elsa/wto moot court 2015-16 · elsa/wto moot court 2015-16 eriador – measures affecting the...
TRANSCRIPT
ELSA/WTOMOOTCOURT2015-16
Eriador–Measuresaffectingtheelectricitysector
BENCHMEMORANDUM
TableofContents
1.THECASE 1
2.TIMELINE 7
3.RELATIVEWEIGHTOFCLAIMS 8
4.THECLAIMS 9
4.1CLAIM(A):THEIFFGRANTASANEXPORTSUBSIDY 94.1.1BORDURIA’SLEGALCLAIM 94.1.2FINANCIALCONTRIBUTIONANDBENEFIT 94.1.3ARTICLE3.1(A):CONTINGENTUPONEXPORTPERFORMANCE 94.2CLAIM(B):THEIFFGRANTANDTHEERIBANKLOANCAUSESERIOUSPREJUDICE 124.2.1BORDURIA’SLEGALCLAIM 124.2.2ARTICLE1.1(A):FINANCIALCONTRIBUTIONBYAPUBLICBODY 124.2.3ARTICLE1.1(B):BENEFIT 144.2.4ARTICLE1.2ANDARTICLE2:SPECIFIC 164.2.5ARTICLE5AND6:SERIOUSPREJUDICE 184.3CLAIM(C):THEFEED-IN-TARIFFSCHEME 224.3.1BORDURIA’SLEGALCLAIM 224.3.2ARTICLE1.1(A):FINANCIALCONTRIBUTIONBYAPUBLICBODY 224.3.3ARTICLE1.1(B):BENEFIT 234.3.4ARTICLE1.2ANDARTICLE21:SPECIFIC 264.3.5ARTICLE5AND6:SERIOUSPREJUDICE 264.4GATTARTICLEXX 294.5THEFRAMEWORKCONVENTIONONTHEPROMOTIONOFRENEWABLEENERGY 314.5.1ASEVIDENCEOFFACT 314.5.2VCLTARTICLE31(2) 314.5.3VCLTARTICLE31(3) 324.5.4VCLTARTICLE41 334.5.5VCLTARTICLE40:LEXPOSTERIOR 34
5.SELECTEDCASELAWANDREADINGS 35
6.THESCMAGREEMENT 37
1
1. TheCase(includingclarifications)1. Eriador is amajor industrialised country, and aMemberof theWTO,which isactivelyseekingtolimititsdependenceonfossilfuels,andtomoveitseconomytowardsfull reliance on sustainable and renewable energy sources. It is a party to theFrameworkConventiononthePromotionofRenewableEnergy2010(‘FCPRE’),alargemultilateral treatywith173statesparties.145countriesarebothWTOMembersandstatespartiestotheFCPRE.ThePreambletotheFCPREreads:
Recognisingthatexistingglobalenergymarketsaredistorted,duetothefailureofsuchmarketstointernalisethefullcostofcarbon,
whileArticle11requireseachStatespartyto‘useallavailablemeanstoencouragetherapiddevelopmentofrenewableenergy,withaviewtoensuringthatatleasthalfofitspopulation’senergyneedsaremetbyrenewableenergysuppliersby2020’.2. Electricity generation facilities in Eriador are all privately owned, and includeplantsrepresentingawiderangeofgenerationtechnologies(coal,naturalgas,nuclear,solar,wind,tidal,hydro).Theseelectricitygenerators,aswellassomeforeignsuppliers,sell theirenergy to theEriadorianElectricityCorporation(EEC),agovernmentagencywhosefunctionistoadministertheday-to-dayfunctioningofthegridintheinterestsofstabilityandefficiency.TheEECthensellstheenergydirectlytoconsumers.TheEECisunderanobligationtoensurethataspecified(andgraduallyincreasing)proportionoftheelectricityitpurchasesisgeneratedfromrenewablesources.In2015,themandatedproportion was 30%, and the actually achieved proportion was 41%. The actuallyachieved percentage of electricity produced from renewable sources has never fallenbelowthemandatedpercentage.3. Pricesatthewholesalelevelaresetbyacombinationoflong-termcontractsof20to30yearsduration(accountingforonethirdofsupply),medium-termcontractsof5to15yearsduration(accountingforanotherthird),andspotmarkettransactionsforthe remainder. Contracts are awarded through open competitive tendering processes.Pricesinspotmarketsaresetviatheauctionmethod.Electricityproducershavealwaysbeen treated equally by the EEC in its award of general contracts, and the standardtermsremainthesame,regardlessofthesourceoftheirelectricity.Astodispatch, thegeneral situation is that generation facilities are dispatched in order of their variableoperatingcosts,fromlowesttohighestcostaselectricitydemandincreases.4. CleanTechisalargetechnologycompanybasedinEriador,whichspecialisesinthedevelopmentandcommercialisationofcuttingedge,innovativetechnologiesfortherenewableenergysector.5. For many years, CleanTech has been conducting research into cold fusion, ameansofproducingenergythroughnuclearreactionat,orcloseto,roomtemperature,withoutthetoxicby-productsassociatedwithcurrentnuclear(fission)technology.Coldfusion is a carbon-free (or essentially carbon-free) process for the production ofelectricity. This research has been very successful. In just over a decade, CleanTechmanagedtodevelopcoldfusiontechnologyclosetothepointofcommercialisation,mostsignificantly through the invention of the Fusilliscope, a revolutionary device whichenables users temporarily to overcome repulsive forces between atomic particles, atcomparatively low energy cost. While the capital costs of Fusilliscopes are very high(higherthanforsolarenergy),Fusilliscopeshaverelativelylowvariableoperatingcosts
2
(lowerthanforsolar),canbemoreeasilyaggregatedintogenerationfacilitiesofmuchhighercapacitythansolar,andareflexibleenoughtoprovidebase-, intermediate-andpeak-loadelectricityasrequired.6. In2008,CleanTechestablishedaproductionfacilityfortheFusilliscope.Initially,itsoughtfundsforthisprojectfromprivateinvestors,butwasunsuccessfulduetotheproject’sextremelyhighriskprofile,theunprovennatureofthetechnology,uncertaintyconcerningtheanticipatedcostsofelectricitygenerationusingthetechnology,andthehugecapitalinvestmentneeded.Instead,itobtaineda$750mloanonfavourabletermsfromEribank,anentitymajorityownedbytheEridorianstate.Eribankisgovernedbyaboard of directors appointed by the EriadorianMinistry of Commerce, but with eachappointee acting in his or her independent capacity. (Historically, the appointeddirectorshavehadamixofbackgrounds, some from thepublic sector, some from theprivatesector.Therearenoformalcriteriafortheirappointment,andappointmentsareconsideredintheusualmanner,byreferencetothequalificationsandexperienceofthecandidate,andtheneedsoftheorganisation.)Itisrunlargelyonacommercialbasis,butby its constitution is required to conduct its business ‘having regard to the strategicpolicy priorities of the Eriadorian state’ and ‘in consultation, as appropriate, withrelevantgovernmentministries’.Eribanktypically,butnotalways,followstheadviceoftheEriadoriangovernmentwhenitsupportsthegrantofaloan.InthecaseoftheloantoCleanTech,EribankconsultedwiththeEriadorianMinistryoftheEnvironmentastotheirviewofthecommercialviabilityofthisnewtechnology,aswellasitssignificanceforEriadorianeconomygenerally.TheMinistryoftheEnvironmentexpresslysupportedtheloan,whileacknowledgingthatthefinaldecisionwhetherornottograntitwasforEribankitself.Eribankisalso,separately,usedonoccasionasthevehiclethroughwhichtheEriadoriangovernmentdisbursesfundstoEriadorianbusinessesundergovernmentgrantprograms.7. CleanTech used the money provided by Eribank to construct the productionfacility. Over the next 12 months, CleanTech perfected its production process, mademinoramendmentstothedesignof theFusilliscope,anddevelopedrelationshipswithpotential users of the technology, as it prepared this division of its business for sale.Then, in early 2009, CleanTech sold the entire Fusilliscope business – including theproduction facility, as well as all intellectual property rights to the technology – toFuture Energy, a company incorporated in Eriador, whose core business is theconstruction and operation of power plants in Eriador. Future Energy has beenoperatingintheEriadorianmarketforsomeyears.ItisunrelatedtoCleanTech,andthepurchaseoftheFusilliscopebusinesswasatapricewhichreflecteditsfullmarketvalue,ascertifiedbyanindependentauditor.8. Future Energy quickly integrated the Fusilliscope into its domestic powergeneration facilities, and also began selling the Fusilliscope to electricity suppliersoperating in foreign markets. To safeguard its position as market leader in thecommercialisationofcoldfusiontechnologyinEriador,FutureEnergydoesnotsell,andisnotwilling to sell, Fusilliscopes toanyelectricityproducerswhich compete,ormaypotentiallycompete,withitintheEriadorianelectricitymarket.9. However, it soonbecameclear that thecostsofproducingelectricityusing theFusilliscope were considerably higher than the wholesale price of electricity in theEriadorianelectricitymarket. ItconsequentlyturnedtotheEriadoriangovernmentforassistance.10. Convinced of the long term viability of this technology, and of the potentialsignificanceofexportsofFusilliscopes fortheEriadorianeconomy,FutureEnergywas
3
awardeda$500mgrantundertheEriadoriangovernment’s‘InnovationfortheFuture’program.OpentoanybusinessoperatinginanysectoroftheEriadorianeconomy,thisprogram seeks to provide financial assistance to projects which promise to make asignificant contribution to the sustainable growth and global integration of theEriadorian economy. When firms apply for grants under this scheme, they typicallyprovideinformationconcerningthetrackrecordofthecompanysofar,itsplansforthefutureemphasizingitscontributiontothegoalsoftheprogram,anditsspecificplansforthe grant money sought. The Eriadorian government considers all applications byreference to the criteria of whether and to what extent they are likely to ‘make asignificant contribution to the sustainable growth and global integration of theEriadorian economy’, andmakes awards to those projectswhich in its view aremostlikely to make the most significant contributions to those objectives. Different sizedgrantsareawarded todifferent successful candidates,basedon the requestmade, thebusiness plan on which the request is founded, and the judgment of the Eriadoriangovernment as to amountwhich ought to be awarded. Funds are disbursed in full tosuccessful applicants as soon as an award is made. The overall budget of the grantprogram isnot formally limited.While theregulationsestablishing thisgrantprogramdoesnotcontainaformalallocationofacertainamountoffundstoanyparticularsectororindustry,overthefiveyearsithasbeenrunning,90%offundsdisbursedunderthisscheme have gone to companies operating in the renewable energy sector. (TheapplicantpoolwasbroadlyrepresentativeoftheEriadorianeconomyasawhole–thatis, the share of applicants from different industries broadly reflected each industry’sshareoftheEriadorianeconomy.Eventhehighestestimateshavetherenewableenergysector representing significantly less than 5% of the highly diversified Eriadorianeconomy.)FutureEnergy’sgrantwasawardedanddisbursed inearly2010.Thegrantitselfcontainednoformal legalconditionspertainingtoexportperformance.Itdidnotrequire Future Energy to spend the grant money on a new production facility forFusilliscopes,thoughFutureEnergydidmakeclearthatthiswasamajorpartofitsplanin the application it made for the grant. The grant was disbursed directly by theEriadoriangovernment,notbyEribank.11. In addition, at the same time, the Eriadorian government implemented a newfeed-in-tariffschemetoincreasethesupplyofelectricityfromcoldfusion,pursuanttoaDirection from the Ministry of Commerce in the exercise of its statutory authority.Participants in the scheme are awarded contracts with the EEC, containing the samestandardterms,andof thesameduration,as longtermpurchaseagreementsbetweenthe EEC and other providers of both renewable and non-renewable energy. The onlysalientdifferenceisthepriceoffered.Underthisscheme,FutureEnergywasawardedalong term purchase agreement with EEC, under which EEC would pay a guaranteedpricetoFutureEnergy,forallelectricitygeneratedanddeliveredintothegridfromitscoldfusionplants,foraperiodof30years.Theguaranteedpriceunderthecontractwassetaccordingtothefollowingformula:
C=M+X*YwhereCisthedailycontractpriceforeachunitofelectricity,MistheaverageunitwholesaleelectricitypriceinEriadorforthatday,Xistheaveragenumberoftonsofcarbonemittedintheproductionofoneunitofelectricityplacedonthewholesalemarket,andYisthetruesocialcostofonetonofcarbon,initiallysetat$152/tonbyanindependentagencyonthebasisofpeer-reviewedpapersandinternationalpractice,butperiodicallyreviewed.Underthisformulaasitoperatesinpractice,thedailycontractpricereceivedbyFutureEnergy(C)issignificantlyhigherthantheaveragedailymarketprice(M),typicallybyatleast10%.TheformulawasdesignedtoensurethatthepricepaidtoFutureEnergycloselyapproximatesthe‘true’costofelectricity–
4
namely,whatthewholesalecostofelectricitywouldbe,ifthefullsocialcostsofcarbonwerefullyinternalised.TheDirectionoftheMinistryofCommerceestablishingtheschemenotesthatithasbeenadoptedinaccordancewithEriador’sobligationsunderArticle11oftheFCPRE.Inprinciple,thisschemeisopentoallsuppliersofcoldfusionenergy(andonlythosesuppliers),butinpracticeitonlyappliestoFutureEnergy,asatpresentFutureEnergyistheonlysupplieroperatinginEriadorwiththattechnology.12. In the five years since these measures were put in place, Future Energy hassignificantly increased itsmarketshare inEriador’swholesaleelectricitymarket, from2% in 2010 to 36% in 2015. (In 2010, Future Energy supplied 2% of the Eriadorianmarket,andessentiallyallofthiscamefromnon-renewablesources.Thishasremainedunchanged from 2010-2015: it still supplies 2% of the market using non-renewableenergy in 2015, and did so in all the intervening years. Thus, Future Energy’s entireincreaseinmarketsharehascomeaboutasaresultofincreasingproductionofenergythrough cold fusion.) Future Energy has also built several more generation facilitiesusingcoldfusiontechnology,andsellsall itsenergyfromthemintothegridunderthetermsof the long termcontractualagreementoutlinedabove. Inaddition, ithasspent$500m constructing and commissioning an additional production facility forFusilliscopes,whichhasalloweditmassivelytoexpanditsexportsalesofFusilliscopes.The production facility was designed, built and commissioned over 2010-11, andbecameoperationalatfullcapacityin2012.Itwouldnothavebeenbuiltwereitnotforthe Innovation for theFuturegrant.FutureEnergynowexports this technologyunderlicence to electricity producers in over 50 countries worldwide. It does not sell anyFusilliscopes domestically, in part because thatmay increase the number of supplierscompetingforcontractsunderthegovernment’sfeed-in-tariffscheme.13. Borduria isan industrialisedcountry,andMemberof theWTO,whichsharesaborderwithEriador.LikeEriador,itisapartytotheFCPRE.TheElektricalgridsofthetwocountriesareinterconnected,suchthatBordurianelectricitygeneratorsareabletotransmit their electricity into theEriadorian grid, and sell into theEriadorianmarket.Borduria’stwoprimaryelectricityproducers,anditsonlyelectricityexporters–bothofwhom still operate only traditional coal-fired power stations – have complained thattheir share of the wholesale electricity market in Eriador has declined precipitouslysince 2010, from50% to just 23% in 2015, just as Future Energy’smarket share hasrisen,inaccordancewiththefollowingtable.
Company Nationality MarketShareFutureEnergy Eriador 2010:2%
2011:3%2012:15%2013:22%2014:29%2015:36%
BorduriaEnergyCorporation
Borduria 2010:20%2011:20%2012:16%2013:14%2014:12%2015:11%
ElectricityBorduria Borduria 2010:30%2011:30%2012:26%2013:21%
5
2014:17%2015:12%
Other Eriador 2010:46%2011:45%2012:41%2013:41%2014:41%2015:40%
Other Other 2010:2%2011:2%2012:2%2013:2%2014:1%2015:1%
Priorto2010,bothcompanies’marketshareshadbeenstableforalongtime,atessentiallythesamelevelsasshownfor2010.NocompanyotherthanFutureEnergyhasgainedmarketshareintheperiodfrom2010-2015,andthesizeoftheoverallmarkethasstayedessentiallystableovertheperiod.Furthermore,thepercentageoftheEriadorianmarketsuppliedbyrenewableenergyotherthancoldfusionhasalsoremainedsteadyat7%from2010-2015.TheBorduriansupplierscomplainalsothattheircontractualarrangementswiththeEriadoriangovernmentforthewholesalesupplyofelectricityintotheEriadoriangridhavenotbeenrenewed,withfivemajorcontractsexpiringin2012,2013and2014(twofortheBordurianEnergyCorporation,andthreeforElectricityBorduria).TheynotethatinitsAnnualReportsofOperations,theEEChasreportedthatthiswasthedirectresultoftheunexpectedlylargesizeandcostsofthelong-termcontractsputinplacewithFutureEnergy.14. BorduriaisalsohometoSolarTech,aworldleadingcompanyspecialisingintheproduction and export of solar panels. In late 2012, it signed a Memorandum ofUnderstandingwith Elektrica, an electricity generation company based in the state ofCarpathia (also aMember of theWTO), for the supply of 40,000 solar panel units onterms to be agreed. This was an important contract for SolarTech, as 40,000 unitsrepresents approximately 10% of its overall annual sales of solar panels. In addition,Elektrica is a strategic customer for SolarTech, as Elektrica is looking to expand itsoverallproductionofrenewableenergyconsiderably inthecomingyears.However, in2013,Elektricabrokeoffnegotiationsintheirfinalstages,informingSolarTechthattheyhadbeenapproachedbyFutureEnergywithanofferforthesaleofFusilliscopesat50%of thepriceatwhich theywouldnormallybesold,andasa resulthaddecidedon thebasisof cost to refocus their investmentsaway from the creationofnewsolarenergyfacilities,towardscoldfusion,andtopurchaseFusilliscopesfromFutureEnergy.FutureEnergyregardstheCarpathianmarketasofstrategicinterest,andwishestoestablishamarket-leadingpositioninCarpathiaasquicklyaspossible.Italsobelievesthatalargepurchase of Fusilliscopes by Elektrica will reassure other potential purchasers thatFusilliscopesareamatureandreliableproduct.FutureEnergyfeltabletooffersuchalargediscountsince itsproductioncosts forFusilliscopeshave fallendramaticallyasaresult of economies of scale achieved through the addition of the second productionfacility,andasaresultof lessons learntover theyearssince it started tomanufactureFusilliscopes.
6
LegalClaims15. Borduria requests consultationswith thegovernmentofEriador, in respectof:(a)theloanbyEribanktoCleanTech;(b)theFITscheme,andthecontractbetweenEECandFutureEnergyconcludedpursuanttoit;(c)the‘InnovationfortheFuture’granttoFutureEnergy.TheRequestwasaccompaniedbyaStatementofAvailableEvidence inthe form requiredbyArticles 4.2 and7.2 of theSCMAgreement. During the course ofthese consultations, both parties agreed to proceed on the basis that electricity is aproduct,notaservice.Eriadoralsomadeclearthat,itdoesnotcontestthattheEribankloanwouldconferabenefitwithin themeaningofArticle1.1(b) if itwereestablishedthat the loan was granted by a public body. The parties could not resolve theirdisagreementconcerningthelegalrelevancetothisdisputeoftheFCPRE.16. BorduriaconsidersthatthesemeasuresconstitutespecificsubsidieswithinthemeaningofArticles1and2oftheSCMAgreement,andclaimsthattheyareinconsistentwithEriador’sobligationsunderthatagreementasfollows:
a. thatthe‘InnovationfortheFuture’grantisinconsistentwithArticle3.1(a)oftheSCMAgreementbecauseitiscontingentinfactupontheexportbyFutureEnergyofequipmentforrenewableenergygeneration;
b. thattheloanbyEribankandthe‘InnovationfortheFuture’grant,
individuallyandcumulatively,causeseriousprejudicetotheinterestsofBorduriawithinthemeaningofArticle5(c)oftheSCMAgreementandArticleXVI:1oftheGATT1994,astheyhaveresultedinlostsalesofsolarpanelsinthemarketforenergygenerationequipmentinCarpathiawithinthemeaningofArticle6.3(c)oftheSCMAgreement;
c. thatthelongtermpurchaseagreementbetweenFutureEnergy
andEEC,concludedpursuanttotheFITScheme,causesseriousprejudicetotheinterestsofBorduriawithinthemeaningofArticle5(c)oftheSCMAgreementandArticleXVI:1oftheGATT1994,asithasdisplacedandimpededimportsofelectricityfromBorduriaintoEriadorwithinthemeaningofArticle6.3(a)oftheSCMAgreement.
7
2. Timeline
2008
EribankloangrantedtoCleanTech.CleanTechestablishesfirstproductionfacilityforFusilliscopes.
2009 Early2009,CleanTechsellsFusilliscopebusinesstoFutureEnergy.FutureEnergybeginsproductionofFusilliscopesforexport,andproductionofelectricityforEriadorianmarketusingcoldfusion.
2010 Early2010,InnovationfortheFuturegrantawardedbytheEriadoriangovernmenttoFutureEnergy
2010-11 FutureEnergydesignsandbuildsasecondproductionfacilityforFusilliscopes.
2012 FutureEnergyFITcontractgranted.Late2012,MoUsignedbetweenElektricaandSolarTech.
2013 FutureEnergyisawardedcontractwithElektrica.
2011-2015 OverthisperiodFutureEnergyalsointegratesFusilliscopesintoseveralmoreofitselectricitygenerationfacilitiessupplyingtheEriadorianmarket.
2015 WTOdisputeinitiated.
8
3. Relativeweightofclaims
Thefollowingtableindicatestherecommendedpointswhichmarkersshouldassigntodifferentclaimsandtheirelements.Thehigherthenumber,themoresignificanttheissue,themoretimeteamswillbeexpectedtospendonit,andthemorepointsshouldbeawardedforgoodargumentsmadeinrelationtoit.Whereanissueisassignedascoreof0.5,thisindicatesthatitisarelativelyinsignificantlegalissue:pointsshouldbeawardedforshowingknowledgeoftherelevantlegaltests,butbrevityinrespectofthesepointsshouldberewarded.OnedifficultyconcernsthepointsassociatedwithGATTArticleXX.Itwouldbeaperfectlyreasonabledecisionforteamsnottoarguethispointatallforstrategicreasons,intheirEriadoriansubmission.Itwouldbeevenmorereasonableforthecomplainantnottoraiseit,sinceitisnotforthemtoraise.Inprinciple,teamsshouldnotbepenalizedforsuchstrategicchoices,anditispartlyforthatreasonthatwehavekeptthepointsassignedtothisissuerelativelylow.
CONTENT
Claim(a)Financialcontribution 0.5Benefit 0.5Exportcontingency(includingArticle2.3(a)contingency) 3Claim(b)Financialcontribution
EribankloanArticle1.1(a)(1)(i) 3EribankloanArticle1.1(a)(1)(iv) 3IFFgrant 0.5
BenefitEribankloan(extinctionofbenefitissue) 3IFFgrant 0.5
SpecificityEribankloan 0.5IFFgrant 2
Article6.3(c):lostsales 3Claim(c)Financialcontribution 2Benefit 5Specificity 0.5Article6.3(a):displacementorimpedance 2GATTArticleXX 2Systemicissue:therelevanceoftheFCPRE 3STRUCTURE,ORGANIZATIONANDWEIGHTING 4CREATIVITYOFARGUMENTATION 4CLARITYANDTONEOFWRITTENEXPRESSION 4CORRECTUSEOFLEGALTERMINOLOGY,GRAMMARETC. 4TOTAL: 50
9
4. Theclaims
[Note:writtenmemorandaneednotfollowpreciselythesamestructureasthismemo.Forexample,teamsmaychoosetoorganizebyelement(financialcontribution,benefit,specificity,etc)andaddresseachclaimunderthoseheadings.Theyshouldnotbepenalizedforthis.]
4.1. Claim(a):TheInnovationfortheFutureGrantasan
exportsubsidy4.1.1. Borduria’slegalclaim
Borduriaclaimsthatthe‘InnovationfortheFuture’grantisinconsistentwithArticle3.1(a)oftheSCMAgreementbecauseitiscontingentinfactupontheexportbyFutureEnergyofequipmentforrenewableenergygeneration.Inordertomakeoutthisclaim,Borduriamustinprincipleshowthat:
• thereisa‘financialcontributionbyagovernmentoranypublicbody’or‘incomeorpricesupport’withinthemeaningofSCMArticle1.1(a);
• a‘benefit’istherebyconferredwithinthemeaningofSCMArticle1.1(b);• thegrantis‘contingentinlaworinfact,whethersolelyorasoneof
severalotherconditions,uponexportperformance’withinthemeaningofSCMArticle3.1(a).1
4.1.2. Financialcontributionandbenefit
Thegrantrepresentsa‘financialcontribution’underArticle1.1(a)(i),thatitisgivenbyagovernment(asitisdirectlydisbursedbytheEriadoriangovernmentpursuanttostatutoryauthority),andthatgivinganon-repayablegranttoanenterpriseconfersa‘benefit’onthatenterprise.AllofthesepointsshouldbeconcededbyEriador,andBorduriashouldspendverylittlespacelayingoutthelegalstandardsforthesepointsandshowingtheyaremet.Theonlyquestiononwhichthereshouldbemeaningfulargumentiswhetherthegrantis‘contingentinlaworinfact,whethersolelyorasoneofseveralotherconditions,uponexportperformance’.Asnotedbelowinfootnote1,thequestionofspecificityistiedtothisquestionbyvirtueofArticle2.3.
4.1.3. Article3.1(a):‘contingentinlaworinfact…uponexportperformance’ SCMArticle3.1(a)prohibits‘subsidiescontingent,inlaworinfact,whether
solelyorasoneofseveralconditions,uponexportperformance,includingthoseillustratedinAnnexI’.Notethatthisprovisionprohibitsbothdejureanddefactocontingency.Astodefactoexportcontingency,footnote4totheagreementclarifiesthatthestandardof‘infact’contingency‘ismetwhenthefactsdemonstratethatthegrantingofasubsidy,withouthavingbeenmadelegallycontingentuponexportperformance,isinfacttiedtoactualoranticipatedexportationorexportearnings.’Thefootnotefurthernotesthat‘[t]hemerefactthatasubsidyisgrantedtoenterpriseswhichexportshallnotforthatreasonalonebeconsideredtobeanexportsubsidywithinthemeaningofthisprovision’.
1NotethatanysubsidyfallingwithinArticle3.1(a)isdeemedtobespecificbytheoperationofArticle2.3.
10
Thestandardof‘contingency’,whichisthesameforbothdejureanddefactoclaims,requiresthecomplainanttodemonstrate‘arelationshipofconditionalityordependence’(Canada–Aircraft(AB),para171).Exportperformancemustthereforebeaconditionofthegrantormaintenanceofthesubsidy.Dejureexportcontingencyisdemonstratedonthebasisofthewordsoftherelevantlegislation,regulationorotherlegalinstrumentconstitutingthemeasure(Canada–Aircraft(AB),para167).Itcanbeexplicitorexistasanecessaryimplication(Canada–Autos(AB),para100).Caseswhichhavefoundexportcontingency‘inlaw’havesofarinvolvedsubsidieswhichareonlymadeavailableuponproofofactualexportation,orarenecessarilyonlyavailableinrespectofexporttransactions(eg,Canada–Autos,US–UplandCotton,Canada–Aircraft).Defactoexportcontingencycanbeestablishedbyshowingthat'thegrantingofthesubsidy[is]gearedtoinducethepromotionoffutureexportperformancebytherecipient'(EC–LargeCivilAircraft(AB),para1044).Defactoexportcontingencymustbeinferredfromthetotalconfigurationofthefactsconstitutingandsurroundingthegrantingofthesubsidy(Canada–Aircraft(AB),para167).Thismayincludethefollowingfactors:(i)thedesignandstructureofthemeasuregrantingthesubsidy;(ii)themodalitiesofoperationsetoutinsuchameasure;and(iii)therelevantfactualcircumstancessurroundingthegrantingofthesubsidythatprovidethecontextforunderstandingthemeasure’sdesign,structure,andmodalitiesofoperation(EC–LargeCivilAircraft(AB),para1048).Importantly,theAppellateBodyinEC–LargeCivilAircraftnotedthat‘[w]heretheevidenceshows,allotherthingsbeingequal,thatthegrantingofthesubsidyprovidesanincentivetoskewanticipatedsalestowardsexports,incomparisonwiththehistoricalperformanceoftherecipient…thiswouldbeanindicationthatthegrantingofthesubsidyisinfacttiedtoanticipatedexportation’(para1047).Conversely,‘[t]hegrantingofthesubsidywillnotbetiedtoanticipatedexportationif,allotherthingsbeingequal,theanticipatedratioofexportsalestodomesticsalesisnotgreaterthantheexistingratio’(para1048).Thisisanobjectivetestoftheincentivesprovidedbythesubsidy:Thestandardfordefactoexportcontingencywouldbemet'whenthesubsidyisgrantedsoastoprovideanincentivetotherecipienttoexportinawaythatisnotsimplyreflectiveoftheconditionsofsupplyanddemandinthedomesticandexportmarketsundistortedbythegrantingofthesubsidy'(para1045).Whilethesubjectivemotivationsofthegrantinggovernmentmayconstituterelevantevidence,suchmotivationsarenotsufficienttoprovedefactoexportcontingency(para1050).Borduriamayargue:
• thatthe‘InnovationfortheFuture’grantiscontingentinlawuponexportperformancebecauseoneofthecriteriafortheawardofthegrantconcernstheproject’santicipatedcontributiontothe‘globalintegration’oftheEriadorianeconomy,whichexplicitlylinkstheawardofthegranttoanticipatedexportperformance;
• thatthe‘InnovationfortheFuture’grantisdefactocontingentuponexportperformancebecausehistoricalandprojectedsalesfiguresareavailabletothegovernmentwhenmakinggrantdecisions,implyingthat
11
projectsgeneratingthemostexportswillbethoseselectedforfunding,includingthegrantinquestion;2
• thatwhilethesubsidymaynotchangetheratioofFutureEnergy’sdomestictoexportsales(EC–LargeCivilAircraft,para1048),thistestisnotsuitableforsituationsinwhichthesubsidizedfirmexportsall(oressentiallyall)ofitsproduction,andthatinthiscasethetotalconfigurationoffactsdemonstratesthatthe‘InnovationfortheFuture’grantwasgearedtoincreasetheoverallvolumeofFutureEnergy’sexportsofFusilliscopes.
