WT/DS572/1, G/L/1285  
G/SCM/D122/1, G/ADP/D129/1  
5 December  2018 
(18-7670) Page: 1/3 
 Original:  Spanish  
 
  
PERU - ANTI -DUMPING AND COUNTERVAILING MEASURES  
ON BIODIESEL FROM ARGENTINA  
REQUEST FOR CONSULTATIONS BY ARGENTINA  
The following communication , dated  29 November  2018, from the delegation of  Argentina to the 
delegation of Peru , is circulated to the Dispute Settlement Body in accordance with Article 4.4 of the 
DSU. 
 
_______________  
 
 
My authorities have instructed me to request consultations with the Republic of Peru , pursuant to 
Articles 1 and 4 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes 
("DSU"), Article XXIII:1 of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Tr ade 1994 ("GATT 1994"), 
Article  30 of the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures ("SCM Agreement") and 
Article 17.3 of the Agreement on Implementation of Article VI of the General Agreement on Tariffs 
and Trade 1994 ("Anti -Dumping Agreement") , with respect to Peru's measures imposing 
anti-dumping duties and countervailing duti es on imports of biodiesel (B100) originating in 
Argentina , as established in Resolution No.  189-2016/CDB -INDECOPI of 19 October  20161 and 
Resolution  No. 011-2016/CDB -INDECOPI of 25 January  20162, and the underlying investigations  
and their respective init iation notices .3 Peru's measures appear to be inconsistent with Peru's 
obligations under the following provisions of the GATT 1994, the Anti -Dumping Agreement and the 
SCM Agreement : 
1.  Article 5.2 of the Anti -Dumping Agreement , because Peru initiated the anti-dumping investigation 
without there being evidence of dumping  in the application filed by the domestic industry ; 
2.  Article 5.3 of the  Anti-Dumping Agreement, because Peru does not appear to have examined the 
accuracy and adequacy of the evidence provided in the appli cation to determine whether it was 
sufficient to justify the initiation of an anti -dumping  investigation ; 
3.  Article 5.8 of the Anti -Dumping Agreement , because Peru did not reject the application under 
paragraph 1, did not terminate t he investigation promptly , and did not satisfy itself  that there was 
sufficient evidence of dumping to justify proceeding with the investigation ; 
4.  Article 6.5 of the Anti -Dumping Agreement and Article 12.4 of the SCM Agreement, because 
information which  was by nat ure confidential and/or which was  provided on a confidential basis  by 
                                                
