G/ADP/Q1/MUS/6  
G/SCM/Q1/MUS/6  
G/SG/Q1/MUS/1  
 
2 October 2023  
(23-6619) Page: 1/4 
Committee on Anti -Dumping Practices  
Committee on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures  
Committee on Safeguards  Original: English  
 
NOTIFICATION OF LAWS AND REGULATIONS UNDER  
ARTICLES  18.5, 32.6 AND 12.6  OF THE AGREEMENTS  
QUESTIONS POSED BY THE UNITED STATES  
REGARDING THE NOTIFICATION OF MAURITIUS1 
The following communication , dated  and received on 29 September 2023 , is being circulated at the 
request of the delegation of the United States . 
 
_______________  
 
 
The United States thanks Mauritius for its notification regarding Trade (Anti -Dumping, Countervailing 
and Safeguard Measures) Act 2022, and poses the following questions:2 
Question 1  
In Article 2, the 7 percent negligibility threshold deviates from the 9 percent threshold contemplated 
at Art. 27.10(b) of the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM Agreement). Can 
you please elaborate why Mauritius opted to deviate from the higher threshold?  
Question 2  
Article 3 defines a particular market situation (PMS) as instances where (1) prices are artificially 
low; (2) there is significant barter trade; (3) as a result of government in tervention production costs 
are not representative of actual costs; (4) the product sold in the exporting country is a by -product 
or a waste product in that country, yet constitutes a primary product in Mauritius; or (5) there are 
non-commercial processing  arrangements.  
• Please describe the criteria or methodology Mauritius will use to evaluate each of the 
five instances above to determine if a PMS exists. For example, what methodology will 
Mauritius use to evaluate whether prices are artificially low, what is considered 
significant barter trade, what criteria will Mauritius use to evaluate whether production 
costs are representative of actual costs, etc.?  
Question 3  
Articles 7 through 10 describe the composition of Mauritius ' trade remedy authority stating that the 
Authority shall consist of a Chairperson; a Vice -Chairperson; a representative of the Ministry 
responsible for the subject of commerce; a representative of the Ministry responsible for the subject 
of industry; a law officer designated by the Attor ney-General; and a representative of Customs, and 
that the Authority shall meet at least once a month. It also indicates that the Authority can appoint 
staff to serve as investigators. Please explain who conducts Mauritius ' trade remedy investigations, 
 
1 G/ADP/N/1/MUS/ 4-G/SCM/N/1/MUS/ 4-G/SG/N/1 /MUS/2  
2 For the sake of efficiency, the United States suggests that committee review for questions 2 -6, 9, 14, 
and 15A be conducted in the Committee on Anti -Dumping Practices, whereas review for questions 7, 8, and 
10-13 be conducted in the Committee on Safeguards, and review for questions 1 and 15B be conducted on the 
Committee on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures.  G/ADP/Q1/MUS/6 • G/SCM/Q1/MUS/6 • G/SG/Q1/MUS/1  
 
- 2 - 
 
  and who has the final say in deciding whether duties are imposed. For example, does the staff 
conduct the actual investigations and then make a recommendation regarding the imposition of 
duties to the six members of the Authority? What role do the six members  of the Authority have in 
trade remedy investigations?  
Question 4  
Article 21 states that Mauritius can use an alternative methodology to calculate normal value in 
instances where the exporter of an investigated product is an exporter from a non -market econ omy 
country. Does Mauritius maintain a list of countries it considers to be non -market economies? If so, 
which countries does Mauritius consider non -market economies? What criteria does Mauritius use to 
determine if a country is a market economy or a non -market economy?  
Question 5  
Article 33(4)(a) refers to a non -attribution analysis of "the volume and prices of imports of the 
products in question not sold at dumped or subsidized prices". We note that while this Article tracks 
the language of Art. 3.5 of th e Agreement on Implementation of Article VI of the General Agreement 
on Tariffs and Trade 1994 (ADA Agreement) ("the volume and prices of imports not sold at dumping 
prices  …"), it does not seem to comport precisely with the concept in Article 15.5 of the 
SCM Agreement, which refers to " … the volume and prices of non -subsidized imports …". Is the 
reference to "imports … not sold at … subsidized prices" intended to refer to imports that are not 
subsidized?  
Question 6  
Article 33(4) uses the word "shall", sugg esting that examination of all of factors listed in that article 
must be considered in a non -attribution analysis in every investigation, whether or not relevant to 
the particular investigation. Is that your intent?  
Question 7  
Article 52(3) states that the  initiation of a safeguard investigation shall be effective on the date 
notified to the official Gazette.  
a. Please confirm that this notification would also specify the period of time parties have to 
submit comments or other documentation.  
b. Please provide a  web URL, if applicable, for the Mauritius official Gazette.  
Question 8  
Article 53 states that once a safeguard investigation has been initiated, the Authority will provide 
the full text of the written safeguard application "to any interested party" upon r equest. Please 
confirm that any information which is by nature confidential, or which is provided on a confidential 
basis, will not be disclosed without permission from the providing party, as required by Article 3(2) 
of the Agreement on Safeguards.  
Questi on 9 
Article 59 states that the Authority shall establish and maintain a register relating to each 
investigation or review and that the register shall be available for consultation to the general public 
at the offices of the Authority at all times during t he course of the investigation or review.  
a. Will Mauritius make the register available electronically to the public and/or interested 
parties to a proceeding, or will the register only be available in hard -copy format for in -
person viewing at your offices?  
b. Will the register for a particular investigation or review be available to the public after the 
investigation or review is over or is the register only available while the investigation or 
review is on -going?  G/ADP/Q1/MUS/6 • G/SCM/Q1/MUS/6 • G/SG/Q1/MUS/1  
 
