RESTRICTEDWORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONG/ADP/Q1/TUN/5
G/SCM/Q1/TUN/5
11 September 2001
(01-4276)
Committee on Anti-Dumping Practices
Committee on Subsidies and
Countervailing MeasuresOriginal:  French
NOTIFICATION OF LAWS AND REGULATIONS UNDER
ARTICLES 18.5 AND 32.6 OF THE AGREEMENTS
Replies to the Questions Posed by EGYPT1, the UNITED STATES2, and the
EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES3 Concerning the Notification by Tunisia4
The following communication, dated 21 August 2001, has been received from the Permanent
Mission of Tunisia.
_______________
INTRODUCTION
The WTO Agreements on Anti-Dumping and on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures have
been adopted under Law No. 95-06 of 23 January 1995 ratifying the results of the Uruguay Round.
Since that date, these Agreements have formed an integral part of Tunisia's domestic legislation.
In essence, Law No. 99-9 of 13 February 1999 on Protection against Unfair Import Practices,
and Decree No. 2000-477 of 21 February 2000 specifying the criteria and methods for determiningunfair import practices, are based on the relevant WTO Agreements mentioned, which lay down rules
for the application of anti-dumping measures or countervailing measures.  To date, Tunisia has not
needed to apply these measures.
Nevertheless, if a particular provision is not covered by this legislation, either because of the
special nature of the rules belonging to the legisl ative regime and those belonging to the regulatory
regime or because the provision belongs to the category of rules that are purely treaty provisions, the
rules in the WTO Agreements apply.
QUESTIONS POSED BY EGYPT
1. Article 3.2 of the WTO Anti-Dumping Agr eement states that "With regard to the
volume of the dumped imports, the investigatin g authorities shall consider whether there has
been a significant increase in dumped imports, ei ther in absolute terms or relative to production
or consumption in the importing Member ...".
                                                     
1 G/ADP/Q1/TUN/2-G/SCM/Q1/TUN/2.
2 G/ADP/Q1/TUN/3-G/SCM/Q1/TUN/3.
3 G/ADP/Q1/TUN/4-G/SCM/Q1/TUN/4.
4 G/ADP/N/1/TUN/2-G/SCM/N/1/TUN/2.G/ADP/Q1/TUN/5
G/SCM/Q1/TUN/5
Page 2
What are the criteria applicable by the Authority in cases of determining the volume of
the dumped imports whether in absolute or rela tive terms and consequently the effect of the
dumped imports on prices, especially without the existence of any articles relating to these
topics in the Law or the Regulation?
Reply
Articles 19, 20 and 21 of Decree No. 2000-477 specifying the criteria and methods for
determining unfair import practices allow the provisions in Article 3.2 of the Anti-Dumping
Agreement to be applied when determining the existence of injury.
2. Article 7 of the Tunisian Law sets out " ... a complaint must incl ude evidence of the
existence of dumping or subsidy liable to anti-dumping or countervailing duties, of injury or of
causal link between the imports allegedly being dumped or subsidized and the alleged injury".
How could the Authority, pursuant to Article 5.2 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement,
verify "prices at which the product is sold wh en destined for consumption in the country of
export and the history of the volume of the allegedly dumped imports" as the Law and
Regulation do not refer to this information?
Reply
This verification can be carried out using all the means of proof allowed.
3. Article 12 in the Tunisian Law states that:  "... the Minister responsible for trade shall
send a request for information required for the inve stigation to the authorities of the exporting
countries, as well  as to the exporters concerned".  However, Article 6.1 of the Anti-Dumping
Agreement states that "All interested parties shall be given notice ...".
Please explain how will the Authority notify  all of the interested parties referred to in
Article 6.11 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement?
Reply
Interested parties will be notified in writing in conformity with current administrative
procedures through publication in the Journal Officiel (Official Journal) or through a diplomatic
representative.
- "A request for information shall be answered within the time-limits and in the form
specified in the request."
- Please clarify the "specified time-limits" to receive the information required for the
investigation within the meaning of Arti cle 6.1.1 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement?
Reply
The time-limits specified in the request for in formation are reasonable time-limits that allow
the various parties to submit their views on the question and defend their interests.G/ADP/Q1/TUN/5
G/SCM/Q1/TUN/5
Page 3
- "This notice shall indicate the nature of the product and the country or countries
concerned and include a summary of the information received", this differs from the text of
Article 12.1.1 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement.
How does the Authority plan to meet the requirement of Article 12.1.1 of the
Anti-Dumping Agreement, as there are no referenc es in the proposed Regulation to the rest of
the requirements mentioned in the said Article?
