   
  
G/ADP/Q1/USA/33  
G/SCM/Q1/USA/33  
 
4 April 2022 
(22-2704) Page: 1/2 
Committee on Anti -Dumping Practices  
Committee in Subsidies and Countervailing Measures  Original: English  
 
  
NOTIFICATION OF LAWS AND REGULATIONS UNDER  
ARTICLES 18.5 AND 32.6 OF THE AGREEMENTS  
QUESTION S POSED BY CHINA  
REGARDING THE NOTIFICATION OF THE UNITED STATES1 
The following communication , dated and received on 4 April 2022, is being circulated at the request 
of the delegation of China.  
 
_______________  
 
 
China thanks the United States for its notifications regarding its regulations to improve 
administration and enforcement of anti -dumping and countervailing duty laws 
(G/ADP/N/1/USA/1/ Suppl.31 - G/SCM/N/1/USA/1/Suppl.32), and poses the following questions:  
Question 1  
The new regulation makes bona fide sales a prerequisite of applying for new shipper  review under  
351.214(b)(1), and lists the specific requirements under 351.24(k).  
a) How could the new shippers who did not participate in previous proceedings and suffer the 
very high punitive rate meet the bona fide requirement?  
b) Does the requirement of bona fide sales have only paper value rather than real commercial 
value? Ho w does the United States evaluate bona fide sales in real business scenario when 
there is very high rate?  
c) How does the United State reconcile its regulation with the WTO obligation so as not to 
impose extra burden to the exporters that should be entitled t he new shipper status under 
the WTO rules?  
Question 2  
The new regulation requires an interested party, when applying for scope inquiry, to have a product 
which is or has been in actual production by the time of the filing of the application under section 
351.225 (c). 
Please clarify whether a company, having finished designing a new product and having the sample 
of such product at hand, qualify for the application of scope inquiry. How does the United States 
define the term "is or has been in actual productio n"? 
Question 3  
The new regulation lays out the time point for the suspension of liquidation and commencement for 
the collection of cash deposit of estimated AD and/or CVD duties in scope ruling and 
 
1 G/ADP/N/1/USA/1/Suppl.31 - G/SCM/N/1/USA/1/Suppl.32  G/ADP/Q1/USA/33 • G/SCM/Q1/USA/33  
 
- 2 - 
 
  anti-circumvention investigation respectively under sectio n 351.225(l)(2)  and 351.226(l)(2) and 
authorizes the investigating authority to collect cash deposit retrospectively.  
a) Please explain whether the retrospective collection of cash deposit prior to the initiation of 
the scope inquiry or the anti -circumvention  investigation is inconsistent with the domestic 
court ruling of the United States in the case TRANS TEXAS TIRE, LLC and ZHEJIANG JINGU 
COMPANY v. UNITED STATES . 
b) Please explain how could the exporters who reasonably believed their products to be outside 
of the scope of the order to avoid ultimately paying for the punitive country -wide rate only 
because they had no chance to apply for a separate rate as if they had participated in the 
original AD or CVD investigation at the beginning.  
Question 4  
The new regulation delegates the USDOC to initiate anti -circumvention investigation at request 
under section 351.226, but does not require for the standing of the request, domestic support or 
the size of this applicant.  
Please explain the consideration and r ationale of why the initiation of anti -circumvention does not 
require domestic support as it does for the initiation of AD and CVD investigation.  
Question 5  
The new regulation may apply the determination on a country -wide basis to all products from the 
same country regardless of producers, exporters or importers.  
a) Please explain the rationale of sampling in anti -circumvention cases and clarify the legal 
consequences for those companies that didn't circumvent the AD or CVD order but are not 
selected as man datory respondent.  
b) How would the USDOC determine whether the rest of the companies in the investigated 
country had actually circumvented or not when one of the two selected respondents found 
to be circumventing and the other one not.  
c) Please clarify the leg al consequences for the companies found to be circumventing. Shall 
they pay the cash deposit determined in the original investigation? Which rates will be 
applied for them?  
Question 6  
The new regulation lays out the procedure for covered merchandise referrals, authoring the U nited 
States' Customs to refer any unresolved covered merchandise issue to the USDOC  to make a 
determination under section 351.227.  
a) Please clarify whether it is the discretion of the US Customs to initiate scope inquir y and 
determine the scope order on its own.  
b) When an interested party does not agree with the determination made by the US Customs, 
will it be given a chance to request the US Customs to refer the issue to USDOC?  
c) Where will the United States publish all the  case tables regarding EAPA cases ？Will the case 
information be  published online, for example, in ACCESS system or EDIS  system, so as to 
enable the interested parties and their legal representatives to be informed of the latest 
progress and information?  
__________  