Manual on procedural and substantive issues in relation to

application Anti-dumping measures in Bangladesh

Introduction
The Manual is designed to provide an overview of the basic elements involved in a typical anti-
dumping proceeding. This manual comprises the legislative framework; and proceduraland
substantive aspectsof anti-dumping investigation carried out by the Trade Remedies Division
responsible for conducting investigation and making recommendations on imposition of anti-
dumping duty under the leadership of Chairman, Bangladesh Tariff Commission (BTC). This
manual – that would be regularly updated by the BTC to include its own experience in the use of
trade remedy instruments – would be used to train new officials joining the BTC and to support
the Trade Remedies Division when conducting investigations.

Bangladesh’s obligation under the WTO

As a Member of the WTO, Bangladesh is bound by the provisions of the WTO Agreement,
including the Agreement on Implementation of Article VI of the General Agreement on Tariffs
and Trade 1994 (the AD Agreement) (Annex 1). The Agreement contains detail procedures for
imposition of anti-dumping duty that must be followed by any WTO Member. Accordingly,
Bangladesh has an obligation incorporate the provisions of the AD Agreement in its law and
regulation. Bangladesh has the obligation to notify the WTO Committee on Antidumping
Practices of its rules and name of the investigating authority and semi-annual report of any
antidumping actions taken within the preceding six months.

Legislation
In conformity with the WTO Agreement on anti-dumping dutySection 18B of Customs Act,
1969 mandates the government to impose antidumping duty on any products imported into
Bangladesh at dumping price i.e. price at less than normal value. Article 18B in sub-section (7)
stipulate that ‘No proceedings for imposition of antidumping duty shall commence under this
section unless the Bangladesh Tariff Commission, on receipt of a written application by or on
behalf of a domestic Industry, informs the Government that there is prima facie evidence of
injury, which is caused by dumping on any particular imported product.’Accordingly,
rulesissued underwith sub-section 6 of section 18(B) of Customs Act 1969 on 30-11-1995 via
SRO No.209-Law/95/1642/Customs and SRO No. 210-Law/95/1643/Customs dated 30-11-1995
(Annex 2 and 3)designated Chairman, BTC as investigating authority for identification of
dumping, determination of injury and dumping margin, and making recommendations to the
Government. The Government may impose antidumping duty based on recommendation by the
Chairman within three months from the receipt of the findings and recommendations. Section
18D of the Customs Act 1969 allows appeal against imposition of antidumping duties may be
made to the Customs, Excise and Value added Tax Appellate Tribunal within 90 days of
imposition of such duty.
 CHAPTER I

STEPS FOR APPLICATION AND INITIAITION OF ANTI-DUMPING

INVESTIGATION

When a domestic industry is of the view that there is evidence of dumping and that the dumping
is causing injury, a written petition may be submitted to commence the process of an anti-
dumping action to the Commission. The Commission will have to determine whether the
application is properly documented. During this process the Commission will scrutinise all
information supplied in the Application and specifically investigate whether the necessary
substantiating documentation has been appended to the application.

Once the Commission is satisfied that it has received a properly documented application, it may
arrange for verification of the information contained in the application to confirm the veracity of
the information. The Commission will also of its own conduct further research, as it is required
to do in terms of Article 5.3 of the AD Agreement, to confirm whether the normal value and
export price information, the adjustments made and the margin of dumping determined appear
accurate and whether all interested parties have been identified. The Commission determines that
the application has been made by or on behalf of the Domestic Industry. Once the Commission is
satisfied that all requirements have been met and that the application establishes a prima facie
case of injurious dumping, it will initiate an anti-dumping investigation. A public notice is
issued initiating an investigation.All interested parties will be informed of the investigation and
asked to participate.

