Dispute settlement
United States - Countervailing Duties on Certain Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products from Germany
On 10 November 2000 the EC requested consultations with the US in respect of countervailing duties imposed by the US on imports of certain corrosion-resistant carbon steel flat products (“corrosion resistant steel”) dealt with under US case number C-428-817. This dispute related in particular to the final results of a full sunset review of the above measure carried out by the US Department of Commerce (“DOC”) and published in the US Federal Register No. 65 FR 47407 of 2 August 2000. In this decision the DOC found that revocation of the countervailing duty order would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of a countervailable subsidy. The EC considered that this finding is inconsistent with the obligations of the US under the SCM Agreement and in particular in breach of Articles 10 11.9 and 21 (notably 21.3) thereof.
United States - Anti-Dumping and Countervailing Measures on Steel Plate from India
On 4 October 2000 India requested consultations with the United States concerning: final affirmative determinations of sales of certain cut-to-length carbon quality steel plate products from India at less than fair value by US Department of Commerce (DOC) on 13 December 1999 and affirmed on 10 February 2000; interpretation and use of provisions relating to facts available in the anti-dumping and countervailing duty investigations by DOC; and determination and interpretation by the US International Trade Commission (ITC) of negligibility cumulation and material injury caused by the said Indian steel imports. India considered that these determinations are erroneous and based on deficient procedures contained in various provisions of US anti-dumping and countervailing duty law. According to India these determinations and provisions raise questions concerning the obligations of the United States under the GATT 1994 the Anti-Dumping Agreement the SCM Agreement and the Agreement establishing the WTO (WTO Agreement). India considered that the provisions of these agreements with which these measures and determinations appear to be inconsistent include but are not limited to the following: Articles VI and X of the GATT 1994; Articles 1 2 3 (especially 3.3) 5 (especially 5.8) 6 (especially 6.8) 12 15 18.4 and Annex II of the Anti-Dumping Agreement; Articles 10 11 (especially 11.9) 15 (especially 15.3) 22 and 27 (especially 27.10) of the SCM Agreement; Article XVI of the WTO Agreement.
European Communities - Trade Description of Sardines
On 20 March 2001 Peru requested consultations with the EC concerning Regulation (EEC) 2136/89 which according to Peru prevents Peruvian exporters to continue to use the trade description “sardines” for their products. Peru submitted that according to the relevant Codex Alimentarius standards (STAN 94-181 rev. 1995) the species “sardinops sagax sagax” are listed among those species which can be traded as “sardines”. Peru therefore considered that the above Regulation constitutes an unjustifiable barrier to trade and hence in breach of Articles 2 and 12 of the TBT Agreement and Article XI:1 of GATT 1994. In addition Peru argues that the Regulation is inconsistent with the principle of non-discrimination and hence in breach of Articles I and III of GATT 1994.
Chile - Price Band System and Safeguard Measures Relating to Certain Agricultural Products
On 5 October 2000 Argentina requested consultations with Chile concerning: the price band system established by Law 18.525 (as subsequently amended by Law 18.591 and Law 19.546) as well as implementing regulations and complementary and/or amending provisions; and the provisional safeguard measures adopted on 19 November 1999 by Decree No. 339 of the Ministry of Economy and the definitive safeguard measures imposed on 20 January 2000 by Decree No. 9 of the Ministry of Economy on the importation of various products including wheat wheat flour and edible vegetal oils. Argentina considered that these measures raised questions concerning the obligations of Chile under various agreements. According to Argentina the provisions with which the measures relating to the said price band system are inconsistent include but are not limited to the following: Article II of the GATT 1994 and Article 4 of the Agreement on Agriculture. According to Argentina the provisions with which the safeguard measures are inconsistent include but are not limited to the following: Articles 2 3 4 5 6 and 12 of the Safeguards Agreement and Article XIX:1(a) of the GATT 1994
India - Measures Affecting the Automotive Sector
On 6 October 1998 the EC requested consultations with India concerning certain measures affecting the automotive sector being applied by India. The EC stated that the measures include the documents entitled “Export and Import Policy 1997-2002” “ITC (HS Classification) Export and Import Policy 1997-2002” (“Classification”) and “Public Notice No. 60 (PN/97-02) of 12 December 1997 Export and Import Policy April 1997-March 2002” and any other legislative or administrative provision implemented or consolidated by these policies as well as MoUs signed by the Indian Government with certain manufacturers of automobiles. The EC contended that: under these measures imports of complete automobiles and of certain parts and components were subject to a system of non-automatic import licenses. in accordance with Public Notice No. 60 import licenses might be granted only to local joint venture manufacturers that had signed an MoU with the Indian Government whereby they undertook inter alia to comply with certain local content and export balancing requirements. The EC alleged violations of Articles III and XI of GATT 1994 and Article 2 of the TRIMs Agreement.
