dean22029/WTO_Docs huggingface dataset:
JAPAN - MEASURES AFFECTING CONSUMER PHOTOGRAPHIC FILM AND PAPER
Document: Original: English JAPAN - MEASURES AFFECTING CONSUMER PHOTOGRAPHIC FILM AND PAPER Request for Consultations by the United States
Date: 21 June 1996
Document codes: WT/DS44/1; G/L/87
Complainant: U.S.
Respondent: Japan
Third parties: EU, Mexico
Dispute stage: Panel
Agreements cited: Art. III:1, III:4, X:1, X:3, XXIII:1(b)  GATT 1994

JAPAN - MEASURES AFFECTING
CONSUMER PHOTOGRAPHIC FILM AND PAPER
Request for Consultations by the United States
The following communication, dated 13 June 1996, from the Permanent Mission of the United
States tothe Permanent Mission of Japan and tothe Dispute Settlement Body, iscirculated in accordance
with Article 4.4 of the DSU.
My authorities have instructed me to request consultations with the Government of Japan pursuant
to Article4 of the Understandingon Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes(DSU),
and Article XXIII:1 of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 (GATT 1994) regarding
laws, regulations, and requirements of the Government of Japan affecting the distribution, offering
for sale, and internal sale of imported consumer photographic film and paper, including: liberalization
countermeasures, distribution guidelines and related measures; the Law Pertaining to Adjustment of
Business Activities of the Retail Industry for Large Scale Retail Stores; the Law Against Unjustifiable
Premiums and Misleading Representations; measures regarding dispatched employees; the application
of the Law to Promote Business Reform for Specified Industries and the Ministry of International Trade
and Industry Establishment Law; and related legislation, regulations, and administrative measures.
The United States considers that these measures violate the obligations of the Government of
Japan under the GATT 1994, including Article III and Article X. The United States also considers
that these measures nullify or impair benefits accruing to the United States directly or indirectly under
the GATT 1994, within the meaning of Article XXIII:1(a) and (b). The United States reserves the
right to raise additional factual claims and legal matters during the course of the consultations.
We look forward to receiving your reply to this request and to fixing a mutually convenient
date for consultations.
JAPAN - MEASURES AFFECTING CONSUMER PHOTOGRAPHIC FILM AND PAPER
Document: Constitution of the Panel Established at the Request of the United States Communication from the DSB Chairman
Date: 17 December 1996
Document codes: WT/DS44/3; WT/DS44/2; WT/DS44/2
Complainant: U.S.
Respondent: Japan
Third parties: EU, Mexico
Dispute stage: Panel
Agreements cited: Art. III:1, III:4, X:1, X:3, XXIII:1(b)  GATT 1994

JAPAN - MEASURES AFFECTING
CONSUMER PHOTOGRAPHIC FILM AND PAPER
Constitution of the Panel Established at the Request of the United States
Communication from the DSB Chairman
1. At its meeting on 16 October 1996 (WT/DSB/M/24), the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB)
established a panel in accordance with the request made by the United States (), in accordance
with Article 6 of the DSU.
2. The Panel shall have the following standard terms of reference:
"To examine, in the light of the relevant provisions of the covered agreements cited by the
United States in document , the matter referred to the DSB by the United States
in that document and to make such findings as will assist the DSB in making the
recommendations or in giving the rulings provided for in those agreements".
3. On 12 December 1996 the United States, by virtue of paragraph 7 of Article 8 of the DSU,
requested the Director-General to determine the composition of the Panel. This paragraph provides:
"If there is no agreement on the panelists within 20 days after the date of the establishment
of a panel, at the requestof eitherparty, the Director-General, inconsultationwiththe Chairman
of the DSB and the Chairman of the relevant Council or Committee, shall determine the
composition of the panel by appointing the panelists whom the Director-General considersmost
appropriate in accordance with any relevant special or additional rules or procedures of the
covered agreement or covered agreements which are at issue in the dispute, after consulting
with the parties to the dispute. The Chairman of the DSB shall inform the Members of the
composition of the panel thus formed no later than 10 days after the date the Chairman receives
such a request."
The Director-General has accordingly composed the panel as follows:
Chairman: Mr. William Rossier
Members: Mr. Adrian Macey
Mr. Victor Luiz do Prado
4. The European Communities and Mexico reserved their rights as third parties to the dispute.
JAPAN - MEASURES AFFECTING CONSUMER PHOTOGRAPHIC FILM AND PAPER
Document: Original: English JAPAN - MEASURES AFFECTING CONSUMER PHOTOGRAPHIC FILM AND PAPER Communication from the Chairman of the Panel
Date: 11 June 1997
Document codes: WT/DS44/4
Complainant: U.S.
Respondent: Japan
Third parties: EU, Mexico
Dispute stage: Panel
Agreements cited: Art. III:1, III:4, X:1, X:3, XXIII:1(b)  GATT 1994