The Commissionwill proceed expeditiously with the conduct of the investigation and shall, in
appropriate cases, make a preliminary finding containing the detailed information on the main
reasons behind the determination. A provisional duty not exceeding the margin of dumping may
be imposed by the Government on the basis of the preliminary finding recorded by the
Commission.The provisional duty can be imposed only after the expiry of 60 days from the date
of initiation of investigation. The Commission holds a public hearing inviting all interested
parties to make their submissions before it. The Commission will inform all interested parties of
the essential facts, which form the basis for its decision before the final finding is made. The
interested parties submit their response to the disclosure and the final position of the Commission
taken therein. The Commission examines these final submissions of the parties and comes out
with final findings. Where there is an affirmative final determination, the Commission makes
recommendation to Internal Resource Division, Ministry of Finance to impose definitive duties
for 5 years. Such duty is finally imposed/levied by a Notification of Internal Resource
Division,the Ministry of Finance. Thus, while the Commission recommends the Anti-dumping
duty, it is the Ministry of Finance, which levies such duty. Where there is a negative final
determination, a notice stating the reasons for the negative determination and termination of
investigation is published.
 CHAPTER II

PROCEDURES

1. Some of the Major Principles:

i. When the Commission initiates an investigation, all“interested parties” shall have a
full opportunity for the defence of their intereststhroughout the investigation
(Article 6.2).
ii. All “interested parties” must be given notice of the information, which the
authorities require and ample opportunity to present in writing all evidence which
they consider relevant (Article 6.1, Rule 6.1).
iii. Subject to the requirement to protect confidential information, evidence presented
by any interested party must be made available promptly to other interested parties
participating in the investigation (Article 6.1.2, Rule 6.7).
iv. “interested parties” should have opportunities to see the information used by the
authorities in the investigation and to prepare presentations on the basis of that
information.“interested parties” (Rule 2.ga) shall include:

a. An exporter or foreign producer or the importer of a product subject to

investigation, or a trade or business association a majority of the members
of which are producers, exporters or importers of such product;
b. The government of the exporting Member; and
c. A producer of the like product in the importing Member or a trade and
business association a majority of the members of which produce the like
product in the territory of the importing Member.

In addition, industrial users of product investigated and if product is sold at the retail level,
representative consumer organizations, must be given the opportunity to provide information.

v. Hearings/Oral Arguments (Article 6.2, 6.3, Rule 6.6, 16)

The Commission shall, on request, provide opportunities for all interested parties to meet those
parties with adverse interests, so that opposing views may be presented and rebuttal arguments
offered. Provision of such opportunities must take account of the need to preserve
confidentiality and of the convenience to the parties. There shall be no obligation on any party to
attend a meeting, and failure to do so shall not be prejudicial to that party's case. Interested
parties shall also have the right, on justification, to present other information orally.Para 16 of
the Antidumping rule of Bangladesh requires the Commission to arrange public hearing for the
interested parties before issuance of final report. Oral information shall be taken into account by
authorities only to extent reproduced in writing and made available to other interested parties.

vi. Time-limit for concluding investigation(Article 5.10, Rule 17))

Except in special circumstances, investigations shall be concluded within one year, and in no
case more than 18 months after their initiation.

vii. Transparency(Article 6.1.2, Rule 6.7)

All documents submitted by parties should be made available promptly to all other interested
parties (subject to confidentiality rules). The Commission shall provide opportunities for all
interested parties to see all non-confidential information and to prepare presentations on the basis
of this information.

2. Application and Initiation

Normally speaking, the Designated Authority initiates the proceedings for anti dumping action
on the basis of a petition received from the domestic industry alleging dumping of certain goods
and the injury caused to it by such dumping (Article 5.1, Rule 5.1).

“Standing” of the Application (Article 5.4, Rule 5.3)

An investigation shall not be initiated unless the Commission has determined, on the basis of an
examination of the degree of support for or opposition to the application expressed by the
domestic producers of the like product, that the application has been made by or on behalf of
domestic industry. In order to constitute a valid application, the following two conditions have to
be satisfied:

i. The domestic producers expressly supporting the application must account for not
less than 25% of the total production of the like product by the domestic industry in
Bangladesh; and

