AUSTRALIA – ANTI-DUMPING AND COUNTERVAILING DUTY MEASURES ON CERTAIN PRODUCTS FROM CHINA REQUEST FOR CONSULTATIONS BY CHINA
Document: REQUEST FOR CONSULTATIONS BY
Date: 29 June 2021
Document codes: WT/DS603/1; G/L/1391; G/ADP/D138/1; G/SCM/D133/1
Complainant: China
Respondent: Australia
Third parties: Argentina, Brazil, Canada, EU, India, Japan, South Korea, Malaysia, Mexico, Norway, Russia, Singapore, Switzerland, Taiwan, United Kingdom, U.S., Vietnam
Dispute stage: Panel
Agreements cited: Art. 2.1, 2.2, 2.2.1, 2.2.1.1, 2.2.2, 9.3  Anti-dumpingArt. VI:1, VI:2  GATT 1994Art. 1.1(a)(1), 1.1(b), 1.2, 2.1(c), 11.1, 11.2, 11.3, 14(d)  Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)

AUSTRALIA – ANTI-DUMPING AND COUNTERVAILING DUTY MEASURES ON CERTAIN
PRODUCTS FROM CHINA
REQUEST FOR CONSULTATIONS BY CHINA
The following communication, dated 24 June 2021, from the delegation of China to the delegation
of Australia, is circulated to the Dispute Settlement Body in accordance with Article 4.4 of the DSU.

My authorities have instructed me to request consultations with the Government of Australia
pursuant to Articles 4 o f 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), Article 30 of the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing
Measures (SCM Agreement).
I. MEASURES AT ISSUE
This request for consultations concerns the anti-dumping and countervailing measures imposed by
Australia on imports of certain products originating in China, inter alia, wind towers, deep drawn
stainless steel sinks and railway wheels.
The measures at issue mentioned above include any and all preliminary and final anti-dumping and
countervailing duty measures which were issued by the Anti -Dumping Commission of the
Department of Industry, Science, Energy and Resources of the Australian Government (hereinafter
"the Commission"), include the determ inations by the Commission to initiate the identified
anti-dumping and countervailing duty investigations, the conduct of those investigations, final
anti-dumping and countervailing duty determinations as well as definitive anti -dumping and
countervailing duties imposed as results of those inve stigations, as well as any notices, annexes,
decision memorandum, orders, amendments, or other instruments issued by the Commission in
connection with the anti-dumping and countervailing duty measures as identified in the Appendix.
This request also concerns subsequent periodic and sunset reviews of the anti-dumping and
countervailing duty orders in the proceedings at issue as specified in the Appendix . This request
encompasses any other subsequent closely connected measure relating to the anti-dumping and
countervailing duty orders in the proceedings at issue, including subsequent periodic review
determinations and subsequent sunset review determinations.
II. LEGAL BASIS
A. Anti-Dumping Measures
The anti-dumping measures on wind towers, deep drawn stainless steel sinks and railway wheels
appear to be inconsistent with Australia'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 Australia did not calculate the costs on the basis of the records kept by the exporters or
WT/DS603/1 • G/L/1391 • G/ADP/D138/1 • G/SCM/D133/1