Eriadormayargue:
• thatthe‘InnovationfortheFuture’grantisnotcontingentinlawuponexportperformancebecause:(a)thegrantcontainsnoformalrequirementtoexport,ortofulfilsalestargets,asaconditionofitsdisbursement;(b)‘contributiontoglobalintegration’shouldnotbeequatedwith‘exportperformance’andinanycaseisnotapreconditionfortheawardofagrant;(c)whilethegovernmentmayonoccasionhaveexportperformancefiguresavailabletoitwheretheapplicantchoosestosubmitthem,submissionofsuchfiguresisnotarequirementofanapplicationandthereforeasystematiccomparativeevaluationofapplicationsonthismetricisimpossible;and(d)inanycase,pastandanticipatedfutureexportperformancecanonlyeverbeoneofmanyfactorswhichmay(butneednot)betakenintoaccountindecisionsonwhetherornottoawardagrant,anditisperfectlypossibletoobtainagrantintheabsenceofanypastoranticipatedfutureexportperformance;
• thatinthecaseofthespecificgranttoFutureEnergy,thereweremanyreasonsotherthanexportperformanceforgivingthegrant,includingthecontributiontheprojectmadetothe‘sustainablegrowth’oftheEriadorianeconomy;
• thatthegrantisnotcontingentinfactuponexportperformancebecausethesubsidydidnot‘skewanticipatedsalestowardsexports’,andFutureEnergy’sratioofexporttodomesticsalesisessentiallythesamebeforeandafterthesubsidy.
2cfCanada–Aircraft(21.5)(Brazil),para5.33.
12
4.2. Claim(b):TheInnovationfortheFutureGrantandtheEribankloancauseseriousprejudice
4.2.1. Borduria’slegalclaim
BorduriaclaimsthattheloanbyEribankandthe‘InnovationfortheFuture’grantcauseseriousprejudicetotheinterestsofBorduriawithinthemeaningofArticle5(c)oftheSCMAgreementandArticleXVI:1oftheGATT1994,astheyhaveresultedinlostsalesofsolarpanelsinthemarketforenergygenerationequipmentinCarpathiawithinthemeaningofArticle6.3(c)oftheSCMAgreement.Inordertomakeoutthisclaim,Borduriamustshowthat:
• eachofthemeasuresrepresentsa‘financialcontributionbyapublicbody’or‘incomeorpricesupport’withinthemeaningofSCMArticle1.1(a);
• eachofthemeasuresconfersa‘benefit’withinthemeaningofSCMArticle1.1(b);
• eachofthemeasuresis‘specific’withinthemeaningofSCMArticle2;and
• theeffectoftheloanandthegrant,eitherindividuallyorcumulatively,is‘significant..lostsalesinthesamemarket’,withinthemeaningofSCMArticle6.3(c).
4.2.2. Article1.1(a):‘financialcontributionbyagovernmentoranypublicbody’
or‘incomeorpricesupport’
Article1.1(a)(1)envisagesthreedifferentpossibilitiesasregardsthenatureofthebodiesinvolvedinmakingafinancialcontribution.First,afinancialcontributionmaydirectlybemadebyagovernmentinitsownright.Second,thefinancialcontributionmaybemadebyapublicbody.Third,aprivatebodyisentrustedordirectedbythegovernmenttogivethefinancialcontribution.
(a) Article1.1(a)(1)(i)
Loansandgrantsasa‘directtransferoffunds’fallwithintheexamplesof‘financialcontribution’listedinSCMArticle1.1(a)(1)(i).TheInnovationfortheFuturegrantwasmadebyagovernment.BothofthesepointsshouldbeconcededbyEriador.Thereis,however,scopefordifferentargumentsonthequestionofwhethertheEribankloanwasmadebya‘publicbody’.TheAppellateBodyhasexplainedthatbeingvestedwith,orexercising,governmentalauthorityisthekeyfeatureofapublicbody–notonlythefactofgovernmentcontrol.Thatistosay,apublicbodymustbeanentitythatpossesses,exercisesorisvestedwithgovernmentalauthority(US–AD/CVD(AB),para317).Whethertheconductofanentityisthatofapublicbodymustineachcasebedeterminedonitsownmerits,withdueregardbeinghadtothecorecharacteristicsandfunctionsoftherelevantentity,itsrelationshipwiththegovernment,andthelegalandeconomicenvironmentprevailinginthecountryinwhichtheinvestigatedentityoperates.Forexample,evidenceregardingthescopeandcontentofgovernmentpoliciesrelatingtothesectorinwhichtheinvestigatedentityoperatesmayinformthequestionofwhethertheconductofanentityisthatofapublicbody.Itmayalsoberelevantwhetherthefunctions
13
orconductoftheentityinquestionareordinarilyclassifiedasgovernmentalinthelegalorderoftherelevantMember,aswellaswithintheWTOMembershipgenerally.Theabsenceofanexpressstatutorydelegationofauthoritydoesnotnecessarilyprecludeadeterminationthataparticularentityisapublicbody.Inordertoshowthatabodyisapublicbody,itisnotsufficienttoshowmerelyformallinksbetweenthebodyandgovernment(eg,majoritygovernmentownership).Andwhileevidencethatagovernmentexercisesmeaningfulcontroloveranentityanditsconductmayserve,incertaincircumstances,asevidencethattherelevantentitypossessesgovernmentalauthority,itisnotthecasethatanyentitymeaningfullycontrolledbygovernmentisa‘publicbody’.Ininterpretingthemeaningof‘publicbody’,theexistenceofArticle1.1(a)(1)(iv)(onentrustmentordirection)isrelevantcontextbecauseitdemonstratesthatthereisadistinctionbetweenapublicbodyandaprivateentityentrustedordirectedforaspecificpurposebythegovernment.(SeegenerallyUS–AD/CVD(China)(AB),para282-322;US–CarbonSteel(India)(AB),para4.9-4.30;US–DRAMS(Korea).)Inthepresentcase,BorduriaislikelytopointtothefollowingfactorstosuggestthatEribankisa‘publicbody’:(a)Eribank’sconstitutionrequiresittoconductitsbusinesshavingregardtothestrategicpolicyprioritiesoftheEriadorianstatewhichimpliesadegreeofresponsibilityfortheimplementationofEriadorianindustrialpolicy;(b)thatEribankisusedonoccasiontodisbursegovernmentgrants,whichisanessentiallygovernmentalfunction;(c)theEriadoriangovernmentappointsEribank’sboard;and(d)thatEribankismajorityownedbythestate.Eriadormayarguethat:(a)mostofthefactspointtoadegreeofcontrolbythegovernmentoverEribank,butlittlebywayoftheexerciseorinvestitureofgovernmentalauthority;(b)thelinksbetweentheEriadoriangovernmentandEribank,asregardsownershipandthepowertoappointtheboard,areinthenatureof‘formalindiciaofcontrol’andareontheirowninsufficienttoshowthatEribankisapublicbody;(c)thatdisbursingfundsundergovernmentgrantsoughtnottobeconsideredanexerciseofgovernmentalauthority,asitconcernsmerelythetechnicalaspectsofadministeringagrant,notthepowertoawardthegrantsthemselves.(b) Article1.1(a)(1)(iv)
Afinancialcontributioncanalternativelybeshowntoexist,where‘agovernmentmakespaymentstoafundingmechanism,orentrustsordirectsaprivatebodytocarryoutoneormoreofthetypeoffunctionsillustratedin(i)to(iii)abovewhichwouldnormallybevestedinthegovernmentandthepractice,innorealsense,differsfrompracticesnormallyfollowedbygovernments’.Thisparagraphcoverssituationswhereaprivatebodyisbeingusedasaproxybythegovernment,andisintendedtoensurethatgovernmentsdonotevadetheirobligationsundertheSCMAgreementbyusingprivatebodiestotakeactionsthatwouldotherwisefallwithinArticle1.1(a)(1),weretheytobetakenbythegovernmentitself(US–CVDsonDRAMS(AB),paras108,113).TheAppellateBodyhasinterpreted"entrustment"torefertosituationsinwhichagovernmentgivesresponsibilitytoaprivatebody,and"direction"torefertosituationswhereagovernmentexercisesitsauthority,includingsomedegreeofcompulsion,overaprivatebody.Importantly,a‘direction’neednotalwaysinvolvethedegreeofobligationassociatedwitha‘command’:whilemerewords
14
ofencouragementarenotenough,intherightcircumstancesgovernmental‘guidance’canconstitutedirection.Governmentshavebothinformalandformalmeansattheirdisposaltoexerciseauthorityoveraprivatebody,someofwhicharemoresubtlethanothers(seegenerallyUS–DRAMSCVDs(AB),para109-116).Incasesinterpretingthisprovision,anumberoffactorshavebeentakenintoaccount,including:theextentofcooperationbetweenthegovernmentandtheprivatebody;theextenttowhichtheactionsoftheprivatebodyare‘non-commercial’;thedegreetowhichthegovernmentisinapositiontoexerciseinfluenceovertheprivatebody;andevidenceoftheintentofthegovernment(see,eg,US–DRAMSCVDs;Japan–DRAMSCVDs;US–CountervailingMeasures(China);EC–DRAMSCVDs.)Borduriamayarguethat:
• theloantoCleanTechwasonnon-commercialterms;• thereisclearevidencethattheEriadoriangovernmentfavouredthe
grantingoftheloan,andcommunicatedthattoEribank;• theEriadoriangovernmentisinapositiontoexerciseinfluenceoverthe
decision-makingofEribank,bothdirectlythroughthemandatedconsultationprocessandthroughitsinfluenceovermanagementasmajorityshareholder,andindirectlybyvirtueofitspowerofappointmentoftheboard;
• EribankisrequiredbyitsconstitutiontomakeitsbusinessdecisionshavingregardtothestrategicprioritiesoftheEridorianstate,whichmakesEribankespeciallysusceptibletoinfluencefromthestate;
• EribankhasahistoryofcooperatingwiththeEriadoriangovernmentonsuchmatters;and
• asaresultitisappropriatetoinfereitherentrustmentordirection,orboth,onthebasisofthetotalityofthefacts.
Eriadormayarguethat:
• thenatureoftheinfluenceoftheEriadoriangovernmentoverEribank’slendingdecisionsisconstitutionallylimitedtothatofadviceandconsultation,
• directorsareexpresslyrequiredtoactintheirindependentcapacity,andthedecisioninrelationtotheEribankloanwasexpresslystatedtobeforEribankonly;and
• thereisnopositiveevidenceofanyactionbeyondtheseparameters,whetherbythreatorinducement,whichwouldelevateittothelevelofentrustmentordirection.
4.2.3. Article1.1(b):‘benefit’
UnderArticle1.1(b),asubsidyisdeemedtoexistonlyifthefinancialcontributionconfersa‘benefit’ontherecipient.TheAppellateBodyhasexplainedthatwhetherabenefithasbeenconferredshouldnormallybedeterminedbyassessingwhethertherecipienthasreceivedthefinancialcontributionontermsmorefavourablethanthoseavailabletotherecipientinthemarket(eg,Canada–Aircraft(AB),para157).ThereisnoquestionthattheInnovationfortheFutureGrantconfersabenefit,becauseitisanon-repayablegrant.Furthermore,EriadorhasconcededthattheEribankloanconferredabenefitonCleanTech(Case,para15).Theonlydifficultlegalquestion,therefore,iswhetherthebenefitoftheEribankloanwas
15
extinguishedasaresultofthesaleoftheFusilliscopebusinessfromCleanTechtoFutureEnergy.Note:someteamsmaychoosetoraisethequestionofpassthroughatthestageofdeterminingcausationunderArticle6.Thisisperfectlypermissible,andaslongasthisissueisdiscussed,itdoesnotmatterinpracticaltermswhetheritisdonehere,oratthelaterstage.TheAppellateBodyhasmadeclearthatthereisarebuttablepresumptionthatprivatizationsofasubsidizedstate-ownedproduceratarm'slengthandforfairmarketvalueextinguishthebenefitofthesubsidy(eg,US–CVMeasuresonCertainECProductsAB),para127;US–LeadandBismuthII(AB),para68).However,inEC–LargeCivilAircraft,differentmembersoftheAppellateBodycouldnotagreeonwhetherthissameprincipleappliedinthecaseofprivate-to-privatesales(seepara726).Thispresumptionhasbeencriticizedinthesecondaryliterature.3Differentviewsonthisquestionrevolvetoalargeextentarounddifferentunderstandingsofthenatureofthe‘benefit’inquestion.Ifthe‘benefit’enjoyedbytherecipientofthesubsidyisunderstoodasanincreaseinitswealth,thenthepresumptionmakessense:thisincreaseinwealthisfullyretainedbytheselleronsaleofthebusinessatfairmarketvalue.However,ifthe‘benefit’isunderstoodasadecreaseinthemarginalcostofproduction(iethesubsidyallowsthesubsidizedproducertoproducemoreofthegoodatlowercost),thenthepresumptiondoesnotmakesense.Thisisbecausethissortofbenefitmaywellalsobeenjoyedbythebuyerofthebusiness,forexamplewherethesubsidyresultedinthecreationofanew,moreefficientproductionfacilitywhichwouldnototherwisehaveexisted.Discussionofthisissuewillrequireteamstothinkcarefullyabouttherationaleofthepresumption,andwhetherthisrationaleappliesequallyinthecontextofthepresentfacts,inlightofthebasicpurposeoftheSCMAgreement.PointsmaybeawardedforteamspersuasivelydisagreeingwiththeAB’sreasoningintheprivatizationcases.Borduriamayargue:
• thepresumptionoftheextinctionofthebenefitofasubsidyafterasaleatfairmarketvalueandatarm’slengthdoesnotapplytoprivate-to-privatesales;
• thattheEribankloanclearlyresultedinareductionofCleanTech’smarginalcostsofproduction,andanincreaseinitsoverallproductionofFusilliscopes,sincethefirstproductionfacilitywouldnothaveexistedatallabsenttheloan,andsincethecreationofthisfacilitypermittedCleanTechtomakeitsproductionprocessmoreefficient;and
• thatthisbenefit(thereductioninmarginalcostsofproductionandoverallincreaseinproduction,comparedtowhatotherwisewouldexist)continuedtoexistafterthesaleofthebusiness,andwaspassedontoFutureEnergywhenitpurchasedthefirstproductionfacility;and
3See,eg,GeneM.GrossmanandPetrosC.Mavroidis,‘UnitedStates–ImpositionofCountervailingDutiesonCertainHot-RolledLeadandBismuthCarbonSteelProductsOriginatingintheUnitedKingdom:HereToday,GoneTomorrow?PrivatizationandtheInjuryCausedbyNon-RecurringSubsidies’,inHenrikHornandPetrosC.Mavroidis(eds),TheWTOCaseLawof2001:TheAmericanLawInstituteReporters’Studies(Cambridge,UK:CambridgeUniversityPress,2001);Diamond,‘PrivatizationandTheDefinitionofSubsidy:ACriticalStudyofAppellateBodyTexturalism’(2008)11(3)JIEL649.
16
• thatevenifthebenefitofthesubsidieswereextinguishedasaresultoftheprivate-to-privatesalestransaction,thisdoesnotnecessarilymeanthattheeffectsoftheextinguishedsubsidiesdonotcauseseriousprejudice.Inotherwords,thereisnoneedforthebenefitofasubsidytocoincidetemporarilywithitseffects-theremaybeatimelagbetweentheeffectsofasubsidyandtheexistenceofitsbenefit.(EC–LargeCivilAircraft(AB),paras.712,771).
Eriadormayargue:
• thatthepresumptionwhichtheAppellateBodyestablishedinitsprivatizationcasesappliesequallytoprivate-to-privatesales;
• thattheterm‘benefit’inSCMArticle1.1(b)referstoincreaseinwealthonthepartoftherecipientofthesubsidy,andthatthisbenefitwasclearlyextinguishedbythearm’slengthsaletoFutureEnergyatfairmarketvalue.
4.2.4. Article1.2andArticle2:‘specific’
ByvirtueofSCMArticle1.2,asubsidyissubjecttothePartIIIoftheagreementonlyifitis‘specific’inaccordancewiththeprovisionsofArticle2.Therequirementofspecificity‘servestoacknowledgethatsomesubsidiesarebroadlyavailableandwidelyusedthroughoutaneconomyandarethereforenotsubjecttotheAgreement’ssubsidydisciplines’(US–UplandCotton(Panel),para7.1143).Article2distinguishesbetweenthreedifferentcategoriesofspecificity:enterprise-specificity;industry-specificity;andregionalspecificity.TheteamswillbeexpectedtoapplyArticle2.1todeterminethespecificityofthetwosubsidiesatissuehere.ThesomewhatcomplexstructureofArticle2.1(reproducedattheendofthismemo)hasbeenexplainedbytheAppellateBodyasfollows:
Article2.1(a)establishesthatasubsidyisspecificifthegrantingauthority,orthelegislationpursuanttowhichthegrantingauthorityoperates,explicitlylimitsaccesstothatsubsidytoeligibleenterprisesorindustries.Article2.1(b)inturnsetsoutthatspecificity“shallnotexist”ifthegrantingauthority,orthelegislationpursuanttowhichthegrantingauthorityoperates,establishesobjectivecriteriaorconditionsgoverningtheeligibilityfor,andtheamountof,thesubsidy,providedthateligibilityisautomatic,thatsuchcriteriaorconditionsarestrictlyadheredto,andthattheyareclearlyspelledoutinanofficialdocumentsoastobecapableofverification.…Finally,Article2.1(c)setsoutthat,notwithstandinganyappearanceofnon-specificityresultingfromtheprincipleslaiddowninsub-paragraphs(a)and(b),otherfactorsmaybeconsiderediftherearereasonstobelievethatasubsidymay,infact,bespecificinaparticularcase.(US–AD/CVDs(China)(AB),para367)
Article2.1(a)thereforeapplieswherethereisalimitation,onthefaceofthelegislationorinotherstatementsormeansbywhichthegrantingauthorityexpressesitswill,thatexpresslyandunambiguouslyrestrictstheavailabilityofasubsidyto'certainenterprises'andasaresultdoesnotmakethesubsidy'sufficientlybroadlyavailablethroughoutaneconomy'(EC–LargeCivilAircraft(AB),para949;US–UplandCotton(Panel),para7.1142).The‘objectivecriteriaorconditions’referredtounderArticle2.1(b)aredefinedinfootnote2tomean‘criteriaorconditionswhichareneutral,whichdonotfavourcertainenterprises
17
overothers,andwhichareeconomicinnatureandhorizontalinapplication,suchasnumberofemployeesorsizeofenterprise’.AstoArticle2.1(c),thefactorstobeconsideredare:‘useofasubsidyprogrammebyalimitednumberofcertainenterprises,predominantusebycertainenterprises,thegrantingofdisproportionatelylargeamountsofsubsidytocertainenterprises,andthemannerinwhichdiscretionhasbeenexercisedbythegrantingauthorityinthedecisiontograntasubsidy.’InapplyingArticle2.1(c),‘accountshallbetakenoftheextentofdiversificationofeconomicactivitieswithinthejurisdictionofthegrantingauthority,aswellasofthelengthoftimeduringwhichthesubsidyprogrammehasbeeninoperation.’(a) SpecificityoftheEribankloan
EriadorwouldbewisetoconcedethattheEribankloanisspecific.Itisinthenatureofaone-offloantransaction,notaloanissuedunderthetermsofabroaderprogramme.Itthereforefallstobeanalysedonitsownassingletransaction,andassuchisexplicitlyenterprise-specificunderArticle2.1(a).(b) SpecificityoftheInnovationfortheFuturegrant
ThefirstquestiontobedeterminediswhetherthespecificityoftheIFFgrantshouldbedeterminedatthelevelofthesubsidy,orthelevelofthesubsidyprogrammepursuanttowhichitisawarded.ThePanelinUS–LargeCivilAircraftstatedthatspecificitymustgenerallybeanalysedatthelevelofthesubsidyprogrammepursuanttowhichindividualpaymentsareprovided(wherethesubsidytakestheformofapayment,andwhereitisprovidedpursuanttoawiderprogramme),andnotatthelevelofeachindividualpaymenttakeninisolation,absentoneormorereasonsastowhyananalysisattheleveloftheentireprogrammeisnotappropriate(para7.1252).However,wheretheprogrammeitselfisnotfoundtobespecific,itmayinsomecircumstancesbepossiblestilltofindtheindividualtransactionspecific.ThePanelinJapan–DRAMS(Korea)statedthat
Anindividualtransactionwouldbe“specific”,though,ifitresultedfromaframeworkprogrammewhosenormaloperation(1)doesnotgenerallyresultinfinancialcontributions,and(2)doesnotpre-determinethetermsonwhichanyresultantfinancialcontributionsmightbeprovided,butratherrequires(a)consciousdecisionsastowhetherornottoprovidethefinancialcontribution(tooneapplicantoranother),and(b)consciousdecisionsastohowthetermsofthefinancialcontributionshouldbetailoredtotheneedsoftherecipientcompany.(para7.374)
Japan–DRAMS(Korea)concernedarestructuringarrangementdesignedtosaveaspecificindividualcompanyfrominsolvency,anditwasinpartthispoliticalintentwhichconvincedthePanelthatitwasappropriateinthatcasetoanalysethecaseattheleveloftheindividualtransaction(para7.373).Attheleveloftheprogramme,itwillbedifficultforBorduriatoarguethatthereisexplicitspecificityofanysortinthetermsoftheInnovationfortheFutureprogrammewithinthemeaningofArticle2.1(a).TheprogrammeisopentoallbusinessesoperatinginanysectoroftheEriadorianeconomy.LikeinUS-LargeCivilAircraft,4thecriteriaforawardofgrantsaresufficientlybroadandvague
4Theprogrammeinthatcasereferredto‘highrisk,highpay-off,emergingandenabling
18
nottolimittheprogramtoanidentifiableindustryorgroupofindustries.Atthesametime,EriadorcannotarguethatArticle2.1(b)appliestotheIFFprogram:thecriteriaaccordingtowhichgrantsareawardedareprobablynot‘objective’,certainlydonotautomaticallytriggertheawardofagrant,donotcovertheamountofthegrant,andalmostcertainlydon’taccordwiththerequirementsofthefootnotetoArticle2.1(b).ArgumentwillthereforecentreontheapplicationofArticle2.1(c),relatingtodefactospecificity.Sinceteamshavenotbeengivendataconcerningthenatureandnumberoftheenterprisestowhomgrantshavebeenawarded,argumentsshouldonlyconcernindustry-specificity.Wherethegrantingofthesubsidyindicatesadisparitybetweentheexpecteddistributionofthatsubsidyanditsactualdistribution,apanelwillberequiredtoexaminethereasonsforthatdisparitysoasultimatelytodeterminewhethertherehasbeenagrantingofdisproportionatelylargeamountsofasubsidytocertainenterprises(US–LargeCivilAircraft(AB),para879).Averylargedisparitymayinitselfconstitutesufficientevidenceofspecificityintheabsenceofconvincingrebuttal(id,para888).Itisrelevanttoconsidernotonlytheactual,butalsothepotentialrecipientsofaparticularsubsidy(US–CountervailingMeasures(China)(AB)para4.140).Astotheconceptof‘industry’,thecasesindicatethatthatanindustry,or‘groupofindustries’,maybegenerallyreferredtobythetypeofproductstheyproduce:‘theconceptofan“industry”relatestoproducersofcertainproducts’(US–UplandCotton(Panel),para7.1142;US–AV/CVDs(China)(AB),para373).Borduriamayarguethat:
• thespecificityoftheIFFgrantshouldbedeterminedattheleveloftheindividualgrant,asinJapan–DRAMS(Korea);
• evenattheleveloftheIFFprogramme,‘therenewableenergysector’representsa‘groupofindustries’withinthemeaningofSCMArticle2.1(c),andthefactthat90%ofgrantrecipientsareintherenewableenergysector,whilethatsectorrepresentslessthan10%ofeligiblebusinessesacrossthehighlydiversifiedEriadorianeconomyasawhole,raisesastrongprimafaciecasethattheprogrammeisdefactospecifictoagroupofindustriesunderSCMArticle2.1(c);and
• therearenofactsavailableintheCasetoofferaconvincingrebuttalofthatprimafaciecase.
Eriadormayarguethat:
• thespecificityofthegrantshouldbedeterminedattheleveloftheprogramme,asthefactsofthiscasearedistinguishablefromJapan–DRAMS(Korea);
• ‘therenewableenergysector’istoobroadanddifferentiatedtorepresentan‘industry’or‘groupofindustries’withinthemeaningofSCMArticle2.1(c);
• whenaccountistakenofthelimiteddurationoftheprojectsofar,adegreeofdisproportionistobeexpected,whichislikelytoevenoutovertime;and
• takenasawhole,thefactsareinsufficienttoshowaprimafaciecaseofspecificity.
4.2.5. SCMArticle5andArticle6.3(c):‘theeffectofthesubsidyissignificant…
lostsalesinthesamemarket’technologies’.
19
SCMArticle5providesthatnoMember‘shouldcause,throughtheuseofanysubsidyreferredtoinparagraphs1and2ofArticle1,adverseeffectstotheinterestsofotherMembers,i.e.:…(c)seriousprejudicetotheinterestsofanotherMember’.Footnote13tothatprovisionclarifiesthat‘theterm“seriousprejudicetotheinterestsofanotherMember”…includesthreatofseriousprejudice.’Article6.3(c)furtherprovidesthat‘Seriousprejudiceinthesenseofparagraph(c)ofArticle5mayariseinanycasewhere…(c)theeffectofthesubsidyis…significant…lostsalesinthesamemarket.’
BorduriamustthereforeshowthattheeffectoftheEribankloanandtheInnovationfortheFuturegrant,eitherindividuallyorcollectively,hasbeensignificantlostsalesonthepartoftheBordurianproducer(SolarTech),andthatSolarTech’sproductscompeteinthesamemarketasthesubsidizedproduct.Youshouldexpectmostoftheargumentatthispointintheanalysistofocusonthequestionofcausation:thatistosay,thequestionofwhetherthefailureofSolarTechtowinthecontractwithElektricaistheeffectofthesubsidiestoFutureEnergy,whetherindividuallyorcumulatively.
