Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Use of zeroing in the W-T comparison methodology and targeted dumping (US anti-dumping measures on large residential washers from Korea (DS464))

Use of zeroing in the W-T comparison methodology and targeted dumping (US anti-dumping measures... <jats:sec> <jats:title content-type="abstract-subheading">Purpose</jats:title> <jats:p>The purpose of this paper is to review the use of zeroing in the weighted average-to-transaction (W-T) comparison methodology and targeted dumping under the anti-dumping agreement by reviewing the WTO appellate body’s rulings on the use of zeroing in the W-T comparison methodology in the USA – anti-dumping measures on large residential washers from Korea (DS464). Although the appellate body has ruled that the use of zeroing would not be allowed in the weighted-average-to-weighted-average comparison methodology nor in the transaction-to-transaction comparison methodology, it has not ruled on whether the use of zeroing is allowed in the W-T comparison methodology prior to the instant case.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title content-type="abstract-subheading">Design/methodology/approach</jats:title> <jats:p>This paper mainly analyzes the WTO appellate body report on the USA – anti-dumping and countervailing measures on large residential washers from Korea’s rulings (DS464) and reviews other WTO appellate body reports on the use of zeroing in anti-dumping measures. This paper reviews the relevant provisions of the WTO anti-dumping agreement and the US Anti-Dumping Act, and also referred prior papers on the use of zeroing.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title content-type="abstract-subheading">Findings</jats:title> <jats:p>The appellate body upheld the panel’s finding that the USA’s use of zeroing in the W-T comparison methodology is inconsistent with Article 2.4.2 of the anti-dumping agreement. As zeroing inflates dumping margins, increases the amount of duty collected, and hinders the expansion of trade in goods. The use of zeroing should be prohibited or permitted only in very limited circumstances.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title content-type="abstract-subheading">Social implications</jats:title> <jats:p>Zeroing, which has been the subject of many WTO disputes between the USA and foreign governments, causes dumped sales to be masked by fair value. The WTO appellate body has consistently condemned the US practice of zeroing over the past decade as an unfair commerce practice. The instant case and this paper will help to stop the practice of zeroing in anti-dumping measures.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title content-type="abstract-subheading">Originality/value</jats:title> <jats:p>The text of Article 2.4.2 does not clearly prohibit the use of zeroing. The paper reviews the WTO appellate body’s rulings on the use of zeroing in the W-T comparison methodology in the USA – anti-dumping measures on large residential washers from Korea (DS464). The appellate body report was very recently circulated, on September 9, 2016. The appellate body has not ruled on whether the use of zeroing is allowed in the W-T comparison methodology prior to the instant case. This paper, first, concludes that the W-T comparison methodology is inconsistent with Article 2.4.2 of the anti-dumping agreement.</jats:p> </jats:sec> http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Journal of Korea Trade CrossRef

Use of zeroing in the W-T comparison methodology and targeted dumping (US anti-dumping measures on large residential washers from Korea (DS464))

Journal of Korea Trade , Volume 21 (2): 107-124 – Jun 5, 2017

Use of zeroing in the W-T comparison methodology and targeted dumping (US anti-dumping measures on large residential washers from Korea (DS464))


