WORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONG/ADP/Q1/CHN/14
G/SCM/Q1/CHN/14
11 April 2003
(03-2020)
Committee on Anti-Dumping Practices
Committee on Subsidies and Countervailing MeasuresOriginal:  English
NOTIFICATION OF LAWS AND REGULATIONS UNDER
ARTICLES 18.5 AND 32.6 OF THE AGREEMENTS
Questions Posed by the UNITED STATES Regarding the
Notification of THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA1
The following communication, dated 10 April 2003, has been received from the Permanent
Mission of the United States.
_______________
QUESTIONS ON ANTI-DUMPING
The United States thanks China for its notifications of its anti-dumping regulations2 and
provisional rules.3
1. Are any laws other than the Foreign Trade Law of the People’s Republic of China given
precedence over the notified regulations and provisional rules?  If so, have these laws been notified to
the Committee?
2. We understand that a number of implementing rules concerning anti-dumping proceedings
have been issued by the Chinese government but do not appear to have been notified to the
Committee.  These include additional rules issued by the Ministry of Foreign Trade and Economic
Cooperation (MOFTEC), rules issued by the St ate Economic and Trade Commission (SETC), and
rules governing judicial review of trade remedy cases.  When will China notify the translated text ofthese rules to the Committee?
3. Throughout this document, we refer to MOFTEC, SETC and the State Council Tariff
Commission, as these are the organs cited in the notified regulations and rules.  In light of recent
government restructuring, please identify the specif ic government entities that will be administering
China’s anti-dumping rules and regulations and the particular rules or regulations for which each
entity will be responsible.
4. None of the notified regulations appear to contain a provision corresponding to ADA
Art 2.4.1.  How does China intend to apply the currency exchange provisions of ADA Art. 2.4.1?
5. ADA Art. 2.4.2 requires that when a weighted average normal value is compared to
individual export transaction prices, an explanati on must be provided as to why the other methods
                                                     
1 G/ADP/N/1/CHN/2 & Suppl.1.
2 G/ADP/N/1/CHN/2 (11 September 2002).
3 G/ADP/N/1/CHN/2/Suppl.1 (18 February 2003).G/ADP/Q1/CHN/14
G/SCM/Q1/CHN/14
Page 2
cannot address the price differences at issue.  Article 6 of the notified regulations includes no such
requirement.  How does China intend to apply Article 6 in a manner consistent with ADA Art. 2.4.2?
6. Paragraph 2 of Article 8 of the notified regulations discusses the competent authority’s
examination of pricing and indicates that the authority should examine “price undercutting” of the
dumped imports.  Please explain how this language  is consistent with ADA Art. 3.2, under which the
investigating authorities are “to consider whether there has been a significant price undercutting by
the dumped imports as compared with the price of a like product of the importing Member...”.
7. Paragraph (4) of Article 8 of the notified regulations does not contain the requirement in ADA
Art. 3.7 that an affirmative determination of threat of material injury by reason of dumped importsmust be based on a belief that further dumped imports are “imminent,” and that material injury by
reason of the dumped imports would occur unless an anti-dumping duty measure were applied.  How
does China intend to implement these requirements of the ADA?
8. The specific provisions of ADA Arts. 4.1 and 4.2 concerning treatment of regional markets
are not incorporated into Article 11 of the notified regulations.  How does China propose to apply the
regional market provision of Article 11 in a manner consistent with ADA Arts. 4.1 and 4.2?
9. Please clarify the standards of evidence that applicants must meet in providing each type of
information specified in Articles 14 and 15 of the notified regulations and Articles 15 through 24 ofthe Provisional Rules on Initiation of Anti-Dumping Investigations .
10. Article 16 of the notified regulations and corresponding articles of MOFTEC’s Provisional
Rules on Initiation of Anti-Dumping Investigations do not include the provision of ADA Art. 5.3 that
requires the authorities to examine the accuracy and adequacy of the evidence provided in theapplication to determine whether it is sufficient to justify the initiation of an investigation.  Also,
Article 16 does not include the provision of ADA Art. 5.5 specifying that the authorities shall avoid
publicizing an application for investigation prior to an investigation being initiated.  How does China
intend to meet the requirements of ADA Arts. 5.3 and 5.5?
