UNITED STATES – DETERMINATION OF THE INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION IN HARD RED SPRING WHEAT FROM CANADA
Document: Request for Consultations by Canada
Date: 15 April 2004
Document codes: WT/DS310/1; G/L/678; G/ADP/D53/1; G/SCM/D59/1
Complainant: Canada
Respondent: U.S.
Dispute stage: Panel
Agreements cited: Art. VI:6  GATT 1994Art. 3.1, 3.2, 3.4, 3.5, 1, 18.1  Anti-dumpingArt. 15.1, 15.2, 15.4, 15.5, 10, 19.1, 32.1  Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)

UNITED STATES – DETERMINATION OF THE
INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION IN HARD RED SPRING WHEAT
FROM CANADA

Request for Consultations by Canada

 The following communication, dated 8 April 2004, from the delegation of Canada to the
delegation of the United States and to the Chairperson of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated in
accordance with Article 4.4 of the DSU.

 My authorities have instructed me to request consultations with the Government of the United
States of America pursuant to Article 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), Article 17 of the Agreement on Implementation of Article VI of the General Agreement
on Tariffs and Trade 1994 (Anti-Dumping Agreement) and Article 30 of the Agreement on Subsidies
and Countervailing Measures (SCM Agreement) concerning: the investigation of the United States
International Trade Commission (Commission) in Hard Red Spring Wheat from Canada
(Invs. Nos. 701-TA-430B and 731-TA-1019B (Final)); the Commission's final determination that an
industry in the United States is materially injured by reason of imports from Canada of hard red spring
wheat that have been found by the Department of Commerce to be subsidized by the Government of
Canada and sold in the United States at less th an fair value (68 Federal Register (FR) 60707
(23 October 2003)); the Department of Co mmerce's countervailing dut y order (68 FR 60642
(23 October 2003)) and antidumping duty order (6 8 FR 60641 (23 October 2003)) with respect to
hard red spring wheat from Canada; and the final definitive anti-dumping and countervailing duties
applied as a result.

 Through these measures, it appears that the United States has violated its obligations under
Article VI:6(a) of the GATT 1994, Articles 1, 3.1, 3.2, 3.4, 3.5 and 18.1 of the Anti-Dumping
Agreement and Articles 10, 15.1, 15.2, 15.4, 15.5, 19.1 and 32.1 of the SCM Agreement, inter alia,
by:

 1. Failing to apply anti-dumping and counte rvailing duties only in circumstances that
are provided for and pursuant to inves tigations conducted in accordance with
Article VI:6(a) of the GATT 1994 and the above-referenced provisions of the
Anti-Dumping Agreement and the SCM Agreement.

 2. Failing to comply with th e requirements of the above provisions relating to injury and
causation by, inter alia:
WT/DS310/1, G/L/678,
G/ADP/D53/1, G/SCM/D59/1

(i) failing to properly examine the effect of the dumped and subsidized imports
on prices in the domestic market for like products;
(ii) failing to properly examine the impact of the dumped and subsidized imports
on domestic producers of like products;
(iii) failing to properly demonstrate a causal relationship between the dumped and
subsidized imports and material injury to the domestic industry;
(iv) failing to properly examine known factors other than dumping and
subsidizing that were injuring the domestic industry; and
(v) attributing to the dumped and subsidized imports the injuries caused by other
factors.
 I look forward to receiving your reply to this request and to selecting a mutually acceptable
date for holding consultations, in accordance with the timeframes set out in DSU Article 4.3. Canada
welcomes any suggestions that the United States ma y wish to make concerning dates on which these
consultations could take place.