(a) ‘theeffectofthesubsidy…’
Borduriamustshowthereisa‘genuineandsubstantialrelationshipofcauseandeffect’betweentheloanandthegrant,ononehand,andthelostsalesbySolarTech,ontheother(EC–LargeCivilAircraft(AB),para1232).Thiscanbeshownthroughademonstrationthatthemeasuresinquestionareanecessaryandsubstantialcause,eveniftheyarenotasufficientcauseinthemselves(id,para1233).Thecausationtestwillnotbesatisfiediftheeffectofotherfactorsissuchastorendertheimpactofthesubsidiestooremoteorattenuated(seegenerally,EC–LargeCivilAircraft(AB),para1232-1233).Analysingtheeffectofthesubsidywillnecessarilyinvolvecounterfactualanalysis–thatis,acomparisonoftheexistingmarketsituationwiththemarketsituationwhichwouldhavearisenintheabsenceofthesubsidy(US–UplandCotton(21.5-Brazil)(AB),para351).Here,thatmayinvolveseekingtoascertainthelikelyoutcomeoftheElektricadealintheabsenceofthesubsidy(subsidies)inquestion.Generallyspeaking,itappearseasiertoshowthatsubsidiescontingentonexportperformancecontributetoadverseeffects,sinceintheirnaturetheymodifytheincentivesfacedbyadomesticproducer,rewarddiscriminationinfavourofproductionforexportmarketsoverthedomesticmarket,andtherebyreduceexportprices.Evenrelativelysmallsubsidiesmayhavesignificanteffects,dependingonthenatureofthesubsidies,andthecircumstancesinwhichthosesubsidiesarereceived,includingtherelevantmarketstructureandconditionsofcompetitioninthatmarket(US–LargeCivilAircraft(AB),para1253-1254).SinceBorduriaisallegingthatthelostsalesaretheresultoftwosubsidies,thequestionarisesastowhethertheeffectsofeachsubsidyaretobeanalysedseparately,ortogether.Itisperfectlypossibleforeachsubsidytobeanalysedseparatelyastowhethertheyindividuallyconstituteagenuineandsubstantivecause,thoughinthatcasecaremustbetakentoensurethat,asaresultofthisatomizedapproachnosubsidyatallisfoundtobeasubstantialcause(US–LargeCivilAircraft(AB),para1284).Asregardsanalyzingcollectivecausation,theAppellateBodyhasstatedthatthereareatleasttwopermissible
20
approaches:aggregation(wheresufficientlysimilarsubsidiesaregroupedtogether,andtheeffectsofthegroupasawholearedetermined);andcumulation(whereasinglesubsidyisanalysedtodeterminewhetheritconstitutesagenuineandsubstantivecauseofadverseeffects,andothersubsidiesareanalysedtodeterminetheextenttowhichtheyhaveagenuinecausalconnectiontothesameeffects)(US–LargeCivilAircraft(AB),para1284ff).Bothapproachesareprobablyavailableinthepresentcase,butthebetterBordurianteamsshouldrealizethattheyarelikelytohaveamarginallyeasiertimearguingacaseforcumulation,asperthePanel’sapproachinEC–LargeCivilAircraft.Butthisisaminorpoint,andnottoomuchshouldbemadeofit.Argumentsaboutcausationareinevitablyfactintensive,andyoushouldexpectteamstoofferawiderangeofcreativeargumentsbasedonvariousinterpretationsofthesparsefactsintheproblem.Forthepurposesofthemoot,themostimportantthingisthattheteams:(a)demonstratethattheyunderstandandcanapplytheapplicablelegaltestsofcausation;and(b)showgoodjudgmentinselectingthemostplausibleandpersuasiveargumentsmadeavailablebythefactsoftheCase.Aslongastheseskillsaredemonstrated,pleasedotrytostopteamstakingtoomuchoftheirallottedtimeattemptingoverlycomplicatedcausalarguments,orspeculatingaboutfactswhicharenotgivenintheproblem.Borduriamayargue(muchliketheUSinEC–Aircraft):
• thatwithoutthesubsidiesFusilliscopeswouldnothaveenteredintoproductionatallbythetimeoftheElektricasale,oratleastwouldhavebeenanimmatureandtechnologicallylessadvancedproduct,andthatthereforeFutureEnergycouldnotpossiblyhavewontheElektricacontractwithoutthesubsidies;and
• evenifitisfoundthattheFusilliscopescouldorwouldhaveenteredproduction,thesubsidiesenabledFutureEnergytoreducedthemarginalcostsofproductionofFusilliscopes(byenablinglearningeffectsandeconomiesofscale),allowingittoofferapricediscountbelowthelevelthatwouldotherwisehavebeeneconomicallyjustifiable,whichwasdecisiveinElektrica’sdecisiontogivethecontracttoFutureEnergy;
• andthatthereforeevenifotherfactorscontributedtothelostsales,thesubsidies,individuallyand/orcumulatively,neverthelessstillconstituteda‘genuineandsubstantive’causeofthem.
Eriadormayargue:
• thatwithouttheEribankloan,CleanTech’sabilitytoconstructthefirstproductionwouldnothavebeenprecludedbutmerelydelayed,andthatitisverylikelythatproductionwouldhavestartedinanycasebythetimeoftheElektricadeal;
• thatFutureEnergywouldhaveofferedthe50%discounttoElektricaevenwithoutthesubsidies,giventhestrategicimportanceoftheCarpathianmarketandofElektricaasabusinesspartner;
• thatElektrica’sdecisiontoawardthecontracttoFutureEnergywasnotprimarilybasedonpricecompetition,butonothercompetitiveadvantagesofFusilliscopes,egtheirabilitytoprovideelectricityacrossdifferentloadtypes,theirbetterscalabilityascomparedtosolar;theirlowervariablecostsofelectricityproduction,andtheirstatusasanadvancedanddisruptivetechnology.
21
(b)‘significant’lostsalesinthe‘samemarket’,and‘threatofseriousprejudice’ SomeEriadorianteamsmayoffertwofurther,somewhatweakerargumentsin
responsetothisclaim.First,theymaysuggestthat,evenifthesubsidiesledtothelostsalesinquestion,theselostsaleswerenot‘significant’.TheAppellateBodyhasnotedthattheterm‘significant’means"important,notableorconsequential",andhasbothquantitativeandqualitativedimensions(US—UplandCotton(Article21.5-Brazil)(AB),para.416).Lostsalescanhavesignificantbeyondtheirdirectrevenueeffects,forexample,totheextentthattheydelayamanufacturer'sabilitytobenefitfromtheimportantlearningeffectsandeconomiesofscaleinthisindustry(EC–LargeCivilAircraft(AB),para7.1845).Theymayalsohavelargersignificancewherethecustomerisstrategic(ibid.).Inthiscase,however,thefactsstronglysuggestthatthelostsalesaresignificant.Mostteamsarethereforelikelytoconcedethispoint.
SomeEriadorianteamsmayalsotrytomountanargumentthattheselostsales
werenotinthe‘samemarket’asrequiredbyArticle6.3(c).Salescanbelost"inthesamemarket",withinthemeaningofArticle6.3(c),onlyifthesubsidizedproductandthecomplainant’sproductscompeteinthesameproductmarket(US–UplandCotton(AB),para408-9;EC–LargeCivilAircraft(AB),para1119-1123).WhilethefactsoftheElektricadealthemselvesstronglysuggestthatsolarpanelsandFusilliscopescompeteforthesamecustomers,someteamsmayattempttoarguethatthesegenerationtechnologiesaresufficientlydifferentthattheyfallwithindistinctproductmarkets.AlthoughitisnotaformalelementofaclaimunderArticle6.3(c)(atleastasitrelatestolostsales–seeKorea–Vessels),neverthelessyoumayfindsometeamsreferringtotheconceptof‘likeproducts’atthispointintheargument.Itisnotunreasonabletosuggestthatproductsare‘inthesamemarket’iftheyare‘likeproducts’,andasaresulttheargumentsreferredtosection4.3.5belowmayberelevanthere.
SomeBordurianteamsmayalsomountasecondarycasethat,evenifthereisinsufficientevidenceofadverseeffects,neverthelessathreatoflostsalesstillexists,asperfootnote14totheSCMAgreementreferredtoabove.Thefactualbasisforsuchaclaimwouldbequitesparse,andasaresultfewteamsarelikelytospendahugeamountofspaceonit.Nevertheless,thosewhomakeapersuasivecaseonthisrelativelyadvancedpointmayberewarded.
22
4.3. Claim(c):TheFeed-in-tariffscheme
Importantnote:fromthequestionswhicharoseintherequestsforclarifications,itisclearthatsometeamshavefocusedtheirattentiononthediscriminatoryaspectsofthismeasure.Tosomeextentthisisunderstandable:thereisanobviousproblemwiththeFITcontractasanattempttopromoterenewableenergyinEriador,namelythatitsinglesoutcoldfusionforspecialtreatment,whileofferingnosimilarassistanceatalltootherrenewableenergieswhichmaybeequallybeneficialfortheenvironment.Inotherwords,thereisastrongintuitiveargumentthatitisdiscriminatoryinsomesense.ButitisimportanttorememberthatevidenceofdiscriminationisatbestonlyindirectlyrelevantundertheSCMAgreement,andinrealitythisaspectwouldnormallybechallengedunderanotheragreement.Ifteamstrysomehowtobringinthemeasure’sdiscriminatoryaspectsintotheirargument,theymustclearlyandpersuasivelymakeacasefortheirrelevanceunderaspecificprovisionoftheSCMAgreement.
4.3.1. Borduria’slegalclaim
BorduriaclaimsthatthelongtermpurchaseagreementbetweenFutureEnergyandEEC,concludedpursuanttotheFITScheme,describedinpara11oftheCase,causesseriousprejudicetotheinterestsofBorduriawithinthemeaningofArticle5(c)oftheSCMAgreementandArticleXVI:1oftheGATT1994,asithasdisplacedandimpededimportsofelectricityfromBorduriaintoEriadorwithinthemeaningofArticle6.3(a)oftheSCMAgreement.Inordertomakeoutthisclaim,Borduriamustshowthat:
• theFITcontractrepresentsa‘financialcontributionbyagovernmentoranypublicbody’or‘incomeorpricesupport’withinthemeaningofSCMArticle1.1(a);
• theFITcontractconfersa‘benefit’withinthemeaningofSCMArticle1.1(b);
• theFITcontractis‘specific’withinthemeaningofSCMArticle2;and• theeffectoftheFITcontractisto‘displaceorimpedetheimportsofa
likeproduct’,withinthemeaningofSCMArticle6.3(a).
4.3.2. Article1.1(a):‘financialcontributionbyagovernmentoranypublicbody’or‘incomeorpricesupport
ThemeasureatissuehasbeendesignedtomirrorquitecloselytherelevantaspectsofthechallengedFITProgrammeinCanada–Feed-inTariff.Inthatcase,itwasfoundthatthemeasurewasa‘governmentpurchaseofgoods’underArticle1.1(a)(1)(iii),andthesameconclusionisappropriatehere.ThereisnograntaspecttothepaymentsundertheFITcontractbetweenEECandFutureEnergy:paymentsmadeunderthecontractareforelectricitydeliveredintothegrid.TheEECtakespossessionoftheelectricityforresaletoretailconsumers.TheEECisactingentirelyunderthecontroloftheEriadoriangovernmentinthisrespect,andinanycaseisapublicbodyitself.NotealsothatEriadorandBorduriahavebothagreedtoproceedonthebasisthatelectricityisa‘good’nota‘service’.EriadorwouldthereforebewisetoconcedethattheFITschemeisa‘governmentpurchaseofgoods’.SometeamsontheBorduriansidemayseektomaketheclaimthatthemeasureisalsoa‘formofincomeorpricesupport’underArticle1.1(b).Thisisarguable,
23
andthepossibilitywasleftopenbythePanelinCanada–FIT.However,thebetterteamsshouldnotspendtoomuchspaceonthispoint,asthemeasureisa‘governmentpurchaseofgoods’,anditisbettertospendmorespaceonthemoredifficultandinterestingquestionof‘benefit’.
4.3.3. Article1.1(b):‘benefit’
Thisisthemostimportantandperhapsthemostconceptuallydifficultquestionoflawinthisclaim,andasignificantamountofspaceshouldbespentonargumentsconcerningit.UnderArticle1.1(b),asubsidyisdeemedtoexistonlyifthefinancialcontributionconfersa‘benefit’ontherecipient.Asnotedabove,theAppellateBodyhasstatedthatwhetherabenefithasbeenconferredshouldbedeterminedbyassessingwhethertherecipienthasreceiveda‘financialcontributionontermsmorefavourablethanthoseavailabletotherecipientinthemarket’(Canada–Aircraft(AB),para157).UsingArticle14(d)asinterpretivecontext,onewaytoassessthisquestionhereistoexaminewhethertheremunerationobtainedbycoldfusiongeneratorsundertheFITschemeis"morethanadequate"whencomparedtotheremunerationthesamegeneratorswould,inthelightofthe"prevailingmarketconditions",otherwisereceiveontherelevant"market"forelectricityinEriador.ThiswastheapproachadoptedinCanada–FIT.Theanalysisthereforeproceedsintwosteps:first,definingtherelevantmarket;andsecond,determiningtherelevantbenchmarkpriceinthatmarket.(a) Whatistherelevant‘market’?Thefirstquestiontheteamswillhavetoaddressisthedefinitionofthemarketinquestion,fromwhichabenchmarkistobediscerned.ThiswasamajorissueintheCanada–FITdispute,onwhichtherewasanimportantdisagreementbetweenthePanelandtheAppellateBody.ThePaneldefinedtherelevantmarketasthewholesaleelectricitymarketasawhole;whiletheAppellateBodydefineditmorenarrowlyasthewholesalemarketforwind-andsolar-PVgeneratedelectricity.TheAppellateBody’spositionhasbeenheavilycriticizedinthesecondaryliterature,5andassuchitisopentoteamstodisagreewiththeABonthispoint,and/ortodistinguishtheAB’srulinginthatcaseonthebasisofitsfacts.Importantly,thefactsofthiscasehavebeendesignedtomakeitinbothsides’interesttodefinethemarketinbroadtermsasthemarketforwholesaleelectricityasawhole.ThisisprimarilybecauseEriador’sbenchmarkpriceinitsFITcontractsiscalculatedonthebasisofasinglemarketforwholesaleelectricityasawhole.Nevertheless,youshouldexpectsometeamstoarguethispoint.
5See,eg,Rubini,‘‘TheGood,theBadandtheUgly.’LessonsonMethodologyinLegalAnalysisfromtheRecentWTOLitigationonRenewableEnergySubsidies’(2014)48(5)JWT895-938;CharnovitzandFischer,‘Canada–RenewableEnergy:ImplicationsforWTOLawonGreenandNot-so-GreenSubsidies’(2015)14(2)WorldTradeReview177-210;Pal,‘HastheAppellateBody’sDecisioninCanada–RenewableEnergy/Canada–Feed-InTariffProgramOpenedtheDoorforProductionSubsidies’,(2014)17(1)JIEL125-137;CosbeyandMavroidis,‘ATurquoiseMess:GreenSubsidies,BlueIndustrialPolicyandRenewableEnergy:TheCaseforRedraftingtheSubsidiesAgreementoftheWTO’(2014)17(1)JIEL11-47.
24
Thefollowingfactorspointtotheexistenceinthiscaseofasinglewholesalemarketforelectricity:(a)thereisfulldemand-sidesubstitutabilityattheretaillevelbetweenallelectricityregardlessofhowitisproduced;(b)therearenophysicaldifferencesbetweendifferentformsofelectricitydependingonhowitisproduced;(c)thereisstrongsupply-sidesubstitutability,ascoldfusioniscapableofproducingbase-,intermediate-andpeak-loadelectricity,makingitpotentiallycompetitivewithallothergenerationtechnologies;(d)priortotheFITscheme,theEECdidnotdistinguishinitspricingpracticesbetweendifferentgenerationtechnologies,andstillmakesnodistinctionbetweenrenewableandnon-renewablegenerationtechnologiesoutsidetheFITscheme;(e)theFITformulaiscalculatedonthebasisthatthereisasinglewholesaleelectricitymarket;(f)thesamebroadcontracttypesareequallyappliedtoallgeneratorsinthemarket,regardlessofgenerationtechnology;(g)thefactthat7%oftheEriadorianmarketwassuppliedbyrenewableenergy,withoutspecificsupportforthesegenerators,suggeststhatgovernmentinterventionisnotnecessarytocreateamarketforrenewableenergygenerally(asopposedtocoldfusionspecifically).Thefollowingfactorspointtotheexistenceofaseparatemarketforelectricityderivedfromcoldfusion(andothercomparablerenewableenergytechnologies);(a)thefactssuggestthatamarketforcoldfusionelectricitywouldnotexistabsenttheFITscheme;(b)theproductioncoststructureforcoldfusion(highcapitalcosts,lowvariableoperatingcosts)issimilartosolarandwind,anddifferentfromtraditionalnon-renewablesources;(c)thegovernmentmandatedsupplymixhastheconsequencethattheEECmustmakeadistinctioninitspurchasingdecisionsbetweendifferentgenerationtechnologies,thusreducingthesubstitutabilityinpracticebetweenthem.Thefollowinganalysisproceedsonthebasisthatthe‘market’inthiscaseisthemarketforwholesaleelectricityasawhole,takingthegovernment-mandatedsupplymixasgiven,whichisthebetterviewonthefactsofthiscase.Importantly,whichevermarketisdeterminedtobetheappropriateone,itisclearthatthemarketmustbedefinedtakingthegovernment-mandatedsupplymixasgiven(Canada–FIT(AB),para5.190). (b) IdentificationoftherelevantbenchmarkpriceinthedefinedmarketOncethemarkethasbeendefined,thenexttaskistoidentifyanappropriatebenchmarkpriceinthatmarket.Forthepurposesofthepresentcase,thekeyprinciplesforthedeterminationofanappropriatebenchmarkareasfollows.First,properbenchmarkpriceswouldnormallyemanatefromthemarketforthegoodinquestioninthecountryofprovision(US–CarbonSteel(India)(AB),para4.151).ThestartingpointofanalysisisthereforetheelectricitypricesintheEriadorianmarketasdeterminedbythecombinationofgeneralcontractsandspotmarkets.
Second,however,thesepricesmayinsomecircumstancesberejectedasinappropriate.TheAppellateBodyhasmadeclearthatexistingin-countrypricesmayinsomecircumstancesberejectedasbenchmarksifthereisasufficientlysignificantpricedistortioninthedomesticmarket,suchthatthedomesticpricesarenotinrealitymarketdetermined(seeUS–AD/CVDs(Chinas)(AB)para446);US–CountervailingMeasures(China)(AB),para4.50;US–CarbonSteel(India)(AB);para4.155;US–SoftwoodLumberIV(AB),para100).Yetimportantly,inall
25
ofthesecases,thedistortionarosefromtheactionsofgovernmentasamarketparticipantaffectingmarketpricesthroughtheexerciseofmarketpower.Thisisnotthecasehere,wherethedistortionresultsfromthefactthatpricesonthewholesalemarketdonotaccountforthenegativeexternalityofcarbonemissions,andtheinvolvementofgovernmentinthecreationandmaintenanceofthatdistortionisofadifferentkind.Itisthereforenotclearwhetherthedistortioninthepresentcaseisattributabletogovernmentactioninthesamewayasinthecasescitedabove,andifnot,whetherthislineofjurisprudenceapplies.
Third,ifexistingin-countrypricesareappropriatelyrejectedasdistorted,thequestionthenbecomeshowtoconstructanalternativebenchmark.Differentapproachesarepossible:datafromothercountriesmaybeused,orproxypricesmaybeconstructedusingvariousmethods,providedthattheyreflecttheprevailingmarketconditionsforthegoodorserviceinquestioninthecountryofprovisionorpurchase.InCanada–FIT,thePanelsuggestedthatabenchmarkbasedonproductioncosts,withareasonablerateofreturn,maybeappropriate.TheAppellateBodyexpressednoviewonthemeritsofthiscomparison,butsuggestedotherpossibilities(para5.217,5.227ff).Importantly,however,thefactsinthiscasearenotsufficienttoconstructreliablebenchmarksonthebasisofeitherforeigncountrymarkets,orproductioncosts,andteamswillthereforehavetobasetheirargumentsprimarilyontheappropriatenessoftheproxyconstructedbyEriador,replicatedintheFITformula.SomeBordurianteamsmaywellrealizethattheireasiestlineofattackmightbetochallengethespecificsoftheFITformulaitself,whichhasanumberofflawsifitspurposeistoapproximatethecostofelectricityinanundistortedmarket.Therearemanyreasonswhythedetailsofthisformulamightbeproblematic,eg:shouldMbeanaveragepriceorshoulditbetiedtospotmarkettransactions?shouldFutureEnergy’ssupplybeexcludedfromthecalculationoftheaverageM?IsMrealisticgiventhatthesupplymixwhichwouldactuallyexistinatrulycompetitivemarketmightbeverydifferentfromtheexistingmarket?Isthepricegiventoonetonofcarbonreasonable,oritisoverestimated?Followingtheseprinciples,Borduriamayargue:
• thatactuallyexistingin-countrypricesoutsideoftheFITSchemeareappropriatebenchmarks,astheyaredeterminedbymarketcompetition(competitivetenderinthecaseofgeneralcontracts,anddirectcompetitioninthecaseofspotmarkettransactions);
• thatwhilethedomesticelectricitymarketisdistortedbythenegativeexternalitiesassociatedwithcarbonemissions,thisisnotapricedistortioncausedbygovernmentalintervention,andthereforeisnotareason(underthecurrentjurisprudence)forrejectingin-countrypricesasbenchmarks;
• thatevenifitispermissibletoconstructabenchmarkbycorrectingforthisdistortion,theFITformuladoesnotcorrectlydoso,andinfactsystematicallyover-estimatestheelectricitypricewhichwouldexistintheEriadorianmarketifitwerenotdistorted,andprovidesmorethanadequateremuneration;
• thatitisnotappropriatetoadoptamarketbenchmarkwhichcorrectsforonlyonedistortion,andnotthemanyotherswhicharguablybesetenergymarkets;
26
• evenifthePanelfindsthatexistingmarketpriceswouldnotsustainthegovernment-mandatedsupplymix,andthatthepriceforcoldfusionelectricitywouldthereforehavetobehigherthanmarketpricestosustainthissupplymix,neverthelesstheFITformulaisclearlytoohighasitresultsinaproportionofrenewableenergywellinexcessofthedefinedminimum.
Eriadormayargue:
• thatactuallyexistingmarketpricesinEriador(otherthanFITprices)arenotappropriatebenchmarksbecausetheexistingmarketisdistortedsinceitdoesnotaccountforthenegativeexternalityofcarbonemissions,andthatthisdistortionhasbeenrecognizedassignificantbyallpartiestotheFCPRE;
• that,furthermore,actuallyexistingmarketpricesshouldberejectedbecausetheycannotsustainthesupplymixdefinedbytheEriadoriangovernment,whichmustbetakenasagivenforthepurposesofbenefitanalysis;
• thatthelackofavailablereliableinformationprecludesconstructingalternativebenchmarksbasedon,eg,foreignmarketsorproductioncosts+reasonableratesofreturn;
• thatthebestavailablebenchmarkisthereforeaproxybasedonexistingmarketpricesinEriador,correctedtoremovethedistortion;
• thatwhiletheFITformulamaynotperfectlyemulatethepricewhichwouldexistinanundistortedmarket,noworkableformulacandoso,andtheFITformulaisareasonableandunbiasedapproximation.
4.3.4. Article1.2andArticle2:‘specific’
EriadorislikelytoconcedethattheFITschemeis‘specific’withinthemeaningofSCMArticles1.2and2.Borduriawillnotethattheschemeisonlyavailabletogeneratorsofcoldfusionenergy,andisthereforeexplicitlylimitedto‘certainenterprises’underSCMArticle2.1(a).Inanycase,itisdefactoonlyusedbyoneenterprise,FutureEnergy.
4.3.5. SCMArticle5andArticle6.3(a):‘theeffectofthesubsidyistodisplaceorimpedetheimportsofalikeproductofanotherMemberintothemarketofthesubsidizingMember’
BorduriamustshowthattheeffectoftheFITschemehasbeentodisplaceorimpedetheimportsoflikeproductsfromBorduriaintothemarketofEriador.Themarket:A‘market’withinthemeaningofArticle6.3(a)is‘asetofproductsinaparticulargeographicalareathatareinactualorpotentialcompetitionwitheachother’.Consequently,theapplicationofArticle6.3(a)requiresthedefinitionoftherelevantproductmarketinordertodeterminewhetherparticularproductscanbetreatedasformingpartofasingleproductmarketorseveralproductmarketsforpurposesofananalysisofdisplacementandimpedance(EC–LargeCivilAircraft(AB),para1123).Inthiscase,argumentsconcerningthedefinitionoftherelevantmarketarelikelytomirrorthosesetoutinsection4.3.3above,andarecloselyrelatedalsotothequestionoflikeproduct.Likeproducts:Borduriamustshowthattheelectricityprovidedbyitsproducersis‘like’theelectricityproducedbyFutureEnergy.Footnote46totheagreement
27
notesthat‘[t]hroughoutthisAgreementtheterm“likeproduct”…shallbeinterpretedtomeanaproductwhichisidentical,i.e.alikeinallrespectstotheproductunderconsideration,orintheabsenceofsuchaproduct,anotherproductwhich,althoughnotalikeinallrespects,hascharacteristicscloselyresemblingthoseoftheproductunderconsideration.’Thisdefinitionof‘likeproducts’isspecifictotheSCMAgreement,andwasinterpretedbythePanelinIndonesia–Autos.Inthatcase,thePanelfoundthatusefulguidancecanbederivedfromtheinterpretationof‘likeproducts’fromotherWTOagreements(para14.174).Itfoundphysicaldifferencesbetweenproductstobehighlyrelevant,particularlytotheextentthattheyhadanimpactonthepriceoftheproductsinquestion,theusestowhichtheyareput,andtheirsubstitutability(para14.173).Italsofounditrelevanttoconsiderthewaysinwhichproducersthemselvesanalysemarketsegmentation(para14.177).Importantly,theABhasmadeclearthatacentralaspectoftheapplicationofArticle6.3(a)isanassessmentofthecompetitiverelationshipbetweenspecificproductsinthemarketplace(EC–LargeCivilAircraft(AB),para1123).Displacementorimpedance:‘Displacement’arisesunderArticle6.3(a)wheretheeffectofthesubsidyisthatimportsofalikeproductofthecomplainingMemberaresubstitutedbythesubsidizedproductinthemarketofthesubsidizingMember.‘Impedance’referstosituationswheretheexportsorimportsofthelikeproductofthecomplainingMemberwouldhaveexpandedhadtheynotbeen“obstructed”or“hindered”bythesubsidizedproduct.ItcouldalsorefertoasituationwheretheexportsorimportsofthelikeproductofthecomplainingMemberdidnotmaterializeatallbecauseproductionwasheldbackbythesubsidizedproduct.(SeegenerallyEC–LargeCivilAircraft(AB),paras1160-1162).Causation:Borduriamustshowthatthisdisplacementorimpedanceisaneffectofthesubsidy.Todothis,itmustshowthereisa‘genuineandsubstantialrelationshipofcauseandeffect’betweentheFITschemeandthelossofmarketsharebyElectricityBorduriaandtheBordurianElectricityCorporation.ThiscanbeshownthroughademonstrationthattheFITschemeisanecessaryandsubstantialcause,evenifitisnotasufficientcauseinitself.ThecausationtestwillnotbesatisfiediftheeffectofotherfactorsissuchastorendertheimpactoftheFITschemetooremoteorattenuated.Analysingtheeffectofthesubsidywillnecessarilyinvolvecounterfactualanalysis–thatis,acomparisonoftheexistingmarketsituationwiththemarketsituationwhichwouldhavearisenintheabsenceofthesubsidy.Borduriamayargue:
• thatelectricityfromBorduriais‘like’electricityproducedfromcoldfusionbecausethe‘productcharacteristics’ofelectricityareidenticalregardlessofthetechnologyusedtogenerateit,andbecausethereisasinglemarketforwholesaleelectricityinEriador,inwhichallgenerationtechnologiescompetewithoneanother,forthereasonsgivenunder4.3.3above;
• thattheFITschemeprovidedastrongincentiveforFutureEnergytoincreaseproduction,andthatitdidso,withthedirectresultthatitincreaseditsmarketshare;
• thatBEC’sandEB’slossofmarketshareissubstantiallyattributabletoFutureEnergy’sincreasedproduction,asevidencedbythemarketsharedata,combinedwiththestatementintheEEC’sAnnualReports;
28
• thatevenifthegovernmentmandatedsupplymixwasalsoacontributingfactortothislossofmarketshare,theFITschemeisstillasubstantialcause,giventhattheachievedmarketshareofrenewableenergyissubstantiallyhigherthanthemandatedminimum;
• that,evenifthereisinsufficientevidenceofdisplacementorimpedance,neverthelessathreatofdisplacementorimpedancestillexists.
Eriadormayargue:
• thatproductionmethodscanberelevanttothedeterminationofthelikenessofproducts,wheretheyhaveaneffectonthecompetitiverelationshipbetweenthemandtheindiciaoflikeness,andthatinthiscasetherelevantproductiontechnologiesareradicallydifferentintheirnatureandeffects;
• thatcoldfusionenergydoesnotcompeteinthesamemarketasnon-renewableenergyforthereasonssetoutin4.3.3above;and
• thatBEC’sandEB’slossofmarketshareshouldbeattributedtothegovernmentmandatedsupplymix,whichrequiredrenewableenergytoconstitute30%ofsupplyby2015,andthereforewouldinanycasehaveledtoalossofmarketshareonthepartofnon-renewablesuppliers.Asaresult,thereisno‘genuineandsubstantialrelationshipofcauseandeffect’betweentheFITSchemeandthelossofmarketshare.
29
4.4. GATTArticleXX
AlthoughthisproblemisdesignedtobefocussedalmostexclusivelyontheSCMAgreement,andtheclaimsareexplicitlylimitedtoclaimsunderthatagreement,itremainsanopenquestionunderthepresentstateofthejurisprudencewhetherGATTArticleXXisavailableasadefencetoallclaimsundertheSCMAgreement.Wemightthereforeexpectsometeamstoarguethis–particularlyasoneoftheClarificationsquestionsexplicitlyconcernedthisissue.Thisisarelativelyadvancedpointoflaw,soteamsshouldbegiventhespacetoshowtheirabilitytodiscussanddevelopitiftheywishto.Atthesametime,itwouldbeamistaketospendtoomuchspaceonthisquestiontotheexclusionofextendeddiscussionoftheSCMAgreementitself.Asaresulttheissueisonlybrieflycanvassedhere.(a) ApplicabilityofGATTArticleXXtoclaimsundertheSCMAgreementTheAppellateBodyhasconsideredtheapplicabilityofGATTArticleXXtonon-GATTobligationsinanumberofcases,andhasruleditinapplicableinrelationtosome,applicableinrelationtoothers,anddeclinedtodecideinrelationtoothersstill(China–RawMaterials;China–Audiovisuals;US–MeasuresrelatingtoShrimpfromThailand;US–Poultry).IthasneverconsidereditsapplicabilitytotheSCMAgreement.EriadormayclaimthatArticleXXGATTisapplicabletoclaimsundertheSCMAgreementbecause:
• theobjectandpurposeoftheSCMAgreementistoelaborate,interpretandimprovetherelevantGATTdisciplinesrelatingtotheuseofsubsidies(ieGATTArticleXVI),andtheseGATTdisciplinesarethemselvessubjecttoGATTArticleXX;
• thereareanumberoftextualhooksintheSCMAgreementwhichrefertotheGATT(egArt5,Fn12,13…)
• thatthereisnoexplicitindicationinthetext,ornegotiatinghistory,oftheSCMAgreementwhichexcludestheoperationofGATTArticleXX;and
• thattherearestrongreasonsofpolicyandprinciple,includingthefundamentalrightofstatestoregulate,toapplyGATTArticleXXtoclaimsundertheSCMAgreement.
