. /.  WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  G/ADP/W/457 
26 September 2006 
 
 (06-4571) 
Committee on Anti-Dumping Practices Original:   English 
  
 
TRANSITIONAL REVIEW MECHANISM IN 
CONNECTION WITH PARAGRAPH 18 OF THE PROTOCOL 
ON THE ACCESSION OF THE PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF CHINA 
 
Questions from Japan to the People’ s Republic of China (Anti-Dumping
) 
 
  The following  communication, dated 25 September 2006, is being circulated at the request of the Delegation of Japan.  
_______________ 
 
  Japan appreciates the efforts by the Peopl e’s Republic of China (PRC) for steady 
improvements in the anti-dumping laws and practi ces. Japan would like to pose a question once again 
about the “appearance notice” which we already ask ed on the occasion of the Trade Policy Review 
(TPR) of the PRC in April 2006.  In addition, we would like to pose a question relating to the injury 
determination in a specific case.  The TPR and TRM are very important mechanisms to ensure and 
promote greater transparency in the PRC’s dom estic system. Japan expects the most sincere 
correspondence from the Government of the PRC. 
 
1. MOFCOM only sends questionnaires to and determines individual margins of dumping for 
exporters or producers who have fulfilled an “appearance notice” at the initial stage of the investigation.  For those who have not fulfilled the appearance notice, MOFCOM applies a uniform 
margin of dumping ranging from several dozens to more  than 100 per cent.  We would like to request 
the PRC to explain the consistency of its measure  with the Anti-Dumping Agreement (ADA) to use 
facts available that can be adverse to th e exporter’s interests and to apply high all others’ rates  not 
based on Article 9.4 ( ⅱ) of the ADA, without sending questio nnaires to exporters who have not 
fulfilled the appearance notice, including “the known exporters or producers” mentioned in the 
petitioner’s application.  
  In Mexico-Anti-Dumping Measures on Rice  (DS295), the Appellate Body stated that “an 
exporter shall be given the opportunity to provide in formation required by the investigating authority 
before the latter resorts to facts available that can  be adverse to the exporter’s interests”.  The 
Appellate Body found that Mexico, by having not provided required information to the US exporters 
and having nevertheless determined in reliance on f acts available a higher margin of dumping than the 
margins individually calculated, acted inconsistently  with paragraph 1 of A nnex II and Article 6.8 of 
the Anti-Dumping Agreement.  
 
 Although Japan has already posed this question during the TPR held in April, we have not 
received the PRC’s reply yet.  We hope that the PRC replies to Japan’s question on this occasion and 
also submits its written answers to the Secret ariat in the TPR framework without delay. 
 
 G/ADP/W/457 
Page 2  
 
  2. In the investigation on Spandex, MOFCOM ma de a preliminary determination of injury on 
24 May 2006, based on the volume of imports from all countries and territories under investigation 
(Japan,  Singapore,  Korea, Rep. of;  the Separa te Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and 
Matsu and the United States of America) including de minimis  margins for three Korean exporters.  In 
EC – Bed Linen  (DS141), the Appellate Body ruled that the imports from the exporters or producers 
who had the individual margins of dumping found to be de minimis , were not considered to be 
"dumped imports" referred under Artic le 3.1 and 3.2 of the ADA.  With regard to the volume of the 
dumped imports, Japan believes that MOFCOM should exclude the imports from Korea
 when it 
considers whether there has been a significant increase  in dumped imports, either in absolute terms or 
relative to production or consumption in the importi ng member and the effect of the dumped imports 
on prices.  While we strongly expect that MOFCOM will make a final determination consistent with 
the ADA, Japan requests the PRC to explain the consis tency of its preliminary determination with the 
ADA, especially in view of the Appellate Body’s ruling in EC-Bed Linen . 
 
__________