140 likes | 303 Views
Some Trade Remedy Issues in the WTO Dispute Settlement and Trade Negotiations. Mitsuo Matsushita. Recent Trend of Antidumping Actions. Proliferation of antidumping legislation Antidumping as a double-edged sword. 2. Anti-circumvention measures. Types of circumvention
E N D
Some Trade Remedy Issues in the WTO Dispute Settlement and Trade Negotiations Mitsuo Matsushita
Recent Trend of Antidumping Actions • Proliferation of antidumping legislation • Antidumping as a double-edged sword
2. Anti-circumvention measures • Types of circumvention • Modification of product • Importing country circumvention • Third country circumvention • Country hopping
Negotiation on anti-circumvention measures • Dunckel Draft • Practices of WTO Members • One interpretation->anti-circumvention measures are allowed. (U.S., EC etc) • Another interpretation->anti-circumvention is not allowed. (Japan) • What has happened in the Antidumping Committee after the UR ?
4. What are the major problems of anti-circumvention ? • Screw driver operations • Chilling effect on remodeling and upgrading products • Chilling effect on foreign direct investment
5. Sunset Clause • Article 11.3 of the AD Agreement-5 year period • U.S. practices – about one half of outstanding antidumping actions do not expire after 5 years. • Japan v. U.S.- Panel and AB decisions • Japanese proposal at the Antidumping Committee
6. Zeroing • What is zeroing? • Zeroing prohibited by the EC-Bed Linen Case • Subsequent cases • Japan v. U.S. in zeroing disputes-panel and AB reports • Proposals for amending the AD Agreement on zeroing
Automatic Extension of Antidumping Measures • Mostly EC problems • 1995 entry into EC of three countries • 2004 entry into EC of 10 countries • Legal questions of automatic extension of AD duties with respect to new members • Investigation before imposition of AD duties ? • Article XXIV:5 of the GATT requires that trade restrictions after the formation of a customs union should not be higher than before the formation. Is an automatic extension a violation of this provision? • So far this issue has been discussed in bilateral trade negotiations • Is a multilateral approach necessary ?
8. Subsidy Issues • “Serious prejudice” in the SCM Agreement Art. 6.1 and non-actionable subsidies in Art. 8 and Art. 9 lapsed in 1999 due to lack of consensus between developed and developing countries. • “Environment” is becoming an important issue and, in light of this, non-actionable subsidy on environment and basic R&D should be restored.
9. Major Subsidy Disputes • Trend of cases – 1995-2005, total 112 cases in which SCM measures were applied • U.S. shares close to half (45 cases) • EC shares about 1/5 (23 cases) • Canada share less than 1/10 (10 cases) • Others: Mexico (8 cases), Brazil (6 case) and Japan (1 case)
10. Major Cases • Hinix Case (Korea v. U.S./EC/Japan) • Korea Shipbuilding Case (EC v. Korea, Korea v. EC) • Civil Aircraft Case (U.S. v. EC) • Lumber Case (Canada v. U.S.) • U.S. Cotton Case (Brazil v. U.S.) • U.S. FSC Case (EC v. U.S.)
11. Subsidy in Fishery • Two opposing positions • U.S., N.Z and Chile (Fish Friends) maintain that subsidy in fishery should be prohibited. • EC, Japan, Korea and Taiwan maintain that total prohibition of subsidy in fishery goes beyond Doha Mandates • Basic issues – (a) Are fish being depleted, (b) Does total prohibition prohibits subsidy to improve ?
12. Safeguards • Background of the SG Agreement • VER in 1970s and 80s and selective safeguard issues • VER was abolished as of the time of inauguration of the WTO • SG Agreement somewhat eased the requirement (quota modulation and prohibition of countermeasure if SG is based on absolute increase of quantity) • Trend of safeguards since 1995 – more use by WTO Members • Between 1995 and 2006, in the total 155 cases, SG investigation was initiated. • In the same period, there were 76 cases in which SG measures were applied. • Between 1985 and 1994, total number of cases in which SG measures were applied was 26.
13. Some Issues of Safeguards • Can a WTO member which is a member of FTA/RTA exclude other participants of the FTA or RTA from its SG measures while applying them on WTO Members that are not members of the FTA or RTA? • NAFTA and MERCOSUL state that its member exempt other members from its SG measures when that member invokes SG measures vis-à-vis outsiders. • Some AB decisions on this issue, i.e., U.S. Gluten Case, U.S. Line Pipe Case, U.S. Steel Case and Argentina/Footwear Case • So far, panels and AB have dealt with this issue as that of “parallelism”. • A systemic issue of whether or not an internal non-application of SG measures while applying them to outside parties remains unsettled.