Borduriamayargue:
• that,asageneralproposition,theGATTandthespecializedAnnex1Aagreements(includingtheSCMAgreement)applycumulatively(Argentina–FootwearSafeguards,para80ff);
• theuseoftheterm‘thisagreement’inGATTArticleXXpresumptivelyprecludesitsapplicationtootheragreementsintheabsenceofclearreasonstothecontrary;
• that,whilePartVoftheSCMAgreementimplementsGATTArticleVI,PartsIIandIIIcontainobligationswhichareindependentof,andadditionalto,GATTobligationsrelatingtosubsidies;
• that,unlikeotherspecializedagreements,theSCMAgreementcontainsnoexplicitreferencetoArticleXX,andthattheremustbeareasonforthisdecisionnottoincludeit;and
• thattheSCMAgreementcontainscertainlimitedcarveoutsfornon-
30
actionablesubsidiesunderPartIV,whichimplicitlyexcludestheoperationofgeneralexceptionsunderArticleXX.
(b) ApplicationofGATTArticleXXtotheFITclaimGATTArticleXXstates,inrelevantpart:
Subjecttotherequirementthatsuchmeasuresarenotappliedinamannerwhichwouldconstituteameansofarbitraryorunjustifiablediscriminationbetweencountrieswherethesameconditionsprevail,oradisguisedrestrictiononinternationaltrade,nothinginthisAgreementshallbeconstruedtopreventtheadoptionorenforcementbyanycontractingpartyofmeasures:…(b)necessarytoprotecthuman,animalorplantlifeorhealth;…(g)relatingtotheconservationofexhaustiblenaturalresourcesifsuchmeasuresaremadeeffectiveinconjunctionwithrestrictionsondomesticproductionorconsumption
EvenifEriadorsucceedsinmakingitscasethatArticleXXisapplicable,itfacesconsiderabledifficultiesinshowingthatitpassesallthehurdlescontainedinthatprovision.Inbrief:
• underArticleXX(g),aquestionmayariseastowhethertheFITschemehasbeen‘madeeffectiveinconjunctionwithrestrictionsondomesticproductionorconsumption’;
• underArticleXX(b),whichcontainsanecessitytest,Eriadorwillbevulnerabletotheclaimthattherealesstraderestrictivemeansofachievingitsobjective,e.g.throughtheuseofanon-discriminatoryconsumersubsidyfortheconsumptionofrenewableenergy(orcoldfusionenergy);
• underthechapeau,thereisastrongargumentthattheapplicationoftheFITschemeonlytocoldfusionis‘arbitraryandunjustifiablediscrimination;asiteffectivelysinglesoutoneEriadorianproducerforspecialtreatment,anddoesnotofferthesameorsimilararrangementforanyotherrenewableenergysupplierswhichpresumablymayhaveacomparablybeneficialclimateimpact(see,e.g.US-Shrimp(AB)),includingforeignsupplierswhomaywishtosupplyrenewableenergyintotheEriadorianmarketnoworinthefuture;and
• underthechapeau,EriadorwillalsobevulnerabletotheclaimthatthepriceformulacontainedintheFITcontractconstitutes‘arbitraryandunjustifiablediscrimination’sinceitsystematicallyoverestimatesthepriceofelectricityinanundistortedmarket,forallthereasonssetoutabove.Asaresult,theformularesultsinanarbitrarycompetitiveadvantagebeinggiventothosecompanieswhichreceiveanFITcontract–arbitrarybecauseitisnotcommensuratewiththeproblemitseekstoaddress,northecontributionofthosecompaniestoitssolution.
31
4.5. TheFrameworkConventiononthePromotionof
RenewableEnergy
TheinclusionoftheFrameworkConventiononthePromotionofRenewableEnergyinthefactsofthiscaseprovidesteamswithanopportunitytoturntheirmindstosystemicquestionsofWTOlawoutsidetheconfinesoftheSCMAgreement,andmorespecificallytodemonstratetheirknowledgeofsomebasicpropositionsabouttherelationshipbetweenWTOlawandnon-WTOlawinthecontextofWTOdisputesettlementproceedings.ThissectionlooksinturnatanumberofwaysinwhichEriadormayseektorelyontheFCPRE.Giventhattimeislimited,thereshouldbenopenaltyforteamsstrategicallychoosingnottorefertotheFCPRE,particularlyiftheyshowgoodknowledgeoftherelevantlawunderquestioning.
4.5.1. Asevidenceoffact First,EriadormayseektorelyonthePreambleoftheFCPREassupportforits
claim,setoutinsection4.3.3above,thattheelectricitymarketinEriadorissignificantlydistorted,asamatteroffact.InthatPreamble,all173statespartiestotheFCPREexplicitlyacknowledgethatfact,aswellasitsimportance.
Thisisunlikelytobeatallcontroversial.Non-WTOlawhasbeenusedtosupport
findingsoffactinthisfashionbeforeinWTOproceedings.Thefactthatelectricitymarketsaredistortedasaresultofcarbonexternalitiesiswellaccepted.AndinanycasetheevidentiaryvalueoftheFCPREhereisonlysecondaryandsupportive.
4.5.2. VCLTArticle31(2):asinterpretivecontext
DSUArticle3.2providesthatWTOagreementsaretobeinterpretedinaccordancewithcustomaryrulesofinterpretationofpublicinternationallaw.ManyofthesecustomaryrulesarecodifiedinArticles31and32oftheViennaConventionontheLawofTreaties1969.AccordingtoVCLTArticle31(1),atreaty‘shallbeinterpretedingoodfaithinaccordancewiththeordinarymeaningtobegiventothetermsofthetreatyintheircontextandinthelightofitsobjectandpurpose’.Article31(2)thenprovidesthat‘thecontextofatreatyshallcomprise,inadditiontoitstext,includingitspreambleandannexes:(a)anyagreementrelatingtothetreatywhichwasmadebetweenallthepartiesinconnexionwiththeconclusionofthetreaty;and(b)anyinstrumentwhichwasmadebyoneormorepartiesinconnexionwiththeconclusionofthetreatyandacceptedbytheotherpartiesasaninstrumentrelatedtothetreaty.’Themostnotableexampleofa‘non-WTO’treatybeingacceptedascontextfortheinterpretationofWTOagreementsintheHarmonizedSystem,whichisrelevanttotheinterpretationoftariffheadingsinschedules(seeEC–ChickenCuts;China–AutoParts;EC–ComputerEquipment).However,thiswasonthebasisoftheextremelycloselinkbetweentheHSandtheGATT/WTOagreements,includingtheexistenceofabroadconsensusamongstWTOMemberstousetheHSasabasisfortheirSchedules(seeEC–ChickenCuts(AB),paras197-199).ThereisnoequivalentlinkbetweentheWTOagreementsand
32
theFCPRE–indeed,theFCPREwasnotinexistenceatthetimetheWTOagreementswerenegotiated.ItisthereforehardtoseehowtheFCPREcouldfallwithineitherofthedefinitionsofcontextsetoutinVCLTArticle31(2),asanagreementmade‘inconnexionwiththeconclusionofthetreaty.’
4.5.3. VCLTArticle31(3) Article31(3)(c)oftheViennaConventionontheLawofTreatiesstatesthat,in
theinterpretationofatreaty,‘[t]hereshallbetakenintoaccount,togetherwiththecontext…[a]nyrelevantrulesofinternationallawapplicableintherelationsbetweentheparties.’Eriadormayarguethatthisprovision(coupledwithDSUArticle3.2)requiresthepaneltotakeintoaccounttheFCPREinitsinterpretationoftheSCMAgreement.
ThefirstquestioniswhethertheFCPREis‘applicableintherelationsbetween
theparties’withinthemeaningofVCLTArticle31,giventhatnotallWTOMembersarepartytotheFCPRE.(SometeamsmayarguethattheFCPREisacodificationofcustomaryinternationallaw,thoughthiswillbedifficultforthemtoshow.)OntheapproachofthepanelinEC–Biotech,itwouldnot.Inthatcase,thePaneldeterminedthatthephrase‘theparties’shouldbeinterpretedtomeanallpartiestotheWTOagreement.However,theteamswouldbeexpectedtodebatethemeaningandsignificanceofthefollowingmorerecentpassagefromtheAppellateBody’sdecisioninEC–LargeCivilAircraft:
Aninterpretationof"theparties"inArticle31(3)(c)shouldbeguidedbytheAppellateBody'sstatementthat"thepurposeoftreatyinterpretationistoestablishthecommonintentionofthepartiestothetreaty."ThissuggeststhatonemustexercisecautionindrawingfromaninternationalagreementtowhichnotallWTOMembersareparty.Atthesametime,werecognizethataproperinterpretationoftheterm"theparties"mustalsotakeaccountofthefactthatArticle31(3)(c)oftheViennaConventionisconsideredanexpressionofthe"principleofsystemicintegration"which,inthewordsoftheILC,seekstoensurethat"internationalobligationsareinterpretedbyreferencetotheirnormativeenvironment"inamannerthatgives"coherenceandmeaningfulness"totheprocessoflegalinterpretation.InamultilateralcontextsuchastheWTO,whenrecourseishadtoanon-WTOruleforthepurposesofinterpretingprovisionsoftheWTOagreements,adelicatebalancemustbestruckbetween,ontheonehand,takingdueaccountofanindividualWTOMember'sinternationalobligationsand,ontheotherhand,ensuringaconsistentandharmoniousapproachtotheinterpretationofWTOlawamongallWTOMembers.(para845)
Inafootnotetothispassage,theABalsoobservedthat:
WenotethatArticle31(3)(b)requiresatreatyinterpretertotakeintoaccount,togetherwithcontext,"anysubsequentpracticeintheapplicationofthetreatywhichestablishestheagreementofthepartiesregardingitsinterpretation".(emphasisadded)AccordingtotheAppellateBodyinEC–ChickenCuts,Article31(3)(b)requirestheagreement,whetherexpressortacit,ofallWTOMembersforapracticetoqualifyunderthatprovision.TheAppellateBodyrecognizedthattheagreementofthepartiesregardingatreaty'sinterpretationmaybededuced,notonlyfromtheactionsofthoseactuallyengagedinthe
33
relevantpractice,butalsofromtheacceptanceofotherpartiestothetreatythroughtheiraffirmativereactions,ordependingontheattendantcircumstances,theirsilence.(footnote1916)
AfurtherquestionunderArticle31(3)(c)iswhethertheFCPREis‘relevant’totheinterpretationoftheSCMAgreement,ifsoinwhatspecificrespects.Aruleis"relevant"ifitconcernsthesamesubjectmatteroftheprovisionbeinginterpreted(EC–LargeCivilAircraft(AB),para846;US–AD/CVDs(China)(AB),para308).6EriadormayarguethatthePreambletotheFCPREisrelevanttotheinterpretationoftheterm‘benefit’inSCMArticle1.1(b).Morespecifically,itmayarguethatthedeterminationofthemarketbenchmarkunderthatprovisionoughttotakeintoaccounttheclearstatementintheFCPREthatexistingmarketdistortionscausedbycarbonemissionsareofglobalsignificanceandinternationalconcern.Thiswouldarguablysupporttheconclusionthatpricesdrawnfromsuchdistortedmarketsoughttoberejectedasanappropriatebenchmarkforbenefitanalysis.
4.5.4. VCLTArticle41 Article41oftheViennaConventionontheLawofTreatiesaddressesthe
situationinwhichtwoormorepartiestoamultilateralagreementmayconcludeanagreementtomodifythetermsofthemultilateralagreementasbetweenthemselvesonly.Itstates:
Article41AgreementstoModifyMultilateralTreatiesbetweenCertainof
thePartiesOnly1. Twoormoreofthepartiestoamultilateraltreatymayconclude
anagreementtomodifythetreatyasbetweenthemselvesaloneif:
(a) Thepossibilityofsuchamodificationisprovidedforbythetreaty;or
(b) Themodificationinquestionisnotprohibitedbythetreatyand:(i) Doesnotaffecttheenjoymentbytheotherpartiesof
theirrightsunderthetreatyortheperformanceoftheirobligations;
(ii) Doesnotrelatetoaprovision,derogationfromwhichisincompatiblewiththeeffectiveexecutionoftheobjectandpurposeofthetreatyasawhole.
2. Unlessinacasefallingunderparagraph1(a)thetreatyotherwiseprovides,thepartiesinquestionshallnotifytheotherpartiesoftheirintentiontoconcludetheagreementandofthemodificationtothetreatyforwhichitprovides.
GivenrecentattemptstoargueArticle41beforetheAppellateBodyinPeru–
AgriculturalProducts,itmaybethatsomeEriadorianteamsseektorelyonArticle41toarguethatEriadorandBorduriahaveeffectivelyenteredintoanagreementtomodifytheWTOAgreementsintersebyvirtueoftheiragreementtoArticle11oftheFCPRE.
6ThisdecisionisalsonoteworthyforthewayinwhichitusedtheILCArticlesonStateResponsibilitywithoutanexplicitfindingthattheyrepresentcustomaryinternationallaworgeneralprinciplesoflaw.
34
Thisargumentwouldconfrontanumberofdifficulties.Oneisthat,onitsface,Article41onlyapplieswhereallthepartiestothemodifyingagreementarepartiestotheagreementbeingmodified.ThisisnotthecaseinrespectoftheFCPRE.Anotheristhat,evenifitwereadmittedthattheFCPREmodifiestheWTOAgreementstopermittheuseofsubsidiestorenewableenergyproviders,itishardtoseehowthiswouldsatisfytherequirementsofVCLTArticle41(1)(b)(i).AsubsidyofthisnaturewouldnecessarilyhavethepotentialtoaffecttheenjoymentofallotherWTOMembersoftheirrightsundertheWTOagreement.Andthird,theAppellateBodyhasrecentlydecided,perhapscontroversially,thatWTOMembershaveinanycasecontractedoutofArticle41,atleastinthecontextofFTAsandcustomsunions,byputtinginplacespecificrulesregardingamendmentsandwaivers(Peru–AgriculturalProducts(AB),para5.112).Thesamemayormaynotapplytoothertypesofinternationalagreements.
4.5.5. VCLTArticle30:lexposterior
Finally,EriadormayarguethatitsobligationsunderFCPREArticle11to‘useallavailablemeanstoencouragetherapiddevelopmentofrenewableenergy’directlyconflictwithitsobligationsundertheSCMAgreement,andthatintheeventofsuchaconflictthelatertreatyprevailsunderVLCTArticle30,withtheconsequencethattheFCPRElimitstheapplicationoftheSCMAgreementtotheextentofanyconflict.Whilethereremainssomescholarlydisagreementonthisissue,thebestindicationsfromthecurrentjurisprudencearethatthisargumentisunlikelytosucceed.InEC–Hormones,forexample,theAppellateBodyrejectedtheideathattheprecautionaryprinciple,evenifitwereacceptedasanestablishedprincipleofcustomaryinternationallaw,couldbeuseddirectlyinWTOproceedingstomodifytheeffectofthecleartermsoftheSPSAgreement,saying:
‘theprecautionaryprincipledoesnot,byitself,andwithoutacleartextualdirectivetothateffect,relieveapanelfromthedutyofapplyingthenormalprinciplesoftreatyinterpretationinreadingtheprovisionsoftheSPSAgreement’.(para124)
Then,inMexico–SoftDrinks,theAppellateBodyrejectedanargumentfromMexicoonthebasisthatitwouldrequiretheAppellateBodytodetermine‘whethertheUnitedStateshasactedconsistentlyorinconsistentlywithitsNAFTAobligations’.TheAppellateBodysaw‘nobasisintheDSUforpanelsandtheAppellateBodytoadjudicatenon-WTOdisputes’(para56).TotheextentthatEriador’sargumentwouldrequirethePaneltointerpretandapplyEriador’sobligationsundertheFCPRE,thesamereasoningwouldarguablyapply.
35
5. SelectedcaselawAppellateBodyReport,UnitedStates–DefinitiveAnti-Dumpingand
CountervailingDutiesonCertainProductsfromChina,WT/DS379/AB/R,adopted25March2011
PanelReport,UnitedStates–DefinitiveAnti-DumpingandCountervailingDutieson
CertainProductsfromChina,WT/DS379/R,adopted25March2011,asmodifiedbyAppellateBodyReportWT/DS379/AB/R.
AppellateBodyReport,UnitedStates–CountervailingMeasuresonCertainHot-
RolledCarbonSteelFlatProductsfromIndia,WT/DS436/AB/R,adopted19December2014.
PanelReport,UnitedStates–CountervailingMeasuresonCertainHot-Rolled
CarbonSteelFlatProductsfromIndia,WT/DS436/RandAdd.1,adopted19December2014,asmodifiedbyAppellateBodyReportWT/DS436/AB/R.
AppellateBodyReports,Canada–CertainMeasuresAffectingtheRenewable
EnergyGenerationSector/Canada–MeasuresRelatingtotheFeed-inTariffProgram,WT/DS412/AB/R/WT/DS426/AB/R,adopted24May2013.
PanelReports,Canada–CertainMeasuresAffectingtheRenewableEnergy
GenerationSector/Canada–MeasuresRelatingtotheFeed-inTariffProgram,WT/DS412/RandAdd.1/WT/DS426/RandAdd.1,adopted24May2013,asmodifiedbyAppellateBodyReportsWT/DS412/AB/R/WT/DS426/AB/R.
AppellateBodyReport,EuropeanCommunitiesandCertainMemberStates
–MeasuresAffectingTradeinLargeCivilAircraft,WT/DS316/AB/R,adopted1June2011.
PanelReport,EuropeanCommunitiesandCertainMemberStates–Measures
AffectingTradeinLargeCivilAircraft,WT/DS316/R,adopted1June2011,asmodifiedbyAppellateBodyReport,WT/DS316/AB/R.
AppellateBodyReport,UnitedStates–MeasuresAffectingTradeinLargeCivil
Aircraft(SecondComplaint),WT/DS353/AB/R,adopted23March2012PanelReport,UnitedStates–MeasuresAffectingTradeinLargeCivilAircraft
(SecondComplaint),WT/DS353/R,adopted23March2012,asmodifiedbyAppellateBodyReportWT/DS353/AB/R.
AppellateBodyReport,UnitedStates–ImpositionofCountervailingDutieson
CertainHot-RolledLeadandBismuthCarbonSteelProductsOriginatingintheUnitedKingdom,WT/DS138/AB/R,adopted7June2000
36
PanelReport,UnitedStates–ImpositionofCountervailingDutiesonCertainHot-RolledLeadandBismuthCarbonSteelProductsOriginatingintheUnitedKingdom,WT/DS138/RandCorr.2,adopted7June2000,upheldbyAppellateBodyReportWT/DS138/AB/R
AppellateBodyReport,Peru–AdditionalDutyonImportsofCertainAgricultural
Products,WT/DS457/AB/RandAdd.1,adopted31July2015PanelReports,EuropeanCommunities–MeasuresAffectingtheApprovaland
MarketingofBiotechProducts,WT/DS291/R,Add.1toAdd.9andCorr.1/WT/DS292/R,Add.1toAdd.9andCorr.1/WT/DS293/R,Add.1toAdd.9andCorr.1,adopted21November2006
AppellateBodyReport,UnitedStates–CountervailingMeasuresConcerning
CertainProductsfromtheEuropeanCommunities,WT/DS212/AB/R,adopted8January2003
37
6. Annex:TheSCMAgreement
AGREEMENTONSUBSIDIESANDCOUNTERVAILINGMEASURESMembersherebyagreeasfollows:
PARTI:GENERALPROVISIONS
Article1
DefinitionofaSubsidy1.1 ForthepurposeofthisAgreement,asubsidyshallbedeemedtoexistif:
(a)(1) thereisafinancialcontributionbyagovernmentoranypublicbodywithintheterritoryofaMember(referredtointhisAgreementas"government"),i.e.where:
(i) agovernmentpracticeinvolvesadirecttransferoffunds
(e.g.grants,loans,andequityinfusion),potentialdirecttransfersoffundsorliabilities(e.g.loanguarantees);
(ii) governmentrevenuethatisotherwisedueisforegoneor
notcollected(e.g.fiscalincentivessuchastaxcredits)7;
(iii) agovernmentprovidesgoodsorservicesotherthangeneralinfrastructure,orpurchasesgoods;
(iv) agovernmentmakespaymentstoafundingmechanism,or
entrustsordirectsaprivatebodytocarryoutoneormoreofthetypeoffunctionsillustratedin(i)to(iii)abovewhichwouldnormallybevestedinthegovernmentandthepractice,innorealsense,differsfrompracticesnormallyfollowedbygovernments;
or
7InaccordancewiththeprovisionsofArticleXVIofGATT1994(NotetoArticleXVI)andtheprovisionsofAnnexesIthroughIIIofthisAgreement,theexemptionofanexportedproductfromdutiesortaxesbornebythelikeproductwhendestinedfordomesticconsumption,ortheremissionofsuchdutiesortaxesinamountsnotinexcessofthosewhichhaveaccrued,shallnotbedeemedtobeasubsidy.
38
(a)(2) thereisanyformofincomeorpricesupportinthesenseofArticleXVIofGATT1994;
and
(b) abenefitistherebyconferred.
1.2 Asubsidyasdefinedinparagraph1shallbesubjecttotheprovisionsofPartIIorshallbesubjecttotheprovisionsofPartIIIorVonlyifsuchasubsidyisspecificinaccordancewiththeprovisionsofArticle2.
Article2
Specificity2.1 Inordertodeterminewhetherasubsidy,asdefinedinparagraph1ofArticle1,isspecifictoanenterpriseorindustryorgroupofenterprisesorindustries(referredtointhisAgreementas"certainenterprises")withinthejurisdictionofthegrantingauthority,thefollowingprinciplesshallapply:
(a) Wherethegrantingauthority,orthelegislationpursuanttowhichthegrantingauthorityoperates,explicitlylimitsaccesstoasubsidytocertainenterprises,suchsubsidyshallbespecific.
(b) Wherethegrantingauthority,orthelegislationpursuanttowhich
thegrantingauthorityoperates,establishesobjectivecriteriaorconditions8governingtheeligibilityfor,andtheamountof,asubsidy,specificityshallnotexist,providedthattheeligibilityisautomaticandthatsuchcriteriaandconditionsarestrictlyadheredto.Thecriteriaorconditionsmustbeclearlyspelledoutinlaw,regulation,orotherofficialdocument,soastobecapableofverification.
(c) If,notwithstandinganyappearanceofnon-specificityresulting
fromtheapplicationoftheprincipleslaiddowninsubparagraphs(a)and(b),therearereasonstobelievethatthesubsidymayinfactbespecific,otherfactorsmaybeconsidered.Suchfactorsare:useofasubsidyprogrammebyalimitednumberofcertainenterprises,predominantusebycertainenterprises,thegrantingofdisproportionatelylargeamountsofsubsidytocertainenterprises,andthemannerinwhichdiscretionhasbeenexercisedbythegrantingauthorityinthedecisiontogranta
8Objectivecriteriaorconditions,asusedherein,meancriteriaorconditionswhichareneutral,whichdonotfavourcertainenterprisesoverothers,andwhichareeconomicinnatureandhorizontalinapplication,suchasnumberofemployeesorsizeofenterprise.
39
subsidy.9Inapplyingthissubparagraph,accountshallbetakenoftheextentofdiversificationofeconomicactivitieswithinthejurisdictionofthegrantingauthority,aswellasofthelengthoftimeduringwhichthesubsidyprogrammehasbeeninoperation.
2.2 Asubsidywhichislimitedtocertainenterpriseslocatedwithinadesignatedgeographicalregionwithinthejurisdictionofthegrantingauthorityshallbespecific.ItisunderstoodthatthesettingorchangeofgenerallyapplicabletaxratesbyalllevelsofgovernmententitledtodososhallnotbedeemedtobeaspecificsubsidyforthepurposesofthisAgreement.2.3 AnysubsidyfallingundertheprovisionsofArticle3shallbedeemedtobespecific.2.4 AnydeterminationofspecificityundertheprovisionsofthisArticleshallbeclearlysubstantiatedonthebasisofpositiveevidence.
PARTII:PROHIBITEDSUBSIDIES
Article3
Prohibition3.1 ExceptasprovidedintheAgreementonAgriculture,thefollowingsubsidies,withinthemeaningofArticle1,shallbeprohibited:
(a) subsidiescontingent,inlaworinfact10,whethersolelyorasoneofseveralotherconditions,uponexportperformance,includingthoseillustratedinAnnexI11;
(b) subsidiescontingent,whethersolelyorasoneofseveralother
conditions,upontheuseofdomesticoverimportedgoods.3.2 AMembershallneithergrantnormaintainsubsidiesreferredtoinparagraph1.
9Inthisregard,inparticular,informationonthefrequencywithwhichapplicationsforasubsidyarerefusedorapprovedandthereasonsforsuchdecisionsshallbeconsidered.10Thisstandardismetwhenthefactsdemonstratethatthegrantingofasubsidy,withouthavingbeenmadelegallycontingentuponexportperformance,isinfacttiedtoactualoranticipatedexportationorexportearnings.Themerefactthatasubsidyisgrantedtoenterpriseswhichexportshallnotforthatreasonalonebeconsideredtobeanexportsubsidywithinthemeaningofthisprovision.11MeasuresreferredtoinAnnexIasnotconstitutingexportsubsidiesshallnotbeprohibitedunderthisoranyotherprovisionofthisAgreement.
40
Article4
Remedies4.1 WheneveraMemberhasreasontobelievethataprohibitedsubsidyisbeinggrantedormaintainedbyanotherMember,suchMembermayrequestconsultationswithsuchotherMember. 4.2 Arequestforconsultationsunderparagraph1shallincludeastatementofavailableevidencewithregardtotheexistenceandnatureofthesubsidyinquestion.4.3 Uponrequestforconsultationsunderparagraph1,theMemberbelievedtobegrantingormaintainingthesubsidyinquestionshallenterintosuchconsultationsasquicklyaspossible.Thepurposeoftheconsultationsshallbetoclarifythefactsofthesituationandtoarriveatamutuallyagreedsolution.4.4 Ifnomutuallyagreedsolutionhasbeenreachedwithin30days12oftherequestforconsultations,anyMemberpartytosuchconsultationsmayreferthemattertotheDisputeSettlementBody("DSB")fortheimmediateestablishmentofapanel,unlesstheDSBdecidesbyconsensusnottoestablishapanel.4.5 Uponitsestablishment,thepanelmayrequesttheassistanceofthePermanentGroupofExperts13(referredtointhisAgreementasthe"PGE")withregardtowhetherthemeasureinquestionisaprohibitedsubsidy.Ifsorequested,thePGEshallimmediatelyreviewtheevidencewithregardtotheexistenceandnatureofthemeasureinquestionandshallprovideanopportunityfortheMemberapplyingormaintainingthemeasuretodemonstratethatthemeasureinquestionisnotaprohibitedsubsidy.ThePGEshallreportitsconclusionstothepanelwithinatime-limitdeterminedbythepanel.ThePGE'sconclusionsontheissueofwhetherornotthemeasureinquestionisaprohibitedsubsidyshallbeacceptedbythepanelwithoutmodification.4.6 Thepanelshallsubmititsfinalreporttothepartiestothedispute.ThereportshallbecirculatedtoallMemberswithin90daysofthedateofthecompositionandtheestablishmentofthepanel'stermsofreference.4.7 Ifthemeasureinquestionisfoundtobeaprohibitedsubsidy,thepanelshallrecommendthatthesubsidizingMemberwithdrawthesubsidywithoutdelay.Inthisregard,thepanelshallspecifyinitsrecommendationthetime-periodwithinwhichthemeasuremustbewithdrawn.
12Anytime-periodsmentionedinthisArticlemaybeextendedbymutualagreement.13AsestablishedinArticle24.
41
4.8 Within30daysoftheissuanceofthepanel'sreporttoallMembers,thereportshallbeadoptedbytheDSBunlessoneofthepartiestothedisputeformallynotifiestheDSBofitsdecisiontoappealortheDSBdecidesbyconsensusnottoadoptthereport.4.9 Whereapanelreportisappealed,theAppellateBodyshallissueitsdecisionwithin30daysfromthedatewhenthepartytothedisputeformallynotifiesitsintentiontoappeal.WhentheAppellateBodyconsidersthatitcannotprovideitsreportwithin30days,itshallinformtheDSBinwritingofthereasonsforthedelaytogetherwithanestimateoftheperiodwithinwhichitwillsubmititsreport.Innocaseshalltheproceedingsexceed60days.TheappellatereportshallbeadoptedbytheDSBandunconditionallyacceptedbythepartiestothedisputeunlesstheDSBdecidesbyconsensusnottoadopttheappellatereportwithin20daysfollowingitsissuancetotheMembers.144.10 IntheeventtherecommendationoftheDSBisnotfollowedwithinthetime-periodspecifiedbythepanel,whichshallcommencefromthedateofadoptionofthepanel’sreportortheAppellateBody’sreport,theDSBshallgrantauthorizationtothecomplainingMembertotakeappropriate15countermeasures,unlesstheDSBdecidesbyconsensustorejecttherequest.4.11 Intheeventapartytothedisputerequestsarbitrationunderparagraph6ofArticle22oftheDisputeSettlementUnderstanding("DSU"),thearbitratorshalldeterminewhetherthecountermeasuresareappropriate.164.12 ForpurposesofdisputesconductedpursuanttothisArticle,exceptfortime-periodsspecificallyprescribedinthisArticle,time-periodsapplicableundertheDSUfortheconductofsuchdisputesshallbehalfthetimeprescribedtherein.
