G/ADP/Q1/SLV/15  
G/SCM/Q1/SLV/15  
G/SG/Q1/SLV/14  
 
1 June 2023 
(23-3725) Page: 1/7 
Committee on Anti -Dumping Practices  
Committee on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures  
Committee on Safeguards  Original: English  
 
 
NOTIFICATION OF LAWS AND REGULATIONS UNDER  
ARTICLE 18.5, 32.6  AND 12.6 OF THE AGREEMENTS  
REPLIES TO QUESTIONS1 POSED BY THE  UNITED STATES OF AMERICA  
REGARDING THE NOTIFICATION OF EL SALVADOR2 
The following communication, dated and received on 30 May 2023, is being circulated at the request 
of the delegation of El Salvador . 
 
_______________  
 
Question 1 
In Article 4, El Salvador states that for purposes of calculating the dumping margin, if 
there is not an identical like product to use as a match for the product under investigation, 
El Salvador will choose a similar product based on a set of criteria. How  is the most similar 
product chosen? Is there a hierarchy for determining which criteria of those listed in 
Article 4 is the most important? Does El Salvador make any sort of adjustment to account 
for the difference in cost and price between the product un der investigation and the 
chosen similar like product? If so, how is the adjustment calculated? If not, how does 
El Salvador determine when a product is considered too dissimilar to use as a comparison? 
In such instances, what would El Salvador use as the basis for normal value?  
Reply: 
Article 4 provides a list of the factors that may be considered, without determining a hierarchy 
amongst them, allowing the Investigating Authority to choose between them or others. In that 
regard, a petitioner may by any mea ns plausible prove that the product is similar to the imported 
one, including by making use of technical information, HS codes for the product, market analysis of 
the product, among others.  
Question 2 
In Article 6, El Salvador states that in determining support for, or against, a trade remedy 
petition DATCO may send notifications to domestic producers who, within five days from 
the day following the receipt of notification, shall express in writing their support for, or 
opposition to, the appl ication. Is the five -day period business or calendar days? How does 
El Salvador ensure the domestic producers received the notification? How does DATCO 
determine when the notification is received, and the five -day period starts? How does 
DATCO ensure it ha s found all domestic producers? Does DATCO do its own research or 
rely only the list of domestic producers named by the Petitioner in the petition?  
 
1 G/ADP /Q1/SLV/14  - G/SCM /Q1/SLV/14  - G/SG /Q1/SLV/13 . 
2 G/ADP/N/ 1/SLV/3/Suppl.2  - G/SCM/N/ 1/SLV/3/Suppl.2  - G/SG/N/ 1/SLV/3/Suppl.2 . G/ADP/Q1/SLV/15 • G/SCM/Q1/SLV/15 • G/SG/Q1/SLV/14  
 
- 2 - 
 
  Reply: 
According to Article 49 of the Central American Regulation on Unfair Trade Practices ( Reglamento 
Centroamericano sobre Prácticas Desleales de Comercio ) and Article 92 of the Special Law on Trade 
Defence, the period in question will be in calendar days.  
The receipt of the notification is proven by an acknowledgment of receipt of emails, phon e calls or 
other forms of communication. Based on Administrative Procedures Act3 a notification could be done 
by any means that provides a proof of receipt and in such manner a notification will be considered 
as received.  
To find the available national pr oducers DATCO,  requires information from other governmental 
offices related to commerce and statistics. DATCO also verifies the information given by the 
petitioner or petitioners in order to confirm that the producers listed as national producers are 
opera ting at the moment of the request.  
Question 3 
Article 7 states that any party with a legitimate interest in an investigation into unfair 
trade practices may inform the investigating authority in writing of its interest in 
participating in the investigation  within 15 days following the publication in the Official 
Journal of the resolution initiating the investigation. Please explain how "legitimate 
interest" is defined in your Law. How is legitimate interest different from "interested 
parties"? Are there opp ortunities for members of the public to participate or make 
submissions in El Salvador's trade remedy investigations?  
Reply: 
Legitimate interest is defined by the Administrative Law Litigation Tribunal in its definitive provision 
in the case under the refe rence 14 -2018 as the expectation of obtaining benefits or to avoid prejudice 
facing an action or omission done by a public authority, on which it does not exist a direct link but 
a subjacent relationship.  
Interested parties do have a direct link to the cas e and a direct interest on it, third parties with 
legitimate interest have a subjacent interest to it, in that manner, members of the public who have 
a proven interest in the investigation may participate in trade remedy investigations.  
When considering th e participation of a third party based on its interest in the case the concepts 
related will be taken into account by the Investigating Authority.  
If an interested party is not able to register to participate in a trade remedy proceeding 
within the initial  15-day period, does this preclude the party from participation in later 
stages of the investigation (e.g., submitting comments)?  Does the 15 -day period apply to 
each of the dumping, subsidy, and injury stages of the investigation?  Can the 15 -day 
period be  extended?  If so, under what circumstances?  
In the context of Article 7, as it refers to  in Article 4(f)(7) of  the Special Law on Trade Defence, it is 
applied to third Parties that may have legitimate interest in the investigation. If said third Parties do  
not express their interest within this period, their right to participate will preclude. Nonetheless, 
based on the Administrative Procedures Act if a situation outside of the ordinary or outside of their 
control has limited the possibility to express thei r interest, the Investigating Authority will study 
such situation to consider if an extemporary petition could be admitted. Under the referenced Act, 
an extension of 10 working days may be granted by the Investigation Authority in virtue of a 
reasoned requ est made by the interested Party.  
However, if a directly interested party does not communicate its interest in the procedure its right 
to participate does not preclude. In the case of exporters, foreign producers, importers, and foreign 
 
