IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/wotrrv/v18y2019i02p287-307_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

United States – Certain Methodologies and Their Application to Anti-Dumping Proceedings Involving China: Nails in the Coffin of Unfair Dumping Margin Calculation Methodologies

Author

Listed:
  • PRUSA, THOMAS J.
  • VERMULST, EDWIN A.

Abstract

The WTO Appellate Body report United States – Certain Methodologies and Their Application to Anti-Dumping Proceedings Involving China is yet another in a long line of disputes involving US Department of Commerce's dumping margin calculation methodologies. The AB ruled against the United States on three important aspects: (1) the use of the Nails test to rationalize the exceptional method in Article 2.4.2 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement so as to justify using the weighted average-to-transaction methodology in dumping margin calculations; (2) the treatment of multiple companies in a non-market economy as a single NME-wide entity; and (3) the USDOC's policy of using adverse facts available for such an entity. Yet, some aspects of the AB's decision – most notably affirming the use of average prices – significantly weaken Article 2.4.2's pattern requirement and potentially open the door to greater use of the exceptional method.

Suggested Citation

  • Prusa, Thomas J. & Vermulst, Edwin A., 2019. "United States – Certain Methodologies and Their Application to Anti-Dumping Proceedings Involving China: Nails in the Coffin of Unfair Dumping Margin Calculation Methodologies," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 18(2), pages 287-307, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:wotrrv:v:18:y:2019:i:02:p:287-307_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1474745619000053/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:wotrrv:v:18:y:2019:i:02:p:287-307_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/wtr .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.