An Analysis on the Conformity of U.S. Trade Remedy Measures with WTO Agreements ─ Focusing on Double Remedy Issues

• Main Authors: LIAO, JO-YU, 廖若妤
• Other Authors: LI, KUEI-YING
• Format: Others
• Language: zh-TW
• Published: 2018
• Online Access: http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/utc69u

碩士 === 東吳大學 === 法律學系 === 106 === The concept of double remedy means that a domestic subsidy leads to the decrease of the export price and normal value of the product in the same degree, when the investigating authority use nonmarket economy methodology to calculate the normal value based on surrogate values from a third country, the subsidy will be capture in the calculation of the dumping margin and the resulting antidumping duty. Accordingly, if investigating authority imposes a countervailing duty in the equivalent to the full amount of the subsidy and an antidumping duty equivalent to the full amount of the dumping margin on the same time, this will result in the subsidy being offset twice which leads to the double remedy effect. This controversy can be traced back to the opinion that the United States Department of Commerce (USDOC) takes on whether to impose the countervailing duty on nonmarket economy, i.e. China. Before these days, USDOC thought that countervailing duty law should not apply to nonmarket economies because a subsidy is essentially a market phenomena, it has no meaning or purpose in a nonmarket economy. However, since 2006 USDOC has changed its opinion that countervailing duty could be imposed on nonmarket economy which opened the gate for the future disputes. Double remedy issue has occurred in both WTO dispute mechanism and United States judicial system. Both decisions deem that double remedy effect may inconsistent with WTO Agreements and U.S. Trade Laws, yet they did not shed light on how to prevent the double remedy effect. Further, Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled that countervailing duty should not apply to nonmarket economy. In order to filling the blank and justify the application to nonmarket economy, Congress passed a bill (Public Law 112-99) specifically allowing USDOC to do so. To sum up, double remedy issue implicates with many factors, especially with the nonmarket economy status of China. In view of China’s WTO Accession Protocols on its nonmarket economy status has expired, United States and European Union has amended their trade remedy laws which may alter the direction of the double remedy issue. Furthermore, the current practice of USDOC also has the possibility of being challenged.