JAPAN - MEASURES AFFECTING
CONSUMER PHOTOGRAPHIC FILM AND PAPER
Communication from the Chairman of the Panel
The following communication, dated 5 June 1997, addressed to the Dispute Settlement Body,
is circulated in accordance with Article 12.9 of the DSU.
Article 12.8 of the DSU stipulates that the period in which the panel shall conduct its
examination, from the date that the composition and terms of reference of the panel have been agreed
upon until the date the final report is issued to the parties, shall, as a general rule, not exceed six months.
Article 12.9 of the DSU states that when the panel considers that it cannot issue its report within
six months, it shall inform the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) in writing of the reasons for the delay
together with an estimate of the period within which it will issue its report.
The Panel "" was established
by the DSB on 16 October 1996 and, at the request of the United States, the Director-General, by
virtue of Article 8.7 of the DSU, announced the composition of the Panel on 17 December 1996.
In light of a number of factors including (i) the wish of the parties to use the maximum time
periods prescribed in the DSU for the preparation of their submissions; (ii) the number and complexity
of the measures complained against; (iii) the unprecedented volume of the evidence submittedin English
and Japanese which is approaching 20,000 pages, the Panel is not able to issue its report within six
months.
The Panel expects to complete its work before the end of the year 1997.
JAPAN - MEASURES AFFECTING CONSUMER PHOTOGRAPHIC FILM AND PAPER
Document: Panel Report Action by the Dispute Settlement Body
Date: 23 April 1998
Document codes: WT/DS44/5; WT/DS44/R
Complainant: U.S.
Respondent: Japan
Third parties: EU, Mexico
Dispute stage: Panel
Agreements cited: Art. III:1, III:4, X:1, X:3, XXIII:1(b)  GATT 1994

JAPAN - MEASURES AFFECTING CONSUMER PHOTOGRAPHIC FILM AND PAPER
Panel Report
Action by the Dispute Settlement Body
At its meeting on 22 April 1998, the Dispute Settlement Body adopted the Panel report on

JAPON - MESURES AFFECTANT LES PELLICULES ET PAPIERS
PHOTOGRAPHIQUES DESTINES AUX CONSOMMATEURS
Rapport du groupe spécial
Groupe spécial intitulé "Japon - Mesures affectant les pellicules et papiers photographiques destinés
aux consommateurs" ().
Informe del Grupo Especial
En su reunión de 22 de abril de 1998, el Órgano de Solución de Diferencias adoptó el informe
de consumo ().
Document: Original: English Japan - Measures Affecting Consumer Photographic Film and Paper Report of the Panel
Date: 31 March 1998
Document codes: WT/DS44/R
Complainant: U.S.
Respondent: Japan
Third parties: EU, Mexico
Dispute stage: Panel
Agreements cited: Art. III:1, III:4, X:1, X:3, XXIII:1(b)  GATT 1994

Japan - Measures Affecting
Consumer Photographic Film and Paper
Report of the Panel
The report of the Panel on Japan - Measures Affecting Consumer Photographic Film and Paper is being
circulated to all Members, pursuant to the DSU. The report is being circulated as an unrestricted
document from 20 March 1998 pursuant to the Procedures for the Circulation and Derestriction of
WTO Documents (WT/L/160/Rev.1). Members are reminded that in accordance with the DSU only
parties to the dispute may appeal a panel report, an appeal shall be limited to issues of law covered
in the panel report and legal interpretations developed by the panel, and that there shall be no ex parte
communications with the panel or Appellate Body concerning matters under consideration by the panel
or Appellate Body.
Noteby the Secretariat: This PanelReport shall beadopted by the DisputeSettlement Body (DSB) within60 daysafterthe dateof itscirculation
unless a party to the dispute decides to appeal or the DSB decides by consensus not to adopt the report. If the Panel Report is appealed
to the Appellate Body, it shall not be considered for adoption by the DSB until after the completion of the appeal. Information on the current
status of the Panel Report is available from the WTO Secretariat.
JAPAN - MEASURES AFFECTING DISTRIBUTION SERVICES
Document: Original: English JAPAN - MEASURES AFFECTING DISTRIBUTION SERVICES Request for Consultations by the United States
Date: 20 June 1996
Document codes: WT/DS45/1; S/L/22
Complainant: U.S.
Respondent: Japan
Dispute stage: Consultation
Agreements cited: Art. III, VI, XVI, XVII, XXIII:3  Services (GATS)

JAPAN - MEASURES AFFECTING DISTRIBUTION SERVICES
Request for Consultations by the United States
The following communication, dated 13 June 1996, from the Permanent Mission of the United
States tothe Permanent Mission of Japan and tothe Dispute Settlement Body, iscirculated in accordance
with Article 4.4 of the DSU.
My authorities have instructed me to request consultations with the Government of Japan pursuant
to Article 4 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes (DSU)
and Article XXIII:1 of the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) regarding measures affecting
distribution services, applied by the Government of Japan pursuant to or in connection with the Law
Pertaining to Adjustment of Business Activities of the Retail Industry for Large Scale Retail Stores,
and related legislation, regulations, and administrative measures.
The United States considers that, through these measures, the Government of Japan fails to
carry out its obligations and specific commitments under Article III and Article XVI of the GATS.
The United States also considers that these measures nullify or impair benefits accruing to the United
States directly or indirectly under the GATS, within the meaning of Article XXIII:3. The United States
reserves the right to raise additional factual claims and legal matters during the course of the
consultations.
We look forward to receiving your reply to this request and to fixing a mutually convenient
date for consultations.
JAPAN - MEASURES AFFECTING DISTRIBUTION SERVICES
Document: Understanding on
Date: 26 September 1996
Document codes: WT/DS45/1/Add.1
Complainant: U.S.
Respondent: Japan
Dispute stage: Consultation
Agreements cited: Art. III, VI, XVI, XVII, XXIII:3  Services (GATS)