1 Resolution No. 189 -2016/CDB -INDECOPI , published in the Official Journal El Peruano  of 
25 October  2016, imposing definitive anti -dumping duties on imports of biodiesel (B100) originating in the 
Argentine Republic, as confirmed by Resolution No. 0145 -2018/SDC -INDECOPI, published in the Officia l 
Journal El Peruano  of 27 July 2018.  
2 Resolution No. 011 -2016/CDB -INDECOPI, published in the Official Journal of 28 January 2016, 
providing for the application of definitive countervailing duties on imports of biodiesel (B100) originating in the 
Argentin e Republic, as confirmed by Resolution No. 0144 -2018/SDC -INDECOPI, published in the Official 
Journal El Peruano  of 27 July 2018.  
3 The anti -dumping investigation was initiated by Resolution No. 50 -2014/CFD -INDECOPI of 
20 April 2015, published in the Offici al Journal El Peruano  of 26 April 2015. The anti -subsidy investigation was 
initiated by Resolution No. 081 -2014/CFD -INDECOPI of 21 July 2014, published in the Official Journal 
El Peruano  of 28 July 2014.  WT/DS572/1 • G/L/1285 • G/SCM/D122/1 • G/ADP/D129/1  
- 2 - 
  the parties was not treated as such by Peru, and was disclosed without specif ic permission of those 
parties ; 
5.  Article 2.2 of the Anti -Dumping Agreement , because Peru failed to determine the margin of 
dumping by comparison with the cost of production in the country of origin plus a reasonable amount 
for administrative, selling and general costs and for profits ; 
6.  The first sentence of Article 2.2.1.1 of the Anti -Dumping Agreement because , when constructing 
the cost of production in the country of origin , Peru included costs not associated with the production 
and sale of the product under consideration . Furthermore, with regard to the second sentence of 
Article 2.2 .1.1 of the Anti -Dumping Agreement , Peru failed to  consider all available evidence on the 
proper allocation of costs  when calculating an amount for administrative, selling and general costs;  
7.  Article 2.2.2(iii) of the Anti-Dumping Agreement and Article VI:1(b)(ii) of the GATT 1994 , because 
Peru failed to  use a reasonable method to calculate the amount for profit ; 
8.  Article 2.2 and Article 2.2.2(iii) of the Anti -Dumping Agreement, inte rpreted in the light of 
Article  VI:1(b)(ii) of the GATT 1994, because  Peru failed to ensure  that the margin determined for 
profit  did not exceed the profit normally realized by other exporters or producers on sales of products 
of the same general category in the domestic market of the country of origin ; 
9.  Article VI:2 of the GATT 1994 and Article 9.3 of the Anti -Dumping Agreement , because Peru 
imposed anti -dumping duties in excess of the margin of dumping that it should have established 
under Article 2 of the Anti -Dumping Agreement ; 
10.  Article 18.1 of the Anti -Dumping Agreement , because Peru  took definitive action against the 
alleged dumping practice in a manner inconsistent with the provisions of the GATT 1994, as 
interpreted by the Anti -Dumping Agreement ; 
11.  Article 14( d) of the SCM Agreement , interpreted in the light of  Article 1.1(a)(1)(iii) and (iv) and 
Article 1.1(b)  of the SCM Agreement , by considering that the Government of the Argentine Republic 
entrusts  private bodies to make a purchase for more than adequate remuneration , and, 
consequently, Article 19.4 of the SCM Agreement and Article VI:3 of the GATT 1994 , by levying a 
countervailing duty in excess of the alleged subsidy granted ; 
12.  Article 3.1 and 3.4 of the Anti -Dumping Agreement and Article 15.1 and 15.4 of the 
SCM Agreement, because Peru failed  to make a determination of injury based on positive evidence 
and inv olving an objective examination ; 
13.  Article 15.1 and 15.5 of the SCM Agreement and Article 3.1 and 3.5 of the Anti -Dumping 
Agreement , because  Peru failed to conduct an objective examinatio n, based on positive evidence, 
of other factors that may have caused injury to the domestic industry and, consequently, attributed 
the injury caused by other factors to the allegedly subsidized and dumped imports ; 
14.  Article s 10, 19 .1 and 32.1 of the SCM  Agreement , because Peru imposed a countervailing duty  
not in accordance with  the provisions of that Agreement ; 
15.  Article XVI:4 of the Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization , 
Article  32.5 of the SCM Agreement and Article 18.4 of t he Anti -Dumping Agreement, because Peru 
failed to take all necessary steps to ensure that the imposition of the  countervailing duties and 
anti-dumping duties on biodiesel  (B100) originating in Argentina was in accordance with the 
provisions of those Agreem ents; 
16.  Article  VI:5 of the GATT 1994 , because Peru  imposed both anti -dumping and countervailing 
duties on the same  product to compensate for the same situation of alleged dumping and 
subsidization . 
Peru's measures appear to nullify or impair the benefits accruing to Argentina,  directly or indirectly , 
under the cited Agreements . WT/DS572/1 • G/L/1285 • G/SCM/D122/1 • G/ADP/D129/1  
- 3 - 
  Argentina reserves the right to address , during the course of the consultations,  further factual claims 
and legal issues und er other provisions of the WTO Agreement regarding the above matters , 
including any amendment, replacement, extension, implementation measures or other related 
measures . 
Argentina looks forward to Peru's response to this request with a view to  arranging a mutually 
convenient date and place for the consultat ions. 
 
__________