RESTRICTED  WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  G/SCM/M/61 
25 September 2007 
 (07-4021) 
Committee on Subsidies  
and Countervailing Measures  
 
 
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING  
HELD ON 26 APRIL 2007 
 
Chairperson:  Mr. Keiya Iida (Japan ) 
 
 
1. The Committee on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures  ("the Committee") held a regular 
meeting on 26 April 2007. 
2. The Committee adopted  the agenda proposed in WTO/AIR/3002 of 16 April 2007:  
A. EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES – REVIEW OF NEW LEGISLATIVE NOTIFICATION ................................2  
B. INDIA – REVIEW OF NEW LEGISLATIVE NOTIFICATION ................................................................2  
C. MEXICO – REVIEW OF NEW LEGIS LATIVE NOTIFICATION ............................................................2  
D. NEW ZEALAND - REVIEW OF NEW LEGISLATIVE NOTIFICATION ..................................................3  
E. PANAMA – REVIEW OF NEW LEGIS LATIVE NOTIFICATION ...........................................................3  
F. CHINESE TAIPEI - REVIEW OF NEW LEGISLATIVE NOTIFICATION .................................................3  
G. TURKEY – REVIEW OF NEW LEGIS LATIVE NOTIFICATION ............................................................3  
H. SEMI -ANNUAL REPORTS OF COUNTERVAILING DUTY ACTIONS ...................................................3  
I. NOTIFICATIONS OF PRELIMINARY AND FINAL COUNTERVAILING DUTY ACTIONS .......................4  
J. CONSTANT DOLLAR METHODOLOGY FOR GRADUATION FROM ANNEX VII (B) TO THE 
SCM AGREEMENT ..........................................................................................................................4  
K. PERMANENT GROUP OF EXPERTS - ELECTION OF EXPERTS ..........................................................4  
L. PROCEDURES FOR EXTENSIONS UNDER ARTICLE 27.4  OF THE AGREEMENT ON 
SUBSIDIES AND COUNTERVAILING MEASURES (G/SCM/W/535  AND 537) ....................................5  
M. DATE OF THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING ......................................................................................7  
N. ELECTION OF OFFICERS ...............................................................................................................7  
 
3. The Chairman  stated that the Committee's review of new notifications of countervailing duty 
legislation under items A-G of the agenda was based on procedures adopted by the Committee in 
April 1996.1  These procedures provided that at each re gular meeting the Committee would consider 
notifications of new or amended countervailing duty laws a nd/or regulations not previously reviewed 
by the Committee if these notifica tions had been circulated to Me mbers in all three WTO working 
languages at least six weeks prior to the scheduled date of the meeting.  Pursuant to this provision, the 
Committee had before it at this meeting new notif ications received from the European Communities, 
                                                      
