RESTRICTED  WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  G/ADP/M/32 
23 October 2007 
 (07-4551) 
Committee on Anti-Dumping Practices  
 
 
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING 
HELD ON 24-25 APRIL 2007 
 
Chairperson:   Mrs. Victoria Campeanu (Romania) 
 1. The Committee on Anti-dumping Practices ("the Committee") held a regular meeting on 
24 and 25 April 2007.  The proposed agenda for the meeting was circulated in WTO/AIR/2999. 
2. The Committee adopted the following agenda. 
A.
 ARGENTINA – REVIEW OF NEW LEGISLATIVE NOTIFICATION 
(G/ADP/N/1/ARG/1/SUPPL .8 ) .......................................................................................................2  
B. ARMENIA – REVIEW OF NEW LEGISLATIVE NOTIFICATION (G/ADP/N/1/ARM/1/SUPPL .1) ............2  
C. CHINA – REVIEW OF NEW LEGISLATIVE NOTIFICATION (G/ADP/N/1/CHN/2/SUPPL .5)..................2  
D. EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES – REVIEW OF NEW LEGISLATIVE NOTIFICATION 
(G/ADP/N/1/EEC/2/SUPPL .8).........................................................................................................2  
E. INDIA – REVIEW OF NEW LEGISLATIVE NOTIFICATION (G/ADP/N/1/IND/2/SUPPL .4 - 
G/SCM/N/1/IND/2/SUPPL .4) ..........................................................................................................3  
F. MEXICO – REVIEW OF NEW LEGIS LATIVE NOTIFICATION (G/ADP/N/1/MEX/1/SUPPL .4 - 
G/SCM/N/1/MEX/1/SUPPL .3 - G/SG/N/1/MEX/1/SUPPL .3) ..............................................................3  
G. NEW ZEALAND – REVIEW OF NEW LEGISLATIVE NOTIFICATION 
(G/ADP/N/1/NZL/2/SUPPL .3 - G/SCM/N/1/NZL/2/SUPPL .3) ............................................................3  
H. PANAMA – REVIEW OF NEW LEGIS LATIVE NOTIFICATION (G/ADP/N/1/PAN/2 - 
G/SCM/N/1/PAN/2) .......................................................................................................................3  
I. CHINESE TAIPEI – REVIEW OF NEW LEGISLATIVE NOTIFICATION 
(G/ADP/N/1/TPKM /1/SUPPL .1 - G/SCM/N/1/TPKM /1/SUPPL .1).......................................................3  
J. TURKEY – REVIEW OF NEW LEGIS LATIVE NOTIFICATION (G/ADP/N/1/TUR/3/SUPPL .3 - 
G/SCM/N/1/TUR/3/SUPPL .3 & CORR .1).........................................................................................4  
K. SEMI -ANNUAL REPORTS OF ANTI -DUMPING ACTIONS .................................................................4  
1. Review of semi-annual reports ................................................................................................4  
2. Draft revision of semi-annual reporting form at – Report on the current status ................6  
L. NOTIFICATIONS OF PRELIMINARY AND FINAL ANTI -DUMPING ACTIONS .....................................7  
M. CHAIRPERSON 'S REPORT ON MEETING OF INFORMAL GROUP ON ANTI -
CIRCUMVENTION .........................................................................................................................7  
N. CHAIRPERSON 'S REPORT ON MEETING OF WORKING GROUP ON IMPLEMENTATION ...................8  
O. OTHER BUSINESS .........................................................................................................................8  
 Anti-dumping measure of the European  Communities on PET products from 
Chinese Taipei – item requested by Chinese Taipei ..............................................................8  G/ADP/M/32 
Page 2  
 
  P.
 DATE OF NEXT REGULAR MEETING ..............................................................................................9  
Q. ELECTION OF OFFICERS ...............................................................................................................9  
 
