Abstract
AbstractIn July 2014, Indonesia implemented a safeguard tariff on galvalume, a type of galvanized flat-rolled steel. Chinese Taipei and Viet Nam challenged the measure, mainly claiming that Indonesia's administering authority failed to satisfy various substantive and procedural requirements of the GATT 1994 and the Safeguards Agreement. The Panel and AB found that the tariff was not a safeguard measure but rather was a simple increase in Indonesia's applied rate. Interestingly, Viet Nam, the largest import supplier, is a member of a free trade area with Indonesia, meaning Viet Nam is not subject to the MFN rate. Viet Nam's preferential tariff treatment likely influenced Indonesia's decision to claim the action was a safeguard. Ironically, even though the Appellate Body essentially rejected its claims, the ruling benefits Viet Nam.
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