producers under investigation and b ecause Australia did not properly determine the costs of
production;
2. Article 2.1 and 2.2 of the Anti -Dumping Agreement and Article VI:1 of the GATT 1994,
because in constructing the normal value, Australia 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, Australia included costs not associated with the production and sale of the product
under consideration;
4. Article 2.4 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement, because Australia did not make a fair comparison
between the export price and the normal value and because Australia did not make due allowance
for differences which affect price comparability;
5. Article 2.2 and 2.2.2 of the Anti -Dumping Ag reement, because Australia 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 Agreement and Article VI:2 of the GATT 1994, because the
amount of the anti -dumping duty imposed by the Australia exceeds the margin of dumping as
established under Article 2 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement and Article VI:1 of the GATT 1994.
B. Countervailing Measures
China considers that the conduct of the identified countervailing duty investigation on deep drawn
stainless steel sinks, as well as the countervailing duty determinations, orders, and any definitive
countervailing duties imposed pursuant thereto, are inco nsistent with the obligations of Australia
under the SCM Agreement. More specific, China considers t he Commission has applied unlawful
standards and methodologies for these purposes in determining financial contribution, specificity,
and benefit in respect of the alleged provision of inputs for less than adequate remuneration in the
proceedings at issue as detailed below:
1. Article 1.1(a)(1) of the SCM Agreement, because the Commission incorrectly determined, or
did not have a sufficient basis to determin e financial contribution within the meaning of that
provision;
2. Article 1.1(b) and Article 14(d) of the SCM Agreement, because the Commission improperly
found that the alleged provision of goods for less than adequate remuneration conferred a benefit
upon the recipient, and improperly calculated the amount of any benefit allegedly conferred,
including, its erroneous findings that prevailing market conditions in China were "distorted" as the
basis for rejecting actual transaction prices in China as benchmark;
3. Article 2 .1(c) of the SCM Agreement, because the Commission failed to make a proper
determination on the basis of positive evidence that the alleged provision of input goods for less
than adequate remuneration was specific to an enterprise or indu stry or group of enterprises or
industries;
4. Articles 11.1, 11.2, and 11.3 of the SCM Agreement, because:
4.1 the Commission initiated countervailing duty investiga tions in respect of the alleged
provision of inputs for less than adequate remuneration, in the absence of sufficient evidence in
the petition to determine the financial contribution within the meaning of Article 1.1(a)(1) of the
SCM Agreement, and in the absence of a sufficient review of the petition by the Commission in
respect of this allegation;
4.2 the Commission initiated countervailing duty investigations in respect of the alleged
provision of inputs for less than adequate remuneration, in the absence of sufficient evidence in
the petition to support an allegation that any such subsidy would be specific under Article 2.1(c)
of the SCM Agreement, and in the absence of a sufficient review of the petition by the
Commission in respect of this allegation.
WT/DS603/1 • G/L/1391 • G/ADP/D138/1 • G/SCM/D133/1

The above-mentioned measures of the Commission appear to nullify or impair, directly or indirectly,
the benefits accruing to China under the mentioned agreements.
China reserves the right to raise additional claims and legal matters in respect of the mentioned
issues, including any amendment, replacement, extension, implementation measures or other
related measures, in the course of the consultations.
China looks forward to receiving a response to the present request from Australia and to
establishing a mutually convenient date for consultations.
WT/DS603/1 • G/L/1391 • G/ADP/D138/1 • G/SCM/D133/1

Appendix

A. Wind Towers 1

No. Case Type Legal Instruments Date (latest update)
1 Investigation EPR 221: Notice and Final Report concerning the Dumping of Wind Towers
Exported from China
16 April 2014
2 Continuation EPR 487: Findings and Final Report of the Inquiry into the Continuation of
Anti-Dumping Measures Applying to Wind Towers Exported from China
27 March 20192

B. Deep Drawn Stainless Steel Sinks3

No. Case Type Legal Instruments Date (latest update)
1 Investigation EPR 238: Notice and Final Report concerning the Alleged Dumping of Deep
Drawn Stainless Steel Sinks Exported from the People's Republic of China
and Alleged Subsidisation of Dee p Drawn Stainless Steel Sinks Exported
from China

26 March 2015
2 Review EPR 352 21 November 2016
3 Review EPR 459 15 June 2018
4 Review EPR 461 12 October 2018
5 Continuation EPR 517 28 February 2020

C. Railway Wheels4

No. Case Type Legal Instruments Date (latest update)
1 Investigation EPR 466: Notice and Final Report concerning the Alleged Dumping of
Certain Railway Wheels Exported from China
16 July 2019