1. SURVEILLANCE OF IMPLEMENTATION OF RECOMMENDATIONS ADOPTED BY THE DSB
A. UNITED STATES – SECTION 211 OMNIBUS APPROPRIATIONS ACT OF 1998: STATUS REPORT BY THE UNITED STATES (WT/DS176/11/ADD.93)
• Mr. Chairman, the United States provided a status report in this dispute on August 19, 2010, in accordance with Article 21.6 of the DSU.
• As has been noted, a number of legislative proposals that would implement the DSB’s recommendations and rulings in this dispute were introduced in the First Session of the current (111th) Congress. The Second Session of the 111th Congress began in January.
• The Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives held a hearing on certain of these proposals on March 3, 2010. In addition, the U.S. Administration is working with Congress to implement the DSB’s recommendations and rulings.
[Second intervention:]
• In response to the comments about systemic concerns about the dispute settlement system, as we’ve said on numerous occasions, the facts simply do not support Members’ assertions or justify such systemic concerns. The record is clear: the United States has come into compliance, fully and promptly, in the vast majority of its disputes.
• As for the remaining few instances where our efforts to do so have not yet been entirely successful, the United States has been working actively towards compliance in furtherance of the purpose of the dispute settlement system.
• In relation to efforts towards compliance in this dispute, the United States has previously noted that a number of legislative proposals have been introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate. These include H.R. 188, H.R. 1530, H.R. 1531, H.R. 2272, S. 1089, H.R. 1103, and S. 1234. These bills would repeal or clarify Section 211.
B. UNITED STATES – ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES ON CERTAIN HOT-ROLLED STEEL PRODUCTS FROM JAPAN: STATUS REPORT BY THE UNITED STATES (WT/DS184/15/ADD.93)
• The United States provided a status report in this dispute on August 19, 2010, in accordance with Article 21.6 of the DSU.
• As of November 23, 2002, the U.S. authorities had addressed the DSB’s recommendations and rulings with respect to the calculation of antidumping margins in the hot-rolled steel antidumping duty investigation at issue in this dispute. Details were provided in the document numbered WT/DS184/15/ADD.3.
• With respect to the recommendations and rulings of the DSB that were not already addressed by the U.S. authorities, the U.S. Administration will work with the U.S. Congress with respect to appropriate statutory measures that would resolve this matter.
C. UNITED STATES – SECTION 110(5) OF THE US COPYRIGHT ACT: STATUS REPORT BY THE UNITED STATES (WT/DS160/24/ADD.68)
• The United States provided a status report in this dispute on August 19, 2010, in accordance with Article 21.6 of the DSU.
• The U.S. Administration will continue to confer with the European Union, and to work closely with the U.S. Congress, in order to reach a mutually satisfactory resolution of this matter.
D. EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES – MEASURES AFFECTING THE APPROVAL AND MARKETING OF BIOTECH PRODUCTS: STATUS REPORT BY THE EUROPEAN UNION (WT/DS291/37/ADD.31)
• The United States thanks the EU for its status report and its statement today.
• Although the EU has recently approved several biotech applications pending in its approval pipeline, the EU has not resolved fundamental problems in the operation of its regulatory system for biotech products.
• A number of pending biotech applications are still affected by lengthy delays, including two of the products which the DSB found to be unduly delayed in breach of the EU’s WTO obligations.
• In addition, even though the DSB found nine bans adopted by individual EU member States on products approved at the EU level to be in breach of the EU’s WTO obligations, EU member States continue to adopt and maintain such bans.
• As the EU noted in its status report, U.S. and EU officials held discussions last month to discuss matters related to the EU’s regulation of biotech products.
• The United States appreciates the efforts taken by the Commission in organizing the meeting. The United States found the discussions to be constructive.
• The United States is reviewing the information received during the discussions, and will continue to monitor developments regarding the EU’s biotech approval system.
