. /.   WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  G/ADP/Q1/JPN/14 
G/SCM/Q1/JPN/14 30 September 2009 
 
(09-4579) 
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 JAPAN1 
   The following communication, dated 28 September 2009, is being circulated at the request of the Delegation of the United States.
2   
 
_______________ 
 
  The United States thanks Japan for its notif ication and poses the following questions with 
regard to Japan's notification of the Guidelines  for Procedures Relating to Anti-Dumping Duty 
(hereinafter Anti-dumping Guidelines ) and the Guidelines for Proced ures Relating to Countervailing 
Duty (hereinafter Countervailing Duty Guidelines ).   
 
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 
approximately 50 per cent".  Does th is mean that the Japanese authority attempts to obtain information 
concerning "approximately 50 per cent" of the domest ic 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 Implementati on of Article VI of the General Agreement on 
Tariffs and Trade 1994 (hereinafter Anti-dumping Agreement ) and Article 16.1 of the Agreement on 
Subsidies and Countervaili ng Measures (hereinafter SCM Agreement )?   
 
Question 2 
  Can Japan please clarify how the provisions re lated to "the Degree of  Support" described in 
Paragraph 3 of Section 5 of the Anti-dumping Guidelines  comport with Ar ticle 5.4 of the Anti-dumping 
Agreement  and Article 11.4 of the SCM Agreement ?   
                                                     
 
1 G/ADP/N//1/JPN/2/Suppl.6-G /SCM/N/1/JPN/2/Suppl.6-G/SG/N/1/JPN/2/Suppl.2.   
2 These questions will not be taken up at the meetings of the Committee on Subsidies and 
Countervailing Measures nor at the meeting of Anti-dumping Practices which will be held on 20, 21 and 
22 October 2009 respectively.  The Un ited States has requested that these questions be placed on the agenda for 
the meeting where the legislative notification from Japan would be taken up.   G/ADP/Q1/JPN/14 
G/SCM/Q1/JPN/14 Page 2 
 
 
  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 evid ence 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 eviden ce by interested parties, such as time 
limits.   
 
Question 4 
 
 Section 10 of the Anti-dumping Guidelines  describes the circumstan ces under which the facts 
available may be applied in making a determination.  However, this section does not indicate whether 
the administering authority will notify interested partie s of deficiencies in thei r submissions or describe 
the opportunities available to intere sted parties to remedy submis sions deemed deficient by the 
administering authority.  Please explain the administering authority's procedures for ensuring that interested parties:  1) are made aware of any defi ciencies in their submissions;  and 2) afforded a 
reasonable opportunity to remedy any such deficiencies, in accordance with the provisions of Article 6 
and Annex II of the Anti-dumping Agreement .   
 
  
__________