RESTRICTEDWORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONG/ADP/M/14
12 August 1999
(99-3421)
Committee on Anti-Dumping Practices
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR METING
HELD ON 29 APRIL 1999
Chairman:  Mr. José Antonio S. Buencamino (Philippines)
1. The Committee on Anti-Dumping Practices (the "Committee") held a regular meeting on
29 April 1999.
The Committee adopted the following agenda:
Page
A. National Legislations - Review of  Notifications of New or Amended
Legislation or Regulations not previo usly  reviewed by the Committee........................2
(i) Argentina -  G/ADP/N/1/ARG/1 /Suppl.2-G/SCM/N/1/Suppl.2 ..........................2
(ii) Australia – G/ADP/N/1/ AUS/2/-G/SCM/N/ 1/AUS/2/.........................................3
(iii) Benin – G/ADP/N/1BEN/2..................................................................................3
(iv) Czech Republic –G/ADP/N/1/CZE/2 ..................................................................3
(v) Egypt- G/ADP/N/1/EGY/2/Rev .1-G/SCM/N/1/E GY/2/Rev.1 ............................3
(vi) Fiji – G/ADP/N /1/FJI/2-G/SCM/N /1/FJI/2 / ........................................................3
(vii) Maldives – G/ ADP/N/1/MDV/2 ..........................................................................3
B. Semi-annual Reports of Anti-Dumping actions (G/ADP/N/47 and Addenda) ..............4
C. Preliminary and final Anti-dumpi ng actions (G/ADP/N/45-46 and
G/ADP/N/48-49) ............................................................................................................5
D. Chairman's report on meeting of Ad Hoc Group on Implementation ............................5
E. Chairman's report on meeting of Info rmal Group on Anti-Circumvention....................7
F. Other Business............................................................................................................... .7
(i) Indonesia – Anti-dumping Action on tin plate.....................................................7
G. Date of the Next  Regular Meeting..................................................................................8
H. Election of Officers ........................................................................................................8G/ADP/M/14
Page 2
A. NATIONAL LEGISLATION
2. The Chairman drew the Committee's attention to the fact that, unfortunately, most questions
were submitted after the applicable deadline of 8 April 1999.  Members were aware of the fact that the
translation process was a significant bottleneck in the processing of documents for circulation.  Thiswas not due to any lack of effort on the part of the Secretariat, but simply a result of the
extraordinarily heavy translation workload.  Members were well aware of the deadlines for
submission of documents for the regular meetings of this Committee.  Not only were they established
and announced at the Committee's meeting in October 1998, but several reminders in the form of
airgrams had been sent as well. The Secretariat would, as it did last October, prepare and circulate a
document setting forth deadlines for submissions in connection with the October 1999 meetings of the
Committee, as well as the Committees on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures and Safeguards.Members were strongly urged to make every effort to comply with the applicable deadlines for
submissions.  Members could not be expected to prepare adequately for the complex and often
technical discussions in these meetings withou t the necessary documentation, in their preferred
working language.  Late submissions significantly reduced the ability of the Committee and its
subsidiary bodies to work effectively, a situation which should not be allowed to continue.
3. Turning to the substantive discussion of notificatio ns the Chairman stated that as provided for
in the agreed procedures adopted by the Committee at its special meeting in April 1996
(G/ADP/W/284, 12 February), Members receiving writ ten questions by the applicable deadline of 8
April 1999 would be asked to respond orally to those questions at the meeting.  Questions concerning
the countervailing duty legislation notification of the European Communities would be addressed atthe meeting of the SCM Committee the followin g week, and the relevant documents would be
distributed in the document package for that meeting.  The Chairman observed that Members who
received questions after the applicable deadline were asked to respond to those questions to the extent
possible.  Members would, however, be requested, in accordance with the procedures adopted by the
Committee, to answer all questions submitted in writing.  The Chairman reminded Members thatfollow up questions might be asked in this meeting.  However, such follow up questions were to be
submitted in writing no later than 24 May 1999 if the Member posing the question wished to receive a
written answer.  Written answers to all questions written submitted should be submitted to the
Secretariat no later than 5 July 1999.
4. The Chairman drew the Committee's attention to document G/ADP/W/408, circulated on
18 March 1999.  This document listed all the written questions concerning legislation considered by
the Committee since it started the process of review in July 1995 which had not yet been answered inwriting.  Some of these questions might simply had been overlooked, some were directed to Members
who had not participated actively in this Committ ee.  Previous chairmen of the Committee and the
Committee on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures had written directly to the representatives of
Members with outstanding questions, and some responses had been received.  The Chairman stated
that it was really a matter for the Members who had not yet received written answers to the questionsthey had posed to pursue the matter with other Members.  The list was intended to assist Members in
assessing their own compliance with the legislation review, and in deciding whether to further pursue
answers to questions remaining outstanding.