E. UNITED STATES – MEASURES RELATING TO ZEROING AND SUNSET REVIEWS: STATUS REPORT BY THE UNITED STATES (WT/DS322/36/ADD.11)
• Mr. Chairman, the United States provided a status report in this dispute on August 19, 2010, in accordance with Article 21.6 of the DSU.
• As noted in the status report, the United States has taken steps to implement the DSB’s recommendations and rulings in this dispute. With respect to the outstanding issues, the United States will continue to consult with interested parties in order to address those issues.
F. UNITED STATES – CONTINUED EXISTENCE AND APPLICATION OF ZEROING METHODOLOGY: STATUS REPORT BY THE UNITED STATES (WT/DS350/18/ADD.8)
• Mr. Chairman, the United States provided a status report in this dispute on August 19, 2010, in accordance with Article 21.6 of the DSU.
• As noted in that status report, the United States has taken steps to implement the DSB’s recommendations and rulings in this dispute. With regard to the remaining issues, the United States will continue to consult with interested parties.
G. UNITED STATES – LAWS, REGULATIONS AND METHODOLOGY FOR CALCULATING DUMPING MARGINS (“ZEROING”): STATUS REPORT BY THE UNITED STATES (WT/DS294/38/ADD.2)
• Mr. Chairman, the United States provided a status report in this dispute on August 19, 2010, in accordance with Article 21.6 of the DSU.
• As noted in that status report, the United States has already taken a number of steps to implement the DSB’s recommendations and rulings, and the United States will continue to consult with interested parties with regard to the remaining issues.
• Finally, as mentioned in previous DSB meetings, the EU requested authorization from the DSB to suspend concessions or other obligations in this dispute, and the United States objected to the EU’s request. Therefore, pursuant to Article 22.6 of the DSU, the matter has been referred to arbitration.
2. UNITED STATES – CONTINUED DUMPING AND SUBSIDY OFFSET ACT OF 2000: IMPLEMENTATION OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS ADOPTED BY THE DSB
A. STATEMENTS BY THE EUROPEAN UNION AND JAPAN
• As the United States has already explained at previous DSB meetings, the President signed the Deficit Reduction Act into law on February 8, 2006. That Act includes a provision repealing the Continued Dumping and Subsidy Offset Act of 2000. Thus, the United States has taken all actions necessary to implement the DSB’s recommendations and rulings in these disputes.
• We recall, furthermore, that Members, including the EU and Japan, have acknowledged during previous DSB meetings that the 2006 Deficit Reduction Act does not permit the distribution of duties collected on goods entered after October 1, 2007.
• We therefore do not understand the purpose for which the EU and Japan have inscribed this item today.
• With respect to comments regarding further status reports in this matter, the United States fails to see what purpose would be served by further submission of status reports repeating, again, that the United States has taken all actions necessary to implement the DSB’s recommendations and rulings in these disputes.
• Finally, with respect to Japan’s renewal of measures suspending concessions, the United States will be reviewing carefully the measures taken by Japan. As we have observed previously, the DSB only authorized the suspension of concessions or other obligations as provided in the Award of the Arbitrator.
3. UNITED STATES – ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES ON POLYETHYLENE RETAIL CARRIER BAGS FROM THAILAND
A. STATEMENT BY THE UNITED STATES ON IMPLEMENTATION OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS ADOPTED BY THE DSB
• The United States is pleased to report that it has implemented the recommendations and rulings of the DSB in the dispute Anti-Dumping Measures on Polyethylene Retail Carrier Bags from Thailand.
• The United States and Thailand had agreed to a reasonable period of time of six months from the adoption of the panel report. The reasonable period of time expired August 18, 2010.
• The U.S. Department of Commerce recalculated the margins of dumping from the investigation for two respondents, providing offsets for non-dumped comparisons. The recalculated margin for one of the respondents was zero, and the Department has revoked the order with respect to that respondent. In addition, the Department recalculated the all-others rate.
• The implementation of the Department’s new determination, including the revocation with respect to one respondent, was effective July 28, 2010. Therefore, the United States has implemented the DSB recommendations and rulings prior to the expiry of the reasonable period of time in this dispute.