A. ARGENTINA – REVIEW OF NEW LEGISLATIVE NOTIFICATION (G/ADP/N/1/ARG/1/SUPPL .8 ) 
3. The Chairperson  recalled that the review of the new legislative notifications on the agenda 
would be conducted in accordance with the pertin ent procedures adopted by the Committee, found in 
document G/ADP/W/284.  As provided for in tho se procedures, written questions concerning new 
legislative notifications were to have been submitte d to the Member concerned and to the Secretariat 
not later than three weeks before the meeting, that is, by 14 March 2007.  Members which had 
received written questions in time were asked to resp ond orally to those questions in the meeting, and 
subsequently to respond in writing to all questi ons received in written form.  Follow-up questions 
could be asked in the meeting, and were to be submitted in writing no later than 8 May 2007 if the 
Member posing the question wished to receive a written answer.  Written answers to all written 
questions submitted by that deadline were to be  submitted not later than 5 June 2007.   
 
4. The Committee then reviewed the new legi slative notification of Argentina.   
5. The questions concerning the notification of Argentina  can be found in the following 
documents: 
G/ADP/Q1/ARG/17 – Submitted by the United States 
G/ADP/Q1/ARG/18 – Submitted by China 
TO DATE, NO WRITTEN REPLIES HAVE BEEN RECEIVED. 
 
B. ARMENIA – REVIEW OF NEW LEGISLATIVE NOTIFICATION (G/ADP/N/1/ARM/1/SUPPL .1) 
6. No questions were posed regarding the notification of Armenia .  The Committee took note  of 
the notification. 
 
C. CHINA – REVIEW OF NEW LEGISLATIVE NOTIFICATION (G/ADP/N/1/CHN/2/SUPPL .5) 
7. The questions regarding the notification of China  can be found in the following documents:   
G/ADP/Q1/CHN/59 – Submitted by the United States 
G/ADP/Q1/CHN/60 – Submitted by the European Communities 
Answers to these questions can be found in the following documents: 
 G/ADP/Q1/CHN/61 – Replies to  the European Communities 
 G/ADP/Q1/CHN/62 – Replies to the United States 
8. The Committee took note  of the notification of China and the questions and answers. 
D. EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES – REVIEW OF NEW LEGISLATIVE NOTIFICATION 
(G/ADP/N/1/EEC/2/SUPPL .8) 
9. The questions regarding the notifi cation of the European Communities  can be found in the 
following document:   
G/ADP/Q1/EEC/25 – Submitted by China 
Answers to these questions can be found in the following document:  G/ADP/M/32 
 Page 3 
 
 
   G/ADP/Q1/EEC/26 – Replies to China 
E. INDIA – REVIEW OF NEW LEGISLATIVE NOTIFICATION (G/ADP/N/1/IND/2/SUPPL .4 - 
G/SCM/N/1/IND/2/SUPPL .4) 
10. The questions regarding the notification of India  can be found in the following documents:   
G/ADP/Q1/IND/10 – Submitted by China 
G/ADP/Q1/IND/11 – Submitted by the United States (SCM only) 
Answers to these questions can be found in the following documents:  G/ADP/Q1/IND/12 – Replies to the United States (SCM only) 
 G/ADP/Q1/IND/13 – Replies to China 
F. 
MEXICO – REVIEW OF NEW LEGISLATIVE NOTIFICATION (G/ADP/N/1/MEX/1/SUPPL .4 - 
G/SCM/N/1/MEX/1/SUPPL .3 - G/SG/N/1/MEX/1/SUPPL .3) 
11. The questions regarding the notification of Mexico  can be found in the following documents: 
G/ADP/Q1/MEX/16 – Submitted by the United States 
G/ADP/Q1/MEX/17 – Submitted by China G/ADP/Q1/MEX/18 – Submitted by the European Communities 
Answers to these questions can be found in the following documents: 
G/ADP/Q1/MEX/19 – Replies to the United States 
G/ADP/Q1/MEX/20 – Replies to China G/ADP/Q1/MEX/21 – Replies to the European Communities 
G. 
NEW ZEALAND – REVIEW OF NEW LEGISLATIVE NOTIFICATION (G/ADP/N/1/NZL/2/SUPPL .3 - 
G/SCM/N/1/NZL/2/SUPPL .3) 
12. No questions were posed regardi ng the notification of New Zealand .  The Committee took 
note of the notification. 
H. PANAMA – REVIEW OF NEW LEGISLATIVE NOTIFICATION (G/ADP/N/1/PAN/2 - 
G/SCM/N/1/PAN/2) 
13. The questions regarding the notification of Panama  can be found in the following document: 
G/ADP/Q1/PAN/5 – Submitted by the United States 
G/ADP/Q1/PAN/6 – Submitted by the European Communities 
TO DATE, NO WRITTEN REPLIES HAVE BEEN RECEIVED. 
 
