Green_Earth
Canada - Anti-Dumping Measures on Imports of Certain Carbon Steel Welded Pipe from the Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu - Report of the Panel
日期:2016/12/21
作者:Dispute Settlement Body
文件編號:WT/DS482/R
附件下載:WTDS482R.doc
因為版本問題,開啟附件時可能會出現錯誤訊息,如「檔案已損毀」的訊息,請您忽略此訊息,即可正常開啟

CANADA – ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES ON IMPORTS OF CERTAIN CARBON STEEL WELDED PIPE FROM THE SEPARATE CUSTOMS TERRITORY OF TAIWAN, PENGHU, KINMEN AND MATSU

REPORT OF THE PANEL


TABLE OF CONTENTS

1   Introduction.. 10

1.1   Complaint by the Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu. 10

1.2   Panel establishment and composition. 10

1.3   Panel proceedings. 10

1.3.1   General 10

1.3.2   Working procedures on Business Confidential Information (BCI) 11

2   Factual aspects. 11

2.1   The measures at issue. 11

3   Parties' requests for findings and recommendations. 12

4   Arguments of the parties. 13

5   Arguments of the thiRd parties. 13

6   Interim Review... 14

6.1   Paragraphs 6.9, 6.49, 6.50, 6.51, 6.72, 6.91, 6.102, 6.113, 6.123, 6.149, 6.166, and 6.213 (paragraphs 7.9, 7.49, 7.50, 7.51, 7.73, 7.92, 7.103, 7.114, 7.124, 7.150, 7.167, and 7.214 of the Final Report) 14

6.2   Paragraph 6.14 (paragraph 7.14 of the Final Report) 14

6.3   Paragraph 6.53 (paragraph 7.54 of the Final Report) 14

6.4   Paragraph 6.64 (paragraph 7.65 of the Final Report) 15

6.5   Paragraph 6.79 (paragraph 7.80 of the Final Report) 15

6.6   Paragraph 6.84 (paragraph 7.85 of the Final Report) 15

6.7   Paragraphs 6.109 and 6.111 (paragraphs 7.110 and 7.112 of the Final Report) 15

6.8   Paragraphs 6.133 and 6.135 (paragraphs 7.134 and 7.136 of the Final Report) 16

6.9   Paragraph 6.142 (paragraph 7.143 of the Final Report) 16

6.10   Paragraphs 6.144 and 6.145 (paragraphs 7.145 and 7.146 of the Final Report) 16

6.11   Paragraphs 6.170-6.173 (paragraphs 7.171-7.174 of the Final Report) 16

7   Findings. 17

7.1   General principles regarding treaty interpretation, the applicable standard of review, and burden of proof 17

7.1.1   Treaty Interpretation. 17

7.1.2   Standard of Review.. 17

7.1.3   Burden of Proof 17

7.2   Immediate termination under Article 5.8 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement: exporter‑specific or country-wide margins of dumping?. 18

7.2.1   Introduction. 18

7.2.2   Main arguments of the parties. 18

7.2.3   Main arguments of third parties. 19

7.2.3.1   Brazil 19

7.2.3.2   European Union. 19

7.2.3.3   Norway. 19

7.2.3.4   United Arab Emirates. 20

7.2.3.5   United States. 20

7.2.4   Evaluation by the Panel 20

7.2.4.1   Article 3.3 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement 22

7.2.4.2   Article 9.4 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement 23

7.2.4.3   De minimis exporters in Article 9.5 new shipper reviews. 25

7.2.4.4   Conclusion. 25

7.3   Multiple margins of dumping: Article 6.10 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement 26

7.3.1   Introduction. 26

7.3.2   Main arguments of the parties. 26

7.3.3   Main arguments of third parties. 26

7.3.3.1   Brazil 26

7.3.4   Evaluation by the Panel 26

7.4   Provisional measures on imports from a Chinese Taipei exporter with a preliminary de minimis margin of dumping: Article 7.1(ii) of the Anti-Dumping Agreement 27

