|
Implementation back to top
DS136
& DS162: US — Anti-Dumping Act of 1916
The US recalled that legislation repealing the 1916 Act was pending in
both the US Senate and the US House of Representatives. The EC said that
the US had not shown any progress on implementation since 29 January 2004.
Also, the EC would like the US to indicate at the DSB meeting the next
steps taken towards implementation. The EC recalled that it may use its
right to suspend concessions. Japan said that it gravely regretted that on
26 May, a Federal District Court in its final judgment imposed on a
Japanese company a payment of US$ 30 million damages under this Act. Japan
strongly urged the US to take actions so that Japanese companies will not
incur further damages. Japan emphasized that if the US fails to take the
appropriate measures, it would have no other choice than the reactivation
of the arbitration process.
DS176: US — Section 211 Omnibus Appropriations Act of 1998
The US stated that the US administration was continuing to work with the
US Congress to find the appropriate statutory measures that would resolve
this dispute. The EC said that the “US-Cuba Trademarks Protection Act”
would ensure the protection of the intellectual propriety rights both in
Cuba and in the US. Also, the EC recalled that the US government had been
an active sponsor of the TRIPS. Cuba asked until when its government and
other involved parties would have to face this indifference and contempt
from the US government. Furthermore, Cuba wanted to know how long they
would have to wait for the US to fulfil the recommendations and rulings of
the DSB.
DS184: US — Anti-dumping measures on certain hot-rolled steel products
from Japan
The US provided a status report informing that the US administration was
continuing to work with the US congress. Japan said that while the
deadline for implementation was 31 July 2004, the US did not show any
progress in its implementation.
DS217
&
DS234: US — Continued Dumping and Subsidy Offset Act of 2000
The US recalled that legislation to bring the Continued Dumping and
Subsidy Offset Act into conformity with US WTO obligations was introduced
in the US Senate on 19 June 2003 and in the House of Representatives on 10
March 2004.
Among the complaining parties, Canada, Chile, EC, Chile, Japan and India
deplored that the US continued to fail to repeal the “Byrd Amendment”.
Canada reminded the US that repealing of the US WTO inconsistent measure
was a preferred solution rather than retaliation. Japan urged the US
Administration to repeal this Act, so that Japan and other complaining
parties do not have to suspend concessions and other obligations to the
US.
Request for panel establishment back to top
DS308: Mexico — Tax measures on soft drinks and other beverages
At this DSB meeting, for the first time the panel request (DS308/4) for
the Mexican Tax measures on soft drinks and other beverages had appeared
on its agenda. The US claimed that the Mexican tax measures discriminate
against beverages and syrups made with any sweetener other than cane
sugar.
Mexico disagreed with the US request judging it to premature. The DSB
agreed to revert to this matter.
DS310: US — Determination of the International Trade Commission in hard
red spring wheat from Canada
For the first time, Canada requested the establishment of a panel
regarding the injury determination of the US International Trade
Commission in hard red spring wheat originating in Canada (DS310/2).
Canada considered that the US had violated its obligations under the
Anti-Dumping Agreement and the Subsidies and Countervailing Measures
Agreement.
In response, the US expressed its disappointment that Canada had decided
to request a panel for this matter.
The US blocked this first panel request by Canada. The DSB agreed to
revert to this matter.
Next meeting back to top
The next meeting of the DSB is scheduled for 20 July 2004.
|
