Skip to main content
Trade

WT/DS294 - United States - Laws, regulations and methodology for calculating dumping margins ('zeroing')

WTO dispute settlement case - Launched by the EU

Country or region
  • United States
Trade topics
  • Dispute settlement
Context
  • WTO - Case launched by the EU

Summary of the case

  • Complaint by: EU
  • Complaint against: United States
  • Third parties: Argentina, Brazil, China, Hong Kong, India, Japan, Korea, Republic Of, Mexico, Norway, Taiwan (Chinese Taipei), Turkey

In the original dispute the EU challenged the US use of zeroing methodologies when establishing the overall dumping margin. The request covered the US law, implementing regulation, DOC methodologies, dumping and injury determinations on specific cases. On 9 May 2006, the DSB condemned the US for (1) using zeroing in 15 specific original investigations, and for maintaining in such investigations a zeroing methodology which is WTO incompatible per se and for (2) using zeroing in 16 specific reviews (the Appellate Body rejected the challenge of the US zeroing methodology in reviews because of insufficient facts on the Panel's record). The US had until 9 April 2007 to implement the DSB ruling.

The use of the zeroing methodology in original investigations has stopped since 22 February 2007 but the US had not taken action to implement the ruling on the 16 specific reviews. The EU challenged the failure of the US to implement in a 21.5 panel, which was established in September 2007.

At its meeting on 11 June 2009, the Dispute Settlement Body adopted the Appellate Body report and the compliance Panel report, as modified by the Appellate Body report, but the US still failed to bring itself into compliance.

In view of this persistent refusal of the US to comply with WTO obligations, the EU formally notified the WTO on 29 January 2010 of its request to receive authorization to retaliate against trade from the US. The US objected to the level of suspension of concessions or other obligations requested by the EU on 12 February 2010. Accordingly, the matter was referred to arbitration.

Since the US announced its intention to comply the arbitration was suspended. On 6 February 2012 the US set out in a Roadmap its intention to remove with effect for the future the WTO-inconsistent zeroing methodology from the calculation of the anti-dumping duty (cash deposit) rates of all known affected EU exporters. The EU withdrew its request for sanctions against the US on 22 June 2012 after the US fulfilled the steps under the Roadmap.

Relevant WTO provision: AD(1, 2.4, 3, 5.8, 9.3,9.4, 9.5, 11, 18.3, 18.4); GATT(VI:1, VI:2); WTO (XVI:4) DSU Art.8.7,11,19 and 21.5

Status

On 22 June 2012 the EU withdrew its request for sanctions against the US on 22 June 2012 after the US fulfilled the steps under a Roadmap of 6 February 2012 to remove with effect for the future the WTO-inconsistent zeroing methodology from the calculation of the anti-dumping duty (cash deposit) rates of all known affected EU exporters.

  • Consultations requested: 12 June 2003
  • Panel requested: 17 February 2004
  • Panel established: 19 March 2004
  • Panel report circulated: 31 October 2005
  • Appeal requested: 17 January 2006
  • Appeal report circulated: 18 April 2006
  • Panel/Appellate Body report adopted: 09 May 2006
  • Implementation deadline: 09 April 2007
  • Recourse to Articles:
    • 12 February 2010 - Recourse to Art. 22. Recourse to Art. 22 – US
    • 29 January 2010 - Recourse to Art. 22. Recourse to Art. 22 – EU
    • 14 September 2007 - Recourse to Art. 21.5.

Documents

EU submissions and other related documents

Full case details and WTO documents on the WTO website

Latest news

  • News article

In a ruling published on 5 March 2024, the World Trade Organization (WTO) upheld the EU’s ability to take environmental and climate-based action under the Renewable Energy Directive (‘RED II’).

  • 2 min read

Latest events