11. With regard to the Provisional Rules on Initiation of Anti-Dumping Investigations :
(a) Do Articles 8 and 9 of the provisional rules concern solely how an “industry” is
defined for ascertaining whether there is sufficient support for the application for
purposes of ADA Art. 5.4, or do they also relate to how the industry is defined for
conducting injury analysis for purposes of ADA Art. 3?
(b) Article 9 of the provisional rules, which specifies when MOFTEC may define the
domestic industry on a regional basis, does not require that there be a concentration of
dumped imports into the region.  Assuming that Article 9 is pertinent to injury
analysis, how is this provision consistent with the last sentence of ADA Art. 4.1(ii)?
(c) Do Articles 20 and 21 of the provisional rules require an applicant to choose whether
its application is based on material injury to the domestic industry or threat of
material injury?  Can an applicant file an application based on theories of both
material injury and threat?
(d) If an applicant files its application solely on the theory of threat of material injury
pursuant to Article 21, is the applicant then free to omit from its application the price
and volume information specified in subparagraphs (1), (2) and (3) of Article 20?  IfG/ADP/Q1/CHN/14
G/SCM/Q1/CHN/14
Page 3
so, please explain how the provisions of Article 21 are consistent with ADA
Art 5.2(iv).
12. Article 18 of the notified regulations and Article 42 of the Provisional Rules on Initiation of
Anti-Dumping Investigations  state that, where MOFTEC does not receive an application for an AD
investigation, it may, upon consultation with SETC, decide to self-initiate an investigation.  Please
elaborate on the circumstances under which this might occur and, in particular, how China would
propose to interpret the “special circumstances” standard contained in ADA Art. 5.6.   How would
China envisage compiling the evidence required by ADA Art. 5 before self-initiating an
investigation?  Is MOFTEC the only organization that has authority to self-initiate anti-dumping
cases?
13. With regard to the Provisional Rules on Questionnaire in Anti-Dumping Investigations :
(a) Article 13 of the Rules requires that responses and supporting materials be translated
into simplified Chinese characters.  For voluminous supporting documents, such ascompany annual reports, will MOFTEC allow parties to limit translation to only the
relevant portions of the documents?
(b) Under Article 8, does MOFTEC send questionnaires only to those foreign producers
and exporters that have registered with it pursuant to Article 6?  Why does MOFTECnot also circulate questionnaires to other producers and exporters named in the
application, pursuant to Article 13 of the  Provisional Rules on Initiation of Anti-
Dumping Investigations ?
(c) What explanation will MOFTEC provide to parties submitting information of the
grounds for its conclusion under Article 20 that the reasons for requesting
confidential treatment are insufficient?
(d) Article 20 provides that MOFTEC will request amendment of a request for
confidential treatment in two situations: 1) the original reason  given for the request is
deemed insufficient; or 2) the non-confidential summary  (or reason given for not
providing such a summary) is deemed insufficient.  However, Article 20 onlyexplains what will happen in one of those situations if the amendment continues to be
deemed insufficient (i.e. if the amended non-confidential summary is still insufficient,
the material will be disregarded).  Article 20 does not explain what steps will be taken
if the amended reason for requesting confidentiality is still deemed insufficient.  In
such a case, will the materials be disregarded or treated as non-confidential?
(e) What does MOFTEC do with material which has been submitted to it, but which it
will disregard under Article 20 because of an insufficient non-confidential summary?
14. With regard to the Provisional Rules on Public Hearing in Anti-Dumping Investigations :
(a) Please clarify what type of information would fall within the definition of “national
secrets” or “ personal privacy” under Article 4 of the Rules .
(b) Articles 5 through 10 of the Rules  suggest that holding a hearing is at the discretion of
MOFTEC.  How is this Article consiste nt with ADA Art. 6.2, which states that
“authorities shall, on request, provide opportunities for all interested parties to meet
those parties with adverse interests, so  that opposing view may be presented and
rebuttal arguments offered”?G/ADP/Q1/CHN/14
G/SCM/Q1/CHN/14
Page 4
(c) Article 14 of the Rules  suggests that only interested parties may attend a hearing.
