WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  G/ADP/AHG/W/167 
4 January 2005 
 (05-0018) 
Committee on Anti-Dumping Practices 
Working Group on Implementation Original:   English 
 
 
 
LISTS OF QUESTIONS ON FOUR TOPI CS IDENTIFIED FOR DISCUSSIONS 
BY THE WORKING GROUP ON IMPLEMENTATION OF THE 
COMMITTEE ON ANTI-DUMPING PRACTICES 
 
Paper by Hong Kong, China  
   The following communication, dated 16 December 2004, is being circulated at the request of 
the Delegation of Hong Kong, China. 
 
_______________ 
 
  At the meeting of the Working Group on Implementation (the “Group”) of the Committee on Anti-Dumping Practices in October 2004, members c onsidered how to take the work of the Group 
forward.  In this regard, some members have sugg ested making better use of the presence of experts at 
meetings of the Group to enhance discussions on th e specific topics which have been identified for 
discussions by the Group.  At the time, Hong Kong,  China suggested, as a possible way to facilitate 
discussions by members during the meetings of the Group, that lists of questions could be drawn up on the identified topics, which may provide a starti ng point for members to exchange experience and 
views on the relevant topics. 
  This paper follows up on our earlier suggestion and annexes a set of questions on each of the 
four topics currently subject to discussions in the Gr oup.  These four topics are: Art. 2.2 Export prices 
to third countries or constructed normal value; Art.  2.4.1 Foreign exchange fluctuations; Art. 6.7 
Conduct of verification; and Art 13 Judicial, arbitral or administrative review.       
 
 Members are invited to note the following:  1. The lists do not intend to preclude member s from submitting their own papers on the four 
topics, whether with reference to the lists of questions or otherwise.  However, for members 
who have not submitted any papers on the topics, the lists of questions may provide a starting 
point for exchanging views on the four topics at meetings of the Group.   
 2. The questions are drawn up with a view to facilitating discussions at meetings of the Group, 
and do not purport to be exhaustive.  Discussions on the four topics need not be restricted to 
the questions on the lists.  Members should be free to raise and discuss other issues related to 
the four topics. 
 G/ADP/AHG/W/167 
Page 2  
 
 ANNEX 
 
 
QUESTIONS ON THE FOUR TOPICS CURRENTLY BEING 
CONSIDERED BY THE WORKING GROUP ON IMPLEMENTATION 
 
 
Article 2.2  Export prices to third countries or constructed normal value 
 
 
1. Is the use of export prices to third country provided for in the domestic legislation?  In 
practice, how often is this method resorted  to (compared to the use of home market 
prices/constructed normal value)? 
 2. Is there a preference/hierarch y between the use of third country export price and constructed 
normal value?  What are the relevant criteria and what is the rationale behind such 
preference/hierarchy if any?  Where is such  information set out (e.g. in the domestic 
legislation)? 
 3. If there is no such preference/hierarchy, how  would investigating authorities choose between 
the two methods in practice? 
 
4. Where export price to third countries is used , what are the criteria used for identifying the 
appropriate third country (e.g. similarities of vol ume of sales, product mix, nature of market 
and consumer spending power)?  What is th e relative importance of each criterion?   
 5. What are the criteria for rejecting a third count ry initially considered to be most appropriate? 
(e.g. market considered non-viable or sales outsi de ordinary course of trade)?  How would the 
authorities continue with the investigation in such case (identify another appropriate third 
country, or go to constructed normal value?) 
 6. How is the situation of export-oriented small economies taken into account in the two tests?   
 
7. What role do exporters have in iden tifying the appropriate third country?   
 8. What are the difficulties faced by investiga ting authorities when using export prices to third 
countries?  How are such difficulties overcome? 
 
 
Article 2.4.1  Foreign exchange fluctuations 
 
 
1. Under what circumstances would auth orities perform a currency conversion? 
 2. What reference benchmark do authorities use to determine the exchange rate?   
 
3. When do authorities find “fluctuations” and “sustained movements” of exchange rates? 
 4. Which date do authorities normally determine to be the “date of sale”?  
5. How do authorities apply Article 2.4. 1 in the case of constructed prices? 
 6. How do authorities give effect to the requireme nt to allow exporters 60 days to adjust the 
price in case of sustained movements in exchange rates? 
  G/ADP/AHG/W/167 
 Page 3 
 
 
 7. To what extent are the views of the expor ters taken into account when performing currency 
conversion and determining exchange rate  fluctuations/sustained movements? 
  
Article 6.7  Conduct of verification
 
 
1. Where are the procedures for verification set out (e.g. legislation/administrative 
regulations/handbook)? 
 2. Under what circumstances will authorities c onduct on-site verification, and against which 
parties?  Who has the right to object to the ve rification visit?  Where a party is not verified, 
how is information submitted by that party treated (compared to information submitted by 
other parties who are verified)? 
 3. Do authorities allow the presence of exporter governments during the verification visit?  
(Conversely, do authorities request to be present where their own exporters are being verified 
by foreign investigating authorities?) 
 4. At which stage during the investigation is verification conducted? How much advance notice 
do authorities give on verification, and to whom?  What is the normal duration of a 
verification visit?   
 
5. What advance information do authorities give to parties to prepare them for the verification 
process?  What information are parties normally required to get ready for the verification?  What do authorities normally inspect during a verification visit? 
 
6. Do authorities give special allowance to SME or developing country producers/traders?    
 7. How do authorities decide when to accept or reject additional information or clarification 
received during verification?  Do authorities seek additional information/clarification during the course of a verification visit, and if so, how  much time is the party given to provide the 
information/clarification?  
 
8. What follow-up action is taken by the authoriti es after the verification visit?  Where a report 
is prepared, what information does such report c ontain (including at what level of detail), and 
when is such report issued (relative to the date of  the verification visit and date of issue of the 
final determination)? Who has a right to access su ch report, and/or to comment on the report?  
How much time is given for the relevant party/parties to comment on the report?  
  
Article 13  Judicial, arbitral or administrative review
 
 
1. What domestic review system(s) are in place (judicial, arbitral and/or administrative)?  Where 
is the legislative framework for such  review mechanism(s) set out?   
 2. What are the review procedures?  Who conducts  the review?  Who has standing to request a 
review?  Is a party required to exhaust ot her remedies before invoking the review 
mechanism(s) in question?  How long does it nor mally take to complete the review process 
(and any subsequent appeal, if available)? 
 3. What is reviewable?  What are the grounds fo r review and the standard of review?  Where 
appeal is available, what are the grounds for appeal?  
 G/ADP/AHG/W/167 
Page 4  
 
 4. At which stage(s) of the AD investigation procedures can parties resort to the review 
mechanism(s) in question?   
 5. What remedies (both interim and final) are av ailable to an applicant of the review?  What 
happens where the authorities’ decision is revoke d (e.g. case remitted to the authorities for re-
determination, or the review body has authority to substitute its determin ation/give directions 
to authorities on the re-determination)?  If pa rties are not still satisfied with the re-
determination, do they have to invoke new re view proceedings, or is fast-track review 
available? 
 
6. What are the statistics on the use of review mechanism(s) by the parties (both petitioners and 
respondents of an investigation)? 
 
__________