I. CHINESE TAIPEI – REVIEW OF NEW LEGISLATIVE NOTIFICATION (G/ADP/N/1/TPKM /1/SUPPL .1 - 
G/SCM/N/1/TPKM /1/SUPPL .1) 
14. The questions regarding the notification of Chinese Taipei  can be found in the following 
documents: 
G/ADP/Q1/TPKM/4 – Submitted by the United States G/ADP/M/32 
Page 4  
 
  G/ADP/Q1/TPKM/5 – Submitted by the European Communities 
Answers to these questions can be found in the following document:  G/ADP/Q1/TPKM/6 – Replies to the Eu ropean Communities and the United States 
J. 
TURKEY – REVIEW OF NEW LEGISLATIVE NOTIFICATION (G/ADP/N/1/TUR/3/SUPPL .3 - 
G/SCM/N/1/TUR/3/SUPPL .3 & CORR .1) 
15. The questions regarding the notification of Turkey  can be found in the following document: 
G/ADP/Q1/TUR/6 – Submitted by China 
Answers to these questions can be found in the following document:  G/ADP/Q1/TUR/7 – Replies to China 16. The Chairperson
 recalled that the deadline for writte n follow-up questions was 8 May 2007, 
and that the deadline for written answers to all writte n questions posed in connection with the meeting 
was 5 June 2007.  Concerning the autumn 2007 regul ar meeting, in accordance with the Committee's 
agreed procedures, for a new legislative notification to be placed on the agenda of that meeting, it 
would need to be circulated in all three languages not  later than six weeks before the meeting, i.e., by 
13 September 2007.  Shortly after that date, the Secretariat would circulate a document informing 
Members of all of the legislative notifications  to be reviewed at the autumn meeting. 
17. In order for a previously-reviewed legislative notification to appear on the agenda of the 
autumn meeting, written questions would have to be submitted to the Member concerned and to the 
Secretariat not later than 13 September 2007.   
18. The Chairperson expressed concern over the fact  that some Members still had not submitted 
any notification concerning legislation.  This was a matter of concern to all Members, from the point 
of view of transparency and better understanding, and for many Members all that would be required 
was a single nil notification.  For those Members that conducted anti-dumping investigations but had 
not yet notified their legislation, she stated that  it was all the more important for the Committee to 
have the opportunity to review and ask questions about  that legislation.  Therefore, all Members that 
had not made a legislative notification were encouraged to do so as promptly as possible.  
K. SEMI -ANNUAL REPORTS OF ANTI -DUMPING ACTIONS  
1. Review of semi-annual reports 
19. The Chairperson  recalled that a request for semi-annua l reports for the second half of 2006 
had been circulated in document G/ADP/N/153, date d 16 January 2007, and that the reports were to 
have been submitted by 9 March 2007 .  It appeared that most Members taking anti-dumping actions 
during the period in question had submitted a semi -annual report, although so me of these reports had 
arrived after the deadline.  The Chairperson encourag ed all Members to make an effort to submit their 
semi-annual reports on time, and reminded the Memb ers taking no anti-dumping actions that all that 
was necessary was to submit, twice per year, a simple letter to that effect.   
20. On the status of semi-annual reports for the second half of 2006, the Chairperson noted that  
paragraph 1 of document G/ADP/N/ 153/Add.1, dated 17 April 2007, identified the Members that had 
submitted semi-annual reports for that period.  These were available in the document package or in  G/ADP/M/32 
 Page 5 
 