JAPAN - MEASURES AFFECTING DISTRIBUTION SERVICES
Request for Further Consultations by the United States
The following communication, dated 20 September 1996, from the Permanent Mission of the
United States to the Permanent Mission of Japan and to the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated
at the request of the United States.
My authoritieshave instructedme torequest furtherconsultationswiththe Government of Japan
under Article 4 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes
(DSU) and Article XXIII:1 of the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) regarding measures
affecting distribution services, applied by the Government of Japan pursuant to or in connection with:
the Law Concerning Enterprise Reform for Specified Industries, No. 61 of 1995; Special Measures
for Improvement of Commerce Integration,No. 82 of 1991; Temporary Measures for the Improvement
of Specified Facilities by Utilizing the Abilities of Private Enterprise, No. 77 of 1986 (Minkatsu Ho);
the Law to Adjust Business Activities of Large Enterprises in Order to Secure Business Opportunities
for Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises, No. 74 of 1977 (Bunya Ho); the Small and Medium-Sized
Retailers Promotion Law, No. 101 of 1973; the Law Concerning Special Measures for the Adjustment
of Retail Business, No. 155 of 1959 (Shocho Ho); the Law Concerning the Organization of Small
and Medium Enterprises, No. 185 of 1957; and related legislation, regulations and administrative
guidance.
This request for consultations supplements the United States' prior request of 13 June 1996
(),concerningthe LawPertainingtoAdjustmentofBusinessActivitiesoftheRetail Industry
for Large Scale Retail Stores, No. 109 of 1973 (Daiten Ho), for which consultations were held on
10 July 1996.
The United States considers that, through the measures identified in this request and in the
request of 13 June, the Government of Japan fails to carry out its obligations and specific commitments
under Article III, Article VI, Article XVI, and Article XVII of the GATS. The United States also
considers that these measures nullify or impair benefits accruing to the United States directly or indirectly
under the GATS, within the meaning of Article XXIII:3. The United States reserves the right to raise
additional factual claims and legal matters during the course of the consultations.
We look forward to receiving your reply to this supplemental request and to fixing a mutually
convenient date for the further consultations.
BRAZIL - EXPORT FINANCING PROGRAMME FOR AIRCRAFT
Document: Request for Consultations by Canada
Date: 21 June 1996
Document codes: WT/DS46/1; G/SCM/D3/1
Complainant: Canada
Respondent: Brazil
Third parties: Australia, EU, South Korea, U.S.
Dispute stage: Retaliation & Arbitration
Agreements cited: Art. XVI  GATT 1994Art. 3, 27  Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)

BRAZIL - EXPORT FINANCING PROGRAMME FOR AIRCRAFT
Request for Consultations by Canada
The following communication, dated 18 June 1996, from the Permanent Mission of Canada
to the Permanent Mission of Brazil is circulated in accordance with Article 4.4 of the DSU.
The Government of Canada requests consultations with the Government of Brazil pursuant
to Article 4 of the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures and in accordance with Article 4
of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes, regarding certain
export subsidies granted under the Brazilian Programa de Financiamento às Exportações (PROEX)
to foreign purchasers of Brazil's Embraer aircraft.
PROEX is described by Brazilian Government documentation as an interest rate equalization
programme that equalizes the cost of financing on exports of covered Brazilian products to international
levels. PROEX provides foreign purchasers of Embraer aircraft with interest rate subsidies valued
at between 3.5 and 3.8 percentage points per annum over ten-year periods. The effect of the subsidies
is to provide financial terms that are more advantageous than purchasers would obtain from commercial
lenders or by export credit agencies were they to purchase from countries other than Brazil.
Article 3 of the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures prohibits subsidies
contingent, in law or fact, upon export performance. However, Article 27 provides developing countries
with an exception to this obligation, subject to certain criteria, before they must eliminate all export
subsidies.
The Government of Canada is of the view that the PROEX programme may be inconsistent
with Brazil's obligations under the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures. The provisions
of this Agreement with which PROEX may be inconsistent include the following:
(i) Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures, Article 3;
(ii) Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures, Article 27.4; and
(iii) Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures, Article 27.5.
In accordance with Article 4 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the
Settlement of Disputes and pursuant to Article 4 of the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing
Measures, the Government of Canada requests consultations with the Government of Brazil to discuss
this matter with the intention of reaching a mutually satisfactory result. The Government of Canada
welcomes any suggestions the Government of Brazil may wish to make concerning dates on which
the consultations could take place within 30 days from the date of receipt of this request.
BRAZIL - EXPORT FINANCING PROGRAMME FOR AIRCRAFT
Document: Original: English BRAZIL - EXPORT FINANCING PROGRAMME FOR AIRCRAFT Communication from Brazil The followingcommunication, dated 23September 1996,from the Permanent Mission of Brazil to the Chairman of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated at the request of that delegation.
Date: 25 September 1996
Document codes: WT/DS46/3
Complainant: Canada
Respondent: Brazil
Third parties: Australia, EU, South Korea, U.S.
Dispute stage: Retaliation & Arbitration
Agreements cited: Art. XVI  GATT 1994Art. 3, 27  Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)

