Market access
Filter :
Language
Publication date
Content type
Series
Authors
Guatemala - Definitive Anti-Dumping Measures on Grey Portland Cement from Mexico
On 5 January 1999 Mexico requested consultations with Guatemala concerning definitive anti-dumping duties imposed by the authorities of Guatemala on imports of grey Portland cement from Mexico and the proceedings leading thereto. Mexico alleged that the definitive anti-dumping measure is inconsistent with Articles 1 2 3 5 6 7 12 and 18 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement and its Annexes I and II as well as with Article VI of the GATT 1994.
Thailand - Anti-Dumping Duties on Angles, Shapes and Sections of Iron or Non-Alloy steel and H-Beams from Poland
On 30 June 1998 the EC requested consultations with the US in respect of the alleged imposition of countervailing duties on certain hot-rolled lead and bismuth carbon steel (leaded bars) from the UK. The EC asserted that the US imposed countervailing duties of 1.69 per cent on United Engineering Steels Ltd (UES) for the review period 1 January 1994 to 31 December 1994 and of 2.4 per cent for the review period 1 January 1995 to 20 March 1995 on the basis of subsidies which had been granted to British Steel Corporation (BSC). The EC also contended that the US imposed countervailing duties on British Steel plc (BSplc) / British Steel Engineering Steels LTD (BSES) for the review period 1 January 1996 to 31 December 1996 on the basis of subsidies granted to BSC before its privatization in 1988. The EC alleged that these impositions of countervailing duties constitute a violation of Articles 1.1(b) 10 14 and 19.4 of the Subsidies Agreement.
European Communities - Measures Affecting Asbestos and Asbestos – Containing Products
On 28 May 1998 Canada requested consultations with the EC in respect of measures imposed by France in particular Decree of 24 December 1996 with respect to the prohibition of asbestos and products containing asbestos including a ban on imports of such goods. Canada alleged that these measures violate Articles 2 3 and 5 of the SPS Agreement Article 2 of the TBT Agreement and Articles III XI and XIII of GATT 1994. Canada also alleged nullification and impairment of benefits accruing to it under the various agreements cited.
United States - Anti-Dumping Act of 1916 - Complaint by the European Communities
On 10 February 1999 Japan requested consultations with the United States in respect of the US Anti-Dumping Act of 1916 15 U.S.C. 72 (1994) (“US 1916 Act”). Japan alleged that the US 1916 Act stipulates that the importation or sale of imported goods within the US market in certain circumstances is unlawful constituting a criminal offence and inviting civil liability. Japan further alleged that judicial decisions under the US 1916 Act are made without the procedural safeguards provided for in the Anti-Dumping Agreement. Japan stated that a court action had been brought under the US 1916 Act against affiliates of Japanese companies. Japan contended that the US 1916 Act is inconsistent with Articles III VI and XI of the GATT 1994 and the Anti-Dumping Agreement.
United States - Anti-Dumping Act of 1916 - Complaint by Japan
On 10 February 1999 Japan requested consultations with the United States in respect of the US Anti-Dumping Act of 1916 15 U.S.C. 72 (1994) (“US 1916 Act”). Japan alleged that the US 1916 Act stipulates that the importation or sale of imported goods within the US market in certain circumstances is unlawful constituting a criminal offence and inviting civil liability. Japan further alleged that judicial decisions under the US 1916 Act are made without the procedural safeguards provided for in the Anti-Dumping Agreement. Japan stated that a court action had been brought under the US 1916 Act against affiliates of Japanese companies. Japan contended that the US 1916 Act is inconsistent with Articles III VI and XI of the GATT 1994 and the Anti-Dumping Agreement.
Brazil - Export Financing Programme for Aircraft
On 28 August 2000 the WTO issued the dispute panel reports in the case "Brazil - Export financing programme for aircraft".
