MEXICO – DEFINITIVE ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES ON BEEF AND RICE
Document: Complaint with Respect to Rice Status Report by Mexico
Date: 8 December 2006
Document codes: WT/DS295/13
Complainant: U.S.
Respondent: Mexico
Third parties: China, EU, Turkey
Dispute stage: Appellate Body
Agreements cited: Art. 12.5, 12.7, 19.3, 11.9, 21.1, 21.2, 32.1, 12.1.1  Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)Art. VI:2  GATT 1994Art. 1, 3.1, 3.2, 3.4, 3.5, 4.1, 5.8, 6.1, 6.2, 6.4, 6.8, 6.9, 6.10, 9.3, 9.4, 9.5, 11.1, 12.1, 12.2, 11.9, 18.1, 19.3, 21.1, 21.2, 32.1  Anti-dumping

MEXICO – DEFINITIVE ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES ON BEEF AND RICE

Complaint with Respect to Rice

Status Report by Mexico

 The following communication, dated 7 December 2006, from the delegation of Mexico to the
Chairman of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated pursuant to Article 21.6 of the DSU.

Status Report Regarding Implementation of the DSB Recommendations and Rulings in the Dispute

(WT/DS295)

 Mexico submits this report in accordance with Article 21.6 of the Understanding on Rules
and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes.

 On 20 December 2005, the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) adopted its recommendations and
rulings in (WT/DS295). At that
meeting, Mexico expressed disagreement with th e findings and conclusions of the Panel and the
Appellate Body, but nevertheless expressed its political readiness to comply with its WTO obligations
by agreeing to the adoption of the reports concerned.

 On 19 January 2006, Mexico reaffirmed to the DSB its intention to implement the
recommendations and rulings of the DSB in this dispute in a manner that respects its WTO
obligations, and to that end Mexico and the United States notified the DSB, on 18 May 2006, of the
reasonable period agreed pursuant to Article 21.3(b) of the DSU, and concluded that:

 (a) With regard to the definitive anti-dum ping measure (paragraphs 8.1 and 8.2 of the
final Panel report and paragra phs 350 (b) and (c) of the fi nal Appellate Body report),
the reasonable period would be eight months; and

 (b) with regard to Articles 64, 68, 89D, 93 V and 97 of the Mexican Foreign Trade Act
(paragraph 8.5 of the Panel report and para graph 350 of the Appellate Body report),
the reasonable period would be twelve months.

 Thus, we wish to state that, on 11 September 2006, Mexico published a resolution
1
eliminating the anti-dumping quota on rice that had been declared inconsistent with Mexico's
obligations under the Anti-Dumping Agreement. Me xico has thereby complied with its first set of
obligations in this case.

 Furthermore, with respect to the articles of th e Foreign Trade Act, the Government of Mexico
has already tabled an initiative in its Congress to bring them into conformity with the
recommendations and rulings of the DSB. In that connection, the draft reforms have already been
approved by the Senate on 23 Nove mber 2006 and are currently awaiting approval by the Chamber of
Deputies. Before they are submitted to the plenar y chamber, they must be approved by the Foreign
Trade Commission, and this approval is expected to be given in the next few days.

 Despite a recent change of government, the Ex ecutive is doing its utmost, together with the
Congress, to complete the legislative process and a pprove the necessary amendments before expiry of
the reasonable period allowed us in this case, so as to contribute, through this attitude of compliance,
to the strengthening of the WTO dispute settlement mechanism and the multilateral trade framework
as a whole. We stand ready to continue hold ing consultations and to remain in constant
communication with the complaining Party in this dispute with respect to any matter relating thereto.

Law, originating in the United States, irrespective of the country of provenance, on the basis of the conclusions
and recommendations of the Panel and the Appellate Body of the WTO Dispute Settlement Body.