-九游会旗舰厅

��ࡱ�>�� bd����a�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� @ ��;bjbjvv .(r<r<;�������2222222f�����fb"2���������!�!�!�!�!�!�!$t#r�%n�!2� ��� � �!22����!� .2�2��!� �!re t22e!�� �?](���':� �! "0b"� �4&a�4&e!ff22224&2e!p��� x ' �����!�!ff���2ff�18 march 2011 lesser duty rule contact group the members of the contact group are australia, canada, the eu, india, japan, and the united states. the group met internally on 22 february and 14, 15, 17 and 18 march and with other delegations on 24 february and 15 march. the group met with china, egypt, new zealand, south africa, turkey and the fans (hong kong china, japan, korea, mexico, chinese taipei and thailand participated) and received written comments from peru. in broad terms, there remain clear differences of view over whether there should be a mandatory ldr. among those supporting a mandatory ldr, arguments included that a mandatory ldr was in line with the objective of the anti-dumping agreement to remedy injury, not dumping; and that it is economically efficient and fosters fair competition. among those opposed to a mandatory ldr the arguments included that it potentially calls into question the injury standard in the anti-dumping agreement; it is unclear how it would be calculated and is necessarily subjective and burdensome to investigating authorities. ldr also created inequity in the system by providing the greatest benefits to the greatest dumpers and thereby putting companies dumping to a lesser degree at a disadvantage. more specifically, the group�s internal discussions and discussions with other wto members raised the following range of views. this is not an exhaustive list nor is there any weighting given to these issues. regardless of whether the ldr is mandatory or permissive, whether there should be more guidance on how a lesser duty sufficient to remove the injury is determined. whether there should be a strict rule or provide guidance on a range of possible methodologies. irrespective of whether the ldr is made mandatory or remains a desirability, whether there must be guidance on the methodology used by a member. whether a methodology could be considered on a case-by-case basis. if the desirability clause in the current text of article 9.1 was retained, and guidance added on specific methodologies, whether the �desirability� clause was effectively moving closer to a mandatory provision. whether there should be disclosure provisions and the ability by interested parties to comment. whether there should be guidance or rules on procedural aspects relating to determining a lesser duty. a mandatory ldr would require a definition for the determination of an injury margin. in the absence of a definition of an injury margin, ldr would be difficult to calculate and would have procedural consequences which might be substantive. the ldr could impact on the standard for the determination of injury. the ldr could have implications for, or redefine, injury as currently provided in article 3. would a suggestion that one could quantify injury for ldr purposes have consequences for the demands to quantify other factors and injury? would price be the only element in determining injury? would it raise other aspects such as public interest considerations? how would ldr address the determination of injury in relation to the volume of dumped imports? whether there would be difficulty in counteracting future injury. would an ldr mean something other than a determination of injury, for example, �possible� injury? whether there are practical difficulties in determining a non-injurious price, for example, where there may be several models and categories of products. whether there should be a hierarchy of approaches in terms of possible methodologies for calculating an injury margin. whether there needed to be a sequencing of determining injury under article 3 followed by a qualitative analysis for ldr purposes under article 9.1. whether there should be reciprocity between members using ldr, either from a multilateral perspective or in the context of bilateral trade agreements. for example, if a member applies the ldr, its exporters should also expect to have ldr applied in anti-dumping cases involving their exports. among the issues raised in this context was the consistency with article 9.2 which provides that anti-dumping duties and price undertakings shall be imposed on a non-discriminatory basis; whether this would require the use of the same methodology or mutual recognition of methodologies where members may not have the same methodology for determining a lesser duty. an alternative concept was only using ldr for exporters (and/or