China Requests for WTO Panel to Examine
EU Battery Electric Vehicle Duties
·
DS630: European Union — Definitive
Countervailing Duties on New Battery Electric Vehicles from China
·
DS593: EU wants Time to Implement WTO
Panel in Palm Oil and Oil Palm Crop Based Biofuels
·
DS597: United States – Origin Marking
Requirement (Hong Kong, China), US raises security matters in HK to Avoid
Adverse Ruling
·
Appellate Body Appointments - Colombia, speaking on behalf of 130 members,
introduced for the 85th time the group's proposal to start the selection processes
for filling vacancies on the Appellate Body.
The
US said fundamental reform of WTO dispute settlement is needed to address these
and other US concerns. Despite extensive US engagement, WTO members continue to
have vastly different perspectives on the role of WTO dispute settlement in today’s
world and the reforms that are needed, it added.
Ten
members urged others to consider joining the Multi-party
interim appeal arrangement (MPIA), a contingent measure to safeguard the right to
appeal in the absence of a functioning Appellate Body.
·
Surveillance of Implementation – Status Reports
Presented
At
a meeting of the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) on 24 March, WTO members considered
a request from China for the establishment of a dispute panel to review the European
Union’s countervailing duties on new battery electric vehicles from China.
DS630: European Union — Definitive
Countervailing Duties on New Battery Electric Vehicles from China
China
submitted its first request for the establishment of a dispute panel with respect
to the definitive countervailing duties imposed by the European Union in October
2024 on new battery electric vehicles from China. The request also concerns the
underlying investigation that led to the imposition of the duties. China and the
European Union held consultations in December 2024 with the aim of reaching a mutually
satisfactory solution but failed to resolve the dispute, China said, prompting its
request for the panel.
China
outlined the various concerns it had about the process resulting in the duties.
It said this process was not carried out in a manner consistent with the WTO's Agreement
on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures and the General Agreement on Tariffs and
Trade 1994. China said that while WTO members have the legitimate right to adopt
trade remedy measures, such rights must be exercised within the confines of the
WTO agreements.
The
European Union said it regretted China's decision to request a panel. The EU said
it had hoped the consultations with China had provided the necessary information
and clarifications China needed. China undoubtedly has the right to bring this issue
to WTO dispute settlement, the EU said, but it strongly maintains that the measures
in question are entirely justified and is confident they are in compliance with
WTO rules. The EU said it is not ready to accept the establishment of a panel.
The
DSB took note of the statements and agreed to revert to this matter should a requesting
member wish to do so.
DS593: European Union – Certain Measures
Concerning Palm Oil and Oil Palm Crop Based Biofuels
The
European Union said it intended to implement the panel ruling in DS593 by bringing
the concerned measures into conformity with the WTO agreements. The EU said it was
impractical for it to comply immediately and that it needed a reasonable period
of time to do so. The EU added that it was keen to discuss and agree with Indonesia
the length of this period of time at the earliest available opportunity, as it has
done with Malaysia in a related dispute case.
Indonesia
underlined the necessity for the EU to adjust its policies in line with the WTO
agreements as well as the importance of prompt and effective implementation of the
panel's ruling. Indonesia said it is committed to working constructively with the
EU to ensure a smooth and efficient implementation process. It encouraged the EU
to provide a clear and detailed timeline for this process.
DS597:
United States – Origin Marking Requirement (Hong Kong, China)
The
United States once again raised the matter of the panel ruling in DS597 at the DSB
meeting. The US said it was raising the matter as a result of further alarming developments
and effects of the National Security Law of Hong Kong, China on free speech and
human rights. The US referred back to its previous statements regarding its position
on essential security and its reasons for placing this item on the DSB agenda.
Hong
Kong, China said it was regrettable that the United States continues to abuse DSB
meetings as a platform for political posturing. The US approach reflects a troubling
presumption that it alone has the authority to interpret national security matters,
said Hong Kong, China, adding that it remains frustrated at being deprived of the
legitimate right to allow the case to be settled through a proper channel.
China
reiterated its objections to the item being placed on the DSB agenda. It said the
WTO dispute settlement mechanism is a forum to resolve trade disputes rather than
a place to discuss political issues.
Colombia,
speaking on behalf of 130 members, introduced for the 85th time the group's proposal
to start the selection processes for filling vacancies on the Appellate Body. The
extensive number of members submitting the proposal reflects a common interest in
the functioning of the Appellate Body and, more generally, in the functioning of
the WTO's dispute settlement system, Colombia said.
The
United States said it does not support the proposed decision and noted its longstanding
concerns with WTO dispute settlement that have persisted across US administrations.
The US said the panel reports in DS593 and DS597 provided examples of its concerns
regarding WTO dispute settlement overreach. The US said fundamental reform of WTO
dispute settlement is needed to address these and other US concerns. Despite extensive
US engagement, WTO members continue to have vastly different perspectives on the
role of WTO dispute settlement in today’s world and the reforms that are needed,
it added.
More
than 20 members took the floor to comment, one speaking on behalf of a group of
members. Most reiterated their support for the joint proposal and for the urgent
need to restore a fully functioning dispute settlement system. Several welcomed
the progress made in the dispute settlement reform discussions last year and said
they looked forward to starting consultations on how to take the process forward.
Ten members urged others to consider joining the Multi-party interim appeal arrangement
(MPIA), a contingent measure to safeguard the right to appeal in the absence of
a functioning Appellate Body.
Colombia,
on behalf of the 130 members, said it regretted that for the 85th occasion members
have not been able to launch the selection processes. Ongoing conversations about
reform of the dispute settlement system should not prevent the Appellate Body from
continuing to operate fully, and members shall comply with their obligation under
the Dispute Settlement Understanding to fill the vacancies as they arise, Colombia
said for the group.
Surveillance
of Implementation
The
United States presented status reports with regard to DS184, "US — Anti-Dumping
Measures on Certain Hot-Rolled Steel Products from Japan", DS160, "United
States — Section 110(5) of US Copyright Act", DS464, "United States —
Anti-Dumping and Countervailing Measures on Large Residential Washers from Korea",
and DS471, "United States — Certain Methodologies and their Application to
Anti-Dumping Proceedings Involving China."
The
European Union presented a status report with regard to DS291, "EC — Measures
Affecting the Approval and Marketing of Biotech Products."
Indonesia
presented its status reports in DS477 and DS478, "Indonesia — Importation of
Horticultural Products, Animals and Animal Products."
Next meeting
The
next regular DSB meeting will take place on 25 April 2025.