Does China allow for public attendance at hearings?
15. With regard to the Provisional Rules on On-the-Spot Verification in Anti-Dumping
Investigations :
(a) Please clarify the intent of the statement in Article 4 of the Rules  that MOFTEC will
only conduct verifications of exporters “who have been fully cooperative in the
investigation.”  For example, will failure to provide a small, discrete amount of data
while otherwise cooperating to the best of their ability prevent verification?
(b) Please clarify the meaning and intent of Article 6 of the Rules .  What factors will
MOFTEC consider in determining whether the “various situations of each case” call
for verification?
(c) How much time will MOFTEC normally schedule to conduct a verification of a
responding company, pursuant to Article 11 of the Rules ?
(d) Under what circumstances does MOFTEC foresee using non-government experts to
assist in verification, as indicated in Article 12 of the Rules ?  What is the penalty
should such experts breach their obligation of  confidentiality with respect to certain
company information?
(e) If, under Article 16 of the Rules , the verification team decides to use Chinese as the
working language, will MOFTEC provide translators?
(f) Please clarify what is envisioned as a “reasonable period” and elaborate as to the
level of detail that will be disclosed in MOFTEC reports of the results of verification,
as envisioned under Article 19 of the Rules .
(g) Article 21 of the Rules  indicates that facts available may be applied when verification
fails to be completed as scheduled due to delay caused by exporters and producers inquestion.  What allowance will MOFTEC make for circumstances where it is not
possible for the company to reasonably respond in the time allotted for verification?
16. Please confirm that China’s application of facts available under  Article 21 of the notified
regulations will be applied in a manner consistent with ADA Art. 6.8 and Annex II.
17. Article 22 of the notified regulations does not provide a definition of “interested parties,”
which is particularly important with respect to the treatment of and access to confidential information.
How does China define interested parties and how does that definition comply with ADA Art. 6.11?
18. Article 22 also states that “[a]n interested party may request the investigating authorities to
treat the information it provided as confidential if it considers that any disclosure of such information
will create significantly adverse effects.”   How does MOFTEC define what constitutes “significantly
adverse effects ”?
19. With regard to the Provisional Rules on Access to Non-Confidential Information in Anti-
Dumping Investigations :G/ADP/Q1/CHN/14
G/SCM/Q1/CHN/14
Page 5
(a) Please elaborate on the standards that MOFTEC will apply in determining whether a
non-confidential summary meets the conditions of ADA Art. 6.5.1.
(b) How quickly will the documents referenced in Article 5 of the Rules  be made
available for public viewing and how long after the end of the investigation will these
documents remain available to the public?
(c) With regard to Article 8 of the Rules , what is the rationale for requiri1ng a party who
seeks information to identify in advance the contents and scope of the information to
be consulted? Please explain how this provision is consistent with ADA Art. 6.4
which states that the authorities must provide opportunities for “all interested partiesto see all information that is relevant to the presentation of their cases?”
(d) How far in advance must an interested party who seeks to review the public file
notify MOFTEC, per Article 8 of the Rules ?
20. With regard to the Provisional Rules on Disclosure of Information in Anti-Dumping
Investigations :
(a) In what form and to what degree of detail will MOFTEC make available the
“essential data, information, evidence and reasons adopted for establishment of theexistence of dumping and dumping margin” described in Articles 3 through 5 and 9
of the Rules ?
(b) What provision will MOFTEC make to an swer questions from interested parties
about the disclosed information?
21. Article 27 of the notified regulations, which describes circumstances under which the
investigating authorities may terminate an anti-dumpi ng investigation, indicates in Paragraph 5 that an
investigation may be terminated if both MOFTEC and SETC consider it not appropriate to continue.
Under what circumstances beyond those already specified in Article 27 would MOFTEC and SETC
consider terminating an investigation?
22. Article 29 of the notified regulations indicates that any decision to apply provisional measures
is proposed by MOFTEC, but decided by the State Council Tariff Commission (the “Tariff
Commission”).  The same requirement applies to final determinations, as specified in Article 38.