- 3 - 
 
  Question 10  
Article 78(1) states that the Authority shall "draw up a time frame for the investigation which shall, 
except owing to circumstances beyond its controls, be followed so as to not cause injustice to any 
party." Please describe how the Authority intends to n otify parties of any changes or extensions to 
the time frame.  
Question 11  
Article 78(2) states that interested parties that intend to participate in a safeguard investigation 
have 20 days from the date of the initiation of the investigation to "make itself known" to the 
Authority. Article 80 states that parties have 30 days after initiation to submit written comments for 
consideration for the preliminary determination.  
a. Please confirm whether parties can register as interested parties and later submit written 
comments within the 30 day period.  
b. Please describe the procedure, if any, available to parties interested in requesting additional 
time to submit written comments.  
Question 12  
Article 81 describes the procedures for the preliminary determination.  Paragraphs (5) and (6) state 
that the preliminary determination shall be submitted to the WTO Committee on Safeguards and 
provided to all participating interested parties. Will the copy of the preliminary determination also 
be published in Mauritius ' official Gazette? Where are Mauritius ' Gazette notices published? Please 
provide the URL.  
Question 13  
Article 86(3) states that the Authority shall publish a decision not to impose a definitive safeguard 
measure in the official Gazette. Please confirm whether Mauritius intends to also notify the 
WTO Committee on Safeguards of any decision to not impose a definitive safeguard measure.  
Question 14  
Article 93 states that the Authority shall examine whether a duty less than the full dumping or 
subsidy margin shall  be adequate to remove the injury to the domestic industry. Will Mauritius 
automatically examine lesser duty in every investigation, or does a lesser duty analysis need to be 
requested by an interested party in order to be examined?  
Question 15  
Article 94,  paragraphs (8) and (9), state that the Authority may apply a residual antidumping duty 
rate for imports from exporters and producers not known to the Authority at the time the final 
determination was made, and that this rate shall not exceed a rate higher  than the difference 
between the highest normal value and the lowest export price established for exporters and 
producers examined during the investigation . 
Article 94, paragraphs (8) and (10) state that the Authority may apply a residual countervailing du ty 
rate for imports from exporters and producers not known to the Authority at the time the final 
determination was made, and that rate shall not exceed the sum of the highest subsidy amounts 
found in respect of each subsidy programme . 
A. With respect to anti dumping proceedings under Article 94, paragraph (8) and (9), why is 
the residual/All Others rate a punitive rate? In general, Article 9.4 of the AD Agreement 
provides rules that limit the amount of antidumping duty of non -examined companies to 
either (1) t he weighted -average margin of dumping of individually examined exporters or 
producers; or (2) in the case of prospective normal value system to the difference between 
weighted -average normal value of selected exporters and producers and the exports prices 
of exporters or producers not individually examined. How is the application of the residual/All G/ADP/Q1/MUS/6 • G/SCM/Q1/MUS/6 • G/SG/Q1/MUS/1  
 
- 4 - 
 
  Others rate set forth in Article 94, paragraph (8) and (9) consistent with Article 9.4 of the 
AD Agreement?  
B. With respect to countervailing duty proceedings und er Article 94, paragraph (8) and (10), 
why is the residual/All Others rate a punitive rate? Article 19.4 of the SCM Agreement 
provides that " No countervailing duty shall be levied on any imported product in excess of 
the amount of the subsidy found to exis t, calculated in terms of subsidization per unit of the 
subsidized and exported product." How is the application of the residual/All Others rate set 
forth in Article 94, paragraphs (8) and (10), which contemplates that the residual/All Others 
rate of non -examined companies could equal " the sum of the highest subsidy amounts found 
in respect of each subsidy programme,"  consistent with Article 19.4 of the SCM Agreement?  
__________