BRAZIL - EXPORT FINANCING PROGRAMME FOR AIRCRAFT
Communication from Brazil
The followingcommunication, dated 23September 1996,from the Permanent Mission of Brazil
to the Chairman of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated at the request of that delegation.
In a letter sent to you by Ambassador John M. Weekes, dated 16 September 1996, Canada
requested the inclusionof an item onthe agenda of the meeting of the Dispute Settlement Body scheduled
for 27 September 1996, concerning the establishment of a Panel pursuant to Article XXIII of GATT 1994
and Articles 4 and 6 of the UnderstandingonRules and Procedures Governingthe Settlement of Disputes
(DSU)toexamine certainaspects of theBrazilianProgramade FinanciamentoàsExportações (PROEX)
that relate to the export of aircraft by the Brazilian company Embraer.
As stated during the bilateral consultations with the Government of Canada, Brazil is not of
the view that the interest rate equalization granted under export operations of Embraer aircraft is
inconsistent with the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM), in particular Article 3
thereof.
Even if the aspects of PROEX at issue were to be considered inconsistent with Article 3 of
the Agreement on SCM, Brazil isof the view thattheywould be justified byArticle 27of the Agreement.
This provision, concerning Special and Differential Treatment of Developing Country Members, is
of necessity invoked whenever an Article 3 question is raised concerning a developing country.
Otherwise, the Article 27 benefits explicitly negotiated for by developing countries could always be
avoided by the simple expedient of not raising the Article in the panel request. Brazil's rights under
Article 27 were recognized by Canada during the consultations and in document , but not
in Canada's proposed terms of reference for the Panel.
Brazil has no intention of blocking Canada's request. Nevertheless, in light of the above, and
in accordance with Article 7 of the DSU, Brazil reserves its rights to invoke Article 27 of the Agreement
on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures before any Panel is established to examine the matter at
issue, and requests that the terms of reference proposed by Canada explicitly recognize Brazil's right
to do so.
BRAZIL – EXPORT FINANCING PROGRAMME FOR AIRCRAFT
Document: Reservation of Third-Party Rights Note by the Secretariat The European Communities and the United States  have reserved their third-party rights in this dispute. BRÉSIL – PROGRAMME DE FINANCEMENT DES EXPORTATIONS POUR LES AÉRONEFS Réserve des droits de tierce partie Note du Secrétariat Les Communautés européennes et les États-Unis ont réservé leurs droits de tierces parties dans ce différend. BRASIL – PROGRAMA DE FINANCIACIÓN DE LAS EXPORTACIONES PARA AERONAVES Reserva de derechos en calidad de terceros Nota de la Secretaría Las Comunidades Europeas y los Estados Unidos se han reservado sus derechos en calidad de
Date: 19 August 1998
Document codes: WT/DS46/6
Complainant: Canada
Respondent: Brazil
Third parties: Australia, EU, South Korea, U.S.
Dispute stage: Retaliation & Arbitration
Agreements cited: Art. XVI  GATT 1994Art. 3, 27  Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)

BRAZIL – EXPORT FINANCING PROGRAMME FOR AIRCRAFT
Reservation of Third-Party Rights
Note by the Secretariat
The European Communities and the United States have reserved their third-party rights in
this dispute.
BRÉSIL – PROGRAMME DE FINANCEMENT DES EXPORTATIONS
POUR LES AÉRONEFS
Réserve des droits de tierce partie
Note du Secrétariat
dans ce différend.
BRASIL – PROGRAMA DE FINANCIACIÓN DE LAS EXPORTACIONES
PARA AERONAVES
Reserva de derechos en calidad de terceros
Nota de la Secretaría
terceros en esta diferencia.
BRAZIL - EXPORT FINANCING PROGRAMME FOR AIRCRAFT
Document: Constitution of the Panel Established at the Request of Canada Communication from the DSB Chairman
Date: 28 October 1998
Document codes: WT/DS46/7; WT/DS46/5; WT/DS46/5
Complainant: Canada
Respondent: Brazil
Third parties: Australia, EU, South Korea, U.S.
Dispute stage: Retaliation & Arbitration
Agreements cited: Art. XVI  GATT 1994Art. 3, 27  Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)

BRAZIL - EXPORT FINANCING PROGRAMME FOR AIRCRAFT
Constitution of the Panel Established at the Request of Canada
Communication from the DSB Chairman
1. At its meeting on 23 July 1998, the DSB established a panel pursuant to the request by Canada

2. At that DSB meeting, parties agreed that th e Panel should have standard terms of reference.
The terms of reference of the Panel are the following:
"To examine, in the light of the relevant provisions of the covered agreements cited by Canada
in document , the matter referred to the DSB by Canada in that document and to
make such findings as will assist the DSB in making the recommendations or in giving the
rulings provided for in those agreements".
3. On 16 October 1998, Canada requested the Dir ector-General to determine the composition of
the Panel, pursuant to paragraph 7 of Article 8 of the DSU. This paragraph provides:
"If there is no agreement on the panelists within 20 days after the date of the
establishment of a panel, at the request of either party, the Director-General, in
consultation with the Chairman of the DSB and the Chairman of the relevant Council or
Committee, shall determine the composition of the panel by appointing the panellists
whom the Director-General considers most appropriate in accordance with any relevant
special or additional rules or procedures of the covered agreement or covered
agreements which are at issue in the dispute, after consulting with the parties to the
dispute. The Chairman of the DSB shall inform the Members of the composition of the
panel thus formed no later than 10 days after the date the Chairman receives such a
request."
1
4. On 22 October 1998, the Director-General accordingly composed the panel as follows:
Chairman: Mr. Dariusz Rosati
Members: Mr. Akio Shimizu
Mr. Kajit Sukhum

1 Paragraph 12 of Article 4 of the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures provides:
"For purposes of disputes conducted pursuant to this Article, except for time-periods specifically
prescribed in this Article, time-periods applicable under the DSU for the conduct of such disputes shall be
half the time prescribed there."

