|
Panel establishment
back to top
DS403:
Philippines — Taxes on Distilled Spirits
A panel was established at the US
second-time request (WT/DS403/4) which challenged the Philippines tax
regime on distilled spirits.
The US, the Philippines and the EU
agreed that the panel established on 19 January 2010 (WT/DS396
— see DSB summary)
to review the EU complaint on the same issue will also examine the US
complaint.
The US said spirits distilled in
the Philippines were taxed at a low rate, while other distilled spirits
were taxed at rates from approximately 10 to 40 times higher. The US urged
the Philippines to take action soon to level the playing field for
imported and domestic spirits in the Philippines market.
The Philippines was disappointed
that the US had chosen to renew its panel request. The Philippines said
that consultations held with the US clarified the non-discriminatory and
impartial nature of its tax regime on distilled spirits.
China, Australia, Mexico, Chinese
Taipei, Thailand, the US, India and the EU reserved their third-party
rights.
Panel
requests deferred back to top
DS402:
United States — Use of Zeroing in Anti-Dumping Measures Involving Products
from Korea
Korea introduced its first time
request for a panel to examine the use of zeroing by the US in
anti-dumping investigations (WT/DS402/3). The US blocked Korea's request.
Korea said that consultations with
the US held since 24 November 2009 failed to resolve the dispute. Korea
said that zeroing had repeatedly been found inconsistent with the
Anti-Dumping Agreement. Korea added that the US had not contested those
rulings.
The US was disappointed that Korea
had chosen to move forward with a panel request. The US said that it
discontinued zeroing in the context of average-to-average comparisons in
investigations and that it was therefore not in a position to agree to a
panel.
DS404:
United States — Anti-dumping Measures on Certain Shrimp from Viet Nam
Viet Nam requested a panel
concerning a number of anti-dumping measures imposed by the US on certain
frozen warm water shrimp from Viet Nam and the use of zeroing
(WT/DS404/5). The US blocked Viet Nam's request.
This was the first time Viet Nam
had requested a panel since it joined the WTO in January 2007. Viet Nam
said that the central issue involved in its request was zeroing and
specifically zeroing in periodic reviews under US law. Viet Nam added that
the US measures at issue were inconsistent with WTO rules as well as with
Viet Nam's protocol of accession (WT/L/662) and paragraphs 254 & 255 of
the Working Party report on Viet Nam's accession (WT/ACC/VNM/48).
The US was disappointed that Viet
Nam had chosen to move forward with a panel request. The US raised several
concerns regarding Viet Nam's panel request, claiming for example that
some items were not the subject of consultations, and that the original
anti-dumping investigation as well as the first review of the anti-dumping
order were each initiated following applications received prior to Viet
Nam's accession to the WTO. The US said that it was therefore not in a
position to agree to a panel and strongly urged Viet Nam to reconsider its
decision to pursue a panel.
DS405:
European Union — Anti-Dumping Measures on Certain Footwear from China
China introduced its first time
request for a panel to examine anti-dumping measures imposed by the EU on
Chinese footwear (WT/DS405/2).
The EU blocked China's request.
China said that the EU anti-dumping
regulation which formed part of the legal basis for the imposition of
anti-dumping measures on Chinese footwear was inconsistent with WTO rules
as well as with China's Protocol of accession. China said that
consultations with the EU failed to resolve its concerns and that no
mutually satisfactory solution could be reached.
The EU recalled that anti-dumping
measures were not about protectionism but about fighting unfair trade. The
EU was convinced of the strength of its case and said that consultations
with China had not been held on a large number of claims. The EU said it
had offered a second round of consultations with China and concluded that
the panel request was premature. The EU opposed the establishment of a
panel.
Implementation back to top
DS366:
Colombia — Indicative Prices and Restrictions on Ports of Entry
Columbia gave its 1st status report
(WT/DS366/15) regarding its implementation of the DSB recommendations. In
this dispute, Panama challenged Columbia's restrictive measures imposed on
Panama's imports. The DSB adopted the Panel report on 20 May 2009 (WT/DS366/R
and
Corr.1). The reasonable period of time for Columbia to
implement the ruling ended on 4 February 2010.
Columbia announced it had fully implemented the
DSB ruling within the reasonable period of time and said that it was now
in full compliance with its WTO obligations. Columbia said it made various
substantial changes to the measures challenged by Panama.
Panama said it would thoroughly and carefully
assess Columbia's measures, to be certain that they overcome the
difficulties in this dispute. Panama was still not clear on how the new
measures will work and would ask for some more information to Colombia.
Panama would follow up and monitor Columbia's new measures to make sure
they are in accordance with WTO rules and the DSB recommendations. After
careful consideration, Panama would decide whether it needed to take this
case further.
Byrd
Amendment case back to top
DS217:
United States — Continued Dumping and Subsidy Offset Act of 2000
Japan and the EC requested this
item to be placed on the agenda.
In accordance with the DSB
authorization to suspend concessions to the US, the EU announced its
decision to adjust the level of sanctions against the US, for the 5th
year, and brought it up to USD95,38 million, applicable as of 1 May 2010.
The EU said that the level of retaliation reflected the proportionate
increase of the amount distributed to US companies from anti-dumping and
countervailing duties collected on EU products.
The US regretted that the EU had
increased its level of sanctions. The US said that it had taken all steps
necessary to comply with the DSB ruling and failed to see how the
continued suspension of concession would further that purpose. The US said
it was perplexed with this decision and will review the action taken by
the EU. The US added that the DSB only authorized the suspension of
concessions as provided by the arbitrator.
European Communities — Export
subsidies: statements by Australia, Brazil and Thailand back to top
This item was on the agenda at the
request of Australia, Brazil and Thailand. In a joint statement delivered
by Australia, the three members recalled their concerns about the recent
EU decision to export additional sugar above its annual scheduled quantity
commitment. The three countries urged the EU to provide the necessary
technical information and to justify the WTO consistency of its decision.
The EU recalled that this decision
was temporary and announced that the export of 0.5 million tonnes of sugar
was now exhausted. The EU added that it did not renew this temporary
decision. The EU said that the decision fully respected its international
obligations and WTO commitments. The EU was ready to continue explaining
its temporary decision to export sugar.
Other business back to top
Under other Business, China and the
US made statements on China's implementation in the dispute related to the
protections and the enforcement of China's intellectual property regime
DS362.
In this dispute, the DSB adopted
the panel report on 19 March 2009 (WT/DS362/R).
The reasonable period of time for China to implement the ruling ended on
20 March 2010.
China recalled that at the last DSB
meeting it announced that it had completed all necessary steps to
implement the DSB recommendations. China provided further information
related to the different legislative steps taken to implement the DSB
recommendations. China approved two decisions that came into force on 1
April 2010 revising its intellectual property regime in accordance with
the WTO. China concluded that with the coming into force of these two
decisions, it had brought its measures into conformity with the DSB
recommendations.
The US did not share China's assessment that it was in full compliance
with WTO rules. The US said it had begun working with China bilaterally on
addressing certain questions. The US looked forward to further discussions
with China on this issue.
Next meeting back to top
The next meeting of the DSB will be
held on 18 may 2010.
|