3 The Administrative Procedures Act applicable as internal law in El Salvador.  G/ADP/Q1/SLV/15 • G/SCM/Q1/SLV/15 • G/SG/Q1/SLV/14  
 
- 3 - 
 
  governments their r ight of defence will be guaranteed by making all relevant notifications by any 
means possible.  
This will apply to the initial investigation process and reviews.  
Question 4 
Article 8 states that "non -market economy countries" shall be understood to mean a 
country in which the government determines economic activity through a central planning 
mechanism. How does El Salvador determine whether a country is a non -market 
economy? Are there specific criteria it examines? If so, what are the criteria? Does 
El Salvador maintain a list of countries it considers to be non -market economies? Are 
these countries pre -determined to be non -market economies or does El Salvador need to 
conclude, in the context of an anti -dumping investigation or proceeding, that a country is 
a non -market economy country?  
Reply: 
El Salvador does not have a list of "non-market economy countries " but relies on international data 
and statistics to determine such qualification, being necessary to conclude said characteristic within 
an investigation . 
Question 5 
Article 9 lists three criteria that El Salvador examines to pick a substitute country for 
purposes of determining normal value in non -market economy cases (i.e., production 
processes in the substitute country and non -market economy country, th e scale of 
production, and the product quality). Does El Salvador consider any additional criteria or 
factors in selecting the substitute country (e.g., the economic similarity between the 
non-market country and the third country)?  
Reply: 
El Salvador relie s on the criteria given by the Anti -Dumping Agreement, Special Law on Trade 
Defence, and its Regulations to select a third country; nonetheless, economic similarity might be a 
reference proof to consider by the competent authority not determining the final  criteria.  
Question 6 
Article 10 states that, in determining whether lesser duty is appropriate, El Salvador 
considers the impact of the measure on the domestic market. How does El Salvador 
measure the impact of the measure on the domestic market? Does El Salvador consider 
public interest in determining whether to apply lesser duty? Is lesser duty automatically 
examined by DATCO in every investigation or is examination of lesser duty something that 
must be prompted (e.g., requested by an interested party)?  
Reply: 
El Salvador relies on its domestic data and statistics to measure the impact of a measure on the 
domestic market, it also corroborates the accuracy of the information provided by the Parties 
regarding the impact on the domestic market. The related c ondition will be determinant when 
considering the application of lesser duty, this will include an examination of public interest.  
The proportion of the duty is determined by the examined factors, such information is provided by 
the Parties and compiled by  the authority. If an opposing Party presents information on lesser duty 
or if the authority determines the applicability of lesser duty, this will be applied.  G/ADP/Q1/SLV/15 • G/SCM/Q1/SLV/15 • G/SG/Q1/SLV/14  
 
