In addition, we advise companies on risks and opportunities relating to trade remedies in the context of corporate mergers and acquisitions and foreign direct investment activities.

Sidley’s trade remedies professionals have appeared regularly before all of the regulatory agencies and courts, including, in the United States, the U.S. International Trade Commission, the Department of Commerce’s International Trade Administration, the Office of the United States Trade Representative, the U.S. Court of International Trade, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, and the U.S. Supreme Court. Likewise, in the EU, Sidley’s professionals appear regularly before the European Commission (DG Trade), the EU Member State trade ministries, and the European Courts and EU Member State courts in connection with trade remedy proceedings.

As some examples, we have:

• Assisted major steel producers in AD proceedings in other jurisdictions, including Thailand, and India;
• Advised importers and trade associations, as well as the Governments of Singapore, India, Colombia, China, Hong Kong and Pakistan on U.S. textile trade and other trade policy matters;
• Represented some of the largest steel producers in Western Europe, Korea, Malaysia, India and Colombia in numerous U.S. anti-dumping and countervailing duty cases, and other producer and consumer groups in Section 201 steel safeguards proceedings;
• Represented major Japanese and Korean electronics manufacturers in various U.S. anti-dumping proceedings on consumer electronics and high-tech products;
• Advised Hollywood studios in an unusual countervailing duty proceeding concerning the production of motion pictures in Canada;
• Advised a European steel manufacturer in its effort to obtain U.S. Supreme Court review of the controversial “zeroing” practice used by the U.S. Department of Commerce in calculating dumping margins, and represented that same company in the U.S. International Trade Commission’s “sunset” review of an applicable anti-dumping order;
• Represented exporting producers and major EU importers in the EU anti-dumping investigation of footwear from China and Vietnam;
• Advised a major Japanese producer in a number of EU investigations targeting TV camera systems, including an anti-circumvention investigation, and an investigation of TCS parts;
• Advised the association of EU steel producers in various EU anti-dumping investigations of ferro-alloys, and won the court-ordered annulment of duties imposed in one investigation;
• Prepared a report for the World Bank on the U.S. and EU treatment of non-market economies in trade remedy investigations;
• Represented major multinational groups with production in China and Korea in EU anti-dumping investigations of imports of their products; and
• Advised the Government of Norway in EU safeguard and anti-dumping investigations of farmed salmon, as well as in the related WTO dispute settlement actions.  

For a more detailed list of U.S. and EU cases in which we have participated, please click here.

In addition, because of Sidley’s unparalleled practice in WTO litigation, we have the unusual capability to advise clients in domestic trade remedy proceedings with an eye toward their evolution into WTO disputes. We have advised clients on the complex interaction of domestic and WTO law, and we have represented clients in U.S. and EU anti-dumping cases while coordinating the development of WTO strategy with their respective governments.

Trade remedies regimes have been proliferating around the globe in recent years. Countries that have historically been the targets of anti-dumping and countervailing duty proceedings in the United States and the EU – such as China, Egypt and Thailand – have enacted and now are busily employing their own unfair trade laws. Our lawyers have had experience in these countries’ expanding trade remedies practices, which can provide a significant benefit for clients with global sales and manufacturing strategies.