墨西哥反倾销.pdfVIP

Discussion draft: not to be cited or quoted Without author’s express consent Antidumping/Countervailing Duty Law and Practice in Mexico * David A. Gantz This paper begins with a short history of trade remedy laws in Mexico, followed by a brief summary of the major differences with the United States and Canadian antidumping and countervailing duty laws and an account of Mexican use of such laws since 1986. It then focuses on the application of the Foreign Trade Law (FTL) (revised through 2006) 1 2 and the implementing regulations (FTL Regulations) (2000). The paper concludes with a discussion of administrative and judicial review; NAFTA Chapter 19 review is discussed elsewhere. While we are well aware that under the Mexican legal system decisional law is not controlling, we have nevertheless drawn on the decisions of Mexican courts, the WTO Dispute Settlement Body and NAFTA Chapter 19 binational panels, as well as final determinations by the investigating authority as an aid to understanding how the FTL and FTL Regulations have been applied in practice. 1 Historical Development 1.1 Accession to GATT Unlike the United States and Canada, Mexico does not have a long history of the implementation of antidumping and countervailing duty laws. Rather, the enactment of these laws coincided with Mexico’s accession to GATT in 1986. Prior to 1986, Mexico’s was primarily a closed economy. High tariffs and the extensive use of import quotas protected high-cost, inefficient local industry; there was no need for antidumping or countervailing duty laws to provide additional protection.3 As Craig Giesze has observed, Ad valorem tariff