1 See document G/SCM/W/293. G/SCM/M/61 
Page 2  
 
  India, Mexico, New Zealand, Panama, Chinese Taipei  and Turkey.  Since many of these notifications 
also pertained to anti-dumping and might alrea dy have been reviewed in the Committee on Anti-
Dumping Practices, the Chairman proposed that th e discussion in this Committee focus on questions 
relating specifically to the countervailing duty aspects of the notifications.   
A. EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES – REVIEW OF NEW LEGISLATIVE NOTIFICATION  
4. The Committee had before it in document G/SCM/N/1/EEC/2/Suppl.7, dated 
8 February 2007, a notification of the European Communities concerning the anti-subsidy legislation 
of Bulgaria and Romania.  The delegation of China had posed questions in document 
G/SCM/Q1/EEC/25, which pertained primarily to the anti-dumping aspect of this notification.  
5. The delegate of the European Communities  stated that the responses to the questions of China 
provided by his delegation in the Committee on Anti-Dumping Practices equally applied to 
countervailing measures.  
6. The Committee took note  of the statements.  
B. INDIA – REVIEW OF NEW LEGISLATIVE NOTIFICATION  
7. The Chairman  stated that a new legislative notification received from India had been 
circulated in document G/SCM/N/1/IND/2/Suppl.4 , dated 3 November 2006.  China had posed 
questions on this notification in document G/ SCM/Q1/IND/10.  More recently the Committee had 
also received questions from the United States, wh ich had been circulated in G/SCM/Q1/IND/11 of 
24 April 2007.  
8. The delegate of India  stated that the questions posed by China related to the anti-dumping 
aspects of India's notification and that India had already responded to these questions in the 
Committee on Anti-Dumping Practices.  He would convey the questions just received from the 
United States to this authorities.   
9. The Committee took note  of the statements.  
C. MEXICO – REVIEW OF NEW LEGIS LATIVE NOTIFICATION  
10. The Chairman stated that the Committee had received a new legislative notification from 
Mexico, which had been circulated in document G/SCM/N/1/MEX/Suppl.3, dated 8 February 2007.  
Questions on this notification had been submitte d by the United States, China and the European 
Communities in documents G/SCM/Q1/MEX/16,17 and 18, respectively. 
11. The delegate of Mexico  stated that his delegation had responded in the Committee on Anti-
Dumping Practices to the questions posed by  the United States, China and the European 
Communities.2  
12. The Committee took note  of the statements.  
                                                      
2 Subsequent to the meeting responses of Mexico to the questions of the United States, China and the 
European Communities were circulated in documents G/SCM/Q1/MEX/19-21.   G/SCM/M/61 
 Page 3 
 
 
  D. NEW ZEALAND - REVIEW OF NEW LEGISLATIVE NOTIFICATION  
13. The Chairman  stated that a new legislative notification of New Zealand had been circulated in 
document G/SCM/N/1/NZL/2/Suppl.3, dated 23 February  2007.  No questions had been posed on this 
notification.  
14. The delegate of New Zealand  explained that the changes notified in document were of a 
minor, technical nature.  
E. PANAMA – REVIEW OF NEW LEGIS LATIVE NOTIFICATION  
15. The Committee had before it in document G/SCM/N/1/PAN/2 a new legislative notification 
of Panama, on which the United States and the European Communities had submitted questions in 
documents G/SCM/Q1/PAN/ 5 and 6, respectively.  
16. The delegate of Panama  stated that it appeared that most of the issues raised by the 
United States and the European Communities relate d to the anti-dumping aspects of the legislation 
notified in G/SCM/N/1/PAN/2.  In order to fac ilitate the preparation of responses, he asked these 
delegations to clarify which aspects of their ques tions pertained specifically to countervailing duty 
matters.  
17. The Committee took note  of the statements.  
F. CHINESE TAIPEI - REVIEW OF NEW LEGISLATIVE NOTIFICATION  
18. The Committee had before it in document G/ SCM/N/1/TPKM/1/Suppl.1 a new legislative 
notification of Chinese Taipei, on which the Un ited States and the European Communities had 
submitted written questions in documents G/SCM/Q1/TPKM/4 and 5, respectively.  
19. The delegate of Chinese Taipei  stated that he had answered the questions raised by the United 
States and the European Communities in th e Committee on Anti-Dumping Practices.   
20. The Committee took note  of the statements. 
G. TURKEY – REVIEW OF NEW LEGIS LATIVE NOTIFICATION  
21. The Committee had before it in document G/SCM/N/1/TUR/3/Suppl.3 a new legislative 
notification of Turkey.  China had submitted qu estions on this notification in document 
G/SCM/Q1/TUR/6.    
22. The delegate of Turkey  stated that his delegation had already answered the questions posed 
by China in the Committee on Anti-Dumping Practices.   
23. The Committee took note  of the statements made.  
H. SEMI -ANNUAL REPORTS OF COUNTERVAILING DUTY ACTIONS  
24. The Chairman  stated that a request to submit semi-annual reports for the period 1 July-
31 December 2006, to be submitted not later than 9 March 2007, had been circulated in document 
G/SCM/N/153.  Australia, Canada, Chile, the Eu ropean Communities and the United States had 
submitted semi-annual reports on countervailing duty  actions taken during th is period, which had 
been circulated in addenda to G/SCM/N/153.  Me mbers which had notified that they had not taken 
any countervailing duty action during the period July -December 2006 were listed in paragraph 2 of G/SCM/M/61 
Page 4  
 
