The New Rules Adopted by the European Union to Address “Significant Distortions” in the Anti-Dumping Context
On 9 November 2016, the European Commission (Commission) finally presented its long-awaited proposal on how to calculate normal value in anti-dumping proceedings involving Chinese producers post-11 December 2016. Although projected as supposedly “neutral” in terms of its application ratione territoriae, the text, context and its expected implementation indicate that the claimed neutrality is just a fig leaf. As was of course perfectly foreseeable, the proposal did not make it through the co-decision procedure (Article 294 Treaty on the Functioning of the EU) in time and, equally foreseeable, China initiated a World Trade Organization (WTO) dispute settlement proceeding against the European Union (EU) on 12 December 2016 (Request for consultations by China, European Union—Measures related to price comparison methodologies, G/ADP/D116/1, G/L/1170, WT/DS516/1, 12 December 2016.). After protracted negotiations, on 3 October 2017, the Council and the European Parliament agreed on a compromise proposal which was eventually adopted by both the institutions and will shape the EU’s new approach in anti-dumping cases against China, and possibly other countries, in the years to come. However, the WTO-compatibility of the new provisions is questionable as discussed in this article.
- Vermulst E (2010) EU Anti-dumping law and practice. Sweet & Maxwell, London, pp 299–307Google Scholar
- Vermulst E, Gatta B (2012) Disciplining the use of TDI against China through WTO dispute settlement. Global Trade Customs J 7(4):143–158Google Scholar
- Vermulst E, Sud J, Evenett S (2016) Normal value in anti-dumping proceedings against China post-2016: are some animals less equal than others. Global Trade Customs J 11(5):212–228Google Scholar