EUROPEAN UNION - ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES ON BIODIESEL FROM ARGENTINA REQUEST FOR CONSULTATIONS BY ARGENTINA
Document: REQUEST FOR CONSULTATIONS BY
Date: 8 January 2014
Document codes: WT/DS473/1; G/L/1062; G/ADP/D101/1
Complainant: Argentina
Respondent: EU
Third parties: Australia, China, Malaysia, Norway, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, U.S., Colombia, Indonesia, Mexico
Dispute stage: Appellate Body
Agreements cited: Art. 2.2  Anti-dumpingArt. VI:1  GATT 1994Art. 2.2.1.1, 9.3, 2, 18.4  Anti-dumpingArt. XVI:4  Agreement Establishing the World Trade OrganizationArt. 2.1, 2.2.2(iii), 2.4  Anti-dumpingArt. VI:2  GATT 1994Art. 3.1, 3.4, 3.5, 1  Anti-dumpingArt. VI  GATT 1994

EUROPEAN UNION - ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES ON BIODIESEL FROM ARGENTINA
REQUEST FOR CONSULTATIONS BY ARGENTINA
 The following communication, dated 19 December 2013, from the delegation of Argentina
to the delegation of the European Union and to the Chairperson of the Dispute Settlement Body,
is circulated in accordance with Article 4.4 of the DSU.

I have received instructions from my authorities to request consultations with the
European Union in accordance with Articles 1 and 4 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures
Governing the Settlement of Disputes (DSU), Article XXII of the General Agreement on Tariffs
and Trade 1994 ("GATT 1994") and Article 17 of the Agreement on Implementation of Article VI
of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 ("Anti-Dumping Agreement") with respect to:
a. Provisional
1 and definitive 2 anti-dumping measures imposed by the European Union
on imports of biodiesel originating, inter alia, in Argentina, and the investigation 3 that
led to the imposition of the measures. These measures appear to be inconsistent with
the European Union's obligations under the following provisions of the GATT 1994 and
the Anti-Dumping Agreement:
1. Article 2.1, 2.2 and 2.2.1.1 of the Anti -Dumping Agreement and Article VI:1 of
the GATT 1994, because the European Union did not calculate the costs on the basis
of the records kept by the exporters or producers under investigation and because
the European Union did not properly determine the costs of production;
2. Article 2.1 and 2.2 of the Anti-Dumpi ng Agreement and Article VI:1 of
the GATT 1994, because in constructing the normal value, the European Union did
not use the production cost in the country of origin;
3. Article 2.1, 2.2 and 2.2.1.1 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement, because in constructing
the normal value, the European Union included costs not associated with
the production and sale of the product under consideration;
4. Article 2.4 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement, because the European Union did not
make a fair comparison between the export price and the normal value and because
the European Union did not make due allowance for differences which affect price
comparability, including differences in taxation;

1 The provisional measures were imposed through Commission Regulation (EU) No. 490/2013
of 27 May 2013 imposing a provisional anti-dumping duty on imports of biodiesel originating in Argentina
and Indonesia, OJ L 141, 28.5.2013, p. 6.
2 The definitive measures were imposed through Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No. 1194/2013
of 19 November 2013 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty
imposed on imports of biodiesel originating in Argentina and Indonesia, OJ L 315, 26.11.13, p. 2.
3 The investigation was initiated pursuant to the Notice of initiation of an anti-dumping proceeding
concerning imports of biodiesel originating in Argentina and Indonesia, OJ C 260, 29.8.2012, p. 8.
WT/DS473/1 • G/L/1062 • G/ADP/D101/1

5. Article 2.2 and 2.2.2 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement, because the European Union
did not properly determine the amounts for profits in accordance with the rules
established under those articles;
6. Article 9.3 of the Anti-Dumping Agreem ent and Article VI:2 of the GATT 1994,
because the amount of the anti-dumping duty imposed by the European Union
exceeds the margin of dumping as established under Article 2 of
the Anti-Dumping Agreement and Article VI:1 of the GATT 1994;
7. Article 3.1, 3.2, 3.4 and 3.5 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement, because the
European Union's determination of injury, particularly as regards imports of products
manufactured by the domestic
4 industry, was not based on positive evidence and did
not involve an objective examination of the volume of the allegedly dumped imports
and the effect of the allegedly dumped imports on prices in the domestic market for
like products, and the consequent impact of these allegedly dumped imports on
domestic producers of such products;
8. Article 3.1 and 3.4 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement, because the European Union's
determination of injury was not based on positive evidence, nor did it involve an
objective examination of the consequent impact of the allegedly dumped imports
on domestic producers of the like product, inter alia with regard to capacity
and utilization of capacity of the domestic industry;
9. Article 3.1 and 3.5 of the Anti-Dumping Ag reement, because the European Union did
not carry out an objective examination, based on positive evidence, of the causal
relationship between the allegedly dumped imports and the alleged injury to the
domestic industry, and because the European Union did not carry out an objective
examination, based on positive evidence, of factors other than the allegedly dumped
imports which at the same time were injuring the domestic industry, and thus
attributed the injury caused by those factors to the allegedly dumped imports;
10. Article 6.5, 6.5.1, 6.4 and 6.2 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement, because the
European Union failed to provide timely opportunities for the interested parties
to examine the information that was relevant to the presentation of their cases,
including, inter alia , data concerning the establishment of margins of dumping
and the determination of injury, and to prepare their presentations on the basis
of that information, thereby depriving the interested parties of the full opportunity
for the defence of their interests.
The European Union's anti-dumping measures on biodiesel originating, inter alia , in
Argentina, also appear to be inconsistent with Articles 1 and 18 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement
and with Article VI of the GATT 1994 as a result of the above-mentioned violations.

b. Article 2(5) of Council Regulation (EC) No. 1225/2009 of 30 November 2009 on
protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the
European Community
5 in that it establishes that if costs associated with the production
and sale of the product under investigation are not reasonably reflected in the records of
the party concerned, they shall be adjusted or established on the basis of the costs of
other producers or exporters in the same country or, where such information is not
available or cannot be used, on any other reasonable basis, including information from
other representative markets. This measure appears to be inconsistent as such with the
following obligations of the European Union:
1. Article 2.2 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement, which requires that the cost
of production in the country of origin be used to determine the margin of dumping

4 The term "domestic" is used to refer to the European industry as defined in Article 4 of Council
Regulation (EC) No. 1225/2009 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of
the European Community, OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 51.
5 Council Regulation (EC) No. 1225/2009 on protection against dumped imports from countries not
members of the European Community, OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 51.
WT/DS473/1 • G/L/1062 • G/ADP/D101/1

on the basis of a comparison between the ex port price and the production cost plus
a reasonable amount for administrative, selling and general costs and for profits;
2. Article 2.2.1.1 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement, which requires that costs normally
be calculated on the basis of records kept by the exporter or producer
under investigation;
3. Article XVI:4 of the Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization
and Article 18.4 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement, since the European Union did not
take all of the necessary measures to ensure conformity of its laws, regulations and
administrative procedures with the provisions of the GATT 1994 and
the Anti-Dumping Agreement.
The above-mentioned measures of the European Union appear to nullify or impair, directly
or indirectly, the benefits accruing to Argentina under the mentioned agreements.

Argentina reserves the right to address additional measures and claims in respect of the
mentioned issues, including any amendment, replacement, extension, implementation measures
or other related measures, in the course of the consultations.

Argentina awaits the response of the European Union to this request in order to coordinate
a mutually convenient date and place for the consultations.