United States of America: Antidumping investigation of glyphosate imported from China
Description
The threatened antidumping case against glyphosate imported from China evaporated on April 29, 2010, when the petitioner in this case withdrew its petition. That withdrawal led to the publication of a notice that the investigation has been discontinued.
The case began on March 31, 2010, when a U.S. producer (Albaugh, Inc.) filed an antidumping petition against imports of glyphosate (more commonly known by the brand name Round Up) imported from China. Glyphosate is a very widely used herbicide.
Questions might have been raised regarding the standing of this firm, insofar as the petition was filed jointly with the only other, and largest, producer of glyphosate in the United States (Monsanto). According to the petitioner, Monsanto has itself brought antidumping cases with respect to this product before the antidumping authorities of Argentina, Australia, Brazil, and the European Communities.
The petitioner claimed dumping margins between 299.65% and 349.65%. The United States imported $315.3 million worth of this product from China in 2009.
Any Evidence-Based Deliberation:
| Question | Result |
|---|---|
| Is there anything in the public record to suggest that evidence of the effectiveness of the proposed measure was considered during official deliberations? | No |
| Is there any evidence that alternatives to the proposed measure were considered? | No |
| Is there anything in the public record that suggests that empirical evidence informed the comparison across the alternatives available to government? | No |
| Was such evidence identified? | No |
| Is such evidence publicly available? | No |
| Did the official decision-maker in question provide an explanation as to why a chosen measure was favoured over alternatives? | No |
| Is there any evidence to suggest that potentially affected trading partners were consulted before the measures were taken? | No |
| Is there any evidence that safeguards have been put in place to ensure that implementation of the initiative is transparent and non-discriminatory? | No |
| Did the government state its intention to review the measure within one year of implementation? | No |
Date Discovered:
Implemented: No
Date of inception:
GTA Evaluation: Green
Source:
Information taken from the public version of the petition.
Government Response:
- 458 reads