5. The questions regarding the notification of Argentina can be found in the following
documents:
G/ADP/Q1/ARG/3 Submitted by the European Communities
G/ADP/Q1/ARG/4 Submitted by the United States.
G/ADP/Q1/ARG/5 Submitted by the JapanG/ADP/M/14
Page 3
The answers provided by Argentina to thes e questions can be found in the following
document:
G/ADP/Q1/ARG/5 to European Communities, United States, and Japan
6. The questions regarding the notification of Australia can be found in the following document:
G/ADP/Q1/AUS/1 Submitted by Canada
NO WRITTEN ANSWERS HAVE AS YET BEEN PROVIDED BY AUSTRALIA.
7. No questions were received regarding the notification of Benin The Committee took note of
the notification.
8. The questions regarding the notification of the Czech Republic can be found in the following
documents:
G/ADP/Q1/CZE/1 Submitted by the European Communities
G/ADP/Q1/CZE/2 Submitted by the United StatesG/ADP/Q1/CZE/3 Submitted by Turkey
NO WRITTEN ANSWERS HAVE AS YET BEEN PROVIDED BY THE CZECH
REPUBLIC.
9. The questions regarding the notification of Egypt can be found in the following documents:
G/ADP/Q1/EGY/2 Submitted by the European Communities
G/ADP/Q1/EGY/3& Corr.1 Submitted by Romania
G/ADP/Q1/EGY/4 Submitted by the United States.
The answers provided by Egypt to these quest ions can be found in the following document:
G/ADP/Q1/EGY/5 to European Communities, Romania, and United States
10. No questions were received regarding the notification of Fiji.  The Committee took note of
the notification.
11. No questions were received regarding the notification of Maldives.  The Committee took note
of the notification.
12. The Chairman informed the Committee that the new notifications of Indonesia, document
G/ADP/N/1/IDN/2/Supplement 1, Latvia, document  G/ADP/N/1/LVA/1, and the United States,
documents G/ADP/N/1/USA/1/Supplements 4 and 5, would be on the agenda of the meeting in
October 1999.  The Secretariat would inform Members of additional new notifications to beconsidered at that meeting in mid-September 1999.  The deadline for submission of questions
regarding new notifications of legislation for the October 1999 meeting would be 7 October 1999.
13. The Chairman noted that, in order for a previously reviewed notification of legislation to
appear on the agenda of the Committee's regular meeting in October 1999, questions had to be
submitted to the Secretariat, and to the Member whose notification was in question, no later than16 September 1999.  The Chairman hoped that this advance warning would help Members in
scheduling their internal work programmes.G/ADP/M/14
Page 4
B. SEMI-ANNUAL REPORTS OF ANTI-DUMPING ACTIONS
14. The Chairman recalled that a request for the semi-annual report for the second half of 1998, to
be submitted by 26 February 1999, was circulated to the Members in G/ADP/N/47, dated
5 January 1999.  He noted that there had been some improvement in the submission of semi-annualreports.  While a number of semi-annual reports that were received late, the degree of lateness was
less than it had been in the past.  Members were well aware of the applicable deadlines for submission
of semi-annual reports – semi-annual reports are always  due at the end of February for the period July
through December of the previous year, and at th e end of August for the period January through June
of the current year.  There was simply no reason that this routine task could not be routinely attended
to by Members, and their semi-annual reports submitted in a timely fashion.
15. Members who had submitted semi-annual reports were identified in paragraph 1 of document
G/ADP/N/47 Addendum 1, dated 20 April 1999. To the extent possible, the semi-annual reports had
been translated and circulated to the Committee, an d were included in the documents made available
for the meeting.
16. In addition to the 26 Members who submitted semi-annual reports, 25 Members, listed in
paragraph 2 of document G/ADP/N/47 Addendum 1, notified the Committee that they did not takeany anti-dumping actions during the period in question.  With respect to notifications of no action,
there was no good explanation for some Members' failure to make this notification in a timely fashion.
All that was required if a Member took no action during a given period was a one sentence letter
stating that fact sent to the Chairman or the Secretary of the Committee before the end of February,
and another such letter before the end of August.  Particularly for Members who did not conduct anti-dumping investigations, it seemed that this should be a relatively simple task.
17. While there had been an improvement in compliance, there remained a significant number of
Members who had not responded to the request for semi-annual reports, and had therefore failed to
comply with this important requirement set forth in Article 16.4 of the Agreement. These Members
were identified document G/ADP/N/47 addendum 1 at paragraph 3.
18. The delegate of Colombia noted that Australia's notification indicated that provisional
measures were imposed against synthetic fibre from Colombia, with a 23 percent dumping margin.