  document G/SCM/N/153/Add.1.  The Secretariat ha d informed him that Nigeria, Cameroon and 
Croatia should be added to this list.  As reflected in paragraph 3 of G/SCM/N/153/Add.1, there 
remained a large number of Members that had not submitted a semi-annual report and that thus failed 
to comply with this important notification requirement.   
25. There were no comments or questions on any of the semi-annual reports.  
I. NOTIFICATIONS OF PRELIMINARY AND FINAL COUNTERVAILING DUTY ACTIONS  
26. The Chairman  noted that since the last regular meeting the Committee had received 
notifications of preliminary and final counter vailing duty actions from Argentina, Canada, the 
European Communities, South Africa and the Un ited States (documents G/SCM/N/150-152, 154 and 
156-157).  
27. There were no comments or questions on these notifications. 
28. The Chairman  recalled that Article 25.11 of the SCM Agreement required Members to submit   
reports on preliminary and final countervailing duty ac tions and that a similar notification requirement 
existed in Article 16.4 of the Anti-Dumping Agr eement.  The Committee on Anti-Dumping Practices 
had recently adopted a decision regarding minimu m information to be provided in reports on 
preliminary or final anti-dumping actions.  This  decision had been circulated in document 
G/ADP/2/Rev.1, dated 30 October 2006.  Given that  these notification requirements were identical, 
the question naturally arose as to whether it woul d be appropriate for this Committee to adopt a 
similar decision in respect of the reports to be submitted under Article 25.11 of the SCM Agreement .  
The Chairman then suggested that the new Chairperson hold informal consultations on this matter.   
29. It was so agreed .  
J. CONSTANT DOLLAR METHODOLOGY FO R GRADUATION FROM ANNEX VII (B) TO THE 
SCM AGREEMENT   
30. The Chairman  reminded Members that, pursuant to the Doha Ministerial Decision on 
Implementation-Related Issues and Concerns3 -- in which Ministers agreed that Annex VII(b) to the 
Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures included the Members that were listed therein 
until their GNP per capita reached US$1,000 in consta nt 1990 dollars for three consecutive years -- as 
of 1 January 2003, the methodology set forth in G/SC M/38, Appendix 2 applie d.  In 2003, 2004, 2005 
and 2006, the Secretariat had circulated Notes updating GNP per capita for Members listed in 
Annex VII(b).4  The Secretariat would circulate new upda ted calculations when the necessary World 
Bank data became available.  
31. The Committee took note  of the statement. 
K. PERMANENT GROUP OF EXPERTS - ELECTION OF EXPERTS  
32. The Chairman  stated that the issue of how to proceed  with regard to the vacant positions in 
the Permanent Group of Experts had been on the age nda of this Committee at its regular meetings 
held in October 2005 and in April and October 2006.  It was his view however that the situation had 
not changed since the last regular meeting and th e Committee was therefore not in a position to adopt 
a decision on this issue at this juncture.  It w ould not be possible to resolve this matter unless 
                                                      
