WTO issued on Oct. 19 the panel report regarding US anti-dumping duties on Chinese imports.
The report concluded that with respect to targeted dumping and single rate presumption, the 13 anti-dumping measures taken by the US against Chinese products were not consistently with WTO’s rules, and WTO supported China’s major claims.
A person in charge of the Department of Treaty and Law, China’s Ministry of Commerce, said China welcomed the conclusions of WTO’s panel report.
The person said China launched the claims three years ago and the case involved a number of industries, including electromechanical, light industry, and metals and minerals, with an overall annual export value of about 8.4 billion US dollars, concerning significant trade benefits of China.
The anti-dumping case started on Dec. 3, 2013, and products involved include industrial products, such as oil well pipe, aluminum extrusions and diamond saw blade, as well as agricultural products, such as warmwater shrimp.
The US is the country that launched the most anti-dumping investigations and measures in 1980-2013.
The Global Trade Protection Report shows that the US has launched the most anti-dumping proceedings, while China is the biggest target of the proceedings.
The tire industry is the one that received the most anti-dumping and anti-subsidy investigations by the US.
According to the Anti-dumping Agreement of WTO, a country has to meet three conditions to take anti-dumping measures against the other country:
First, there are dumping actions;
Secondly, the dumping actions do led to physical harm or threat, or hamper relevant industries;
Thirdly, there is causality between dumping and impairment.
According to the definition of dumping, if the export price of a product is lower than ordinary price, it will be concluded as dumping. The gap between export price and ordinary price is called dumping margin.
Therefore, it takes three steps to decide whether dumping exists: find out the export price; find out the ordinary price; and compare the two prices.
With respect to the anti-dumping claims by the US against China’s tire products, the dumping assessments are on the brink of the criteria.
Industry insiders said that the US’s anti-dumping and anti-subsidy assessments against Chinese tires are opaque and its definition of dumping is assertive. Such acts severely violated China’s interests.
For the US companies and government, anti-dumping investigation against China’s tire products is no longer a threat to local importers and foreign exporters, but a real tool to protection its trade.
Chinese authorities are assessing the panel report of WTO and will prepare for the following works with respect to WTO’s dispute settlement procedure.
