Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Foreword
- A Note on the American Law Institute
- American Law Institute Reporters
- 1 Introduction
- 2 European Communities – Anti-Dumping Duties on Imports of Cotton-Type Bed Linen from India (AB-2000-13, WT/DS141/AB/R:DSR 2003: III, 965): Recourse to Article 21.5 of the DSU by India
- 3 United States – Sunset Review of Anti-Dumping Duties on Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products From Japan (AB-2003-5, WT/DS244/AB/R): A Legal and Economic Analysis of the Appellate Body Ruling
- 4 United States – Continued Dumping and Subsidy Offset Act of 2000 (WT/DS217/AB/R: DSR 2003:I,375)
- 5 European Community – Antidumping Duties on Malleable Cast Iron Tube or Pipe Fittings from Brazil (WT/DS219/AB/R: DSR 2003:VI, 2613)
- 6 United States – Final Determination with Respect to Certain Softwood Lumber from Canada (AB-2003-6, WT/DS257/AB/R)
- 7 United States – Definitive Safeguard Measures on Imports of Certain Steel Products (WT/DS259; WT/DS252; WT/DS248; WT/DS249; WT/DS251; WT/DS258; WT/DS254; WT/DS253: DSR 2003:VII, 3117)
- 8 Mexico – Measures Affecting Telecommunications Services (WT/DS204/R): A Comment on “El mess in TELMEX”
- 9 European Communities – Conditions for the Granting of Tariff Preferences to Developing Countries (WT/DS246/AB/R)
- 10 United States – Anti-Dumping Act of 1916 (Original Complaint by the European Communities) – Recourse to Arbitration by the United States under 22.6 of the DSU, WT/DS136/ARB, 24 February 2004: A Legal and Economic Analysis
- 11 Japan – Measures Affecting the Importation of Apples (AB-2003-4): One Bad Apple? (DS245/AB/R): A Comment
- Index
- References
4 - United States – Continued Dumping and Subsidy Offset Act of 2000 (WT/DS217/AB/R: DSR 2003:I,375)
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 06 July 2010
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Foreword
- A Note on the American Law Institute
- American Law Institute Reporters
- 1 Introduction
- 2 European Communities – Anti-Dumping Duties on Imports of Cotton-Type Bed Linen from India (AB-2000-13, WT/DS141/AB/R:DSR 2003: III, 965): Recourse to Article 21.5 of the DSU by India
- 3 United States – Sunset Review of Anti-Dumping Duties on Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products From Japan (AB-2003-5, WT/DS244/AB/R): A Legal and Economic Analysis of the Appellate Body Ruling
- 4 United States – Continued Dumping and Subsidy Offset Act of 2000 (WT/DS217/AB/R: DSR 2003:I,375)
- 5 European Community – Antidumping Duties on Malleable Cast Iron Tube or Pipe Fittings from Brazil (WT/DS219/AB/R: DSR 2003:VI, 2613)
- 6 United States – Final Determination with Respect to Certain Softwood Lumber from Canada (AB-2003-6, WT/DS257/AB/R)
- 7 United States – Definitive Safeguard Measures on Imports of Certain Steel Products (WT/DS259; WT/DS252; WT/DS248; WT/DS249; WT/DS251; WT/DS258; WT/DS254; WT/DS253: DSR 2003:VII, 3117)
- 8 Mexico – Measures Affecting Telecommunications Services (WT/DS204/R): A Comment on “El mess in TELMEX”
- 9 European Communities – Conditions for the Granting of Tariff Preferences to Developing Countries (WT/DS246/AB/R)
- 10 United States – Anti-Dumping Act of 1916 (Original Complaint by the European Communities) – Recourse to Arbitration by the United States under 22.6 of the DSU, WT/DS136/ARB, 24 February 2004: A Legal and Economic Analysis
- 11 Japan – Measures Affecting the Importation of Apples (AB-2003-4): One Bad Apple? (DS245/AB/R): A Comment
- Index
- References
Summary
Introduction
On January 16, 2003, the WTO Appellate Body (AB) issued its report on the appeal by the United States (US) of the Panel decision in United States – Continued Dumping and Subsidy Offset Act of 2000. The report concerns the consistency of the United States Continued Dumping and Subsidy Offset Act of 2000 (the “CDSOA,” or the so-called Byrd Amendment) with several WTO provisions. This legislation requests the federal state to distribute proceeds from antidumping and countervailing duties to all US economic operators that have supported a request previously submitted to the ratione materiae competent US authority to investigate alleged dumping or subsidization. The appeal was directed against the Panel's finding that the Byrd legislation was inconsistent with the US obligations under the WTO Antidumping Agreement (AD), and the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM). A total of 11 complainants (Australia, Brazil, Canada, Chile, the European Community, India, Indonesia, Japan, Korea, Mexico, and Thailand), and five additional third parties (Argentina, Costa Rica, Hong Kong (China), Israel, and Norway), evidence the interest among WTO Members in the issues at stake in the dispute.
The subject matter of the dispute was not the application of the Byrd legislation in a particular instance, but the legislation as such, irrespective of any application. The AB dealt with two substantive issues:
To what extent does the Byrd Amendment constitute a specific action against dumping, impermissible under Arts. 18.1 AD and 32.1 SCM?
To what extent does the United States, by transferring duty payments made by exporters to the market to domestic firms, comply with the obligations under Arts. 5.4 AD and 11.4 SCM?
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The WTO Case Law of 2003The American Law Institute Reporters' Studies, pp. 52 - 86Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2006