Panel Reports

On 22 February 2018, the WTO circulated the panel report in the case brought by Japan in “Korea - Import Bans, and Testing and Certification Requirements for Radionuclides".

On 25 January 2018, the WTO circulated the panel report in the case brought by Indonesia in “European Union - Anti-Dumping Measures on Biodiesel from Indonesia”

On 25 May 2012, China requested consultations with the United States concerning the imposition of countervailing duty measures by the United States on certain products from China. China challenges various aspects of certain identified countervailing duty investigations, including their opening, conduct and the preliminary and final determinations that led to the imposition of countervailing duties. China also challenges the “rebuttable presumption” allegedly established and applied by the US Department of Commerce that majority government ownership is sufficient to treat an enterprise as a “public body”.

On 20 September 2011, the United States requested consultations with China concerning China's measures imposing anti-dumping and countervailing duties on broiler products from the United States.

On 6 December 2017, the WTO circulated the panel report in the dispute brought by Indonesia in “United States — Anti-Dumping and Countervailing Measures On Certain Coated Paper From Indonesia

On 14 November 2017, the WTO circulated the panel report in the case brought by Korea in “United States - Anti-Dumping Measures on Certain Oil Country Tubular Goods from Korea”

On 25 April 2017, the WTO issued the panel report in the case brought by Canada in “China - Anti-Dumping Measures on Imports of Cellulose Pulp from Canada".

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 19 December 2014, the European Union requested consultations with the United States with respect to conditional tax incentives established by the State of Washington in relation to the development, manufacture, and sale of large civil aircraft. The European Union alleges that the measures constitute specific subsidies within the meaning of Articles 1 and 2 of the SCM Agreement. The European Union also considers that the measures are prohibited subsidies that are inconsistent with Articles 3.1(b) and 3.2 of the SCM Agreement

On 25 June 2014, Chinese Taipei requested consultations with Canada with respect to the provisional and definitive anti-dumping measures imposed by Canada on imports of certain carbon steel welded pipe (CSWP) originating in, among others, Chinese Taipei. Chinese Taipei claims that the measures are inconsistent with: - Articles 1, 3.1, 3.2, 3.4, 3.5, 3.7, 5.8, 6.8, 6.10, 18 and Annex II of the Anti-Dumping Agreement; - Article VI of the GATT 1994. On 7 November 2014, Chinese Taipei requested further consultations. In addition to the measures listed in the original request for consultations, Chinese Taipei claimed that the measures were also inconsistent with Articles 2.2, 7.1(ii), 7.5, 9.2 and 9.3 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement.

On 8 April 2014, the European Union requested consultations with the Russian Federation concerning certain measures adopted by the Russian Federation affecting the importation of live pigs and their genetic material, pork, pork products and certain other commodities from the European Union, purportedly because of concerns related to cases of African swine fever. The European Union claims that the measures at issue are inconsistent with: - Articles 2.2, 2.3, 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 5.1, 5.2, 5.3, 5.4, 5.5, 5.6, 5.7, 6.1, 6.2, 6.3, 7, 8, Annex B, and Annex C of the SPS Agreement; and - Articles I:1, III:4 and XI:1 of the GATT 1994.

On 3 December 2013, China requested consultations with the United States regarding the use of certain methodologies in anti-dumping investigations involving Chinese products. China claims that the measures mentioned in the request for consultations are inconsistent with: - Articles 2.4.2, 6.1, 6.8, 6.10, 9.2, 9.3, 9.4 and Annex II of the Anti-Dumping Agreement; and - Article VI:2 of the GATT 1994.

On 6 February 2013, the United States requested consultations with India concerning certain measures of India relating to domestic content requirements under the Jawaharlal Nehru National Solar Mission (“NSM”) for solar cells and solar modules.

On 6 October 2004, the United States requested consultations with the Governments of Germany, France, the United Kingdom, and Spain (the “member States”), and with the European Communities (“EC”) concerning measures affecting trade in large civil aircraft.

On 18 June 2013, Panama requested consultations with Colombia with respect to the imposition by Colombia of a compound tariff affecting the importation of textiles, apparel and footwear from Panama. The measure at issue is a compound tariff that Colombia has allegedly imposed by Presidential Decree No. 074 of 23 January 2013 (Decree 074/2013). Panama claims that this measure at issue is contained in: - Decree 074/2013; - Decree 1497/2011 as regards the definition of the products covered by the nomenclature of Chapters 61, 62, 63 and 64 of the Tariff Schedule; and - Memorandum No. 000165 of 30 April 2013 from the Customs Management Department of the Directorate of National Taxes and Customs on “measures to control compliance with Decree 074 of 2013”.

On 12 December 2012, Panama requested consultations with Argentina with respect to certain measures imposed by Argentina that affect trade in goods and services. Panama alleges that various Argentine measures are applied exclusively in respect of certain countries listed in the Regulations to the Income/Profit Tax Law, Decree 1344/98, as amended by Decree 1037/00. Panama claims that the measures are inconsistent with: - Articles II:1, XI, XVI and footnote 8, and XVII of the GATS; and - Articles I:1, III:2, III:4 and XI:1 of the GATT 1994. On 21 December 2012, the European Union requested to join the consultations. On 28 December 2012, the United States requested to join the consultations.

