WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  WT/DS343/7 
18 September 2006 
 
 (06-4467) 
 Original:   English 
  
 
UNITED STATES – MEASURES RELATING TO SHRIMP FROM THAILAND 
 
Request for the Establishment of a Panel by Thailand
 
  
 The following communication, dated 15 Septem ber 2006, from the delegation of Thailand to 
the Chairman of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated pursuant to Article 6.2 of the DSU. 
 
_______________ 
  
 Upon instructions from my authorities, I wish to  convey the request of the Government of the 
Kingdom of Thailand ("Thailand") for the establishmen t of a panel pursuant to Article XXIII of the 
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 (t he "GATT 1994"), Articles 4 and 6 of the 
Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes (the "DSU"), and 
Article 17 of the Agreement on Implementation of Article VI of the General Agreement on Tariffs 
and Trade 1994 (the "AD Agreement") with respect to  certain measures imposed by the United States 
relating to imports of certain frozen warm water shrimp ("shrimp") from Thailand.
 
 
 On 24 April 2006, Thailand requested consulta tions with the United States pursuant to 
Article 4 of the DSU, Article XXII:1 of the GATT 1994, and Articles 17.2, 17.3 and 17.4 of the 
AD Agreement.1  Consultations were held in Gene va on 1 August 2006.  However, these 
consultations failed to resolve the dispute.     Thailand considers that the specific measures at  issue, as described herein, are inconsistent 
with the provisions of the GATT 1994 a nd the AD Agreement described below: 
 
1. The Specific Measures at Issue: 
  There are two measures imposed by the United States relating to imports of shrimp from Thailand at issue in this dispute.  
 (a) The Anti-Dumping Duty Measure 
  The first measure consists of the investigati on, determinations, and order that led to the 
imposition of anti-dumping duties on imports of sh rimp from Thailand (the "Anti-Dumping Duty 
Measure").  The United States initiated this inves tigation on 27 January 2004, pursuant to section 732 
of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the "Act"), in respect of certain frozen and canned warmwater 
shrimp imported from Thailand and several other countries.
2  On 28 July 2004, pursuant to section 
733 of the Act, the United States Department of Co mmerce ("USDOC") preliminarily determined that 
                                                      
1 WT/DS343/1, G/L/776, G/ADP/D66/1 (27 April 2006). 
2 Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigations: Certain Frozen and Canned Warmwater Shrimp from 
Brazil, Ecuador, India, Thailand, the People's Republic of China and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam , 
69 Fed. Reg. 3876 (27 January 2004). WT/DS343/7 
Page 2  
 
  certain frozen and canned warmwater shrimp from Th ailand were being dumped in the United States 
(the "Preliminary Determination").
3  On 23 December 2004, the USDOC published a final 
determination that frozen and ca nned warmwater shrimp from Tha iland were being dumped in the 
United States (the "Final Determination").4  Following a determination by the US International Trade 
Commission that the US domestic industry was mate rially injured by imports of frozen warmwater 
shrimp from Thailand but that there was no injury or  threat thereof to the US domestic industry by 
reason of imports of canned wa rmwater shrimp from Thailand,5 the USDOC published an amended 
final determination of dumpi ng and an anti-dumping duty order imposing definitive anti-dumping 
duties only on imports of certain frozen warmwater shrimp from Thailand (the "Amended Final 
Determination").6   
 
 The measure at issue includes the use by the US DOC, in the course of its investigation and in 
the Preliminary, Final and Amended Final Determ inations, of the practice known as "zeroing" to 
calculate dumping margins for each investigated Thai exporter.  Under this practice, in calculating 
overall weighted-average dumping margins for each i nvestigated Thai exporter, the USDOC set to 
zero the results of intermediate comparisons of export price and normal value for which the export 
price exceeded the normal value.  The effect of th e use of this practice was artificially to create 
margins of dumping where none would otherwise ha ve been found or, at a minimum, to inflate 
margins of dumping and hence to impose inaccurate  definitive anti-dumping measures on imports of 
shrimp from Thailand.  
 (b) The Continuous Bond Requirement 
  The second measure consists of the requirement  imposed by the United States on importers of 
shrimp from Thailand subject to the Anti-Dumping Duty Measure to maintain a continuous bond in 
the amount of the applicable anti-dumping duty marg in multiplied by the value of imports of shrimp 
imported by the importer in the preceding year in order to secure the payment of anti-dumping duties 
(the "Continuous Bond Requirement").  The Contin uous Bond Requirement has been imposed at the 
time of entry on all imports of shrimp from Thailand subject to anti-dumping duties since 
approximately 1 February 2006.  The Continuous Bond Requirement has been imposed pursuant to 
the US Customs and Border Protection ("CBP") agency's Amendment to Bond Directive 99-3510-004 for Certain Merchandise Subject to Antidumpi ng/Countervailing Cases, dated 9 July 2004 (the 
"Amended Bond Directive"),
7 the document entitled "Clarifica tion to July 9, 2004 Amended 
Monetary Guidelines for Setting Bond Amounts for Special Categories of Merchandise Subject to Antidumping and/or Countervailing Duty Cases", also posted on CBP's website,
8 and the document 
                                                      
