Tag: dispute settlement panel

US Rejects China’s Request For Panel To Mediate WTO Dispute

china dumping steel

The US on Friday deferred China’s first request to establish a WTO dispute settlement panel to mediate its dispute against the US and its practice of levying both antidumping and countervailing duties on imports from nonmarket economies (NMEs), such as China.

China filed its WTO complaint in mid-September, taking issue with US CV and AD duty measures on a variety of products, including steel. As reported, WTO documents show the suit pertains to import orders and investigations implemented by the US between November 20, 2006 and March 13, 2012. March 13 was the date the US signed into law the newest CVD legislation permitting it to levy both AD and CV duties against NMEs.

The implementation of CVDs in addition to AD duties in NME cases is called “double remedies” or “double counting” by opponents of the measure.

As reported, China is questioning “any and all determinations or actions” by the US Department of Commerce, the US International Trade Commission or US Customs and Border Protection relating to the “imposition or collection” of CVDs. The dispute also includes AD measures, “as well as the combined effect of these antidumping measures and the parallel countervailing duty measures.”

Imports covered in the dispute include circular welded carbon quality steel pipe, light-walled rectangular pipe and tube, circular welded austenitic stainless pressure pipe, circular welded carbon quality steel line pipe, pre-stressed concrete steel wire strand, steel grating, wire decking and OCTG. Also included are seamless carbon and alloy steel standard, line and pressure pipe; drill pipe and galvanized wire.

 

MADE IN USA CERTIFIED® ….. http://usa-c.com

WTD Trade Alert – WTO Appellate Body Favors US on Chinese Raw Materials Exports


The World Trade Organization Appellate Body today affirmed a dispute settlement panel decision from July 2011 finding in favor of the United States and rejecting China’s attempts to portray its export restraints on various raw materials as conservation or environmental protection measures or measures taken to manage critical shortages of supply.

The export restraints challenged include export quotas and export duties, as well as related minimum export price, export licensing and export quota administration requirements. The raw materials at issue include various forms of bauxite, coke, fluorspar, magnesium, manganese, silicon carbide, silicon metal, yellow phosphorus, and zinc.

Export restraints can artificially increase world prices for these raw materials while artificially lowering prices for Chinese producers, the United States argued.