Reply
With regard to notifying the public, the provisions in Article 12 of the Law correspond to
those in Article 12.1.1 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement.  The summary of the information includes
the adequate information called for in the latter Article.
4. Article 5.5 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement st ates that "... after receipt of a properly
documented application and before proceeding to initiate an investigation, the authorities shallnotify the government of the exporting Member concerned".
How do the Services plan to implement the provisions of the above-mentioned Article?
Reply
According to Article 12 of the Law, the request for information is sent to the diplomatic
representative in the exporting country.
5. Article 44 of the proposed Tunisian Law states that "... the importer must submit a
request, supported by evidence, to the Minister re sponsible for trade within six months from the
date of assessment of the amount of the definitive duties imposed".
Could the Authority explain what is the legal basis for determining the six-month period
mentioned in this Article and how does the Au thority plan to implement the provisions of
Article 9.3.2 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement?
Reply
The six-month time-limit provided in Article 44 of the aforementioned Tunisian Law allows
the application of the relevant provisions in Article 9.3.2 of the Agreement and observance of the
time-limits prescribed therein.
6. Article 45 of the proposed Law states that  "No request for reimbursement of definitive
anti-dumping duties or definitive countervailing duties shall be deemed to be duly supported by
evidence unless it includes accurate details of the amount whose reimbursement is claimed and
is accompanied by customs documents relating to the calculation and payment of that amount."Moreover, Article 46 of the Law states that "The request for reimbursement must include a
statement by the exporter or producer establishing that the margin of dumping or the amount
of the subsidy that gave rise to countervailing  duties has been reduced or eliminated.  Any
request that does not include such a statement shall be rejected."
Could the Authority explain the legal basis for the text of these Articles?  Please clarify
how the provisions of Article 46 are consistent with the Agreements?G/ADP/Q1/TUN/5
G/SCM/Q1/TUN/5
Page 4
Reply
In conformity with the WTO Agreements on Anti-Dumping and on Subsidies and
Countervailing Measures, the Tunisian Law requires that the request for reimbursement be supportedby evidence that the dumping practices or subsidies have been eliminated.  The requirement that the
exporter or producer should submit a statement establishing that the margin of dumping or the amount
of the subsidy that gave rise to the duties has been  reduced or eliminated is simply a form of evidence
that allows such practices to be prevented in the future.
7. It is noted that the Tunisian Law and Regulation did not include any text pertaining to
the following:
(a) Special and preferential treatment of developing countries;(b) dispute settlement procedures;
(c) notifying the WTO Committees on Anti-Dumping and Subsidies with
preliminary and final determinations.
Reply
These are rules that are purely treaty provisions and therefore apply in accordance with the
law ratifying the results of the Uruguay Round.
8. Article 20 of the Regulation states that:  "The examination of the impact of the dumped
or subsidized imports on the domestic industry concerned shall include an evaluation of allrelevant economic factors and indices having a bearing on the state of the industry ...".
However, Article 3.4 of the Anti-Dumping Agre ement states that "... Evaluation of all the
economic factors and indices having a bearing on the state of the industry , including ..., ability
to raise capital or investments".
We notice that Article 20 ignored two elemen ts of the factors to be examined by the
authorities.  This is not consistent with th e requirements of Article 3.4 of the Anti-Dumping
Agreement.
Reply
The list of economic factors and indices given in Article 20 of the Decree is not exhaustive
but indicative.  Any other indicator of the extent of the injury can be considered in conformity with
Article 3.4 of the Agreement.
QUESTIONS POSED BY THE UNITED STATES
Law No. 99-9 of 13 February 1999 on Protec tion Against Unfair Import Practices
1. Regarding the definition of "domestic indus try" in Chapter I, Article 2, can Tunisia
explain its treatment of domestic producers who are (or are related to) exporters or importers
of the allegedly dumped or subsidized product?G/ADP/Q1/TUN/5
G/SCM/Q1/TUN/5
Page 5
Reply
The Law on Protection Against Unfair Import Practices has objective scope in that it applies
to dumping and subsidies practices and their results.
2. Does Tunisia’s Law provide for "regional i ndustries" as contemplated by Article 4.1(ii)
of the Anti-Dumping Agreement and Article 16.2 of the SCM Agreement?
Reply
The Tunisian Law only concerns the domestic industry.
3. Can Tunisia clarify the purpose of the reference to "country of origin" in Chapter II,
Article 4(a), its description of the "financial contribution" element of a subsidy?
Reply
The intention of the concept of country of origin in Article 4(a) of the aforementioned Law is
to provide more detail in order to target the origin of subsidy practices and facilitate the task of the
authority responsible for the investigation.
