Canada-Chile Free Trade Agreement
Chapter M - Anti-dumping and Countervailing Duty Matters
Article M-01: Reciprocal Exemption from the Application of Anti-dumping
Duty Laws
1. Subject to Article M-03, as of the date of entry into force of this Agreement each Party agrees not to apply its domestic anti-dumping law to goods of the other Party. Specifically:
- (a) neither Party shall initiate any anti-dumping investigations or reviews with respect to goods of the other Party;
- (b) each Party shall terminate any ongoing anti-dumping investigations or inquiries in respect of such goods;
- (c) neither Party shall impose new anti-dumping duties or other measures in respect of such goods; and
- (d) each Party shall revoke all existing orders levying anti-dumping duties in respect of such goods.
2. Each Party shall amend, and publish as appropriate, its relevant domestic anti-dumping law in relation to goods of the other Party to ensure that the objectives of this Article are achieved.
Article M-02: Rules of Origin
Article M-01 applies only to goods that the competent investigating authority of the importing Party, applying the importing Party's anti-dumping law to the facts of a specific case, determines are goods of the other Party.
Article M-03: Phase-in Provisions
1. Article M-01 applies to all goods of the other Party as of:
- (a) the date on which the tariff of both Parties is eliminated at the subheading level; or
- (b) January 1, 2003, whichever comes first.
2. For the purpose of paragraph 1, elimination at the subheading level occurs when the tariff for each eight-digit tariff line under the six-digit subheading is zero under this Agreement.
Article M-04: Exceptional Circumstances
1. Either Party may request, in writing, consultations with the other Party regarding exceptional circumstances that may arise with respect to the operation of this Chapter.
2. Exceptional circumstances may include significant changes in recent trading conditions.
3. The Parties shall enter into consultations within 10 days of receipt of a request and shall conclude such consultations within 30 days of such receipt, except where the matter involves perishable goods, in which case the consultations shall be concluded within 20 days.
4. In the consultations, the Parties shall make every attempt to arrive at a mutually satisfactory resolution of the particular matter, with a view to promptly restoring recent trading conditions. To this end, the Parties shall:
- (a) provide sufficient information to enable a full examination of the exceptional circumstances; and
- (b) treat any confidential or proprietary information exchanged in the course of consultations on the same basis as the Party providing the information.
5. These consultations shall be without prejudice to a Party's right to invoke any applicable government-to-government dispute settlement procedures available under this Agreement or the WTO Agreement.
Article M-05: Committee on Trade Remedies
The Parties hereby establish a Committee on Trade Remedies to:
- (a) consult with a view to defining subsidy disciplines further and eliminating the need for domestic countervailing duty measures on trade between them;
- (b) work together in multilateral fora, including the World Trade Organization, and in the context of negotiating Chile's full accession to the NAFTA and the establishment of a Free Trade Area of the Americas, with a view to improving trade remedy regimes to minimize their potential to impede trade;
- (c) consult on opportunities for working together with other like-minded countries with a view to expanding agreement on the elimination of the application of anti-dumping measures within free trade areas;
- (d) facilitate Chile's full accession to the NAFTA, and in particular Chapter Nineteen, by examining the current domestic anti-dumping and countervailing duty regimes and the operation of the Parties' legal systems, including judicial review of administrative agency decisions; and
- (e) meet annually, and on the request of either Party, to review the operation of this Chapter and other related matters including competition laws and policies.
Article M-06: Review
The Parties shall, not later than 5 years after the coming into force of this Agreement, meet to review this Chapter and to determine whether any changes should be made to its provisions.
Article M-07: Dispute Resolution
1. The dispute settlement provisions of Chapter N (Institutional Arrangements and Dispute Settlement Procedures) shall apply with respect to the avoidance or settlement of all disputes between the Parties regarding the interpretation or application of Articles M-01, M-02, M-03 or M-04 and paragraphs 7 through 9 of this Article.
