The World Trade Organization (OMC) I authorize China to engage in commercial retaliation against US for $ 645 million a year in a tax case levied on U.S. imports of a dozen Chinese products.
With that resolution, China This could suspend benefits for the United States, including the ability to impose new tariffs or increase existing ones against imports of products imported from the North American country.
These measures have been declared incompatible with the norms of the OMC in the initial procedure and in the compliance procedure, after which China authority of the Dispute Resolution Body (OSD) requested to suspend concessions for an annual amount of $ 2,400 million.
Later, US disputed this request, which gave rise to the present arbitration process.
Thus, although China won the controversy, the authorization of retaliation was quantitatively under its request.
On January 26, an arbitrator of the OMC a decision issued on the level of countermeasures China may request in the context of its dispute with the United States regarding the privileges applied by the United States to certain products of the Asian country.
The arbitration procedure arises in a dispute which is China against US.
The disputed US measures concern the imposition of counter tax on a number of Chinese products, and the investigations that led to the imposition of those levies.
The panel of the OMC calculated the final figure based on the parties’ agreement to use a two-phase Armington model similar to that used in arbitral awards in United States – Washing Machines (Article 22.6 – United States) and United States Anti-Dumping Methods (China) (Article 22.6 – United States).
Also taken into account is the parties’ agreement on a “tax exclusion” approach, which excludes tax payments from the final annulment or impairment calculation.
In addition, it was decided to exclude the lawnmowers from the proceedings, in the light of the parties’ agreement that the relevant counter-tax measures were withdrawn before the end of the reasonable period and therefore did not fall within the scope of the proceedings. scope of this procedure.
In his methodology paper, China indicated that the proceedings included a total of 11 antitrust investigations, in particular proceedings under Section 129 in respect of:
- pressure tubes
- kitchen shelves
- seamless tubes
- Graphic Printing Paper
- aluminum extrusions
- steel cylinders
In its written submission, the United States agreed on the relevance of only 10 of those 11 anti-tax investigations.