ii. The domestic producers expressly supporting the application must account for
more than 50% of the total production of the like product by those expressly supporting
and those opposing the application.
Box1 1: Standing test of Applicant - Example A
Category of domestic producers Production’000
A. Producers submitting complaint 30,000
B. Producers supporting complaint, 20,000
But not filing it
C. Producers opposing complaint 20,000
D. Producers not expressing an opinion 30,000
Total 100,000
A+B = Domestic producers supporting the application.
A+B+C = Domestic producers who have expressed an opinion about the application, either in
favour or against.
A+B+C+D = All domestic producers.
First part of test
In determining whether the domestic producers supporting the application account for more than 50
per cent of the output of domestic producers expressing an opinion about the application filed, the
output of producers supporting the application (A+B) is expressed as a percentage of the output of
the producers expressing an opinion
(A+B+C+D):
(A+B)/(A+B+C) x100
= (30,000+20,000)/(30,000+20,000+20,000) x 100
=50,000/70,000 x 100 = 71%
As 71% is greater than 50%, the first part of the standing test is met.
Second part of test
Similarly, in determining whether the domestic producers supporting the application account for at
least 25% of the total output of domestic producers, the output of domestic producers supporting the
application (A+B) is expressed as a percentage of total production (A+B+C+D):
(A+B)/(A+B+C+D) x100
= (30,000+20,000)/(30,000+20,000+20,000+30,000) x 100
=50,000/100,000 x 100 = 50%
As 50% is greater than 25%, the second part of the standing test is also met.
Therefore, the applicant has met the standing requirements.
Box 2: Standing test of Applicant: Example B
Category of domestic producers Production’000
A. Producers submitting complaint 15,000
B. Producers supporting complaint, 5,000
But not filing it
C. Producers opposing complaint 10,000
D. Producers not expressing an opinion 70,000
Total 100,000
First part of test
As in the first example, in determining whether the domestic producers supporting the
application account for more than 50% of the output of domestic producers expressing an
opinion about the application filed, the output of the producers expressing support is
expressed as a percentage of the output of those producers expressing an opinion:
(A+B)/(A+B+C) x100
= (15,000+5,000)/(15,000+5,000+10,000) x 100
=20,000/30,000 x 100 = 66%
As 66% is greater than 50%, the first part of the standing test is met.

Second part of test

In turn, in determining whether the domestic producers supporting the application account
for at least 25% of the total output of domestic producers, the output of domestic producers
supporting the application is expressed as a percentage of total production of the domestic
industry:

(A+B)/(A+B+C+D) x100
= (15,000+5,000)/(15,000+5,000+10,000+70,000) x 100
=20,000/100,000 x 100 = 20%
As 20% is less than 25%, the second part of the standing test is not met.
In this case, the applicant does not have standing and the process cannot continue.
Box 3: Standing test of Applicant: Example C
Category of domestic producers Production’000
A. Producers submitting complaint 16,000
B. Producers supporting complaint, 10,000
But not filing it
C. Producers opposing complaint 30,000
D. Producers not expressing an opinion 44,000
Total 100,000
First part of test
As in the first example, in determining whether the domestic producers supporting the
application account for more than 50% of the output of domestic producers expressing an
opinion about the application filed, the output of the producers expressing support is
expressed as a percentage of the output of those producers expressing an opinion:
(A+B)/(A+B+C) x100
= (16,000+10,000)/(16,000+10,000+30,000) x 100
=26,000/56,000 x 100 = 46.43%
As 46.43% is less than 50%, the first part of the standing test is not met.

Second part of test

In turn, in determining whether the domestic producers supporting the application account
for at least 25% of the total output of domestic producers, the output of domestic producers
supporting the application is expressed as a percentage of total production of the domestic
industry:

(A+B)/(A+B+C+D) x100
= (16,000+10,000)/(16,000+10,000+30,000+44,000) x 100
=26,000/100,000 x 100 = 26%

As 26% is greater than 25%, the second part of the standing test is met.