3 Notice of Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, Postponement of Final 
Determination, and Negative Critical Circumstances De termination:  Certain Frozen and Canned Warmwater 
Shrimp from Thailand , 69 Fed. Reg. 47100 (4 August 2004). 
4 Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, Postponement of Final 
Determination, and Negative Final Determination of Critical Circumstances:  Certain Frozen and Canned Warmwater Shrimp from Thailand , 69 Fed. Reg. 76918 (23 December 2004). 
5 Certain Frozen or Canned Warmwater Shrimp and Prawns from Brazil, China, Ecuador, India, 
Thailand, and Vietnam [Investigations Nos. 1063-1068 (Final)] , 70 Fed. Reg. 3943 (27 January 2005) and 
USITC Publication 3748, Certain Frozen or Canned Warmwater Shrimp and Prawns from Brazil, China, 
Ecuador, India, Thailand, and Vietnam: Investigations Nos. 1063-1068 (Final)  (January 2005). 
6 Notice of Amended Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Antidumping Duty 
Order:  Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from Thailand , 70 Fed. Reg. 5145 (February 1, 2005).   
7 The Amended Bond Directive is posted on CBP's website at 
http://www.cbp.g ov/xp/cgov/import/add_cvd/bon ds/07082004.xml (last accesse d on 12 September 2006). 
8 Posted at http://www.cbp.gov/linkhandler/cgov/import/add_cvd/bonds/bond_clarification.ctt/bond_ 
clarificaiton.doc (last accesse d on 12 September 2006).  WT/DS343/7 
 Page 3 
 
 
  entitled "Current Bond Formulas", also posted on CBP's website.9 10  The measure at issue includes 
any amendments or extensions to the Continuous  Bond Requirement, and any related or implementing 
measures.   Prior to the adoption of th e Amended Bond Directive and the imposition of the Continuous 
Bond Requirement, importers of goods subject to US anti-dumping or countervailing duties were 
required to maintain a minimum bond as general secu rity for compliance with customs regulations 
(i.e., not specifically to secure the payment of anti-dumping or countervailing duties) only in the 
amount of 10 per cent of the duties, taxes and f ees paid by the importer on the same merchandise 
imported in the previous year.  Pursuant to the Amended Bond Directive, CBP  may designate imports 
of categories of merchandise subject to anti-dumping or countervailing duties as "special categories" 
and may require importers of goods d eemed to be a "covered case" within  such a "special category" of 
merchandise to provide, at the time of importation, enhanced continuous bonds of sufficient value to 
cover liability for anti-dumping duties, calculate d by multiplying the applicable anti-dumping or 
countervailing duty margin by the value of imports  of the goods imported by the importer in the 
preceding year.  In addition, the importers remain  subject to the separate requirement of US anti-
dumping law to pay, at the time of importation, cash  deposits of estimated anti-dumping duties in the 
amount of the value of the merchandise multiplied by the applicable anti-dumping or countervailing 
duty rate.     Thailand understands that imports of sh rimp from Thailand and five other countries
11 that are 
subject to anti-dumping duties have been designa ted as a "covered case" within the designated 
"special category" of "agriculture/aquaculture" merchandise and have been subjected to the 
Continuous Bond Requirement on that basis.  Thai land understands that thes e imports constitute the 
only case and goods to which the Continuous Bond Requirement has been applied to date.   
 
2. Summary of the Legal Basis of the Complaint  
  (a) The Anti-Dumping Duty Measure   Thailand considers that the Anti-Dumping Duty M easure is inconsistent with Article VI of the 
GATT 1994 and the provisions of the AD Agreement listed below: 
 
 (i) Article 2.4.2 of the AD Agreement, which prohibits the use of zeroing in calculating 
margins of dumping using the average-to -average and transaction-to-transaction 
comparison methodologies.  The use of zeroing to calculate margins of dumping is inconsistent with this obligation. 
 
 (ii) Article 2.1 of the AD Agreement, wh ich requires the investigating authority to 
calculate a single margin of dumping for the "product" under investigation. 
  (iii) Article 2.4 of the AD Agreement, which requires the investigating authority to make 
a fair comparison between export price and normal value.  The use of zeroing to alter 
                                                     