Korea - Measures Affecting Imports of Fresh, Chilled and Frozen Beef
On 1 February 1999 the US requested consultations with Korea in respect of a Korean regulatory scheme that allegedly discriminates against imported beef by inter alia confining sales of imported beef to specialized stores (dual retail system) limiting the manner of its display and otherwise constraining the opportunities for the sale of imported beef. The US alleged that Korea imposes a mark-up on sales of imported beef limits import authority to certain so-called “super-groups” and the Livestock Producers Marketing Organization (“LPMO”) and provides domestic support to the cattle industry in Korea in amounts which cause Korea to exceed its aggregate measure of support as reflected in Korea’s schedule. The US contended that these restrictions apply only to imported beef thereby denying national treatment to beef imports and that the support to the domestic industry amounts to domestic subsidies that contravene the Agreement on Agriculture. The US alleged violations of Articles II III XI and XVII of GATT 1994; Articles 3 4 6 and 7 of the Agreement on Agriculture; and Articles 1 and 3 of the Import Licensing Agreement.
United States - Definitive Safeguard Measures on Imports of Wheat Gluten from the European Communities
On 17 March 1999 the EC requested consultations with the US in respect of definitive safeguard measures imposed by the US on imports of wheat gluten from the European Communities. The EC contended that by a Proclamation of 30 May 1998 and a Memorandum of the same date by the US President under which the US imposed definitive safeguard measures in the form of a quantitative limitation on imports of wheat gluten from the EC effective as of 1 June 1998. The EC considered these measures to be in violation of Articles 2 4 5 and 12 of the Agreement on Safeguards; Article 4.2 of the Agreement on Agriculture; and Articles I and XIX of GATT 1994.
Brazil - Export Financing Programme for Aircraft - Recourse 1
On 19 June 1996 Canada requested consultations with Brazil under Article 4 of the SCM Agreement which provides for special procedures for export subsidies. Canada claimed that export subsidies granted under the Brazilian Programa de Financiamento às Exportações (PROEX) to foreign purchasers of Brazil’s Embraer aircraft are inconsistent with Articles 3 27.4 and 27.5 of the SCM Agreement.
United States - Import Measures on Certain Products from the European Communities
On 4 March 1999 the EC requested consultations with the US in respect of the US decision effective as of 3 March 1999 to withhold liquidation on imports from the EC of a series of products together valued at over $500 million on an annual basis and to impose a contingent liability for 100% duties on each individual importation of affected products. On 2 March 1999 the arbitrators charged with determining the level of suspension of concessions requested by the United States in response to the failure by the EC to implement the recommendations of the DSB in respect of the EC’s banana regime (WT/DS27) had asked for additional data from the parties and informed the parties that they were unable to issue their report within the 60-day period envisaged by the DSU. The EC contends that the measure made effective by the US as of 3 March 1999 deprives EC imports into the United States of the products in question of the right to a duty not in excess of the rate bound in the US Schedule. The EC further contended that by requiring the deposit of a bond to cover the contingent liability for 100% duties US Customs effectively impose 100% duties on each individual importation. The EC alleged violations of Articles 3 21 22 and 23 of the DSU and Articles I II VIII and XI of GATT 1994. The EC also alleged nullification and impairment of benefits under GATT 1994 as well as the impediment of the objectives of the DSU and GATT 1994. The EC had requested urgent consultations pursuant to Article 4.8 of the DSU.
Canada - Certain Measures Affecting the Automotive Industry
On 3 July 1998 Japan requested consultations with Canada in respect of measures being taken by Canada in the automotive industry. Japan contended that under Canadian legislation implementing an automotive products agreement (Auto Pact) between the US and Canada only a limited number of motor vehicle manufacturers are eligible to import vehicles into Canada duty free and to distribute the motor vehicles in Canada at the wholesale and retail distribution levels. Japan further contended that this duty-free treatment is contingent on two requirements: Canadian value-added (CVA) content requirement that applies to both goods and services; and manufacturing and sales requirement. Japan alleges that these measures are inconsistent with Articles I:1 III:4 and XXIV of GATT 1994 Article 2 of the TRIMs Agreement Article 3 of the SCM Agreement and Articles II VI and XVII of GATS.
United States - Anti-Dumping Act of 1916 - Complaint by Japan
On 10 February 1999 Japan requested consultations with the United States in respect of the US Anti-Dumping Act of 1916 15 U.S.C. 72 (1994) (“US 1916 Act”). Japan alleged that the US 1916 Act stipulates that the importation or sale of imported goods within the US market in certain circumstances is unlawful constituting a criminal offence and inviting civil liability. Japan further alleged that judicial decisions under the US 1916 Act are made without the procedural safeguards provided for in the Anti-Dumping Agreement. Japan stated that a court action had been brought under the US 1916 Act against affiliates of Japanese companies. Japan contended that the US 1916 Act is inconsistent with Articles III VI and XI of the GATT 1994 and the Anti-Dumping Agreement.
