. /.   WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  G/ADP/Q1/EEC/26 
G/SCM/Q1/EEC/26 17 October 2007 
 
(07-4479) 
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 
 
Replies to Questions Posed by China1  
Regarding the Notification of the European Communities2 
   The following communication, dated 12 October 2007, is being circulated at the request of the Delegation of the European Communities. 
 
_______________ 
 
 
Question 1 
 
After the EU expanded into 27 countries, will the existing anti-dumping measures apply 
to Bulgaria and Romania?  Is it necessary to r econsider the standing requirements of domestic 
industry in relevant cases?   
 
Reply
 
 
 As in previous enlargements of the Europ ean Union (EU), as of January 2007 all trade 
defence measures that were in force in the EU of 25 Member States (EU-25) are automatically applied also to the new Member States (Bulgaria and Romani a), i.e., all imports into the enlarged EU-27 are 
subject to these measures.  On the same date, all trade defence measures that were applied 
individually by the acceding countries before thei r accession to the EU, automatically lapsed.   
 
 The EC has taken a very prudent approach and is ready to open reviews for those cases where 
interested parties request such reviews and subm it evidence that the measures would have been 
significantly different if they were based on informa tion including the new Member States.  In fact the 
EC published a notice in its Official Journal in D ecember 2006 inviting parties who wished to do so to 
request such a review.
3  However, it is expected that measu res resulting from an EU-27 analysis of 
dumping, injury, etc. will not be different than tho se based on an EU-25 analysis.  This is so because 
imports of goods into the new Member States are very small compared to those into the EU-25 and the overall industrial output of the new Member Stat es is insignificantly low compared to industrial 
output of the EU-25.  All of this suggests hat th e results reached in EU-25 investigations normally 
would be representative for the EU-27 as well.   
 
                                                     
 
1 G/ADP/Q1/EEC/25 – G/SCM/Q1/EEC/25.   
2 G/ADP/N/1/EEC/2/Suppl.8.   
3 OJ C 297, 7.12.2006, p.12.   G/ADP/Q1/EEC/26 
G/SCM/Q1/EEC/26 Page 2 
 
 
  Question 2 
 
When it was enlarged in 2005, the EU extende d existing anti-dumping measures to the 
new member states through reviews.  As to the enlargement of 2007, will the EU take the same 
methodology?  If reviews should be initiated on the EC’s own initiative, will it be applied to 
some anti-dumping cases or all cases?  Could EU explain the reasons?   
 
Reply
 
 
 When the EU was enlarged to 25 Member  States on 1 May 2004, anti-dumping (and 
countervailing) measures in force at that date on imports into EU-15 were extended to imports to the 
new EU-10.  The existing measures at that date we re not, as suggested by the PRC, extended through 
reviews.  However, on 20 March 2004 the EC in itiated on its own initiative eight partial interim 
reviews4 where it was likely that the automatic exte nsion of the measures would create a serious 
economic impact on exports to the acceding countri es of the concerned exporting producers.   
  The EC will not adopt the same approach this ti me as the size of the markets in the two new 
Member States is significantly smaller compared to  the EU-10 and therefore no negative impacts to 
exporting producers on their exports are expected.   For the same reasons as outlined in reply to 
question 1 above, measures were extended to imports  into EU-10 as it was considered that measures 
resulting from an EU-25 analysis of dumping, injury, etc. would in almost all cases not be different 
than those based on an EU-15 analysis.  Again, in  line with the approach taken to this year's 
enlargement, the EU took a prudent approach by  publishing a notice in its Official Journal in 
April 2004
5 inviting parties who wished to do so to request a review.   
 
 
__________ 
 
   
                                                     
 
4 OJ C 70, 20.3.2004, p. 15.   
5 OJ C 91, 15.4.2004, p.2.