WTO Dispute Settlement Body Lays Out Agenda for Dec. 20 Meeting
The World Trade Organization published the agenda for the next meeting of the Dispute Settlement Body, set for Dec. 20. The agenda includes status reports by the U.S. on the implementation of recommendations adopted by the DSB on: antidumping measures on certain hot-rolled steel products from Japan; antidumping and countervailing measures on large residential washers from South Korea; certain methodologies and their application to antidumping proceedings involving China; and Section 110(5) of the U.S. Copyright Act.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
Other such status reports expected are from the European Union on measures affecting the approval and marketing of biotech products, and from Indonesia on horticultural products, animals and animal products. The EU is expected to make a statement about the implementation of DSB recommendations on the U.S.'s Continued Dumping and Subsidy Offset Act of 2000; and the U.S., on the EU's measures affecting trade in large civil aircraft. Also, a long list of countries, excluding the U.S., made a proposal on appellate body appointments.
Further, the European Union will make a request for the establishment of a panel on Russia's measures concerning domestic and foreign products and services, and Costa Rica will request a panel to evaluate the Dominican Republic's antidumping measures on corrugated steel bars. Also, a DSB panel will present its report on the U.S.'s antidumping and countervailing duties on ripe olives from Spain. The panel recently found the antidumping duties to be within WTO rules but that elements of the countervailing duties, namely the specificity finding of the duties, were not (see 2112030054).