This summary has been prepared by the WTO Secretariat’s Information and External Relations Division to help public understanding about developments in WTO disputes. It is not a legal interpretation of the issues, and it is not intended as a complete account of the issues. These can be found in the reports themselves and in the minutes of the Dispute Settlement Body’s meetings.
DS509: China — Duties and other Measures concerning the Exportation of Certain Raw Materials
The EU noted it had requested the establishment of a panel during the last DSB meeting and referred to its statements made then. It noted that at the meeting, China had referred to its publication of 2017 export quotas. While the significance of this statement was unclear to the EU, it welcomed any removal of restrictions on the export of raw materials. The EU said it remained ready to work with China to resolve this dispute.
China said it was disappointed with the EU’s decision to request the establishment of a panel. China reiterated its stance on respecting WTO rules and abiding by its accession commitments. China said that its policies were integral components of measures taken to promote the management of exhaustible natural resources and protection of the environment with the purpose of achieving sustainable development. In regards to its Total Export Quotas of Industrial Products and Agricultural Products of 2017 published on 31 October, China said it regretted that the EU had not carefully reviewed the announcement before requesting a panel.
The United States said it shared the concerns of the EU that China’s export restraints on raw materials were inconsistent with WTO rules. The US said it would have been more efficient for China, and the DSB, had China accepted the establishment of a single panel on 8 November. The US also said it was not clear whether the quotas announced on 31 October addressed the concerns raised.
The DSB agreed to establish a panel. Brazil, Canada, Chile, Chinese Taipei, Colombia, India, Indonesia, Japan, Kazakhstan, Korea, Mexico, Norway, Oman, the Russian Federation, Singapore, the United States and Viet Nam reserved third-party rights to participate in the panel’s proceedings.
Other panel requests
DS494: European Union — Cost Adjustment Methodologies and Certain Anti-Dumping Measures on Imports from Russia (Second Complaint)
The Russian Federation said it had concerns regarding the EU’s cost adjustment methodologies and certain anti-dumping measures on imports from Russia. Russia expressed its disappointment that the EU had maintained such measures despite concern having been raised by other members in disputes DS473 and in DS480. Russia had held unsuccessful consultations with the EU and was accordingly requesting the establishment of a panel. The EU said it regretted Russia’s request. The EU believed both parties had held constructive consultations. The EU was also disappointed to see Russia raising issues, such as Article 2(3) of the EU’s Basic Anti-dumping Regulation, which were not raised in the consultations. The EU believed its measures were WTO consistent. It therefore was not in a position to accept the establishment of a panel.
The DSB therefore deferred the establishment of a panel.
DS499: Russia — Measures Affecting the Importation of Railway Equipment and Parts thereof
Ukraine said that, since 2014, Russia has suspended the validity of conformity assessment certificates for railway products issued to Ukrainian producers of railway equipment and parts without any reasonable explanation. New applications for conformity assessment certificates by Ukrainian producers had been systematically rejected without consideration, Ukraine said. Conformity assessment certificates issued by other Eurasian Economic Union countries had not been recognised by Russian authorities. As a result, Ukrainian railway products could not be imported into, nor registered for operation, in Russia. This has significantly harmed Ukrainian railway producers. Ukraine considers these measures to be inconsistent with the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) 1994 and the Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade. Due to failed consultations, Ukraine requested the establishment of a panel.
The Russian Federation expressed disappointment with Ukraine’s decision to request the establishment of a panel. Russia said it had had fruitful consultations with Ukraine and had positively responded to the relevant questions. Russia affirmed its continuing respect for WTO rules and its accession commitments. Russia was thus not in a position to accept the establishment of a panel.
The DSB therefore deferred the establishment of a panel.
Statements regarding intentions to implement DSB recommendations
DS456: India — Certain Measures Relating to Solar Cells and Solar Modules
India said it had informed the DSB of its intention to implement the DSB rulings and recommendations in DS456 by letter, dated 10 November 2016. As it noted in the letter, India would need a reasonable period of time to do so. India looked forward to working with the United States towards establishing a reasonable period of time.
The United States thanked India for its letter and statement expressing its intention to implement the DSB’s recommendations and rulings. The US said it stood ready to discuss a reasonable period of time for implementation with India.
