UNITED STATES - ANTI-DUMPING ACT OF 1916

Notification of an Appeal by the United States under

paragraph 4 of Article 16 of the Understanding on Rules

and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes (DSU)

            The following notification, dated 29 May 2000, sent by the United States to the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB), is circulated to Members.  This notification also constitutes the Notice of Appeal, filed on the same day with the Appellate Body, pursuant to the  Working Procedures for Appellate Review.

_______________

            Pursuant to Article 16 of the  Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes  ("DSU") and Rule 20 of the Working Procedures for Appellate Review, the United States hereby notifies its decision to appeal to the Appellate Body certain issues of law covered in the Panel report on  United States – Anti-Dumping Act of 1916  (WT/DS136/R) and certain legal interpretations developed by the Panel.

1.         The United States seeks review by the Appellate Body of the Panel's legal conclusion that the 1916 Act is inconsistent with Articles VI:1 and VI:2 of the  General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994  ("GATT 1994").  These findings are in error, and are based upon erroneous findings on issues of law and on related legal interpretations with respect to Article VI of the GATT 1994 and various provisions of the  Agreement on Implementation of Article VI of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994  ("the Anti-dumping Agreement"), including:

(a)        the Panel's legal conclusion that Article VI of the GATT 1994 and the Anti-dumping Agreement apply to any measure addressing transnational price discrimination;

(b)        the Panel's legal conclusion that Article VI of GATT 1994 and the Anti-dumping Agreement apply to the 1916 Act;

(c)        the Panel's legal conclusion that the 1916 Act addresses the same type of price discrimination as Article VI of GATT 1994;

(d)        the Panel's legal conclusion that the 1916 Act violates Article VI:2 of the GATT 1994 because Article VI:2 of the GATT 1994 provides that only measures in the form of anti-dumping duties may be applied to counteract dumping as such;

(e)        the Panel's legal conclusion that, by not providing exclusively for the injury test provided in Article VI:1 of the GATT 1994, the 1916 Act violates Article VI:1 of the GATT 1994.