David Blau, Erika Camarena, Brittnie Chidsey
1

Business interests
 US Domestic Industry
▪ Supplied 20% of market in 2001
▪ By 2004, only 12.4%
 Chinese Import Industry
▪ 20% of US market and growing
 Domestic Industry pushing for action
2




USDOC
Chinese Shrimp Industry
Chinese Saw blade Industry
Third party countries
 EU
 Japan
 Thailand
3
Shrimp
 Initiated by USDOC
Jan 27, 2004
 Determined that US
had calculated
dumping margins for
shrimp producers
claiming that China
was “dumping” shrimp
on the US market
Saw blades
 Initiated by the USDOC
June 21, 2005
 US again claims China
is “dumping” on the US
market and sets “antidumping duties”
4
Shrimp
 “PRC Wide rate”
Saw blades
 “PRC Wide rate”
 112.81%

Independent firms
 164.09%

Industry firms
 Allied 84.93%
 AT&M 2.82%
 Yelin 82.27%
 Bosun 35.51%
 Red Garden 27.89%
 Hebi Jikai 48.5%
 Zhanjiang Goulian .07%
5

China claims that the USDOC misused zeroing
with respect to the Shrimp and Saw blades

As China is the complaining party, the burden
of proof is on them as they make the prima
facie
6

Article 2.4.2 of the Anti-dumping agreement
 Requires a “weighted average” to be used in
calculating anti-dumping duties
▪ Mathematical definition

Article 3.8 of the DSU
 Prima facie

Article 19.1 of the DSU
 Compliance
7

China uses example of
 US—Softwood Lumber V
 US Shrimp v Ecuador
…to show consistency of WTO findings
against zeroing practice
8
Identify types of
product
Calculate weighted
average—US v.
Foreign product
Zeroing practice:
Ignore cases where
Foreign price is
higher, set as 0
Compare to each
other
Aggregate data
and calculate
dumping margin
for product
9
WTO Compliant:
US Price China Price Dumping Margin
Blue Shrimp
$3
$5
($2)
Yellow Shrimp
$3
$2
$1
Green Shrimp
$3
$2
$1
Total Dumping Margin:
$0
Zeroing:
US Price China Price Dumping Margin
Blue Shrimp
$3
$5
$0
Yellow Shrimp
$3
$2
$1
Green Shrimp
$3
$2
$1
Total Dumping Margin:
$2
10

US was not compliant with 2.4.2 of Antidumping agreement


Practice of zeroing inconsistent with WTO principals
US did not contest China’s claims
11

Agree to comply with WTO
 Reasonable period of time ends March 23, 2013


US has not contested findings, but does not
agree to solutions…
…Forces other nations to bring cases to WTO
 Increases legitimacy of WTO process
 Allows US to save face with domestic industry
12

Sources
 “US—anti-dumping measures on certain shrimp and
diamond saw blades from China: Report of the Panel,”
WTO
 “China’s shrimp industry hurt by anti-dumping case,”
The Fish Site
 “Court of international trade remands USDOC refusal
to consider evidence…,” Southern Shrimp Alliance
 Elliot, Ian. “US loses China shrimp case at WTO,”
Feedstuffs.com
13