DOMINICAN REPUBLIC ‑ ANTI‑DUMPING MEASURES ON
CORRUGATED STEEL BARS

REPORT OF THE PANEL

BCI redacted, as indicated [[***]]

 Table of Contents

1  INTRODUCTION.. 13

1.1  Complaint by Costa Rica. 13

1.2  Establishment and composition of the Panel 13

1.3  Panel proceedings. 13

2  FACTUAL ASPECTS: THE MEASURES AT ISSUE. 14

3  PARTIES' REQUESTS FOR FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION.. 14

4  ARGUMENTS OF THE PARTIES. 15

5  ARGUMENTS OF THE THIRD PARTIES. 15

6  INTERIM REVIEW.. 15

7  FINDINGS. 15

7.1  Introduction. 15

7.2  General principles regarding treaty interpretation, standard of review and burden of proof 16

7.2.1  Treaty interpretation. 16

7.2.2  Standard of review. 16

7.2.3  Burden of proof 17

7.3  Costa Rica's claims under Articles 2.1 and 2.4 of the Anti‑Dumping Agreement:
the calculation of the export price. 17

7.3.1  Introduction. 17

7.3.2  The applicable requirements of Article 2.4 of the Anti‑Dumping Agreement 18

7.3.3  Whether the Dominican Republic acted inconsistently with Article 2.4 of the Anti‑Dumping Agreement 19

7.3.3.1  The applicability of Article 2.4 to Costa Rica's claim.. 19

7.3.3.2  Whether the CDC made a comparison in respect of sales made at as nearly as possible
the same time. 20

7.3.4  Exercising judicial economy in respect of certain claims under Articles 2.1 and 2.4 of the Anti‑Dumping Agreement 27

7.3.5  Conclusion. 28

7.4  Costa Rica's claims under Article 2.2.1 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement: cost test 28

7.4.1  Introduction. 28

7.4.2  Requirements applicable to Article 2.2.1 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement 29

7.4.3  Whether the Dominican Republic acted inconsistently with Article 2.2.1 of the
Anti‑Dumping Agreement 30

7.4.3.1  Use of an annual weighted average cost in the cost test 30

7.4.3.2  Whether the CDC failed to determine that below-cost sales were made "within an extended period of time" and "at prices which do not provide for the recovery of all costs within
a reasonable period of time" 35

7.4.4  Conclusion. 36

7.5  Costa Rica's claims under Article 3 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement: determination of
threat of injury and causal relationship. 36

7.5.1  Introduction. 36

7.5.2  Costa Rica's claims under Articles 3.1 and 3.2 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement: consideration of the effect of dumped imports on prices. 36

7.5.2.1  Dominican Republic's claim under Article 6.2 of the DSU. 37

7.5.2.2  Applicable requirements of Articles 3.1 and 3.2 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement 39

7.5.2.3  Whether the CDC's examination of price undercutting was consistent with
Articles 3.1 and 3.2. 41

7.5.2.3.1  Whether the price undercutting was "significant" 41

7.5.2.3.2  Whether the CDC considered whether price undercutting was "the effect of" imports from Costa Rica. 42

7.5.2.3.3  Conclusion. 44

7.5.2.4  Whether the CDC's examination of price depression was inconsistent with
Articles 3.1 and 3.2. 44

7.5.2.4.1  Whether the trend throughout the POI demonstrated price depression. 44

7.5.2.4.2  Whether the CDC's price depression examination considered "the effect of"
imports from Costa Rica. 46

7.5.2.4.3  Conclusion. 46

7.5.2.5  Whether the CDC's price suppression examination is inconsistent with
Articles 3.1 and 3.2. 46

7.5.2.5.1  Whether the CDC's analysis demonstrated price suppression that was "the effect of" dumped imports. 47

7.5.2.5.2  Conclusion. 49

7.5.3  Costa Rica's claims under Articles 3.1 and 3.4 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement 49

7.5.3.1  The applicable requirements of Articles 3.1 and 3.4 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement in relation to the threat of injury analysis. 49