In this case, the first part of the standing test is not met, the applicant does not have standing
and the process cannot continue.
Information to be included in an Application (Article 5.2)
Application must include evidence of dumping, injury and causal link between dumping and
injury.Simple assertion, unsubstantiated by relevant evidence, cannot be considered sufficient to
meet these requirements. In particular, the application should contain the following information
that is reasonably available to the applicant:
- The identity of the applicant
- A description of the volume and value of the domestic production of the like product
- A list of all known domestic producers of the like product and the volume and value
of production accounted for by such producers
- A complete description of the allegedly dumped product
- The names of the country or countries of origin or export in question
- The identity of each known exporter or foreign producer
- A list of known importers
- Information on the normal value (domestic prices in the exporting country or, where
appropriate, the prices for export to a third country or the constructed value)
- Export prices (or, where the export price is constructed, data on the prices of first
resale to an independent buyer in the importing country)
- The evolution of the volume of dumped imports
- The effect of those imports on domestic prices of the like product
- The consequent impact of the imports on the domestic industry
For this purpose, an application form has been developed by the Commission for enabling
the applicant to supply all these information (Annex 4)

Examination of the evidence (Article 5.3, Rule 8))

- The accuracy and adequacy of the evidence provided in the application must be
examined to determine whether there is sufficient evidence to justify the initiation of
an investigation.
Rejection of an application (Article 5.8)
- An application must be rejected as soon as the Commissionis satisfied that there is not
sufficient evidence of either dumping or of injury and where margin of dumping is de
minimis, or volume of dumped imports, or the injury, is negligible.The margin of
dumping is de minimis if it is less than 2% ad valorem. The volume of imports is
 normally regarded as negligible if the volume of dumped imports from a particular
country is found to account for less than 3 per cent of the imports of the like product
in the importing Member, unless countries which individually account for less than 3
per cent of the imports of the like product in the importing Member collectively
account for more than 7 per cent of imports of the like product in the importing
Member.
Avoidance of publicity before initiating investigation (Article 5.5)
- The BTC shall avoid, unless a decision has been made to initiate an investigation, any
publicizing of the application for the initiation of an investigation.
Prior notification of the government of the exporting country(Article 5.5)
- Before proceeding to initiate an investigation, the BTC shall notify the government of
the exporting country concerned.

Initiation of Investigation (Article 12.1, 12.1.1, Rule 6.1, 6.2)

When the Commission is satisfied that there is sufficient evidence to justify the initiation of an
anti-dumping investigation, exporting country and other interested parties known to the
Commission to have an interest therein shall be notified and a public notice shall be given. A
public notice of the initiation of an investigation shall contain:
 Name of exporting country, product involved
 Date of initiation
 Description of dumping methodology and margin
 Summary of allegations regarding injury factors
 Contact addresses
 Time-limits for submitting views
As soon as the investigation has been started, full text of application (non-confidential version)
must be provided/made available to exporting Member/known exporters/other interested parties
(on request) (Article 6.1.3)

Suo-motu Initiation (Article 5.6, Rule 5.4)

Rule 5(4) of the Anti Dumping Rules provides for suo-motu initiation of anti dumping
proceedings by the Designated Authority. In such circumstances, the Authority initiates the anti-
dumping investigation on its own without any complaint/petition filed in this regard, provided
the Authority is satisfied that sufficient evidence exists as to the existence of dumping, injury and
causal link between the dumped imports and the alleged injury. It is further clarified that after
initiation, the suo-motu investigation follows the same procedure as the one based on a petition
as mentioned in the Anti Dumping Rules.

3. Information Gathering (Article 6.1, Rule 6.4)

The Commission must inform interested parties of information required, typically in the
following form of questionnaire:
 Exporters Questionnaire: All information relating to exports, domestic sales and cost
build-up (Annex 5)
 Importers Questionnaire: All information relating to imports of dumped products and
sales (Annex 6)
 Domestic Industry Questionnaire: All information relating to injury analysis (Annex 7)
A minimum period of 30 days must be given to foreign exporters or producers to reply to
questionnaires. The time-limit is counted from the date of receipt of the questionnaire. The
questionnaire should be deemed to have been received one week from the date on which it was
sent to the respondent or transmitted to a diplomatic representative. The period must be extended
upon cause shown, whenever practicable.

Cannot Investigate Everybody? (Article 6.10, Rule 17.3)

The Commission shall determine an individual margin of dumping for each known exporter or
producer concerned of the product under investigation. In cases where the number of exporters,
producers, importers or types of products involved is so large as to make such a determination
impracticable, the authorities may limit their examination either to a reasonable number of
interested parties or products by using samples which are statistically valid on the basis of
information available to the authorities at the time of the selection, or to the largest percentage of
the volume of the exports from the country in question which can reasonably be investigated.
Any selection must be preferably made in consultation with the exporters/importers concerned.

