UNITED STATES – ANTI-DUMPING ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEWS AND OTHER MEASURES RELATED TO IMPORTS OF CERTAIN ORANGE JUICE FROM BRAZIL
Document: Request for Consultations by Brazil
Date: 1 December 2008
Document codes: WT/DS382/1; G/L/872; G/ADP/D75/1
Complainant: Brazil
Respondent: U.S.
Third parties: Argentina, EU, Japan, South Korea, Mexico, Taiwan, Thailand
Dispute stage: Mutually Agreed Solution
Agreements cited: Art. 2.1, 2.4.2, 2.4, 2  Anti-dumpingArt. VI:1, VI:2, II:1  GATT 1994Art. XVI:4  Agreement Establishing the World Trade OrganizationArt. 9.3  Anti-dumping

UNITED STATES – ANTI-DUMPING ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEWS AND OTHER
MEASURES RELATED TO IMPORTS OF CERTAIN ORANGE JUICE
FROM BRAZIL

Request for Consultations by Brazil

 The following communication, dated 27 Novemb er 2008, from the delegation of Brazil to the
delegation of the United States and to the Chairman of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated in
accordance with Article 4.4 of the DSU.

Upon instructions from my authorities, I hereby request consultations with the Government of
the United States pursuant to Article 4 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the
Settlement of Disputes ("DSU"), Article XXII:1 of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994
("GATT 1994"), and Articles 17.2 and 17.3 of the Agreement on Implementation of Article VI of
GATT 1994 ("Anti-Dumping Agreement"), with regard to the matters listed hereunder:
The following determinations of the United States Department of Commerce (USDOC)
concerning the imports of certain orange juice from Brazil, case nº A-351-840:
• the antidumping administrative review for the period from 24 August 2005 to
28 February 2007, and the final results thereof, in " Certain Orange Juice from Brazil:
Final results and Partial Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review" ,
published in 73 Fed. Reg. 46,584 (11 August 2008), as well as any assessment
instructions and cash deposit requirements issued pursuant to them (the "Issues and
Decision Memorandum", dated 5 August 2008, which discusses issues raised in this
review, confirms that "zeroing" was app lied by the USDOC in this review and
specifically rejects the relevance of WTO A ppellate Body precedents for administrative
reviews conducted by the USDOC);
• any on-going or future antidumping administrativ e reviews, and the final results thereof,
related to the imports of certain orange juice from Brazil (case nº A-351-840), as well as
any assessment instructions and cash deposit requirements issued pursuant to them.
Any actions taken by United States Customs and Border Protection (USCBP) to collect
definitive anti-dumping duties at duty assessment rate s established in periodic reviews covered by the
preceding paragraph, including through the issuance of USCBP liquidations instructions and notices.
The following US laws, regulations, administrative procedures, practices and methodologies:

• the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, (the "A ct"), in particular sections 736, 751,
771(35)(A) and (B), and 777A(c) and (d);
• the US Statement of Administrative Action that accompanied the Uruguay Round
Agreements Act, H.R. Doc. No. 103-316, vol. I;
• the implementing regulations of USDOC, codified at Title 19 of the United States Code
of Federal Regulations, 19 CFR Section 351, in particular sections 351.212(b),
351.414(c), and (e);
• the Import Administration Antidumping Manual (1997 edition), including the computer
program(s) to which it refers;
• the general procedures and methodology employed by the United States to determine
dumping margins in administrative reviews, whereby USDOC, in comparing weighted
average normal value with transaction price of individual export transactions, treats as
zero negative intermediate comparison results (i.e. situations in which the individual
export price is greater than the weighted average normal value). Such methodology is
commonly referred to as "simple zeroing" and/or the US "zeroing procedures."
Brazil is concerned that the laws, regulations, administrative procedures, practices and
methodologies described above are as such, and as a pplied in the determina tions and actions listed
above, inconsistent with the obligations of the United States under the Marrakesh Agreement
Establishing the World Trade Organization ("WTO Agreement") and the Agreements annexed
thereto. The provisions with which these measures appear to be inconsistent include, but are not
limited to, the following:
• Articles II, VI:1 and VI:2 of the GATT 1994;
• Articles 1, 2.1, 2.4, 2.4.2, 9.1, 9.3, 11.2 and 18.4 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement;
• And Article XVI:4 of the WTO Agreement.
Brazil reserves the right to raise additional claims and legal matters during the course of the
consultations. It looks forward to receiving the Un ited States Government’s response and to setting a
mutually convenient date for consultations.
Please accept, Excellency, the assurances of my highest consideration.