Colombia was concerned with the calculation of the dumping margin and more specifically with
respect to adjustments on the sales prices for some of the product.  Some adjustments were made on
account of an alleged export subsidy and duty drawback.  The delegate of Colombia asked what
programmes were the basis for such adjustments.  Also, whether Australia, with respect to the alleged
export subsidy, took into account that Colombia's export incentives reflect mostly a duty drawbackscheme.  Moreover, an adjustment was made for an alleged difference of interest rates between the
internal market and the export market.  Colombia indicated that in Colombia there was no
discrimination on the basis of beneficiaries regarding interest rates.  Accordingly, Colombia wanted to
know what were the interest rates that were taken into account in the adjustments that were made by
Australia.  Colombia indicated that it had provided Australia with detailed questions on these issues aswell as the concept of "differences in the levels of trade" for which Australia also performed
adjustments.
19. The delegate of Australia asked the delegate of Colombia to provide written questions on the
issues of concern, in order to be able to respond to them.  The delegate of Australia noted that this
matter was subject to an appeal before the Trade Measures Review Officer, which appeal should beconcluded within the next four monthsG/ADP/M/14
Page 5
20. The delegate of Mexico noted that Panama's semi-annual report did not include certain dates,
and therefore Mexico did not have a clear idea of the status of the investigation of sugar for human
consumption.  Mexico asked Panama to provide more information in this regard.
21. The delegate of Mexico observed that there was no semi-annual report from Ecuador.  He
noted that at the Committee's meeting in October 1998 he had commented on the absence of dates
concerning Ecuador’s investigation of cement from Mexico.
22. The delegate of Mexico reminded Members that Mexico had submitted written questions to
Ecuador and to Panama, concerning the investigations of Mexican exports of Portland cement to
Ecuador, and of sugar to Panama, but had not yet received answers.  He urged the delegations of
Ecuador and Panama to provide the information requested as soon as possible.
23. The Committee took note  of the statements made.
C. NOTIFICATIONS OF PRELIMINARY AND FINAL ANTI-DUMPING ACTIONS
24. The Chairman noted that lists of the notifications of preliminary and final anti-dumping
actions received by the Committee were circulat ed to Members in documents G/ADP/N/45, 46, 48,
49, and 50.  Preliminary and final anti-dumping actions were notified by Argentina, Australia,
Canada, the European Communities, Israel, Korea, Malaysia, Mexico, Nicaragua, and the United
States
25. As with other notification requirements, there appe ared to be a lack of full compliance in this
area, as some Members who had submitted semi-annual reports indicating actions in progress had not
submitted reports of preliminary or final actions taken.  The Chairman reminded Members an
important aspect of the Committee's task was its role in monitoring and discussing actions taken by
Members.  If Members did not take their obligations to notify seriously and comply, the Committeewould be prevented from accomplishing its goal of considering Members' compliance with the
requirements of the Agreement.
26. The Committee took note
 of the statements made.
D. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT ON THE MEETING OF THE AD HOC GROUP ON
IMPLEMENTATION.
27. The Chairman reported that the Ad Hoc Group met on 26-27April 1999.  At that meeting, in
addition to considering two draft recommendations and several other of the topics before the Group,
the Group had decided to set aside for the time being most of the topics it had been considering since
October 1996, and decided on a number of new topics it believed would be appropriate for referral to
the Group by the Committee.
28. With respect to those topics the Group agreed should be set aside for the time being, the
Chairman noted that, as discussed in the Group, these topics had not been eliminated as a subject ofdiscussion.  If any Member had ideas or wished to initiate discussion of any of these set-aside topics,
they might do so simply by submitting, within the applicable deadlines, a paper on the topic for
consideration at the next meeting of the Group.  The agenda of each meeting of the Ad Hoc Group
would include all those topics on which the Secretariat had received, by the applicable deadline, new
papers from any Member.G/ADP/M/14
Page 6
29. That said, the topics which the Group considered could be set aside from active consideration
at this time were:
• Topic 1 – treatment of confidential information.
• Topic 3 - Sampling method under Article 6.10.
• Topics 4 - “special circumstances” in Article 5.6.
• Topics 5 - notification of exporting Member.
• Topic 6 – Hearings.
• Topic 7 - disclosure of essential facts.
• Topic 8 - Public notices.
• Topic 10 - Duty assessment under Article 9.
30. Turning to the new topics the Group considered appropriate for referral to it for discussion by
the Committee, the Chairman noted that the description of the topics was a shorthand reference –
Members should consult the actual suggestions as set forth in document G/ADP/W/407 revision 2 andthe discussion in the Group in determining the scope of the topics.
• Practical issues and experience 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.