PARTIII:ACTIONABLESUBSIDIES
Article5
AdverseEffects
14IfameetingoftheDSBisnotscheduledduringthisperiod,suchameetingshallbeheldforthispurpose.15Thisexpressionisnotmeanttoallowcountermeasuresthataredisproportionateinlightofthefactthatthesubsidiesdealtwithundertheseprovisionsareprohibited. 16Thisexpressionisnotmeanttoallowcountermeasuresthataredisproportionateinlightofthefactthatthesubsidiesdealtwithundertheseprovisionsareprohibited.
42
NoMembershouldcause,throughtheuseofanysubsidyreferredtoinparagraphs1and2ofArticle1,adverseeffectstotheinterestsofotherMembers,i.e.:
(a) injurytothedomesticindustryofanotherMember17;
(b) nullificationorimpairmentofbenefitsaccruingdirectlyorindirectlytootherMembersunderGATT1994inparticularthebenefitsofconcessionsboundunderArticleIIofGATT199418;
(c) seriousprejudicetotheinterestsofanotherMember.19
ThisArticledoesnotapplytosubsidiesmaintainedonagriculturalproductsasprovidedinArticle13oftheAgreementonAgriculture.
Article6
SeriousPrejudice6.1 Seriousprejudiceinthesenseofparagraph(c)ofArticle5shallbedeemedtoexistinthecaseof:
(a) thetotaladvaloremsubsidization20ofaproductexceeding5percent21;
(b) subsidiestocoveroperatinglossessustainedbyanindustry;
(c) subsidiestocoveroperatinglossessustainedbyanenterprise,
otherthanone-timemeasureswhicharenon-recurrentandcannotberepeatedforthatenterpriseandwhicharegivenmerelytoprovidetimeforthedevelopmentoflong-termsolutionsandtoavoidacutesocialproblems;
17Theterm"injurytothedomesticindustry"isusedhereinthesamesenseasitisusedinPartV.18Theterm"nullificationorimpairment"isusedinthisAgreementinthesamesenseasitisusedintherelevantprovisionsofGATT1994,andtheexistenceofsuchnullificationorimpairmentshallbeestablishedinaccordancewiththepracticeofapplicationoftheseprovisions.19Theterm"seriousprejudicetotheinterestsofanotherMember"isusedinthisAgreementinthesamesenseasitisusedinparagraph1ofArticleXVIofGATT1994,andincludesthreatofseriousprejudice.20ThetotaladvaloremsubsidizationshallbecalculatedinaccordancewiththeprovisionsofAnnexIV.21Sinceitisanticipatedthatcivilaircraftwillbesubjecttospecificmultilateralrules,thethresholdinthissubparagraphdoesnotapplytocivilaircraft.
43
(d) directforgivenessofdebt,i.e.forgivenessofgovernment-helddebt,andgrantstocoverdebtrepayment.22
6.2 Notwithstandingtheprovisionsofparagraph1,seriousprejudiceshallnotbefoundifthesubsidizingMemberdemonstratesthatthesubsidyinquestionhasnotresultedinanyoftheeffectsenumeratedinparagraph3.6.3 Seriousprejudiceinthesenseofparagraph(c)ofArticle5mayariseinanycasewhereoneorseveralofthefollowingapply:
(a) theeffectofthesubsidyistodisplaceorimpedetheimportsofalikeproductofanotherMemberintothemarketofthesubsidizingMember;
(b) theeffectofthesubsidyistodisplaceorimpedetheexportsofa
likeproductofanotherMemberfromathirdcountrymarket;
(c) theeffectofthesubsidyisasignificantpriceundercuttingbythesubsidizedproductascomparedwiththepriceofalikeproductofanotherMemberinthesamemarketorsignificantpricesuppression,pricedepressionorlostsalesinthesamemarket;
(d) theeffectofthesubsidyisanincreaseintheworldmarketshareof
thesubsidizingMemberinaparticularsubsidizedprimaryproductorcommodity23ascomparedtotheaverageshareithadduringthepreviousperiodofthreeyearsandthisincreasefollowsaconsistenttrendoveraperiodwhensubsidieshavebeengranted.
6.4 Forthepurposeofparagraph3(b),thedisplacementorimpedingofexportsshallincludeanycaseinwhich,subjecttotheprovisionsofparagraph7,ithasbeendemonstratedthattherehasbeenachangeinrelativesharesofthemarkettothedisadvantageofthenon-subsidizedlikeproduct(overanappropriatelyrepresentativeperiodsufficienttodemonstratecleartrendsinthedevelopmentofthemarketfortheproductconcerned,which,innormalcircumstances,shallbeatleastoneyear)."Changeinrelativesharesofthemarket"shallincludeanyofthefollowingsituations:(a)thereisanincreaseinthemarketshareofthesubsidizedproduct;(b)themarketshareofthesubsidizedproductremainsconstantincircumstancesinwhich,intheabsenceofthesubsidy,itwouldhavedeclined;(c)themarketshareofthesubsidizedproductdeclines,butataslowerratethanwouldhavebeenthecaseintheabsenceofthesubsidy.
22Membersrecognizethatwhereroyalty-basedfinancingforacivilaircraftprogrammeisnotbeingfullyrepaidduetothelevelofactualsalesfallingbelowthelevelofforecastsales,thisdoesnotinitselfconstituteseriousprejudiceforthepurposesofthissubparagraph.23Unlessothermultilaterallyagreedspecificrulesapplytothetradeintheproductorcommodityinquestion.
44
6.5 Forthepurposeofparagraph3(c),priceundercuttingshallincludeanycaseinwhichsuchpriceundercuttinghasbeendemonstratedthroughacomparisonofpricesofthesubsidizedproductwithpricesofanon-subsidizedlikeproductsuppliedtothesamemarket.Thecomparisonshallbemadeatthesameleveloftradeandatcomparabletimes,dueaccountbeingtakenofanyotherfactoraffectingpricecomparability.However,ifsuchadirectcomparisonisnotpossible,theexistenceofpriceundercuttingmaybedemonstratedonthebasisofexportunitvalues.6.6 EachMemberinthemarketofwhichseriousprejudiceisallegedtohavearisenshall,subjecttotheprovisionsofparagraph3ofAnnexV,makeavailabletothepartiestoadisputearisingunderArticle7,andtothepanelestablishedpursuanttoparagraph4ofArticle7,allrelevantinformationthatcanbeobtainedastothechangesinmarketsharesofthepartiestothedisputeaswellasconcerningpricesoftheproductsinvolved.6.7 Displacementorimpedimentresultinginseriousprejudiceshallnotariseunderparagraph3whereanyofthefollowingcircumstancesexist24duringtherelevantperiod:
(a) prohibitionorrestrictiononexportsofthelikeproductfromthecomplainingMemberoronimportsfromthecomplainingMemberintothethirdcountrymarketconcerned;
(b) decisionbyanimportinggovernmentoperatingamonopolyof
tradeorstatetradingintheproductconcernedtoshift,fornon-commercialreasons,importsfromthecomplainingMembertoanothercountryorcountries;
(c) naturaldisasters,strikes,transportdisruptionsorotherforce
majeuresubstantiallyaffectingproduction,qualities,quantitiesorpricesoftheproductavailableforexportfromthecomplainingMember;
(d) existenceofarrangementslimitingexportsfromthecomplaining
Member;
(e) voluntarydecreaseintheavailabilityforexportoftheproductconcernedfromthecomplainingMember(including,interalia,asituationwherefirmsinthecomplainingMemberhavebeenautonomouslyreallocatingexportsofthisproducttonewmarkets);
24Thefactthatcertaincircumstancesarereferredtointhisparagraphdoesnot,initself,conferuponthemanylegalstatusintermsofeitherGATT1994orthisAgreement.Thesecircumstancesmustnotbeisolated,sporadicorotherwiseinsignificant.
45
(f) failuretoconformtostandardsandotherregulatoryrequirementsintheimportingcountry.
6.8 Intheabsenceofcircumstancesreferredtoinparagraph7,theexistenceofseriousprejudiceshouldbedeterminedonthebasisoftheinformationsubmittedtoorobtainedbythepanel,includinginformationsubmittedinaccordancewiththeprovisionsofAnnexV.6.9 ThisArticledoesnotapplytosubsidiesmaintainedonagriculturalproductsasprovidedinArticle13oftheAgreementonAgriculture.
Article7
Remedies7.1 ExceptasprovidedinArticle13oftheAgreementonAgriculture,wheneveraMemberhasreasontobelievethatanysubsidyreferredtoinArticle1,grantedormaintainedbyanotherMember,resultsininjurytoitsdomesticindustry,nullificationorimpairmentorseriousprejudice,suchMembermayrequestconsultationswithsuchotherMember.7.2 Arequestforconsultationsunderparagraph1shallincludeastatementofavailableevidencewithregardto(a)theexistenceandnatureofthesubsidyinquestion,and(b)theinjurycausedtothedomesticindustry,orthenullificationorimpairment,orseriousprejudice25causedtotheinterestsoftheMemberrequestingconsultations.7.3 Uponrequestforconsultationsunderparagraph1,theMemberbelievedtobegrantingormaintainingthesubsidypracticeinquestionshallenterintosuchconsultationsasquicklyaspossible.Thepurposeoftheconsultationsshallbetoclarifythefactsofthesituationandtoarriveatamutuallyagreedsolution.7.4 Ifconsultationsdonotresultinamutuallyagreedsolutionwithin60days26,anyMemberpartytosuchconsultationsmayreferthemattertotheDSBfortheestablishmentofapanel,unlesstheDSBdecidesbyconsensusnottoestablishapanel.Thecompositionofthepanelanditstermsofreferenceshallbeestablishedwithin15daysfromthedatewhenitisestablished.7.5 Thepanelshallreviewthematterandshallsubmititsfinalreporttothepartiestothedispute.ThereportshallbecirculatedtoallMemberswithin
25Intheeventthattherequestrelatestoasubsidydeemedtoresultinseriousprejudiceintermsofparagraph1ofArticle6,theavailableevidenceofseriousprejudicemaybelimitedtotheavailableevidenceastowhethertheconditionsofparagraph1ofArticle6havebeenmetornot.26Anytime-periodsmentionedinthisArticlemaybeextendedbymutualagreement.
46
120daysofthedateofthecompositionandestablishmentofthepanel’stermsofreference.7.6 Within30daysoftheissuanceofthepanel’sreporttoallMembers,thereportshallbeadoptedbytheDSB27unlessoneofthepartiestothedisputeformallynotifiestheDSBofitsdecisiontoappealortheDSBdecidesbyconsensusnottoadoptthereport.7.7 Whereapanelreportisappealed,theAppellateBodyshallissueitsdecisionwithin60daysfromthedatewhenthepartytothedisputeformallynotifiesitsintentiontoappeal.WhentheAppellateBodyconsidersthatitcannotprovideitsreportwithin60days,itshallinformtheDSBinwritingofthereasonsforthedelaytogetherwithanestimateoftheperiodwithinwhichitwillsubmititsreport.Innocaseshalltheproceedingsexceed90days.TheappellatereportshallbeadoptedbytheDSBandunconditionallyacceptedbythepartiestothedisputeunlesstheDSBdecidesbyconsensusnottoadopttheappellatereportwithin20daysfollowingitsissuancetotheMembers.287.8 WhereapanelreportoranAppellateBodyreportisadoptedinwhichitisdeterminedthatanysubsidyhasresultedinadverseeffectstotheinterestsofanotherMemberwithinthemeaningofArticle5,theMembergrantingormaintainingsuchsubsidyshalltakeappropriatestepstoremovetheadverseeffectsorshallwithdrawthesubsidy.7.9 IntheeventtheMemberhasnottakenappropriatestepstoremovetheadverseeffectsofthesubsidyorwithdrawthesubsidywithinsixmonthsfromthedatewhentheDSBadoptsthepanelreportortheAppellateBodyreport,andintheabsenceofagreementoncompensation,theDSBshallgrantauthorizationtothecomplainingMembertotakecountermeasures,commensuratewiththedegreeandnatureoftheadverseeffectsdeterminedtoexist,unlesstheDSBdecidesbyconsensustorejecttherequest.7.10 Intheeventthatapartytothedisputerequestsarbitrationunderparagraph6ofArticle22oftheDSU,thearbitratorshalldeterminewhetherthecountermeasuresarecommensuratewiththedegreeandnatureoftheadverseeffectsdeterminedtoexist.
PARTIV:NON-ACTIONABLESUBSIDIES
Article8
IdentificationofNon-ActionableSubsidies
27IfameetingoftheDSBisnotscheduledduringthisperiod,suchameetingshallbeheldforthispurpose.28IfameetingoftheDSBisnotscheduledduringthisperiod,suchameetingshallbeheldforthispurpose.
47
8.1 Thefollowingsubsidiesshallbeconsideredasnon-actionable29:
(a) subsidieswhicharenotspecificwithinthemeaningofArticle2;
(b) subsidieswhicharespecificwithinthemeaningofArticle2butwhichmeetalloftheconditionsprovidedforinparagraphs2(a),2(b)or2(c)below.
8.2 NotwithstandingtheprovisionsofPartsIIIandV,thefollowingsubsidiesshallbenon-actionable:
(a) assistanceforresearchactivitiesconductedbyfirmsorbyhighereducationorresearchestablishmentsonacontractbasiswithfirmsif:30,31,32
theassistancecovers33notmorethan75percentofthecostsofindustrialresearch34or50percentofthecostsofpre-competitivedevelopmentactivity35,36;andprovidedthatsuchassistanceislimitedexclusivelyto:
29ItisrecognizedthatgovernmentassistanceforvariouspurposesiswidelyprovidedbyMembersandthatthemerefactthatsuchassistancemaynotqualifyfornon-actionabletreatmentundertheprovisionsofthisArticledoesnotinitselfrestricttheabilityofMemberstoprovidesuchassistance.30Sinceitisanticipatedthatcivilaircraftwillbesubjecttospecificmultilateralrules,theprovisionsofthissubparagraphdonotapplytothatproduct.31Notlaterthan18monthsafterthedateofentryintoforceoftheWTOAgreement,theCommitteeonSubsidiesandCountervailingMeasuresprovidedforinArticle24(referredtointhisAgreementas"theCommittee")shallreviewtheoperationoftheprovisionsofsubparagraph2(a)withaviewtomakingallnecessarymodificationstoimprovetheoperationoftheseprovisions.Initsconsiderationofpossiblemodifications,theCommitteeshallcarefullyreviewthedefinitionsofthecategoriessetforthinthissubparagraphinthelightoftheexperienceofMembersintheoperationofresearchprogrammesandtheworkinotherrelevantinternationalinstitutions.32TheprovisionsofthisAgreementdonotapplytofundamentalresearchactivitiesindependentlyconductedbyhighereducationorresearchestablishments.Theterm"fundamentalresearch"meansanenlargementofgeneralscientificandtechnicalknowledgenotlinkedtoindustrialorcommercialobjectives.33Theallowablelevelsofnon-actionableassistancereferredtointhissubparagraphshallbeestablishedbyreferencetothetotaleligiblecostsincurredoverthedurationofanindividualproject.34Theterm"industrialresearch"meansplannedsearchorcriticalinvestigationaimedatdiscoveryofnewknowledge,withtheobjectivethatsuchknowledgemaybeusefulindevelopingnewproducts,processesorservices,orinbringingaboutasignificantimprovementtoexistingproducts,processesorservices.35Theterm"pre-competitivedevelopmentactivity"meansthetranslationofindustrialresearchfindingsintoaplan,blueprintordesignfornew,modifiedorimprovedproducts,processesorserviceswhetherintendedforsaleoruse,
48
(i) costsofpersonnel(researchers,techniciansandother
supportingstaffemployedexclusivelyintheresearchactivity);
(ii) costsofinstruments,equipment,landandbuildingsused
exclusivelyandpermanently(exceptwhendisposedofonacommercialbasis)fortheresearchactivity;
(iii) costsofconsultancyandequivalentservicesused
exclusivelyfortheresearchactivity,includingbought-inresearch,technicalknowledge,patents,etc.;
(iv) additionaloverheadcostsincurreddirectlyasaresultof
theresearchactivity;
(v) otherrunningcosts(suchasthoseofmaterials,suppliesandthelike),incurreddirectlyasaresultoftheresearchactivity.
(b) assistancetodisadvantagedregionswithintheterritoryofa
Membergivenpursuanttoageneralframeworkofregionaldevelopment37andnon-specific(withinthemeaningofArticle2)withineligibleregionsprovidedthat:
(i) eachdisadvantagedregionmustbeaclearlydesignated
contiguousgeographicalareawithadefinableeconomicandadministrativeidentity;
includingthecreationofafirstprototypewhichwouldnotbecapableofcommercialuse.Itmayfurtherincludetheconceptualformulationanddesignofproducts,processesorservicesalternativesandinitialdemonstrationorpilotprojects,providedthatthesesameprojectscannotbeconvertedorusedforindustrialapplicationorcommercialexploitation.Itdoesnotincluderoutineorperiodicalterationstoexistingproducts,productionlines,manufacturingprocesses,services,andotheron-goingoperationseventhoughthosealterationsmayrepresentimprovements.36Inthecaseofprogrammeswhichspanindustrialresearchandpre-competitivedevelopmentactivity,theallowablelevelofnon-actionableassistanceshallnotexceedthesimpleaverageoftheallowablelevelsofnon-actionableassistanceapplicabletotheabovetwocategories,calculatedonthebasisofalleligiblecostsassetforthinitems(i)to(v)ofthissubparagraph.37A"generalframeworkofregionaldevelopment"meansthatregionalsubsidyprogrammesarepartofaninternallyconsistentandgenerallyapplicableregionaldevelopmentpolicyandthatregionaldevelopmentsubsidiesarenotgrantedinisolatedgeographicalpointshavingno,orvirtuallyno,influenceonthedevelopmentofaregion.
49
(ii) theregionisconsideredasdisadvantagedonthebasisofneutralandobjectivecriteria38,indicatingthattheregion'sdifficultiesariseoutofmorethantemporarycircumstances;suchcriteriamustbeclearlyspelledoutinlaw,regulation,orotherofficialdocument,soastobecapableofverification;
(iii) thecriteriashallincludeameasurementofeconomic
developmentwhichshallbebasedonatleastoneofthefollowingfactors:
- oneofeitherincomepercapitaorhouseholdincome
percapita,orGDPpercapita,whichmustnotbeabove85percentoftheaveragefortheterritoryconcerned;
- unemploymentrate,whichmustbeatleast110per
centoftheaveragefortheterritoryconcerned;
asmeasuredoverathree-yearperiod;suchmeasurement,however,maybeacompositeoneandmayincludeotherfactors.
(c) assistancetopromoteadaptationofexistingfacilities39tonew
environmentalrequirementsimposedbylawand/orregulationswhichresultingreaterconstraintsandfinancialburdenonfirms,providedthattheassistance:
(i) isaone-timenon-recurringmeasure;and
(ii) islimitedto20percentofthecostofadaptation;and
38"Neutralandobjectivecriteria"meanscriteriawhichdonotfavourcertainregionsbeyondwhatisappropriatefortheeliminationorreductionofregionaldisparitieswithintheframeworkoftheregionaldevelopmentpolicy.Inthisregard,regionalsubsidyprogrammesshallincludeceilingsontheamountofassistancewhichcanbegrantedtoeachsubsidizedproject.Suchceilingsmustbedifferentiatedaccordingtothedifferentlevelsofdevelopmentofassistedregionsandmustbeexpressedintermsofinvestmentcostsorcostofjobcreation.Withinsuchceilings,thedistributionofassistanceshallbesufficientlybroadandeventoavoidthepredominantuseofasubsidyby,orthegrantingofdisproportionatelylargeamountsofsubsidyto,certainenterprisesasprovidedforinArticle2.39Theterm"existingfacilities"meansfacilitieswhichhavebeeninoperationforatleasttwoyearsatthetimewhennewenvironmentalrequirementsareimposed.
50
(iii) doesnotcoverthecostofreplacingandoperatingtheassistedinvestment,whichmustbefullybornebyfirms;and
(iv) isdirectlylinkedtoandproportionatetoafirm'splanned
reductionofnuisancesandpollution,anddoesnotcoveranymanufacturingcostsavingswhichmaybeachieved;and
(v) isavailabletoallfirmswhichcanadoptthenewequipment
and/orproductionprocesses.8.3 Asubsidyprogrammeforwhichtheprovisionsofparagraph2areinvokedshallbenotifiedinadvanceofitsimplementationtotheCommitteeinaccordancewiththeprovisionsofPartVII.AnysuchnotificationshallbesufficientlyprecisetoenableotherMemberstoevaluatetheconsistencyoftheprogrammewiththeconditionsandcriteriaprovidedforintherelevantprovisionsofparagraph2.MembersshallalsoprovidetheCommitteewithyearlyupdatesofsuchnotifications,inparticularbysupplyinginformationonglobalexpenditureforeachprogramme,andonanymodificationoftheprogramme.OtherMembersshallhavetherighttorequestinformationaboutindividualcasesofsubsidizationunderanotifiedprogramme.408.4 UponrequestofaMember,theSecretariatshallreviewanotificationmadepursuanttoparagraph3and,wherenecessary,mayrequireadditionalinformationfromthesubsidizingMemberconcerningthenotifiedprogrammeunderreview.TheSecretariatshallreportitsfindingstotheCommittee.TheCommitteeshall,uponrequest,promptlyreviewthefindingsoftheSecretariat(or,ifareviewbytheSecretariathasnotbeenrequested,thenotificationitself),withaviewtodeterminingwhethertheconditionsandcriterialaiddowninparagraph2havenotbeenmet.TheprocedureprovidedforinthisparagraphshallbecompletedatthelatestatthefirstregularmeetingoftheCommitteefollowingthenotificationofasubsidyprogramme,providedthatatleasttwomonthshaveelapsedbetweensuchnotificationandtheregularmeetingoftheCommittee.Thereviewproceduredescribedinthisparagraphshallalsoapply,uponrequest,tosubstantialmodificationsofaprogrammenotifiedintheyearlyupdatesreferredtoinparagraph3.8.5 UpontherequestofaMember,thedeterminationbytheCommitteereferredtoinparagraph4,orafailurebytheCommitteetomakesuchadetermination,aswellastheviolation,inindividualcases,oftheconditionssetoutinanotifiedprogramme,shallbesubmittedtobindingarbitration.ThearbitrationbodyshallpresentitsconclusionstotheMemberswithin120daysfromthedatewhenthematterwasreferredtothearbitrationbody.Exceptas
40Itisrecognizedthatnothinginthisnotificationprovisionrequirestheprovisionofconfidentialinformation,includingconfidentialbusinessinformation.
51
otherwiseprovidedinthisparagraph,theDSUshallapplytoarbitrationsconductedunderthisparagraph.
Article9
ConsultationsandAuthorizedRemedies9.1 If,inthecourseofimplementationofaprogrammereferredtoinparagraph2ofArticle8,notwithstandingthefactthattheprogrammeisconsistentwiththecriterialaiddowninthatparagraph,aMemberhasreasonstobelievethatthisprogrammehasresultedinseriousadverseeffectstothedomesticindustryofthatMember,suchastocausedamagewhichwouldbedifficulttorepair,suchMembermayrequestconsultationswiththeMembergrantingormaintainingthesubsidy.9.2 Uponrequestforconsultationsunderparagraph1,theMembergrantingormaintainingthesubsidyprogrammeinquestionshallenterintosuchconsultationsasquicklyaspossible.Thepurposeoftheconsultationsshallbetoclarifythefactsofthesituationandtoarriveatamutuallyacceptablesolution.9.3 Ifnomutuallyacceptablesolutionhasbeenreachedinconsultationsunderparagraph2within60daysoftherequestforsuchconsultations,therequestingMembermayreferthemattertotheCommittee.9.4 WhereamatterisreferredtotheCommittee,theCommitteeshallimmediatelyreviewthefactsinvolvedandtheevidenceoftheeffectsreferredtoinparagraph1.IftheCommitteedeterminesthatsucheffectsexist,itmayrecommendtothesubsidizingMembertomodifythisprogrammeinsuchawayastoremovetheseeffects.TheCommitteeshallpresentitsconclusionswithin120daysfromthedatewhenthematterisreferredtoitunderparagraph3.Intheeventtherecommendationisnotfollowedwithinsixmonths,theCommitteeshallauthorizetherequestingMembertotakeappropriatecountermeasurescommensuratewiththenatureanddegreeoftheeffectsdeterminedtoexist.
PARTV:COUNTERVAILINGMEASURES
Article10
ApplicationofArticleVIofGATT199441
41TheprovisionsofPartIIorIIImaybeinvokedinparallelwiththeprovisionsofPartV;however,withregardtotheeffectsofaparticularsubsidyinthedomesticmarketoftheimportingMember,onlyoneformofrelief(eitheracountervailingduty,iftherequirementsofPartVaremet,oracountermeasureunderArticles4or7)shallbeavailable.TheprovisionsofPartsIIIandVshallnotbeinvokedregardingmeasuresconsiderednon-actionableinaccordance
52
Membersshalltakeallnecessarystepstoensurethattheimpositionofacountervailingduty42onanyproductoftheterritoryofanyMemberimportedintotheterritoryofanotherMemberisinaccordancewiththeprovisionsofArticleVIofGATT1994andthetermsofthisAgreement.Countervailingdutiesmayonlybeimposedpursuanttoinvestigationsinitiated43andconductedinaccordancewiththeprovisionsofthisAgreementandtheAgreementonAgriculture.
Article11
InitiationandSubsequentInvestigation11.1 Exceptasprovidedinparagraph6,aninvestigationtodeterminetheexistence,degreeandeffectofanyallegedsubsidyshallbeinitiateduponawrittenapplicationbyoronbehalfofthedomesticindustry.11.2 Anapplicationunderparagraph1shallincludesufficientevidenceoftheexistenceof(a)asubsidyand,ifpossible,itsamount,(b)injurywithinthemeaningofArticleVIofGATT1994asinterpretedbythisAgreement,and(c)acausallinkbetweenthesubsidizedimportsandtheallegedinjury.Simpleassertion,unsubstantiatedbyrelevantevidence,cannotbeconsideredsufficienttomeettherequirementsofthisparagraph.Theapplicationshallcontainsuchinformationasisreasonablyavailabletotheapplicantonthefollowing:
(i) theidentityoftheapplicantandadescriptionofthevolumeandvalueofthedomesticproductionofthelikeproductbytheapplicant.Whereawrittenapplicationismadeonbehalfofthedomesticindustry,theapplicationshallidentifytheindustryonbehalfofwhichtheapplicationismadebyalistofallknowndomesticproducersofthelikeproduct(orassociationsofdomesticproducersofthelikeproduct)and,totheextentpossible,
withtheprovisionsofPartIV.However,measuresreferredtoinparagraph1(a)ofArticle8maybeinvestigatedinordertodeterminewhetherornottheyarespecificwithinthemeaningofArticle2.Inaddition,inthecaseofasubsidyreferredtoinparagraph2ofArticle8conferredpursuanttoaprogrammewhichhasnotbeennotifiedinaccordancewithparagraph3ofArticle8,theprovisionsofPartIIIorVmaybeinvoked,butsuchsubsidyshallbetreatedasnon-actionableifitisfoundtoconformtothestandardssetforthinparagraph2ofArticle8.42Theterm"countervailingduty"shallbeunderstoodtomeanaspecialdutyleviedforthepurposeofoffsettinganysubsidybestoweddirectlyorindirectlyuponthemanufacture,productionorexportofanymerchandise,asprovidedforinparagraph3ofArticleVIofGATT1994.43Theterm"initiated"asusedhereinaftermeansproceduralactionbywhichaMemberformallycommencesaninvestigationasprovidedinArticle11.
53
adescriptionofthevolumeandvalueofdomesticproductionofthelikeproductaccountedforbysuchproducers;
(ii) acompletedescriptionoftheallegedlysubsidizedproduct,the
namesofthecountryorcountriesoforiginorexportinquestion,theidentityofeachknownexporterorforeignproducerandalistofknownpersonsimportingtheproductinquestion;
(iii) evidencewithregardtotheexistence,amountandnatureofthe
subsidyinquestion;
(iv) evidencethatallegedinjurytoadomesticindustryiscausedbysubsidizedimportsthroughtheeffectsofthesubsidies;thisevidenceincludesinformationontheevolutionofthevolumeoftheallegedlysubsidizedimports,theeffectoftheseimportsonpricesofthelikeproductinthedomesticmarketandtheconsequentimpactoftheimportsonthedomesticindustry,asdemonstratedbyrelevantfactorsandindiceshavingabearingonthestateofthedomesticindustry,suchasthoselistedinparagraphs2and4ofArticle15.
