The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.
© 2019 AFPJapan wins partial WTO victory in S Korea duties case
By Jung Yeon-je GENEVA©2025 GPlusMedia Inc.
The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.
© 2019 AFP
22 Comments
Login to comment
Ganbare Japan!
South Koreas tit-for-tat trade "retaliation" on Japan, by putting huge import tax on Japanese goods, has failed badly!!
Excellent decision, thanks WTO, THANK-YOU!
kwatt
Japanese pneumatic valves seem to have better quality as sold good in SK.
kurisupisu
It is up to any sovereign country to impose any amount of duty on any import.
Japan most certainly does....
Strangerland
Yes, because everything exists in a vacuum, and there are no pre-existing trade agreements anywhere.
facepalm.
itsonlyrocknroll
Compromise comes at a cost.
It is time to weight up that cost and step back, this could mean that the South Korean President Moon Jae-in use his executive powers and refrain from future political interference in the juridical system.
South Korean President Moon Jae-in is the issue here.
Triring
The latter half of this article has nothing to do with the WTO ruling and yet the write forces it in.
As stated in the former half, this dispute started in 2015.
Hachidori
South Korea:” Omona! B..But...Japan has yet to atone for the atrocities committed during WW2! Japan cannot ne trusted! Lets boycott Japanese goods! Let’s built a statue with the leftover pneumatics valves! Let’s make Goryo Great again! “
/S
Samit Basu
https://www.usnews.com/news/business/articles/2019-09-10/south-korea-to-file-wto-complaint-over-japan-trade-curbs
Samit Basu
The WTO threw out 12 of 13 claims made by Japan.
The only Japanese claim the WTO upheld was the error in the formula used to calculate dumping price.
Accordingly, the ROK will continue to levy anti-dumping tariff on Japanese valves based on revised formula in accordance with the WTO ruling.
Heckleberry
@Samit - Not that I care too much about the valve export issue ( I've never heard about it until today), but if what you're saying is true - then LOL at the headline.
Tom Doley
You don't seem to realize that you are blindly following another one of Abe's fake propaganda. I’ve posted this comment from ex PM Hatoyama before and will post again for latecomers like you. The problem with your comment is that all your previous governments admitted that individual rights to claim were not extinguished by the 1965 treaty. It is the Abe government that has back-flipped on this issue.
Heckleberry
@Ganbare - did you read the article? Case was brought to WTO in 2015.
Plus, see the comment by Samit Basu above..
Triring
Samit BasuToday 01:16 pm JST
Actually the detail in full of the rulings goes like this;
https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/504r_e.pdf
Japan only made 5 arguments;
7.97. In its panel request, Japan asserts that Korea's measures are inconsistent with Articles 3.1 and 3.2 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement,
7.99. Specifically with respect to the KTC's price suppression analysis, Japan alleges two additional errors:
7.100. Japan also argues that the KTC failed to consider the counterfactual question of how prices and volumes might have been different in the absence of dumping
7.101. Finally, Japan asserts that, in its price effect analysis, the KTC failed to ensure comparability between the prices of specific products or product segments of the dumped imports and the domestic like product
7.8.3.4 Conclusion on the Panel's terms of reference
7.244. For the reasons stated above, we conclude that:
a. Japan's first causation claim is within the Panel's terms of reference;
b. Japan's second causation claim is within the Panel's terms of reference; and
c. Japan's third causation claim is within the Panel's terms of reference only to the extent that it alleges that certain other known factors were examined by the KTC in an inadequate manner. All other allegations regarding the examination of other known factors are not within the Panel's terms of reference for this dispute, and we will neither consider them further nor resolve them.
TARA TAN KITAOKA
Trade involves people's life, no too wise to play with trade.
Samit Basu
https://en.yna.co.kr/view/AEN20190911000700325
WTO finds Korean anti-dumping tariff on Japanese pneumatic valves is legal under WTO rules.
WTO finds faults in the formula used to calculate the price differences used in tariff calculations.
The anti-dumping tariff on Japanese pneumatic valves will remain, but at a different rate.
Since Japan failed to remove the anti-dumping tariffs, Japan lost.nigelboy
Irrelevant. It's not a numbers game. It's the final determination and recommendation by the Appellate Body that counts.
"....8.5. Pursuant to Article 3.8 of the DSU, in cases where there is infringement of the obligations assumed under a covered agreement, the action is considered prima facie to constitute a case of nullification or impairment of benefits under that agreement. Accordingly, to the extent Korea has acted inconsistently with certain provisions of the Anti-Dumping Agreement, we conclude that Korea has nullified or impaired benefits accruing to Japan under that Agreement.
8.2 Recommendation
8.6. Pursuant to Article 19.1 of the DSU, having found that Korea acted inconsistently with certain provisions of the Anti-Dumping Agreement, we recommend that Korea bring its measures into conformity with its obligations under that Agreement....."
The report of the Appellate Body will be officially adopted by the WTO Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) within 30 days.
Japan demands that the ROK to promptly implement the recommendations presented in the report and to immediately eliminate its measure (anti-dumping duties) that the Appellate Body determined to be inconsistent with the Anti-Dumping Agreement.
Japan will have a right to invoke countermeasures in line with the procedures under the WTO Agreement if the ROK fails to implement the WTO recommendations.
https://www.meti.go.jp/english/press/2019/0911_001.html
saitamaliving
Lol, not even the biased Korean newspapers could count up that much. Also they didn't go into detail. Fact is that the anti dumping tarrifs in general are wrong, the other side points where just accessory. Forgt about those side points, but what do I talk, read the report: https://www.wto.org/english/news_e/news19_e/504abr_e.htm (I recommend the full version).
Since this decision is on a case that started in 2015 (by SK) and has nothing really to do with the current development between those two countries, I wouldn't call that a tit-for-tat behavior, it's rather as a lot of tats from SK.
slowguy2
Yup, the SK government has already announced it does not intend to drop the taxes! :)
slowguy2
^^SK is not compelled to repeal the taxes, and so there will be no repeal. Excellent decision, thanks WTO, THANK YOU!
slowguy2
"Partial victory" = Japanese for the WTO sided with South Korea. Again^^
Triring
slowguy2Today 06:38 am JST
Here is the actually recommendation made by WTO
Doesn't look as if WTO sided with SK by any measure and SK is required to repeal it's taxes to conform with WTO's recommendations.
https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/504r_e.pdf