All anti-dumping orders are now revoked automatically within five years unless a “sunset review” determines that their removal would likely lead to further dumping and injury.
Many anti-dumping orders expire soon. Over 300 “transition orders” — already 5 years old when the agreement started in 1995 — face a July review.
Anti-dumping duties often stay on the books. The oldest U.S. order in effect was imposed in September 1966 on Canadian steel jacks.
Now automatic revocation is supposed to be the norm and continuation the exception. But several contested legal issues must be settled before any reviews begin. Predictably, protected U.S. industries are using those to gut the agreement’s intent.
The Commerce Department and International Trade Commission should resist that pressure. The issues are complex, and at least three threaten to undermine market openness.
First, the agencies should recognize that the U.S. Statement of Administrative Action often contradicts GATT intent, is not binding and was crafted with close cooperation of involved U.S. industries.
In discussing rules for determining the likelihood of injury, for example, the statement advises that “an improvement in the state of the industry . . . may suggest that the state of the industry is likely to deteriorate if the order is revoked.” That Catch-22 means that if a domestic industry performs either poorly or well, anti-dumping protection should continue.