7.5.3.2  Whether the CDC's threat of injury determination complied with Articles 3.1 and 3.4
of the Anti-Dumping Agreement 50

7.5.3.2.1  The relevance of the Article 3.4 evaluation in a threat of injury determination. 50

7.5.3.2.2  The examination of profits. 51

7.5.3.2.3  The examination of cash flow. 53

7.5.3.2.4  The examination of employment 53

7.5.3.2.5  The examination of the domestic industry's loss of market share. 55

7.5.3.2.6  Whether the CDC properly considered the positive performance of certain indicators
and evaluated the economic factors and indices as a whole. 56

7.5.3.3  Conclusion. 58

7.5.4  Costa Rica's claims under Articles 3.1 and 3.7 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement 58

7.5.4.1  Dominican Republic's claim under Article 6.2 of the DSU. 59

7.5.4.2  Applicable requirements of Articles 3.1 and 3.7 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement 61

7.5.4.3  Whether the Dominican Republic acted inconsistently with Articles 3.1 and 3.7. 63

7.5.4.3.1  Significant rate of increase of dumped imports. 63

7.5.4.3.2  Sufficient disposable, or an imminent, substantial increase in, capacity. 66

7.5.4.3.3  Price depression and suppression. 67

7.5.4.3.4  Inventories of the product being investigated. 68

7.5.4.3.5  Whether the CDC's determination, based on the totality of the factors considered, is consistent with Article 3.7. 69

7.5.4.4  Conclusion. 73

7.5.5  Costa Rica's claims under Articles 3.1 and 3.5 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement 73

7.5.5.1  Applicable requirements of Articles 3.1 and 3.5 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement 73

7.5.5.2  Whether the CDC carried out a proper causation analysis. 75

7.5.5.3  Whether the CDC's non-attribution analysis was inconsistent with Articles 3.1 and 3.5. 77

7.5.5.4  Conclusion. 77

7.6  Costa Rica's claim under Article 5.3 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement: the initiation of the investigation. 78

7.6.1  Introduction. 78

7.6.2  Requirements applicable to Article 5.3 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement 78

7.6.3  Whether the Dominican Republic acted inconsistently with Article 5.3 of the Anti‑Dumping Agreement 79

7.6.4  Conclusion. 84

7.7  Costa Rica's claim under Article 5.8 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement 84

7.8  Costa Rica's claim under Article 6.1.3 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement: provision of the
"full text of the written application" received. 85

7.8.1  Introduction. 85

7.8.2  Applicable requirements of Article 6.1.3 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement 86

7.8.3  Whether the Dominican Republic acted inconsistently with Article 6.1.3. 87

7.8.4  Conclusion. 92

7.9  Costa Rica's claim under Article 6.4 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement: opportunities to see certain information. 92

7.9.1  Introduction. 92

7.9.2  Applicable requirements of Article 6.4 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement 93

7.9.3  Whether the Dominican Republic acted inconsistently with Article 6.4. 93

7.9.3.1  Documents received by the CDC from the applicant during the verification visit 94

7.9.3.2  The CDC's reports on the findings and information resulting from the verification visit 96

7.9.3.3  Conclusion. 98

7.10  Costa Rica's claims under Article 6.5 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement: confidential
treatment granted to certain information. 98

7.10.1  Introduction. 98

7.10.2  Requirements applicable of Article 6.5 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement 99

7.10.3  Whether the Dominican Republic acted inconsistently with Article 6.5 of the
Anti‑Dumping Agreement 100

7.10.4  Conclusion. 110

7.11  Costa Rica's claim under Article 6.7 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement and Annex I thereto: information to be verified and any further information which needs to be provided. 110

7.11.1  Introduction. 110

7.11.2  The Panel's terms of reference. 111

7.11.3  Whether the Dominican Republic acted inconsistently with Article 6.7 and Annex I 112

7.11.4  Conclusion. 114

7.12  Costa Rica claims under Article 9.3 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement and Article VI:2 of the GATT 1994. 114

8  CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS. 116