*EPF210 02/04/2003
Excerpt: Bush Proposes Repeal of "Byrd Amendment" on Antidumping Duties
(Administration has said it aims to comply with WTO ruling) (340)

The Bush administration is urging Congress to repeal a provision of antidumping law called the Byrd amendment after a final January ruling by the World Trade Organization (WTO) that it violated U.S. obligations.

The amendment -- formally called the Continued Dumping and Subsidy Offset Act of 2000 -- provides that antidumping duties collected by the U.S. government can be shared with domestic industries that successfully petitioned for relief from cheap dumped foreign imports.

President Bush's budget proposal for fiscal year 2004 (FY2004) urges repeal of the law, saying it amounts to a "corporate subsidy" and provides a "double-dip" benefit to industries that already benefit from the increased prices on competing import goods resulting from countervailing tariffs.

The budget proposal, which was submitted to Congress on February 3 and covers the fiscal year that begins October 1, says that the law annually pays about $230 million to complainants in antidumping and countervailing cases and that this money would be better directed to "higher priority uses."

The administration said it would seek to comply with the WTO ruling even though it defended the Byrd amendment as consistent with U.S. international obligations.

Any effort to repeal the amendment would face significant opposition in Congress although Senate Finance Chairman Charles Grassley has reportedly signaled his support for repeal.

Following is an excerpt of the administration's FY2004 budget proposal dealing with the Byrd amendment:

(begin excerpt)

The budget also proposes to repeal a Treasury-administered provision in the 2001 Agriculture Appropriations Act, the Continued Dumping and Subsidy Offset Act of 2000, that annually pays approximately $230 million to complainants in antidumping/countervailing-duty cases. These corporate subsidies effectively provide a significant "double-dip" benefit to industries that already gain protection from the increased import prices provided by countervailing tariffs. While the Administration does not believe that these payments are inconsistent with U.S. treaty obligations, repeal of the provision would allow the funds to be directed to higher priority uses.

(end excerpt)

(Distributed by the Office of International Information Programs, U.S. Department of State. Web site: http://usinfo.state.gov)

Return to Public File Main Page

Return to Public Table of Contents