3. Methodologies/Definitions
   
   
   13. De Minimis Provsions
       
       
       b. Countervail
       

       WTO Standard: An application [. . . ] shall be rejected and an investigation shall be terminated promptly as soon as the authorities concerned are satisfied that there is not sufficient evidence of either subsidization or of injury to justify proceeding in the case. There shall be immediate termination in cases where the amount of a subsidy is de minimis, or that the volume of subsidized imports, actual or potential, or the injury, is negligible. [. . . ] the amount of the subsidy shall be considered to be de minimis if the subsidy is less than 1 per cent ad valorem. (SCM Agreement, Art. 11.9)

       Any countervailing duty investigation of a product in question originating in a developing country Member shall be terminated as soon as the authorities concerned determine that:

       (a) the overall level of subsidies granted upon the product in question does not exceed 2 per cent of its value calculated on a per unit basis; or

       (b) the volume of the subsidized imports represents less than 4 per cent of the total imports of the like product in the importing Member, unless imports from developing country Members whose individual shares of total imports represents less than 4 per cent collectively account for more than 9 per cent of the total imports of the like product in the importing Member. (AD Agreement, Art. 27.10)

       For [certain] developing country Members [...] which have eliminated export subsidies prior to the expiry of the period of eight years from the date of entry into force of the WTO Agreement, and for those developing country Members referred to in Annex VII, [the de minimis subsidy rate] shall be 3 per cent rather than 2 per cent. This provision shall apply from the date that the elimination of export subsidies is notified to the Committee, and for so long as export subsidies are not granted by the notifying developing country Member. This provision shall expire eight years from the date of entry into force of the WTO Agreement. (SCM Agreement, Art. 27.11)

Argentina | Bolivia | Brazil | Canada | Chile | Colombia | Costa Rica | Dominican Republic | Ecuador | El Salvador | Guatemala | Honduras | Jamaica | Mexico | Nicaragua | Panama | Paraguay | Peru | Saint Lucia | Trinidad & Tobago | United States | Uruguay | Venezuela

Argentina

   The definition of de minimis subsidy margin is the one contained in the Agreement.

   However, Article 48 of Decree 2121/94, provides that, if at any time during a subsidy investigation, the Secretariat of Trade, Industry, and Mining concludes that there is not sufficient evidence of subsidization or injury, or that the margin of subsidization or the volume of actual or potential imports are negligible, the investigation shall be terminated immediately.

Bolivia

   Subsidies not exceeding 1 percent ad valorem shall be disregarded.

Brazil

   The amount of countervailable subsidy is considered de minimis if it is less than one percent ad valorem. Art. 21-8.

   For developing countries, the amount of countervailable subsidy is considered de minimis if the overall level of countervailable subsidies granted upon the product in question does not exceed two percent ad valorem. (Dec. 1751/95 Art. 21.9).

   For those developing countries that have eliminated export subsidies prior to the expiry of the period of eight years the date of entry into force of the WTO Agreement and for the least developing countries listed in Annex IV of the law, the amount of countervailable subsidy will be considered de minimis if the overall level of countervailable subsidies granted upon the product in question does not exceed three percent ad valorem. (Dec. 1751/95 - Art. 21.10, 21.11, 21.12).

   The volume of subsidized imports from an individual country shall normally be considered as negligible if the volume of subsidized imports account for less than three per cent of imports of the like product in Brazil, unless countries which individually account for less than 3 percent of the imports of the like product in Brazil collectively account for more than 7 percent of imports of the like product.

   For developing countries, the volume of subsidized imports from an individual country shall normally be considered as negligible if the volume of subsidized imports account for less than four percent of imports of the like product in Brazil, unless countries which individually account for less than 4 percent of the imports of the like product in Brazil collectively account for more than 9 per cent of imports of the like product. (Dec. 1751/95 - Art. 21.3 and 21.4).

Canada

   For purposes of calculating an amount of subsidy, section 2 of the SIMA defines insignificant as an amount of subsidy that is less than one percent of the export price of the goods.

   With respect to subsidized goods from developing countries, subsection 42(4) requires the Canadian International Trade Tribunal to take into account the provisions of paragraph 12 of Article 27 of the Subsidies Agreement.

   See also the discussion of negligible imports for injury purposes under "De Minimis Provisions -- Antidumping" section, above.