 
  the room, and had been translated and circulated to Members to the extent possible, although some 
had arrived too late for that.   
21. In addition to the Members that had submitted semi-annual reports of ac tions taken, a number 
of Members, listed in paragraph 2 of document G/ADP/N/153 Add.1, had notified the Committee that 
they had not taken any anti-dumping actions during th e period in question.  In addition, Albania, 
Croatia and Nigeria had notified havi ng taken no action, but too late to be included in that list.   
22. Finally, the Chairperson pointed out that there remained a significant number of Members 
that had not responded to the request for semi-annua l reports, which applied to all Members, whether 
or not they had taken anti-dumping actions duri ng the period in question.  These Members were 
identified in paragraph 3 of the document.  She ur ged all Members to comply with this important 
notification requirement. 
23. No questions were raised concerning the semi -annual reports for the first half of 2006 
submitted by:  Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada , Chile, China, Colombia, Costa Rica, Egypt, the 
European Communities, Indonesia, Israel, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Korea, Mexico, New Zealand, 
Pakistan, Chinese Taipei, Thailand, Trinidad and Tobago, Turkey, or the United States.  
24. The representative of the United States  expressed concern over the tardiness of the semi-
annual reports of some Members.  The representative of Hong Kong, China  echoed this concern, in 
respect of the semi-annual report of India .   
25. Concerning the semi-annual report of India , the representative of the United States  requested 
clarification on whether India had issued a final dete rmination in the review of caustic soda initiated 
in May 2005.  The United States also inquired, in respect of the measure on oxo alcohols from the 
United States which was terminated in March 2006 following a seven-month review, whether anti-
dumping duties had been collected during the pendency of the review and, if so, whether those duties 
had been refunded.  The delegate of India  stated that his delegation would reply to the United States 
as quickly as possible, probably within a few weeks.  The delegate of Hong Kong, China  indicated 
that India apparently had imposed an anti-dum ping duty on CD-ROMs from Hong Kong, China in 
October 2006, and queried whether this would be reported in India's semi-annual report.  India  replied 
that the semi-annual report w ould be submitted shortly.   
26. Concerning the semi-annual report of Malaysia,  the representative of the United States  
inquired about the status of the measure on newsprint from the United States, which was not referred to in the report.  The United States wished to know  whether the measure had it been terminated; if so, 
information on the termination should be notified to the Committee.  The representative of Malaysia
 
replied that the investigation on newsprint had been initiated on 16 January 2003, and the measure 
imposed on 26 September 2003.  The measure was scheduled to expire on 25 September 2008.  
Should a sunset review be necessary,  the interested parties would be notified officially, six months 
before the expiry date.   
27. Regarding the semi-annual report of Peru , Chinese Taipei  raised a concern over two anti-
dumping measures that had been in place for more than 5 years, and inquired as to the status of those 
measures.  The delegation of Peru did not comment. 
28. Concerning the semi-annual report submitted by South Africa , the delegate of Egypt  
expressed concerns over South Africa's ongoing sun set review of its measure on carbon block from 
Egypt, identical to those raised at the previous m eeting.  South Africa had reported that this sunset 
review, which was initiated on 23 July 2004, was still ongoing, more than 33 months later, despite the 
fact that the International Trade Administration Commission of South Africa (ITAC) had concluded 
on three occasions that the expiry of the anti-dumpi ng measures was not likely to lead to continuation G/ADP/M/32 
Page 6  
 
