WORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONG/ADP/Q1/CHN/37
G/SCM/Q1/CHN/37
11 November 2003
(03-5998)
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
Follow-Up Questions from the UNITED STATES1
Regarding the Notification of CHINA2
The following communication, dated 7 November 2003, has been received from the
Delegation of the United States.
_______________
The United States would like to thank China for the replies provided in G/ADP/Q1/CHN/34-
G/SCM/Q1/CHN/34.  Referring to the answers provided  by China, and without prejudice to our rights
to pose further follow-up questions at a later date, the United States takes this opportunity to present
the following follow-up questions:
A. Original Question 1. Article 3 of the Rules  states that countervailing duty (“CVD”) investigations of
injury involving agricultural products shall be conducted by the State Economic and Trade
Commission (“SETC”) in conjunction with the Ministry of Agriculture.  Could China please clarify therole of the Ministry of Agriculture in a CVD investigation?
Reply:  The Ministry of Agriculture of the People’s Republic of China is in charge of the agricultural
affairs and plays the role of assisting the Ministry of Commerce in a CVD investigation.
Follow-up Question to Reply 1:  Please describe the assistance the Ministry of Agriculture will
provide.  Will the Ministry of Agriculture have any role in gathering information, calculating
countervailing duty rates or making an injury determination?  If so, please describe those roles.
B. Original Question 7. The first sentence of Article 13 of the Rules states that “In the determination of
injury to [the] domestic industry, SETC may exclude the product under investigation or part thereofthat did not cause injury to the domestic industry”.  The meaning of this provision, which does notappear to implement any portion of the ASCM, is unclear.  Could China provide an example of a
factual situation in which SETC would apply this provision?  How can SETC determine that a portion
of the product under investigation did not cause injury before it has concluded its investigation of
injury? 
Reply :  What is stated in Article 13 of the Rules is that the investigating authority, after careful and
objective investigation and analysis, may exclude th e products under investigation or part thereof that
do not cause injury to the domestic industry.  
                                                     
1 Original questions posed by the United States in G/ADP/Q1/CHN/27-/SCM/Q1/CHN/27.  Original
replies by China in G/ADP/Q1/CHN/34-G/SCM/Q1/CHN/34 (27 October 2003).
2 G/SCM/N/1/CHN/1/Suppl.2  (14 April 2003)G/ADP/Q1/CHN/37
G/SCM/Q1/CHN/37
Page 2
Follow-up Question to Reply 7: Does this mean that volume and pricing data that China's
investigating authority considers for purposes of its injury analysis pursuant to Article 3.2 of the AD
Agreement and Article 15.2 of the SCM Agreement will include data pertaining to the dumped or
subsidized imports that are ultimately excluded from the scope of its order?  If this is the case, what isthe logical basis for China premising an affirmative in jury determination in part on data relating to the
same imports it determines, in the context of the same investigation, are not causing injury?  Can
exclusion of certain portions of the product under in vestigation pursuant to Article 13 of the Rules be
based on the purchaser of the product under investigation, or the region or time period in which the
product under investigation is sold? Has China applied this provision in any investigation? If so, couldChina please provide details involving the application of this provision.
C. Original Question 9.  Article 18 of the Rules states  that SETC shall take account of public interest in
making a determination of injury to the domestic industry.   
(a) Will interested parties have an opportuni ty to present evidence in this respect? 
(b) Will interested parties be allowed to view the information submitted by users and consumers of thesubsidized imports, or adequate non-confidential summaries thereof? 
Reply :  Article 18 of the Rules states that the investigating authority shall take account of public
interest in making an investigation of injury to the domestic industry and provide the users and
consumers of the subsidized imports with the opportunity of presenting views and evidence.
  
