RESTRICTED
WORLD TRADE G/ADP/W/280
G/SCM/W/290
ORGANIZATION 2February 1996
(96-0407)
Original: English Committee onAnti-Dumping Practices
Committee onSubsidies andCountervailing Measures
REPLIES TOQUESTIONS POSED BYCANADA1
CONCERNING THE NOTIFICATION OFLAWS AND
REGULATIONS OFBRAZIL2
Thefollowing communication, dated 23January 1996, hasbeenreceived fromthePermanent
Mission ofBrazil.
_______________
1. Totheextent thatthecovered agreements areintended tobeincluded andtoapply to
investigations andprevail overanycontrary ordifferent provisions contained inprevious laws,
canBrazil identify thespecific parts ofitsexisting legislation thatwillcontinue toapply to
investigations, thespecific articles thatwillchange andhowexactly these articles aretobe
changed?
A. TheDecrees which incorporated theTokyo Round codes (Legislative Decrees Nos. 20and
22,dated 5December 1986, promulgated byDecrees No.93941, dated 16January 1987, and93962,
dated 22January 1987) andtheirregulations (CPA Resolution 00-1227, dated 14August 1987) will
remain inforce during thetransition period, andwillbeapplied onlytotheinvestigations andthe
revisionsinitiatedfrompetitionspresentedbefore31December1994,thedateinwhichDecreeNo.1355
(dated 30December 1994), which incorporated theWTO Agreements intotheBrazilian legislation,
entered intoforce.
InwhatconcernstheUruguayRoundAgreements,complianceisguaranteedbytheincorporation
totheBrazilian legislation oftheAgreement ontheImplementation ofArticle VIofGATT 1994 and
theAgreementonSubsidiesandCountervailingMeasures,whichwasmadethroughDecreeNo.1355/94.
Inwhat concerns theregulation ("implementing legislation") ofbothAgreements, ithasbeenmade
through Decree No.1602, dated 23August 1995, relative toanti-dumping measures, andDecree 1751,
dated 19December 1995, relative tocountervailing measures. Bothregulations willbenotified to
thepertinent Committees assoonastheyaretranslated intooneoftheofficial WTO languages.
2. Could Brazil clarify whether theAgreements willbethelawofgeneral application and,in
1G/ADP/W/102-G/SCM/W/111
2G/ADP/N/1/BRA/1-G/SCM/N/1/BRA/1G/ADP/W/280
G/SCM/W/290
Page2
theevent ofconflict, willsupersede anyother Brazilian laws thatmayconflict withthe
Agreements?
A. Having beenincorporated intotheBrazilian legalsystem bymeans ofaPresidential Decree
(Decree No.1355, dated 30December 1994), theWTO Agreements havethesame hierarchical level
aslaws, andaresubordinate onlytotheFederal Constitution. TheDecree No.1355/94 promulgated
theLegislative Decree No.30/94, dated 15December 1994, which approved theWTO Agreements.
Assuch, ithasadistinct character fromothersubsequent legalinstruments (decrees, ministerial orders),
having precedence overthem.
Incaseofconflict between Decree No.1355/94 andother lawsofthesame hierarchical level,
itistotheJudiciary Branch todecide onmatters ofprecedence.
3. Isthereanymeans bywhich domestic interests could useBrazilian laws(such asaconstitutional
challenge) toprevent theGovernment fromimplementing aDSBpanel decision?
A. EventhoughtheFederalConstitutionhasprecedenceoverallotherlaws,itisdifficulttoconceive
ofasituation where theConstitution could beusedtoprevent theimplementation ofaDSB panel
decision. Inthepast,theresults ofpanel reports were implemented without anyquestioning ofthe
interested parties.
4. Does theBrazilian Government intend toimplement allofthechanges (referred tointhe
Appendix) viaitsdraftlawtopermit administrative changes? Could theBrazilian Government
advise whentheregulations topermit administrative changes totheCommittee willbenotified?
A. Seesecond partofanswer toquestion 1.
5. Willanyofthenewobligations (referred tointheAppendix) beimplemented through regulation
oradministrative practices?
A. Thenewregulations aswellasDecree No.1355/94 guarantee compliance withthenew
obligations.
6. What isthelegal mechanism inBrazilian lawfortheimplementation ofdecisions rendered
byaWTO panel?
A. Nospecific provision hasbeenmade, intheregulation oftheAgreements, inwhatconcerns
theimplementation oftheresults ofWTO panel reports apartfromwhatiscontained intheAgreements
and,inconsequence, inDecree No.1355/94.