4. Tunisia’s Law at Chapter II, Article 7, indicates that an anti-dumping or countervailing
duty complaint must include evidence of (1) the ex istence of dumping or subsidy, (2) of injury or
of (3) a causal link between the allegedly dumped or subsidized imports and the alleged injury
(emphasis added).  Use of the disjunctive "or" in this sentence infers that the complaint need
not include evidence of all three of these elements , particularly inferring that so long as there is
evidence of dumping or unfair subsidization and injury, the complaint need not include
evidence of the causal link between injury an d the offending imports.  Is this a correct
interpretation of the Tunisian law?
Reply
Tunisia's legislative texts on unfair import practices were drawn up in Arabic, which is the
official language for enacting laws in Tunisia and is the authentic language text.  The Arabic version
of this Law requires a combination of the three conditions, namely, the existence of dumping or a
subsidy to which anti-dumping duties or countervailing measures are applicable, injury, and a causal
link.  Consequently, Tunisia confirms that these three conditions must be met.
5. If so, contrast this with Chapter II, Article 10, of the Tunisian Law, which indicates that
the Minister responsible for trade may self-initiat e an investigation only if he has sufficient
evidence of the existence of "dumping or subsidy, injury and causal link, as specified in
Article 7, to justify the initiation of  an investigation" (emphasis added).
Reply
See the reply to question 4.G/ADP/Q1/TUN/5
G/SCM/Q1/TUN/5
Page 6
6. Chapter II, Article 12, indicates that the Minister responsible for trade will place a
notice of initiation of a dumping or subsidies case in the Journal Officiel .  There appears to be
no requirement in Article 12 that the notice include the address to which representations by
interested parties should be directed, or the time -limits by which interested parties are to make
their views known.  How is this consistent with the requirements of Article 12.1.1 of the
Anti-Dumping Agreement and Article 22.2 of the SCM Agreement?
Reply
All parties concerned have the right of defence.  The fact that the response to a request must
be given within the time-limits and in the form sp ecified in the request does not exclude the right of
defence available to all parties concerned.
7. Chapter II, Article 18, states that parties to the investigation may be informed of the
progress and outcome of the investigation, but it does not specify at what points during the
investigation the parties will be so informed.  Does Tunisian law provide that, before the finaldetermination is made, all interested parties will be informed of the essential facts under
consideration in time for them to defend thei r interests, consistent with Article 6.9 of the
Anti-Dumping Agreement and Article 12.8 of the SCM Agreement?
Reply
Article 18 of the Law on Unfair Import Practices allows the application of the provisions in
Article 6.9 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement and Arti cle 12.8 of the SCM Agreement.  Consequently,
the competent Tunisian authority will always inform interested parties of the essential facts so that
they can defend their interests.
8. Regarding Chapter VI, Article 50 (provision  for judicial review) , can Tunisia explain
how the requirement that recourse to judicial review within 20 days of an anti-dumping or
countervailing duty determination by the investig ating authority compares to other requests for
judicial review made to the competent court of first instance?
Reply
The time-limit of 20 days is the public policy time-limit allowed for judicial appeals in
Tunisia.
Decree No. 2000-477 of 21 February 2000 Establishing the Criteria and Procedures for
Determining Unfair Import Practices
9. Can Tunisia explain its practice of resorting to the establishment of normal value in the
"country of origin" rather than the exporting co untry when the product is not produced in the
country of export or when there is no comparab le product for it in the country of export, as
provided in Article 2, second paragraph?
Reply
Pursuant to the Decree of 21 February 2000, the normal value is established on the basis of
the comparable price paid or payable in the ordinary course of trade either in the country of origin or
in the exporting country.
If it proves difficult to utilize this method, one of the following methods may be used:G/ADP/Q1/TUN/5
G/SCM/Q1/TUN/5
Page 7
- The export price for the same product to a third country;
- the constructed value, in other words the cost of production of the product in question
plus a reasonable amount for administrative, selling and general costs and for profits.
10. Does Tunisia deem prices not to be in the "ordinary course of trade" in circumstances
other than those in which parties "appear to be  associated" or "have concluded a compensatory
arrangement," as stated in Article 2, third paragraph, or in which parties have sold the product
below the cost of production, as stated in Article 4?
Reply
Tunisia confines itself only to the cases set out in Articles 2 and 4 of this Decree, in
conformity with the relevant WTO Agreements.
11. Can Tunisia explain what sources it refers to in determining the exchange rate as
described in Article 12?
Reply
According to Article 12 of this Decree, the exchange rate is fixed by utilizing the rate in effect
on the date of sale, which is usually the date of the contract, the order, the confirmation of the order or
the invoice, according to the document setting out the material terms for the sale.  The rates used are
those communicated by the Central Bank of Tunisia.