  or recurrence of dumping or material injury.  Eg ypt understood that the measures had been prevented 
from expiring by litigation pending in a South African  court brought by the only South African carbon 
block producer.  Egypt remained concerned over the decision of South Africa to maintain these anti-
dumping measures for nearly three years after their nor mal termination date with no justification, and 
considered that the measures at least should be su spended during the ongoing judicial review.  Egypt 
asked South Africa for an update on the ongoing cour t proceedings, and an indication of when the 
ITAC would be in a position to conclude the sun set review.  The delegate thanked South Africa for 
having provided some information just before the meeting, but indicated that Egypt still wished to 
hear answers to its questions. 
29. The representative of South Africa
 indicated that before the meeting, his delegation had 
provided to Egypt a 15-page response.  Concer ning the length of the judicial review, the 
representative explained that the sunset review ha d been initiated in 2004 and the final determination 
taken in 2006.  However, the Administration Commission had been taken to court over that determination.  A legal review was to be held in  court on 16-18 May 2007, and a judgement need to 
be rendered.  There was, however, no specific time- frame for that judgement.  After that judgement 
was rendered, the ITAC or the firm  concerned had the opportunity of a ppealing, first to a full bench of 
the High Court, and after that to the Supreme Court of Appeal.  
30. The representative of the United States
 asked Venezuela for a status report on its sunset 
review on PVC from the United States, which had b een initiated in April 2005.  The representative of 
Venezuela  replied that his government would notify the United States once the review was concluded. 
31. The Committee took note  of the semi-annual reports and of the questions, answers and 
statements of Members.   
2. Draft revision of semi-annual reporting fo rmat – Report on the current status 
32. The Chairperson  recalled that leading up to the Octo ber 2006 regular meeting, the Committee 
had been engaged in a process of informal consulta tions to revise the format for semi-annual reports 
of anti-dumping actions, and that extremely good progr ess had been made.  Indeed, by the time of that 
meeting, the Committee had found a consensus on all but one or two elements in the draft revised 
format, and on those remaining points, the Committ ee had reached a consensus minus one.  It had 
been the Chairperson's hope and expectation to r econvene the Committee in a special meeting before 
the end of 2006 to adopt the revised format.  To that end, following the October meeting, informal 
contacts had continued with interested delegations in  an effort to bridge the few remaining gaps, but 
thus far unsuccessfully.  In the view of the Ch airperson, the revised draft as proposed to the 
Committee the previous fall would represent a very  good outcome for WTO Members as a whole and 
for each WTO Member individually, in terms of gr eatly enhanced transparency on Members' anti-
dumping actions under the existing Anti-dumping Agre ement.  She emphasized that it was absolutely 
clear that what was done in the Committee could only be relevant to the existing Agreement under 
which the Committee was constituted, and was without  prejudice to developments in any other fora 
related to any possible future changes to that Agreem ent.  She regretted that in her term of office the 
Committee had not been able to complete its work on this initiative, which enjoyed the support of all 
Members.  She hoped that the Committee could re-enga ge on this issue and reach a consensus, as it 
would be a pity to lose the time, effort and creativit y that all Members had invested in this task.  She 
therefore encouraged her successor and all Members to give  priority to this issue, so that a satisfactory 
solution could be found in the near future.   
33. The representative of Canada  agreed with the Chair con cerning the progress made and 
supported continuing these efforts.  The representative of the United States  agreed that the work on 
this issue should be continued.  He regretted that  a conclusion had not been achieved, in particular 
given that on the outstanding issue the Agreemen t did not require notification.  He urged the  G/ADP/M/32 
 Page 7 
 