 
9 Posted at http://www.cbp.gov /linkhandler/cgov/import/communications_to_trade/pilot_program/ 
current_bond.ctt/current_bond.doc  (las t accessed on 12 September 2006). 
10 CBP is the agency authorised under various statutory and regulatory provisions of US law to 
administer US customs laws and regulations, including the authority to impose bonds pursuant to 19 U.S.C. 
§1484, 19 U.S.C. §1502, 19 U.S.C. §1505, 19 U.S.C.  §1623, and 19 U.S.C. §1673g, and the regulations 
governing the amount and imposition of bonds codified at 19 C.F.R. 113.13 , 19 C.F.R. 113.40, and 19 C.F.R. 
113.62, adopted pursuant to T.D. 84-213, 49 Fed. Reg. 41152 (19 October 1984). 
11 These are Brazil, Ecuador, India, the People's Republic of China and Vietnam. WT/DS343/7 
Page 4  
 
  the results of certain intermediate comp arisons between export price and normal 
value is inconsistent with this requirement.   
  (iv) Article 9.3 of the AD Agreement, whic h requires that the amount of the anti-dumping 
duty must not exceed the margin of dumping.  The imposition of dumping duties 
inflated by the use of zeroing is inconsistent with this obligation.   
  (b) The Continuous Bond Requirement   Thailand considers that the Continuous B ond Requirement is inconsistent with the 
requirements of Article VI of the GATT 1994, includi ng the requirements set out in Article VI:2 and 
Note 1, paragraphs 2 and 3 to Ad Article VI  of the GATT 1994, and the provisions of the 
AD Agreement listed below:   (i) The Continuous Bond Requirement is  inconsistent with Article 18.1 of the 
AD Agreement, in that it constitutes specif ic action against dumping of exports from 
Thailand that was not taken in accordance with the provisions of GATT 1994, as interpreted by the AD Agreement. 
  (ii) The Continuous Bond Requirement is not a security for the payment of anti-dumping 
duties "pending final determination of the facts of any case of suspected dumping" as 
described in Article VI:2 and No te 1, paragraphs 2 and 3 to Ad Article VI  of the 
GATT 1994.  The Continuous Bond Require ment is not a provisional measure 
consistent with Article 7 of the AD Agreem ent as it is not applied in accordance with 
the requirements of Article 7.1 of the AD Agreement and has been applied subsequent to final determinations by the USDOC and the US International Trade 
Commission. 
  (iii) The simultaneous imposition of the Con tinuous Bond Requirement and the obligation 
to make cash deposits of estimated duties is inconsistent with Article VI:2 and 
Note 1, paragraphs 2 and 3 to Ad Article VI  of the GATT 1994 and Article 7.2 of the 
AD Agreement that permit only the imposition of either a bond or a cash deposit. 
 
 (iv) The simultaneous imposition of the Con tinuous Bond Requirement and the obligation 
to make cash deposits of estimated duties is inconsistent with Article VI:2 and 
Note 1, paragraphs 2 and 3 to Ad Article VI  of the GATT 1994 because it does not 
constitute a "reasonable security" for the payment of anti-dumping duties.   
 
 (v) The simultaneous imposition of the Con tinuous Bond Requirement and the obligation 
to make cash deposits of estimated duties is inconsistent with Articles 7.2 and 7.5 of 
the AD Agreement because the total amount of the security is greater than any 
provisionally-estimated amount of dumping. 
 
 (vi) The simultaneous imposition of the Con tinuous Bond Requirement and the obligation 
to make cash deposits of estimated duti es is inconsistent with Article 7.5 and 
Articles 9.1, 9.2 and 9.3 of the AD Agreem ent because it results in the collection of 
anti-dumping duties that exceed the appropriate amounts within the meaning of Article 9.2 and that exceed the margin of dumping as established under Article 2 
within the meaning of Article 9.3.   
  (vii) The duration of the Continuous Bond Requi rement is inconsistent with Article 7.4 of 
the AD Agreement because it is not limited to as short a period as possible. 
   WT/DS343/7 
 Page 5 
 
 
   Thailand further considers that the Continuous  Bond Requirement violates the United States' 
obligations under the GATT 1994 for the following reasons:   (i) The Continuous Bond Requirement cons titutes a restriction on importation prohibited 
under Article XI:1 of the GATT 1994 or, altern atively: (1) a duty or charge imposed 
on or in connection with impor tation inconsistent with Artic le I:1 and Article II:1(a) 
and (b) of the GATT 1994; or (2) a rule and formality or a method of levying duties or charges in connection with importation in consistent with Article I:1 of the GATT 
1994. 
 
 (ii) By applying the Continuous Bond Requirement only to shrimp from Thailand and 
five other countries, the United States fails to  administer its customs laws, regulations 
and administrative rulings in a uniform, im partial or reasonable manner and therefore 
violates Article X:3(a) of the GATT 1994. 
 
 (iii) The Continuous Bond Requirement is not justified by paragraph (d) of Article XX of 
the GATT 1994 and in any case is not applied consistently with the requirements set 
out in the chapeau of Article XX of the GATT 1994.  Thailand considers in particular 
that the Continuous Bond Requirement is not necessary to secure compliance with the 
United States' laws and regulations and that  it is applied in a manner constituting an 
arbitrary and unjustifiable discrimination between Thailand and other countries where 
the same conditions prevail and a disgui sed restriction on international trade. 
  Accordingly, Thailand requests the establishmen t of a panel pursuant to Article XXIII of the 
GATT 1994, Articles 4 and 6 of the DSU, and Article 17 of the AD Agreement.    
 Thailand requests that the establishment of a pa nel in this matter be placed on the agenda of 
the meeting of the Dispute Settlement Body scheduled for 28 September 2006.     
__________