Abstract

<jats:sec>
<jats:title content-type="abstract-subheading">Purpose</jats:title>
<jats:p>The purpose of this paper is to review the use of zeroing in the weighted average-to-transaction (W-T) comparison methodology and targeted dumping under the anti-dumping agreement by reviewing the WTO appellate body’s rulings on the use of zeroing in the W-T comparison methodology in the USA – anti-dumping measures on large residential washers from Korea (DS464). Although the appellate body has ruled that the use of zeroing would not be allowed in the weighted-average-to-weighted-average comparison methodology nor in the transaction-to-transaction comparison methodology, it has not ruled on whether the use of zeroing is allowed in the W-T comparison methodology prior to the instant case.</jats:p>
</jats:sec>
<jats:sec>
<jats:title content-type="abstract-subheading">Design/methodology/approach</jats:title>
<jats:p>This paper mainly analyzes the WTO appellate body report on the USA – anti-dumping and countervailing measures on large residential washers from Korea’s rulings (DS464) and reviews other WTO appellate body reports on the use of zeroing in anti-dumping measures. This paper reviews the relevant provisions of the WTO anti-dumping agreement and the US Anti-Dumping Act, and also referred prior papers on the use of zeroing.</jats:p>
</jats:sec>
<jats:sec>
<jats:title content-type="abstract-subheading">Findings</jats:title>
<jats:p>The appellate body upheld the panel’s finding that the USA’s use of zeroing in the W-T comparison methodology is inconsistent with Article 2.4.2 of the anti-dumping agreement. As zeroing inflates dumping margins, increases the amount of duty collected, and hinders the expansion of trade in goods. The use of zeroing should be prohibited or permitted only in very limited circumstances.</jats:p>
</jats:sec>
<jats:sec>
<jats:title content-type="abstract-subheading">Social implications</jats:title>
<jats:p>Zeroing, which has been the subject of many WTO disputes between the USA and foreign governments, causes dumped sales to be masked by fair value. The WTO appellate body has consistently condemned the US practice of zeroing over the past decade as an unfair commerce practice. The instant case and this paper will help to stop the practice of zeroing in anti-dumping measures.</jats:p>
</jats:sec>
<jats:sec>
<jats:title content-type="abstract-subheading">Originality/value</jats:title>
<jats:p>The text of Article 2.4.2 does not clearly prohibit the use of zeroing. The paper reviews the WTO appellate body’s rulings on the use of zeroing in the W-T comparison methodology in the USA – anti-dumping measures on large residential washers from Korea (DS464). The appellate body report was very recently circulated, on September 9, 2016. The appellate body has not ruled on whether the use of zeroing is allowed in the W-T comparison methodology prior to the instant case. This paper, first, concludes that the W-T comparison methodology is inconsistent with Article 2.4.2 of the anti-dumping agreement.</jats:p>
</jats:sec>

Loading next page...
 
/lp/crossref/use-of-zeroing-in-the-w-t-comparison-methodology-and-targeted-dumping-wmAhfGGMoK
Publisher
CrossRef
ISSN
1229-828X
DOI
10.1108/jkt-03-2017-0026
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

<jats:sec> <jats:title content-type="abstract-subheading">Purpose</jats:title> <jats:p>The purpose of this paper is to review the use of zeroing in the weighted average-to-transaction (W-T) comparison methodology and targeted dumping under the anti-dumping agreement by reviewing the WTO appellate body’s rulings on the use of zeroing in the W-T comparison methodology in the USA – anti-dumping measures on large residential washers from Korea (DS464). Although the appellate body has ruled that the use of zeroing would not be allowed in the weighted-average-to-weighted-average comparison methodology nor in the transaction-to-transaction comparison methodology, it has not ruled on whether the use of zeroing is allowed in the W-T comparison methodology prior to the instant case.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title content-type="abstract-subheading">Design/methodology/approach</jats:title> <jats:p>This paper mainly analyzes the WTO appellate body report on the USA – anti-dumping and countervailing measures on large residential washers from Korea’s rulings (DS464) and reviews other WTO appellate body reports on the use of zeroing in anti-dumping measures. This paper reviews the relevant provisions of the WTO anti-dumping agreement and the US Anti-Dumping Act, and also referred prior papers on the use of zeroing.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title content-type="abstract-subheading">Findings</jats:title> <jats:p>The appellate body upheld the panel’s finding that the USA’s use of zeroing in the W-T comparison methodology is inconsistent with Article 2.4.2 of the anti-dumping agreement. As zeroing inflates dumping margins, increases the amount of duty collected, and hinders the expansion of trade in goods. The use of zeroing should be prohibited or permitted only in very limited circumstances.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title content-type="abstract-subheading">Social implications</jats:title> <jats:p>Zeroing, which has been the subject of many WTO disputes between the USA and foreign governments, causes dumped sales to be masked by fair value. The WTO appellate body has consistently condemned the US practice of zeroing over the past decade as an unfair commerce practice. The instant case and this paper will help to stop the practice of zeroing in anti-dumping measures.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title content-type="abstract-subheading">Originality/value</jats:title> <jats:p>The text of Article 2.4.2 does not clearly prohibit the use of zeroing. The paper reviews the WTO appellate body’s rulings on the use of zeroing in the W-T comparison methodology in the USA – anti-dumping measures on large residential washers from Korea (DS464). The appellate body report was very recently circulated, on September 9, 2016. The appellate body has not ruled on whether the use of zeroing is allowed in the W-T comparison methodology prior to the instant case. This paper, first, concludes that the W-T comparison methodology is inconsistent with Article 2.4.2 of the anti-dumping agreement.</jats:p> </jats:sec>

Journal

Journal of Korea TradeCrossRef

Published: Jun 5, 2017

References