WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  G/ADP/AHG/W/156 
10 March 2004 
 (04-1039) 
Committee on Anti-Dumping Practices 
Working Group on Implementation Original:   English 
 
 
 
ARTICLE 6.7 – CONDUCT OF VERIFICATION 
 
Paper by the European Communities  
 
 
 The following communication, dated 8 March 2004, is being circulated at the request of the 
Delegation of the European Commission.  
_______________ 
 
  Further to the agreement reached in the Working Group on Implementation to examine 
additional topics for discussion, as noted in document G/ADP/W/433, the EC submits the following 
paper to explain how it conducts ve rifications pursuant to Article 6.7 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement 
(ADA). This provision states:  
In order to verify information provided or to obtain further details, the authorities 
may carry out investigations in the territo ry of other Members as required, provided 
they obtain the agreement of the firms concern ed and notify the representatives of the 
government of the Member in question, and unless that Member objects to the investigation.  The procedures described in Annex I shall apply to investigations 
carried out in the territory of other Memb ers.  Subject to the requirement to protect 
confidential information, the authoriti es shall make the results of any such 
investigations available, or shall provid e disclosure thereof pursuant to paragraph 9, 
to the firms to which they pertain and ma y make such results available to the 
applicants.  
Provisions ensuring that verifications are consistent  with these obligations are laid down in the EC’s 
Basic Anti-Dumping Regulation
1, and in particular in Articles 6 and 16. 
  In the EC, the European Commission is responsible for carrying out anti-dumping investigations.  The goal of the verification is to  obtain a reasonable assurance that the information 
provided in the questionnaire replies is complete an d accurate.  Verification encompasses a number of 
steps, including a desk analysis of the replies,  the sending of deficiency letters and on-spot 
verifications. 
 
                                                     
 
1 Council Regulation (EC) No 384/96 of 22 Decem ber 1995 on protection against dumped imports 
from countries not members of the European Community, Official Journal L 56, 6.3.1996, p. 1. as last amended 
by Regulation (EC) No 1972/2002 (OJ L 305, 7.11.2002, p. 1). G/ADP/AHG/W/156 
Page 2  
 
 1.  Desk analysis 
 
 Upon arrival, questionnaire replies are analysed  in detail for completeness, consistency and 
plausibility.  Figures are traced back, when possibl e, to copies of supporting documents provided by 
the respondent (e.g. the company’s annual repor ts and accounts, management reports etc.).  
 2.  Deficiency letters  
 Following this desk analysis, if the reply is  by and large complete yet contains some 
deficiencies, the respondent is informed by a ‘defic iency letter’ in which it is requested to complete, 
correct or clarify its reply.  Such letters are also sent out to receive additional feed-back and 
explanations about possible issues, in order for the case-handlers to understand them fully. The time 
limit normally given is 5 working days.  Deficiency letters are sent by registered mail and telefax. 
  If the reply to the deficiency letter is satisfa ctory and brings the necessary clarification, the 
underlying data will be considered and verified during the verification visit. 
  Substantially incomplete replies to questionnaires or deficiency letters, i.e. replies which have 
deficiencies such as to cause undue difficulty in a rriving at a reasonably accurate finding, are not 
considered.  The same may be true for partially in complete replies if it is found that these replies are 
selective in that they provide a biased picture of th e actual situation of an interested party. However, 
the company concerned is informed beforehand of the possible rejection and of the fact that Article 18 
(facts available – see below) will be applied, including the fact that this may lead to a less favourable 
treatment.  It receives normally 5 working days to comment on this decision or to complete its reply.  
 
3.  Verification visits 
  Verification visits enable a detailed checki ng of the reply against the documents of the 
respondent.  They are normally conducted in all new i nvestigations (“Article 5 – investigations”) and 
all types of review/refund investigations and may concern exporters, foreign and domestic producers, 
importers, traders, agents, trade associations and or ganisations, and users.  Verification visits are as 
much as possible completed at an early stage of th e investigation, i.e. normally some weeks after 
receipt of the replies to the Commission’s questionnair es or deficiency letters.  In new investigations, 
the Commission carries out the verification, whenev er possible, before taking a decision on the 
imposition of provisional measures.  This has the ad vantage that the factual information provided has 
already been checked agai nst the books and records of the companies concerned and that a number of 
factual questions have already been clarified, so  that a decision on provisional measures can be taken 
on a better informed basis.  As a consequence, a lthough the appreciation of the facts may still change 
in the further course of the investigation, in many cases the difference between any provisional and 
definitive measures will be less important.   The organisation of these visits requires a number of procedural steps, such as informing and obtaining agreement for the visit from the companies and the authorities of the third country visited. 
Prior to the visit, the respondent receives a ‘pre-ver ification letter’, setting out in detail the verification 
procedure in question and a list of all information to be prepared to allow for smooth and efficient 
checking.  The letter also contains the names of the visiting officers and confirms time and venue. 
This information is also conveyed to the government of the country concerned.  
 
 The length of the visit depends on the complexity  and importance of the visited company.  It 
is usually between one and three days.  Although this  is obviously a rather short period, requiring an 
extensive preparation, it is in our experience suffici ent.  Keeping the visit comparatively short should 
strike the right balance between the need for deta iled checking on the one hand, and the concern not to 
disrupt the daily business of companies too much, on th e other.  Visits are carried out by teams of 2  G/ADP/AHG/W/156 
 Page 3 
 
 
 casehandlers, generally presenting an adequate mix of competencies (e.g. accounting, law, 
economics).  Interpreters are routinely used by the Commission services to communicate efficiently, 
to allow staff of the visited company to use their own language if need be a nd finally to understand 
any written documents presented.  Visits in compan ies based in the Community (producers, importers, 
users etc.) are generally carried out in the language suggested by the visited company.  Obviously the 
companies concerned can be assisted by advisers of their own choosing (normally lawyers or 
chartered accountants).   At some occasions, the EC has been confronted  with requests from third countries that wished 
their own officials to be present when Commissi on officials conducted a verification in the third 
country concerned:  The EC has agreed to such requests, provided the company visited did not object. 
Conversely, Community exporters also occasionall y requested presence from Commission officials 
during verifications by third countries, in particular new users. In the – so far rare – instances where it 
occurred, such practice proved to be fruitful for all concerned, as it allowed, for example to eliminate 
possible misunderstandings in the conduct of verifications. 
 
 The Commission services generally insist on carrying out the visits at the respondents’ premises, where the original accounting documents and management records are kept, in order to 
minimise any logistical inconvenience related to  the transfer of potentially huge amounts of 
documents from one place to anot her and in order to ensure that source information can easily be 
inspected. 
 
 It often happens that minor errors or defici encies are found during the on-spot visit. In these 
cases, the respondent is requested to correct the response (normally on-spot).  However, information 
found to be unreliable or even misleading, is rej ected.  The rejection can also encompass the whole 
questionnaire reply if such unreliable and/or mislead ing information invalidates the entire reply.  Such 
a rejection will usually not happen during the verification visit but on return of the casehandlers and 
clearance by their superiors.  As for above, the co mpany is informed in writing of this rejection and 
has the right to comment on the decision.   It is important to note that verification visits are the last opportunity to verify the information 
submitted.  Therefore, after the verification visits have taken place, no new factual information can in 
principle be presented by the parties, nor taken into account by the Institutions.  
  It is not the Commission’s practice to provide the companies with specific reports on verification visits.  Rather, parties concerned receive, in accordance with the last sentence of Article 6.7 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement and Arti cle 20 of the Basic Regulation the results of the 
verification visits as part of the disclosure of the findings of the investigation. 
 
__________