Confidential Information(Article 6.5, Rule 7)

Any information which is by nature commercially confidential (for example, because its disclosure
would be of significant competitive advantage to a competitor, or would have a significantly
adverse effect on the person supplying the information or the person from whom the information
was acquired) or which is provided on a confidential basis by parties to an investigation will, upon
good cause being shown, be treated as confidential by the BTC.

Parties requesting that information be treated as confidential should:

 (a) clearly identify the information for which confidential treatment is
requested;

(b) provide justification for the request for confidential treatment; and
(c) provide a non-confidential version or non-confidential summary of the
information for which confidential treatment is requested, or if it is claimed that the
information is not susceptible to such a summary, a statement of the reasons why
such a summary is not possible. A non-confidential version should reproduce the
original but have information considered to be confidential either omitted or
summarised. Non-confidential versions should contain sufficient details to allow
other interested parties a reasonable understanding of the information submitted in
confidence.

As provided for in sub-rule (3) of rule 7 of the SRO No. 209-Law/95/1642/Customs, if the
Commission finds that the request for confidentiality is not warranted and the supplier of
the information is either unwilling to make the information public or to authorise its
disclosure in generalised or summary form, it may disregard such information unless it
can be demonstrated to their satisfaction from appropriate sources that the information is
correct.

Information for which confidential treatment is not requested will be treated as non-
confidential and will be included in the Commission’s public file of the investigation. The
public file is available for perusal or copying by any interested party or member of the
public.

Facts Available (Article 6.8, Rule 6.8)

In cases in which any interested party refuses access to, or otherwise does not provide, necessary
information within a reasonable period or significantly impedes the investigation, preliminary
and final determinations, affirmative or negative, may be made on the basis of the facts available.

4. Preliminary Determination (Article 12.2, Rule 12)

Public notice shall be given of any preliminary determination (affirmative or negative).Each
such notice shall set forth, or otherwise make available through a separate report, in sufficient
detail the findings and conclusions reached on all issues of fact and law considered material by
the BTC. All such notices and reports shall be forwarded to the Member or Members the
products of which are subject to such determination or undertaking and to other interested parties
known to have an interest therein.

5. Conditions for Application of Provisional Measures (Article 7.1, Rule 13)

Provisional measures may be applied only if:
(i) an investigation has been initiated in accordance with the provisions of Rule 6, a
public notice has been given to that effect and interested parties have been given
adequate opportunities to submit information and make comments;
(ii) a preliminary affirmative determination has been made of dumping and
consequent injury to a domestic industry; and
(iii) it is judged that such measures necessary to prevent injury being caused during
the investigation.

Forms of Provisional Measures (Article 7.2)

Provisional measures may take the form of a provisional duty or, preferably, a security - by cash
deposit or bond - equal to the amount of the anti-dumping duty provisionally estimated, being
not greater than the provisionally estimated margin of dumping. The security should be equal to
the amount of the provisional duty. Withholding of appraisement is an appropriate provisional
measure, provided that the normal duty and the estimated amount of the anti-dumping duty be
indicated and as long as the withholding of appraisement is subject to the same conditions as
other provisional measures.

Timing of invoking Provisional measures (Article 7.3, Rule 13)

Provisional measures shall not be applied sooner than 60 days from the date of initiation of the
investigation.

Nevertheless, according to the practice of the Member countries with the most experience in
using anti-dumping measures, the period between the initiation of an investigation and the
application of provisional measures is actually much longer, namely four to six months.

Duration of Provisional measures (Article 7.4, Rule 13)

The provisional duty will remain in force only for a period not exceeding six months, which may
be extended by the Government to nine months.

6. Investigation leading to Final Measures

Comments on preliminary determination
The Commission will examine the comments on preliminary determination received from the
interested parties.