On 31 July 2009, China requested consultations with the European Communities concerning Article 9(5) of Council Regulation (EC) No. 384/96 (the EC's Basic Anti‑Dumping Regulation) which provides that in case of imports from non-market economy countries, the duty shall be specified for the supplying country concerned and not for each supplier and that an individual duty will only be specified for exporters that demonstrate that they fulfil the criteria listed in that provision.

On 12 April 2013, Guatemala requested consultations with Peru with respect to the imposition by Peru of an “additional duty” on imports of certain agricultural products, such as rice, sugar, maize, milk and certain dairy products. Guatemala claims that the measure at issue is inconsistent with: - Article 4.2 and footnote 1 of the Agreement on Agriculture; - Articles II:1(a), II:1(b), X:1, X:3(a), XI and XI:1 of the GATT 1994; and - Articles 1, 2, 3, 5, 6 and 7 of the Customs Valuation Agreement.

On 21 August 2012, Japan requested consultations with Argentina concerning certain measures imposed by Argentina on the importation of goods. Japan challenges: (i) the requirement to present for approval of a non-automatic import licence: Declaración Jurada Anticipada de Importación (DJAI); (ii) non-automatic licences required in the form of Certificados de Importación (CIs) for the importation of certain goods; (iii) requirements imposed on importers to undertake certain trade-restrictive commitments; and (iv) the alleged systematic delay in granting import approval or refusal to grant such approval, or the grant of import approval subject to importers undertaking to comply with certain allegedly trade-restrictive commitments.

On 12 April 2012, India requested consultations with the United States with regard to the imposition of countervailing duties by the United States on certain hot rolled carbon steel flat products from India (“subject goods”).

On 6 March 2012, the United States requested consultations with India with respect to the prohibitions imposed by India on the importation of various agricultural products from the United States purportedly because of concerns related to Avian Influenza. The measures at issue are: the Indian Livestock Importation Act, 1898 (9 of 1898) ("Livestock Act"); a number of orders issued by India's Department of Animal Husbandry, Dairying, and Fisheries pursuant to the Livestock Act, most recently S.O. 1663(E); as well as any amendments, related measures, or implementing measures.

On 1 December 2008, Canada requested consultations with the United States concerning certain mandatory country of origin labelling (COOL) provisions in the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946 as amended by the 2008 Farm Bill and as implemented through an Interim Final Rule of 28 July 2008. These include the obligation to inform consumers at the retail level of the country of origin in respect of covered commodities, including beef and pork. The eligibility for a designation of a covered commodity as exclusively having a US origin can only be derived from an animal that was exclusively born, raised and slaughtered in the United States. This would exclude such a designation in respect of beef or pork derived from livestock that is exported to the United States for feed or immediate slaughter.

On 25 July 2011, the European Union requested consultations with China concerning the imposition of definitive anti-dumping duties on x-ray security inspection equipment from the European Union, pursuant to China's Ministry of Commerce Notice No. 1(2011), including its Annex. The European Union claims that the measure is inconsistent with various provisions of the Anti–Dumping Agreement related to the process of the anti-dumping investigation (including failure to provide access to relevant information and insufficient explanation of the basis for the determinations) as well as the anti–dumping determination at issue (absence of objective examination of the effect of the dumped imports on prices in the domestic market and absence of objective determination of causality). The European Union considers that the measure is inconsistent with Articles 2.4, 3.1, 3.2, 3.4, 3.5, 6.1, 6.2. 6.4, 6.5, 6.9, 12.2.2 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement, and Articles VI:1 and VI:6(a) of the GATT 1994.

On 28 February 2011, China requested consultations with the United States regarding the latter's anti-dumping measures on certain frozen warmwater shrimp from China. China alleged that the US Department of Commerce's (“USDOC”) use of zeroing in the original investigation and several administrative reviews to calculate dumping margins for the subject imports is inconsistent with the United States' obligations under Article VI:1 and VI:2 of the GATT 1994 and Articles 1, 2.1, 2.4, 2.4.2, 5.8, 9.2, 9.3, and 9.4 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement. China further asserted that the USDOC's reliance, in the sunset review, on the dumping margins calculated in the original investigation and administrative reviews is inconsistent with the United States' obligations under Article 11.3 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement.

On 15 September 2010, the United States requested consultations with China with respect to measures imposing countervailing duties and anti-dumping duties on grain oriented flat-rolled electrical steel (“GOES”) from the United States as set forth in Ministry of Commerce of the People's Republic of China (“MOFCOM”) Notice No. 21 [2010], including its annexes. The subsidy that China determined to confer a benefit are the “Buy America” provisions of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 and also State government procurement laws. The United States alleged that China appears to be acting inconsistently with its obligations under: - Articles 10, 11.2, 11.3, 12.3, 12.4.1, 12.7, 12.8, 15.1, 15.2, 15.5, 19, 22.2(iii), 22.3 and 22.5 of the SCM Agreement, - Articles 1, 3.1, 3.2, 3.5, 6.9 and 12.2 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement; and - Article VI of the GATT 1994.