- 4 - 
 
  Question 7 
Article 18 states that allocable subsidies are those for which the subsidy amount may be 
allocated over the average useful life (AUL) of the recipient's operational assets, and that 
such subsidies shall meet one or more of the criteria in Article 18.  
• Please explain how El Salvador determines the AUL for assets.  
Reply : 
El Salvador  determines the AUL based on the criteria given by Article 19 of the notified Regulations, 
which establish the calculation required for such purposes.  
• How does El Salvador define "non-recurring " subsidies?  
Reply : 
"Non-recurring subsidies " are those that ar e only provided once and that thus could not be 
determined as a recurrent practice.  
• Does El Salvador have any exceptions when determining if a subsidy is "recurring " 
or "non-recurring "? If so, please explain.  
Reply : 
El Salvador does not apply any exception s to determine if a subsidy is "recurring " or "non-recurring ". 
• Please also explain what is meant by "be transferred forward in the recipient 's 
accounting records " and how does El Salvador consider the future production when 
determining the allocation of a subsidy?  
Reply : 
This type of subsidies are expected to be perceived in future accounting records, and not especially 
in the one that is ongoing at the time of the subsidy.  
• Please confirm how a firm 's relevant sales during the period of investigation and 
period of review are defined.  Are they defined as: total sales, export sales, sales of 
a particular product, or sales to a particular market? If not, please explain.  
Reply : 
Taking into consideration the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures, the Special Law 
on Trade Defence and its Regulations, relevant sales will be define d depending on the product that 
is subject to investigation. If the company produces a different variety of products but the subsidy 
is oriented to boosting the pr oduction of only one of them, sales will be narrowed (as much as 
possible) to those of the product, but if the company produces one single product or line of products 
that are subject to subsidies, then the total sales will be taken into account.  
Question 8 
Article 18 also states that "{w}here the  number of years between the date of receipt of 
the subsidy and the subsidy POI is greater than the average useful life of the assets, no 
subsidy amount shall be attributed to the subsidy POI." Please clarify wheth er this is 
meant to say that El Salvador will not find a benefit for subsidies provided prior to the 
AUL? If not, please provide further explanation.  
Reply: 
It is correct. El Salvador will not find a benefit for subsidies provided prior to the AUL.  G/ADP/Q1/SLV/15 • G/SCM/Q1/SLV/15 • G/SG/Q1/SLV/14  
 
- 5 - 
 
  Questio n 9 
Articles 39 and 40 describe the provision of goods or services for less than adequate 
remuneration. The articles state that when determining the amount of benefit, 
El Salvador's first preference is to consider an actual private market transaction withi n 
the country under investigation. If that is not available, the next step is to calculate the 
benefit by assessing whether the price paid to the government is sufficient to cover total 
costs, including selling, general and administrative expenses, to prov ide the goods or 
services supplied, plus a reasonable amount for profit, or such other reasonable basis as 
may be determined (i.e., constructed price).  
Does El Salvador take world market prices into consideration when calculating a benefit 
under the provis ion of goods and services for less than adequate remuneration?  
Reply: 
El Salvador complies with the methods provided by law to determine the adequate remuneration. 
This means that it will take into account the country of supply or the country of purchase. It may 
also consider world market prices or any other reasonable basis to be determined.  
Question 10 
In Article 49, Chapter III El Salvador uses the term "like product" instead of the term "like 
or directly competitive products." Article 49 then lists seven factors that may be 
appropriate in considering what might be "a like product." Article 2 of the Agreement on 
Safeguards and Article XIX of the GATT use the term "like or directly products" whereas 
"like product" is used in Article VI of the General A greement and Article 32.6 of the 
Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures. The terms "like product" and "like 
or directly competitive product" do not necessarily have the same meaning. However, we 
note that Article 50 of El Salvador's notificatio n refers to "a comparison between the 
product under investigation and the like or directly competitive product."  
• Please explain how El Salvador 's definition of like product comports with the 
Safeguard Agreement definition of the domestic industry as "produ cers . . . of the 
like or directly competitive products . . . " WTO Safeguard Agreement Article 4.1(c).  
Reply : 
The definition of the domestic industry is regulated in Article 5 of the Special Law on Trade Defence 
and Article 4.1 (c) of the WTO Agreement on Safeguards, which refers to the group of producers of 
like or directly competitive products. Article 49 of the Regulations only regulates some aspects that 
may be considered at the time of evaluating a like product, it is an indicative and non -exhaustive 
list. 
• Additionally, please reconcile Articles 49 and 50. They appear to contain different 
definitions of "like product ". 
Reply : 
Articles 49 and 50 are complementary and not contradictory, in accordance with the definition of 
domestic industry regulated in A rticle 5 of the Special Law on Trade Defence.  
Question 11 
Article 51 states that "the investigating authority shall examine the adjustment plan and 
shall consider whether the proposal is realistic and sufficient." Who will make this 
determination? What are  the consequences if the amended plan does not meet these 
criteria?  G/ADP/Q1/SLV/15 • G/SCM/Q1/SLV/15 • G/SG/Q1/SLV/14  
 