7.4.1   Introduction. 27

7.4.2   Main arguments of the parties. 27

7.4.3   Main arguments of third parties. 29

7.4.3.1   Brazil 29

7.4.4   Evaluation by the Panel 29

7.5   Additional claims under Articles 1, 7.5, and 9.2 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement, and Article VI:2 of the GATT 1994. 31

7.5.1   Introduction. 31

7.5.2   Main arguments of the parties. 32

7.5.3   Evaluation by the Panel 32

7.6   The treatment of imports from exporters with de minimis margins of dumping in the injury investigation: Article 3 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement 33

7.6.1   Introduction. 33

7.6.2   Main arguments of the parties. 33

7.6.3   Main arguments of third parties. 34

7.6.3.1   Brazil 34

7.6.3.2   United Arab Emirates. 34

7.6.4   Evaluation by the Panel 34

7.7   The treatment of factors other than dumped imports in the causation analysis: Articles 3.1 and 3.5 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement 35

7.7.1   Introduction. 35

7.7.2   Main arguments of the parties. 36

7.7.2.1   The effect of subsidization. 36

7.7.2.2   Overcapacity. 36

7.7.3   Main arguments of third parties. 36

7.7.3.1   Brazil 36

7.7.3.2   European Union. 37

7.7.3.3   United States. 37

7.7.4   Evaluation by the Panel 37

7.7.4.1   The effect of subsidization. 37

7.7.4.2   Overcapacity. 39

7.8   The use of facts available in the determination of the dumping margin and duty rate for "all other exporters": Article 6.8 and Annex II, paragraph 7, of the Anti‑Dumping Agreement 40

7.8.1   Introduction. 40

7.8.1.1   The relevant provisions. 41

7.8.1.2   Factual background. 41

7.8.2   Main arguments of the parties. 42

7.8.3   Main arguments of third parties. 44

7.8.3.1   European Union. 44

7.8.3.2   United States. 45

7.8.4   Evaluation by the Panel 45

7.9   The treatment of imports of new product models or types. 48

7.9.1   Introduction. 48

7.9.2   The relevance of the margin of dumping established during the investigation: Article 9.3 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement 49

7.9.2.1   Main arguments of the parties. 49

7.9.2.2   Main arguments of third parties. 50

7.9.2.2.1   European Union. 50

7.9.2.3   Evaluation by the Panel 51

7.9.3   The CBSA's use of facts available: Article 6.8 and Annex II of the Anti‑Dumping Agreement 54

7.9.3.1   Main arguments of the parties. 54

7.9.3.2   Evaluation by the Panel 55

7.9.4   The determination of normal values for new product models or types: Article 2.2 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement 56

7.9.4.1   Main arguments of the parties. 56

7.9.4.2   Evaluation by the Panel 57

7.9.5   The determination of an additional margin of dumping: Article 6.10 of the Anti‑Dumping Agreement 57

7.9.5.1   Main arguments of the parties. 57

7.9.5.2   Evaluation by the Panel 58

7.10   Additional claim under Article 1 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement and Article VI of the GATT 1994  58

7.10.1   Introduction. 58

7.10.2   Main arguments of the parties. 58

7.10.3   Evaluation by the Panel 58

7.11   "As such" claims concerning subsection 2(1), section 30.1, and subsections 35(1), 35(2), 38(1), and 41(1) of SIMA. 59

7.11.1   Introduction. 59

7.11.2   Main arguments of the parties. 59

7.11.3   Main arguments of third parties. 60

7.11.3.1   United States. 60

7.11.4   Evaluation by the Panel 61

7.12   "As such" claims concerning subsections 42(1), 42(6), and 43(1) of SIMA and subsection 37.1(1) of SIMR  64

7.13   Additional "as such" claims concerning subsection 2(1), section 30.1 and subsections 35(1), 35(2), 38(1), 41(1), 42(1), 42(6), and 43(1) of SIMA and subsection 37.1(1) of SIMR. 65

8   Conclusions and Recommendation.. 66