Opportunity to present view (hearings) (Rule 16)

The Commission holds a public hearing inviting all interested parties to make their submissions
before it. All oral submissions made during the hearing need to be reproduced in writing for the
Commission to take the same on board.

Verification of Information (Article 6.7)

The Commission must satisfy themselves as to the accuracy of the information. In order to verify
information provided to obtain further details, the Commission may carry out investigation in the
exporting country, provided they obtain the agreement of the firms concerned and notify the
representatives of the government of the exporting country and does not object.

Disclosure of information (Article 6.9)

Based on these submissions and evidence gathered during the investigation and verification
thereof, the Commission will determine the basis of its final findings. However, the Commission
will inform all interested parties of the essential facts, which form the basis for its decision
before the final finding is made.

Price Undertaking (Article 8, Rule 15)

Agreements by which exporters undertake to align their export prices to their normal values.
Once such an agreement has been concluded, the proceedings may be suspended or terminated.
Price undertakings may not be sought or accepted unless a preliminary affirmative determination
of dumping and injury caused by such dumping has been made. Price increases under such
undertakings should not be higher than the margin of dumping. It is desirable that the price
increases resulting from an undertaking be less than the margin of dumping if that is enough to
remove the injury to the domestic industry.

Monitoring price undertakings: Exporter required to provide periodically information relevant to

the fulfillment of such an undertaking and to permit verification.
Action in case of violation: Provisional measures may be immediately applied (such measures
would be determined on the basis of the best information available). Definitive duties may also
levied on imports entered for consumption not more than 90 days before the application of the
provisional measures, provided such imports were entered after the violation of the undertaking.

Final Determination (Article 9.1, 12.2, Rule 17)

The interested parties submit their response to the disclosure and the final position of the
Commission taken therein. The Commission examines these final submissions of the parties and
comes out with final findings.

It is not obligatory to impose definitive duties even when dumping and injury caused by such
dumping have been demonstrated. The decision whether or not to impose an anti-dumping duty
is a decision to be made by the authorities of the importing country. It is desirable, that the anti-
dumping duty be less than the margin of dumping if such duty is adequate to remove the injury
to the domestic industry. This is known as the “lesser-duty rule”.

Public notice shall be given of any final determination. The notice shall provide sufficient detail
on findings and conclusions reached on all issues of fact and law. Such a notice shall contain the
following information:
 Names of suppliers/supplying countries
 Product description
 Margin of dumping
 Considerations relevant to injury
 Main reasons behind determination

Duration of Final Duty (Article 11.1, 11.3)

An anti-dumping duty shall remain in force only as long as and to the extent necessary to
counteract dumping which is causing injury. Any definitive anti-dumping duty shall be
terminated on a date not later than five years from its imposition.
 CHAPTER III

SUBSTANTIVE ISSUES

Domestic Industry (Article 4.1, Rule 2.zha)

Bangladeshi industrymeans the domestic producers in Bangladesh as a whole of the like products
or those of them whose collective output of the products constitutes a major proportion of the
total domestic production of those products.

Product under Consideration (PUC)

Product under consideration (PUC) in an anti-dumping investigation is the imported product
which is alleged as being dumped in the domestic market of the investigating country.

Period of Investigation (POI) and Injury Investigation Period (IIP) for Injury Analysis
The POI proposed in the application should be as latest as possible, and in any case not more
than six months old as on date of initiation. Injury investigation period is generally for three
immediate preceding years plus the POI selected for dumping margin analysis.

Like product (Article 2.6, Rule 2.ka)

Anti-dumping action can be taken only when there is a Bangladeshi industry which produces
“like products” when compared to the allegedly dumped imported goods. The product produced
in Bangladesh must either be identical to the dumped goods in all respects or in the absence of
such a product, another product that has characteristics closely resembling those goods.

Dumping (Article 2.1)

“Dumping” means export of goods by one country to the market of another country at a price
lower than the normal value. If the export price is lower than the normal value, it constitutes
dumping. Thus, there are two fundamental parameters used for determination of dumping,
namely, the normal value and the export price. Both these elements have to be compared at the
same level of trade, generally at ex-factory level, for assessment of dumping.