11.3 Theauthoritiesshallreviewtheaccuracyandadequacyoftheevidenceprovidedintheapplicationtodeterminewhethertheevidenceissufficienttojustifytheinitiationofaninvestigation.11.4 Aninvestigationshallnotbeinitiatedpursuanttoparagraph1unlesstheauthoritieshavedetermined,onthebasisofanexaminationofthedegreeofsupportfor,oroppositionto,theapplicationexpressed44bydomesticproducersofthelikeproduct,thattheapplicationhasbeenmadebyoronbehalfofthedomesticindustry.45Theapplicationshallbeconsideredtohavebeenmade"byoronbehalfofthedomesticindustry"ifitissupportedbythosedomesticproducerswhosecollectiveoutputconstitutesmorethan50percentofthetotalproductionofthelikeproductproducedbythatportionofthedomesticindustryexpressingeithersupportfororoppositiontotheapplication.However,noinvestigationshallbeinitiatedwhendomesticproducersexpresslysupportingtheapplicationaccountforlessthan25percentoftotalproductionofthelikeproductproducedbythedomesticindustry.11.5 Theauthoritiesshallavoid,unlessadecisionhasbeenmadetoinitiateaninvestigation,anypublicizingoftheapplicationfortheinitiationofaninvestigation.
44Inthecaseoffragmentedindustriesinvolvinganexceptionallylargenumberofproducers,authoritiesmaydeterminesupportandoppositionbyusingstatisticallyvalidsamplingtechniques.45MembersareawarethatintheterritoryofcertainMembersemployeesofdomesticproducersofthelikeproductorrepresentativesofthoseemployeesmaymakeorsupportanapplicationforaninvestigationunderparagraph1.
54
11.6 If,inspecialcircumstances,theauthoritiesconcerneddecidetoinitiateaninvestigationwithouthavingreceivedawrittenapplicationbyoronbehalfofadomesticindustryfortheinitiationofsuchinvestigation,theyshallproceedonlyiftheyhavesufficientevidenceoftheexistenceofasubsidy,injuryandcausallink,asdescribedinparagraph2,tojustifytheinitiationofaninvestigation.11.7 Theevidenceofbothsubsidyandinjuryshallbeconsideredsimultaneously(a)inthedecisionwhetherornottoinitiateaninvestigationand(b)thereafter,duringthecourseoftheinvestigation,startingonadatenotlaterthantheearliestdateonwhichinaccordancewiththeprovisionsofthisAgreementprovisionalmeasuresmaybeapplied.11.8 IncaseswhereproductsarenotimporteddirectlyfromthecountryoforiginbutareexportedtotheimportingMemberfromanintermediatecountry,theprovisionsofthisAgreementshallbefullyapplicableandthetransactionortransactionsshall,forthepurposesofthisAgreement,beregardedashavingtakenplacebetweenthecountryoforiginandtheimportingMember.11.9 Anapplicationunderparagraph1shallberejectedandaninvestigationshallbeterminatedpromptlyassoonastheauthoritiesconcernedaresatisfiedthatthereisnotsufficientevidenceofeithersubsidizationorofinjurytojustifyproceedingwiththecase.Thereshallbeimmediateterminationincaseswheretheamountofasubsidyisdeminimis,orwherethevolumeofsubsidizedimports,actualorpotential,ortheinjury,isnegligible.Forthepurposeofthisparagraph,theamountofthesubsidyshallbeconsideredtobedeminimisifthesubsidyislessthan1percentadvalorem.11.10 Aninvestigationshallnothindertheproceduresofcustomsclearance.11.11 Investigationsshall,exceptinspecialcircumstances,beconcludedwithinoneyear,andinnocasemorethan18months,aftertheirinitiation.
Article12
Evidence12.1 InterestedMembersandallinterestedpartiesinacountervailingdutyinvestigationshallbegivennoticeoftheinformationwhichtheauthoritiesrequireandampleopportunitytopresentinwritingallevidencewhichtheyconsiderrelevantinrespectoftheinvestigationinquestion. 12.1.1 Exporters,foreignproducersorinterestedMembers
receivingquestionnairesusedinacountervailingdutyinvestigationshallbegivenatleast30daysforreply.46Due
46Asageneralrule,thetime-limitforexportersshallbecountedfromthedateofreceiptofthequestionnaire,whichforthispurposeshallbedeemedtohavebeenreceivedoneweekfromthedateonwhichitwassenttotherespondentor
55
considerationshouldbegiventoanyrequestforanextensionofthe30-dayperiodand,uponcauseshown,suchanextensionshouldbegrantedwheneverpracticable.
12.1.2 Subjecttotherequirementtoprotectconfidential
information,evidencepresentedinwritingbyoneinterestedMemberorinterestedpartyshallbemadeavailablepromptlytootherinterestedMembersorinterestedpartiesparticipatingintheinvestigation.
12.1.3 Assoonasaninvestigationhasbeeninitiated,the
authoritiesshallprovidethefulltextofthewrittenapplicationreceivedunderparagraph1ofArticle11totheknownexporters47andtotheauthoritiesoftheexportingMemberandshallmakeitavailable,uponrequest,tootherinterestedpartiesinvolved.Dueregardshallbepaidtotheprotectionofconfidentialinformation,asprovidedforinparagraph4.
12.2. InterestedMembersandinterestedpartiesalsoshallhavetheright,uponjustification,topresentinformationorally.Wheresuchinformationisprovidedorally,theinterestedMembersandinterestedpartiessubsequentlyshallberequiredtoreducesuchsubmissionstowriting.AnydecisionoftheinvestigatingauthoritiescanonlybebasedonsuchinformationandargumentsaswereonthewrittenrecordofthisauthorityandwhichwereavailabletointerestedMembersandinterestedpartiesparticipatingintheinvestigation,dueaccounthavingbeengiventotheneedtoprotectconfidentialinformation.12.3 TheauthoritiesshallwheneverpracticableprovidetimelyopportunitiesforallinterestedMembersandinterestedpartiestoseeallinformationthatisrelevanttothepresentationoftheircases,thatisnotconfidentialasdefinedinparagraph4,andthatisusedbytheauthoritiesinacountervailingdutyinvestigation,andtopreparepresentationsonthebasisofthisinformation.12.4 Anyinformationwhichisbynatureconfidential(forexample,becauseitsdisclosurewouldbeofsignificantcompetitiveadvantagetoacompetitororbecauseitsdisclosurewouldhaveasignificantlyadverseeffectuponapersonsupplyingtheinformationoruponapersonfromwhomthesupplieracquiredtheinformation),orwhichisprovidedonaconfidentialbasisbypartiestoaninvestigationshall,upongoodcauseshown,betreatedassuchbytheauthorities.
transmittedtotheappropriatediplomaticrepresentativesoftheexportingMemberor,inthecaseofaseparatecustomsterritoryMemberoftheWTO,anofficialrepresentativeoftheexportingterritory.47Itbeingunderstoodthatwherethenumberofexportersinvolvedisparticularlyhigh,thefulltextoftheapplicationshouldinsteadbeprovidedonlytotheauthoritiesoftheexportingMemberortotherelevanttradeassociationwhothenshouldforwardcopiestotheexportersconcerned.
56
Suchinformationshallnotbedisclosedwithoutspecificpermissionofthepartysubmittingit.48 12.4.1 TheauthoritiesshallrequireinterestedMembersor
interestedpartiesprovidingconfidentialinformationtofurnishnon-confidentialsummariesthereof.Thesesummariesshallbeinsufficientdetailtopermitareasonableunderstandingofthesubstanceoftheinformationsubmittedinconfidence.Inexceptionalcircumstances,suchMembersorpartiesmayindicatethatsuchinformationisnotsusceptibleofsummary.Insuchexceptionalcircumstances,astatementofthereasonswhysummarizationisnotpossiblemustbeprovided.
12.4.2 Iftheauthoritiesfindthatarequestforconfidentialityis
notwarrantedandifthesupplieroftheinformationiseitherunwillingtomaketheinformationpublicortoauthorizeitsdisclosureingeneralizedorsummaryform,theauthoritiesmaydisregardsuchinformationunlessitcanbedemonstratedtotheirsatisfactionfromappropriatesourcesthattheinformationiscorrect.49
12.5 Exceptincircumstancesprovidedforinparagraph7,theauthoritiesshallduringthecourseofaninvestigationsatisfythemselvesastotheaccuracyoftheinformationsuppliedbyinterestedMembersorinterestedpartiesuponwhichtheirfindingsarebased.12.6 TheinvestigatingauthoritiesmaycarryoutinvestigationsintheterritoryofotherMembersasrequired,providedthattheyhavenotifiedingoodtimetheMemberinquestionandunlessthatMemberobjectstotheinvestigation.Further,theinvestigatingauthoritiesmaycarryoutinvestigationsonthepremisesofafirmandmayexaminetherecordsofafirmif(a)thefirmsoagreesand(b)theMemberinquestionisnotifiedanddoesnotobject.TheproceduressetforthinAnnexVIshallapplytoinvestigationsonthepremisesofafirm.Subjecttotherequirementtoprotectconfidentialinformation,theauthoritiesshallmaketheresultsofanysuchinvestigationsavailable,orshallprovidedisclosurethereofpursuanttoparagraph8,tothefirmstowhichtheypertainandmaymakesuchresultsavailabletotheapplicants.12.7 IncasesinwhichanyinterestedMemberorinterestedpartyrefusesaccessto,orotherwisedoesnotprovide,necessaryinformationwithinareasonableperiodorsignificantlyimpedestheinvestigation,preliminaryand
48MembersareawarethatintheterritoryofcertainMembersdisclosurepursuanttoanarrowly-drawnprotectiveordermayberequired.49Membersagreethatrequestsforconfidentialityshouldnotbearbitrarilyrejected.Membersfurtheragreethattheinvestigatingauthoritymayrequestthewaivingofconfidentialityonlyregardinginformationrelevanttotheproceedings.
57
finaldeterminations,affirmativeornegative,maybemadeonthebasisofthefactsavailable.12.8 Theauthoritiesshall,beforeafinaldeterminationismade,informallinterestedMembersandinterestedpartiesoftheessentialfactsunderconsiderationwhichformthebasisforthedecisionwhethertoapplydefinitivemeasures.Suchdisclosureshouldtakeplaceinsufficienttimeforthepartiestodefendtheirinterests.12.9 ForthepurposesofthisAgreement,"interestedparties"shallinclude:
(i) anexporterorforeignproducerortheimporterofaproductsubjecttoinvestigation,oratradeorbusinessassociationamajorityofthemembersofwhichareproducers,exportersorimportersofsuchproduct;and
(ii) aproducerofthelikeproductintheimportingMemberoratrade
andbusinessassociationamajorityofthemembersofwhichproducethelikeproductintheterritoryoftheimportingMember.
ThislistshallnotprecludeMembersfromallowingdomesticorforeignpartiesotherthanthosementionedabovetobeincludedasinterestedparties.12.10 Theauthoritiesshallprovideopportunitiesforindustrialusersoftheproductunderinvestigation,andforrepresentativeconsumerorganizationsincaseswheretheproductiscommonlysoldattheretaillevel,toprovideinformationwhichisrelevanttotheinvestigationregardingsubsidization,injuryandcausality.12.11 Theauthoritiesshalltakedueaccountofanydifficultiesexperiencedbyinterestedparties,inparticularsmallcompanies,insupplyinginformationrequested,andshallprovideanyassistancepracticable.12.12 TheproceduressetoutabovearenotintendedtopreventtheauthoritiesofaMemberfromproceedingexpeditiouslywithregardtoinitiatinganinvestigation,reachingpreliminaryorfinaldeterminations,whetheraffirmativeornegative,orfromapplyingprovisionalorfinalmeasures,inaccordancewithrelevantprovisionsofthisAgreement.
Article13
Consultations13.1 AssoonaspossibleafteranapplicationunderArticle11isaccepted,andinanyeventbeforetheinitiationofanyinvestigation,Memberstheproductsofwhichmaybesubjecttosuchinvestigationshallbeinvitedforconsultationswiththeaimofclarifyingthesituationastothemattersreferredtoinparagraph2ofArticle11andarrivingatamutuallyagreedsolution.
58
13.2 Furthermore,throughouttheperiodofinvestigation,Memberstheproductsofwhicharethesubjectoftheinvestigationshallbeaffordedareasonableopportunitytocontinueconsultations,withaviewtoclarifyingthefactualsituationandtoarrivingatamutuallyagreedsolution.5013.3 Withoutprejudicetotheobligationtoaffordreasonableopportunityforconsultation,theseprovisionsregardingconsultationsarenotintendedtopreventtheauthoritiesofaMemberfromproceedingexpeditiouslywithregardtoinitiatingtheinvestigation,reachingpreliminaryorfinaldeterminations,whetheraffirmativeornegative,orfromapplyingprovisionalorfinalmeasures,inaccordancewiththeprovisionsofthisAgreement.13.4 TheMemberwhichintendstoinitiateanyinvestigationorisconductingsuchaninvestigationshallpermit,uponrequest,theMemberorMemberstheproductsofwhicharesubjecttosuchinvestigationaccesstonon-confidentialevidence,includingthenon-confidentialsummaryofconfidentialdatabeingusedforinitiatingorconductingtheinvestigation.
Article14
CalculationoftheAmountofaSubsidyinTermsoftheBenefittotheRecipient
ForthepurposeofPartV,anymethodusedbytheinvestigatingauthoritytocalculatethebenefittotherecipientconferredpursuanttoparagraph1ofArticle1shallbeprovidedforinthenationallegislationorimplementingregulationsoftheMemberconcernedanditsapplicationtoeachparticularcaseshallbetransparentandadequatelyexplained.Furthermore,anysuchmethodshallbeconsistentwiththefollowingguidelines:
(a) governmentprovisionofequitycapitalshallnotbeconsideredasconferringabenefit,unlesstheinvestmentdecisioncanberegardedasinconsistentwiththeusualinvestmentpractice(includingfortheprovisionofriskcapital)ofprivateinvestorsintheterritoryofthatMember;
(b) aloanbyagovernmentshallnotbeconsideredasconferringa
benefit,unlessthereisadifferencebetweentheamountthatthefirmreceivingtheloanpaysonthegovernmentloanandtheamountthefirmwouldpayonacomparablecommercialloan
50Itisparticularlyimportant,inaccordancewiththeprovisionsofthisparagraph,thatnoaffirmativedeterminationwhetherpreliminaryorfinalbemadewithoutreasonableopportunityforconsultationshavingbeengiven.SuchconsultationsmayestablishthebasisforproceedingundertheprovisionsofPartII,IIIorX.
59
whichthefirmcouldactuallyobtainonthemarket.Inthiscasethebenefitshallbethedifferencebetweenthesetwoamounts;
(c) aloanguaranteebyagovernmentshallnotbeconsideredas
conferringabenefit,unlessthereisadifferencebetweentheamountthatthefirmreceivingtheguaranteepaysonaloanguaranteedbythegovernmentandtheamountthatthefirmwouldpayonacomparablecommercialloanabsentthegovernmentguarantee.Inthiscasethebenefitshallbethedifferencebetweenthesetwoamountsadjustedforanydifferencesinfees;
(d) theprovisionofgoodsorservicesorpurchaseofgoodsbya
governmentshallnotbeconsideredasconferringabenefitunlesstheprovisionismadeforlessthanadequateremuneration,orthepurchaseismadeformorethanadequateremuneration.Theadequacyofremunerationshallbedeterminedinrelationtoprevailingmarketconditionsforthegoodorserviceinquestioninthecountryofprovisionorpurchase(includingprice,quality,availability,marketability,transportationandotherconditionsofpurchaseorsale).
Article15
DeterminationofInjury5115.1 AdeterminationofinjuryforpurposesofArticleVIofGATT1994shallbebasedonpositiveevidenceandinvolveanobjectiveexaminationofboth(a)thevolumeofthesubsidizedimportsandtheeffectofthesubsidizedimportsonpricesinthedomesticmarketforlikeproducts52and(b)theconsequentimpactoftheseimportsonthedomesticproducersofsuchproducts.15.2 Withregardtothevolumeofthesubsidizedimports,theinvestigatingauthoritiesshallconsiderwhethertherehasbeenasignificantincreaseinsubsidizedimports,eitherinabsolutetermsorrelativetoproductionorconsumptionintheimportingMember.Withregardtotheeffectofthesubsidizedimportsonprices,theinvestigatingauthoritiesshallconsiderwhethertherehasbeenasignificantpriceundercuttingbythesubsidized
51UnderthisAgreementtheterm"injury"shall,unlessotherwisespecified,betakentomeanmaterialinjurytoadomesticindustry,threatofmaterialinjurytoadomesticindustryormaterialretardationoftheestablishmentofsuchanindustryandshallbeinterpretedinaccordancewiththeprovisionsofthisArticle.52ThroughoutthisAgreementtheterm"likeproduct"("produitsimilaire")shallbeinterpretedtomeanaproductwhichisidentical,i.e.alikeinallrespectstotheproductunderconsideration,orintheabsenceofsuchaproduct,anotherproductwhich,althoughnotalikeinallrespects,hascharacteristicscloselyresemblingthoseoftheproductunderconsideration.
60
importsascomparedwiththepriceofalikeproductoftheimportingMember,orwhethertheeffectofsuchimportsisotherwisetodepresspricestoasignificantdegreeortopreventpriceincreases,whichotherwisewouldhaveoccurred,toasignificantdegree.Nooneorseveralofthesefactorscannecessarilygivedecisiveguidance.15.3 Whereimportsofaproductfrommorethanonecountryaresimultaneouslysubjecttocountervailingdutyinvestigations,theinvestigatingauthoritiesmaycumulativelyassesstheeffectsofsuchimportsonlyiftheydeterminethat(a)theamountofsubsidizationestablishedinrelationtotheimportsfromeachcountryismorethandeminimisasdefinedinparagraph9ofArticle11andthevolumeofimportsfromeachcountryisnotnegligibleand(b)acumulativeassessmentoftheeffectsoftheimportsisappropriateinlightoftheconditionsofcompetitionbetweentheimportedproductsandtheconditionsofcompetitionbetweentheimportedproductsandthelikedomesticproduct.15.4 Theexaminationoftheimpactofthesubsidizedimportsonthedomesticindustryshallincludeanevaluationofallrelevanteconomicfactorsandindiceshavingabearingonthestateoftheindustry,includingactualandpotentialdeclineinoutput,sales,marketshare,profits,productivity,returnoninvestments,orutilizationofcapacity;factorsaffectingdomesticprices;actualandpotentialnegativeeffectsoncashflow,inventories,employment,wages,growth,abilitytoraisecapitalorinvestmentsand,inthecaseofagriculture,whethertherehasbeenanincreasedburdenongovernmentsupportprogrammes.Thislistisnotexhaustive,norcanoneorseveralofthesefactorsnecessarilygivedecisiveguidance.15.5 Itmustbedemonstratedthatthesubsidizedimportsare,throughtheeffects53ofsubsidies,causinginjurywithinthemeaningofthisAgreement.Thedemonstrationofacausalrelationshipbetweenthesubsidizedimportsandtheinjurytothedomesticindustryshallbebasedonanexaminationofallrelevantevidencebeforetheauthorities.Theauthoritiesshallalsoexamineanyknownfactorsotherthanthesubsidizedimportswhichatthesametimeareinjuringthedomesticindustry,andtheinjuriescausedbytheseotherfactorsmustnotbeattributedtothesubsidizedimports.Factorswhichmayberelevantinthisrespectinclude,interalia,thevolumesandpricesofnon-subsidizedimportsoftheproductinquestion,contractionindemandorchangesinthepatternsofconsumption,traderestrictivepracticesofandcompetitionbetweentheforeignanddomesticproducers,developmentsintechnologyandtheexportperformanceandproductivityofthedomesticindustry.15.6 Theeffectofthesubsidizedimportsshallbeassessedinrelationtothedomesticproductionofthelikeproductwhenavailabledatapermittheseparateidentificationofthatproductiononthebasisofsuchcriteriaastheproductionprocess,producers'salesandprofits.Ifsuchseparateidentificationofthatproductionisnotpossible,theeffectsofthesubsidizedimportsshallbeassessedbytheexaminationoftheproductionofthenarrowestgrouporrangeof
53Assetforthinparagraphs2and4.
61
products,whichincludesthelikeproduct,forwhichthenecessaryinformationcanbeprovided.15.7 Adeterminationofathreatofmaterialinjuryshallbebasedonfactsandnotmerelyonallegation,conjectureorremotepossibility.Thechangeincircumstanceswhichwouldcreateasituationinwhichthesubsidywouldcauseinjurymustbeclearlyforeseenandimminent.Inmakingadeterminationregardingtheexistenceofathreatofmaterialinjury,theinvestigatingauthoritiesshouldconsider,interalia,suchfactorsas:
(i) natureofthesubsidyorsubsidiesinquestionandthetradeeffectslikelytoarisetherefrom;
(ii) asignificantrateofincreaseofsubsidizedimportsintothe
domesticmarketindicatingthelikelihoodofsubstantiallyincreasedimportation;
(iii) sufficientfreelydisposable,oranimminent,substantialincrease
in,capacityoftheexporterindicatingthelikelihoodofsubstantiallyincreasedsubsidizedexportstotheimportingMember'smarket,takingintoaccounttheavailabilityofotherexportmarketstoabsorbanyadditionalexports;
(iv) whetherimportsareenteringatpricesthatwillhaveasignificant
depressingorsuppressingeffectondomesticprices,andwouldlikelyincreasedemandforfurtherimports;and
(v) inventoriesoftheproductbeinginvestigated.
Nooneofthesefactorsbyitselfcannecessarilygivedecisiveguidancebutthetotalityofthefactorsconsideredmustleadtotheconclusionthatfurthersubsidizedexportsareimminentandthat,unlessprotectiveactionistaken,materialinjurywouldoccur.15.8 Withrespecttocaseswhereinjuryisthreatenedbysubsidizedimports,theapplicationofcountervailingmeasuresshallbeconsideredanddecidedwithspecialcare.
Article16
DefinitionofDomesticIndustry16.1 ForthepurposesofthisAgreement,theterm"domesticindustry"shall,exceptasprovidedinparagraph2,beinterpretedasreferringtothedomesticproducersasawholeofthelikeproductsortothoseofthemwhosecollectiveoutputoftheproductsconstitutesamajorproportionofthetotaldomestic
62
productionofthoseproducts,exceptthatwhenproducersarerelated54totheexportersorimportersorarethemselvesimportersoftheallegedlysubsidizedproductoralikeproductfromothercountries,theterm"domesticindustry"maybeinterpretedasreferringtotherestoftheproducers.16.2. Inexceptionalcircumstances,theterritoryofaMembermay,fortheproductioninquestion,bedividedintotwoormorecompetitivemarketsandtheproducerswithineachmarketmayberegardedasaseparateindustryif(a)theproducerswithinsuchmarketsellalloralmostalloftheirproductionoftheproductinquestioninthatmarket,and(b)thedemandinthatmarketisnottoanysubstantialdegreesuppliedbyproducersoftheproductinquestionlocatedelsewhereintheterritory.Insuchcircumstances,injurymaybefoundtoexistevenwhereamajorportionofthetotaldomesticindustryisnotinjured,providedthereisaconcentrationofsubsidizedimportsintosuchanisolatedmarketandprovidedfurtherthatthesubsidizedimportsarecausinginjurytotheproducersofalloralmostalloftheproductionwithinsuchmarket.16.3 Whenthedomesticindustryhasbeeninterpretedasreferringtotheproducersinacertainarea,i.e.amarketasdefinedinparagraph2,countervailingdutiesshallbeleviedonlyontheproductsinquestionconsignedforfinalconsumptiontothatarea.WhentheconstitutionallawoftheimportingMemberdoesnotpermitthelevyingofcountervailingdutiesonsuchabasis,theimportingMembermaylevythecountervailingdutieswithoutlimitationonlyif(a)theexportersshallhavebeengivenanopportunitytoceaseexportingatsubsidizedpricestotheareaconcernedorotherwisegiveassurancespursuanttoArticle18,andadequateassurancesinthisregardhavenotbeenpromptlygiven,and(b)suchdutiescannotbeleviedonlyonproductsofspecificproducerswhichsupplytheareainquestion.16.4 Wheretwoormorecountrieshavereachedundertheprovisionsofparagraph8(a)ofArticleXXIVofGATT1994suchalevelofintegrationthattheyhavethecharacteristicsofasingle,unifiedmarket,theindustryintheentireareaofintegrationshallbetakentobethedomesticindustryreferredtoinparagraphs1and2.16.5 Theprovisionsofparagraph6ofArticle15shallbeapplicabletothisArticle.
54Forthepurposeofthisparagraph,producersshallbedeemedtoberelatedtoexportersorimportersonlyif(a)oneofthemdirectlyorindirectlycontrolstheother;or(b)bothofthemaredirectlyorindirectlycontrolledbyathirdperson;or(c)togethertheydirectlyorindirectlycontrolathirdperson,providedthattherearegroundsforbelievingorsuspectingthattheeffectoftherelationshipissuchastocausetheproducerconcernedtobehavedifferentlyfromnon-relatedproducers.Forthepurposeofthisparagraph,oneshallbedeemedtocontrolanotherwhentheformerislegallyoroperationallyinapositiontoexerciserestraintordirectionoverthelatter.
63
Article17
ProvisionalMeasures17.1 Provisionalmeasuresmaybeappliedonlyif:
(a) aninvestigationhasbeeninitiatedinaccordancewiththeprovisionsofArticle11,apublicnoticehasbeengiventothateffectandinterestedMembersandinterestedpartieshavebeengivenadequateopportunitiestosubmitinformationandmakecomments;
(b) apreliminaryaffirmativedeterminationhasbeenmadethata
subsidyexistsandthatthereisinjurytoadomesticindustrycausedbysubsidizedimports;and
(c) theauthoritiesconcernedjudgesuchmeasuresnecessaryto
preventinjurybeingcausedduringtheinvestigation.17.2 Provisionalmeasuresmaytaketheformofprovisionalcountervailingdutiesguaranteedbycashdepositsorbondsequaltotheamountoftheprovisionallycalculatedamountofsubsidization.17.3 Provisionalmeasuresshallnotbeappliedsoonerthan60daysfromthedateofinitiationoftheinvestigation.17.4 Theapplicationofprovisionalmeasuresshallbelimitedtoasshortaperiodaspossible,notexceedingfourmonths.17.5 TherelevantprovisionsofArticle19shallbefollowedintheapplicationofprovisionalmeasures.
Article18
Undertakings18.1 Proceedingsmay55besuspendedorterminatedwithouttheimpositionofprovisionalmeasuresorcountervailingdutiesuponreceiptofsatisfactoryvoluntaryundertakingsunderwhich:
(a) thegovernmentoftheexportingMemberagreestoeliminateorlimitthesubsidyortakeothermeasuresconcerningitseffects;or
55Theword"may"shallnotbeinterpretedtoallowthesimultaneouscontinuationofproceedingswiththeimplementationofundertakings,exceptasprovidedinparagraph4.
64
(b) theexporteragreestoreviseitspricessothattheinvestigatingauthoritiesaresatisfiedthattheinjuriouseffectofthesubsidyiseliminated.Priceincreasesundersuchundertakingsshallnotbehigherthannecessarytoeliminatetheamountofthesubsidy.Itisdesirablethatthepriceincreasesbelessthantheamountofthesubsidyifsuchincreaseswouldbeadequatetoremovetheinjurytothedomesticindustry.
18.2 UndertakingsshallnotbesoughtoracceptedunlesstheauthoritiesoftheimportingMemberhavemadeapreliminaryaffirmativedeterminationofsubsidizationandinjurycausedbysuchsubsidizationand,incaseofundertakingsfromexporters,haveobtainedtheconsentoftheexportingMember.18.3 UndertakingsofferedneednotbeacceptediftheauthoritiesoftheimportingMemberconsidertheiracceptanceimpractical,forexampleifthenumberofactualorpotentialexportersistoogreat,orforotherreasons,includingreasonsofgeneralpolicy.Shouldthecaseariseandwherepracticable,theauthoritiesshallprovidetotheexporterthereasonswhichhaveledthemtoconsideracceptanceofanundertakingasinappropriate,andshall,totheextentpossible,givetheexporteranopportunitytomakecommentsthereon.18.4 Ifanundertakingisaccepted,theinvestigationofsubsidizationandinjuryshallneverthelessbecompletediftheexportingMembersodesiresortheimportingMembersodecides.Insuchacase,ifanegativedeterminationofsubsidizationorinjuryismade,theundertakingshallautomaticallylapse,exceptincaseswheresuchadeterminationisdueinlargeparttotheexistenceofanundertaking.Insuchcases,theauthoritiesconcernedmayrequirethatanundertakingbemaintainedforareasonableperiodconsistentwiththeprovisionsofthisAgreement.Intheeventthatanaffirmativedeterminationofsubsidizationandinjuryismade,theundertakingshallcontinueconsistentwithitstermsandtheprovisionsofthisAgreement.18.5 PriceundertakingsmaybesuggestedbytheauthoritiesoftheimportingMember,butnoexportershallbeforcedtoenterintosuchundertakings.Thefactthatgovernmentsorexportersdonotoffersuchundertakings,ordonotacceptaninvitationtodoso,shallinnowayprejudicetheconsiderationofthecase.However,theauthoritiesarefreetodeterminethatathreatofinjuryismorelikelytoberealizedifthesubsidizedimportscontinue.18.6 AuthoritiesofanimportingMembermayrequireanygovernmentorexporterfromwhomanundertakinghasbeenacceptedtoprovideperiodicallyinformationrelevanttothefulfilmentofsuchanundertaking,andtopermitverificationofpertinentdata.Incaseofviolationofanundertaking,theauthoritiesoftheimportingMembermaytake,underthisAgreementinconformitywithitsprovisions,expeditiousactionswhichmayconstituteimmediateapplicationofprovisionalmeasuresusingthebestinformationavailable.Insuchcases,definitivedutiesmaybeleviedinaccordancewiththis
65
Agreementonproductsenteredforconsumptionnotmorethan90daysbeforetheapplicationofsuchprovisionalmeasures,exceptthatanysuchretroactiveassessmentshallnotapplytoimportsenteredbeforetheviolationoftheundertaking.
