Working Papers

Working papers in this section received financial support from the Research Fund of the Seoul National University Asia-Pacific Law Institute, donated by the Seoul National University Law Foundation.


Chang, Seung-Wha, WTO Consistencies of Applications of "Adverse Facts Available"under Antidumping/Countervailing Duty Laws - An Example of the Trade Preference Expansion Act of 2015 (2017)

아태법
11 Mar 2020
Views 588

장승화, 반덤핑/상계관세법상 "불리한 가용 정보 적용"의 WTO 합치성: 미국 2015년 무역특혜확장법(TPEA) 적용을 중심으로, 국제경제법연구 제15권 제3호, 2017.11, pp.7-44.

Chang, Seung-Wha, WTO Consistencies of Applications of "Adverse Facts Available"under Antidumping/Countervailing Duty Laws - An Example of the Trade Preference Expansion Act of 2015 -,Korean journal of international economic law Vol.15 No.3, 2017.11, pp.7-44

Abstract

 WTO Consistencies of Applications of Adverse Facts Available under Antidumping/Countervailing Duty Laws - An Example of the Trade Preference Expansion Act of 2015 - 

Chang, Seung-Wha Seoul National University School of Law 

The Commerce Department of the United States has aggressively applied ‘adverse facts available’ in the context of antidumping/countervailing duty investigations since it enacted the Trade Preference Expansion Act of 2015. As a result, since last year, major Korean exporting enterprises have become subject to antidumping/countervailing duties as high as 60% ad valorem. Representative examples are antidumping measures against Hyundai Heavy Industry(HHI)’s large transmitters and countervailing measures against POSCO’s cold/hot-rolled steel. This paper aims to interpret the requirements and legal standards for applications of adverse facts available under Article 6.8(Annex 2) of Antidumping Agreement and Article 12.7 of the Subsidies Agreement in light of the WTO Appellate Body’s jurisprudence. Then, this paper demonstrates why and how the U.S. antidumping and countervailing measures against HHI and POSCO, respectively, constitute violations of the above WTO provisions. Also, this paper analyzes whether the TPEA, which provides for legal basis of such aggressive resort to AFA provisions, may be challnged as such in the WTO dispute settlement. This paper closes with some trade policy suggestions for the Korean government. 

<Keywords> U.S. Trade Preference Expansion Act of 2015, Adverse facts available, Antidumping Agreement Article 6.8 and Annex 2, Subsidies Agreement Article 12.7, Total AFA, Posco Countervailing duties on Cold/Hot-rolled Steel, Hyundai Heavy Industry Antidumping duties on large transmitters, As such challenges 

1 Gwanak-ro, Gwanak-gu, Seoul 08826, Korea / Tel : 02-880-4119 / E-mail : aplaw@snu.ac.kr

COPYRIGHT 2015 Seoul National University Asia·Pacific Law Institute ALL RIGHT RESERVED.

                                                                                                                                                                                                         Personal Information and Privacy Settings are available at link .