WTO vs USA: The Byrd Amendment
|
Code : ITF0019
|
Region : :USA |
||||
 |
 |
 |
 OR |
||
|
THE BYRD AMENDMENT On January 19th 1999, in the first session of the 106th Congress, senator Mike DeWine (R-OH)9 introduced a bill to bring into effect the CDSOA. According to this Act, all the antidumping and countervailing duties collected by the US Customs Service10,whichwould otherwise be added to the US general treasury, were to be directed into special accounts. These duties were then distributed on an annual basis to the companies that had originally filed the petition for trade protection fromforeign companies indulging in dumping activities... THE WTO MANDATE In December 2000, nine member countries – the European Union,Australia, Brazil, Chile, India, Indonesia, Japan, South Korea and Thailand – requested formal consultations with the United States. It was the largest joint request ever filed in aWTO trade dispute case.19 In February 2001, the USmet the trade representatives of the complainants in Geneva. The initial attempt to jointly resolve the issue without arbitration failed. It was followed by the US using its one-time right to temporarily block investigation into CDSOA. The number of complainants had now increased to 11, which included Canada and Mexico, the NAFTA20 trading partners of the US.... WTO VS USA Although the US, time and again reiterated that itwould implement theWTO’s decision, no convincing step had been taken in that direction. In 2003, Sen. Olympia Snowe’s (R-ME)37 attempt to modify the ByrdAmendment, by introducing a legislation that would divert the collected antidumping duties to help communities rather than companies, was not well received by the US Congress. Another legislation that proposed reviewing all the WTO rulings thatwent against the US, garnered better support, bringing into question the strength of the US’ commitment to theWTO... |
|
| For Case Books
Click Here >> For Case eBooks Click Here >> |
|