5. The European Communities and the United States ha ve reserved their rights as third parties to
the dispute.
BRAZIL - EXPORT FINANCING PROGRAMME FOR AIRCRAFT
Document: Notification of an Appeal by Brazil under paragraph 4 of Article 16 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes (DSU)
Date: 3 May 1999
Document codes: WT/DS46/8
Complainant: Canada
Respondent: Brazil
Third parties: Australia, EU, South Korea, U.S.
Dispute stage: Retaliation & Arbitration
Agreements cited: Art. XVI  GATT 1994Art. 3, 27  Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)

BRAZIL - EXPORT FINANCING PROGRAMME FOR AIRCRAFT
Notification of an Appeal by Brazil under
paragraph 4 of Article 16 of the Understanding on Rules
and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes (DSU)
The following notification, dated 3 May 1999, sent by Brazil to the Dispute Settlement Body
(DSB), is circulated to Members. This notificati on also constitutes the Notice of Appeal, filed on the
same day with the Appellate Body, pursuant to the Working Procedures for Appellate Review.
The Government of Brazil hereby notifies the Appellate Body and the Dispute Settlement
Body of its decision to appeal to the Appellate Body certain issues of law addressed by the Panel
Report in Brazil – Export Financing Programme for Aircraft (), circulated 14 April 1999,
and certain legal interpretations developed by the Panel in the Report.
Brazil gives this notice pursuant to Article 4.8 of the Agreement on Subsidies and
Countervailing Measures, Paragraph 4 of Article 16 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures
Governing the Settlement of Disputes, and Rules XX and XXXI(1) of the Working Procedures for
Appellate Review.
Brazil asks the Appellate Body to review the fo llowing issues of law addressed in the Panel
Report and legal interpretations developed by the Panel:
1. the Panel's conclusion that measures about which the Parties did not consult were
properly before the Panel;
2. the Panel's conclusion that the level of export subsidies should not be measured by
budgeted amounts for purposes of Article 27.4 of the Agreement on Subsidies and
Countervailing Measures;
3. the Panel's conclusion that subsidies result from interest equalization payments for the
financing of exports of civil aircraft, made pursuant to Brazil's Programa de
Financiamento às Exportações ("PROEX"), at the time an aircraft is exported;
4. the Panel's conclusion that PROEX interest equalization payments for aircraft are
used to secure a material advantage in the field of export credit terms;
5. the Panel's conclusion that Brazil should withdraw the subsidy within 90 days.
BRAZIL - EXPORT FINANCING PROGRAMME FOR AIRCRAFT
Document: Communication from the Appellate Body
Date: 2 August 1999
Document codes: WT/DS46/9; WT/DS46/AB/R.
Complainant: Canada
Respondent: Brazil
Third parties: Australia, EU, South Korea, U.S.
Dispute stage: Retaliation & Arbitration
Agreements cited: Art. XVI  GATT 1994Art. 3, 27  Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)

BRAZIL - EXPORT FINANCING PROGRAMME FOR AIRCRAFT
Communication from the Appellate Body
The following communication, dated 2 August 1999, from Mr. Said El-Naggar, Chairman of
the Appellate Body, addressed to the Chairman of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated in
accordance with Article 17.5 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement
of Disputes.
It is my honour to transmit to you the Report of the Appellate Body in , It will be circulated as an unrestricted
document to Members of the at 4 p.m. today, in accordance with
paragraph 5 of Article 17 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of
Disputes. The three Members of the Appellate Body who served on this appeal were myself, as
Presiding Member; Mr. James Bacchus and Mr. Claus-Dieter Ehlermann, as Members.
BRAZIL - EXPORT FINANCING PROGRAMME FOR AIRCRAFT
Document: Communication from Brazil
Date: 16 September 1999
Document codes: WT/DS46/11
Complainant: Canada
Respondent: Brazil
Third parties: Australia, EU, South Korea, U.S.
Dispute stage: Retaliation & Arbitration
Agreements cited: Art. XVI  GATT 1994Art. 3, 27  Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)

BRAZIL - EXPORT FINANCING PROGRAMME FOR AIRCRAFT
Communication from Brazil
The following communication, dated 13 September 1999, from the Permanent Mission of
Brazil to the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated at the request of Brazil.
I would like to make reference to Article 4.9 of the Agreement on Subsidies and
Countervailing Measures and Article 21.3 of the DSU, and to Brazil's obligation to inform the Dispute
Settlement Body of its intentions in respect of implementation of the DSB's recommendations
concerning the case "".
I would also like to make reference to the agreement reached with Canada, during the
20 August 1999 meeting of the DSB in which the Panel and Appellate Body Reports regarding the
above-mentioned case were adopted (see documen ts and ), and which
was accepted by the DSB, that the obligation under Article 21.3 would be fulfilled in writing.
My authorities have instructed me to inform you that Brazil intends to comply with the
recommendations of the DSB with regard to this matter.
BRAZIL – EXPORT FINANCING PROGRAMME FOR AIRCRAFT
Document: Status Report by Brazil
Date: 24 November 1999
Document codes: WT/DS46/12; WT/DS46/R; WT/DS46/AB/R
Complainant: Canada
Respondent: Brazil
Third parties: Australia, EU, South Korea, U.S.
Dispute stage: Retaliation & Arbitration
Agreements cited: Art. XVI  GATT 1994Art. 3, 27  Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)

BRAZIL – EXPORT FINANCING PROGRAMME FOR AIRCRAFT
Status Report by Brazil
The following communication, dated 19 November 1999, from the Permanent Mission of
Brazil to the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated pursuant to Article 21.6 of the DSU.
Status Report on the Implementation of the Recommendations and Rulings in the
Dispute Regarding
At the DSB meeting of 20 August 1999, the Panel and Appellate Body reports regarding the
case "" were adopted ( and
). Brazil was thereby required to bring the measures found to be inconsistent with its
obligations under the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures into conformity with that
Agreement within 90 days.
On 13 September, pursuant to Article 4.9 of the SCM Agreement and Article 21.3 of the
DSU, Brazil informed the Dispute Settlement Body, in writing (), of its intention to
comply with he recommendations contained in the reports cited above.
My authorities have now instructed me to inform you that Brazil has effectively implemented
the DSB recommendations within the 90 day period established by the Panel and upheld by the
Appellate Body.
Equalisation payments under PROEX will be grante d only to the extent that the net interest
rate applicable to a transaction under that Programme is brought down to the appropriate international
market "benchmark".
All implementing legislation is fully compatible with Provisory Measure 1892-32, dated
22 October 1999, which establishes in Article 1:
"In financing operations linked to exports of national goods or services and
employing resources from the Special Progamme for Official Credit Operations, the
National Treasury may contract, within the framework of "PROEX – Programa de
Financiamento às Exportações", financial obligations compatible with those
negotiated in the international market."
1