Specific Questions Regarding Legislation Submitted 5April 1995
1. According toArticle 2ofProvisional Measure 926,Brazilian authorities mayapply provisional
measures afterhaving conducted apreliminary analysis. Could theBrazilian delegate please
clarify ifBrazil intends preliminary analysis tohavethesame meaning astheWTO wording
preliminary affirmative determination. Forexample, willtheBrazilian authorities firstpublish
anddistribute tointerested parties, apublic statement disclosing theinformation prior tothe
impositionofprovisionaldutiesasrequiredunderArticle12oftheAgreementonImplementation
ofArticle VIoftheGATT 1994?
2. According toArticle 3ofProvisional Measure 926,theSRFoftheBrazilian Ministry ofFinanceG/ADP/W/280
G/SCM/W/290
Page3
mayaccept adeposit inmoney orabankguarantee during theperiod between theapplication
ofprovisional duties andthefinaldecision. Paragraph 1specifies that:
Theguarantee mustensure, inallcases, thesame levelofcorrection forinflation usedforthe
purposes offederal taxes, including interest, starting from thedate provisional duties
wereimposed.
Could theBrazilian delegate please specify whether, intheevent thattheimporter provides
adeposit inmoney andthattheaction iseither terminated orthefinaldetermination indicates
noinjury, willtheBrazilian authorities treattherefund ofthedeposit inasimilar manner (i.e.
correct forinflation andinclude interest)?
3. Article 4ofProvisional Measure 926specifies theprovisions forundertakings, butdoesnot
provide anytimeconstraints fortheacceptance ofsuchundertakings. Article 8.2ofthe
Agreement onImplementation ofArticle VIoftheGATT 1994setsoutthatprice undertakings
shallnotbesought oraccepted untilafterapreliminary affirmative determination ofdumping
andinjury hasbeenmade. Could theBrazilian delegate please indicate where Brazilian anti-
dumping lawssetoutthistimethreshold?
Answers 1,2and3
Inwhatconcerns Provisional Measure 926/95, ithasbeenrepublished asLawNo.9019, dated
30March 1995, without anymodification toitscontent. ThisLawestablished thejuridical nature
oftheanti-dumping duties andofthecountervailing measures, eliminating linkswiththeimport tax,
anddefined theauthorities thatarecompetent toconduct anti-dumping andsubsidies investigations,
aswellasfortheapplication ofmeasures andreceipt ofduties.
Even though Provisional Measure 926/95, republished asLawNo.9019, makes reference to
provisional measures andundertakings, thedefinition ofsuchmeasures aswellastheconditions for
theiradoption aredefined intheregulation oftheAgreements (Decrees 1602/95 and1751/95). We
considerthatthediscussiononpointsconsideredinthe"Specificquestionsregardinglegislationsubmitted
5April 1995" should occur during theexamination ofthenewlegislation.
Questions Regarding Transparency ofProcess
Thesoleparagraph following Article 6ofProvisional Measure 926setsouttheinformation
thatwillbecontained inprovisional andfinalanti-dumping orders.
1. Could theBrazilian delegate indicate whether Brazilian authorities willgivepublic notice of
information regarding apriceundertaking order andwillforward thisinformation tointerested
parties asrequired byArticle 12.2oftheAgreement onImplementation ofArticle VIofthe
GATT 1994?
2. CouldtheBraziliandelegateindicatewhetherpublicnoticeofprovisionalandfinalanti-dumping
orders willbegiven andwhether interested parties willbenotified asrequired byArticle 12.2
oftheAgreement onImplementation ofArticle VIoftheGATT 1994?
3. Could theBrazilian delegate please indicate whether, atthetimeofinitiation ofananti-dumpingG/ADP/W/280
G/SCM/W/290
Page4
investigation, theinvestigating authority willprovide public notice andwillnotify interested
parties oftheinformation specified inArticle 12.1.1 oftheAgreement onImplementation of
Article VIoftheGATT 1994?
Answers 1,2and3
Theanswer tothese questions isyes.Asmentioned inprevious answers, thenewregulation
aswellasDecree No.1355, which made theAgreements anintegral partofBrazilian legislation,
guarantee thetransparency oftheprocess.
Questions Regarding Procedural Fairness
1. CantheBrazilian delegate clarify howitintends toimplement obligations regarding procedural
fairness? Forexample, whatopportunities doauthorities accord interested parties toprepare
andsubmit information?
A. Thenewregulation, aswellasDecree No.1355/94, guarantee fairprocedures. Theinterested
parties havetherighttodefend theirinterests. They canexamine thenon-confidential parts ofthe
investigation information, theycanpresent elements ofproof which theyconsider relevant andask
formeetings during thewhole oftheperiod ofinvestigation. Itshould alsobenoted thatthenew
regulation makes afinalconference withalltheinterested parties anobligatory partoftheinvestigation,
forthepresentation oftheessential factsunder judgement andtheopportunity forcomments thereon.