Article19
ImpositionandCollectionofCountervailingDuties19.1 If,afterreasonableeffortshavebeenmadetocompleteconsultations,aMembermakesafinaldeterminationoftheexistenceandamountofthesubsidyandthat,throughtheeffectsofthesubsidy,thesubsidizedimportsarecausinginjury,itmayimposeacountervailingdutyinaccordancewiththeprovisionsofthisArticleunlessthesubsidyorsubsidiesarewithdrawn.19.2 Thedecisionwhetherornottoimposeacountervailingdutyincaseswhereallrequirementsfortheimpositionhavebeenfulfilled,andthedecisionwhethertheamountofthecountervailingdutytobeimposedshallbethefullamountofthesubsidyorless,aredecisionstobemadebytheauthoritiesoftheimportingMember.ItisdesirablethattheimpositionshouldbepermissiveintheterritoryofallMembers,thatthedutyshouldbelessthanthetotalamountofthesubsidyifsuchlesserdutywouldbeadequatetoremovetheinjurytothedomesticindustry,andthatproceduresshouldbeestablishedwhichwouldallowtheauthoritiesconcernedtotakedueaccountofrepresentationsmadebydomesticinterestedparties56whoseinterestsmightbeadverselyaffectedbytheimpositionofacountervailingduty.19.3 Whenacountervailingdutyisimposedinrespectofanyproduct,suchcountervailingdutyshallbelevied,intheappropriateamountsineachcase,onanon-discriminatorybasisonimportsofsuchproductfromallsourcesfoundtobesubsidizedandcausinginjury,exceptastoimportsfromthosesourceswhichhaverenouncedanysubsidiesinquestionorfromwhichundertakingsunderthetermsofthisAgreementhavebeenaccepted.Anyexporterwhoseexportsaresubjecttoadefinitivecountervailingdutybutwhowasnotactuallyinvestigatedforreasonsotherthanarefusaltocooperate,shallbeentitledtoanexpeditedreviewinorderthattheinvestigatingauthoritiespromptlyestablishanindividualcountervailingdutyrateforthatexporter.19.4 Nocountervailingdutyshallbelevied57onanyimportedproductinexcessoftheamountofthesubsidyfoundtoexist,calculatedintermsofsubsidizationperunitofthesubsidizedandexportedproduct.
56Forthepurposeofthisparagraph,theterm"domesticinterestedparties"shallincludeconsumersandindustrialusersoftheimportedproductsubjecttoinvestigation.57AsusedinthisAgreement"levy"shallmeanthedefinitiveorfinallegalassessmentorcollectionofadutyortax.
66
Article20
Retroactivity
20.1 Provisionalmeasuresandcountervailingdutiesshallonlybeappliedtoproductswhichenterforconsumptionafterthetimewhenthedecisionunderparagraph1ofArticle17andparagraph1ofArticle19,respectively,entersintoforce,subjecttotheexceptionssetoutinthisArticle.20.2 Whereafinaldeterminationofinjury(butnotofathreatthereoforofamaterialretardationoftheestablishmentofanindustry)ismadeor,inthecaseofafinaldeterminationofathreatofinjury,wheretheeffectofthesubsidizedimportswould,intheabsenceoftheprovisionalmeasures,haveledtoadeterminationofinjury,countervailingdutiesmaybeleviedretroactivelyfortheperiodforwhichprovisionalmeasures,ifany,havebeenapplied.20.3 Ifthedefinitivecountervailingdutyishigherthantheamountguaranteedbythecashdepositorbond,thedifferenceshallnotbecollected.Ifthedefinitivedutyislessthantheamountguaranteedbythecashdepositorbond,theexcessamountshallbereimbursedorthebondreleasedinanexpeditiousmanner.20.4 Exceptasprovidedinparagraph2,whereadeterminationofthreatofinjuryormaterialretardationismade(butnoinjuryhasyetoccurred)adefinitivecountervailingdutymaybeimposedonlyfromthedateofthedeterminationofthreatofinjuryormaterialretardation,andanycashdepositmadeduringtheperiodoftheapplicationofprovisionalmeasuresshallberefundedandanybondsreleasedinanexpeditiousmanner.20.5 Whereafinaldeterminationisnegative,anycashdepositmadeduringtheperiodoftheapplicationofprovisionalmeasuresshallberefundedandanybondsreleasedinanexpeditiousmanner.20.6 IncriticalcircumstanceswhereforthesubsidizedproductinquestiontheauthoritiesfindthatinjurywhichisdifficulttorepairiscausedbymassiveimportsinarelativelyshortperiodofaproductbenefitingfromsubsidiespaidorbestowedinconsistentlywiththeprovisionsofGATT1994andofthisAgreementandwhereitisdeemednecessary,inordertoprecludetherecurrenceofsuchinjury,toassesscountervailingdutiesretroactivelyonthoseimports,thedefinitivecountervailingdutiesmaybeassessedonimportswhichwereenteredforconsumptionnotmorethan90dayspriortothedateofapplicationofprovisionalmeasures.
Article21
DurationandReviewofCountervailingDutiesandUndertakings
67
21.1 Acountervailingdutyshallremaininforceonlyaslongasandtotheextentnecessarytocounteractsubsidizationwhichiscausinginjury.21.2 Theauthoritiesshallreviewtheneedforthecontinuedimpositionoftheduty,wherewarranted,ontheirowninitiativeor,providedthatareasonableperiodoftimehaselapsedsincetheimpositionofthedefinitivecountervailingduty,uponrequestbyanyinterestedpartywhichsubmitspositiveinformationsubstantiatingtheneedforareview.Interestedpartiesshallhavetherighttorequesttheauthoritiestoexaminewhetherthecontinuedimpositionofthedutyisnecessarytooffsetsubsidization,whethertheinjurywouldbelikelytocontinueorrecurifthedutywereremovedorvaried,orboth.If,asaresultofthereviewunderthisparagraph,theauthoritiesdeterminethatthecountervailingdutyisnolongerwarranted,itshallbeterminatedimmediately.21.3 Notwithstandingtheprovisionsofparagraphs1and2,anydefinitivecountervailingdutyshallbeterminatedonadatenotlaterthanfiveyearsfromitsimposition(orfromthedateofthemostrecentreviewunderparagraph2ifthatreviewhascoveredbothsubsidizationandinjury,orunderthisparagraph),unlesstheauthoritiesdetermine,inareviewinitiatedbeforethatdateontheirowninitiativeoruponadulysubstantiatedrequestmadebyoronbehalfofthedomesticindustrywithinareasonableperiodoftimepriortothatdate,thattheexpiryofthedutywouldbelikelytoleadtocontinuationorrecurrenceofsubsidizationandinjury.58Thedutymayremaininforcependingtheoutcomeofsuchareview.21.4 TheprovisionsofArticle12regardingevidenceandprocedureshallapplytoanyreviewcarriedoutunderthisArticle.Anysuchreviewshallbecarriedoutexpeditiouslyandshallnormallybeconcludedwithin12monthsofthedateofinitiationofthereview.21.5 TheprovisionsofthisArticleshallapplymutatismutandistoundertakingsacceptedunderArticle18.
Article22
PublicNoticeandExplanationofDeterminations
22.1 WhentheauthoritiesaresatisfiedthatthereissufficientevidencetojustifytheinitiationofaninvestigationpursuanttoArticle11,theMemberorMemberstheproductsofwhicharesubjecttosuchinvestigationandotherinterestedpartiesknowntotheinvestigatingauthoritiestohaveaninterestthereinshallbenotifiedandapublicnoticeshallbegiven.
58Whentheamountofthecountervailingdutyisassessedonaretrospectivebasis,afindinginthemostrecentassessmentproceedingthatnodutyistobeleviedshallnotbyitselfrequiretheauthoritiestoterminatethedefinitiveduty.
68
22.2 Apublicnoticeoftheinitiationofaninvestigationshallcontain,orotherwisemakeavailablethroughaseparatereport59,adequateinformationonthefollowing:
(i) thenameoftheexportingcountryorcountriesandtheproductinvolved;
(ii) thedateofinitiationoftheinvestigation;
(iii) adescriptionofthesubsidypracticeorpracticestobe
investigated;
(iv) asummaryofthefactorsonwhichtheallegationofinjuryisbased;
(v) theaddresstowhichrepresentationsbyinterested
Membersandinterestedpartiesshouldbedirected;and
(vi) thetime-limitsallowedtointerestedMembersandinterestedpartiesformakingtheirviewsknown.
22.3 Publicnoticeshallbegivenofanypreliminaryorfinaldetermination,whetheraffirmativeornegative,ofanydecisiontoacceptanundertakingpursuanttoArticle18,oftheterminationofsuchanundertaking,andoftheterminationofadefinitivecountervailingduty.Eachsuchnoticeshallsetforth,orotherwisemakeavailablethroughaseparatereport,insufficientdetailthefindingsandconclusionsreachedonallissuesoffactandlawconsideredmaterialbytheinvestigatingauthorities.AllsuchnoticesandreportsshallbeforwardedtotheMemberorMemberstheproductsofwhicharesubjecttosuchdeterminationorundertakingandtootherinterestedpartiesknowntohaveaninteresttherein.22.4 Apublicnoticeoftheimpositionofprovisionalmeasuresshallsetforth,orotherwisemakeavailablethroughaseparatereport,sufficientlydetailedexplanationsforthepreliminarydeterminationsontheexistenceofasubsidyandinjuryandshallrefertothemattersoffactandlawwhichhaveledtoargumentsbeingacceptedorrejected.Suchanoticeorreportshall,dueregardbeingpaidtotherequirementfortheprotectionofconfidentialinformation,containinparticular:
(i) thenamesofthesuppliersor,whenthisisimpracticable,thesupplyingcountriesinvolved;
(ii) adescriptionoftheproductwhichissufficientforcustoms
purposes;
59WhereauthoritiesprovideinformationandexplanationsundertheprovisionsofthisArticleinaseparatereport,theyshallensurethatsuchreportisreadilyavailabletothepublic.
69
(iii) theamountofsubsidyestablishedandthebasisonwhich
theexistenceofasubsidyhasbeendetermined;
(iv) considerationsrelevanttotheinjurydeterminationassetoutinArticle15;
(v) themainreasonsleadingtothedetermination.
22.5 Apublicnoticeofconclusionorsuspensionofaninvestigationinthecaseofanaffirmativedeterminationprovidingfortheimpositionofadefinitivedutyortheacceptanceofanundertakingshallcontain,orotherwisemakeavailablethroughaseparatereport,allrelevantinformationonthemattersoffactandlawandreasonswhichhaveledtotheimpositionoffinalmeasuresortheacceptanceofanundertaking,dueregardbeingpaidtotherequirementfortheprotectionofconfidentialinformation.Inparticular,thenoticeorreportshallcontaintheinformationdescribedinparagraph4,aswellasthereasonsfortheacceptanceorrejectionofrelevantargumentsorclaimsmadebyinterestedMembersandbytheexportersandimporters.22.6 ApublicnoticeoftheterminationorsuspensionofaninvestigationfollowingtheacceptanceofanundertakingpursuanttoArticle18shallinclude,orotherwisemakeavailablethroughaseparatereport,thenon-confidentialpartofthisundertaking.22.7 TheprovisionsofthisArticleshallapplymutatismutandistotheinitiationandcompletionofreviewspursuanttoArticle21andtodecisionsunderArticle20toapplydutiesretroactively.
Article23
JudicialReview EachMemberwhosenationallegislationcontainsprovisionsoncountervailingdutymeasuresshallmaintainjudicial,arbitraloradministrativetribunalsorproceduresforthepurpose,interalia,ofthepromptreviewofadministrativeactionsrelatingtofinaldeterminationsandreviewsofdeterminationswithinthemeaningofArticle21.Suchtribunalsorproceduresshallbeindependentoftheauthoritiesresponsibleforthedeterminationorreviewinquestion,andshallprovideallinterestedpartieswhoparticipatedintheadministrativeproceedingandaredirectlyandindividuallyaffectedbytheadministrativeactionswithaccesstoreview.
PARTVI:INSTITUTIONS
Article24
70
CommitteeonSubsidiesandCountervailingMeasures
andSubsidiaryBodies24.1 ThereisherebyestablishedaCommitteeonSubsidiesandCountervailingMeasurescomposedofrepresentativesfromeachoftheMembers.TheCommitteeshallelectitsownChairmanandshallmeetnotlessthantwiceayearandotherwiseasenvisagedbyrelevantprovisionsofthisAgreementattherequestofanyMember.TheCommitteeshallcarryoutresponsibilitiesasassignedtoitunderthisAgreementorbytheMembersanditshallaffordMemberstheopportunityofconsultingonanymatterrelatingtotheoperationoftheAgreementorthefurtheranceofitsobjectives.TheWTOSecretariatshallactasthesecretariattotheCommittee.24.2 TheCommitteemaysetupsubsidiarybodiesasappropriate.24.3 TheCommitteeshallestablishaPermanentGroupofExpertscomposedoffiveindependentpersons,highlyqualifiedinthefieldsofsubsidiesandtraderelations.TheexpertswillbeelectedbytheCommitteeandoneofthemwillbereplacedeveryyear.ThePGEmayberequestedtoassistapanel,asprovidedforinparagraph5ofArticle4.TheCommitteemayalsoseekanadvisoryopinionontheexistenceandnatureofanysubsidy.24.4 ThePGEmaybeconsultedbyanyMemberandmaygiveadvisoryopinionsonthenatureofanysubsidyproposedtobeintroducedorcurrentlymaintainedbythatMember.SuchadvisoryopinionswillbeconfidentialandmaynotbeinvokedinproceedingsunderArticle7.24.5 Incarryingouttheirfunctions,theCommitteeandanysubsidiarybodiesmayconsultwithandseekinformationfromanysourcetheydeemappropriate.However,beforetheCommitteeorasubsidiarybodyseekssuchinformationfromasourcewithinthejurisdictionofaMember,itshallinformtheMemberinvolved.
PARTVII:NOTIFICATIONANDSURVEILLANCE
Article25
Notifications25.1 Membersagreethat,withoutprejudicetotheprovisionsofparagraph1ofArticleXVIofGATT1994,theirnotificationsofsubsidiesshallbesubmittednotlaterthan30Juneofeachyearandshallconformtotheprovisionsofparagraphs2through6.
71
25.2 Membersshallnotifyanysubsidyasdefinedinparagraph1ofArticle1,whichisspecificwithinthemeaningofArticle2,grantedormaintainedwithintheirterritories.25.3 ThecontentofnotificationsshouldbesufficientlyspecifictoenableotherMemberstoevaluatethetradeeffectsandtounderstandtheoperationofnotifiedsubsidyprogrammes.Inthisconnection,andwithoutprejudicetothecontentsandformofthequestionnaireonsubsidies60,Membersshallensurethattheirnotificationscontainthefollowinginformation:
(i) formofasubsidy(i.e.grant,loan,taxconcession,etc.);
(ii) subsidyperunitor,incaseswherethisisnotpossible,thetotalamountortheannualamountbudgetedforthatsubsidy(indicating,ifpossible,theaveragesubsidyperunitinthepreviousyear);
(iii) policyobjectiveand/orpurposeofasubsidy;
(iv) durationofasubsidyand/oranyothertime-limitsattached
toit;
(v) statisticaldatapermittinganassessmentofthetradeeffectsofasubsidy.
25.4 Wherespecificpointsinparagraph3havenotbeenaddressedinanotification,anexplanationshallbeprovidedinthenotificationitself.25.5 Ifsubsidiesaregrantedtospecificproductsorsectors,thenotificationsshouldbeorganizedbyproductorsector.25.6 Memberswhichconsiderthattherearenomeasuresintheirterritoriesrequiringnotificationunderparagraph1ofArticleXVIofGATT1994andthisAgreementshallsoinformtheSecretariatinwriting.25.7 MembersrecognizethatnotificationofameasuredoesnotprejudgeeitheritslegalstatusunderGATT1994andthisAgreement,theeffectsunderthisAgreement,orthenatureofthemeasureitself.25.8 AnyMembermay,atanytime,makeawrittenrequestforinformationonthenatureandextentofanysubsidygrantedormaintainedbyanotherMember(includinganysubsidyreferredtoinPartIV),orforanexplanationofthereasonsforwhichaspecificmeasurehasbeenconsideredasnotsubjecttotherequirementofnotification.
60TheCommitteeshallestablishaWorkingPartytoreviewthecontentsandformofthequestionnaireascontainedinBISD9S/193-194.
72
25.9 Memberssorequestedshallprovidesuchinformationasquicklyaspossibleandinacomprehensivemanner,andshallbeready,uponrequest,toprovideadditionalinformationtotherequestingMember.Inparticular,theyshallprovidesufficientdetailstoenabletheotherMembertoassesstheircompliancewiththetermsofthisAgreement.AnyMemberwhichconsidersthatsuchinformationhasnotbeenprovidedmaybringthemattertotheattentionoftheCommittee.25.10 AnyMemberwhichconsidersthatanymeasureofanotherMemberhavingtheeffectsofasubsidyhasnotbeennotifiedinaccordancewiththeprovisionsofparagraph1ofArticleXVIofGATT1994andthisArticlemaybringthemattertotheattentionofsuchotherMember.Iftheallegedsubsidyisnotthereafternotifiedpromptly,suchMembermayitselfbringtheallegedsubsidyinquestiontothenoticeoftheCommittee.25.11 MembersshallreportwithoutdelaytotheCommitteeallpreliminaryorfinalactionstakenwithrespecttocountervailingduties.SuchreportsshallbeavailableintheSecretariatforinspectionbyotherMembers.Membersshallalsosubmit,onasemi-annualbasis,reportsonanycountervailingdutyactionstakenwithintheprecedingsixmonths.Thesemi-annualreportsshallbesubmittedonanagreedstandardform.25.12 EachMembershallnotifytheCommittee(a)whichofitsauthoritiesarecompetenttoinitiateandconductinvestigationsreferredtoinArticle11and(b)itsdomesticproceduresgoverningtheinitiationandconductofsuchinvestigations.
Article26
Surveillance26.1 TheCommitteeshallexaminenewandfullnotificationssubmittedunderparagraph1ofArticleXVIofGATT1994andparagraph1ofArticle25ofthisAgreementatspecialsessionsheldeverythirdyear.Notificationssubmittedintheinterveningyears(updatingnotifications)shallbeexaminedateachregularmeetingoftheCommittee.26.2 TheCommitteeshallexaminereportssubmittedunderparagraph11ofArticle25ateachregularmeetingoftheCommittee.
PARTVIII:DEVELOPINGCOUNTRYMEMBERS
Article27
SpecialandDifferentialTreatmentofDevelopingCountryMembers
73
27.1 MembersrecognizethatsubsidiesmayplayanimportantroleineconomicdevelopmentprogrammesofdevelopingcountryMembers.27.2 Theprohibitionofparagraph1(a)ofArticle3shallnotapplyto:
(a) developingcountryMembersreferredtoinAnnexVII.
(b) otherdevelopingcountryMembersforaperiodofeightyearsfromthedateofentryintoforceoftheWTOAgreement,subjecttocompliancewiththeprovisionsinparagraph4.
27.3 Theprohibitionofparagraph1(b)ofArticle3shallnotapplytodevelopingcountryMembersforaperiodoffiveyears,andshallnotapplytoleastdevelopedcountryMembersforaperiodofeightyears,fromthedateofentryintoforceoftheWTOAgreement.27.4 AnydevelopingcountryMemberreferredtoinparagraph2(b)shallphaseoutitsexportsubsidieswithintheeight-yearperiod,preferablyinaprogressivemanner.However,adevelopingcountryMembershallnotincreasethelevelofitsexportsubsidies61,andshalleliminatethemwithinaperiodshorterthanthatprovidedforinthisparagraphwhentheuseofsuchexportsubsidiesisinconsistentwithitsdevelopmentneeds.IfadevelopingcountryMemberdeemsitnecessarytoapplysuchsubsidiesbeyondthe8-yearperiod,itshallnotlaterthanoneyearbeforetheexpiryofthisperiodenterintoconsultationwiththeCommittee,whichwilldeterminewhetheranextensionofthisperiodisjustified,afterexaminingalltherelevanteconomic,financialanddevelopmentneedsofthedevelopingcountryMemberinquestion.IftheCommitteedeterminesthattheextensionisjustified,thedevelopingcountryMemberconcernedshallholdannualconsultationswiththeCommitteetodeterminethenecessityofmaintainingthesubsidies.IfnosuchdeterminationismadebytheCommittee,thedevelopingcountryMembershallphaseouttheremainingexportsubsidieswithintwoyearsfromtheendofthelastauthorizedperiod.27.5 AdevelopingcountryMemberwhichhasreachedexportcompetitivenessinanygivenproductshallphaseoutitsexportsubsidiesforsuchproduct(s)overaperiodoftwoyears.However,foradevelopingcountryMemberwhichisreferredtoinAnnexVIIandwhichhasreachedexportcompetitivenessinoneormoreproducts,exportsubsidiesonsuchproductsshallbegraduallyphasedoutoveraperiodofeightyears.27.6 ExportcompetitivenessinaproductexistsifadevelopingcountryMember'sexportsofthatproducthavereachedashareofatleast3.25percentinworldtradeofthatproductfortwoconsecutivecalendaryears.Exportcompetitivenessshallexisteither(a)onthebasisofnotificationbythe
61ForadevelopingcountryMembernotgrantingexportsubsidiesasofthedateofentryintoforceoftheWTOAgreement,thisparagraphshallapplyonthebasisofthelevelofexportsubsidiesgrantedin1986.
74
developingcountryMemberhavingreachedexportcompetitiveness,or(b)onthebasisofacomputationundertakenbytheSecretariatattherequestofanyMember.Forthepurposeofthisparagraph,aproductisdefinedasasectionheadingoftheHarmonizedSystemNomenclature.TheCommitteeshallreviewtheoperationofthisprovisionfiveyearsfromthedateoftheentryintoforceoftheWTOAgreement.27.7 TheprovisionsofArticle4shallnotapplytoadevelopingcountryMemberinthecaseofexportsubsidieswhichareinconformitywiththeprovisionsofparagraphs2through5.TherelevantprovisionsinsuchacaseshallbethoseofArticle7.27.8 Thereshallbenopresumptionintermsofparagraph1ofArticle6thatasubsidygrantedbyadevelopingcountryMemberresultsinseriousprejudice,asdefinedinthisAgreement.Suchseriousprejudice,whereapplicableunderthetermsofparagraph9,shallbedemonstratedbypositiveevidence,inaccordancewiththeprovisionsofparagraphs3through8ofArticle6.27.9 RegardingactionablesubsidiesgrantedormaintainedbyadevelopingcountryMemberotherthanthosereferredtoinparagraph1ofArticle6,actionmaynotbeauthorizedortakenunderArticle7unlessnullificationorimpairmentoftariffconcessionsorotherobligationsunderGATT1994isfoundtoexistasaresultofsuchasubsidy,insuchawayastodisplaceorimpedeimportsofalikeproductofanotherMemberintothemarketofthesubsidizingdevelopingcountryMemberorunlessinjurytoadomesticindustryinthemarketofanimportingMemberoccurs.27.10 AnycountervailingdutyinvestigationofaproductoriginatinginadevelopingcountryMembershallbeterminatedassoonastheauthoritiesconcerneddeterminethat:
(a) theoveralllevelofsubsidiesgrantedupontheproductinquestiondoesnotexceed2percentofitsvaluecalculatedonaperunitbasis;or
(b) thevolumeofthesubsidizedimportsrepresentslessthan
4percentofthetotalimportsofthelikeproductintheimportingMember,unlessimportsfromdevelopingcountryMemberswhoseindividualsharesoftotalimportsrepresentlessthan4percentcollectivelyaccountformorethan9percentofthetotalimportsofthelikeproductintheimportingMember.
27.11 ForthosedevelopingcountryMemberswithinthescopeofparagraph2(b)whichhaveeliminatedexportsubsidiespriortotheexpiryoftheperiodofeightyearsfromthedateofentryintoforceoftheWTOAgreement,andforthosedevelopingcountryMembersreferredtoinAnnexVII,thenumberinparagraph10(a)shallbe3percentratherthan2percent.ThisprovisionshallapplyfromthedatethattheeliminationofexportsubsidiesisnotifiedtotheCommittee,andforsolongasexportsubsidiesarenotgrantedbythe
75
notifyingdevelopingcountryMember.ThisprovisionshallexpireeightyearsfromthedateofentryintoforceoftheWTOAgreement.27.12 Theprovisionsofparagraphs10and11shallgovernanydeterminationofdeminimisunderparagraph3ofArticle15.27.13 TheprovisionsofPartIIIshallnotapplytodirectforgivenessofdebts,subsidiestocoversocialcosts,inwhateverform,includingrelinquishmentofgovernmentrevenueandothertransferofliabilitieswhensuchsubsidiesaregrantedwithinanddirectlylinkedtoaprivatizationprogrammeofadevelopingcountryMember,providedthatbothsuchprogrammeandthesubsidiesinvolvedaregrantedforalimitedperiodandnotifiedtotheCommitteeandthattheprogrammeresultsineventualprivatizationoftheenterpriseconcerned.27.14 TheCommitteeshall,uponrequestbyaninterestedMember,undertakeareviewofaspecificexportsubsidypracticeofadevelopingcountryMembertoexaminewhetherthepracticeisinconformitywithitsdevelopmentneeds.27.15 TheCommitteeshall,uponrequestbyaninteresteddevelopingcountryMember,undertakeareviewofaspecificcountervailingmeasuretoexaminewhetheritisconsistentwiththeprovisionsofparagraphs10and11asapplicabletothedevelopingcountryMemberinquestion.
PARTIX:TRANSITIONALARRANGEMENTS
Article28
ExistingProgrammes28.1 SubsidyprogrammeswhichhavebeenestablishedwithintheterritoryofanyMemberbeforethedateonwhichsuchaMembersignedtheWTOAgreementandwhichareinconsistentwiththeprovisionsofthisAgreementshallbe:
(a) notifiedtotheCommitteenotlaterthan90daysafterthedateofentryintoforceoftheWTOAgreementforsuchMember;and
(b) broughtintoconformitywiththeprovisionsofthisAgreement
withinthreeyearsofthedateofentryintoforceoftheWTOAgreementforsuchMemberanduntilthenshallnotbesubjecttoPartII.
28.2 NoMembershallextendthescopeofanysuchprogramme,norshallsuchaprogrammebereneweduponitsexpiry.
Article29
76
TransformationintoaMarketEconomy
29.1 Membersintheprocessoftransformationfromacentrally-plannedintoamarket,free-enterpriseeconomymayapplyprogrammesandmeasuresnecessaryforsuchatransformation.29.2 ForsuchMembers,subsidyprogrammesfallingwithinthescopeofArticle3,andnotifiedaccordingtoparagraph3,shallbephasedoutorbroughtintoconformitywithArticle3withinaperiodofsevenyearsfromthedateofentryintoforceoftheWTOAgreement.Insuchacase,Article4shallnotapply.Inadditionduringthesameperiod:
(a) Subsidyprogrammesfallingwithinthescopeofparagraph1(d)ofArticle6shallnotbeactionableunderArticle7;
(b) Withrespecttootheractionablesubsidies,theprovisionsof
paragraph9ofArticle27shallapply.29.3 SubsidyprogrammesfallingwithinthescopeofArticle3shallbenotifiedtotheCommitteebytheearliestpracticabledateafterthedateofentryintoforceoftheWTOAgreement.FurthernotificationsofsuchsubsidiesmaybemadeuptotwoyearsafterthedateofentryintoforceoftheWTOAgreement.29.4 InexceptionalcircumstancesMembersreferredtoinparagraph1maybegivendeparturesfromtheirnotifiedprogrammesandmeasuresandtheirtime-framebytheCommitteeifsuchdeparturesaredeemednecessaryfortheprocessoftransformation.
PARTX:DISPUTESETTLEMENT
Article30 TheprovisionsofArticlesXXIIandXXIIIofGATT1994aselaboratedandappliedbytheDisputeSettlementUnderstandingshallapplytoconsultationsandthesettlementofdisputesunderthisAgreement,exceptasotherwisespecificallyprovidedherein.
PARTXI:FINALPROVISIONS
Article31
ProvisionalApplication
77
Theprovisionsofparagraph1ofArticle6andtheprovisionsofArticle8andArticle9shallapplyforaperiodoffiveyears,beginningwiththedateofentryintoforceoftheWTOAgreement.Notlaterthan180daysbeforetheendofthisperiod,theCommitteeshallreviewtheoperationofthoseprovisions,withaviewtodeterminingwhethertoextendtheirapplication,eitheraspresentlydraftedorinamodifiedform,forafurtherperiod.