What oversight rules govern the Tariff Commission’s decisions?  What discretion does the Tariff
Commission have in setting dumping margins or otherwise modifying MOFT EC’s recommendations?
Does the Tariff Commission have the authority to in crease the duty margin determined by MOFTEC?
23. Article 29 also specifies that anti-dumping duties will be collected by Chinese Customs.
What provisions are available to an importer to seek redress in the event of a dispute over
classification of imported merchandise and/or an error in the amount of duty collected by ChineseCustoms?
24. Article 30 of the notified regulations specifies that provisional measures may be extended to
nine months under special circumstances.  Article 30 does not include the limitation of ADA Art. 7.4
that the extension of provisional measures to nine months may be taken only when the authoritiesexamine whether a duty lower than the margin of dumping would be sufficient to remove injury.
Please confirm that the only circumstances under which provisional measures may be extended to
nine months is when authorities examine whether a duty lower than the margin of dumping would besufficient to remove injury.G/ADP/Q1/CHN/14
G/SCM/Q1/CHN/14
Page 6
25. Articles 31 through 36 of the notified regulations describe conditions under which an
investigation may be suspended in favor of a price undertaking.  These articles are further elaborated
upon in the Provisional Rules on Price Undertakings in Anti-Dumping Investigations .  Regarding
these provisional rules:
(a) Article 10 of the Rules  lists five factors that MOFTEC shall examine in considering
whether to accept price undertakings.  Pl ease elaborate as to how MOFTEC will
evaluate each of the five factors, including providing appropriate examples.
(b) Please clarify the intent of the statement in Article 11 of the Rules  that MOFTEC will
accept undertakings only with exporters or producers “who have been fully
cooperative during the period of investigation.”   For example, will failure to provide
a small, discrete amount of data while otherwise cooperating to the best of its ability
prevent an exporter from negotiating a price undertaking?
(c) Article 12 of the Rules allows for the suspension or termination of the anti-dumping
investigation if a price undertaking is accepted by MOFTEC.  Under what
circumstances would an investigation be suspended and under what circumstances
would the investigation be terminated?  Per Article 18 of the Rules , presumably a
suspended investigation would resume from th e point in the investigation timetable at
which it was suspended.  However, at what stage would a terminated investigation
resume?  Would it essentially resume from the beginning of the process, with new
questionnaires, etc.?
(d) Article 16 of the Rules specifies that the duration of price undertakings will be five
years.  What provisions exist for ending a price undertaking sooner, e.g. if the injury
caused by the dumped imports is eliminated?
(e) Article 17 of the Rules specifies that MOFTEC or Chinese Customs may verify
information supplied by domestic importers of merchandise that is exported by a
party subject to a price undertaking.  How would MOFTEC treat exporters in
circumstances where an importer that is not affiliated with the exporter refuses tocooperate with MOFTEC or Chinese Customs?
(f) Please clarify the circumstances under which MOFTEC might consider a price
undertaking to no longer be consistent “with public interests,” as described in
Article 22 of the Rules .
26. Article 41 of the notified regulations does not include the provisions of ADA Arts. 6.10 and
9.4 that govern how to proceed when it is impractical to examine every exporter.  ADA Art. 6.10
provides a framework for selecting exporters to be examined, as well as a requirement that voluntary
respondents not be discouraged.  ADA Art. 9.4 specifies rules for duty assessment when theinvestigation is limited to certain exporters.  Are the Provisional Rules on Sampling in Anti-Dumping
Investigations  intended to clarify how China will apply Article 41 of the notified regulations in a
manner consistent with ADA Arts. 6.10 and 9.4?
27. With regard to the  Provisional Rules on Sampling in Anti-Dumping Investigations :
(a) In Articles 9 and 10 of the Rules , for exporters not selected by MOFTEC for
investigation that choose not to submit a response, what dumping margins, if any,
will be assigned?G/ADP/Q1/CHN/14
G/SCM/Q1/CHN/14
Page 7
(b) Article 9 of the Rules  specifies that questionnaires will be issued only to the
“selected” exporters or producers, while Article 10 states that exporters or producers
that are not selected may provide information to MOFTEC voluntarily.  Are there anylimitations as to the amount or type of info rmation that may be provided voluntarily,
or when such information may be submitted?  To what extent will China use
information submitted by a non-selected exporter in the determination of the dumping
margin?
