. /.  WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION   
G/ADP/Q1/BRA/17 
G/SCM/Q1/BRA/17 4 October 2012 
 
(12-5376) 
Committee on Anti-Dumping Practices 
Committee on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures Original:   English 
 
 
 
NOTIFICATION OF LAWS AND REGULATIONS UNDER 
ARTICLES 18.5 AND 32.6 OF THE AGREEMENTS 
 
Questions Posed by the UNITED STATES Regarding 
the Notification of BRAZIL1 
 
  The following communication, dated 1 October 2012, is being circulated at the request of the 
Delegation of the United States.    
 
_______________ 
 
 
 The United States thanks Brazil for its notification of Directive 46 regarding revised 
requirements for antidumping applications (hereinafter Directive 46 ) and poses the following 
questions: 
 
Question 1 
 
 Directive 46  does not describe the role DECOM plays in the evaluation of the antidumping 
application and does not identify any applicable sta ndards and deadlines.  Are the deadlines, standards 
and other procedural and methodological requireme nts pertaining to the filing and evaluation of 
antidumping applications outlined in Articles 18 th rough 24 of Decree No. 1602 of August 23, 1995 
still applicable and in force?    
Question 2 
 
 Articles 6 and 8 of the Section I (General Inst ructions) contain the term  "restricted".  Please 
indicate the meaning of this term.  Is interested parties' access to "restricted" information simply restricted until an investigation is initiated?  Once an investigation is initiated, can members of the 
public who are not interested parties obtain access to restricted information? 
 
Question 3 
 
 After an investigation is initiated, does DECOM seek any further information from the 
petitioners pertaining to injury and the causality f actors detailed in Articles 5 and 9 of Section II 
(General Information), and in Articles 6.12 and 7 of Section III (Information By Company 
Represented In The Application)?    
                                                      
1 G/ADP/N/1/BRA/2/Suppl.8-G/SCM/ N/1/BRA/2/Suppl.8/Corr.1.   G/ADP/Q1/BRA/17 
G/SCM/Q1/BRA/17 Page 2 
 
 
  Question 4  
 
 After an investigation is initiated, does DE COM seek any further information from domestic 
producers of the like product who are not part of the petitioning group pertaining to injury and the 
causality factors detailed in Articles 5 and 9 of Sec tion II (General Information), and in Articles 6.12 
and 7 of Section III (Information By Compan y Represented In The Application)?    
 
Question 5 
  Article 5.3 of Section II (General Informati on) discusses trade associations.  In instances 
where an application is filed by a trade association,  does DECOM require that that a majority of the 
association's members produce the domestic like pr oduct?  If so, how is majority defined ( e.g., 50% of 
members)?    Question 6 
 
 Articles 5.1 through 5.5 of Section II (General Information) describe the data to be collected 
from the petitioner regarding representativeness and st anding.  Has Brazil ever considered polling the 
domestic industry?  If so, what procedural step s are taken in order to poll the industry?  
 Question 7 
 
 Article 8.4 of Section II (General Information)  describes the various alternatives available to 
the petitioner for establishing normal valu e for purposes of the application ( e.g., representative price 
in the domestic market, export price to third country, constructed value).  Is there a hierarchy in terms 
of preference among the various alternatives liste d or are all alternatives considered equally 
acceptable to DECOM?    
Question 8 
 
 Article 8.5 of Section II (General Informati on) discusses the requirements for export price.  
We understand, however, that in evaluating the me rits of the application, DECOM often relies on 
import statistics made available from the Brazilian tax authority to establish export price.  For 
purposes of initiation, to what extent does DECOM rely on the data provided by the petitioner, as 
opposed to import statistics obtained through its own research, to determine export price?  Question 9 
 
 Does DECOM employ a reasonably available standa rd in its evaluation of data provided by 
petitioners in trade remedy applications?  If so, wh at checks are in place to ensure that prior to 
initiation of an investigation, DECOM is satis fied the data provided is sufficient?   
 Question 10 
 
 To what extent do any of the cha nges to Brazil's practice outlined in Directive 46 also apply 
to countervailing duty applications? 
 
 
 
__________