Brazil - Export Financing Programme for Aircraft - Recourse 1
On 19 June 1996 Canada requested consultations with Brazil under Article 4 of the SCM Agreement which provides for special procedures for export subsidies. Canada claimed that export subsidies granted under the Brazilian Programa de Financiamento às Exportações (PROEX) to foreign purchasers of Brazil’s Embraer aircraft are inconsistent with Articles 3 27.4 and 27.5 of the SCM Agreement.
United States - Anti-Dumping Act of 1916 - Complaint by the European Communities
On 9 June 1988 the European Communities requested consultations with the United States in respect of the alleged failure of the United States to repeal its Anti-Dumping Act of 1916. The European Communities contended that the US Anti-Dumping Act of 1916 is still in force and is applicable to the import and internal sale of any foreign product irrespective of its origin including products originating in countries which are WTO Members. The European Communities also alleged that the 1916 Act exists in the US statute books in parallel with the Tariff Act of 1930 as amended which includes the US implementing legislation of multilateral Anti-Dumping provisions. The European Communities alleged violations of Articles III:4 VI:1 and VI:2 of the GATT 1994 Article XVI:4 of the WTO Agreement and Articles 1 2 3 4 and 5 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement.
United States - Tax Treatment for "Foreign Sales Corporations"
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.
Australia - Measures Affecting Importation of Salmon - Recourse 1
On 5 October 1995 Canada requested consultations with Australia in respect of Australia’s prohibition of imports of salmon from Canada based on a quarantine regulation. Canada alleged that the prohibition is inconsistent with Articles XI and XIII of the GATT 1994 and also inconsistent with the SPS Agreement.
Canada - Certain Measures Affecting the Automotive Industry
On 3 July 1998 Japan requested consultations with Canada in respect of measures being taken by Canada in the automotive industry. Japan contended that under Canadian legislation implementing an automotive products agreement (Auto Pact) between the US and Canada only a limited number of motor vehicle manufacturers are eligible to import vehicles into Canada duty free and to distribute the motor vehicles in Canada at the wholesale and retail distribution levels. Japan further contended that this duty-free treatment is contingent on two requirements: Canadian value-added (CVA) content requirement that applies to both goods and services; and manufacturing and sales requirement. Japan alleges that these measures are inconsistent with Articles I:1 III:4 and XXIV of GATT 1994 Article 2 of the TRIMs Agreement Article 3 of the SCM Agreement and Articles II VI and XVII of GATS.
United States - Sections 301-310 of the Trade Act of 1974
On 25 November 1998 the EC requested consultations with the US in respect of Title III chapter 1 (sections 301-310) of the US Trade Act of 1974 (the Trade Act) as amended and in particular sections 306 and 305 of this Act.
Korea - Definitive Safeguard Measure on Imports of Certain Dairy Products
On 12 August 1997 the EC requested consultations with Korea in respect of a definitive safeguard measure imposed by Korea on imports of certain dairy products. The EC contended that under the provisions of different governmental measures Korea has imposed a safeguard measure in the form of an import quota on imports of certain dairy products. The EC considered that this measure is in violation of Articles 2 4 5 and 12 of the Agreement on Safeguard Measures as well as a violation of Article XIX of GATT 1994.
Argentina - Safeguard Measures on Imports of Footwear
On 10 November 2000 the EC requested consultations with the US concerning the continued application by the United States of countervailing duties on a number of products. In particular the EC claimed that the application of the “same person” methodology by the US and the continued imposition of duties based on it are in breach of Articles 10 19 and 21 of the SCM Agreement because there is no proper determination of a benefit to the producer of the goods under investigation as required by Article 1.1(b) of the SCM Agreement. The EC included in this request for consultations 14 US countervailing duty orders1 where this “same person” methodology was applied. All these cases involve alleged non-recurring subsidies granted to firms prior to a change of ownership.