28. How does China interpret the following provisions in Article 44 of the notified regulations:
(1)  “there is a dumping history of the dumped imports causing injury to the domestic industry”;(2)  “the importer of the dumped imports was, or should have been, aware that the exporters practice
dumping and that such dumping would cause injury  to the domestic industry”; and (3) “the dumped
imports were massively imported in a short time and were likely to seriously undermine the remedial
effect of the definitive anti-dumping duty to be applied”?  Will the importers concerned be given an
opportunity to comment, consistent with ADA Art. 10.6(ii)?
29. Under Article 45 of the notified regulations, when provisional anti-dumping duties are to be
refunded following a negative final determination, what actions will be required of importers to obtain
the refunds?  How quickly will such refunds be made?  Will interest be paid on refunds of duties that
were originally paid in cash?
30. With regard to the Provisional Rules on Refund of Anti-Dumping Duty :
(a) Article 6 of the Rules  lists the type of evidence to be submitted to MOFTEC as part of
a request for refund.  Why are applicants required to provide data on sales to thirdcountries?  Does this provision apply even when the normal value for the sales at
issue is based on home market sales?  Article 6 also requests that copies of the import
contract, invoice(s), bill of lading, and evidence of payment of the sale and of the
anti-dumping duty be provided for every sale covered by the refund application.
Would China consider such data and documentation to be “necessary information”
within the meaning of ADA Art. 6.8 and, if so, on what grounds?  How would China
in such context implement its obligations under ADA Art. 6.13 to “take due accountof any difficulties experienced by interested parties…and…provide any assistance
practicable”?
(b) Why is MOFTEC basing its margin calculation for purposes of the refund review on
the six-month period preceding the refund application (see Articles 6 and 12 of theRules )?  Why shouldn’t the period for the margin calculation be the three-month
period covered by the refund application, per Article 4 of the Rules ?
(c) How promptly will refunds be made under Article 18 of the Rules ?  Will interest be
paid on such refunds?
31. Regarding the Provisional Rules on New Shipper Review in Anti-Dumping Investigations :
(a) Please clarify the meaning of Article 6 of the Rules .  Does this Article mean that there
must be entries into China of the subject merchandise (as opposed to shipment whichhave not yet reached China) before a new shipper review will be conducted?
(b) Article 7 of the Rules  requires exporters to request a new shipper review within
30 days of “actual export,” which, in turn, is defined as the date of invoicing.  How isG/ADP/Q1/CHN/14
G/SCM/Q1/CHN/14
Page 8
this rule applied in situations in which more than 30 days passes between actual
export/invoicing date, and the date merchandise enters China?
(c) Will China limit its request for information under Article 9 of the Rules  to only that
which is absolutely necessary to conduct the review?  For example, will MOFTEC
waive the requirement to provide third country sales when it is clear that sufficient
home market sales are available to calculate normal value?
(d) Article 15 of the Rules  appears to require that new shippers subject to a new shipper
review must pay cash as the guarantee pending completion of the review.  Why are
bonds not acceptable as a guarantee for new shippers, particularly as China acceptsbonds as guarantees from exporters under its provisional measures?
(e) What standard of evidence would MOFTEC require as sufficient to demonstrate that
the anti-dumping duty is reflected in the resale price for sales through affiliated
importers, as required by Article 19 of the Rules ?
(f) How does the “preliminary conclusion” referenced in Article 21 of the Rules  differ
from a preliminary determination?
(g) Will the procedures described in each of the other sets of notified rules apply to new
shipper reviews, as well?
32. In regard to Article 48 of the notified regulations, will anti-dumping measures expire
automatically after five years if no review is undertaken?  If not, what procedures are required to
apply for revocation of the anti-dumping measures?  Please clarify the meaning of “ may be extendedas appropriate” as used in Article 48.  For example, will there be a finite extension of the anti-
dumping measure?  Will another review be required to remove the measure at a later date, and if so,
how soon following the fifth anniversary may such a review be requested?  Under what
circumstances, and based upon what information, will China conduct the review specified in
Article 48?