2. Apart from this Chapter, no provision of this Agreement shall be construed as imposing obligations on a Party with respect to either Party's anti-dumping or countervailing duty law.
3. Except as otherwise provided in paragraph 1, all disputes between the Parties arising in respect of the application of anti-dumping measures or countervailing duty measures by either Party shall be settled in accordance with the WTO Agreement.
4. Where a dispute referred to in paragraph 3 involves, as disputing Parties, Canada and Chile exclusively, the Parties shall act in accordance with the following procedures consistent with the DSU:
- (a) if a request for consultations under Article 4 of the DSU is made, the Parties shall enter into consultations within 10 days of receipt of the request and shall conclude such consultations within 30 days of such receipt, except where the matter involves perishable goods, in which case consultations shall be concluded within 20 days;
- (b) a Party shall not object to the establishment of a panel that has been requested by the other Party under Article 6(1) of the DSU at the first meeting of the DSB at which the request is examined; and
- (c) unless the Parties otherwise agree, the terms of reference of the panel shall be to determine whether the imposition of an anti-dumping measure or a countervailing duty measure against a good of the complaining Party by the Party complained against is in accordance with Article VI of the GATT 1994, or the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures or the Agreement on Implementation of Article VI of the GATT 1994.
5. Unless the Parties otherwise agree, where a DSU panel issues a final report concluding that the imposition by either Canada or Chile of an anti-dumping measure or a countervailing duty measure against a good of the other Party is not in accordance with Article VI of the GATT 1994, or the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures or the Agreement on Implementation of Article VI of the GATT 1994, the Party complained against shall direct its competent authorities to take action not inconsistent with the panel report with respect to the goods of the complaining Party, including, where appropriate, the refund, with interest, of the whole or part of the duty paid.
6. The final report of the DSU panel shall be deemed to be a final report of a panel under Article N-16.
7. The Party complained against shall not be required to take action pursuant to paragraph 5 until:
- (a) the time period for notification to the DSB of a decision to appeal under Article 16(4) of the DSU has expired; or
- (b) the panel report is adopted following completion of the appeal procedure under Article 17 of the DSU.
8. Following the expiration of the time period referred to in subparagraph 7(a) or the adoption of the panel report referred to in subparagraph 7(b), if the Party complained againstfails to comply with the final report of a DSU panel pursuant to paragraph 4 within a reasonable period of time, and no compensation has been offered in lieu thereof and no other mutually satisfactory resolution of the matter has been reached, the complaining Party may suspend the application to the Party complained against of benefits of equivalent effect under Article N-18 until such time as the matter is resolved.
9. If a Party chooses to suspend benefits in accordance with Article N-18 as well as under the DSU, the combined effect of such suspension of benefits may not be greater than the effect of the violation.
Article M-08: Definitions
For purposes of this Chapter:
Agreement on Implementation of Article VI of the GATT 1994 means the Agreement on Implementation of Article VI of the General Agreement on Tariff and Trade 1994, which forms part of the WTO Agreement;
Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures means the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures, which forms part of the WTO Agreement;
Competent investigating authority means:
- (a) in the case of Canada
- (i) the Canadian International Trade Tribunal or its successor; or
- (ii) the Deputy Minister of National Revenue as defined in the Special Import Measures Act, as amended, or the Deputy Minister's successor; and
- (b) in the case of Chile, the National Commission for the Investigation of the Existence of Price Distortions in Imported Goods ("Comisión Nacional Encargada de Investigar la Existencia de Distorsiones en el Precio de las Mercaderías Importadas"), or its successor;
domestic anti-dumping law means a Party's relevant statutes, regulations and administrative guidelines;
DSB means the Dispute Settlement Body established in Article 2 of the DSU; and
reasonable period of time means the period necessary for review and the taking of action not inconsistent with the panel report, taking into account the factual and legal issues involved. In no event shall the reasonable period of time exceed an amount of time equal to the maximum permitted for investigation (from initiation to final order) to be carried out under the relevant WTO Agreements.
- Date modified:
