 
. /.  WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  TN/RL/GEN/2 
14 July 2004 
 (04-3021) 
Negotiating Group on Rules Original:   English 
  
 
PRICE UNDERTAKINGS
1 
 
Communication from Brazil;  Chile;  Colomb ia;  Costa Rica;  Hong Kong, China ;   
Japan;  Korea, Republic of;  Norway;  Switzerland;  Separate Customs  
Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu;  and Thailand  
 
 The following communication, dated 7 April 2004, is being circulated at the request of the Delegations of Brazil; Chile; Colombia;  Costa Rica;  Hong Kong, China;  Japan;  Korea, Republic of;  
Norway;  Switzerland;  Separate Customs Territo ry of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu;  and 
Thailand. 
 
 The submitting delegations have requested that this paper, which was submitted to the Rules 
Negotiating Group as an informal document (JOB(04)/41 and Rev.1*), also be circulated as a formal 
document.  
_______________ 
 
 
Basic Principle: 
 
• Allow exporters to manage their regular business  without the imposition of anti-dumping 
duties, while at the same time protecting the domestic industry  from the injurious effects of 
dumping.  
 
• There must be clearly defined terms and procedures  for the price undertaking that provide 
meaningful opportunities for exporters to offer, through a price undertaking, the removal of the 
injury caused by dumping.  
 
Problem with the current AD Agreement: 
 
• Article 8 currently provides few guidelines on term s and procedures relating to price undertaking.  
It also leaves authorities a wide level of discretion to refuse offers of price undertakings. 
 
Proposal for Amendment: 
 1. Clarify that the authorities in the importing country cannot require all exporters, the majority 
of exporters or a specific proportion of the exporte rs to offer price undertakings as a condition for the 
acceptance of price undertaking offers fro m one or a limited number of exporters.  
 
                                                     
 
1This issue has been referred to by Members in  documents TN/RL/W/10, TN/RL/W/26, TN/RL/W/31, 
TN/RL/W/47, TN/RL/W/66 TN /RL/W/81, TN/RL/W/99, TN /RL/W/118, TN/RL/W/144. 
*In English only. TN/RL/GEN/2 
Page 2  
 
 2.  Require authorities to provide, in a public notice, the criteria and reasons for non-acceptance 
of a price undertaking offer, and to permit, before a final decision is taken and within the time-limits 
of the investigation, comments from the exporter offering the price undertaking.  
 As regard Article 8.3, this sets out certai n grounds for rejection of price undertakings, 
including reasons of “impracticability” and “other re asons”.  In our view, it is necessary to minimize 
the wide level of discretion and ambiguity c ontained in this provision.  This includes , inter alia , to 
clarify that the existence of a large number of expor ters in itself is not a valid reason for rejection, 
except in clearly defined exceptiona l circumstances, including when compliance cannot be monitored.  
Furthermore, the general policy reasons set out in  Article 8.3 does not constitute an acceptable reason 
for rejection of offers of price undertakings.  
 
3. Clarify that price undertaking offers shall be  accepted if they offset injury caused by dumping 
and comply with the procedures and other conditions necessary for the implementation of the price 
undertaking. This proposal should be seen in the context of the proposal on “Lesser Duty”. 
 4.  Clarify that authorities, prior to the preliminary determination of injury and dumping, shall inform exporters of their right to offer pri ce undertakings as well as make known to them the 
applicable rules and procedures to be followed in  requesting consideration of price undertakings, 
including any procedural deadlines.  
 
5.  Clarify that exporters have the right to requ est an adjustment of the price undertaking if there 
are changes in circumstances, incl uding situation where domestic market price falls below the level 
stipulated in the price undertaking.  
 
6.  Clarify that price undertakings should be implemented in good faith and in a predictable 
manner, and that they should not be terminated merely because of minor non-compliance of procedural requirements, provided the substantive commitments are respected.  
__________ 
 
  