WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  G/ADP/Q1/JPN/15 
G/SCM/Q1/JPN/15 22 April 2010 
 
(10-2084) 
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 
 
Replies to Questions Posed By the UNITED STATES1 Regarding  
the Notification of JAPAN2 
   The following communication, dated 20 April 2010, is being circulated at the request of the Delegation of Japan.   
 
_______________ 
 
 
Question 1 
 
 Both Section 3(1) of the Countervailing Duty Guidelines  and Section 4(1) of the Anti-
Dumping Guidelines  state that "major proportion", when it  refers to the domestic industry, "shall 
be interpreted as approximatel y 50 per cent".  Does this me an that the Japanese authority 
attempts to obtain information concerning "appro ximately 50 per cent" of the domestic industry 
in examining injury in antidumping and countervailing duty investigations?  If so, could Japan 
explain how such a practice conforms to Article 4.1 of the WTO Agreement on Implementation 
of Article VI of the General Agreemen t on Tariffs and Trade 1994 (hereinafter Anti-dumping 
Agreement ) and Article 16.1 of the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures 
(hereinafter SCM Agreement )?   
 
Reply
 
 
 These provisions do not mean that the Japan's inve stigating authorities (hereinafter, referred to 
as "JIA") obtain information from only  "approximately 50 pe r cent" of the domestic industry in 
examining injury.    
 When JIA conducts investigati on, based on Article 10 of the Cabinet Order Relating to Anti-
Dumping Duty  and Article 7 of the Cabinet Order Relating to Countervailing Duty , JIA gives all the 
domestic producers which have be en recognized by JIA, opportunity to submit evidence on their own 
initiative.  The JIA also sends questionnaires to them.    Question 2 
 
 Can Japan please clarify how the provisions related to "the Degree of Support" described 
in Paragraph 3 of Section 5 of the Anti-dumping Guidelines  comport with Article 5.4 of the Anti-
dumping Agreement  and Article 11.4 of the SCM Agreement ?   
                                                     
 
1 G/ADP/Q1/JPN/14-G/SCM/Q1/JPN/14.   
2 G/ADP/N//1/JPN/2/Suppl.6-G /SCM/N/1/JPN/2/Suppl.6-G/SG/N/1/JPN/2/Suppl.2.   G/ADP/Q1/JPN/15 
G/SCM/Q1/JPN/15 Page 2 
 
 
  Reply
 
  Paragraph 3 of Section 5 of the Anti-dumping Guidelines and Paragraph 3 of Section 4 of the 
Countervailing Duty Guidelines  provide for the criteria, "50 per cent  threshold", pursuan t to Article 5.4 
of the Anti-dumping Agreement  and Article 11.4 of the SCM Agreement.   
 
 According to the criteria, any investigation ca nnot be initiated unless the collective output of 
the products made by those who s upport the application exceeds that of those who oppose it or do not 
express their position.  This rule intends to ensure that even if all of those who do not express their 
position are counted as opponent, the proportion of collective output of the products made by 
supporters exceeds 50 per cent.    
Question 3 
 
 Paragraph 3 of Section 8 of the Anti-dumping Guidelines  describes the circumstances 
under which interested parties may be requested to submit evidence in an investigation.   
a. May interested parties submit evidence only
 under the circumstances listed?   
b. May interested parties submit evidence on their own initiative, i.e. , absent a 
specific request from the administering authority for such evidence?  If so, 
please describe any limitations on the submission of evidence by interested 
parties, such as time limits.   
 
Reply  
  Interested parties may submit evidence on their own initiative until the deadline for the 
submission of evidence.  The deadline is specified in the public notice concerning the initiation of the 
investigation.  In addition, JIA notifies the in itiation of the investigation, the deadline for the 
submission of evidence, etc. to interested parties which have been recognized by JIA at the time of 
initiation.     Paragraph 3 of Section 8 of the Anti-dumping Guidelines clarifies and illustrates the cases JIA 
permits interested parties to submit evidence.  In a ddition, interested parties may submit evidence when 
JIA requires them to submit evidence  during the investigating period.   
 
Question 4 
 
 Section 10 of the Anti-dumping Guidelines  describes the circumstances under which the 
facts available may be applie d in making a determination.  Howeve r, this section does not indicate 
whether the administering authority will notify interested parties of deficiencies in their submissions or describe the oppo rtunities available to interested parties to remedy submissions 
deemed deficient by the administering authority.   Please explain the ad ministering authority's 
procedures for ensuring that interested parties:  1) are made aware of any deficiencies in their 
submissions;  and 2) afforded a reasonable opportunity to reme dy any such deficiencies, in 
accordance with the provisions of Article 6 and Annex II of the Anti-dumping Agreement .   
 
Reply
 
 
 When JIA finds that answers and evidence wh ich interested parties gave in Questionnaire 
and/or submitted during on-the-spot investigations have deficiencies on the investigation process, JIA 
notifies interested parties of deficiencies and give them reasonable opportunity to correct them. G/ADP/Q1/JPN/15 
 G/SCM/Q1/JPN/15 
 Page 3 
 
 
   When JIA applies the facts available consisten tly with the domestic laws and regulations and 
the WTO agreements, JIA specifies deficiencies of  evidences in the "essential facts", and gives 
reasonable opportunity to interested parties to rebut them.    
__________