• Title/Summary/Keyword: 제로잉

Search Result 3, Processing Time 0.015 seconds

A Study on Effects of Zeroing on the Anti-Dumping Margin of Korean Stainless Steel (미국 제로잉 철폐가 한국 철창제품의 덤핑마진 하락에 미치는 영향)

  • Kim, Hong-Youl
    • International Commerce and Information Review
    • /
    • v.13 no.3
    • /
    • pp.301-323
    • /
    • 2011
  • There have been 20 cases of trade disputes related to zeroing in WTO. In these day, it was judged that the use of zeroing in the calculation of dumping margin is against ADA. Recently, WTO decided in favor of Korea in regards to Korea's stainless steel products on January, 2011. There finally was a high possibility of zeroing being changed. In December 2010, the American government announced it would revise zeroing system through an federal register. Many researchers, such as Linsey and Ikenson(2000), William W. Nye(2009) already clarified through empirical analysis that no use of zeroing leads to a large decline in the margin of dumping. If zeroing is abolished in the future, the margin of dumping imposed on Korea's stainless steel will drop sharply. According to this empirical study, the margin of dumping in 6 stainless steel among 12 products commodities subject to Anti Dumping regulation from US reduced below de-minimis or 3%. These stainless steel is likely to be excluded from the Anti Dumping regulation through review investigation and Korea's export of steel to America is expected to be increased steeply in the future.

  • PDF

A Study on Effect and Legitimacy of Zeroing on the WTO Anti-dumping Agreement - Focusing on US-Orange Juice case - (WTO 반덤핑협정하의 제로잉 효과와 적법성 - 미국-오렌지주스 사건을 중심으로 -)

  • Kim, Cheol-Soo;Ha, Choong-Lyung
    • International Commerce and Information Review
    • /
    • v.16 no.3
    • /
    • pp.465-486
    • /
    • 2014
  • This paper intends to analyse some legal issues on US-Orange Juice Case. Brazil's WTO challenge is to the methods undertaken by US in calculating antidumping duties in administrative reviews of Brazilian Orange Juice. Panel resulted that conforms with earlier Appellate Body decision outlawing the use of 'weighted average to transaction zeroing. This paper note that panel's stance was driven from 'stability and predictability' within the DSB system. There was a de facto form of stare decisis. However, Panel in US-Orange Juice recognized that Appellate Body decision is wrong about finding zeroing to be violation of the fair comparison requirement of the Article 2.4 of the WTO Anti-Dumping agreement. Zeroing dispute of WTO Anti-Dumping Agreement will be continued that because this matter. Fortunately, the American government announced it would be stop zeroing system of administrative reviews. As result, Carefully, We anticipate that US-Orange Juice's decision is the end of zeroing method on the WTO Anti-Dumping Agreement.

  • PDF

Legal Issues of "Zeroing" Practice Based on the Article 2.4.2 of the WTO Anti-Dumping Agreement (WTO 반덤핑협정 제2.4.2조에 의거한 네거티브 덤핑마진 산정 방식("제로잉")의 법적 문제)

  • Chae, Hyung-Bok
    • THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
    • /
    • v.38
    • /
    • pp.265-302
    • /
    • 2008
  • This paper intends to analyse some legal issues on "Zeroing" which is based on the article 2.4.2 under the WTO Anti-dumping Agreement. "Zeroing" stands for a specific methodology in calculating a general dumping margin for a product in question under which negative individual dumping margins are treated as zero (thus "zeroed") before aggregating all individual dumping margins. The article 2.4.2 of the Anti-dumping Agreement regulates three types of calculating methodology on dumping margin as first symmetrical method(average-to-average: A-A), second symmetrical method(individual-to-individual: I-I) and asymmetrical method(average-to-individual: A-I). However, this article does not have any provisions about the "Zeroing" practice. In their anti-dumping practices, the EC and the United-States calculated dumping margin based on the "Zeroing", but this methodology has been disputed in the Dispute Settlement Body(DSB) of the WTO. This paper analysed their legal problems with some WTO cases in particular concerning EC-Bed Linen, U.S.-Softwood Lumber Zeroing, U.S.-Zeroing(EC) and U.S.-Sunset Review(Japan) cases. On the basis of theses analysis, we can therefore ask some questions as follows; To begin with, although the article 2.4.2 of the WTO Anti-dumping Agreement does not clearly refer to the "Zeroing", how do some developing countries, as the U.S.A and the E.U. calculate dumping margin as the "Zeroing"? Secondly, what is the relationship between the symmetrical method and asymmetrical method to the dumping margin? And if we adopt the zeroing method, what is the different rate to anti-dumping margin? Thirdly, although the Panel decided that the zeroing methodology of dumping margin used by th U.S.A in administrative review between the U.S.A and the E.U, why does the Appellate Body made the decision that the american methodology is incompatible with the WTO Anti-dumping Agreement? Lastly, what will be affected the upper decision taken by the Appellate Body to the DDA negotiation of anti-dumping matters? Even though the WTO Appellate made a decision that the zeroing method is incompatible with the principles of the WTO law, this methodology contains a lot of problems. Some members of the WTO as the U.S.A and the E.U did not officially declare this methodology to abandon, and the debate concerned is arguing. Therefore this paper tried to present the adequate solution in order to promote the zeroing methodology in the international anti-dumping system and practices.

  • PDF