RESTRICTED
WORLD TRADE G/ADP/Q1/USA/1
G/SCM/Q1/USA/1
ORGANIZATION 1October 1996
(96-3934)
Original: English Committee onAnti-Dumping Practices
Committee onSubsidies andCountervailing Measures
NOTIFICATION OFLAWS AND REGULATIONS UNDER
ARTICLES 18.5AND 32.6OFTHE AGREEMENTS
Follow-up questions from HONG KONG
toreplies from theUNITED STATES1
Thefollowingcommunication,dated20September1996,hasbeenreceivedfromtheHongKong
Economic andTrade Office.
_______________
II. Conduct ofinvestigations
6. Allothers rate
Question 1:Follow-up toHKquestion 9(p13)
Wewould appreciate itiftheUScould explain howtheywould determine whether amargin
isbased largely ontheexporter ’sowndata. WilltheUSapply quantitative criteria toassess theimpact
oftheuseofbestinformation available onthedumping margin ascompared withtheresult which
would havebeenobtained bytheexclusive useoftheexporter ’sowndata?
Question 2:Follow-up toHKquestion 10(p13)
Would theUSexplain whatreasonable methods havetheyinmind indetermining anall-others
ratewhen:
(a) themargins established inrespect ofproducers/exporters subject toindividual
investigations areallbased onbestinformation available; and
(b) themargins established inrespect ofproducers/exporters subject toindividual
investigations include bothzero/deminimis margins andthosebased onbestinformation
available?
1G/ADP/W/60-G/SCM/W/69.G/ADP/Q1/USA/1
G/SCM/Q1/USA/1
Page2
III. Anti-dumping methodology
4. Normal value
(b) Level oftrade adjustment
Question 3:Follow-up toHKquestion 27(p18)
What istherelevant USstatutory provisions formeasuring thelevel oftrade difference by
reference toother products, other timeperiods orother products? What istherelevant USstatutory
provisions formaking appropriate adjustment inmaking suchameasurement? What istherationale
inreferring toother products, orother producers?
Question 4:Follow-up toKorea question 10(p18)
TheUSseems toaccept thatitmight notalways bepossible, under itsstatute, toestablish the
normal value atthesame level oftrade oftheexport price/CEP andtoquantify thelevel oftrade
difference. InthecaseofCEP, CEPoffset could bemade inestablishing thenormal value. This
adjustment isnotavailable inthecaseofexport price. Would theUSexplain howfaircomparison
canbeeffected when thenormal value cannot beestablished atthesame leveloftrade oftheexport
price under itsstatute andprice comparability isaffected asaresult?
(c) CEPoffset
Question 5:Follow-up toHKquestion 28,Japan question 4(p19,20)
TheUSconsiders thatthemethodology prescribed inSec.773(a)(7)(B) would begreatly skewed
ifselling expenses deducted indetermining theconstructed export pricewerelimited tothose incurred
intheUS,while selling expenses deducted fromthenormal value wereunlimited. Would theUSexplain
inwhatwayitconsiders thatthemethodology would begreatly skewed? Would theindirect selling
expenses tobededucted under Sec.773(a)(7)(B) notbelimited tothose incurred intheforeign market?
Ifallindirect selling expenses incurred byasales function intheUSwere deducted under
Sec.772(d)(1)(D), would afaircomparison notrequire allindirect selling expenses incurred byan
identical salesfunction intheforeign market bededucted indetermining thenormal value?
(d) Profit adjustment
Question 6:
Indetermining theconstructed export price, Sec.772(d)(3) deducts profits allocated toexpenses.
Where thenormal value cannot beestablished atthesame leveloftrade astheCEPandthelevelof
trade differences cannot bequantified, Sec.773(a)(7)(B) provides foranoffset against theindirect
selling expenses incurred intheforeign country. Would there alsobededuction ofprofits allocated
tosuchexpenses inorder toeffect afaircomparison?