3WT/MIN(01)/17, para. 10.1. 
4 See documents G/SCM/110 & /Add.1, 2 and 3 and Corr.1.    G/SCM/M/61 
 Page 5 
 
 
  interested delegations changed their positions.  He proposed that the Committee take note of this 
situation and revert to this i ssue at its next meeting.   
33. It was so agreed .  
L. PROCEDURES FOR EXTENSIONS UNDER ARTICLE 27.4  OF THE AGREEMENT ON SUBSIDIES AND 
COUNTERVAILING MEASURES (G/SCM/W/535  AND 537)   
34. The Chairman  stated that the Committee had before it in documents G/SCM/W/535 and 537 
proposals to extend beyond 2007 the procedures that were adopted in 2001 that authorized the Committee to take decisions on an annual basis to extend the transition period under Article 27.4 of 
the SCM Agreement .  At the regular meeting of the Comm ittee held on 26-27 October 2006, he had 
reported on discussions that had taken place on these proposals at informal, open-ended meetings held 
in June, July and October 2006.  Since that regular  meeting, further informal Committee meetings on 
this subject had taken place on 24 November a nd 15 December 2006 and on 15 February, 8 March 
and 26 April 2007.  There had also been bilatera l and plurilateral discuss ions among interested 
delegations.  At the informal meeting held on 15  February the Chairman had indicated in his 
concluding remarks that it appeared that there we re three main issues to be addressed in order to 
arrive at a consensus on this matte r:  first, the duration of an extension;  second, the applicable 
requirements during the extended transition period; and third, whether it should be possible for the 
Members in question to request another extension.  Intensive discussions in the last couple of months 
on these issues have resulted in a text that had b een tabled by proponents in the previous week in 
document JOB(07)/50 and that had been introduced at an open-ended informal meeting of this 
Committee held on 26 April.  The Chairman consider ed that this text was generally viewed as an 
excellent basis to reach agreement on this subject , although particular aspects of this text required 
further work.  There was also a ge nerally shared view that the Committee should aim to try and adopt 
a recommendation for consideration by the General Council at its meeting in July.  This meant that 
the Committee had to engage in an inte nsive, text-based process in May.   
35. The delegate of Barbados
, speaking on behalf of the proponents of the proposal contained in 
document JOB(07)/50, stated that this proposal refl ected the result of almost one year of continued 
consultations with Members and that there wa s a widely shared view among proponents and non-
proponents that this text could form the b asis of a recommendation from the Committee to the 
General Council to grant an extension of the tran sition period for the programmes listed in documents 
G/SCM/W/535 and 537.  Proponents had discussed the pr oposal in JOB(07)/50 with other delegations 
both in an informal, plurilateral context and in bi lateral meetings and they recognized that some 
delegations had some recommendations for inclusion in the text.  As always, proponents stood ready 
to discuss these suggestions and to see how some of th em could best be incorporated into the text of 
JOB(07)/50 within certain limits and within what the proponents saw as the parameters of this 
anticipated agreement: the fact that the longer th e time period accorded, the more stringent the 
conditions applied, and the shorter the time-frame , the more relaxed the conditions.  This was a 
principle that had been well established by all dele gations since the beginning of the discussions for 
the extension of the transition period. 
36. The delegate of Barbados considered that a deci sion could be taken on the basis of this text in 
the very near future.  The proponents continued to  see the General Council meeting in May 2007 as an 
opportunity to seek agreement and if that were not po ssible, given certain time constraints, they would 
urge the Committee to still seek to have a reco mmendation ready as soon as possible despite the 
scheduling of the next General Council being in Ju ly 2007.  Proponents had requested that the two 
most recent statements delivered on behalf of the proponents at the informal meetings be compiled in 
JOB(07)/49 to ensure that delegations could be guided by the discussions, negotiations and 
concessions that had been made at the informal a nd plurilateral level.  It was important that the 
Committee recognize that the proposal in JOB(07 )/50 was not an initial position but rather a G/SCM/M/61 
Page 6  
 