1 Unofficial translation. Text in Portuguese reads as follows: "Nas operações de
financiamento com recursos da programação Es pecial das Operações Oficiais de Crédito,
vinculadas à exportação de bens ou serviços Nacionais, o Tesouro N acional poderá pactuar

The implementing regulation includes:
(i) a Resolution by the National Monetary Council altering its own Resolution
2576, dated 17 December 1998, which establishes the criteria applicable to
PROEX interest rate equalisation payments; and
(ii) a Central Bank Circular Letter which establishes new maximum equalisation
percentages and revokes Circular Letter 2843, dated 25 March 1999.
These regulations will be published at the official gazette in the next few days.

encargos financeiros compatíveis com os praticados no mercado internacional, no âmbito do
Programa de Financiamento às Exportações – PROEX."
BRAZIL – EXPORT FINANCING PROGRAMME FOR AIRCRAFT
Document: Recourse by Canada to Article 21.5 of the DSU Constitution of the Panel Note by the Secretariat
Date: 17 December 1999
Document codes: WT/DS46/14; WT/DS46/13.; WT/DS46/13
Complainant: Canada
Respondent: Brazil
Third parties: Australia, EU, South Korea, U.S.
Dispute stage: Retaliation & Arbitration
Agreements cited: Art. XVI  GATT 1994Art. 3, 27  Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)

BRAZIL – EXPORT FINANCING PROGRAMME FOR AIRCRAFT
Recourse by Canada to Article 21.5 of the DSU
Constitution of the Panel
Note by the Secretariat
1. At its meeting on 9 December 1999, the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) decided, in
accordance with Article 21.5 of the DSU, to refer to the original panel the matter raised by Canada in
document
2. At that DSB meeting, it was also agreed that the Panel should have standard terms of
reference as follows:
“To examine, in the light of the relevant provisions of the covered agreements cited
by Canada in document , the matter referred to the DSB by Canada in
that document and to make such findings as will assist the DSB in making the
recommendations or in giving the rulings provided for in those agreements.”
3. The Panel is composed as follows:
Chairperson: Mr. Dariusz Rosati
Members: Mr. Kajit Sukhum
Mr. Akio Shimizu
4. Australia, the European Communities and the United States have reserved their third party
rights.
BRAZIL – EXPORT FINANCING PROGRAMME FOR AIRCRAFT
Document: Recourse by Canada to Article 21.5 of the DSU Communication from the Chairman of the Panel
Date: 9 March 2000
Document codes: WT/DS46/15
Complainant: Canada
Respondent: Brazil
Third parties: Australia, EU, South Korea, U.S.
Dispute stage: Retaliation & Arbitration
Agreements cited: Art. XVI  GATT 1994Art. 3, 27  Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)

BRAZIL – EXPORT FINANCING PROGRAMME FOR AIRCRAFT
Recourse by Canada to Article 21.5 of the DSU
Communication from the Chairman of the Panel
The following communication, dated 8 March 2000 and addressed to the Dispute Settlement
Body, is circulated in accordance with Article 21.5 of the DSU.
Article 21.5 of the DSU stipulates that a panel examining the existence or consistency with a
covered agreement of measures taken to comply with the recommendations and rulings by the Dispute
Settlement Body (DSB) shall circulate its report wi thin 90 days after referral of the matter to it.
Article 21.5 further provides that when a panel considers that it cannot issue its report within 90 days, it
shall inform the DSB in writing of the reasons for the delay together with an estimate of the period
within which it will issue its report.
At its meeting of 9 December 1999, the DSB decided, in accordance with Article 21.5, to refer
to the original panel the matter raised by Canada in I wish to inform you that the Panel
does not expect to be able to circulate the report to the Members by 9 March 2000, that is, within the 90
days provided for in the DSU, due to the short timeframes provided for in the timetable.
The Panel expects to be able to circulate its report to Members by the middle of April 2000.
BRAZIL – EXPORT FINANCING PROGRAMME FOR AIRCRAFT
Document: Recourse by Canada to Article 21.5 of the DSU Notification of an Appeal by Brazil under paragraph 8 of Article 4 of the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures and paragraph 4 of Article 16 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes
Date: 22 May 2000
Document codes: WT/DS46/17
Complainant: Canada
Respondent: Brazil
Third parties: Australia, EU, South Korea, U.S.
Dispute stage: Retaliation & Arbitration
Agreements cited: Art. XVI  GATT 1994Art. 3, 27  Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)

