G/ADP/Q1/EU/1  
G/SCM/Q1/EU/1  
 
4 April 2017  
(17-1832) Page: 1/2 
Committee on Anti -Dumping Practices  
Committee on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures  Original: Eng lish 
 
NOTIFICATION OF LAWS  AND REGULATIONS UNDE R 
ARTICLE 18.5 OF THE AGREEMENT  
QUEST IONS POSED BY THE UN ITED STATES  
REGARDING  THE NOTIFICATION OF THE EUROPEAN UNION1 
The following communication, dated 31 March 2017, is being circulated at the request of the 
Delegation of the United States . 
 
_______________  
 
 
The United States thanks the European Union for its notification of "Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 of 
the European Parliament and of the Council (8 June 2016) " (Regulation) and poses the following 
questions:  
 
Question 1  
 
The Regulation throughout refers to goods entered or released "for free circulation " and goods 
entered for "consumption. " It is unclear if there are meaningful differences between the goods 
encompassed by these terms. Please explain any difference s between the terms "for free 
circulation " and "for consumption ". 
 
Question 2  
 
Article 2 paragraph 5 of the Regulation states that, "[c]osts shall normally be calculated on the 
basis of records kept by the party under investigation, provided that such reco rds are in 
accordance with the generally accepted accounting principles of the country concerned and that it 
is shown that the records reasonably reflect the costs associated with the production and sale of 
the product under consideration ." (emphasis added ). Please explain whether the Commission 
requires the submitting party to show or demonstrate that GAAP -compliant records reasonably 
reflect the costs associated with the production and sale of the product under consideration in its 
initial submission or i f the Commission would notify the submitter of any specific concerns and 
allow an opportunity to provide additional information.  
 
Question 3  
 
Article 5 paragraph 3 of the Regulation states that the Commission shall, "as far as possible " 
examine the accura cy and adequacy of the evidence provided in the complaint to determine 
whether there is sufficient evidence to initiate an investigation. Please explain the purpose and 
meaning of the phase "as far as possible, " which does not appear in the Article 5.3 of the 
Agreement on Implementation of Article VI of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994.  
 
Question 4  
 
Article 8 paragraphs 5 and 6 of the Regulation appear to contain conflicting information. 
Specifically, paragraph 5 states that, "[w]here underta kings are accepted, the investigation shall 
be terminated. The Commission shall terminate the investigation in accordance with the 
examination procedure referred to in Article 15(3) "; whereas paragraph 6 states that, "[i]f the 
                                                
1 G/ADP/N/1/EU/3 (dated 1 October 2016).  G/ADP/Q1/EU/1 • G/SCM/Q1/EU/1  
 
- 2 - 
 
  undertakings are accepted, th e investigation of dumping and injury shall normally be completed. " 
Please explain whether investigations are terminated, in whole or in part, if an undertaking 
agreement is accepted.  
 
Question 5  
 
Article 9 paragraph 3 of the Regulation notes that the Com mission may be assisted in an 
investigation of possible circumvention by customs authorities. Please explain what types of data 
can be shared between customs authorities and the Commission and how any business proprietary 
or confidential data are protected  from disclosure. Under what authorities or instruments, such as 
a memorandum of understanding or other agreement, is the sharing of data between the 
Commission and customs authorities allowed? Is the use of any shared information in a 
circumvention procee ding limited to that proceeding?  
 
Question 6  
 
Article 11 paragraph 2 of the Regulation notes that an expiry review can be initiated on the 
Commission's own initiative. Please explain the evidence required for an initiation on the 
Commission's own initiati ve and how that evidence and information would be collected. This 
paragraph also explains that, for expiry reviews initiated following a request by or on behalf of the 
Union producers, the request for an expiry review must contain sufficient evidence that the expiry 
of the measures would be likely to result in a continuation or recurrence of dumping and injury. Is 
the evidence collected by the Commission to support the initiation of an expiry review on its own 
initiative subject to the same standard? Is the  evidence on which the ex officio  initiation is based 
provided to interested parties at the time of initiation (akin to the provisions of the matters set out 
in a review request)? If so, what form does this disclosure take?  
 
Question 7  
 
Please explain whe ther the "interim review " referenced in Article 11 paragraph 3 of the Regulation 
covers all imports from the subject country or only those from certain exporters.   
 
Question 8  
 
Article 17 paragraph 4 of the Regulation states that, "[w]here it is decided t o sample and there is a 
degree of non -cooperation by some or all of the parties selected which is likely to materially affect 
the outcome of the investigation, a new sample may be selected. " In cases where the level of non -
cooperation by only some parties selected leads to the selection of a new sample, would the 
Commission seek to replace all previously selected parties or would it seek to select substitutes for 
only those sampled parties found to be non -cooperative? Please explain whether companies 
select ed in the first sample would be eligible for selection in the repeat sample, if they had been 
deemed cooperative. Also, please explain whether any non -cooperation that leads to the selection 
of a new sample has any impact on the rate assigned to non -select ed cooperative companies in 
the event of an affirmative final finding of dumping and injury.  
 
__________