data (sales) requiring detailed
analysis and processing, the parties are requested to supply them in magnetic format,
account always being taken of the possible limitations facing a particular enterprise in
submitting data in that way.  In those cases where confidential treatment of certaininformation is requested, the parties are asked to furnish both a confidential and a
public version of the replies concerned.
(f) Deadlines for submission of replies:  normally a period of no less than 30 calendar
days is established as from the receipt of the questionnaire.  In cases where the
questionnaire is sent by post, the relevant period starts one week after dispatch.
(g) Opportunities to correct incomplete replies to the questionnaire:  when there are
incomplete replies to the questionnaire, additional information is normally requested
and a brief period granted for reply.
(h) Grounds for rejection:  the submission of false or misleading information or the
submission of incomplete replies in response to a request for further information mayG/ADP/AHG/W/84
Page 4
lead the authority to take preliminary or definitive decisions based on the best
information available.
(i) Procedures for notifying rejection of replies to the questionnaire:  there is no
procedure for notifying rejection of replies to the questionnaire.  However, when
additional information is being requested following the submission of incompletereplies, the possibility of taking provisional or definitive decisions based on the best
information available is repeated.  Should the authority believe that the submission of
false, misleading or incomplete replies was intended to hamper the investigation, it
will adopt provisional or definitive decisions on the basis of the best information
available and will record the fact in its decision.
(j) Extensions:  the provision contained in the WTO Agreements is applied for the
granting of extensions for replies to the questionnaires.  All extensions must berequested in writing and duly justified by the requesting party.  To grant the
extension, the authority assesses the justification given by the interested party and the
feasibility of granting such extension based on the expiry of the deadline for the last
questionnaire expected to be submitted and based on the stage reached in the
investigation.  In this connection, up to two extensions have been granted rangingbetween five and fifteen consecutive days, depending on the particular circumstances
adduced by the interested party.
Practical issues and experience in providing opportunities for industrial users and consumer
organizations to provide information under Article 6.12
Venezuela's anti-dumping laws define the parties interested in an investigation as including,
inter alia , industrial users of the product under investigation, consumer organizations in cases where
the product under investigation is being retailed and, in general, any natural or legal person whose
subjective rights or legitimate personal and direct interests may be affected by the procedure for the
determination of dumping, subsidies or injury.  When the consumers and industrial users of the
product under investigation are considered as interest ed parties, they may participate actively in the
investigation and may submit such arguments and evidence as they may deem necessary.
__________