H.R. 2714House110th Congress (2007-2009)In Committee

To require the President to delay or reverse the implementation of a decision of a World Trade Organization dispute settlement panel or the Appellate Body that is adverse to the United States involving the calculation of dumping margins and weighted average dumping margins, and for other purposes.

Introduced June 14, 2007

Legislative Activity

Stay on top of the latest movement without scrolling through every action

2 earlier actions
HouseCommittee Latest Action

Referred to the Subcommittee on Trade.

June 18, 2007

View full timeline
HouseIntro Referral

Introduced in House

June 14, 2007

HouseIntro Referral

Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.

June 14, 2007

HouseCommittee

Referred to the Subcommittee on Trade.

June 18, 2007

Floor Debate

1 member

What members said about H.R. 2714 on the floor

1 Democrat
Nancy E. Boyda
Rep. Nancy E. BoydaD-KS-2 · Apr 29, 2008

Madam Speaker, I would like to commend the state of Kansas for passing the Interstate Compact on Educational Opportunity for Military Children Kansas (Kansas House Bill 2714). Military parents, like…

Bill Text

Latest available legislative text

Reading Mode
Latest
Introduced in HouseIssued June 14, 2007

I

110th CONGRESS

1st Session

H. R. 2714

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

June 14, 2007

Mr. Barrett of South Carolina (for himself, Mr. Regula, Mr. Spratt, and Mr. Neal of Massachusetts) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

A BILL

To require the President to delay or reverse the implementation of a decision of a World Trade Organization dispute settlement panel or the Appellate Body that is adverse to the United States involving the calculation of dumping margins and weighted average dumping margins, and for other purposes.

1.

Amendments to the Uruguay Round Agreements Act

(a)

Dispute settlement panels and procedures

Section 123 of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (19 U.S.C. 3533) is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:

(i)

Delay or reversal of implementation of adverse decisions

Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, the President shall delay or reverse the implementation of a decision of a dispute settlement panel or the Appellate Body that is adverse to the United States involving the calculation of dumping margins and weighted average dumping margins (commonly known as zeroing decisions) until the United States has obtained clarification of rights and obligations within WTO multilateral negotiations such that historic practices of the United States are permitted in investigations under section 731 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1673), reviews under section 751 of such Act (19 U.S.C. 1675), and under any other phase of an antidumping proceeding.

.

(b)

Administrative action following WTO panel reports

Section 129(b) of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (19 U.S.C. 3538(b)) is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:

(5)

Delay or reversal of implementation of adverse decisions

Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, the President shall delay or reverse the implementation of a decision of a dispute settlement panel or the Appellate Body that is adverse to the United States involving the calculation of dumping margins and weighted average dumping margins (commonly known as zeroing decisions) until the United States has obtained clarification of rights and obligations within WTO multilateral negotiations such that historic practices of the United States are permitted in investigations under section 731 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1673), reviews under section 751 of such Act (19 U.S.C. 1675), and under any other phase of an antidumping proceeding.

.

2.

Amendment to the Tariff Act of 1930

Paragraph (7) of section 771 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1677) is amended by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:

(J)

Additional requirements

In evaluating whether there is material injury, or threat thereof, by reason of imports of the subject merchandise, the Commission shall make its determination without regard to—

(i)

whether other imports are likely to replace subject imports; or

(ii)

the effect of a potential order on the domestic industry.

.