back to top

Panel establishment 

DS403: Philippines — Taxes on Distilled Spirits

A panel was established at the US second-time request (WT/DS403/4) which challenged the Philippines tax regime on distilled spirits.

The US, the Philippines and the EU agreed that the panel established on 19 January 2010 (WT/DS396 — see DSB summary) to review the EU complaint on the same issue will also examine the US complaint.

The US said spirits distilled in the Philippines were taxed at a low rate, while other distilled spirits were taxed at rates from approximately 10 to 40 times higher. The US urged the Philippines to take action soon to level the playing field for imported and domestic spirits in the Philippines market.

The Philippines was disappointed that the US had chosen to renew its panel request. The Philippines said that consultations held with the US clarified the non-discriminatory and impartial nature of its tax regime on distilled spirits.

China, Australia, Mexico, Chinese Taipei, Thailand, the US, India and the EU reserved their third-party rights.

  

back to top

Panel requests deferred

DS402: United States — Use of Zeroing in Anti-Dumping Measures Involving Products from Korea

Korea introduced its first time request for a panel to examine the use of zeroing by the US in anti-dumping investigations (WT/DS402/3). The US blocked Korea's request.

Korea said that consultations with the US held since 24 November 2009 failed to resolve the dispute. Korea said that zeroing had repeatedly been found inconsistent with the Anti-Dumping Agreement. Korea added that the US had not contested those rulings.

The US was disappointed that Korea had chosen to move forward with a panel request. The US said that it discontinued zeroing in the context of average-to-average comparisons in investigations and that it was therefore not in a position to agree to a panel.

DS404: United States — Anti-dumping Measures on Certain Shrimp from Viet Nam

Viet Nam requested a panel concerning a number of anti-dumping measures imposed by the US on certain frozen warm water shrimp from Viet Nam and the use of zeroing (WT/DS404/5). The US blocked Viet Nam's request.

This was the first time Viet Nam had requested a panel since it joined the WTO in January 2007. Viet Nam said that the central issue involved in its request was zeroing and specifically zeroing in periodic reviews under US law. Viet Nam added that the US measures at issue were inconsistent with WTO rules as well as with Viet Nam's protocol of accession (WT/L/662) and paragraphs 254 & 255 of the Working Party report on Viet Nam's accession (WT/ACC/VNM/48).

The US was disappointed that Viet Nam had chosen to move forward with a panel request. The US raised several concerns regarding Viet Nam's panel request, claiming for example that some items were not the subject of consultations, and that the original anti-dumping investigation as well as the first review of the anti-dumping order were each initiated following applications received prior to Viet Nam's accession to the WTO. The US said that it was therefore not in a position to agree to a panel and strongly urged Viet Nam to reconsider its decision to pursue a panel.

DS405: European Union — Anti-Dumping Measures on Certain Footwear from China

China introduced its first time request for a panel to examine anti-dumping measures imposed by the EU on Chinese footwear (WT/DS405/2). The EU blocked China's request.

China said that the EU anti-dumping regulation which formed part of the legal basis for the imposition of anti-dumping measures on Chinese footwear was inconsistent with WTO rules as well as with China's Protocol of accession. China said that consultations with the EU failed to resolve its concerns and that no mutually satisfactory solution could be reached.

The EU recalled that anti-dumping measures were not about protectionism but about fighting unfair trade. The EU was convinced of the strength of its case and said that consultations with China had not been held on a large number of claims. The EU said it had offered a second round of consultations with China and concluded that the panel request was premature. The EU opposed the establishment of a panel.

 

back to top

Implementation 

DS366: Colombia — Indicative Prices and Restrictions on Ports of Entry

Columbia gave its 1st status report (WT/DS366/15) regarding its implementation of the DSB recommendations. In this dispute, Panama challenged Columbia's restrictive measures imposed on Panama's imports. The DSB adopted the Panel report on 20 May 2009 (WT/DS366/R and Corr.1). The reasonable period of time for Columbia to implement the ruling ended on 4 February 2010.

Columbia announced it had fully implemented the DSB ruling within the reasonable period of time and said that it was now in full compliance with its WTO obligations. Columbia said it made various substantial changes to the measures challenged by Panama.

Panama said it would thoroughly and carefully assess Columbia's measures, to be certain that they overcome the difficulties in this dispute. Panama was still not clear on how the new measures will work and would ask for some more information to Colombia. Panama would follow up and monitor Columbia's new measures to make sure they are in accordance with WTO rules and the DSB recommendations. After careful consideration, Panama would decide whether it needed to take this case further.

 

back to top

Byrd Amendment case 

DS217: United States — Continued Dumping and Subsidy Offset Act of 2000

Japan and the EC requested this item to be placed on the agenda.

In accordance with the DSB authorization to suspend concessions to the US, the EU announced its decision to adjust the level of sanctions against the US, for the 5th year, and brought it up to USD95,38 million, applicable as of 1 May 2010. The EU said that the level of retaliation reflected the proportionate increase of the amount distributed to US companies from anti-dumping and countervailing duties collected on EU products.

The US regretted that the EU had increased its level of sanctions. The US said that it had taken all steps necessary to comply with the DSB ruling and failed to see how the continued suspension of concession would further that purpose. The US said it was perplexed with this decision and will review the action taken by the EU. The US added that the DSB only authorized the suspension of concessions as provided by the arbitrator.

  

back to top

European Communities — Export subsidies: statements by Australia, Brazil and Thailand 

This item was on the agenda at the request of Australia, Brazil and Thailand. In a joint statement delivered by Australia, the three members recalled their concerns about the recent EU decision to export additional sugar above its annual scheduled quantity commitment. The three countries urged the EU to provide the necessary technical information and to justify the WTO consistency of its decision.

The EU recalled that this decision was temporary and announced that the export of 0.5 million tonnes of sugar was now exhausted. The EU added that it did not renew this temporary decision. The EU said that the decision fully respected its international obligations and WTO commitments. The EU was ready to continue explaining its temporary decision to export sugar.

  

back to top

Other business 

Under other Business, China and the US made statements on China's implementation in the dispute related to the protections and the enforcement of China's intellectual property regime DS362.

In this dispute, the DSB adopted the panel report on 19 March 2009 (WT/DS362/R). The reasonable period of time for China to implement the ruling ended on 20 March 2010.

China recalled that at the last DSB meeting it announced that it had completed all necessary steps to implement the DSB recommendations. China provided further information related to the different legislative steps taken to implement the DSB recommendations. China approved two decisions that came into force on 1 April 2010 revising its intellectual property regime in accordance with the WTO. China concluded that with the coming into force of these two decisions, it had brought its measures into conformity with the DSB recommendations.

The US did not share China's assessment that it was in full compliance with WTO rules. The US said it had begun working with China bilaterally on addressing certain questions. The US looked forward to further discussions with China on this issue.

  

back to top

Next meeting 

The next meeting of the DSB will be held on 18 may 2010.