Biodiesel Production Line suppliers European Union and Argentina part to put forward to appeal about the adjudication of case of their biology derv with respect to group of WTO conflict expert.

In the past in two weeks of time, both sides claims in respective petition for appeal a certain number of mistakes in adjudication of conflict expert group.

This case (DS473) is Argentine 2013 the bottom mentions WTO, think European Union the opposes a dumping to investigated measure to disobey WTO regulation about entrance biology derv. Subsequently, established expert group in April 2014. (” bridge weekly ” , on January 16, 2014, mixed on May 30, 2013 on October 24, 2013)

What this commerce term points to “ dumping ” is undertake selling with exporting the market under the price of normal value. According to WTO regulation, want existence dumping action only and affirm bring about domestic industry to be damaged, one country can be collected oppose dumping tax the behavior with quits dumping.

Argentina is the country of the biggest biology derv exit on the world, think of the European Union turn over dumping measure to bring about annual the sale loss of 1.6 billion dollar.

This year in March, expert group thinks the European Union that is accused turns over dumping regulations basically to did not violate WTO regulation, but concerned dumping of office of European Union investigation and the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade that decide to what industry of European Union country damages the in some way disobeyed WTO and oppose dumping agreement. (” bridge weekly ” , on April 7, 2016)

The viewpoint of the European Union

The problem of 3 respects existence that the European Union instrument of appeal May 20 thinks expert group ruling is medium, namely: Those who produce cost is affirmatory, entrance product is normal the computation of value, and to Argentine biology derv oppose dumping tax.

For instance, expert group says, the European Union produces cost without the record computation according to generator, violated trade regulation consequently. Authorities of European Union investigation did not consider the price that Argentine generator pays actually to buy soya bean, the reason is Argentine exit taxation system is accused existence is screwy. Soja is the main raw material of biology derv.

Turn over dumping agreement to set, should the notes of preferential use generator will calculate manufacturing cost, if record the reflects related goods production with reasonable “ and sale cost ” . To expert group, this is the record that asks to evaluate generator whether “ is inside acceptability limit, with a kind accurate the real cost that reflected producer with reliable means ” .

Accordingly, expert group thinks the European Union does not use specific notes to do not have enough legal basis.

In addition, the European Union investigated authorities to replace the average and real value that buys soya bean with the price of international level, the reason is the twist in the institution of Argentine export revenue that is charged likewise. Expert group thinks, use the manufacturing cost that produces a country formerly what the European Union fails what to ask according to WTO regulation to make the normal value of computational biology derv in that way. #p#·ÖÒ³±êÌâ#e#

It is last bits when the European Union appeals, expert group rules European Union place is collected turned over dumping duty to exceed according to the dumping profit margin that turns over dumping agreement to ask the likelihood is formed.

The European Union asks a:appellant orgnaization overthrows these adjudication now, think these adjudication are the legal inference that is based on “ mistake. ”

Argentine appeal

In the instrument of appeal that will issue on May 31, argentina also oppugns a certain number of points in expert group adjudication. Especially, argentina thinks, the assessment of expert group mistake the way that the European Union returns cost of generator of oversight of dumping regulations and office of European Union investigation basically to record is both the relation between, especially, expert group thinks essential rules did not violate the regulation of WTO.

Argentina also asks a:appellant orgnaization overthrows the adjudication of expert group, when thinking the European Union is deciding to whether be put in the dumping, fail to be in what fairness makes between normal value and export price to compare, affect the price to be able to compare sexual difference without “ adjustment especially, especially the difference of taxation system respect. ”

In expert group level, argentina also claims, because European Union oneself is produced,the European Union did not ensure can superfluous the entrance dumping that the harm that bring about is not accused by ascribe, disobeyed WTO consequently oppose dumping agreement. The total conclusion that the European Union surveys office at that time is the harm that the entrance caused pair of country industries. Expert group rejected this accusation.

In instrument of appeal, argentine requirement Judge WTO old rejects these rulings of expert group, think expert group opposes dumping agreement provision without proper explanation and application.

According to WTO regulation, a:appellant orgnaization issues a report in 90 days after getting instrument of appeal, a:appellant orgnaization will discuss concerned law and legal explanation, is not the factual ruling of expert group.

ICTSD report.