importers) that cooperated during an investigation as a mechanism for encouraging cooperation. among the issues raised in this context was whether such an approach would be permissive or discretionary; on what basis would determination of cooperation be made; whether this would blur the broader rules relating to cooperation and non-cooperation; how this would work if an exporter exported to many importers (and not all importers cooperated). the issue of whether there should be a transparency requirement, as even where a ldr was not mandatory, it could be subject to dispute settlement and could discourage the uptake of ldr. whether or not a particular methodology is used, it should be explained if there is a change in practice. delmim������� � � � � � � � g h 8 9 � � e � � � � � � p t � � � nm�������#_uz��$v��=��������./67d������������������������������������������������������������������������������h�' h�y@ h�6h�v h�h�v hl�h]�h�yxh�k9h{}9h�]�h�bh�x�hef;n/1� � g h 8 9 � � � � n�_�v�=�.����������������������� & fgd�v  & fgd�]� & fgd�gd�k9$a$gd�]�gdef;$a$gd�]�;�drtu|��������\7y����������*7u|�����������3��* ./4����!$z[chn�������!9l��69;����������������������������������������������������������������������������������hgu�h~v1h9a[h�x�h]�hef;h�v r.t�\��7y�u����![��:;���������������������gdef; & fgd�x� & fgd9a[ & fgd�]�,1�h��/ ��=!�"�#��$��%����� ���@@��@ normalcj_hajmh sh th da���d default paragraph fontri���r  table normal�4� l4�a� (k���(no list ; (����/1��gh89����n�_�v�= � . t � \ � � 7 y � u � ���![��:=l;0l;0�l;0�l;0�l;0�l;0�l;0�l;0�l;0�l;0�l;0�l;0�l;0�l;0�l;0�l;0�l;0�l;0�l;0�l;0�l;0�l;0�l;0�l;0�l;0�l;0�l;0�l;0�l;0�l;0�l;0�l;0�l;0�l;0�l;0�l;0�l;0�l;0�l;0�l;0�l;0�l;0�l;0�l;0�d;.;;�8�@�����������0�( � ��b �s ���� ?���"j��|"k���l��w"m��`"n�tt"o�\�"p���q�\c#r�t�s�4{�t�lau���#v�d`w�$��x�<y�\oz� �{�d/�|��/�}����~� 0��|���<����0��������0���t|���,������"���j����b#���j���c#��\2�vvaaqqxx��''..55bbppeoovv}}������=      ! __ggvv}}��,,33@@nnvvntt{{��������=  !b *�urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags�country-region�9!*�urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags�place�8"*�urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags�date� �18�2011�3�day�month�year"! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! � � � � � � =�� ��=3333delmim��dd��pp��e�pt������uz� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � [ 7 y � � */4!z!:l9::=klqrlmoq��ij����yz������dgjkopwx`acdghnoqr{|�������������������������������������ux������z{� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �         % & ) * - . 5 6 8 9 a b g h o p s t z \ > ? d e j k m n x y [ \ i j p q w y ~  � � "#* 349:#$()./45bcefqrtuy[()./5689:;9:=$a�( ?���������z"%1��@�����������*b� �����������=y� z���������h�h���^�h`���ojqjo(�h�h���h�8���^�8`���ojqj^jo(�h�ho�h����^�`���ojqjo(�h�h���h�� ���^�� `���ojqjo(�h�h���h�� ���^�� `���ojqj^jo(�h�ho�h�x���^�x`���ojqjo(�h�h���h�h���^�h`���ojqjo(�h�h���h����^�`���ojqj^jo(�h�ho�h�����^��`���ojqjo(�h�h��h�h����h^�h`���ojqjo(�h�h��h�8����8^�8`���ojqj^jo(�h�ho�h�����^�`���ojqjo(�h�h���h�� ����� ^�� `���ojqjo(�h�h���h�� ����� ^�� `���ojqj^jo(�h�ho�h�x����x^�x`���ojqjo(�h�h���h�h����h^�h`���ojqjo(�h�h���h�����^�`���ojqj^jo(�h�ho�h�������^��`���ojqjo(�h�h��h�h����h^�h`���ojqjo(�h�h���h�8����8^�8`���ojqj^jo(�h�ho�h�����^�`���ojqjo(�h�h���h�� ����� ^�� `���ojqjo(�h�h���h�� ����� ^�� `���ojqj^jo(�h�ho�h�x����x^�x`���ojqjo(�h�h���h�h����h^�h`���ojqjo(�h�h���h�����^�`���ojqj^jo(�h�ho�h�������^��`���ojqjo(�h�h��h�h����h^�h`���ojqjo(�h�h���h�8����8^�8`���ojqj^jo(�h�ho�h�����^�`���ojqjo(�h�h���h�� ����� ^�� `���ojqjo(�h�h���h�� ����� ^�� `���ojqj^jo(�h�ho�h�x����x^�x`���ojqjo(�h�h���h�h����h^�h`���ojqjo(�h�h���h�����^�`���ojqj^jo(�h�ho�h�������^��`���ojqjo(�h�h��z"%1=y�*b$a�(��������������������                                    ���v � �p�b�' ~v1�6�k9{}9ef;�y@�}g9a[�yx1p�l��x��]�]�@�gu�=�@��i��;�@��unknown������������g��z ��times new roman5��symbol3&� �z ��arial?5� �z ��courier new;��wingdings"1���h�������7 $7 $!������24113�q���hx ��?����������������������ef;��draft 17 march 2011 genet 003kreier    �������oh�� '��0�������� $ @ l x dpx���draft 17 march 2011 genet 003 normal.dotkreier2microsoft word 10.0@f�#@r{�]��@�e(��@�e(��7����՜.�� ,��0 hp���� ���� � ��dfat$ 1� draft 17 march 2011 title �������� !"#$%&'()* ,-./0����2345678����:;<=>?@��������c����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������root entry�������� �f�ga](��e�data ������������1table����p&worddocument����.(summaryinformation(������������1documentsummaryinformation8��������9compobj������������j������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ ���� �fmicrosoft word document msworddocword.document.8�9�q
网站地图