Article32
OtherFinalProvisions32.1 NospecificactionagainstasubsidyofanotherMembercanbetakenexceptinaccordancewiththeprovisionsofGATT1994,asinterpretedbythisAgreement.6232.2 ReservationsmaynotbeenteredinrespectofanyoftheprovisionsofthisAgreementwithouttheconsentoftheotherMembers.32.3 Subjecttoparagraph4,theprovisionsofthisAgreementshallapplytoinvestigations,andreviewsofexistingmeasures,initiatedpursuanttoapplicationswhichhavebeenmadeonorafterthedateofentryintoforceforaMemberoftheWTOAgreement.32.4 Forthepurposesofparagraph3ofArticle21,existingcountervailingmeasuresshallbedeemedtobeimposedonadatenotlaterthanthedateofentryintoforceforaMemberoftheWTOAgreement,exceptincasesinwhichthedomesticlegislationofaMemberinforceatthatdatealreadyincludedaclauseofthetypeprovidedforinthatparagraph.32.5 EachMembershalltakeallnecessarysteps,ofageneralorparticularcharacter,toensure,notlaterthanthedateofentryintoforceoftheWTOAgreementforit,theconformityofitslaws,regulationsandadministrativeprocedureswiththeprovisionsofthisAgreementastheymayapplytotheMemberinquestion.32.6 EachMembershallinformtheCommitteeofanychangesinitslawsandregulationsrelevanttothisAgreementandintheadministrationofsuchlawsandregulations.32.7 TheCommitteeshallreviewannuallytheimplementationandoperationofthisAgreement,takingintoaccounttheobjectivesthereof.TheCommitteeshallinformannuallytheCouncilforTradeinGoodsofdevelopmentsduringtheperiodcoveredbysuchreviews.32.8 TheAnnexestothisAgreementconstituteanintegralpartthereof.
62ThisparagraphisnotintendedtoprecludeactionunderotherrelevantprovisionsofGATT1994,whereappropriate.
78
ANNEXI
ILLUSTRATIVELISTOFEXPORTSUBSIDIES
(a) Theprovisionbygovernmentsofdirectsubsidiestoafirmoranindustry
contingentuponexportperformance.(b) Currencyretentionschemesoranysimilarpracticeswhichinvolvea
bonusonexports.(c) Internaltransportandfreightchargesonexportshipments,providedor
mandatedbygovernments,ontermsmorefavourablethanfordomesticshipments.
(d) Theprovisionbygovernmentsortheiragencieseitherdirectlyor
indirectlythroughgovernment-mandatedschemes,ofimportedordomesticproductsorservicesforuseintheproductionofexportedgoods,ontermsorconditionsmorefavourablethanforprovisionoflikeordirectlycompetitiveproductsorservicesforuseintheproductionofgoodsfordomesticconsumption,if(inthecaseofproducts)suchtermsorconditionsaremorefavourablethanthosecommerciallyavailable63onworldmarketstotheirexporters.
(e) Thefullorpartialexemptionremission,ordeferralspecificallyrelatedto
exports,ofdirecttaxes64orsocialwelfarechargespaidorpayablebyindustrialorcommercialenterprises.65
63Theterm"commerciallyavailable"meansthatthechoicebetweendomesticandimportedproductsisunrestrictedanddependsonlyoncommercialconsiderations.64ForthepurposeofthisAgreement: Theterm"directtaxes"shallmeantaxesonwages,profits,interests,rents,royalties,andallotherformsofincome,andtaxesontheownershipofrealproperty; Theterm"importcharges"shallmeantariffs,duties,andotherfiscalchargesnotelsewhereenumeratedinthisnotethatareleviedonimports; Theterm"indirecttaxes"shallmeansales,excise,turnover,valueadded,franchise,stamp,transfer,inventoryandequipmenttaxes,bordertaxesandalltaxesotherthandirecttaxesandimportcharges; "Prior-stage"indirecttaxesarethoseleviedongoodsorservicesuseddirectlyorindirectlyinmakingtheproduct; "Cumulative"indirecttaxesaremulti-stagedtaxesleviedwherethereisnomechanismforsubsequentcreditingofthetaxifthegoodsorservicessubjecttotaxatonestageofproductionareusedinasucceedingstageofproduction; "Remission"oftaxesincludestherefundorrebateoftaxes; "Remissionordrawback"includesthefullorpartialexemptionordeferralofimportcharges.
79
(f) Theallowanceofspecialdeductionsdirectlyrelatedtoexportsorexport
performance,overandabovethosegrantedinrespecttoproductionfordomesticconsumption,inthecalculationofthebaseonwhichdirecttaxesarecharged.
(g) Theexemptionorremission,inrespectoftheproductionanddistribution
ofexportedproducts,ofindirecttaxes58inexcessofthoseleviedinrespectoftheproductionanddistributionoflikeproductswhensoldfordomesticconsumption.
(h) Theexemption,remissionordeferralofprior-stagecumulativeindirecttaxes58ongoodsorservicesusedintheproductionofexportedproductsinexcessoftheexemption,remissionordeferraloflikeprior-stagecumulativeindirecttaxesongoodsorservicesusedintheproductionoflikeproductswhensoldfordomesticconsumption;provided,however,thatprior-stagecumulativeindirecttaxesmaybeexempted,remittedordeferredonexportedproductsevenwhennotexempted,remittedordeferredonlikeproductswhensoldfordomesticconsumption,iftheprior-stagecumulativeindirecttaxesareleviedoninputsthatareconsumedintheproductionoftheexportedproduct(makingnormalallowanceforwaste).66ThisitemshallbeinterpretedinaccordancewiththeguidelinesonconsumptionofinputsintheproductionprocesscontainedinAnnexII.(i) Theremissionordrawbackofimportcharges58inexcessofthoselevied
onimportedinputsthatareconsumedintheproductionoftheexportedproduct(makingnormalallowanceforwaste);provided,however,thatinparticularcasesafirmmayuseaquantityofhomemarketinputsequalto,andhavingthesamequalityandcharacteristicsas,theimported
65TheMembersrecognizethatdeferralneednotamounttoanexportsubsidywhere,forexample,appropriateinterestchargesarecollected.TheMembersreaffirmtheprinciplethatpricesforgoodsintransactionsbetweenexportingenterprisesandforeignbuyersundertheirorunderthesamecontrolshouldfortaxpurposesbethepriceswhichwouldbechargedbetweenindependententerprisesactingatarm'slength.AnyMembermaydrawtheattentionofanotherMembertoadministrativeorotherpracticeswhichmaycontravenethisprincipleandwhichresultinasignificantsavingofdirecttaxesinexporttransactions.InsuchcircumstancestheMembersshallnormallyattempttoresolvetheirdifferencesusingthefacilitiesofexistingbilateraltaxtreatiesorotherspecificinternationalmechanisms,withoutprejudicetotherightsandobligationsofMembersunderGATT1994,includingtherightofconsultationcreatedintheprecedingsentence. Paragraph(e)isnotintendedtolimitaMemberfromtakingmeasurestoavoidthedoubletaxationofforeign-sourceincomeearnedbyitsenterprisesortheenterprisesofanotherMember.66Paragraph(h)doesnotapplytovalue-addedtaxsystemsandborder-taxadjustmentinlieuthereof;theproblemoftheexcessiveremissionofvalue-addedtaxesisexclusivelycoveredbyparagraph(g).
80
inputsasasubstitutefortheminordertobenefitfromthisprovisioniftheimportandthecorrespondingexportoperationsbothoccurwithinareasonabletimeperiod,nottoexceedtwoyears.ThisitemshallbeinterpretedinaccordancewiththeguidelinesonconsumptionofinputsintheproductionprocesscontainedinAnnexIIandtheguidelinesinthedeterminationofsubstitutiondrawbacksystemsasexportsubsidiescontainedinAnnexIII.
(j) Theprovisionbygovernments(orspecialinstitutionscontrolledby
governments)ofexportcreditguaranteeorinsuranceprogrammes,ofinsuranceorguaranteeprogrammesagainstincreasesinthecostofexportedproductsorofexchangeriskprogrammes,atpremiumrateswhichareinadequatetocoverthelong-termoperatingcostsandlossesoftheprogrammes.
(k) Thegrantbygovernments(orspecialinstitutionscontrolledbyand/or
actingundertheauthorityofgovernments)ofexportcreditsatratesbelowthosewhichtheyactuallyhavetopayforthefundssoemployed(orwouldhavetopayiftheyborrowedoninternationalcapitalmarketsinordertoobtainfundsofthesamematurityandothercredittermsanddenominatedinthesamecurrencyastheexportcredit),orthepaymentbythemofallorpartofthecostsincurredbyexportersorfinancialinstitutionsinobtainingcredits,insofarastheyareusedtosecureamaterialadvantageinthefieldofexportcreditterms.
Provided,however,thatifaMemberisapartytoaninternationalundertakingonofficialexportcreditstowhichatleasttwelveoriginalMemberstothisAgreementarepartiesasof1January1979(orasuccessorundertakingwhichhasbeenadoptedbythoseoriginalMembers),orifinpracticeaMemberappliestheinterestratesprovisionsoftherelevantundertaking,anexportcreditpracticewhichisinconformitywiththoseprovisionsshallnotbeconsideredanexportsubsidyprohibitedbythisAgreement.
(l) AnyotherchargeonthepublicaccountconstitutinganexportsubsidyinthesenseofArticleXVIofGATT1994.
ANNEXIIGUIDELINESONCONSUMPTIONOFINPUTSINTHEPRODUCTIONPROCESS67
I
67Inputsconsumedintheproductionprocessareinputsphysicallyincorporated,energy,fuelsandoilusedintheproductionprocessandcatalystswhichareconsumedinthecourseoftheirusetoobtaintheexportedproduct.
81
1. Indirecttaxrebateschemescanallowforexemption,remissionordeferralofprior-stagecumulativeindirecttaxesleviedoninputsthatareconsumedintheproductionoftheexportedproduct(makingnormalallowanceforwaste).Similarly,drawbackschemescanallowfortheremissionordrawbackofimportchargesleviedoninputsthatareconsumedintheproductionoftheexportedproduct(makingnormalallowanceforwaste).2. TheIllustrativeListofExportSubsidiesinAnnexIofthisAgreementmakesreferencetotheterm"inputsthatareconsumedintheproductionoftheexportedproduct"inparagraphs(h)and(i).Pursuanttoparagraph(h),indirecttaxrebateschemescanconstituteanexportsubsidytotheextentthattheyresultinexemption,remissionordeferralofprior-stagecumulativeindirecttaxesinexcessoftheamountofsuchtaxesactuallyleviedoninputsthatareconsumedintheproductionoftheexportedproduct.Pursuanttoparagraph(i),drawbackschemescanconstituteanexportsubsidytotheextentthattheyresultinaremissionordrawbackofimportchargesinexcessofthoseactuallyleviedoninputsthatareconsumedintheproductionoftheexportedproduct.Bothparagraphsstipulatethatnormalallowanceforwastemustbemadeinfindingsregardingconsumptionofinputsintheproductionoftheexportedproduct.Paragraph(i)alsoprovidesforsubstitution,whereappropriate.
II Inexaminingwhetherinputsareconsumedintheproductionoftheexportedproduct,aspartofacountervailingdutyinvestigationpursuanttothisAgreement,investigatingauthoritiesshouldproceedonthefollowingbasis:1. Whereitisallegedthatanindirecttaxrebatescheme,oradrawbackscheme,conveysasubsidybyreasonofover-rebateorexcessdrawbackofindirecttaxesorimportchargesoninputsconsumedintheproductionoftheexportedproduct,theinvestigatingauthoritiesshouldfirstdeterminewhetherthegovernmentoftheexportingMemberhasinplaceandappliesasystemorproceduretoconfirmwhichinputsareconsumedintheproductionoftheexportedproductandinwhatamounts.Wheresuchasystemorprocedureisdeterminedtobeapplied,theinvestigatingauthoritiesshouldthenexaminethesystemorproceduretoseewhetheritisreasonable,effectiveforthepurposeintended,andbasedongenerallyacceptedcommercialpracticesinthecountryofexport.Theinvestigatingauthoritiesmaydeemitnecessarytocarryout,inaccordancewithparagraph6ofArticle12,certainpracticaltestsinordertoverifyinformationortosatisfythemselvesthatthesystemorprocedureisbeingeffectivelyapplied.2. Wherethereisnosuchsystemorprocedure,whereitisnotreasonable,orwhereitisinstitutedandconsideredreasonablebutisfoundnottobeappliedornottobeappliedeffectively,afurtherexaminationbytheexportingMemberbasedontheactualinputsinvolvedwouldneedtobecarriedoutinthecontextofdeterminingwhetheranexcesspaymentoccurred.Iftheinvestigating
82
authoritiesdeemeditnecessary,afurtherexaminationwouldbecarriedoutinaccordancewithparagraph1.3. Investigatingauthoritiesshouldtreatinputsasphysicallyincorporatedifsuchinputsareusedintheproductionprocessandarephysicallypresentintheproductexported.TheMembersnotethataninputneednotbepresentinthefinalproductinthesameforminwhichitenteredtheproductionprocess.4. Indeterminingtheamountofaparticularinputthatisconsumedintheproductionoftheexportedproduct,a"normalallowanceforwaste"shouldbetakenintoaccount,andsuchwasteshouldbetreatedasconsumedintheproductionoftheexportedproduct.Theterm"waste"referstothatportionofagiveninputwhichdoesnotserveanindependentfunctionintheproductionprocess,isnotconsumedintheproductionoftheexportedproduct(forreasonssuchasinefficiencies)andisnotrecovered,usedorsoldbythesamemanufacturer.5. Theinvestigatingauthority'sdeterminationofwhethertheclaimedallowanceforwasteis"normal"shouldtakeintoaccounttheproductionprocess,theaverageexperienceoftheindustryinthecountryofexport,andothertechnicalfactors,asappropriate.TheinvestigatingauthorityshouldbearinmindthatanimportantquestioniswhethertheauthoritiesintheexportingMemberhavereasonablycalculatedtheamountofwaste,whensuchanamountisintendedtobeincludedinthetaxordutyrebateorremission.
ANNEXIII
GUIDELINESINTHEDETERMINATIONOFSUBSTITUTIONDRAWBACKSYSTEMSASEXPORTSUBSIDIES
I Drawbacksystemscanallowfortherefundordrawbackofimportchargesoninputswhichareconsumedintheproductionprocessofanotherproductandwheretheexportofthislatterproductcontainsdomesticinputshavingthesamequalityandcharacteristicsasthosesubstitutedfortheimportedinputs.Pursuanttoparagraph(i)oftheIllustrativeListofExportSubsidiesinAnnexI,substitutiondrawbacksystemscanconstituteanexportsubsidytotheextentthattheyresultinanexcessdrawbackoftheimportchargesleviedinitiallyontheimportedinputsforwhichdrawbackisbeingclaimed.
II InexamininganysubstitutiondrawbacksystemaspartofacountervailingdutyinvestigationpursuanttothisAgreement,investigatingauthoritiesshouldproceedonthefollowingbasis:
83
1. Paragraph(i)oftheIllustrativeListstipulatesthathomemarketinputsmaybesubstitutedforimportedinputsintheproductionofaproductforexportprovidedsuchinputsareequalinquantityto,andhavethesamequalityandcharacteristicsas,theimportedinputsbeingsubstituted.TheexistenceofaverificationsystemorprocedureisimportantbecauseitenablesthegovernmentoftheexportingMembertoensureanddemonstratethatthequantityofinputsforwhichdrawbackisclaimeddoesnotexceedthequantityofsimilarproductsexported,inwhateverform,andthatthereisnotdrawbackofimportchargesinexcessofthoseoriginallyleviedontheimportedinputsinquestion.2. Whereitisallegedthatasubstitutiondrawbacksystemconveysasubsidy,theinvestigatingauthoritiesshouldfirstproceedtodeterminewhetherthegovernmentoftheexportingMemberhasinplaceandappliesaverificationsystemorprocedure.Wheresuchasystemorprocedureisdeterminedtobeapplied,theinvestigatingauthoritiesshouldthenexaminetheverificationprocedurestoseewhethertheyarereasonable,effectiveforthepurposeintended,andbasedongenerallyacceptedcommercialpracticesinthecountryofexport.Totheextentthattheproceduresaredeterminedtomeetthistestandareeffectivelyapplied,nosubsidyshouldbepresumedtoexist.Itmaybedeemednecessarybytheinvestigatingauthoritiestocarryout,inaccordancewithparagraph6ofArticle12,certainpracticaltestsinordertoverifyinformationortosatisfythemselvesthattheverificationproceduresarebeingeffectivelyapplied.3. Wheretherearenoverificationprocedures,wheretheyarenotreasonable,orwheresuchproceduresareinstitutedandconsideredreasonablebutarefoundnottobeactuallyappliedornotappliedeffectively,theremaybeasubsidy.InsuchcasesafurtherexaminationbytheexportingMemberbasedontheactualtransactionsinvolvedwouldneedtobecarriedouttodeterminewhetheranexcesspaymentoccurred.Iftheinvestigatingauthoritiesdeemeditnecessary,afurtherexaminationwouldbecarriedoutinaccordancewithparagraph2.4. Theexistenceofasubstitutiondrawbackprovisionunderwhichexportersareallowedtoselectparticularimportshipmentsonwhichdrawbackisclaimedshouldnotofitselfbeconsideredtoconveyasubsidy.5. Anexcessdrawbackofimportchargesinthesenseofparagraph(i)wouldbedeemedtoexistwheregovernmentspaidinterestonanymoniesrefundedundertheirdrawbackschemes,totheextentoftheinterestactuallypaidorpayable.
ANNEXIV
CALCULATIONOFTHETOTALADVALOREMSUBSIDIZATION
84
(PARAGRAPH1(A)OFARTICLE6)681. Anycalculationoftheamountofasubsidyforthepurposeofparagraph1(a)ofArticle6shallbedoneintermsofthecosttothegrantinggovernment.2. Exceptasprovidedinparagraphs3through5,indeterminingwhethertheoverallrateofsubsidizationexceeds5percentofthevalueoftheproduct,thevalueoftheproductshallbecalculatedasthetotalvalueoftherecipientfirm's69salesinthemostrecent12-monthperiod,forwhichsalesdataisavailable,precedingtheperiodinwhichthesubsidyisgranted.703. Wherethesubsidyistiedtotheproductionorsaleofagivenproduct,thevalueoftheproductshallbecalculatedasthetotalvalueoftherecipientfirm'ssalesofthatproductinthemostrecent12-monthperiod,forwhichsalesdataisavailable,precedingtheperiodinwhichthesubsidyisgranted.4. Wheretherecipientfirmisinastart-upsituation,seriousprejudiceshallbedeemedtoexistiftheoverallrateofsubsidizationexceeds15percentofthetotalfundsinvested.Forpurposesofthisparagraph,astart-upperiodwillnotextendbeyondthefirstyearofproduction.715. Wheretherecipientfirmislocatedinaninflationaryeconomycountry,thevalueoftheproductshallbecalculatedastherecipientfirm'stotalsales(orsalesoftherelevantproduct,ifthesubsidyistied)intheprecedingcalendaryearindexedbytherateofinflationexperiencedinthe12monthsprecedingthemonthinwhichthesubsidyistobegiven.6. Indeterminingtheoverallrateofsubsidizationinagivenyear,subsidiesgivenunderdifferentprogrammesandbydifferentauthoritiesintheterritoryofaMembershallbeaggregated.7. SubsidiesgrantedpriortothedateofentryintoforceoftheWTOAgreement,thebenefitsofwhichareallocatedtofutureproduction,shallbeincludedintheoverallrateofsubsidization.
68AnunderstandingamongMembersshouldbedeveloped,asnecessary,onmatterswhicharenotspecifiedinthisAnnexorwhichneedfurtherclarificationforthepurposesofparagraph1(a)ofArticle6.69TherecipientfirmisafirmintheterritoryofthesubsidizingMember.70Inthecaseoftax-relatedsubsidiesthevalueoftheproductshallbecalculatedasthetotalvalueoftherecipientfirm'ssalesinthefiscalyearinwhichthetax-relatedmeasurewasearned.71Start-upsituationsincludeinstanceswherefinancialcommitmentsforproductdevelopmentorconstructionoffacilitiestomanufactureproductsbenefitingfromthesubsidyhavebeenmade,eventhoughproductionhasnotbegun.
85
8. Subsidieswhicharenon-actionableunderrelevantprovisionsofthisAgreementshallnotbeincludedinthecalculationoftheamountofasubsidyfor
thepurposeofparagraph1(a)ofArticle6.
ANNEXV
PROCEDURESFORDEVELOPINGINFORMATIONCONCERNINGSERIOUSPREJUDICE
1. EveryMembershallcooperateinthedevelopmentofevidencetobeexaminedbyapanelinproceduresunderparagraphs4through6ofArticle7.Thepartiestothedisputeandanythird-countryMemberconcernedshallnotifytotheDSB,assoonastheprovisionsofparagraph4ofArticle7havebeeninvoked,theorganizationresponsibleforadministrationofthisprovisionwithinitsterritoryandtheprocedurestobeusedtocomplywithrequestsforinformation.2. IncaseswheremattersarereferredtotheDSBunderparagraph4ofArticle7,theDSBshall,uponrequest,initiatetheproceduretoobtainsuchinformationfromthegovernmentofthesubsidizingMemberasnecessarytoestablishtheexistenceandamountofsubsidization,thevalueoftotalsalesofthesubsidizedfirms,aswellasinformationnecessarytoanalyzetheadverseeffectscausedbythesubsidizedproduct.72Thisprocessmayinclude,whereappropriate,presentationofquestionstothegovernmentofthesubsidizingMemberandofthecomplainingMembertocollectinformation,aswellastoclarifyandobtainelaborationofinformationavailabletothepartiestoadisputethroughthenotificationproceduressetforthinPartVII.733. Inthecaseofeffectsinthird-countrymarkets,apartytoadisputemaycollectinformation,includingthroughtheuseofquestionstothegovernmentofthethird-countryMember,necessarytoanalyseadverseeffects,whichisnototherwisereasonablyavailablefromthecomplainingMemberorthesubsidizingMember.Thisrequirementshouldbeadministeredinsuchawayasnottoimposeanunreasonableburdenonthethird-countryMember.Inparticular,suchaMemberisnotexpectedtomakeamarketorpriceanalysisspeciallyforthatpurpose.TheinformationtobesuppliedisthatwhichisalreadyavailableorcanbereadilyobtainedbythisMember(e.g.mostrecentstatisticswhichhavealreadybeengatheredbyrelevantstatisticalservicesbutwhichhavenotyetbeenpublished,customsdataconcerningimportsanddeclaredvaluesoftheproductsconcerned,etc.).However,ifapartytoadisputeundertakesadetailedmarketanalysisatitsownexpense,thetaskofthepersonorfirmconductingsuchananalysisshallbefacilitatedbytheauthoritiesofthethird-country
72Incaseswheretheexistenceofseriousprejudicehastobedemonstrated.73Theinformation-gatheringprocessbytheDSBshalltakeintoaccounttheneedtoprotectinformationwhichisbynatureconfidentialorwhichisprovidedonaconfidentialbasisbyanyMemberinvolvedinthisprocess.
86
Memberandsuchapersonorfirmshallbegivenaccesstoallinformationwhichisnotnormallymaintainedconfidentialbythegovernment.4. TheDSBshalldesignatearepresentativetoservethefunctionoffacilitatingtheinformation-gatheringprocess.Thesolepurposeoftherepresentativeshallbetoensurethetimelydevelopmentoftheinformationnecessarytofacilitateexpeditioussubsequentmultilateralreviewofthedispute.Inparticular,therepresentativemaysuggestwaystomostefficientlysolicitnecessaryinformationaswellasencouragethecooperationoftheparties.5. Theinformation-gatheringprocessoutlinedinparagraphs2through4shallbecompletedwithin60daysofthedateonwhichthematterhasbeenreferredtotheDSBunderparagraph4ofArticle7.TheinformationobtainedduringthisprocessshallbesubmittedtothepanelestablishedbytheDSBinaccordancewiththeprovisionsofPartX.Thisinformationshouldinclude,interalia,dataconcerningtheamountofthesubsidyinquestion(and,whereappropriate,thevalueoftotalsalesofthesubsidizedfirms),pricesofthesubsidizedproduct,pricesofthenon-subsidizedproduct,pricesofothersupplierstothemarket,changesinthesupplyofthesubsidizedproducttothemarketinquestionandchangesinmarketshares.Itshouldalsoincluderebuttalevidence,aswellassuchsupplementalinformationasthepaneldeemsrelevantinthecourseofreachingitsconclusions.6. Ifthesubsidizingand/orthird-countryMemberfailtocooperateintheinformation-gatheringprocess,thecomplainingMemberwillpresentitscaseofseriousprejudice,basedonevidenceavailabletoit,togetherwithfactsandcircumstancesofthenon-cooperationofthesubsidizingand/orthird-countryMember.Whereinformationisunavailableduetonon-cooperationbythesubsidizingand/orthird-countryMember,thepanelmaycompletetherecordasnecessaryrelyingonbestinformationotherwiseavailable.7. Inmakingitsdetermination,thepanelshoulddrawadverseinferencesfrominstancesofnon-cooperationbyanypartyinvolvedintheinformation-gatheringprocess.8. Inmakingadeterminationtouseeitherbestinformationavailableoradverseinferences,thepanelshallconsidertheadviceoftheDSBrepresentativenominatedunderparagraph4astothereasonablenessofanyrequestsforinformationandtheeffortsmadebypartiestocomplywiththeserequestsinacooperativeandtimelymanner.9. Nothingintheinformation-gatheringprocessshalllimittheabilityofthepaneltoseeksuchadditionalinformationitdeemsessentialtoaproperresolutiontothedispute,andwhichwasnotadequatelysoughtordevelopedduringthatprocess.However,ordinarilythepanelshouldnotrequestadditionalinformationtocompletetherecordwheretheinformationwouldsupportaparticularparty'spositionandtheabsenceofthatinformationintherecordistheresultofunreasonablenon-cooperationbythatpartyintheinformation-gatheringprocess.
87
ANNEXVI
PROCEDURESFORON-THE-SPOTINVESTIGATIONSPURSUANTTO
PARAGRAPH6OFARTICLE121. Uponinitiationofaninvestigation,theauthoritiesoftheexportingMemberandthefirmsknowntobeconcernedshouldbeinformedoftheintentiontocarryouton-the-spotinvestigations.2. Ifinexceptionalcircumstancesitisintendedtoincludenon-governmentalexpertsintheinvestigatingteam,thefirmsandtheauthoritiesoftheexportingMembershouldbesoinformed.Suchnon-governmentalexpertsshouldbesubjecttoeffectivesanctionsforbreachofconfidentialityrequirements.3. ItshouldbestandardpracticetoobtainexplicitagreementofthefirmsconcernedintheexportingMemberbeforethevisitisfinallyscheduled.4. Assoonastheagreementofthefirmsconcernedhasbeenobtained,theinvestigatingauthoritiesshouldnotifytheauthoritiesoftheexportingMemberofthenamesandaddressesofthefirmstobevisitedandthedatesagreed.5. Sufficientadvancenoticeshouldbegiventothefirmsinquestionbeforethevisitismade.6. Visitstoexplainthequestionnaireshouldonlybemadeattherequestofanexportingfirm.Incaseofsucharequesttheinvestigatingauthoritiesmayplacethemselvesatthedisposalofthefirm;suchavisitmayonlybemadeif(a)theauthoritiesoftheimportingMembernotifytherepresentativesofthegovernmentoftheMemberinquestionand(b)thelatterdonotobjecttothevisit.7. Asthemainpurposeoftheon-the-spotinvestigationistoverifyinformationprovidedortoobtainfurtherdetails,itshouldbecarriedoutaftertheresponsetothequestionnairehasbeenreceivedunlessthefirmagreestothecontraryandthegovernmentoftheexportingMemberisinformedbytheinvestigatingauthoritiesoftheanticipatedvisitanddoesnotobjecttoit;further,itshouldbestandardpracticepriortothevisittoadvisethefirmsconcernedofthegeneralnatureoftheinformationtobeverifiedandofanyfurtherinformationwhichneedstobeprovided,thoughthisshouldnotprecluderequeststobemadeonthespotforfurtherdetailstobeprovidedinthelightofinformationobtained.8. EnquiriesorquestionsputbytheauthoritiesorfirmsoftheexportingMembersandessentialtoasuccessfulon-the-spotinvestigationshould,wheneverpossible,beansweredbeforethevisitismade.
ANNEXVII
88
DEVELOPINGCOUNTRYMEMBERSREFERREDTO
INPARAGRAPH2(A)OFARTICLE27 ThedevelopingcountryMembersnotsubjecttotheprovisionsofparagraph1(a)ofArticle3underthetermsofparagraph2(a)ofArticle27are:
(a) Least-developedcountriesdesignatedassuchbytheUnitedNationswhichareMembersoftheWTO.
(b) Eachofthefollowingdevelopingcountrieswhichare
MembersoftheWTOshallbesubjecttotheprovisionswhichareapplicabletootherdevelopingcountryMembersaccordingtoparagraph2(b)ofArticle27whenGNPpercapitahasreached$1,000perannum74:Bolivia,Cameroon,Congo,Côted'Ivoire,DominicanRepublic,Egypt,Ghana,Guatemala,Guyana,India,Indonesia,Kenya,Morocco,Nicaragua,Nigeria,Pakistan,Philippines,Senegal,SriLankaandZimbabwe.
74TheinclusionofdevelopingcountryMembersinthelistinparagraph(b)isbasedonthemostrecentdatafromtheWorldBankonGNPpercapita.