BRAZIL – EXPORT FINANCING PROGRAMME FOR AIRCRAFT
Recourse by Canada to Article 21.5 of the DSU
Notification of an Appeal by Brazil under paragraph 8 of
Article 4 of the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures
and paragraph 4 of Article 16 of the Understanding on Rules
and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes
The following notification, dated 22 May 2000, sent by Brazil to the Dispute Settlement
Body (DSB), is circulated to Members. This noti fication also constitutes the Notice of Appeal, filed
on the same day with the Appellate Body, pursuant to the Working Procedures for Appellate Review.
The Government of Brazil hereby notifies the Appellate Body and the Dispute Settlement
Body of its decision to appeal certain issues of law and legal interpretations developed by the Panel in
its Report on – Recourse by Canada to
Article 21.5 of the DSU, as well as certain legal findings and conclusions of the Panel.
Brazil gives this notice pursuant to Article 4.8 of the Agreement on Subsidies and
Countervailing Measures, Article 16.4 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the
Settlement of Disputes, and Rules XX and XXI(1) of the Working Procedures for Appellate Review.
Brazil asks that the Appellate Body reverse the following legal findings and conclusions of
the Panel, and the legal interpretations that support these findings and conclusions:
1. That Brazil's continued issuance of PROEX support, pursuant to letters of commitment issued
prior to 18 November 1999, is inconsistent with the requirements of Article 3.2 of the
Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures ("SCM Agreement").
2. That the first paragraph of Item (k) of Annex I to the SCM Agreement cannot be used to
establish that PROEX interest equalization payments for aircraft are permitted.
3. That payments under PROEX are not "payments" within the meaning of the first paragraph of
Item (k) of Annex I to the SCM Agreement.
4. That PROEX payments are used to secure a material advantage in the field of export credit
terms within the meaning of the first para graph of item (k) of Annex I to the SCM
Agreement.
5. That Brazil's measures to comply with the recommendations and rulings of the Dispute
Settlement Body do not exist or are not consistent with the SCM Agreement, and that Brazil
has failed to implement the DSB's 20 August 1999 recommendation.

To the extent required by any of these requested reversals, Brazil also asks that the Appellate
Body complete the Panel's analysis, as appropriate.
BRAZIL – EXPORT FINANCING PROGRAMME FOR AIRCRAFT
Document: Recourse by Brazil to Article 22.6 of the DSU and Article 4.11 of the SCM Agreement Constitution of the Arbitrator Note by the Secretariat
Date: 13 June 2000
Document codes: WT/DS46/19; WT/DS46/18
Complainant: Canada
Respondent: Brazil
Third parties: Australia, EU, South Korea, U.S.
Dispute stage: Retaliation & Arbitration
Agreements cited: Art. XVI  GATT 1994Art. 3, 27  Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)

BRAZIL – EXPORT FINANCING PROGRAMME FOR AIRCRAFT
Recourse by Brazil to Article 22.6 of the DSU and Article 4.11 of the SCM Agreement
Constitution of the Arbitrator
Note by the Secretariat
1. At its meeting on 22 May 2000, the Dispute Sett lement Body (DSB) agreed that the matter
raised by Brazil in document shall be referred to arbitration in accordance with
Article 22.6 of the DSU and Article 4.11 of the SCM Agreement.
2. Article 22.6 of the DSU provides as follows:
"When the situation described in paragraph 2 occurs, the DSB, upon request, shall grant
authorization to suspend concessions or other obligations within 30 days of the expiry of the
reasonable period of time unless the DSB decides by consensus to reject the request.
However, if the Member concerned objects to the level of suspension proposed, or claims that
the principles and procedures set forth in paragraph 3 have not been followed where a
complaining party has requested authorization to suspend concessions or other obligations
pursuant to paragraph 3(b) or (c), the matter shall be referred to arbitration. Such arbitration
shall be carried out by the original panel, if members are available, or by an arbitrator
1
appointed by the Director-General and shall be completed within 60 days after the date of
expiry of the reasonable period of time. Concessions or other obligations shall not be
suspended during the course of the arbitration."
3. Article 4.11 of the SCM Agreement provides as follows:
"In the event a party to the dispute requests arbitration under paragraph 6 of Article 22 of the
DSU, the arbitrator shall determine whether the countermeasures are appropriate."
4. The original panel will carry out the Arbitration, namely:
Chairman: Dr. Dariusz Rosati
Members: Professor Akio Shimizu
Mr. Kajit Sukhum
BRAZIL – EXPORT FINANCING PROGRAMME FOR AIRCRAFT
Document: Recourse by Canada to Article 21.5 of the DSU Communication from the Appellate Body
Date: 15 June 2000
Document codes: WT/DS46/20
Complainant: Canada
Respondent: Brazil
Third parties: Australia, EU, South Korea, U.S.
Dispute stage: Retaliation & Arbitration
Agreements cited: Art. XVI  GATT 1994Art. 3, 27  Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)

BRAZIL – EXPORT FINANCING PROGRAMME FOR AIRCRAFT
Recourse by Canada to Article 21.5 of the DSU
Communication from the Appellate Body
The following communication, dated 15 June 2000, from the Chairman of the Appellate Body
addressed to the Chairman of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated in accordance with
Article 4.9 of the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures.
I am writing to you pursuant to Article 4.9 of the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing
Measures, which stipulates that the Appellate Body shall circulate its report within 30 days from the
date when a party to the dispute formally notifies its intention to appeal. Article 4.9 states,
furthermore, that when the Appellate Body consider s that it cannot provide its report within 30 days,
it shall inform the Dispute Settlement Body in writ ing of the reasons for the delay together with an
estimate of the period within which it will submit its report.
Brazil notified the Dispute Settlement Body of its decision to appeal certain issues of law
covered in the Panel Report and legal interpretations developed by the Panel in this case on Monday,
22 May 2000 with the result that the 30-day period specified in Article 4.9 will expire on Wednesday,
21 June 2000. Due to the time required for completion and translation of its Report, the Appellate
Body will not be able to circulate its Report by Wednesday, 21 June 2000. We estimate that the
Appellate Body Report in this appeal will be circulated to WTO Members no later than Friday,
21 July 2000.
BRAZIL – EXPORT FINANCING PROGRAMME FOR AIRCRAFT
Document: Communication from Canada
Date: 21 June 2000
Document codes: WT/DS46/21; WT/DS46/19
Complainant: Canada
Respondent: Brazil
Third parties: Australia, EU, South Korea, U.S.
Dispute stage: Retaliation & Arbitration
Agreements cited: Art. XVI  GATT 1994Art. 3, 27  Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)

