U.S. Wins at WTO Compliance Panel on China Duties on Steel
China Revokes Illegal Duties
Burdening U.S. High-Tech Steel Exports
U.S. Trade Representative
Michael Froman announced on 31 July that the United
States has prevailed in a WTO challenge to China’s compliance actions following
WTO findings in 2012, that China’s duties on high-tech
steel were inconsistent with WTO rules – duties that contributed to over $250
million in annual export losses for American steel exporters. This compliance
challenge was the first time any WTO Member had initiated a WTO proceeding to
challenge a claim by China that it had complied with adverse WTO findings.
In 2012, the United States
prevailed in a WTO dispute that found that China broke WTO rules by imposing
antidumping and countervailing duties on U.S. exports of grain oriented
electrical steel (“GOES”). Despite these adverse findings, China decided to
continue to impose duties on GOES from the United States and claimed that its
new rationale for the duties brought China into WTO compliance. The United
States then took the unprecedented step of challenging China’s claim to ensure
that China lived up to its WTO obligations and stopped misusing trade remedies
in a manner that harmed American workers and businesses.
“The Obama Administration is
committed to standing up for American workers,” said Ambassador Froman. “When China decided to maintain its WTO illegal
duties, we did not hesitate to challenge that action. The WTO report confirms
we were right. Following our challenge, China terminated those duties just a
few months ago, reopening a more than $250 million market for American workers
and steel companies. Today’s report highlights once again that the United
States can and will ensure that our trading partners live up to their
obligations.”
Background
GOES is a high-tech,
high-value magnetic specialty steel that is primarily used by the power
generating industry in transformers, rectifiers, reactors, and large electric
machines. AK Steel Corporation, based in Ohio, and Allegheny Ludlum, based in
Pennsylvania, manufacture GOES in the United States.
On April 10, 2010, China
imposed antidumping (“AD”) and countervailing duties (“CVDs”) on GOES from the
United States. Before China imposed these duties, U.S. exports of GOES amounted
to more than $260 million. The year after China imposed the duties, the value
of U.S. exports of GOES fell to less than $3 million. The antidumping duties
ranged as high as 64.8 percent, and the
countervailing (anti-subsidy) duties ranged as high 44.6 percent.
On September 15, 2010, the
United States initiated dispute settlement proceedings challenging China’s
imposition of these duties. The WTO panel decided in favor
of the United States, finding that China breached several procedural and due
process obligations in conducting its AD and CVD investigations.
In addition, the Panel found
numerous defects in China’s determination that U.S. exports caused adverse
price effects in the Chinese market. The Panel also found that China claimed
unsupported findings that U.S. exports caused injury to China’s domestic
industry. In October 2012, the Appellate Body upheld the Panel’s findings
relating to China’s material injury determination.
The WTO recommended that China
bring its measures into conformity with WTO rules. On July 31, 2013, China
issued a re-determination, which continued the imposition of AD/CVD duties on
imports of GOES from the United States — again finding that U.S. exports caused
adverse price effects in the Chinese market, and that U.S. exports caused
material injury to the domestic industry.
On January 13, 2014, the
United States initiated a compliance challenge. As in the original proceeding,
the compliance panel sided with the United States, finding numerous defects in
China’s determination that U.S. exports caused adverse price effects in the
Chinese market. The compliance panel also found that China again claimed
unsupported findings that U.S. exports caused injury to China’s domestic industrys. Furthermore, China failed to disclose the
essential facts underlying its revised material injury determination. As a
result, the WTO panel found that China failed to comply with the
recommendations and rulings of the DSB in this dispute.
In April 2015, after the compliance
panel’s meeting with the parties and after the parties had submitted all of
their submissions, China’s Ministry of Commerce (MOFCOM) revoked the AD and CVD
duties on GOES from the United States before the compliance panel issued its
public report.