Chile

The Commission shall reject a petition and terminate the investigation without delay, if it finds that the evidence of subsidy or of injury is insufficient to justify continuation of the proceedings. Where the amount of the subsidy is de minimis, or the volume of actual or potential imports of subsidized goods or the degree of injury is not significant, it shall terminate the investigation immediately. The amount of subsidy shall be deemed de minimis if it less than 1 per cent ad valorem. (Supreme Decree No. 16. Ministry of External Relations, published in the Diario Oficial on May 17, 1995).

Colombia

   The amount of the subsidy shall be considered de minimis if it is less than 1 percent ad valorem.

Costa Rica

   An application [...] shall be rejected and an investigation shall be terminated promptly as soon as the authorities concerned are satisfied that there is not sufficient evidence of either subsidization or of injury to justify proceeding with the case.

   There shall be immediate termination in cases where the amount of the subsidy is de minimis, or where the volume of subsidized imports, actual or potential, or the injury is negligible. [...] the amount of the subsidy shall be considered to be de minimis if the subsidy is less than 1 per cent ad valorem.

   Any countervailing duty investigation of a product originating in a developing Member shall be terminated as soon as the authorities concerned determine that:

         (a) the overall level of subsidies granted upon the product in question does not exceed 2 per cent of its value/calculated on a per unit basis; or

         (b) the volume of the subsidized imports represents less than 4 per cent of the total imports for the like product in the importing Member, unless imports from developing country Members whose individual shares of total import represent less than 4 per cent collectively account for more than 9 per cent of the total imports for the like product in the importing country.

Dominican Republic

Ecuador

   Same provisions as in the previous section.

El Salvador

   There is no specific provision but El Salvador applies the rules in accordance with the WTO Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Agreements.

Guatemala

   When the amount of dumping or subsidy is less than 1 percent ad valorem it shall be deemed insignificant, and the investigation shall be terminated. (Central American Regulations on Unfair Business Practices and Safeguard Clause, Chapter 4, Art. 21).

Honduras

   When the amount of dumping or subsidy is less than 1 percent ad valorem it shall be deemed insignificant, and the investigation shall be terminated. (Central American Regulations on Unfair Business Practices and Safeguard Clause, Chapter 4, Art. 21).

Jamaica

(1) Where at any time before making a preliminary determination in an investigation relating to the dumping or subsidizing of goods

         (a) the Commission is satisfied, in respect of some or all of those goods that

               (i) there is insufficient evidence of dumping to justify proceeding with the investigation in relation thereto; or

               (ii) the margin of dumping is de minimis or that the volume of dumped imports actual or potential, or the injury, is negligible;

         (b) the Commission comes to the conclusion, in respect of some or all of those goods, that the evidence does not disclose a reasonable indication that the dumping or subsidizing thereof has caused or is likely to cause material injury, the Commission shall act in accordance with subsection (2).

(2) The Commission shall

         (a) cause the investigation to be terminated with respect to the goods in respect of which it is satisfied as mentioned in subsection (1)(a) or has come to the conclusion referred to in subsection (1)(b); and

         (b) cause notice of the termination to be given and published as provided in section 25.

   For the purposes of subsection (1)(a) the margin of dumping shall be considered to be de minimis if it is less than two per cent, expressed as a percentage of the export price; (b) the volume of dumped imports shall normally be regarded as negligible if the volume of dumped imports from a particular country is found to account for less than three per cent of imports of the like product in Jamaica, unless countries which individually account for less than three per cent of imports of the like products collectively account for more than seven per cent of imports of the like product.

Mexico

   The Law and the Regulations do not expressly establish which de minimis margins are to be observed by the Secretariat.

   Nevertheless, in view of the contents of item 2.I.B of this document, the Secretariat must observe the provisions of Article 5.8 of the Antidumping Agreement (2%) and Article 11.9 of the GATT Agreement on Subsidies (1%).

Nicaragua

Panama

Paraguay

Peru

Santa Lucia

Trinidad and Tobago

United States

   A countervailable subsidy is generally considered de minimis if Commerce determines that the aggregate net countervailable subsidy is less than 1% ad valorem.

   In cases involving merchandise from developing countries, however, an aggregate net countervailable subsidy of less than 2% ad valorem is de minimis.

   Finally, in cases involving merchandise from certain specified eligible developing countries, an aggregate net countervailable subsidy of less than 3% ad valorem is regarded as de minimis.

   These de minimis standards are applicable only to the investigation phase of the proceeding; the 0.5% de minimis standard applied under pre-URAA law applies in reviews of CVD orders.

Uruguay

Venezuela

Continue to Margin of Dumping