Gregory W. Bowman (Mississippi College - School of Law); Nick Covelli (Canadian International Trade Tribunal); David A. Gantz (The University of Arizona); James E. Rogers (College of Law); Ihn-Ho Uhm (Canadian International Trade Tribunal (retired))

Abstract:

While much has been written on Canadian and United States antidumping and countervailing duty laws,2 there is a relative paucity of English-language literature on the antidumping and countervailing duty laws of Mexico.3 This is unfortunate, especially since Mexico is active in its use of these laws, and since the laws have undergone important recent amendments. This article is intended to rectify this imbalance, at least in part, and contribute to the comparative analysis of Mexican trade remedy laws with the antidumping and countervailing duty laws of its NAFTA partners in particular and other countries in general.

The article is organized as follows.  First, it discusses the historical development of Mexican antidumping and countervailing duty laws.  It also provides a summary of the   major differences between these and US and Canadian antidumping and countervailing duty laws, and accounts for Mexican use of such laws since 1986. Next, the article discusses the application of Mexico’s Foreign Trade Law (FTL), as revised through 2006,4 and its implementing regulations (the FTL Regulations of 2000).5 The analysis concludes with a discussion of  administrative and judicial review, and NAFTA Chapter 19 review, of  Mexican antidumping and countervailing duty determinations.  While under the Mexican legal system decisional law is not controlling, the analysis nevertheless draws on the decisions of Mexican courts, the World Trade Organization (WTO) Dispute Settlement Body (DSB), and NAFTA Chapter 19 binational panels, as well as on final determinations by the investigating authority in Mexico.  All of these are aids to understanding how the FTL and FTL Regulations have been applied in practice.