Follow-up Question to Reply 9: Will information presented by users and consumers on public interest,
or adequate non-confidential summaries thereof, be made part of the public record?
D. Original Question 21. Article 35 of the Rules states that when requested by an interested party, or when
SETC deems it necessary, a public hearing may be held.  Under what circumstances would requests for
hearings not be honoured?
Reply :  A public hearing may not be held under the condition that the interested parties do not request
one and the investigating authority thinks it has fully understood the opinions from the interested
parties.
Follow-up Question to Reply 21: Will all requests by interested parties for public hearings be
honoured, including when the investigating authority thinks it has fully understood the opinions of the
interested parties?
E. Original Question 23.  Will China entertain requests for price undertakings pursuant to Article 37 of the
Rules prior to making a preliminary determination of dumping and injury?  If so, please explain howsuch a practice would be consistent with ASCM Article 18.2 which states that price undertakings shallnot be sought or accepted until after an affirmative preliminary determination of subsidization and
injury caused by subsidization has been made? 
Reply:   There is no such expression in Article 37 of the Rules. It is a misunderstanding of the United
States.
Follow-up Question to Reply 23: Will undertakings be sought or accepted prior to an affirmative
preliminary determination of subsidization and injury caused by such subsidization?
F. Original Question 28. Article 45 of the Rules states  that interested parties shall have access to non-
confidential information after the initiation of the case and prior to the publication of the finaldetermination.  The second paragraph of Article 45 states that the interested parties may also have
access to the non-confidential information within a reasonable period after publication of the final
determination.   G/ADP/Q1/CHN/37
G/SCM/Q1/CHN/37
Page 3
(a)  Are there any circumstances in which interested  parties would be denied access to non-confidential
information?  If so, please explain.  How would such circumstances be consistent with ASCM Article12.3?  (b)  How does China define “reasonable period” fo r purposes of this provision?  Will records of
investigations be available indefinitely for reference in future investigations and for judicial review?  
(c)  How is this Article consistent with ASCM Article 12.3, under which  authorities are to “provide
timely opportunities for all interested Members and in terested parties to see all information that is
relevant to the presentation of thei r cases, that is not confidential…”? 
Reply:   Article 45 of the Rules states that interested parties shall have access to the non-confidential
information after the initiation of the case and prior to the publication of the final determination.  The
interested parties may also have access to the non- confidential information within a reasonable period
after the publication of the final determination. Article 45 reflects the essence and spirits of ASCM and
is consistent with Article 12.3 of ACSM.
  
Follow-up Question to Reply 28: Will China provide “timely” access to non-confidential information
after the publication of the final determination per Article 12.3 of the ASCM?  How long after the
final determination will the public record be available?  In the case of a positive determination, will
the public record be available as long as the particular countervailing duty measures are in place?
G. Original Question 31.  Article 50 of the Rules lists circumstances which would lead to termination of
the injury investigation.  This list does not include termination based on the amount of the subsidybeing de minimis , although these grounds are included in Article 28 of the Regulations of the People’s
Republic of China on Countervailing Measures .  How is Article 50 consistent with Article 11.9 of the
ASCM which states that there shall be immediate termination in cases where the amount of a subsidy isde minimis (i.e., less than 1 percent, ad valorem)? 
Reply:   The treatment of de minims  subsidies has already been provided for in Regulations of the
People’s Republic of China on Countervailing Measures , therefore there is no duplicated provision in
the Rules.  
Follow-up Question to Reply 31:  What part of the Regulations of the People’s Republic of China on
Countervailing Measures  provides for the immediate termination of investigation in cases where the
amount of a subsidy is de minimis ?
H. Original Question 32.  Article 51 of the Rules contains provisions on interim and expiration reviews.
(a)  Does China intend to issue implementing rules for interim reviews and expiration  reviews?  If so,when?  Will these rules be notified to the WTO?(b)  Will five-year expiration reviews be conducted in all cases either at the request of interested parties
or based on self-initiation by the administering authority?
(c)  Under what circumstances will the administering authority self-initiate a review?(d)  What is the timeline for completion of interim and expiration reviews?(e)  Will the determination be issued publicly?  If so, in what format (e.g., where will it be published)?(f)  What organization now conducts interim and expiration reviews?(g)  What procedural rights will parties have with respect to the injury determination?
Reply:  With regards to the interim and expiration reviews, Regulations of the People’s Republic of
China on Countervailing Measures and Rules on Investigations and Determinations of Industry Injuryfor Countervailing Measures have made the clear elaboration.
Follow-up Question to Reply 32: Does the Bureau of Industry Injury Investigation initiate expiration
reviews separately from the Bureau of Fair Trade for Import and Export?  Which Bureau is
responsible for conducting the expiration review?
__________