 
  remaining Member to reflect on its position, and su pported continuing, and hopefully finishing, the 
work under the new Chairperson.  The re presentative of the European Communities  deplored the 
current situation, and encouraged the delegation of Hong Kong, China to reconsider its position so 
that the issue could be brought to a successful conclusion.   
34. The representative of Hong Kong, China  appreciated the efforts of the Chairperson and the 
Members in this exercise.  Consensus had not been  reached, however, and the existing format of the 
semi-annual report had been agreed by the Member s and adopted by the Committee in 1995, and any 
changes to that format also should be subject to  the Members' consensus view.  Hong Kong, China 
attached great importance to transparency, and ha d approached the exerci se with a great sense of 
reality.  From the beginning, the delegation had been prepared to consider and accommodate the 
legitimate concerns of Members, and with this spirit of cooperation and constructiveness Hong Kong, 
China had come with different proposals and counter-proposals to clarify the existing reporting requirements of the semi-annual reports.  Hong Kong , China had shown flexibility, but did not want 
to compromise the objectives of openness and transp arency.  While openness had a cost, efforts and 
resources incurred in compilation and release of such crucial information were fully justified.  If Hong 
Kong, China were asked to choose between the integrity of the system and administrative 
convenience, the choice was obvious.  Hong Kong, Ch ina maintained an open mind on the issue and 
was willing to engage in further di alogue with the other Members. 
35. The Committee took note
 of the statements made.    
L. NOTIFICATIONS OF PRELIMINARY AND FINAL ANTI -DUMPING ACTIONS  
36. The Chairperson  recalled that the lists of the notifications of preliminary and final anti-
dumping actions submitted by Members since the Committee's last meeting could be found in 
documents G/ADP/N/150-152, and G/ADP/N/155-156.  During that period, the following Members 
had notified preliminary and/or final anti-dumping actions:  Argentina, Australia, Canada, Chile, 
China, Egypt, European Communities, Korea, Mala ysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Pakistan, Peru, South 
Africa, Thailand, Trinidad and Tobago, Turkey, and the United States. 
37. The Chairperson  drew the attention of Members to the apparent lack of full compliance with 
this notification requirement.  In particular, comparin g the semi-annual reports with the lists of actions 
taken, it appeared that some Members had repor ted anti-dumping actions in progress in their semi-
annual reports but had not submitted re ports of preliminary or final ac tions taken.  These reports were 
a key element of the required transparency c oncerning Members' anti-dumping actions, and the 
Committee could not effectively carry out its monitoring and discussion functions if Members did not 
fulfil their obligations in this regard.  The Chai rperson therefore strongly urged all Members taking 
anti-dumping actions to provide these notifications of  preliminary and final actions, consistently and 
in a timely fashion.  The Committee had adopted  at its October 2006 regular meeting a revised 
minimum information format to simplify and cl arify this notification requirement (document 
G/ADP/2/Rev.1) which could be used by Members.   
38. No questions were raised regard ing any of the notifications.  
39. The Committee took note  of the Chairperson's statement.  
M. CHAIRPERSON 'S REPORT ON MEETING OF INFORMAL GROUP ON ANTI -CIRCUMVENTION  
40. The Chairperson  recalled that the Informal Group on Anti-Circumvention had met that 
morning, and that as usual the questions for discu ssion were:  what constitutes circumvention; what 
has been done by Members confronted with what th ey consider to be circumvention; and to what 
extent can circumvention be dealt with under WTO ru les and what are the options deemed necessary.  G/ADP/M/32 
Page 8  
 