33. ADA Art. 11.1 specifies that an anti-dumping duty shall remain in force only as long as and
to the extent necessary to counteract dumping that is causing injury.  Article 49 of the notified
regulations indicate that MOFTEC, in consultation with SETC, may decide to re-examine the
necessity of continuing the anti-dumping action.  The procedures governing such interim reviews are
provided in the Provisional Rules on Interim Review of Dumping and Dumping Margin .  Regarding
these Rules :
(a) What standards of evidence would MOFTEC consider sufficient to meet the
requirements of Article 9 of the Rules ?
(b) Article 12 of the Rules states that requests for interim review by the domestic
industry must “be in conformity with provisions of Article 14, 15 and 17 of the “Anti-
Dumping Regulations of the People’s Republic of China.”  Does this mean that the
domestic industry must provide information relating to injury and standing?
(c) Regarding Article 15 of the Rules , how will MOFTEC notify all respondent parties
subject to the review when the domestic industry requests an interim review?G/ADP/Q1/CHN/14
G/SCM/Q1/CHN/14
Page 9
(d) With respect to Article 25 of the Rules , does the limitation of the examination to
normal value, export price and the dumping margin include all elements that affect
the calculation of those topics?
(e) Article 26 of the Rules allows for reviews to be conducted against exporters or
producers that were found not to be dumping in the original investigation.  ADA
Art. 11.2 only permits reviews to determine the need for “continued imposition” of
duties, not to impose new duties.  What au thority in the ADA allows for the provision
in Article 26 of the Rules ?
(f) Please clarify the meaning of Article 31 of the Rules .
(g) Under what circumstances will MOFTEC  conduct a verification in a review?
(h) How do the preliminary conclusions referenced in Article 33 of the Rules  differ from
a preliminary determination?
(i) Will the procedures described in the other sets of notified rules apply to interim
reviews, as well?
34. Article 50 of the notified regulations indicates that the State Council Tariff Commission will
decide on the anti-dumping duty based on a propos al from MOFTEC.  Under what circumstances
would the Tariff Commission  deviate from a proposal  from MOFTEC?  What rules govern the Tariff
Commission’s actions and will any such actions be made public? Will decisions of the Tariff
Commission be publicized? Where the Tariff Co mmission does not accept MOFTEC’s proposal, will
a justification or explanation be given?
35. Article 55 of the notified regulations specifies that MOFTEC and SETC may take
“appropriate measures” to prevent circumvention of anti-dumping measures. Please describe how the
authorities will determine whether such circumvention has occurred, and the types of measures the
authorities may take if such circumvention has occurred.  Does China have, or intend to promulgate,
regulations addressing circumvention?
36. Article 58 of the notified regulations indicates that MOFTEC and the SETC may formulate
specific implementing measures.  Apart from the provisional rules that have already been issued, what
other level of rulemaking, if any, is required or contemplated to implement these notified regulations?
Are there other forms of guidance or official interpretation, such as case precedent ( stare decisis ), that
will influence MOFTEC’s, SETC’s and the  Tariff Commission’s decisions?
37. Article 56 of the notified regulations specifies that China may take “corresponding measures”
against any country that “discriminatorily” imposes anti-dumping measures against exports from
China.  Based on what authority in the ADA could China take such action?  Under what
circumstances does China foresee applying this provision (i.e. what type of action would be
considered as “discriminatory” within the meaning of Article 56)?  What sorts of actions would be
taken against another country?  Is there any law prohibiting use of Article 56 prior to exhausting other
remedies such as the WTO dispute settlement process?
38. Please elaborate on how judicial reviews will be conducted, including specific entities that
will conduct the reviews and the procedures under which such reviews will be conducted. Does China
intend to notify the Committee of The Administrative Review Law of the People ’s Republic of China
and The Administrative Litigation Procedure Law of the People’s Republic of China ?
__________