United States - Definitive Safeguard Measures on Imports of Circular Welded Carbon Quality Line Pipe from Korea
On 13 June 2000 Korea requested consultations with the United States in respect of the definitive safeguard measure imposed by the United States on imports of circular welded carbon quality line pipe (line pipe). Korea noted that on 18 February 2000 the United States proclaimed a definitive safeguard measure on imports of line pipe (subheadings 7306.10.10 and 7306.10.50 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States). In that proclamation the United States announced that the proposed date of introduction of the measure was 1 March 2000 and that the measure was expected to remain in effect for 3 years and 1 day. Korea considered that the US procedures and determinations that led to the imposition of the safeguard measure as well as the measure itself contravened various provisions contained in the Safeguards Agreement and the GATT 1994. In particular Korea considers that the measure is inconsistent with the United States’ obligations under Articles 2 3 4 5 11 and 12 of the Safeguards Agreement; and Articles I XIII and XIX of the GATT 1994.
Canada - Export Credits and Loan Guarantees for Regional Aircraft
On 22 January 2001 Brazil requested consultations with Canada concerning subsidies which are allegedly being granted to Canada’s regional aircraft industry. Brazil’s claims are as follows: Export credits within the meaning of Item (k) of Annex I to the SCM Agreement are being provided to Canada’s regional aircraft industry by the Export Development Corporation (EDC) and the Canada Account. Loan guarantees within the meaning of Item (j) of Annex I to the SCM Agreement are being provided by EDC Industry Canada and the Province of Quebec to support exports of Canada’s regional aircraft industry. Brazil takes the view that all of the above-mentioned measures are subsidies within the meaning of Article 1 of the SCM Agreement since they are financial contributions that confer a benefit. According to Brazil they are also contingent in law or in fact upon export and constitute therefore a violation of Article 3 of the SCM Agreement.
United States - Tax Treatment for "Foreign Sales Corporations" - Recourse 1
On 18 November 1997 the European Communities requested consultations with the United States in respect of Sections 921-927 of the US Internal Revenue Code and related measures establishing special tax treatment for “Foreign Sales Corporations” (FSC). The European Communities contended that these provisions were inconsistent with the United States' obligations under Articles III:4 and XVI of the GATT 1994 Articles 3.1(a) and (b) of the SCM Agreement and Articles 3 and 8 of the Agreement on Agriculture.
