Navigation >> Home >> Performance reporting >> The Customs outcome >> Output 5

Output 5

Anti-dumping and countervailing administration

This output covers the investigation of dumping and countervailing complaints and the determination, implementation and review of appropriate measures. It also covers providing advice to industry and foreign governments and maintaining Australia’s policy and legislative framework for anti-dumping and countervailing.

Performance measures

Figure 27: Performance against targets set in the 2000-01 PBS – output 5

Back to top

Performance assessment

New investigations

During 2000-01 Customs forwarded 12 reports to the Minister for Justice and Customs for a decision on new applications for dumping and countervailing duties to be imposed. These reports covered 12 different goods from 17 countries.

Three reports (A4 copy paper, continuous paper and clear float glass exported from Indonesia) which were originally submitted to the former Minister, Senator the Hon Amanda Vanstone, were resubmitted to Senator the Hon Chris Ellison after his appointment as Minister for Justice and Customs in January 2001. The previous Minister also directed Customs to re-evaluate certain aspects of another case (ordinary portland cement from four countries) in light of guidelines issued on economies in transition.

During the year the focus of dumping and countervailing duty applications moved from industries such as paper and chemicals to manufactured goods such as steel shelving, copper tubing, ring binders, road sweeper components and gas water heaters.

An accelerated review was conducted in relation to steel pipe from Thailand. One exporter, given a residual rate of anti-dumping measures in the original investigation, applied for an individual rate. The Minister fixed a higher rate of dumping duty on 9 March 2001.

Extensions to investigations

Customs has up to 155 days to complete an investigation and report to the Minister. On or before 110 days, Customs must issue a statement of essential facts on which it proposes to base its report to the Minister. There are certain circumstances in which the Minister can approve extensions to the due date for a statement of essential facts. An extension to the statement of essential facts automatically extends the due date for the final report to the Minister.

Reasons for extensions vary and included implications of holiday periods in the country of export, the complexity of cases, and information verification problems.

Extensions were granted for the following investigations:

• pineapple pieces from Thailand and Indonesia and pineapple juice from Thailand (90 days)
• ring binders from Malaysia (25 days)
• gas water heaters from Japan (25 days)
• steel shelving from China (25 days)
• ammonium nitrate from Russia (140 days)
• tinplate from Taiwan and United Kingdom (31 days).

Taking into account the approved extensions of time, all investigations were completed within the statutory timeframes.

Review and litigation

Interested parties can request a review of specific dumping decisions reached. A specialised independent body, the Trade Measures Review Officer, is responsible for undertaking these reviews.

The Trade Measures Review Officer reviewed four decisions by the Minister. In three cases, it recommended that the Minister’s original decision about imposing measures be affirmed. These investigations were:

• tinplate exported from Taiwan
• linear low density polyethylene exported from the Republic of Korea, Malaysia and Saudi Arabia
• polyvinyl chloride exported from Hungary and the Republic of Korea.

In one case, the Trade Measures Review Officer recommended a re-investigation of certain decisions (hot dip galvanised steel pipe). As a result of the re-investigation, the Minister affirmed her original decision to impose measures on 21 December 2000.

The following matters were appealed to the Federal Court and were pending as at 30 June 2001:

• the reinvestigation of galvanised steel pipe
• the Minister’s decision to impose anti-dumping duty on imports of certain carpet backing from Belgium
• the Minister’s decision about non-injurious prices for clear float glass imported from Indonesia.

New guidelines

The former Minister for Justice and Customs, Senator Vanstone, wrote to the CEO on 14 December 2000, setting out guidance on the determination of material injury. This letter clarified and reinforced the interpretation of guidelines already applied by Customs in this area. The Minister may give formal guidance to the CEO in relation to material injury, but this guidance cannot be case-specific and must be tabled in Parliament within 15 sitting days.

On 7 December 2000 the former Minister provided Customs with guidelines on price control in economies in transition. The Minister issued revised guidelines on 28 June 2001. Both sets of guidelines were publicised in Australian Customs Dumping Notices. The Minister can issue informal guidelines to the CEO on any dumping matter, in order to address the CEO’s attention to matters that the Minister considers relevant to the determination of dumping cases. These guidelines do not have formal legal status.

Both the current and former Minister stressed that WTO rules on anti-dumping (as embodied in the General Agreement on Tariff and Trade) are Australia’s guide for dumping issues and that Australia’s anti-dumping system will be WTO-compliant at all times.

Revised application form

During the year, Customs consulted with industry groups with the aim of clarifying the dumping and countervailing application form. The revised form should assist the applicant to supply all relevant information and enable a clearer understanding of the issues raised by the application.

Customs and industry groups have reached an agreed position and the revised application form should be tabled early in 2001-02. It was expected that the new form will result in fewer applications being rejected on technical grounds.

Back to top