EGYPT – ANTI-DUMPING DUTIES ON MATCHES FROM PAKISTAN
Document: Request for Consultations by Pakistan
Date: 24 February 2005
Document codes: WT/DS327/1; G/L/731; G/ADP/D61/1
Complainant: Pakistan
Respondent: Egypt
Third parties: China, EU, Japan, U.S.
Dispute stage: Mutually Agreed Solution
Agreements cited: Art. 6.1, 6.1.3, 6.4, 6.5, 6.2, 6.9, 6.13, 12.1, 12.2, 2.1, 2.2, 6.6, 6.8, 2.4, 3.1, 3.2, 3.4, 3.5  Anti-dumpingArt. VI:1  GATT 1994Art. 1, 18  Anti-dumpingArt. XXIII:1(a), VI:2  GATT 1994

EGYPT – ANTI-DUMPING DUTIES ON MATCHES FROM PAKISTAN

Request for Consultations by Pakistan

 The following communication, dated 21 February 2005, from the delegation of Pakistan to the
delegation of Egypt and to the Chairman of the Dis pute Settlement Body, is ci rculated in accordance
with Article 4.4 of the DSU.

 My authorities have instructed me to request consultations with the Arab Republic of Egypt
("Egypt") pursuant to Article 4 of the Unde rstanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the
Settlement of Disputes ("DSU"), Article XXIII:1 of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994
("GATT") and Article 17 of the Agreement on Im plementation of Article VI of the General
Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 (the "AD Ag reement") with respect to the imposition of
definitive anti-dumping duties on imports of ma tches in boxes from Pakistan under Decree
No. 667/2003 dated 18 November 2003, as well as any amendments or extensions to this Decree.

2. These measures appear to be inconsistent with Egypt's obligations under the GATT and the
AD Agreement. Pakistan is particularly concerne d about the following aspects of the imposition of
these anti-dumping duties and the investigation leading thereto:

(1) Egypt's failure to furnish the applica tion to the known Pakistani exporters and the
Government of Pakistan (Articles 6.1.3 and 6.4 of the AD Agreement).

(2) Egypt's granting of confidential treatment to information contained in the domestic industry's
application without requiring the applicants to provide showing of good cause for such a
treatment and without requiring the applicants to furnish non-confidential summaries "in
sufficient detail to permit a reasonable unders tanding of the substance of the information
submitted in confidence", or to give any i ndication that such information could not be
summarized and the reasons why summarization was not possible (Article 6.5, Article 6.5.1
and Article 6.5.2 of the AD Agreement).

(3) Egypt's failure to disclose the essential facts under consideration that formed the basis of the
decision to impose definitive measures in Egypt's Essential Facts and Conclusions Report and
to provide the Pakistani exporters a full opportuni ty to defend their interests while taking due
account of the difficulties faced by them (Article 6.2, Article 6.4, Article 6.9 and Article 6.13
of the AD Agreement).

(4) In its determination of dumping:

 (i) Egypt's resort to constructed value to determine the normal value for the Pakistani
exporter Mohsin Match Factory (Pvt.) Ltd. ("Mohsin") without properly establishing
that no sales of the like product were made in the ordinary course of trade or that
domestic sales do not permit a proper compar ison (Article VI:1 of the GATT, and
Article 2.1, Article 2.2, and Article 6.8 read with Annex II of the AD Agreement).

 (ii) Egypt's failure to use actual data from the Pakistani exporter Khyber Match Factory
(Pvt) Ltd. ("Khyber") in calculating the ad ministrative, selling, and general costs
("SG&A costs") and profits for this company in the context of constructing its normal
value (Article VI:1 of the GATT, and Article 2.2, Article 2.2.1.1, Article 2.2.2, and
Article 6.8 read with Annex II of the AD Agreement).

 (iii) Egypt's failure to use a reasonable me thod to calculate SG&A costs and profits for
Khyber and Mohsin (Article 2.2.2 and Ar ticle 6.8 read with Annex II of the
AD Agreement).

 (iv) Egypt's failure to properly determin e the constructed normal value for Khyber and
Mohsin (Article VI:1 and Article VI:2 of the GATT, and Article 2.1, Article 2.2 and
Article 6.8 read with Annex II of the AD Agreement).

 (v) Egypt's failure to properly determin e the export price for Khyber and Mohsin
(Article VI:1 and VI:2 of the GATT, a nd Article 2.1 and Article 2.2 of the AD
Agreement).

 (vi) Egypt's failure to make a fair comp arison between the normal value and the export
price for Khyber and Mohsin, including, Egyp t's failure to make a due allowance for
the duty drawback claimed by both companies (Article VI:1 and Article 2.4 of the
AD Agreement).

(5) In its determination of the existence of material injury to the domestic industry:

 (i) Egypt's failure to base its examination of the volume of the dumped imports, the
effect of the dumped imports on prices in the domestic market and the consequent
impact of these imports on domestic pr oducers on positive evidence because of its
reliance on inaccurate information regarding the volume of dumped imports (Article
3.1, Article 3.2 and Article 6.6 of the AD Agreement).

 (ii) In its analysis of price effects, Egypt' s failure to examine whether the dumped imports
resulted in significant undercutting, suppression or de pression of domestic prices
(Article 3.1 and Article 3.2 of the AD Agreement).

 (iii) Egypt's failure to base its examination of the impact of the dumped imports on the
domestic industry on positive evidence regard ing the relevant economic factors and
indices having a bearing on the state of the industry; in particular, Egypt's evaluation
of the market share of the domestic industry based on inflated figures for total market
volume resulting from inaccurate estimates of the volume of imports from Pakistan
(Article 3.1, Article 3.4 and Article 6.6 of the AD Agreement).

 (iv) Egypt's reliance on information collect ed from only one domestic producer to analyse
certain economic factors and indices having a bearing on the state of the domestic
industry, despite the participation of ot her domestic producers in the investigation
(Article 3.1 and 3.4 of the AD Agreement).

(6) In its determination that there is a causa l link between the alleged dumping and the alleged
material injury to the domestic industry, Egyp t's failure to examine any known factors other
than dumped imports which at the same time we re injuring the domestic industry; including
Egypt's failure to examine inter alia : (i) the impact of imports from third countries on the
domestic industry, (ii) the effects of the re moval of a safeguard measure on the products
subject to investigation; and (iii) the effects of financial and managerial difficulties faced by
the largest domestic producer (Article 3.1 and 3.5 of the AD Agreement).

(7) Egypt's failure to provide in the final report containing the determination of dumping, injury
and causal link all relevant information on the matters of fact and law and reasons, which led
to the imposition of the definitive anti-dumping duty (Article 12.2 and Article 12.2.2 of the
AD Agreement).
3. It appears to Pakistan that the foregoing ca nnot be reconciled with Article VI of the GATT,
Articles 1 and 18 of the AD Agreement, and the specific provisions of the AD Agreement cited above.
Pakistan considers that the benefits accruing to it directly or indirectly under the WTO Agreement
may be nullified or impaired within the meaning of Article XXIII:1(a) of the GATT.
4. Pakistan looks forward to receiving your reply to this request at your earliest convenience. I
propose that the date and venue of these consultations be agreed between our two Missions.