The WTO has ordered Russia to change the duty on light trucks


The panel for dispute resolution under the world trade organization (WTO) on Friday, January 27, returned a verdict on the complaint of the European Union to the Russian anti-dumping duties on light commercial vehicles (LCVs) from Germany and Italy. The arbitrators ruled that Russia’s actions were incompatible with articles of the anti-Dumping agreement of the WTO and the General agreement on tariffs and trade (GATT), but rejected most of the claims of the European Union, it follows from the published report the WTO.

In 2014 the European Union has complained of Russia to the WTO in respect of antidumping duties on LCVs from Germany and Italy imposed by the Board of the Eurasian economic Commission on the territory of the Customs Union. In may 2013, the EEC Board decided to impose anti-dumping duties for a period up to 2018 on imports of light commercial vehicles from Germany and Italy of all grades in size from 23 to 29,6% of the customs value. This measure was the result of anti-dumping investigation initiated by the Russian Ministry of industry and trade in 2011, according to the statement of LLC “Sollers-Elabuga”, while collecting under the license of Fiat cars. The Department of domestic market protection of the EEC came to the conclusion that the automotive industry of the Customs Union has suffered material damage due to the fact that German and Italian suppliers of imported cars to Russia at the price of 23-30% below the normal value.

A panel at the WTO has recognized that the Department of ECE in its investigation, which took place in 2011-2013, focused on the wrong definition of “domestic industry” is considered only one manufacturer, Sollers, excluding from the definition of GAZ group that made an incorrect analysis of material damage to the industry and causality between the dumped imports and the injury. In addition, ECE failed to take into account in your analysis-the impact of the financial crisis in 2009, according to the decision, and are unable to adequately assess the magnitude of the dumping margin — the difference between the normal value of goods in the exporting country and the export value. At the same time, the arbitrators dismissed most of the charges of the EU — 21 of 29, thus confirming the correctness of the greater part of the investigation of the EEC.

Source