(e) Indirect selling expenses
Question 7:Follow-up toAustralia question 5
When comparison istobemade withtheCEP, thenormal value canbetheprice atthesame
level oftrade, byestablishing theprice atthesame level oftrade totheextent practicable
(Sec. 773(a)(1)(B)) andasnecessary effecting anyprescribed adjustment (Sec. 773(a)(6)) andG/ADP/Q1/USA/1
G/SCM/Q1/USA/1
Page3
level-of-trade adjustment (Sec. 773(a)(7)(A)). Would dueallowance bemade forother differences
demonstrated toaffect price comparability andnotaccounted forbysuchstipulated adjustments?
8. Constructed value/cost ofproduction
(e) Constructed value
Question 8:Follow-up toHKquestion 32(p26)
Forthepurpose ofSec.773(e)(2)(B)(ii), bywhat yardstick would theUSconsider whether
salesofthelikeproduct atprices below perunitcosts ofproduction plusSGA costs are,byreason
ofprice, intheordinary course oftrade ornot?
IV. Administrative reviews
2. Comparison ofIndividual Transactions toAverages
Question 9:Follow-up toHKquestion 35(p28)
Isthereview anddetermination oftheamount ofanti-dumping dutyunder Sec.751(a) within
themeaning ofdetermination ofthefinalliability forpayment ofanti-dumping duties inArticle 9.3
oftheAgreement? Inaninvestigation initiated after1January 1995, would therulestipulated in
Sec.777A(d)(1) beapplicable tothedetermination ofdumping? Inaccordance withArticle 9.3and
Article 18.3.1 oftheAgreement, would thesame rulebealsoapplicable tothecalculation ofmargins
ofdumping inthedetermination oftheamount ofanti-dumping dutyunder Sec.751(a)?
Question 10:
Sec.751(a)(2)(B) provides foraccelerated review anddetermination ofanti-dumping duties
fornewexporters andproducers. Would thenewexporters andproducers beentitled totermination
upondeminimis margin under Sec.733,735and771(24)(A)(i), faircomparison between like-with-like
transactions under Sec.777A(d)(1), andexchange rateprovisions under Sec.773A? Ifnot,howwould
theUSexplain thedisparity intreatment between anexporter/producer subject toanADdutyanda
newunrelated exporter/producer subject toanaccelerated review, inboththeirfirsttimedetermination
ofdumping?
V. Miscellaneous
4. Multinational Corporations
Question 11:Follow-up toHKquestion 30(p34)
Would theapplication ofsec.773(d)(3) result inanormal value different fromthatotherwise
could havebeenobtained onthebasis ofdataregarding thecountry ofexport (origin) only? How
would theUSreconcile thisprovision withArticle 2.2oftheAgreement which establishes thenormal
value solely onthebasis ofdataregarding thecountry ofexport (origin)?
VI. Injury
5. Cross-cumulation
Question 12:Follow-up toHKquestion 22(p37)
Article 3.5oftheADAgreement provides thattheauthorities shallexamine anyknown factors
otherthanthedumped imports which atthesametimeareinjuring thedomestic industry andtheinjuriesG/ADP/Q1/USA/1
G/SCM/Q1/USA/1
Page4
caused bytheseotherfactors mustnotbeattributed tothedumped imports. Howwould theUSreconcile
thisprovisionwithsection771(7)(G)whichpermitscrosscumulationofthevolumeandeffectofdumped
andsubsidised imports?
Others
Question 13:
When theUSadministering authority initiates aninvestigation, itdefines itsscope interms
ofaclassorkindofmerchandise, alikeproduct andanindustry. Such ascope inturndelimits the
boundaries oftheUSadministering authority ’sdetermination whether thepetition wasfiledonbehalf
ofaUSindustry.
When, inthecourse oftheinvestigation, theUSadministering authority subsequently modifies
thescope ofinvestigation (byenlarging orreducing it),howdoestheUSfulfilitsobligation toensure
thatthepetition remains filedonbehalf ofthenewly defined USindustry? IftheUSdoesnotreconsider
whether itsobligation remains fulfilled, onwhatlegalbasis doesitrelyforsuchinaction?
When theUSadministering authority includes parts, components orsubassemblies inthescope
ofananti-dumping investigation, howdoesitdetermine thatsuchpetition isfiledonbehalf ofaUS
industry? What efforts aremade todetermine theviews andmarket shares oftheproducers inthe
USofparts, components orsubassemblies?