Anti-dumping, subsidies, safeguards

Le 31 janvier 2012 l’OMC a publié le rapport du Groupe spécial qui avait examiné les plaintes déposées par le Costa Rica El Salvador le Guatemala et le Honduras concernant l’affaire République dominicaine — Mesures de sauvegarde visant les importations de sacs en polypropylène et de tissu tubulaire (DS415 DS416 DS417 et DS418).

Le 23 décembre 1999 l’OMC a publié le rapport du Groupe spécial dans l’affaire “États-Unis - Imposition de droits compensateurs sur certains produits en acier au carbone plomb et bismuth laminés à chaud originaires du Royaume-Uni”.

On 30 August 2017 the WTO issued the panel reports in the cases brought by the European Union and Japan in “Brazil - Certain Measures Concerning Taxation And Charges”.

On 30 January 2002 Japan requested consultations with the United States in respect of the final determinations of both the United States Department of Commerce (DOC) and the United States International Trade Commission in the full sunset review of the anti-dumping duties imposed on imports of corrosion-resistant carbon steel flat products from Japan. These determinations were issued on 2 August 2000 and 21 November 2000 respectively. Japan claimed that these determinations were erroneous and based on deficient rulings procedures and provisions pertaining to the United States Tariff Act of 1930 as amended (“the Act”) and related regulations. Japan further claimed that the procedures and provisions of the Act and related regulations as well as the above determinations were inconsistent with inter alia Articles VI and X of GATT 1994; Articles 2 3 5 6 (including Annex II) 11 12 and 18.4 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement; and Article XVI:4 of the WTO Agreement.

Le 21 décembre 2000 l’OMC a publié le rapport du Groupe spécial dans l’affaire “États-Unis - Mesure de sauvegarde à l’importation de viande d’agneau fraîche réfrigérée ou congelée en provenance de Nouvelle-Zélande”.

On 8 May 1998 the US requested consultations with Mexico in respect of an anti-dumping investigation of high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS) grades 42 and 55 from the US conducted by Mexico. The US alleged that on 27 February 1997 the Government of Mexico published a notice initiating this anti-dumping investigation on the basis of an application dated 14 January 1997 from the Mexican National Chamber of Sugar and Alcohol Producers. The US further alleged that on 23 January 1998 Mexico issued a notice of final determination of dumping and injury in that investigation and consequently imposed definitive anti-dumping measures on these imports from the United States. The US contended that the manner in which the application for an anti-dumping investigation was made as well as the manner in which a determination of threat of injury was made is inconsistent with Articles 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 10 and 12 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement.

On 6 November 2000 Turkey requested consultations with Egypt concerning an anti-dumping investigation by the Egyptian Ministry of Trade and Supply with respect to imports of rebar from Turkey. The investigation was completed and the final report released on 21 October 1999. As a result of the investigation anti-dumping duties were imposed ranging from 22.63-61.00 per cent ad valorem. Turkey considered that: Egypt made determinations of injury and dumping in that investigation without a proper establishment of the facts and based on an evaluation of the facts that was neither unbiased nor objective; during the investigation of material injury or threat thereof and the causal link Egypt acted inconsistently with Articles 3.1 3.2 3.4 3.5 6.1 and 6.2 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement; and during the investigation of sales at less than normal value Egypt violated Article X:3 of the GATT 1994 as well as Articles 2.2 2.4 6.1 6.2 6.6 6.7 and 6.8 and Annex II Paragraphs 1 3 5 6 and 7 and Annex I Paragraph 7 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement.

On 19 September 2008 China requested consultations concerning the definitive anti-dumping and countervailing duties imposed by the United States pursuant to the final anti-dumping and countervailing duty determinations and orders issued by the US Department of Commerce in several investigations. China considers that these measures which include the conduct of the underlying anti-dumping and countervailing duty investigations are inconsistent with the obligations of the United States under inter alia Articles I and VI of the GATT 1994 Articles 1 2 10 12 13 14 19 and 32 of the SCM Agreement Articles 1 2 6 9 and 18 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement and Article 15 of the Protocol on the Accession of the People's Republic of China (the Protocol of Accession).

Le 16 janvier 2003 l’Organe d’appel a publié son rapport sur l’affaire “États-Unis - Loi de 2000 sur la compensation pour continuation du dumping et maintien de la subvention”.

On 20 December 2002 Canada requested consultations with the United States regarding the investigation of the USITC in Softwood Lumber from Canada (Invs. Nos. 701-TA-414 and 731-TA-928 (Final)) and the final definitive anti-dumping and countervailing duties applied as a result of the USITC’s final determination made on 2 May 2002 notice of which was published in the United States Federal Register on 22 May 2002 (Volume 67 Number 99 at pp. 36022-36023) that an industry in the United States is threatened with material injury by reason of imports of softwood lumber from Canada that the Department of Commerce has determined are subsidized and sold in the United States at less than fair value. Canada claimed that through these measures the United States has violated its obligations under Article VI:6(a) of the GATT 1994 Articles 1 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.7 3.8 12 and 18.1 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement and Articles 10 15.1 15.2 15.3 15.4 15.5 15.7 15.8 22 and 32.1 of the SCM Agreement.