Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorPRUSA, Thomas J.
dc.contributor.authorVERMULST, Edwin
dc.date.accessioned2019-10-14T13:55:54Z
dc.date.available2019-10-14T13:55:54Z
dc.date.issued2019
dc.identifier.issn1028-3625
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1814/64550
dc.description.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.en
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdfen
dc.language.isoenen
dc.publisherEuropean University Instituteen
dc.relation.ispartofseriesEUI RSCASen
dc.relation.ispartofseries2019/83en
dc.relation.ispartofseriesGlobal Governance Programme-372en
dc.relation.ispartofseriesGlobal Economicsen
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessen
dc.subjectGlobal safeguarden
dc.subjectBound tariffen
dc.subjectGalvalumeen
dc.subject.otherTrade, investment and international cooperationen
dc.subject.otherRegulation and economic policyen
dc.titleIndonesia – safeguard on certain iron or steel products : if it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it is not a ducken
dc.typeWorking Paperen


Files associated with this item

Icon

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record