Export Price
Export price is the price paid or payable for the product under investigation (the IP) and is
normally measured at the ex-factory level of the exporter.The export price has to be determined
for the IP or the alleged dumped product. If it is alleged that the product is dumped from more
than one country, an export price will have to be determined in respect of each country. There
are different ways to determine the export price. Since the export price has to be determined at
the ex-factory level, the ideal is to obtain a price as close to this level as possible, as this not only
makes it easier to calculate the ex-factory export price, but is also more accurate. In cases where
several models or products form part of the investigation, domestic producers should strive to
obtain export prices for at least those models that represent a major proportion of the total
volume of alleged dumped exports to Bangladesh.

Normal Value (Article 2.1)

Normal value is normally the price at which the like product is sold in the domestic market of the
exporter. This price must be measured at the same level of trade as the IP, i.e. normally the ex-
factory level. Where the normal value cannot be determined with reference to the price on the
exporter’s domestic market, the normal value may be determined on the basis of the export price
from that country to any appropriate third country or on the basis of a constructed normal value
in the exporting country, i.e. the cost to produce and sell the like product on the exporter’s
domestic market, including a reasonable addition for profit.

Fair Comparison(Article 2.4, Rule-Annex 1.6 ka)

Inevitably, there are differences in the circumstances of export and domestic sales which affect
price comparability such as the conditions and term of sales, taxation, quantities and physical
characteristics. Therefore, in order to effect a fair comparison between the normal value and the
export price, these differences are accounted for in each case on its merits. It is only after these
adjustments have been made that there is a basis for fair comparison of the normal value and the
export price which will normally be compared at the same level of trade, normally at the ex-
factory level, and in respect of sales made at as nearly as possible the same time.

Margin of Dumping
Margin of dumping refers to the difference between the Normal Value of the like product and the
Export Price of the product under consideration. Margin of dumping is normally established on
the basis of :-
 a comparison of weighted average Normal Value with a weightedaverage of prices of
comparable export transactions; or
 comparison of normal values and export prices on a transaction to transaction basis.
Anti-dumping duty usually is based on the dumping margin calculated. The equation is shown
below:
Dumping Margin (DM) = Normal Value (NV) - Export Price (EP)
or{as percentage (%) of export price}

NV −EP
x 100% = DM
EP

Material Injury (Article 3, Rule 11)

In regard to injury to the domestic industry, the industry must be able to show that dumped
imports are causing or are threatening to cause “material injury” to the domestic
industry.Material retardation to the establishment of an industry is also regarded as injury. The
material injury or threat thereof cannot be based on mere allegation, statement or conjecture.
Sufficient evidence must be provided to support die contention of material injury. An
antidumping measure may not be imposed unless it is determined, pursuant to an investigation
conducted in conformity with the procedural requirements, that:

1. There is existence of dumped imports;

2. There is material injury to a domestic industry; and
3. There is a causal link between the dumped imports and the injury.

The basic requirement for determination of injury is that there is an objective examination, based
on positive evidence of the volume and price effects of dumped imports and the consequent
impact of dumped imports on the domestic industry such as decline in sales, selling price, market
shares, profits, production etc.

Causality (Article 3.5, Rule 11.2-Annex 2)

The establishment of the causal link between the dumping and injury to the domestic industry is
anessential conditionfor imposition of anti-dumping duty. A ‘causal link’ must exist between the
material injury being suffered by the domestic industry and the dumped imports. In addition,
other injury causes have to be investigated so that they are not attributed to dumping. Some of
these are volume and prices of imports not sold at dumped prices, contraction in demand or
changes in the pattern of consumption, export performance, productivity of the domestic industry
etc.
 CHAPTER IV
Review of Anti-dumping Duties
Any interested party may request a review. The request mustbe supported by evidence justifying
the need for a review. Areview involves a re-examination of the level of dumping,material injury
and/or the need for the continued existenceof anti-dumping duties.There are different types of
reviews, namely:

i. Sunset reviews (Article 11.2)

– Anti-dumping dutiesremain in place for a period of five (5) years after theimposition of the last
substantive (margin of dumping andinjury) review. Sunset reviews are intended to determine
whether there is a likelihood that the removal of the duty would lead to a continuation or
recurrence of injuriousdumping exports.

