WT/REG337/3  
 
21 March 2014  
(14-1786)  Page: 1/2  
Committee on Regional Trade Agreements  Original: English  
 
 ENLARGEMENT OF THE EUROPEAN UNION TO 28 MEMBER STATES -  
ACCESSION OF CROATIA 
(GOODS AND SERVICES) 
QUESTIONS AND REPLIES 
 The following communication, dated 20 March 2014, is being circulated at the request of the 
delegations of the European Union and Croatia. 
 
 This document reproduces the questi ons addressed to the Parties and the 
responses submitted.  
_______________ 
 
 
Question from the delegation of Canada 
 
1.1.  Page 15, paragraph 3.7, footnote 17: Does the EU anticipate a modification of the 
CET once Article XXIV:6 renegoti ations have been concluded? 
 I n  l i n e  w i t h  p r a c t i c e  f o l l o w e d  f o r  p r e v i o us enlargements, the results of Article XXIV:6 
negotiations will be notified to the WTO. These results will be reflected in the future 
EU-28 schedule.  
 Questions from the delegation of the Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, 
Kinmen, and Matsu 
 Provisions on Trade in Goods 
Anti-dumping and Countervailing Measures 
 1.2.  According to pages 18 and 19, paragr aphs 3.26 and 3.27, respectively, of the 
WTO Secretariat's Factual Presentation, the EU has applied the extension of existing 
anti-dumping and countervailing measures to Croatia since 1 July 2013. Hence, we have 
the following questions: 
a. Had the EU initiated any reviews of these anti-dumping and countervailing 
measures on its own initiative before th e extension? If so, please provide the 
details. 
Enlargement as such did not trigger automatic re-examinations of all existing EU trade 
defence measures. This is because enlargement does not necessarily change the basic economic 
parameters of the existing measures. Indeed, enla rgement is only one of the many circumstances 
which may change during the life-time of anti-dumping measures. Other changes, which can have an equally important economic impact, such as the appearance of new producers or the 
disappearance of existing producers, would also not automatically lead to a review. A review would 
legally only be necessary if the changed circumstance affects the level of the measures in force or puts into question the existence of those measur es. Such effect would in view of the economic 
activity in Croatia not necessarily exist. This is illustrated in particular by the fact that the 
production and trade flows of goods in Croatia are less than 0.5% of those of the EU before 
1 July 2013. Therefore, the economic parameters of the investigations carried out on the basis of WT/REG337/3 
 
- 2 - 
 
  the enlarged EU would in most cases be the same as those of the investigations previously carried 
out on the basis of 27 Member States. 
 However, wherever enlargement substantia lly changes the circumstances regarding 
antidumping measures (e.g. the injury parameters), reviews of such measures are possible in 
accordance with Article 11(3) of Council Regu lation (EC) No 1225/2009 of 30 November 2009 on 
protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Community and 
Article 11.2 of the WTO Anti-dumping Agreement. Since the date of enlargement, i.e. as of 
1 July 2013, interested parties have therefore the possibility to lodge review requests of trade 
defence measures for which enlargement significan tly changes dumping, subsidy, injury or other 
important parameters of the measures. Reviews are initiated, provided that the alleged changes 
are substantiated by sufficient prima facie evidence. It should be repeated, however, that the 
mere fact of enlargement is not regarded as a si gnificant change of circumstances for the purpose 
of initiation of a review. Depending on the results of the review investigations the measures 
concerned are maintained, modified or abolished. In brief, the EU enlargement can be 
appropriately addressed under Article 11.2 of the WTO Anti-Dumping Agreement. 
 
Finally, it should also be recalled that the ab ove approach has been made fully transparent 
by the EU, as explained in reply to the next question.   
b. If not, had the EU initiated any other procedures or had it adopted any other 
measures to make sure the extension was consistent with Article 24.5(a) of 
GATT 1994? 
 The EU published in the Official Journal of the European Union a Notice regarding the 
application of antidumping and anti-subsidy measures in force in the Union following enlargement 
and the possibility of review ( OJ C 137, 16.5.2013, p. 9–9) . A website on this issue has also been 
launched. In that way all parties were fully in formed and could prepare themselves, e.g. for a 
review request if they considered that this would be appropriate. 
  The EU considers that the purpose of an examin ation in the light of Article 24.5(a) of GATT 
1994 would be to ascertain whether on the whole the general incidence of the duties and other 
regulations of commerce has increased or become  more restrictive. Therefore, WTO Members 
should also take into account the improved market access opportunities offered in the new Member State individually and in the entire EU, as a result of the enlargement. 
 
__________