India has filed an appeal against certain portions of a recent ruling passed by the World Trade Organisation in a case related to imposition of penal duties by the US on steel exports by Indian companies.

While the dispute panel’s report favoured India in its observation that the US’ determination of countervailing duties (CVD) – a levy to neutralise Government subsidies – on high grade iron ore breached WTO rules, it rejected a number of objections raised by New Delhi on specific technical issues related to how penal duties are to be calculated and how a public body is to be defined.

In its notice of appeal against the panel ruling, India has asked for re-consideration of the panel’s decision to reject the challenges it had posed to the US method of calculating countervailing duties.

“There are a few areas which we want the WTO Appellate Body to consider like how a public body is defined. That is an important area. Besides, there are several smaller issues of interpretation,” Rajeev Kher, Commerce Secretary, said in an interaction with the media on Tuesday.

Indian steel companies such as Tata and Essar have been hit hard by CVD ranging from 18 per cent to 500 per cent imposed by the US on carbon steel from India for more than a decade. This has reduced Indian steel exports to the US to almost zero.

CVD has been imposed by the US on the ground that iron ore sourced by Indian steelmakers from public sector NMDC is supplied at subsidised rate because it is government-owned. In a case filed before the WTO in 2012, India rejected the claim and argued that NMDC always sells at the prevailing market prices which are determined by their exports to Japan and South Korea.

The WTO also ruled in India’s favour in the way it decided to define a ‘public body’. However, according to a statement on the web-site of the US Trade Representative, the WTO rejected a number of Indian challenges which included challenges to over 300 instances of the use of ‘facts available’ and challenges to the US’ benchmark calculations and inclusion of new subsidy programmes in countervailing duty review proceedings.

The USTR had earlier said that it too would consider the option of challenging the panel report where it was observed that the US was in breach of WTO rules.

Related Topics