Effective EU enforcement is critical for the European steel industry often facing situations wherein foreign steel producing exporting countries do not respect the fundamental obligations they have taken under WTO and FTA commitments.
The current enforcement regulation, in existence since 2014, allows the European Commission to impose countermeasures after the EU has won a dispute settlement proceeding in the WTO or under a bilateral EU trade agreement. The EU can adopt countermeasures only at the end of a dispute settlement procedure, having received an authorisation from the WTO.
However, as of 11 December 2019, the binding WTO Dispute Settlement system is no longer functioning. The failure of WTO Members to agree to appoint new members to the WTO Appellate Body means that a WTO Member can escape from a binding ruling, and hence the authorisation to adopt countermeasures against it, by simply appealing a panel report.
EUROFER welcomes the Commission’s proposal (December 2019) to upgrade the EU Enforcement Regulation as part of a new priority to strengthen enforcement of the EU’s rights under international trade rules. The European steel industry needs an effective dispute settlement/arbitration system including the possibility to appeal.
EUROFER also believes that already upon initiation of a dispute settlement or arbitrage procedure by the EU, interim measures should be possible in case of manifest violation of international trade rules putting at stake the commercial interests of the EU.
Brussels, 16 August 2023 – On 14 August, the Commission initiated two anti-circumvention investigations regarding possible circumvention via Taiwan, Turkey and Vietnam of the anti-dumping and anti-subsidy measures imposed in 2021 and 2022 against imports of stainless steel cold rolled flat products from Indonesia. EUROFER welcomes the openings and the immediate registration of the imports from those countries towards a possible retroactive application of the existing duties.
Brussels, 7 June 2023 – EUROFER applauds the joint efforts of the European Antifraud Office (OLAF) and of the European Public Prosecutor Office (EPPO) in ensuring the enforcement of trade defence instruments (TDIs). OLAF concluded that an EU importer was avoiding the payment of anti-dumping duties by means of untruthful import declarations. The total amount of financial damage across the EU amounts to 6.5 million EUR with possible additional financial and criminal consequences.
New global reality requires disruptive thinking and innovative measures