BRAZIL – EXPORT FINANCING PROGRAMME FOR AIRCRAFT
Communication from Canada
The following communication, dated 16 June 2000, from the Permanent Mission of Canada to
the Permanent Mission of Brazil and to the Chairman of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated at
the request of Canada.
We have received the 13 June 2000 Note from the Secretariat in the matter of . Recourse to Article 22.6 of the DSU and Article 4.11 of the SCM
Agreement. Constitution of the Arbitrator ().
The first paragraph of this Note states as follows:
"At its meeting on 22 May 2000, the Dispute Settle ment Body (DSB) agre ed that the matter
raised by Brazil in document shall be referred to arbitration in accordance with
Article 22.6 of the DSU and Article 4.11 of the SCM Agreement."
Document contains the text of the communication from Brazil dated
7 June 2000, which was circulated to Members on 9 June 2000.
The DSB, at its meeting on 22 May, thus could not have agreed to refer to arbitration the
matter raised by Brazil in document , since this document post-dates the DSB meeting.
Moreover, document contains a new claim by Brazil with respect to Article 22.3 of the
DSU, which Brazil did not raise at the 22 May DSB meeting.
On 9 June, Canada wrote to the arbitrators to express its concern that Brazil's 7 June
communication attempted to modify the scope of the arbitration more than two weeks after the
arbitration was established, one week after the organizational meeting for the arbitration, and
following its receipt of Canada's methodology paper. In our view, this raises a serious issue of due
process. We asked the arbitrators to confirm that Brazil's new claim with respect to Article 22.3 of
the DSU was not within the scope of the arbitration.
The arbitrators have yet to decide on this point. We must therefore register our strong
concern with the Note by the Secretariat, which seems to pre-judge the decision of the arbitrators on
the scope of the arbitration.
Accordingly, we would ask that you direct the Secretariat to issue a corrigendum to its Note,
making clear that at its meeting on 22 May, the DSB did not refer to arbitration the matter raised by
Brazil in document WT/DS46/18. The DSB agreed only to refer to arbitration the matter raised by
Brazil in its oral intervention of 22 May.
BRAZIL - EXPORT FINANCING PROGRAMME FOR AIRCRAFT
Document: Communication from the Chairman of the DSB
Date: 3 July 2000
Document codes: WT/DS46/22; WT/DS46/21; WT/DS46/19
Complainant: Canada
Respondent: Brazil
Third parties: Australia, EU, South Korea, U.S.
Dispute stage: Retaliation & Arbitration
Agreements cited: Art. XVI  GATT 1994Art. 3, 27  Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)

BRAZIL - EXPORT FINANCING PROGRAMME FOR AIRCRAFT
Communication from the Chairman of the DSB
The following communication to the Permanent Mission of Canada, dated 21 June 2000, from
the Chairman of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated at his request. It was sent in response to a
communication from Canada (issued as , dated 21 June 2000).
Thank you for your letter dated 16 June 2000 concerning - Recourse by Brazil to Article 22.6 of the DSU and Article 4.11 of the SCM
Agreement. In response to your request for the Secretariat to issue a corrigendum to ,
insofar as it refers to the Communication of Brazil contained in document , the
Secretariat have assured me that they have referred to this document issued subsequently to the DSB
meeting of 22 May 2000 only out of concern for transparency. As the DSB record was not going to
be available for some time yet, a reference to the later Brazilian communication which referred to
what Brazil said at the DSB meeting seemed indicated. The Secretariat have also pointed out to me
that the Brazilian communication in its first sentence clearly refers to what was said at the DSB
meeting of 22 May, in its last sentence states that it "upholds the requests made at the DSB meeting of
22 May" and that in any case the record of that DSB meeting is authoritative.
Insofar as your letter expresses worries about the Secretariat note pre-judging the later
decision of the Arbitrator on the scope of the arbitration, it seems from the above explanation that the
Secretariat have acted purely out of a concern for transparency. Furthermore there can be no question
but that the Panel will decide any question concerning the scope of the arbitration solely on the basis
of the submissions of the parties and the merits of the case.
BRAZIL – EXPORT FINANCING PROGRAMME FOR AIRCRAFT
Document: Recourse by Canada to Article 21.5 of the DSU Communication from the Appellate Body
Date: 20 July 2000
Document codes: WT/DS46/23; WT/DS46/AB/RW.
Complainant: Canada
Respondent: Brazil
Third parties: Australia, EU, South Korea, U.S.
Dispute stage: Retaliation & Arbitration
Agreements cited: Art. XVI  GATT 1994Art. 3, 27  Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)

BRAZIL – EXPORT FINANCING PROGRAMME FOR AIRCRAFT
Recourse by Canada to Article 21.5 of the DSU
Communication from the Appellate Body
The following communication, dated 20 July 2000, from Mr. Florentino Feliciano, Chairman of
the Appellate Body, addressed to the Chairman of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated in
accordance with Article 4.9 of the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures.
It is my honour to transmit to you the Report of the Appellate Body in , Recourse by Canada to Article 21.5 of the DSU,
 It will be circulated tomo rrow, 21 July 2000, to Members of the , in accordance with paragraph 9 of Article 4 of the Agreement on Subsidies and
Countervailing Measures. It is a confidential document until its circulation. The three Members of
the Appellate Body who served on this appeal were: Mr. James Bacchus, as Presiding Member;
Mr. Claus-Dieter Ehlermann and Mr. Julio Lacarte-Muró, as Members.