Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- United States – Sunset Review of Anti-Dumping Duties on Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products from Japan (WT/DS244): Report of the Appellate Body
- United States – Sunset Review of Anti-Dumping Duties on Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products from Japan (WT/DS244): Report of the Panel
- Cumulative Index of Published Disputes
United States – Sunset Review of Anti-Dumping Duties on Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products from Japan (WT/DS244): Report of the Appellate Body
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 13 December 2017
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- United States – Sunset Review of Anti-Dumping Duties on Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products from Japan (WT/DS244): Report of the Appellate Body
- United States – Sunset Review of Anti-Dumping Duties on Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products from Japan (WT/DS244): Report of the Panel
- Cumulative Index of Published Disputes
Summary
INTRODUCTION
Japan appeals certain issues of law and legal interpretations in the Panel Report, United States – Sunset Review of Anti-Dumping Duties on Corrosion- Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products from Japan (the “Panel Report”). The Panel was established to consider a complaint by Japan against the United States regarding the continuation of anti-dumping duties on certain corrosion-resistant carbon steel flat products from Japan following the conduct of a five-year, or “sunset”, review of those duties.
On 29 July 1992, USDOC initiated an anti-dumping investigation covering, inter alia, certain corrosion-resistant carbon steel flat products from Japan. As a result of this investigation, USDOC issued an order on 19 August 1993, imposing definitive anti-dumping duties on those corrosion-resistant steel products at the rate of 36.41 percent ad valorem for KSC, NSC, and “all others”. On 1 September 1999, USDOC published a notice of initiation of a sunset review of the CRS order. In the final results of that review, USDOC determined that revo- cation of the CRS order “would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping”. USITC subsequently determined that revocation of the CRS order “would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury to an industry in the United States within a reasonably foreseeable time.” Accordingly, the United States did not revoke the CRS order.
Before the Panel, Japan argued that certain provisions of the Tariff Act, the SAA, the implementing regulations, and the Sunset Policy Bulletin were, both “as such” and as applied in the CRS sunset review, inconsistent with Articles VI and X of the GATT 1994, Articles 2, 3, 5, 6, 11, 12, and 18 of the Anti- Dumping Agreement, and Article XVI:4 of the WTO Agreement.
In the Panel Report, circulated to Members of the WTO on 14 August 2003, the Panel found that the United States laws, regulations and policies challenged by Japan are not inconsistent with the Anti-Dumping Agreement, the GATT 1994, or the WTO Agreement, either as such or as applied in the CRS sunset review.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Dispute Settlement Reports 2004:1 , pp. 3 - 84Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2006
- 2
- Cited by