Anti-dumping, subsidies, safeguards

On 26 May 2006, Mexico requested consultations with the United States concerning a series of final anti-dumping determinations by the US Department of Commerce concerning imports of stainless steel sheet and strip in coils from Mexico for the period between January 1999 and June 2004. It also addresses: (i) certain sections of the US Tariff Act of 1930, as amended; (ii) the Statement of Administrative Action that accompanied the Uruguay Round Agreements; (iii) specific sections of the US Department of Commerce’s regulations codified at Title 19 of the US Code of Federal Regulations; (iv) the 1997 edition of the Import Administration Antidumping Manual; and (v) the methodology employed by the US Department of Commerce to determine the overall margin of dumping for the product subject to the original investigation and administrative reviews, whereby the Department disregarded (“zeroed”) negative dumping margins.

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 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.

Le 24 juillet 2020, l’OMC a distribué le rapport du Groupe spécial dans l’affaire introduite par la Fédération de Russie “Union européenne - Méthodes d’ajustement des frais et certaines mesures antidumping visant les importations en provenance de Russie (deuxième plainte)” (DS494).

Le 11 août 2004, l’Organe d’appel a publié son rapport sur l’affaire “États-Unis - Détermination finale de l’existence d’un dumping concernant certains bois d’œuvre résineux en provenance du Canada”.

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.

L’OMC a publié, le 30 janvier 2007, le rapport du groupe spécial qui avait examiné l’affaire “Etats-Unis — Mesure antidumping visant les crevettes en provenance de l’Equateur” (DS/D335).

El 10 de diciembre de 2019, el Órgano de Apelación emitió su informe en la diferencia “Marruecos - Medidas antidumping sobre determinado acero laminado en caliente procedente de Turquía” (DS513), planteada por Turquía. El 4 de diciembre, Marruecos notificó al Órgano de Apelación que había retirado su apelación en esta diferencia.

Le 11 mars 2016, l’OMC a publié le rapport du Groupe spécial dans l’affaire introduite par la Corée “États-Unis - Mesures antidumping et mesures compensatoires visant les gros lave-linge à usage domestique en provenance de Corée” (DS464).

On 7 November 2001, Brazil requested consultations with Argentina in respect of the definitive anti-dumping duties imposed by Argentina on imports of poultry from Brazil, classified under Mercosur tariff line 0207.11.00 and 0207.12.00. These measures were adopted by the Ministry of Economy of Argentina in Resolution 574 from 21 July 2000, published in the Argentinean Official Gazette on 24 July 2000. Brazil considered that the definitive anti-dumping duties imposed, as well as the investigation conducted by the Argentinean Authorities might have been flawed and based on erroneous or deficient procedures, inconsistent with Argentina’s obligations under Articles 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 12 and Annex II of the Anti-Dumping Agreement, Article VI of the GATT 1994, and Articles 1 and 7 of the Customs Valuation Agreement.