WORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONG/ADP/AHG/W/141
15 October 2002
(02-5585)
Committee on Anti-Dumping Practices
Working Group on ImplementationOriginal:  English
TURKEY'S VIEWS REGARDING TIME-PERIOD CONSIDERED IN MAKING
DETERMINATION OF NEGLIGIBLE IMPORT VOLUMES (ARTICLE 5.8)
AND ARTICLE 15 OF THE ANTI-DUMPING AGREEMENT
Paper by Turkey
The following communication, dated 14 October 2002, has been received from the Permanent
Mission of Turkey.
_______________
1. Time-period considered in making determination of negligible import volumes
Turkey believes that recommendations and efforts regarding time-period considered in
making determination of negligible import volumes will contribute a lot to transparency, predictabilityand consistency in implementation.  Precise and foreseeable rules will strengthen the principles of the
Anti-Dumping Agreement.
Referring to the Draft Recommendation G/ADP/AHG/W/124/Rev.3, Turkey would like to
make the following comments.
Turkey is of the view that the period of data collection for the dumping investigation is not
suitable as a basis for determination of negligible import volumes.  The reasons are as follows:  firstly,
this period may not be consistent in every investigation since investigating authorities have discretion
to change period of data collection from one investigation to another, even during the course of the
same investigation.  Secondly, period of data collection for dumping can be more, or less, than one
year and in some cases be as short as six months.  This results in ending up with highly differentiatedperiods.
Taking the most recent 12 consecutive months (but not less than six months) prior to the date
on which the application was filed for which data are available may not be sufficient for the fulfilment
of predictability objective because some Members prefer not to publicize the exact date on which anapplication is filed/received.  In such cases, the period considered in making a determination of
negligible import volumes will be unknown to the interested parties and in general to other Members,
which may also lead to arbitrary determinations.
When the latest 12 consecutive months but not less than six months of the period of data
collection for the injury investigation used for the purpose of initiating the investigation is used, as
such, Turkey believes that this will not contribute to the transparency and objectivity in application.
This is due to the fact that injury investigation period is not consistent in every investigation and is not
predictable to exporters.
It is also important to establish a definite period for making determination of negligible
import volumes, which will secure the predictability aim of this exercise.  Thus, the most recentG/ADP/AHG/W/141
Page 2
12 consecutive months prior to the initiation for which data are available is deemed adequate for such
a purpose.
In our understanding, when the circumstances at the time of examination is not suitable to
commence an investigation due to negligible impor t volume, this does not preclude investigating
authorities' legal rights stemming from the Anti-Du mping Agreement to initiate investigations at a
later stage.  Defining precisely the time-period for negligible import volumes will contribute to
transparency, predictability and consistency in implementation without taking rights of the
investigating authorities concerning Anti-Dumping Agreement.
In the light of these, Turkey proposes the following:
"… with respect to original investigations to determine the existence of dumping and
consequent injury, whether the volume of  actual dumped imports from a particular
country is regarded as negligible shall be determined with reference to the volume of
imports from that country during the most recent 12 consecutive months prior to
initiation for which data are available.
However, Members whose domestic legislation does not allow them to use
the most recent 12 consecutive months prior to the initiation for which data are
available may use the most recent 12 consecutive months prior to the date on which
the application was filed for which data are available, provided that the application
is public.  Those Members shall notify to the Committee regarding limitations in theirlegislation."
2. Operationalization of Article 15 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement
The Anti-Dumping Agreement indicates in Article 15 the need for special treatment to
developing country Members.  However, since Article 15 does not give clear modalities for acommon and transparent application of "special treatment" by developed countries, the Article has
produced very limited results in favour of the developing country Members.
The Doha Ministerial Conference instructed the Committee to draw up appropriate
recommendations to achieve the goal of the Article and so far, there have been a few proposals,
including increasing the de minimis  dumping margin and the negligible  volume of imports, which
could be good starting points.
In this context, we would like to express our support to a certain extent to the proposals
submitted by India in the relevant papers that special and differential treatment should be made in
favour of developing country Members by means of raised de minimis  dumping margin and increased
negligible  import volume.
However, in recent years it has been observed that the number of anti-dumping investigations
initiated by developing countries has increased significantly.  We believe that, even if all Members
reach an agreement on the proposed amendments in favour of developing country Members, the
application would prove that the additional benefit to the developing country Members would stillremain limited unless these amendments bind all Members whether they are "developed" or
"developing".
Due to this, Turkey believes that Article 5.8 should aim at paying special regard to the exports
of developing country Members without making any distinction for the investigating country.  If thetarget country is a developing country, differential treatment should be made irrespective of the
investigating country, that is the investigating country can either be a developed or a developing
country.G/ADP/AHG/W/141
Page 3
In conclusion, in order to have an operational outcome and more concrete results we support
the proposals on raised de minimis  margins and increased negligible  volumes as long as, the relevant
amendments bind all Members irrespective of development level of the investigating country.  To
achieve this result, necessary amendments can be made in Article 15 or directly in Article 5.8.
__________