RESTRICTEDWORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONG/SCM/W/497
25 February 2002
(02-0945)
Committee on Subsidies
and Countervailing MeasuresOriginal:  English
IMPLEMENTATION-RELATED ISSUES REFERRED TO THE
COMMITTEE BY MINISTERS
Review by the SCM Committee of the Provisions of the Agreement on Subsidies
and Countervailing Measures Regarding Countervailing Duty Investigations
Communication from Japan
The following communication, dated 22 February 2002, has been received from the
Permanent Mission of Japan.
_______________
Comments and Questions from Japan to Brazi1l and India2
Japan submits the following comments and questions seeking clarification of certain aspects
of the Brazilian and Indian proposals.  Japan reserves its right for further questions.  These comments
and questions are without prejudice to whether Ja pan endorses any conclusions which may be drawn
in relation to the review of countervailing duty investigations.
Topic 2:  Facts Available
• Introduce provisions on use of "facts available" such as those in Annex II of the AD Agreement
(Brazil).
1. Comments
Japan understands that this proposal intends that the use of "facts available" should be more
exceptionally permitted.  Japan shares Brazil's intent that the use of "facts available" should be
qualified as the exceptional resort.  In addition, Japan appreciates that this proposal considers the
harmonization of the provisions of countervailing duty investigation with those of anti-dumping dutyinvestigation.
• Clarify that all verifiable and timely submitted information should be taken into account, and that
if a portion of information is not verifiable or timely submitted, facts available may be used forthat portion of the information (India).
                                                     
1 G/SCM/W/464
2 G/SCM/W/462G/SCM/W/497
Page 2
2. Comments and question
Japan understands that this proposal intends that the use of "facts available" should be more
exceptionally permitted.  Japan shares India's intent that the use of "facts available" should be
qualified as the exceptional resort.
India states that "all verifiable and timely submitted information should  be taken into
account" (emphasis added).  Could India please explain in which meaning, mandatory or exhortatory,
the word "should" is used?
Topic 4:  Review Procedures
• Introduce provision for assessment of degree of support for review requests (Brazil).
• Introduce provision for notification of Members w hose products are subject to review (Brazil).
• Introduce provision for prior consultation with affected Members before initiating a review, and
during its course (Brazil).
3. Comment
Japan shares Brazil's intent that the review procedures under Article 21 should comply with
the same procedural discipline that the investigation procedures under Article 11 comply with.
• Introduce detail in Article 19.3 concerning expedited review of new exporters (Brazil).
4. Question
Could Brazil please provide concrete examples which Brazil conceives disadvantageous in
implementing the present provision of the ASCM?
• Review needed for continued imposition of measure upon submission of positive information
concerning procedural mistake or manifest error of appreciation by authorities (India).
5. Comment and question
Japan shares India's intent that the discipline should be enforced to ensure further objectivity
of the review procedures.
Could India please provide concrete examples which India conceives disadvantageous in
implementing the present provision of the ASCM?
• Clarify Article 21.2 to provide for automatic adjustment of countervailing duties for schemes
withdrawn (India).
6. Question
Could India please provide concrete examples which India conceives disadvantageous in
implementing the present provision of the ASCM?G/SCM/W/497
Page 3
Topic 5:  Definition of domestic industry and injury analysis
• Clarify "Major proportion of the total domestic production", and clarify whether defining
domestic industry as those who supported the petition cannot be construed as impermissibleinterpretation of the major proportion requirement (India).
7. Comment
Japan shares India's intent that the term "domestic industry" should be more clarified.
• In determining likeness of products, account should be taken of differentiated nature of products
even where they have closely resembling characteristics, inter alia, through consideration of pricecomparison, substitutability and whether in direct competition (India).
8. Comment
Japan shares India's intent that the term "like products" ("produits similaire") in footnote 46 of
the ASCM should be more clarified.
__________