RESTRICTEDWORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONG/ADP/AHG/W/129
26 February 2002
(02-0951)
Committee on Anti-Dumping Practices
Working Group on ImplementationOriginal:  English
IMPLEMENTATION-RELATED ISSUES REFERRED TO THE
COMMITTEE ON ANTI-DUMPING PRACTICES AND ITS
WORKING GROUP ON IMPLEMENTATION
Paper Submitted by the European Community
The following communication, dated 15 February 2002, has been received from the
Permanent Delegation of the European Commission.
_______________
The European Communities submit the following questions concerning certain issues
contained in the submissions made by Brazil (G/ADP/AHG/W/127), India G/ADP/AHG/W/128) andIndonesia (G/ADP/AHG/W/126).  It should be recalled that these questions are posed only for reasons
of clarification and do not prejudice the EC's position on the substance of the submissions.
Topic 7.2: Operationalize Article 15 Anti-Dumping Agreement (ADA)
Submission by Brazil (G/ADP/AHG/W/127)
"Lesser price" commitment with respect to under takings (similar to "lesser duty" rule) based
on the undercutting margin could be considered a constructive remedy for Members that do not use a
"lesser duty" rule.
Questions by the EC:
1. Could Brazil please clarify whether this would mean that the "lesser duty" rule which is
applied on a general basis by a developed country Member would not be considered as a
"constructive remedy" within the meaning of Article 15 second sentence?
2. Could Brazil please explain why it refers to the undercutting margin as a basis for the
"lesser price" commitment?
3. Does Brazil consider that there are also othe r possibilities than undercutting to establish
the non-injurious price level for the purposes of an undertaking?
Submission by India (G/ADP/AHG/W/128)
According to para. 3 of India's submission, the first sentence of Article 15 imposes an
obligation on the investigating authorities that the special situation of developing countries should be
an element to be taken into consideration when making an evaluation as to the application of anti-
dumping measures.G/ADP/AHG/W/129
Page 2
Question by the EC:
4. Is India suggesting that the first sentence of Article 15 ADA imposes a separate
obligation on developed country Members from th e one laid down in the second sentence of this
article? If so, what would this obligation add in  practical terms to the obligation set out in the
second sentence?
In para 5 of its paper, India suggests that the application of an anti-dumping duty against
exporters from a developing country could be presumed to adversely affect the essential interests of
this developing country.
Questions by the EC:
5. Could India please explain in more detail whether and if so why it thinks that essential
interests of a developing country are always affected when anti-dumping measures are imposed
on imports from that developing country?
6. Could India please clarify whether the presumption to be established according to its
proposal could be rebutted and if yes on what basis?
The de minimis dumping margin of 2 per cent should be raised to 5 per cent and the
negligible import volume should be raised from 3 per cent to 7 per cent without there being anyrequirement of cumulation. ( para. 10 )
Questions by  the EC:
7. Could India please expand on the term "without there being any requirement of
cumulation" (emphasis added)?
8. The rationale behind Article 5.7 seems to be that imports below a certain threshold do
only cause 'negligible' injury. Could India please explain why the volume of imports would have
a different impact on the injury suffered by the domestic industry depending on whether the
exporter is situated in a developing or a developed country?
9. Could this proposal in India's view be implemented without changing the Agreement?
Imports from developing countries up to a specified percentage of total domestic consumption
of the like product in the importing developed country would lead to negligible injury and no anti-
dumping measures made applicable.  The specific percentage of imports could be arrived at afterfurther discussions with the other member countries. ( para. 12 )
Question by the EC:
10. Could India please explain whether in her view this proposal can be implemented
without changing the Agreement ?
Submission by Indonesia (G/ADP/AHG/W/126)
No measures should be imposed where imports from developing countries have declined in
relative and absolute terms in the twelve month period following the investigation period.G/ADP/AHG/W/129
Page 3
Questions by the EC:
11. After initiation of an anti-dumping investigation imports may decline for several
reasons, e.g. as a mere reaction to the initiation  of an anti-dumping investigation or because
anti-dumping practices have been abandoned on a lasting basis. Could Indonesia please expandon whether and if so how these two scenarios should be distinguished?
12. How does Indonesia envisage the practical implementation of its proposal since  data
concerning the imports for the 12 months following the IP will only be available with a certain
delay?
13. Should the investigating authorities carry out a new ex officio investigation following the
end of the investigation period in order to find out whether imports have declined?
__________