United States - Section 211 Omnibus Appropriations Act of 1998
On 8 July 1999 the European Communities requested consultations with the United States in respect of Section 211 of the US Omnibus Appropriations Act. The EC and its member States alleged as follows: - Section 211 which was signed into law on 21 October 1998 did not allow the registration or renewal in the United States of a trademark if it was previously abandoned by a trademark owner whose business and assets have been confiscated under Cuban law. - This law provided that no US court shall recognize or enforce any assertion of such rights. - Section 211 US Omnibus Appropriations Act was not in conformity with the US’ obligations under the TRIPS Agreement notably its Article 2 in conjunction with the Paris Convention Article 3 Article 4 Articles 15 to 21 Article 41 Article 42 and Article 62
India - Measures Affecting the Automotive Sector
On 6 October 1998 the EC requested consultations with India concerning certain measures affecting the automotive sector being applied by India. The EC stated that the measures include the documents entitled “Export and Import Policy 1997-2002” “ITC (HS Classification) Export and Import Policy 1997-2002” (“Classification”) and “Public Notice No. 60 (PN/97-02) of 12 December 1997 Export and Import Policy April 1997-March 2002” and any other legislative or administrative provision implemented or consolidated by these policies as well as MoUs signed by the Indian Government with certain manufacturers of automobiles. The EC contended that: under these measures imports of complete automobiles and of certain parts and components were subject to a system of non-automatic import licenses. in accordance with Public Notice No. 60 import licenses might be granted only to local joint venture manufacturers that had signed an MoU with the Indian Government whereby they undertook inter alia to comply with certain local content and export balancing requirements. The EC alleged violations of Articles III and XI of GATT 1994 and Article 2 of the TRIMs Agreement.
Canada - Measures Affecting the Importation of Milk and the Exportation of Dairy Products - Recourse 1
On 8 October 1997 the United States requested consultations with Canada in respect of export subsidies allegedly granted by Canada on dairy products and the administration by Canada of the tariff-rate quota on milk. The United States contended that these export subsidies by Canada distort markets for dairy products and adversely affect US sales of dairy products. The United States alleged violations of Articles II X and X1 of the GATT 1994 Articles 3 4 8 9 and 10 of the Agreement on Agriculture Article 3 of the SCM Agreement and Articles 1 2 and 3 of the Import Licensing Agreement.
United States - Definitive Safeguard Measures on Imports of Circular Welded Carbon Quality Line Pipe from Korea
On 13 June 2000 Korea requested consultations with the United States in respect of the definitive safeguard measure imposed by the United States on imports of circular welded carbon quality line pipe (line pipe). Korea noted that on 18 February 2000 the United States proclaimed a definitive safeguard measure on imports of line pipe (subheadings 7306.10.10 and 7306.10.50 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States). In that proclamation the United States announced that the proposed date of introduction of the measure was 1 March 2000 and that the measure was expected to remain in effect for 3 years and 1 day. Korea considered that the US procedures and determinations that led to the imposition of the safeguard measure as well as the measure itself contravened various provisions contained in the Safeguards Agreement and the GATT 1994. In particular Korea considers that the measure is inconsistent with the United States’ obligations under Articles 2 3 4 5 11 and 12 of the Safeguards Agreement; and Articles I XIII and XIX of the GATT 1994.
United States - Import Prohibition of Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products - Recourse 1
On 8 October 1996 India Malaysia Pakistan and Thailand requested consultations with the United States concerning a ban on importation of shrimp and shrimp products from these complainants imposed by the US under Section 609 of US Public Law 101-162. Violations of Articles I XI and XIII of the GATT 1994 as well nullification and impairment of benefits were alleged.
Mexico - Anti-Dumping Investigation of High Fructose Corn Syrup (HFCS) from the United States - Recourse 1
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.
United States - Transitional Safeguard Measure on Combed Cotton Yarn from Pakistan
On 3 April 2000 Pakistan requested consultations with the US in respect of a transitional safeguard measure applied by the United States as of 17 March 1999 on combed cotton yarn (United States category 301) from Pakistan (see US Federal Register of 12 March 1999 document 99-6098). In accordance with Article 6.10 of the Agreement on Textiles and Clothing (ATC) the United States had notified the TMB on 5 March 1999 that it had decided to unilaterally impose a restraint after consultations as to whether the situation called for a restraint had failed to produce a mutually satisfactory solution. In April 1999 the TMB examined the US restraint pursuant to Article 6.10 of the ATC and recommended that the US restraint should be rescinded. On 28 May 1999 in accordance with Article 8.10 of the ATC the United States notified the TMB that it considered itself unable to conform to the recommendations issued by the TMB. Despite a further recommendation of the TMB pursuant to Article 8.10 of the ATC that the United States reconsider its position the United States continued to maintain its unilateral restraint and thus the matter remained unresolved. Pakistan claimed as follows: the transitional safeguards applied by the United States are inconsistent with the United States’ obligations under Articles 2.4 of the ATC and not justified by Article 6 of the ATC; the US restraint does not meet the requirements for transitional safeguards set out in paragraphs 2 3 4 and 7 of Article 6 of the ATC.