12. What type of evidence does Tunisia require from interested parties that wish to deduct
administrative costs or other offsets from th e total subsidy, as explained in Article 17(b)?
Reply
Interested parties are requested to submit all evidentiary documents drawn up in the
prescribed form.
13. Article 20 of the Decree indicates that, for purposes of determining material injury or
threat thereof, Tunisia examines several factors h aving a bearing on the state of the industry as
described in Anti-Dumping Agreement Article 3.4 and SCM Agreement Article 15.4.  Article 20
does not, however, specify that the investigating authority must examine the domestic industry’sability to raise capital or investments.  Does Tunisia consider this to be a relevant factor having
a bearing on the state of the industry for purposes of determining material injury or threat
thereof?
Reply
The economic factors and indices listed in Article 20 of the Decree for the purpose of
examining the effect of dumped or subsidized imports on the domestic industry are listed for
indicative purposes and are not exhaustive.
Any other factor deemed important may also be taken into account, for example, the ability to
raise capital or investments.G/ADP/Q1/TUN/5
G/SCM/Q1/TUN/5
Page 8
14. Tunisia indicates in Article 21 that its auth orities will consider four of the five factors
enumerated in Anti-Dumping Article 3.7 and SCM Article 15.7 in making a determination of
the threat of material injury.  The one fact or referenced in these Articles of the WTO
Agreements that is not contained in Article 21 of the Tunisian Law references a substantialincrease in the capacity of the exporter, taking  into account the availability of other export
markets to absorb any additional exports.  Can Tunisia explain why it is not required to
consider this factor in making a determin ation of the threat of material injury?
Reply
Article 21 of the Decree takes into account, but does not exclude, factors used to determine
the existence of a threat of serious injury listed in Article 3.7 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement and
15.7 of the SCM Agreement.
15. Chapter II, Article 7 of Tunisia’s La w No. 99-9 requires that a request for an
antidumping or countervailing duty investigation be made "by or on behalf of the domesticindustry".  However, Article 25 of the Tunisian Decree, which describes the information that
must be provided in a complaint against unfair import practices, does not require that the
complaint identify the industry on behalf of which the application is made.  How is this
consistent with Anti-Dumping Agreement Article 5.2 and SCM Agreement Article 11.2?
Reply
The aforementioned Decree is a general regulatory framework for the implementation of the
Law on Protection Against Unfair Import Practices.  The first paragraph of Article 25 of the Decree
refers to Articles 7 and 8 of the Law.
Pursuant to these Articles, any complaint must  necessarily indicate the domestic industry on
whose behalf the request is made.
16. While Article 25 does require that the comp laint contain evidence of dumping or unfair
subsidization and injury, it does not require other elements required by Anti-Dumping
Agreement Article 5.2(iv) and SCM Agreement Article 11.2(iv), such as information on thevolume of the allegedly dumped/subsidized imports.  Per the WTO Agreements, it must also
require information on the effect of the imports on the prices of the like product in the domestic
market, and the consequent impact of the import s on the industry as demonstrated by relevant
factors having a bearing on the state of the domestic industry.  How is Article 25 of the Decree
consistent with Anti-Dumping Agreement Article 5.2(iv) and SCM Agreement Article 11.2(iv)?
Reply
Article 25 of the Decree concerning the criteria for complaints must be read in the light of
Article 20 of the same Decree and Article 9 of th e Law on Protection Against Unfair Import Practices.
These Articles show that any request must contain information on the scope of the injury
caused to the domestic industry, as required by Article 5.2(iv) of the Anti-Dumping Agreement and
Article 11.2(iv) of the SCM Agreement.G/ADP/Q1/TUN/5
G/SCM/Q1/TUN/5
Page 9
QUESTIONS POSED BY THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES
The notification of Decree No. 2000-477 of 21 February 2000 states on page 21 that
"[a] subsidy liable to provisional countervailing duty shall be considered de minimis  if the
subsidy is less than 1 per cent ad valorem ".
1. Can Tunisia please confirm that neither provisional nor definitive countervailing duties
will be imposed if the subsidy is less than 1 per cent ad valorem ?
2. Does the threshold of 1 per cent also ap ply to imports originating in developing
countries or do the thresholds laid down in Articles 27.10(a) and 27.11 apply?
Reply
The subsidy liable to a provisional countervailing duty is considered de minimis  if it is less
than 1 per cent ad valorem , as provided in Article 18 of Decree No. 2000-477 and in accordance with
Article 11.9 of the SCM Agreement.
For developing countries, the relevant provisions agreed by the Members of the WTO apply.
__________