./.WORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONG/ADP/W/435
G/SCM/W/526
10 October 2003
(03-5377)
Committee on Anti-Dumping Practices
Committee on Subsidies and Countervailing MeasuresOriginal:  English
EFFECT OF MEMBERSHIP ENLARGEMENT ON TRADE REMEDIES
CURRENTLY IN FORCE IN THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES:  TEN QUESTIONS
The following communication, dated 10 October 2003, has been received from the Permanent
Mission of the United States.
_______________
In order to better understand the effect on exporters of the announced policies of the EC with
respect to the effect of enlargement of the European Union on the EC’ s trade remedy measures, the
United States wishes to pose the following questions.
1. Please update the Committee on the EC’s plans regarding the effect of enlargement on
outstanding trade remedy measures by the EC.  Do the documents entitled “Trade And Enlargement -
Why is enlargement good news for third countries?” (MEMO/03/72, dated 27 March 2003) and
“Trade and Enlargement - A Sectoral Overview ” (MEMO/03/73, dated 27 March 2003), continue to
represent a complete and accurate picture of the EC’s policy with respect to the effect of enlargement
on outstanding trade remedy measures by the EC?  Have any other documents been issued which
pertain to this issue?  Does the EC intend to hold a hearing to discuss with interested parties the
appropriateness of the extension of measures to additional customs territories?  How and when doesthe EC intend to advise interested parties that these measures will be extended to the ten countries
acceding to the European Union?
2.  Does the EC intend to conduct reviews of th e injury determinations of all outstanding trade
remedy measures to confirm that those determinations remain a valid basis on which to impose traderemedy measures?  If so, have such reviews begun?
3.  In its currently ongoing investigations, is the EC basing its injury determinations on
information relating to the domestic industry in  the EU-15 or the domestic industry in the EU-25?
Does the answer vary depending on whether the proceeding is scheduled for completion monthsbefore enlargement, weeks before enlargement, days  before enlargement, or after enlargement?  In
which cases, if ever, does the EC intend to begin ex amining issues of injury to the domestic industry
based upon the industry in the EU-25?
4.  Article 5.4 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement provides that an investigation shall not be
initiated unless the authorities have determined that the application has been made by or on behalf of
the domestic industry.  In order to be considered “by or on behalf of the domestic industry”, it must be
supported by domestic producers whose collective output constitutes more than 50 per cent of the
total production of the like product produced by that portion of the domestic industry expressing
either support for or opposition to the application.  However, no investigation shall be initiated when
domestic producers expressly supporting application account for less than 25 per cent of total
production of the like product produced by the domestic industry.  Please identify all cases in whichG/ADP/W/435
G/SCM/W/526
Page 2
the EC has considered producers in the ten acceding countries for purposes of determining whether
the application has been supported “by or on behalf of the domestic industry”.  If the EC has not yet
begun considering such producers for this determination, when does it intend to begin doing so?  Does
the EC intend to review all ongoing investigations to ensure that they were supported by domestic
producers in the expanded EU-25?
5. If, based on an examination of the facts with respect to a domestic industry in the EU-15, an
affirmative preliminary anti-dumping or countervailing duty determination is issued prior to
enlargement resulting in provisional measures, will those provisional measures be lifted upon
enlargement pending a final determination based on an examination of the facts with respect to that
domestic industry in the EU-25?
6.  One particular concern is the statement in the above-cited memoranda that the burden of
establishing the need for a review will be on the exporter to establish that circumstances with regard
to a case have changed substantially due to enlargement.  An exporter is unlikely to have access to
detailed information about the precise condition of a domestic industry in another country, given howsensitive such information about its competitors is likely to be.  Has the EC reconsidered its proposal
to impose such an insurmountable burden upon exporters in requesting a review?
7.  Will the EC consider a request to review th e injury determination upon enlargement without a
parallel request to review the appropriate level of duties?  If the EC receives a request for a reviewsolely of the injury determination, will it self-initiate an accompanying review of the appropriate level
of duties?  If so, what evidence, if any, will the authority be required to have before undertaking such
a self-initiated review?  Please explain the basis for the EC’s policy in this regard.
8.  If another Member has an outstanding measure against the EU, would that Member be
justified in applying that measure against imports from all of the acceding countries upon EU
enlargement?  Why or why not?
9.  If another Member has an outstanding measur e against an individual Member of the EU-15,
would that Member be justified in applying that measure against imports from all EU-25 Members
upon EU enlargement?  Why or why not?
10.  If another Member has a trade remedy measure against one of the acceding countries, would
that Member be justified in applying the measure against imports from anywhere in the EC upon
enlargement?  Why or why not?
__________