ii. Mid-Term reviews (Article 11.2, Rule 23)

- Reviews conducted during the period thatanti-dumping measures are in force, on the necessity
ofwhether to continue those measures in the original form andthe original level based on
evidence that circumstances suchas dumping margins have changed since the anti-
dumpingmeasures entered into force.

iii. New Shipper reviews (Article 9.5)

– This type of review is conducted onrequest in cases where an exporter in a country that
issubject to a residual anti-dumping duty, which did not exportto Bangladesh during the
original investigation period, wishes to start exporting to Bangladesh, and where such an
exporter is notrelated to any other party in the exporting country specificallycovered by the anti-
dumping duties. The purpose of thereview is to enable the new shipper to prove that it will not
bedumping the product on the Bangladeshi market

iv. Judicial Review (Article 13)

Members that adopt anti-dumping legislation must also maintainindependent judicial, arbitral, or
administrative tribunals or proceduresfor the purpose of prompt review of administrative actions
to finaldeterminations and reviews of determinations.

National procedures: Appeal to Appellate Tribunal (Section 18D)

An appeal against the order of determination or review thereof regarding the existence, degree
and effect of any dumping in relation to import of any goods shall lie to the Customs, Excise and
Value Added Tax Appellate Tribunal.

(2) Every appeal shall be filed within ninety days of the date of order under appeal:

Provided that the Appellate Tribunal may entertain any appeal after the expiry of the said period
of ninety days, if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing
the appeal in time.

(3) The Appellate Tribunal may, after giving the parties to the appeal, an opportunity of being
heard, pass such orders thereon as it thinks fit, confirming, modifying or annulling the order
appealed against.

(4) Every appeal shall be heard by a special Bench constituted by the President of the Appellate
Tribunal for hearing such appeals and such Bench shall consist of the President and not less than
two members and shall include one technical member and one judicial member.
 CHAPTER V

Anti-circumvention investigation

An anti-circumvention investigation is an investigation into whether certain activities are

occurring with the intention of avoiding or reducing dumping duties.

Circumvention activities take various forms and exploit different aspects of the anti-dumping
system. The outcome of these activities is that they ensure that the relevant goods do not attract
the intended dumping duty. Circumvention activities include:

 slight modification of goods

 assembly of parts in importing country;
 assembly of parts in a third country;
 export of goods through one or more third countries;
 arrangements between exporters;

The full anti-dumping investigation process is as outlined below:

 PRE-INITIATION PROCEDURE

Receive application

Identify deficiencies and

send deficiency letter

Deficiencies addressed
(properly documented
application)

16 days

Article 5.3 adequacy and

accuracy investigation

Factory visit and Obtain and study NBR Internet research on

applicant verification statistics product, exporters, etc

Visit Customs Houses to

obtain copies of invoices
for importer details,
exporter details and
actual export prices

24 days

Article 5.5 notification to

exporting countries

Decision to initiate

7 days

Decision not to initiate:

reasons to applicant Initiation

same day

Article 6.1.1 notification

to all interested parties
 PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION
PROCEDURE

Initiation

same
day

Article 6.1.1 notification

to all interested parties

51 days

Obtain interested party

responses

7 days

Analysis of information,
issue deficiency letters

47 days

Verify all information

Oral hearings (on site/desktop)

24 days

Preliminary
determination
 Affirmative preliminary
Negative preliminary determination:
determination: Imposition of
termination of preliminary measures
investigation (max 6 months)

1 day

Issue preliminary report

to all interested parties
 FINAL INVESTIGATION PROCEDURE

Issue preliminary report to all interested

parties

14 days

Receive comments on preliminary report

7 days

Obtain interested party responses

14 days

Essential facts finding

Same day

Essential facts letter to all interested parties

7 days

Comments from interested parties

14 days

Negative final
determination: termination Affirmative final: Recommendation to MoC to
of investigation impose definitive duties for 5 years

7 days 7 days

Submit final report with recommendation

to MoC

14 days

MoC's request to NBR to impose definitive

anti-dumping duties

7 days
Issue final report to all interested parties