WT/DS436/14/Add.5  
 
12 April 2016  
(16-2060)  Page: 1/2  
  Original: English  
 
  UNITED STATES – COUNTERVAILING MEASURES ON CERTAIN HOT-ROLLED CARBON 
STEEL FLAT PRODUCTS FROM INDIA 
STATUS REPORT BY THE UNITED STATES  
Addendum 
The following communication, dated 11 April 2016, from  the delegation of the United States to the 
Chairperson of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated pursuant to Article 21.6 of the DSU. 
_______________ 
 
Status Report Regarding the Implementation of the 
DSB Recommendations and Rulings in the Dispute 
United States – Countervailing Measures on Certain Hot-Rolled 
Carbon Steel Flat Products from India 
(WT/DS436) 
 
The United States submits this report in accordance with Article 21.6 of the Understanding on 
Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes ("DSU"). 
  
On 19 December, 2014, the Dispute Settlement Body ("DSB") adopted its recommendations and rulings in United States – Countervailing Measures on Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat 
Products from India  (WT/DS436).  At the following DSB meeting, the United States informed the 
DSB of its intention to implement the recommendations and rulings of the DSB in connection with 
this matter.   
On 24 March, 2015, the United States and India in formed the DSB that they had agreed that a 
reasonable period of time for the United States  to implement the recommendations and rulings of 
the DSB would end on 19 March, 2016.  On 9 March, 2016, the United States and India informed 
the DSB that they had agreed to extend the reas onable period of time so as to expire on 
18 April, 2016.   US authorities are conferring with interested parties and working to implement the 
recommendations and rulings of the DSB in a manner that is appropriate.  On 5 October, 2015, 
the US Trade Representative requested, pursuant to section 129(b)(2) of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act ("URAA"), the Secretary of Commerce to issue a determination that would render 
the determinations by the Department of Commerce subject to the DSB's recommendations not 
inconsistent with those recommendations and rulings.  Also on 5 October, 2015, the US Trade Representative requested, pursuant to section 129(a)(1) of the URAA, the US International Trade 
Commission ("USITC") to issue an advisory report on whether US law permits the USITC to take 
steps in connection with the particular proceeding that would render its determination subject to the DSB's recommendations not inconsistent wi th those recommendations and rulings.   
 
On 23 October, 2015, the USITC issued an affirmative advisory report to the US Trade 
Representative, indicating that Title VII of the Tariff Act of 1930 permits the USITC to take steps that would render its action in that proceeding not inconsistent with the DSB's recommendations 
and rulings.  On 6 November, 2015, the US Trade Representative requested, pursuant to section 
129(a)(4) of the URAA, that the USITC issue a determ ination that would render its action in that 
proceeding not inconsistent with the DSB's recommendation and rulings.  On 7 March, 2016, the WT/DS436/14/Add.5 
 
- 2 - 
 
  USITC issued a determination pursuant to Section 129(a)(4).  The USITC "f[ou]nd that an industry 
in the United States is materially injured by reason of imports of hot-rolled steel found by the US Department of Commerce (Commerce) to be subsid ized, and ma[d]e an affirmative determination 
regarding subsidized hot-rolled steel imports from India."
1  This USITC determination pursuant to 
Section 129(a)(4) renders its action subject to the DSB's recommendations not inconsistent with 
those recommendations and rulings.  
__________  
                                               
1 USITC Publication 4599, at 2 (March 2016) (footnotes omitted).