  document that was the result of one year of informal discussion and negotiation.  While he recognised 
that some of the specific language recommended by  the proponents might be changed, it was essential 
that the main principles of the submission - the ti me-frame, the enhanced tr ansparency procedures and 
the commitment of no further requests for extensions, were maintained in their current configurations. 
37. With respect to issue of the time-frame, the delegate of Barbados noted that whereas the 
original proposal in documents G/SCM/W/535 and 537 had sought an extension of 11 years plus two, 
with identical conditions to that existing in th e original G/SCM/39, the proposal contained in 
JOB(07)/50 suggested six years plus two as the transition period, with a commitment to bring the programmes into conformity with Article 3.1(a) of the SCM Agreement , a commitment not to request 
any further extensions for these programmes after 2015, and enhanced transparency procedures 
including the provision of an action plan and the convening of a mid period assessment.  These new 
provisions were all based on specific suggestions ma de by interested Members during consultations.  
In footnote 1 of paragraph 1(e) of JOB(07)/50, the proponents committed to there being no further 
requests for extension of the transition period for an y of the programmes at issue after 2015.  This was 
a commitment that had been extremely challenging fo r the proponents to persuade their capitals to 
agree to and they were confident that this la nguage should give the necessary certainty to non-
proponents that this current request would be the fi nal request for an extension.  He urged flexibility 
and recognition of the political sensitivities on th is issue and emphasized that this was not a 
commitment envisaged in the original proposals in G/SCM/W/535 and 537 but rather was a direct 
result of the specific signals and indeed in some  cases, specific drafting from some non-proponents.  
In new paragraph 1(g) of JOB(07)/50, the pr oponents had incorporated ideas for enhanced 
transparency procedures, including actions to be undertaken at the national level during the initial 
period of the transition in advance of 2015 and th e provision of an action plan during a mid-period 
assessment.   
38. The delegate of Barbados stated that the di fference between the text in JOB(07)/50 and the 
text in G/SCM/W/535 and 537 was dramatic and he ask ed delegations to use the drafting exercise as 
an opportunity to tighten the language where nece ssary and to bring the other sections taken from 
G/SCM/39 into consistency with the current process, ra ther than to seek to inject new concepts which 
might simply add a more burdensome administrative layer.  Members should focus on the fact that the 
proponents had committed to bring the programmes at i ssue into conformity with Article 3.1(a) of the 
SCM Agreement , that they had committed to not make any further requests for additional extensions 
and that they had also included enhanced transparency  procedures.  With regard to the future process, 
he proposed that on the basis of the text in JOB(07)/50 the Chairman conduct sessions as soon as 
possible to work on any drafting ch anges that might be necessary.   
39. The delegate of the Dominican Republic
 supported the statement ma de by Barbados on behalf 
of the proponents of the proposal contained in JOB(07)/50.  It was of the utmost importance that a favourable decision be taken as soon as possible on this  proposal in order to enable her country to 
continue to apply the programmes identified in the Annex to document G/SCM/W/535.  With a view 
to achieving an agreement that was satisfactory to  all Members, the text proposed in JOB(07)/50 
addressed several of the concerns that had been expressed by interested delegations in informal 
consultations and reflected a s ubstantial change of the initial position of the proponents of the 
proposals in G/SCM/W/535 and 537.  He r delegation considered that Me mbers were close to reaching 
agreement on this matter and that the Committee shoul d keep up the intensity of its work on this 
matter in order to adopt a recommendation to  the General Council as soon as possible.  
40. The Chairman
 drew the attention of Members to the fact that the existing procedures under 
G/SCM/39 provided for an annual review by the Co mmittee of compliance with  the transparency and 
standstill requirements provided for in those proce dures.  This review wa s to be conducted on the 
basis of annual updating notifications.  In this rega rd, he proposed that the Members concerned submit 
this annual notification by 30 June 2007.   G/SCM/M/61 
 Page 7 
 
 
  41. The Committee took note  of the statements. 
M. DATE OF THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING  
42. The Chairman  stated that the next regular meeting of the Committee would be held in the 
week of 22 October 2007.  The precise da tes would be announced in due course. 
43. The Committee took note  of the statement.  
N. ELECTION OF OFFICERS  
44. The Committee elected Mr. Pablo Klein of Mexico as Chairperson and elected 
Ms Astrid Holtan of Norway as Vice-Chairperson of the Committee.   
45. The meeting was adjourned.  
__________