Congress approved a bill that authorizes the Commerce Department to apply countervailing duty (CVD) trade remedies, retroactive to May, 2006, in cases of unfairly subsidized imports from nonmarket economies (NMEs) such as China and Vietnam. It also authorizes Commerce to adjust antidumping duties on unfairly traded NME imports on which CVD penalties are imposed if it can be shown that domestic subsidies have inflated the dumping margin, and if the Commerce Department is able to estimate an adjustment.
This legislative “fix” became necessary, in the view of its supporters, by a ruling of the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit last December in GPX Int’l Tire Corp. v. United States. The court found that CVD law is not applicable to imports from NMEs. In that decision the court relied heavily on the legislative intent of Congress, finding that —
in amending and reenacting the trade laws in 1988 and 1994, Congress adopted the position that countervailing duty law does not apply to NME countries. Although Commerce has wide discretion in administering countervailing duty and antidumping law, it cannot exercise this discretion contrary to congressional intent.
By enacting this new law, Congress has in effect rebutted the court’s interpretation of its intent. Whether or not it meant to do so in 1988 and 1994, Congress has sided with the petitioners and Commerce Department officials who believe that NME status offers no protection from CVD action.
Another bill that the Senate approved and is awaiting action in the House of Representatives would provide for the application of CVDs against imports from countries that manipulate their currencies. For an analysis of this bill, its prospects, and the larger disputes in which it is a part see WTR Vol.28 No.11 (April 2, 2012).
The following are the most significant terms
in the Dictionary of Trade Policy regarding
|Actionable Subsidy||Material Injury|
|Administering Authority||National Security|
|Administrative Protective Order||National Treatment|
|Administrative Review||Non-Actionable Subsidy|
|Advisory Centre on WTO Law||Non-Market Economy|
|Best Information Available||Prohibited Subsidy|
|Bounty or Grants||Reciprocity|
|Dispute Settlement Body||Security Exception|
|General Exception||Surrogate Country|
|Good Offices, Conc'n & Mediation||Suspension Agreement|
|Injury Test||Suspension of Concessions|
|International Trade Administration||Trade-Remedy Laws|
|Less Than Fair Value|
|:: Trade-Remedies and Disputes in the WTO||:: U.S. Trade-Remedy Laws||:: U.S. Reciprocity Laws|
trade-remedy and dispute articles of GATT 1947 are
(antidumping and countervailing duties),
or impairment), and
(non-application, now replaced by
XIII of the WTO Agreement).
These are the main U.S. trade-remedy laws:
Other laws have
been largely superceded by other laws or agreements or are otherwise
rarely invoked: Agricultural Disruption (Section 22); no
Dumping and Subsidy Offset Act of 2000 (the Byrd Amendment)
Other laws have been largely superceded by other laws or agreements or are otherwise rarely invoked:
Agricultural Disruption (Section 22); no longer effective
Continued Dumping and Subsidy Offset Act of 2000 (the Byrd Amendment)
While the term "reciprocity" is taken in the WTO to mean the overall balance of concessions that countries make to one another, in the United States it is used to mean laws that can lead to the threat or imposition of sanctions on countries that are found to violate U.S. trade rights.
The principal U.S. reciprocity laws are as follows:
See also the 2012 executive order creating the Interagency Trade Enforcement Center.