Skip to main content
Trade

WT/DS494 - EU - Cost Adjustment Methodologies and Certain Anti-Dumping Measures on Imports from Russia (Second complaint)

WTO dispute settlement case - Complaint against the EU

Country or region
Russia
Trade topics
Dispute settlement
Dispute settlement
WTO - Complaint against the EU

Summary of the case

  • Complaint by: Russian Federation
  • Complaint against: EU
  • Third parties: Argentina; Australia; Brazil; Canada; China; Egypt; India; Indonesia; Japan; Korea, Republic of; Mexico; Norway; Ukraine; United States; Vietnam

The Russian Federation (Russia) challenges the following measures of the European Union (the EU):

  • the first subparagraph of Article 2(3), the second subparagraph of Article 2(3) and the second subparagraph of Article 2(5) of Regulation (EU) No 2016/1036 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2016 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Union (OJ L 176, 30.6.2016, p. 21) (the EU Basic Anti-Dumping Regulation);
  • an alleged EU methodology of systematically making cost adjustments for the determination of the costs of production in the country of origin for investigated companies in a manner inconsistent with the above provisions of the EU Basic Anti-Dumping Regulation and certain provisions of the WTO Anti-Dumping Agreement;
  • certain aspects of the third expiry review of the anti-dumping duties on imports of ammonium nitrate originating in Russia (Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 999/2014 of 23 September 2014 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of ammonium nitrate originating in Russia following an expiry review pursuant to Article 11(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 (OJ L 280, 24.9.2014, p. 19); and certain aspects of the partial interim review, which resulted in Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/1722 of 14 November 2018 amending Implementing Regulation (EU) No 999/2014, and;
  • certain aspects of the expiry review of the anti-dumping duties on imports of certain welded tubes and pipes of iron or non-alloy steel originating in Russia (certain welded tubes and pipes) (Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/110 of 26 January 2015 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of certain welded tubes and pipes of iron or non-alloy steel originating in Belarus, the People's Republic of China and Russia and terminating the proceeding for imports of certain welded tubes and pipes of iron or non-alloy steel originating in Ukraine following an expiry review pursuant to Article 11(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 (OJ L 20, 27.1.2015, p. 6)).

Relevant WTO provisions:

Art. 2.2, 2.2.1.1, 2.2.1, 11.3, 1, 2.1, 2.4, 2.6, 3.1, 3.2, 3.4, 3.5, 4.1, 5.3, 6.1.2, 5.4, 9.1, 9.3, 18.1 of the Anti-dumping Agreement

Art. I:1, II:1(a), II:1(b), VI:1, VI:2(a) of the GATT 1994

Art. 11.1, 6.8, Annex II, 2.3, 6.10 of the Anti-dumping Agreement

Art. VI:2, Annex I of the GATT 1994

Art. 6.4, 11.4, 6.1.3, 6.2, 6.5, 6.5.1, 6.9, 12.2, 12.2.2 of the Anti-dumping Agreement

Status

Procedure

On 7 May 2015, Russia requested consultations with the EU. On 7 November 2016, Russia requested the establishment of a panel. On 16 December 2016, the WTO Dispute Settlement Body established the panel. The panel was composed on 17 December 2018. On 24 July 2020, the panel report was circulated to all WTO Members. On 28 August 2020, the EU submitted a notification of an Appeal. On 2 September 2020, Russia submitted a notification of its Appeal. The appeal procedure is pending.

Panel report

The panel rejected the claims that the specific provisions in the EU Basic Anti-Dumping Regulation are inconsistent with WTO law, and additionally, it rejected Russia’s attempt to bring into the dispute the EU new trade defence legislation, notably Article 2(6a) introduced by Regulation 2017/2321 and Article 7(2a) introduced by Regulation 2018/825. The panel ruled in favour of the EU in the majority of the claims as regards the ammonium nitrate anti-dumping measures, in particular on product scope matters, the likelihood of recurrence of injury and dumping determinations, confidential treatment, use of facts available, definitive disclosure, statement of reasons and others. The panel declined to rule on claims concerning determinations made before Russia acceded to the WTO.

The panel however accepted the claim about an alleged EU methodology of systematically making cost adjustments for the determination of the costs of production in the country of origin and its WTO inconsistent as such. The panel also accepted Russia’s claims as regards the application of the cost adjustment in the expiry review of the welded tubes and pipes anti-dumping measures and as regards procedural aspects of the third expiry review on the ammonium nitrate anti-dumping measures, in particular, the initiation of the review, the access to the initiation request by the Union industry and instances of access to file and confidential treatment.

Documents

EU submissions and other related documents

Full case details and WTO documents on the WTO website

Latest news

  • News article

WTO rules on renewable energy dispute

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’).

  • Press release

EU wins WTO compliance action against US in ripe olives dispute

The World Trade Organization (WTO) has today confirmed that the EU was right to challenge the US for not complying with a ruling relating to ripe olives from Spain. Today's WTO panel report presents again a clear and full win for the EU.

Latest events