CHINA – COUNTERVAILING AND ANTI-DUMPING DUTIES ON GRAIN ORIENTED FLAT-ROLLED ELECTRICAL STEEL FROM THE UNITED STATES
Document: Request for Consultations by the United States
Date: 20 September 2010
Document codes: WT/DS414/1; G/L/927; G/SCM/D85/1; G/ADP/D85/1
Complainant: U.S.
Respondent: China
Third parties: Argentina, EU, Honduras, India, Japan, South Korea, Saudi Arabia, Vietnam, Russia
Dispute stage: Implementation & Compliance
Agreements cited: Art. VI  GATT 1994Art. 1  Anti-dumpingArt. 10, 11.2, 11.3, 12.7, 12.8, 22.3, 12.7, 12.8, 22.3, 22.5, 15.1, 15.2  Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)Art. 6.9, 12.2.2, 6.8, Annex II, 6.4, 6.5.1, 3.1, 3.2  Anti-dumping

CHINA – COUNTERVAILING AND ANTI-DUMPING DUTIES ON
GRAIN ORIENTED FLAT-ROLLED ELECTRICAL STEEL
FROM THE UNITED STATES

Request for Consultations by the United States

 The following communication, dated 15 September 2010, from the delegation of the United
States to the delegation of China and to the Chairman 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
People's Republic of China ("China") pursuant to Articles 1 and 4 of the Understanding on Rules and
Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes , Article XXIII:1 of the General Agreement on
Tariffs and Trade 1994 ("GATT 1994"), Article 30 of the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing
Measures ("SCM Agreement") (to the extent that Artic le 30 incorporates Article XXIII of the GATT
1994), and Article 17.3 of the Agreement on Implementation of Article VI of the General Agreement
on Tariffs and Trade 1994 ("AD Agreement") with respect to China's measures imposing
countervailing duties and anti-dumping duties on grain oriented flat-rolled electrical steel ("GOES")
from the United States, as set forth in Ministry of Commerce of the People's Republic of China
("MOFCOM") Notice No. 21 [2010], including its annexes. China's measures appear to be
inconsistent with China's obligations under th e provisions of the GATT 1994, the SCM Agreement
and the AD Agreement.

 In particular, China's countervailing and an ti-dumping measures on GOES from the United
States appear to be inconsistent with th e following provisions of the GATT 1994, the SCM
Agreement and the AD Agreement.

1. Articles 10 and 19 of the SCM Agreement, be cause China improperly determined that
government purchases under US Buy American Laws conferred a "benefit".

2. Article 12.8 of the SCM Agreement, because Ch ina failed to disclose the "essential facts"
underlying its determinations.

3. Article 12.7 of the SCM Agreement, because Ch ina improperly based its determinations on
the facts available.

4. Article 22.3 of the SCM Agreement, because Chin a failed to provide in sufficient detail the
findings and conclusions it reached on all issues of fact and law it considered material.
WT/DS414/1, G/L/927,
G/SCM/D85/1, G/ADP/D85/1

5. Article 22.5 of the SCM Agreement because Chin a failed to make available all relevant
information on the matters of fact and law and re asons which have led to the imposition of final
measures.

6. Article 11.2 of the SCM Agreement because: (a) the application for a countervailing duty
investigation failed to contain information reaso nably available to the applicant regarding the
existence of a financial contribution, a benefit, sp ecificity, injury and causation; and (b) there was not
sufficient evidence in the application to justify the initiation of an investigation.

7. Article 11.3 of the SCM Agreement because China failed to review appropriately the
accuracy and adequacy of the evidence provided in the application.

8. Articles 12.3 and 12.4.1 of the SCM Agreement, because China failed to provide, or require
the applicant to provide, adequate non-confidential summaries of allegedly confidential information.

9. Article 22.2(iii) of the SCM Agreement, b ecause China included in its countervailing duty
investigation the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 ("Recovery Act") and laws of the
various US states dealing with the government purchase of goods.

10. Articles 15.1, 15.2, 15.5, 12.8, of the SCM Agreement, and Articles 3.1, 3.2, 3.5, 6.9 and 12.2
of the AD Agreement, because: (a) China's analysis of the effect of imports under investigation and
alleged causal link was not based upon an objective examination on the basis of positive evidence;
(b) China failed to provide in sufficient detail th e findings and conclusions reached on all issues of
fact and law it considered material; and (c) China failed to disclose the "essential facts" underlying its
determinations.

11. Article 10 of the SCM Agreement as a conseque nce of the breaches of the SCM Agreement
described above.

12. Article 1 of the AD Agreement as a conseque nce of the breaches of the AD Agreement
described above.

13. Article VI of the GATT 1994.

 China's measures also appear to nullify or impa ir the benefits accruing to the United States
directly or indirectly under the cited agreements.

 We look forward to receiving your reply to the present request and to fixing a mutually
convenient date for consultations.