• Practical issues and experience in conducting "new shipper" reviews under Article 9.5.
31. The Chairman proposed that the Committee agree to refer these topics to the Ad Hoc Group
on Implementation for discussion and the possible development of an agreed understanding or
recommendation on implementation for consideration by the Committee.
32. The Committee so decided
33. The Group had scheduled its next meeting for the last week of October 1999, in conjunction
with the regular spring meeting of the Committee.  The deadline for submissions for that meeting
Monday, 13 September 1999.
34. The Chairman noted that he continued to be encouraged by the presence of experts from
capitals at the meeting of the Ad Hoc Group, who br ing the necessary technical knowledge of their
own practices to the discussions, thereby making them more substantive and useful for all Members.
He strongly encouraged Members, if at all possibl e, to bring technical experts from capitals to future
meetings of the Group.  The Ad Hoc Group had had a fruitful meeting this time, and made significantG/ADP/M/14
Page 7
progress toward its goal of developing recommendations to present to the Committee.  As the
Committee had decided on a group of new topics to be referred to the Group for its consideration, the
Secretariat would issue a reminder to Members of those topics, so that they could begin preparing
submissions.  The Chairman hoped and believed that the new topics of discussion would generate
useful discussions and an exchange of information among Members that would greatly contribute toeach others' understanding of practice and implementation in the anti-dumping area.
E. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT ON MEETING OF INFORMAL GROUP ON ANTI-
CIRCUMVENTION.
35. The Chairman noted that the Informal Group on Anti-Circumvention met on 28 April 1999.
Members discussed the papers submitted with interest, and numerous points were made.  The
Informal Group had agreed to meet again on Wednesday, 27 October 1999, to continue its discussions
on the first topic for discussion under the agreed framework.  He hoped that as experience continuedwith the Informal Group, more Members would participate by submitting papers on the items for
discussion, and in the discussions themselves.  In this respect, he repeated concerns that he had raised
at the meeting about the late submission of papers  for the Informal Group.  Submission of substantive
papers on such a complex and sensitive topic only a few days before the meeting severely limited the
ability of Members, and especially their capital-based experts, to prepare for a meaningful discussion.Therefore, he strongly urged Members in the future to prepare and submit their papers as early as
possible. He hoped that the Group's future meetings would be useful in helping the Committee
accomplish the task set by the Ministerial Decision on Anti-Circumvention.
36. The Committee took note
 of the Chairman’s statement.
F. OTHER BUSINESS
(i) Indonesia – Anti-dumping action on tin plate
37. The delegate of Australia noted that Indonesia's investigating authorities had, on 6 April 1999,
published a definitive disclosure document in an investigation concerning to tin plate from Australia.
Australia’s concerns had been raised with respect to the verification process, and obligations under
Article 6 and Annex I.  The Australian exporters provided a range of rebates and discounts todomestic customers, which had been triggered by quantity or other selling targets.  The investigating
authorities had nominated the calendar year 1997 as the investigation period.  The exporters in
responses to the questionnaire supplied comprehensive data relevant to domestic selling prices and
marketing arrangements throughout this investigation period, including details as to rebate and
discounts arrangements.  During the verification, Indonesia’s investigating authorities focused
specifically on a three month period and requested additional documentation relating to domestic and
exports sold within this narrow period.  The additional documentation was submitted by the exporterswithin the time-frame.  Domestic sales during this time period were subject to the exporters' rebate
and discount arrangements.  However, as many of the rebates would not be paid or credited within the
three month period, the investigating authority declined to make any adjustment to the normal value
determined for the entire investigation period.  Australia was concerned that the period to make
adjustments for the verifiable rebate and discount arrangements would not be suitable for thecomparison to be made between the normal value and the export price.  The delegate of Australia
understood that these concerns had been refered by the exporters directly to the Indonesia’s
investigating authorities, who were in the process of concluding the investigation.
38. The delegate of Indonesia responded that he would refer Australia’s questions to his
Government.
39. The Committee took note  of the statements madeG/ADP/M/14
Page 8
G. DATE OF NEXT REGULAR MEETING
40. The Chairman reminded that the Committee had agreed at its meeting of 21 February 1995
that regular meetings normally would be held in the last week of April and the last week of October.
Accordingly, the next regular meeting of the Committee would be held in the week of25 October 1999.  In light of previously scheduled meetings of the Ad Hoc Group on Implementation
and the Informal Group on Anti-Circumvention, the Committee would therefore meet on Thursday
and Friday, 28-29 October 1999.
H. ELECTION OF OFFICERS
41. The Committee elected Mr. Milan Hovorka of the Czech Republic as Chairman, and
Mr. Roberto Azevedo of Brazil as Vice Chairman, of the Committee.
42. The meeting was adjourned.
__________