Clarifying the legal ambiguity in article 2.2.2(III) of the anti-dumping agreement: A proposed set of interpretative guidelines for “Any other reasonable method”

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review

Abstract

When investigating authorities construct normal value under Article 2.2 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement, they may, if the method prescribed by the chapeau of Article 2.2.2 is unavailable, opt to use Article 2.2.2(iii)’s “any other reasonable method” to calculate amounts for SG&A and for profits, subject only to a “profit cap”. The apparent ambiguity enshrined in Article 2.2.2(iii) has been interpreted to give investigating authorities broad discretion and has engendered various overly discretionary, sometimes abusive, interpretations by investigating authorities. A guideline for the interpretation of Article 2.2.2(iii) can be, however, drawn from the overall context and structure of Article 2 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement. In order to clarify the ambiguity in Article 2.2.2(iii) of the Anti-Dumping Agreement and to prevent any abusive use of “other reasonable method” by investigating authorities’ construction of Constructed Value, all Article 2.2.2(iii) methods must be consistent with this structural guideline of Article 2 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)369-394
Number of pages26
JournalAsian Journal of WTO and International Health Law and Policy
Volume11
Issue number2
StatePublished - 2016

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© 2016 National Taiwan University (IEEB). All rights reserved.

Keywords

  • Article 2.2.2(III)’s other reasonable method
  • Interpretive guidelines
  • WTO anti-dumping agreement

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Clarifying the legal ambiguity in article 2.2.2(III) of the anti-dumping agreement: A proposed set of interpretative guidelines for “Any other reasonable method”'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this