DS473: European Union — Anti-Dumping Measures on Biodiesel from Argentina
The EU said that, while it intended to implement the rulings and recommendations of the DSB in DS473, it required a reasonable period of time to do so. The EU said it stood ready to discuss this with Argentina in due course.
Argentina thanked the EU for its statement and said it hoped the EU would immediately begin the process of implementing the rulings and recommendations. As the process was not particularly complicated, it said the reasonable period of time should be brief. Argentina said it stood ready to discuss this with the EU.
Statements on implementation of DSB recommendations
The EU, Japan, Canada, Brazil and China renewed their calls on the US to submit implementation reports in DS217 and DS234, in accordance with Article 21.6 of the WTO’s Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU), and to stop transferring anti-dumping and countervailing duties to US industry.
The United States reiterated its view that it had taken all actions necessary to implement the recommendations and rulings. Regarding status reports, the US said it failed to see what purpose would be served by further submission of the reports.
DS413: China — Certain Measures Affecting Electronic Payment Services
The United States, while noting that China had issued a regulation in June 2016 setting out a licensing application process for electronic payment service (EPS) suppliers to obtain authorisation to do business in China, reiterated its concern that China’s domestic supplier remained the only entity authorised to provide electronic payment services. The US urged China to ensure that approval for foreign EPS suppliers occurred without delay.
China referred to its previous statements and noted that it had taken all actions necessary to implement the recommendations and rulings of the DSB.
DS436: US — Countervailing Measures on Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products from India
India reiterated statements made at earlier DSB meetings on this issue and its disappointment that the US had not submitted a status report on implementation. India urged the US to come into compliance with its WTO obligations and, until then, to submit status reports.
The United States reiterated its view that it had completed implementation. The US said it remained willing to discuss any questions India may have, but India had not contacted the US to do so.
DS430: India — Measures Concerning the Importation of Certain Agricultural Products
The United States referred to its prior statements on the dispute. The US noted that India required a sanitary import permit before any poultry products could enter India. India only accepted online applications for these permits; however, the online portal was not functional. Thus no permits could be granted. The US remained willing to discuss a solution with India, but would continue to preserve and enforce its rights under the DSU.
India said that the measure found to be inconsistent by the DSB was no longer in force and had been superseded by revised measures. India therefore considered that it had brought itself into conformity with its WTO obligations and thus urged the US to terminate suspension of concessions proceedings under Article 22.6 of the DSU.
DS285: United States — Measures Affecting the Cross Border Supply of Gambling and Betting Services: Statement by Antigua and Barbuda
Antigua and Barbuda noted that 12 years had passed since the US had been found to be in violation of its obligations under the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) in this dispute. Over that period Antigua, a country with a GDP of less than $1 billion, had been deprived of trade revenue worth $250 million. This had significantly retarded Antigua’s economic growth and development. Despite good faith consultations on its part, the US had not proposed settlement terms that would offset the harm. All WTO members, it said, should be concerned with the continued non-compliance of the US in this dispute.
Antigua and Barbuda said it was currently engaged in their final discussions with the US to resolve this matter. However, if a settlement was not reached before the end of 2016, Antigua would have to resort to the suspension of copyright on the sale of US intellectual property, consistent with the award by the DSB.
The United States said it remained committed to resolving this matter, but that it was disappointed that Antigua and Barbuda had characterised the US as having acted in bad faith when the US had taken a constructive approach to resolving the matter. The US said it had, on multiple occasions, attempted to settle this dispute. The US also put forward a package of service concessions as compensation for removing internet gambling from the US schedule of commitments. Antigua and Barbuda was the only member blocking the US from completing this process.
The US said it looked forward to future engagement with the country’s new government. Relating to Antigua and Barbuda’s proposed plan for suspension of benefits, the US said it would review this carefully and expected Antigua to ensure any suspension was transparent and within the DSB’s authorisation. However, the US noted that such suspension of intellectual property rights would be counter to Antigua and Barbuda’s own interests and urged it to reconsider before taking this unprecedented step.
Venezuela, Argentina, Jamaica, Dominica (on behalf of the Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States) and Cuba expressed support for Antigua and Barbuda’s statement and urged the US to come into conformity with its WTO obligations.
The next meeting of the DSB will take place on 16 December.