  New Zealand had submitted a new paper to the Grou p, and Members had engaged in an interesting 
discussion of that paper.  The representative of New Zealand had expressed interest in continuing to 
discuss the issue identified in the paper, and to th is end, the Chairperson urged Members to submit 
papers and to participate in such further discussion.   The Chairperson announced that the next meeting 
of the Informal Group would be held during the week  of 22 October 2007, with the exact date to be 
confirmed in due course.  Any submissions for cons ideration at that meeting should be submitted by 
13 September 2007.  Members were urged to respect this deadline to allow for timely translation and 
circulation of submissions, so that delegations a nd capital-based experts could study the submissions 
in their preferred WTO language and prepare responses that would enhance the discussions.  
41. The Committee took note
 of the Chairperson's report.  
N. CHAIRPERSON 'S REPORT ON MEETING OF WORKING GROUP ON IMPLEMENTATION  
42. The Chairperson  reported that the Working Group on Implementation had met that morning 
and had considered a revised draft recommendation on the conduct of verifications that had been 
prepared by the Secretariat.  A number of Members had made comments on the revised draft, which has helped to clarify the issues.  The Working Group had requested the Secretariat to prepare a further 
revision of the draft recommendation based on the discussions.  The Chairperson had expressed the 
view that the Group seemed to have nearly exhausted its discussions of the three other topics before it, 
and she therefore suggested that Members reflect on th e future work of the Group.  In this connection, 
Members could keep in mind the possibility of star ting a process in the Working Group to develop a 
further list of topics that could be proposed to the Committee for referral to the Working Group for discussion.  The Chairperson had pointed out that the mandate of the Group was not restricted only to 
the preparation of recommendations but also in cluded consideration of other issues regarding 
implementation on which Members believed discu ssion could take place.  She therefore had 
encouraged Members to have a broader perspective wh en reflecting on the future work of the Group.  
The Chairperson informed the Co mmittee that at the meeting of the Working Group, Members had 
not yet been in a position to discuss future work in  detail.  The Group had agreed that before the 
summer break, Members should submit to the Secret ariat any proposals for topics to be discussed by 
the Group.  The Chairperson reported that the next meeting of the Working Group was scheduled for the week of the 22 October 2007, with the exact date to be confirmed later.   
43. The Committee took note
 of the Chairperson's report.  
O. OTHER BUSINESS  
Anti-dumping measure of the European Communities on PET products from 
Chinese Taipei – item requested by Chinese Taipei 
44. The delegate of Chinese Taipei  voiced concern over the implications of the methodology used 
in the targeted dumping determination by the Eu ropean Communities in its investigation of PET 
products from Chinese Taipei.  The delegate stated  that the investigated company had submitted 
evidence demonstrating that the fluctuation of th e export price coincided with the fluctuation of 
selling prices within the European ma rket.  The price differences were all de minimis , whether 
calculated on yearly or monthly basis, or by comparison with the investigated four months.  Information provided by the company during the oral hearing conducted by the EC investigating 
authority had not been taken in to consideration for the purposes of the final determination.  
Chinese Taipei also had strong reservations concer ning the application by the EC investigating 
authority of the practice of zeroing in cases of allege d targeted dumping.  In this particular case, the 
investigating authority had found no dumping margin above the de minimis  level using either a 
weighted-average-to-weighted-average calcula tion methodology, a transaction-to-transaction 
calculation methodology, or even a weighted-avera ge-to-transaction methodology if not accompanied  G/ADP/M/32 
 Page 9 
 
 
  with the zeroing practice.  Therefore, the only wa y the EC investigating authority had reached an 
affirmative determination of dumping above the de minimis  level was through the application of the 
zeroing practice.  Chinese Taipei had expressed th ese concerns directly to the EC investigating 
authority on several occasions, but had found th e final determination to its dissatisfaction.  
Chinese Taipei wished to register an  official concern as well as to seek opportunities to further discuss 
this matter with the EC. 
45. The representative of th e European Communities  indicated that his delegation had only 
become aware of this issue, and of the precise c oncerns of Chinese Taipei, immediately prior to the 
meeting.  His reply therefore would be preliminar y, but he undertook to convey the concerns to his 
capital, and his delegation would revert to that of Chinese Taipei as soon as possible.  The 
representative stated that according to the EC regul ation setting out the findings of the case and the 
recommendation, the Community indeed had used  the so-called third method specified in 
Article 2.4.2 of Anti-dumping Agreement for comp aring normal value with export price, because 
there had been a clear pattern of export pri ce differences between customers and between time 
periods.  Therefore, this method was clearly applicab le.  The EC would continue to discuss this matter 
with Chinese Taipei.   
P. DATE OF NEXT REGULAR MEETING  
46. The Chairperson  recalled the Committee's agreement at its meeting of 21 February 1995 that 
regular meetings normally would be held in the last  week of April and the last week of October, as 
would the regular meetings of the SCM and Safegua rds Committees.  She ther efore proposed that the 
next meeting of the Committee be held during the week of 22 October 2007, back-to-back with the 
meetings of the Working Group on Implementation a nd the Informal Group on Anti-Circumvention.   
Q. ELECTION OF OFFICERS  
47. The Committee elected  by acclamation Mr. Gareth Meyer of Australia as Chairperson; and 
Ms Gabriella Wurcel of Israel as Vice Chairperson.   
48. The Chairperson thanked the Committee, the Vi ce Chairperson and the Secretariat for their 
cooperation and help in carrying out her tasks as Ch airperson of a third WTO Committee in a row.   
49. The meeting was adjourned .   
__________