./.WORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONG/ADP/Q1/LVA/6
G/SCM/Q1/LVA/6
30 April 2003
(03-2288)
Committee on Anti-Dumping Practices
Committee on Subsidies and Countervailing MeasuresOriginal:  English
NOTIFICATION OF LAWS AND REGULATIONS UNDER
ARTICLES 18.5 AND 32.6 OF THE AGREEMENTS
Replies to Questions Posed by the UNITED STATES1
Regarding the Notification of LATVIA2
The following communication, dated 28 April 2003, has been received from the Permanent
Mission of Latvia.
_______________
Q1. Article 3 of Regulation No. 234, Latvia’s Procedures for the Application of Certain
Provisions of the Anti-Dumping Law (“Regulati on No. 234") provides for the use of prices of
other sellers or producers to determine normal value under certain circumstances.  How does
Article 3 relate to Article 5 of Regulation No. 234 which provides for the use of third country
sales or production costs for the determination of normal value?
Reply
Articles 3 and 5 of Regulation No. 234 provide for three different surrogate methods that may
be used for determining the normal value, when a determination based on the domestic sales price of
the exporter (Article 2 of Regulation No. 234) is not possible for several reasons.
Article 3 of Regulation No. 234 lays down a met hod for determination of normal value in a
case where a particular exporter does not produce or sell the like product on the market of the
exporting country.  In such a case, if there are other exporters or producers on its domestic market,
their domestic sales prices may be taken into consideration for determining the normal value.
If there are no other exporters or producers on the market of the exporting country or their
prices are not usable for reasons set in Article 5 of Regulation No. 234, then Article 5 of Regulation
No. 234, which sets conditions for application of third country export price or constructed normal
value, must be applied for determination of the normal value in respect of the particular exporter.
There is no hierarchy between these methods according to the Regulation No. 234.  The
method stipulated in Article 3 of Regulation No. 234 is also not mandatory for the Latvian
investigating authority, and it may be omitted even when there are "other exporters or producers".
Latvia is aware, that the method stipulated in Article 3 of Regulation No. 234 is not explicitly
provided in the A-D Agreement and, until now, has not applied it.
                                                     
1 G/ADP/Q1/LVA/5-G/SCM/Q1/LVA/5
2 G/ADP/N/1/LVA/2/Suppl.2G/ADP/Q1/LVA/6
G/SCM/Q1/LVA/6
Page 2
Q2. For purposes of establishing the threat of material injury, Article 3.7 of the AD
Agreement states that a change in circumstanc es that would create a situation in which
dumping would cause  injury must be clearly foreseen and imminent.  Article 29 of Regulation
No. 234 requires that such a change in circums tances be clearly foreseeable and unavoidable.
What does the term “unavoidable” mean in this context and does it mean the same thing as the
standard articulated in Article 3.7?
Reply
The difference in terms has occurred in the course of translation of the Regulation No. 234
from Latvian into English.  The Latvian term, which is translated as 'unavoidable' in Article 29 of
Regulation No. 234, means the same thing as 'imminent' in Article 3.7 of the A-D Agreement.
Q3.1 Article 18.1 of Regulation No. 234 refers to  the determination of a preliminary dumping
margin for purposes of initiation and for the implementation of provisional measures.  DoesLatvia impose provisional measures at the time of initiation?
Reply
Latvia does not impose provisional measures at the time of initiation.  This is indirectly
provided in Article 21 of the Anti-Dumping Law (G/ADP/N/1/LVA/2), which says that a provisional
determination of the existence of dumping and injury may not be made earlier than 60 days after the
initiation.  Moreover, the provisional measures according to Article 22 of the Anti-Dumping Law may
be taken only after an affirmative provisional determination has been adopted.
Q3.2 If so, how is this consistent with Article 7.3 of the AD Agreement?  Also, does
Article 18.1 of Regulation No. 234 provide th at the dumping margin used to establish
provisional measures will be the same dumping  margin used to initiate the investigation?
Reply
No, Article 18.1 of Regulation No. 234 does not provide that the dumping margin used to
establish provisional measures will be the same dumping margin used to initiate the investigation.
Article 18.1 of Regulation No. 234, in context with the heading of Article 18 of Regulation No. 234,
mentions merely two or three situations when the comparison of the normal value and the export price
to determine the dumping margin is being performed, i.e. upon deciding to initiate the investigation
and upon deciding to take provisional measures.
Under certain circumstances, the dumping margin used to establish provisional measures may
be the same dumping margin used to initiate the investigation (e.g. in case of use of the best
information available according to Article 15 of the Anti-Dumping Law).  However, this would
legally not be the consequence of application of Article 18.1 of Regulation No. 234.
__________