- 6 - 
 
  Reply: 
DATCO as Investigating Authority will be the one in charge of making this determination. If an 
adjustment plan does not meet the criteria, it will be considered to give the opportunity to the 
domestic industry to modify the plan.  
Question 12 
The factors relating to the existence of a threat of serious injury in Article 52 raise 
questions. Article 52 refers correctly to "a threat of serious injury caused by increased 
imports", but the first of the factors listed for consideration refers to "{t}he possibility of 
an increase in imports due" to several listed causes. This suggests that a threat of serious 
injury may exist when there is "the possibility of an increase in i mports" and without an 
actual increase in imports as required by Article 2 of the Agreement on Safeguards. Is this 
accurate or is there a translation error? Please explain. Additionally, please explain 
whether this analysis will look at the listed factors for all global suppliers of the product 
under investigation.  
Reply: 
The factors listed in Article 52 are set out to determine the nature of the threat, and they work as 
an imminent effect of the factors listed in Article 28 of the Special Law on Trade Defe nce. In this 
sense, it is necessary that sufficient evidence of a substantial increase in imports of the product 
under investigation exists.  
Question 13 
Article 58 states that "in their first written representation, the interested parties shall 
clearly ind icate an address within the jurisdiction of the investigating authority…." Are 
foreign producers/exporters required to have a representative physically located in 
El Salvador to participate in a trade remedy investigation? Additionally, how is 
confidential  data treated in El Salvador's trade remedy proceedings? Is confidential data 
only viewed by DATCO or is it made available to all interested parties to a proceeding? 
How does DATCO ensure that information and data submitted by interested parties in its 
trade remedy proceedings remains secure?  
Reply: 
It is not mandatory for a foreign Party to have local presence although a representative might be 
designated to follow closely the process, either way all of the relevant resolutions are notified to all 
interest ed parties through any means necessary, they are also uploaded to the website of the 
Investigating Authority ( http://infotrade.minec.gob.sv/defensa -comercial -investigaciones/ ). 
Confidential information is treated diligently by the Investigating Authority, creating separated 
confidential files for each Party of the process, to which only the Party who has provided the 
information and DATCO has access to. Information is secured a t the offices of DATCO and only the 
Party who has offered the confidential information can ask to review its files. All the information that 
has not been filed as confidential is stored in a non -confidential file, to which every interested Party 
has access  to, besides the mentioned files, there is one file that is exclusive to the authority where 
it stores the working documents, information confidential to all Parties such as customs operations 
data. 
Question 14 
Articles 57 and 59 reference procedural manua ls or guides provided by the investigating 
authority for purpose of putting together applications/petitions for trade remedy 
investigations. Have the referenced "procedural manuals or guides" been created? If not, 
when will they be available? Are these man uals to made available to the public? Do you 
have a website where these manuals will be published?  G/ADP/Q1/SLV/15 • G/SCM/Q1/SLV/15 • G/SG/Q1/SLV/14  
 
- 7 - 
 
  Reply: 
To date, a manual for the filing of a request for final examination under Article 11.3 of the  
Anti-Dumping Agreement (sunset review) has been created,  and it can be found at the Investigating 
Authority 's website at the following link:  
http://infotrade.minec.gob.sv/wp -content/uploads/Acuerdo -Ejecutivo -No-592-Procedimiento -de-
Examen -de-Derechos -Antidumping.pdf  
Further manuals will eventually be uploaded to the following link:  
http://infotrade.minec.gob.sv/legislacion -nacional -regional/defensa -comercial/  
Question 15 
Articles 60 through 69 discuss the "System Committee." Please describe the role of the 
System Committee in the conduct and imposition  of trade remedy measures in El Salvador. 
Is the System Committee involved in conducting trade remedy investigations? Who has 
the final say in determining whether to impose trade remedy measures in El Salvador 
(DATCO, the System Committee or another entity )? Does the System Committee have a 
say in determining whether lesser duty is applied? Who examines and has the final say 
regarding public interest in El Salvador's trade remedy investigations? What triggers an 
evaluation of the public interest (e.g., is p ublic interest examined in every trade remedy 
investigation or only upon request)?  
Reply: 
DATCO as the Investigating Authority is in charge of providing technical data to inform the technical 
aspects of the investigation to the Minister of Economy, based o n said technical data the maximum 
authority at the Ministry has the final say on every matter of the measures to be taken.  
Provisions regarding the Committee as the body responsible for ensuring the proper functioning of 
the National Trade Defence System, are regulated from Article 83 of the Special Law on Trade 
Defence. In that sense said Committee is a forum or observatory between the public and private 
sectors and does not have any interference in the investigations carried out by the Investigating 
Autho rity. 
 
__________