The DSB considers aircraft disputes brought by the US and EC

back to top

Request for panel establishment  

DS316: EC — Measures Affecting Trade in Large Civil Aircraft

The US requested for the first time the DSB to establish a panel for examining certain measures of the EC and the member States which, according to the US, provide subsidies that are inconsistent with their obligations under the SCM Agreement and the GATT 1994 (WT/DS316/6).

The EC rejected the US' request.

The US also requested that the DSB take a decision to combine this panel with the panel established on 20 July 2005 (WT/DS316/5).

The EC objected to the US' request.

  

back to top

Request for information-gathering process and facilitator under Annex V of the Subsidies Agreement 

DS317: US — Measures Affecting Trade in Large Civil Aircraft

Following the establishment of a panel on 17 February 2006, the EC requested for the fourth time the DSB to initiate the procedures for developing information-gathering under Annex V of the SCM Agreement. While the US accepted that the panel be established, it could neither agree to the resumption of the information-gathering process under Annex V launched on 23 September 2005 nor to the initiation of a new process. According to the US, a number of outstanding issues needed to be clarified.
The DSB took note of the statements made.

  

back to top

Surveillance of implementation  

Implementation status reports

- The European Communities presented the following status report:

DS174 & DS290: EC — Protection of Trademarks and Geographical Indications for Agricultural Products and Foodstuffs

The EC reported that the Regulation on geographical indications was adopted by the Council of the European Union on 20 March 2006 (WT/DS174/25/ADD.3 — WT/DS290/23/ADD.3) The EC concluded that it had thus fully complied with the DSB rulings within the reasonable period of time agreed with Australia and the United States (3 April 2006).

Australia and the US welcomed the action taken by the EC but they were concerned by the significant expansion of the exceptions in the new regulation. In addition, they also noted that the new regulation established 1 January 1996 as a cut-off date for the protection of prior trademark rights. They concluded by hoping that the EC would take these comments into account and would correct the aspects in the new regulation.

DS299: EC — Countervailing measures on dynamic random access memory chips

The EC reported that the Council of the European Union adopted on 10 April 2006 a regulation to amend Regulation (EC) N° 1480/2003 imposing a countervailing duty on DRAMs from Korea (WT/DS299/9). Thus the EC said that it implemented the DSB rulings. Korea expressed its view that the EC's re-examination failed to comply with WTO obligations. The EC replied that it would stand ready to pursue dialogue with Korea and respond to any concerns.

- The United States presented the following status reports:

DS285: The US — Measures affecting the cross-Border supply of gambling and betting services

The US explained that in view of a civil investigation undertaken by the US Department of Justice, the US was in compliance with the DSB rulings (WT/DS285/15/ADD.1). The US added that it was aware that Antigua and Barbuda had a different understanding of the DSB findings in this dispute. It argued that the compliance in this dispute related exclusively to the point whether the US was able to show that US laws did not discriminate against foreign suppliers of remote gambling on horse racing. Consequently, the US said that it was now in position to show that US law did not discriminate.
Antigua and Barbuda expressed its disappointments. It explained that the position of the US Department of Justice used by the USTR to assert its compliance was in fact similar to the one which was raised during the course of the proceeding and found unpersuasive by both the panel and the Appellate Body.

DS176: US — Section 211 Omnibus Appropriations Act of 1998

The US reported that US Administration was working with Congress to implement the DSB's rulings.

DS184: US — Anti-Dumping Measures on Certain Hot-Rolled Steel

The US reported that US Administration would continue to work with Congress to enact legislation to implement the DSB’s recommendations.

DS160: US — Section 110(5) of the US Copyright Act

The US said that US Administration continued to work closely with the US Congress and continued to confer with the EC.

  

back to top

Implementation 

DS217 & DS234: US — Continued Dumping and Subsidy Offset Act of 2000

On 1 February 2006, the US congress approved the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005, including a provision to repeal the the CDSOA - the so-called “Byrd Amendment” and on 8 February 2006, President Bush signed the Act into law. As a result, the US considered that it had taken all actions necessary to implement the rulings and failed to see the purpose of submitting status report. Several members disagreed that the US brought its measures fully into conformity with the DSB's rulings. They argued that the transition clause in the proposed legislation would postpone the repeal of the CDSOA until October 2007 and allow duties collected before then to be disbursed subsequently. As a result, they continued to urge the US to provide status reports until it fully complied with the DSB's recommendations.

DS212: US — countervailing measures concerning certain products from the European Communities

The EC continued to deplore the fact that US failed to provide a status report that would provide further clarifications regarding the issuance of preliminary findings from the Department of Commerce. The US confirmed that the US Department of Commerce was working on new determinations in the sunset reviews.

EC — Regime for the Importation, Sale and Distribution of Bananas DS27 and related subsequent WTO proceedings

Honduras, Panama and Nicaragua continued to argue that the EC had failed to bring its measures into conformity with its obligations under the DSB’s recommendations in Bananas dispute. They argued that the new banana regime was no different, as it continued to discriminate against MFN suppliers.

The “disagreement” between the complaining members and the EC about the consistency of the measures adopted by the EC and the legitimacy of the DSB as an appropriate forum to discuss the issues remains unsolved.

  

back to top

Next meeting 

The next meeting of the DSB will be on 17 May 2006.