Argentina - Definitive Anti-Dumping Measures on Imports of Ceramic Floor Tiles from Italy
On 26 January 2000 the EC requested consultations with Argentina in respect of Argentina’s definitive anti-dumping measures on imports of ceramic floor tiles from Italy imposed on 12 November 1999. The EC claimed that the Argentinian investigating authority without justification disregarded all the information on normal value and on export prices provided by the exporters included in the sample; failed to calculate an individual dumping margin for each of the exporters included in the sample; failed to make due allowance for the differences in physical characteristics between the models exported to Argentina and those sold in Italy; and failed to inform the Italian exporters of the essential facts concerning the existence of dumping which formed the basis for the decision whether to apply definitive measures. The EC considered that the anti-dumping measures in question were inconsistent with Articles 2.4 6.8 in conjunction with Annex II 6.9 and 6.10 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement.
United States - Tax Treatment for "Foreign Sales Corporations" - Recourse 1
On 18 November 1997 the European Communities requested consultations with the United States in respect of Sections 921-927 of the US Internal Revenue Code and related measures establishing special tax treatment for “Foreign Sales Corporations” (FSC). The European Communities contended that these provisions were inconsistent with the United States' obligations under Articles III:4 and XVI of the GATT 1994 Articles 3.1(a) and (b) of the SCM Agreement and Articles 3 and 8 of the Agreement on Agriculture.
United States - Section 211 Omnibus Appropriations Act of 1998
On 8 July 1999 the European Communities requested consultations with the United States in respect of Section 211 of the US Omnibus Appropriations Act. The EC and its member States alleged as follows: - Section 211 which was signed into law on 21 October 1998 did not allow the registration or renewal in the United States of a trademark if it was previously abandoned by a trademark owner whose business and assets have been confiscated under Cuban law. - This law provided that no US court shall recognize or enforce any assertion of such rights. - Section 211 US Omnibus Appropriations Act was not in conformity with the US’ obligations under the TRIPS Agreement notably its Article 2 in conjunction with the Paris Convention Article 3 Article 4 Articles 15 to 21 Article 41 Article 42 and Article 62
United States - Anti-Dumping Measures on Certain Hot-Rolled Steel Products from Japan
On 18 November 1999 Japan requested consultations with the United States in respect of the preliminary and final determinations of the US Department of Commerce and the US International Trade Commission on the anti-dumping investigation of Certain Hot Rolled Steel Products from Japan issued on 25 and 30 November 1998 12 February 1999 28 April 1999 and 23 June 1999. Japan considered that these determinations are erroneous and based on deficient procedures under the US Tariff Act of 1930 and related regulations. The Japanese complaint also concerned certain provisions of the Tariff Act of 1930 and related regulations. Japan claimed violations of Articles VI and X of the GATT 1994 and Articles 2 3 6 (including Annex II) 9 and 10 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement.d regulations. Japan claimed violations of Articles VI and X of the GATT 1994 and Articles 2 3 6 (including Annex II) 9 and 10 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement.
Canada - Measures Affecting the Importation of Milk and the Exportation of Dairy Products - Recourse 1
On 8 October 1997 the United States requested consultations with Canada in respect of export subsidies allegedly granted by Canada on dairy products and the administration by Canada of the tariff-rate quota on milk. The United States contended that these export subsidies by Canada distort markets for dairy products and adversely affect US sales of dairy products. The United States alleged violations of Articles II X and X1 of the GATT 1994 Articles 3 4 8 9 and 10 of the Agreement on Agriculture Article 3 of the SCM Agreement and Articles 1 2 and 3 of the Import Licensing Agreement.