[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 120 (Thursday, September 11, 1997)]
[Senate]
[Pages S9212-S9213]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. INOUYE (for himself and Mr. Akaka):
  S. 1167. A bill to amend the Tariff Act of 1930 to clarify the method 
for calculating cost of production for purposes of determining 
antidumping margins; to the Committee on Finance.


 THE TARIFF ACT OF 1930 ANTIDUMPING CLARIFICATION AMENDMENT ACT OF 1997

  Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I rise to introduce legislation that would 
make very minor changes to the antidumping provisions of the Tariff Act 
of 1930. This bill will clarify Commerce Department authority to 
allocate costs in antidumping cases consistent with sound accounting 
principles and commercial reality. Although the antidumping law 
generally affords the Commerce Department wide latitude in determining 
proper cost allocations in antidumping cases, developing case law in 
this area severely limits the ability of the Department to calculate 
accurate dumping margins. Specifically, these cases interpret the 
current antidumping statute to prevent the Department from relying on 
cost allocations based on revenues, even though revenue-based 
allocations are widely accepted in the accounting profession and often 
are most appropriate in particular fact situations.
  This bill would not require a particular kind of cost allocation in 
any given case. Rather, the proposal would clarify the Department of 
Commerce's authority to use any appropriate cost allocation 
methodology, including a revenue-based methodology, consistent with 
generally accepted accounting principles and the particular facts of 
the case at hand.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 1167

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. CLARIFICATION OF RULES FOR CALCULATING COST OF 
                   PRODUCTION AND CONSTRUCTED VALUE.

       Section 773(f)(1)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 
     1677b(f)(1)(A)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``Costs'' and inserting ``(i) Calculation 
     of costs.--Costs'';
       (2) by striking ``The Administering authority'' and 
     inserting ``(ii) Allocation of costs.--
       ``(I) General rule.--The administering authority'';
       (3) by indenting the text so as to align clauses (i) and 
     (ii) (as added by paragraphs (1) and (2)) with clause (i) of 
     subparagraph (C) of such section 773(f)(1)); and
       (4) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(II) Methods for allocating cost of production.--In 
     determining the proper allocation of costs, the administering 
     authority may use value-based methodology, weight-based cost 
     methodology, or any other methodology that is consistent with 
     generally accepted accounting principles of the exporter

[[Page S9213]]

     country (or producing country, where appropriate) and that 
     reasonably reflects the costs associated with the production 
     and sale of each product.''.
       (b) Application to Canada and Mexico.--Pursuant to article 
     1902 of the North American Free Trade Agreement and section 
     408 of the North American Free Trade Agreement Implementation 
     Act, the amendments made by this section shall apply with 
     respect to goods from Canada and Mexico.
       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply with respect to--
       (1) investigations initiated--
       (A) on the basis of petitions filed under section 732(b) or 
     783(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930 after January 1, 1995; or
       (B) by the administering authority under section 732(a) of 
     such Act after such date;
       (2) reviews initiated under section 751 of such Act--
       (A) by the administering authority or the Commission on 
     their own initiative after such date; or
       (B) pursuant to a request filed after such date;
       (3) petitions filed under section 780 of such Act after 
     such date; and
       (4) inquiries initiated under section 781 of such Act--
       (A) by the administering authority on its initiative after 
     such date; or
       (B) pursuant to a request filed after such date.
                                 ______