Mexico          | NAFTA Panel Report Produces Mixed Results | An 83-...

Mexico         

NAFTA Panel Report Produces Mixed Results

An 83-page decision in Mexico’s antidumping case against U.S. beef was released (March 16) by a binational NAFTA panel. A first reading of the report does not lead USMEF to expect changes in the current duties (see online summary) applied to U.S. exporters. A quick review of this complex matter by USMEF staff resulted in a complex series of conclusions, including the following:

1. The U.S. industry had argued that the Secretariat of Commerce and Industrial Development (now the Secretariat of Economy) lacked the authority to proceed against alleged dumping, but the panel denied this argument.
2. The U.S. industry argued that violations occurred in Mexico’s use of official questionnaires, evidence, and arguments, but the panel denied this because “the interested parties did not proceed in their claim.”
3. The third issue — which hinged on shelf life and product classification — was sent back to the Secretariat of Economy since the panel determined its actions were not carried out in accordance with the relevant legal provisions.
4. The U.S. also contended that the antidumping duty imposed should not be greater than the margin of dumping calculated for each product, and the panel agreed that Mexico had imposed duties based on erroneous or incomplete information which must be revised. The panel referred this back to Mexico’s Secretariat of Economy for review.
5. In another decision, however, the panel rejected claims by three U.S. companies that antidumping duties were imposed on them by means of sampling product and pricing of seven companies which did not include the complainants.
6. The panel also asked for a clearer and more concrete explanation of the methodology used to project the rate of increase of imports of U.S. beef.
7. In the case of boneless beef products, the panel concluded that the Mexican ministry “failed to satisfy the requirements for reaching a final affirmative determination of injury because the [ministry] did not determine that the [unfairly traded] imports were the cause of the alleged material injury. 

The complete panel decision is available online.

Mexico imposed antidumping duties on U.S. beef in April 2000 and amended its antidumping and countervailing duty laws in December 2002.

The panel report responded to appeals by U.S. companies against the punitive actions taken by Mexico against alleged dumping of U.S. beef products in the Mexican market.

Under international trade laws, one country accuses another of “dumping” when it believes products are being imported below their cost or home-market price and the country believes its own producers are being injured by those imports.

The U.S. beef industry challenged Mexico's antidumping measure on beef under Chapter Nineteen of the North American Free Trade Agreement.   The NAFTA case addressed whether the Mexican determination is consistent with the legal requirements of Mexico's antidumping law.

Mexico         

NAFTA Panel Report Produces Mixed Results

An 83-page decision in Mexico’s antidumping case against U.S. beef was released (March 16) by a binational NAFTA panel. A first reading of the report does not lead USMEF to expect changes in the current duties (see online summary) applied to U.S. exporters. A quick review of this complex matter by USMEF staff resulted in a complex series of conclusions, including the following:

1. The U.S. industry had argued that the Secretariat of Commerce and Industrial Development (now the Secretariat of Economy) lacked the authority to proceed against alleged dumping, but the panel denied this argument.
2. The U.S. industry argued that violations occurred in Mexico’s use of official questionnaires, evidence, and arguments, but the panel denied this because “the interested parties did not proceed in their claim.”
3. The third issue — which hinged on shelf life and product classification — was sent back to the Secretariat of Economy since the panel determined its actions were not carried out in accordance with the relevant legal provisions.
4. The U.S. also contended that the antidumping duty imposed should not be greater than the margin of dumping calculated for each product, and the panel agreed that Mexico had imposed duties based on erroneous or incomplete information which must be revised. The panel referred this back to Mexico’s Secretariat of Economy for review.
5. In another decision, however, the panel rejected claims by three U.S. companies that antidumping duties were imposed on them by means of sampling product and pricing of seven companies which did not include the complainants.
6. The panel also asked for a clearer and more concrete explanation of the methodology used to project the rate of increase of imports of U.S. beef.
7. In the case of boneless beef products, the panel concluded that the Mexican ministry “failed to satisfy the requirements for reaching a final affirmative determination of injury because the [ministry] did not determine that the [unfairly traded] imports were the cause of the alleged material injury. 

The complete panel decision is available online.

Mexico imposed antidumping duties on U.S. beef in April 2000 and amended its antidumping and countervailing duty laws in December 2002.

The panel report responded to appeals by U.S. companies against the punitive actions taken by Mexico against alleged dumping of U.S. beef products in the Mexican market.

Under international trade laws, one country accuses another of “dumping” when it believes products are being imported below their cost or home-market price and the country believes its own producers are being injured by those imports.

The U.S. beef industry challenged Mexico's antidumping measure on beef under Chapter Nineteen of the North American Free Trade Agreement.   The NAFTA case addressed whether the Mexican determination is consistent with the legal requirements of Mexico's antidumping law.