Antidumping Measures and the Most-favoured Nation Treatment Requirement

2017 ◽  
Vol 52 (4) ◽  
pp. 233-246 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sheela Rai

Decision of the Appellate Body in two cases has raised the issue whether antidumping measures should be applied on MFN basis. One view is that it should be. Another view is that it need not be. Author supports the idea that it need not be but on arguments different from what is given by other writers. Author contends that interpretation of Article VI and Antidumping Agreement do not support the idea of application of antidumping measures on MFN basis.

2018 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 609-633 ◽  
Author(s):  
WEIHUAN ZHOU

AbstractChina's unique economic system poses increasing challenges to the world trading system and attracts growing academic and policy debate. WTO members have frequently resorted to antidumping measures in dealing with price distortions caused by the Chinese government's influence on the economy. The Appellate Body's decision in the recentEU–Biodieseldispute starts to remove the flexibility of condemning state intervention and price distortions under the WTO Anti-Dumping Agreement through antidumping measures. This decision, read with the relevant WTO jurisprudence on the ‘ordinary course of trade’ test and subsidies, suggests that price distortions resulting from state intervention should be addressed under other WTO rules. Therefore, it is necessary for WTO members to shift their focus to, and explore the capacity of, the other rules to overcome the challenges arising from China's state capitalism.


2017 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 47-65
Author(s):  
Tapiwa V. Warikandwa ◽  
Patrick C. Osode

The incorporation of a trade-labour (standards) linkage into the multilateral trade regime of the World Trade Organisation (WTO) has been persistently opposed by developing countries, including those in Africa, on the grounds that it has the potential to weaken their competitive advantage. For that reason, low levels of compliance with core labour standards have been viewed as acceptable by African countries. However, with the impact of WTO agreements growing increasingly broader and deeper for the weaker and vulnerable economies of developing countries, the jurisprudence developed by the WTO Panels and Appellate Body regarding a trade-environment/public health linkage has the potential to address the concerns of developing countries regarding the potential negative effects of a trade-labour linkage. This article argues that the pertinent WTO Panel and Appellate Body decisions could advance the prospects of establishing a linkage of global trade participation to labour standards without any harm befalling developing countries.


Author(s):  
Joanna Gomula

In 2016, panel and Appellate Body reports were adopted in seven disputes. The majority of the disputes concerned general obligations under two basic WTO agreements: the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade of 1994 (GATT 1994) and the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS). Therefore, the 2016 reports provide valuable analytical resources on basic GATT and GATS concepts, and the respective general exceptions clauses. The other disputes concerned anti-dumping and countervailing duty measures. Two disputes involving Latin American states related to measures imposed in order to combat money laundering and tax evasion, and raised the question of whether GATT tariff obligations apply to “illicit trade”. Two other disputes related to the use of green energy, including the promotion of solar cells and modules, and anti-dumping duties on imports of biodiesel.


2020 ◽  
Vol 34 (4) ◽  
pp. 457-459
Author(s):  
Kai He ◽  
T. V. Paul ◽  
Anders Wivel

The rise of “the rest,” especially China, has triggered an inevitable transformation of the so-called liberal international order. Rising powers have started to both challenge and push for the reform of existing multilateral institutions, such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF), and to create new ones, such as the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB). The United States under the Trump administration, on the other hand, has retreated from the international institutions that the country once led or helped to create, including the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP); the Paris Agreement; the Iran nuclear deal; the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty; the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO); and the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC). The United States has also paralyzed the ability of the World Trade Organization (WTO) to settle trade disputes by blocking the appointment of judges to its appellate body. Moreover, in May 2020, President Trump announced his decision to quit the Open Skies Treaty, an arms control regime designed to promote transparency among its members regarding military activities. During the past decade or so, both Russia and the United States have been dismantling multilateral arms control treaties one by one while engaging in new nuclear buildups at home.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document