This paper analyzes the Australia – Anti-Dumping Measures on A4 Copy Paper panel report, the second recent WTO dispute to involve a challenge to Indonesia's paper industry. The Indonesian paper industry benefits from reduced-cost inputs because of the Indonesian government's influence and subsidies over the timber and pulp market. The report offers the first interpretation of ‘particular market situation’ under Article 2.2 of the WTO's Anti-Dumping Agreement. At the same time, it raises questions regarding the appropriateness of using anti-dumping measures to address what are fundamentally subsidy issues. While the panel ultimately found that Australia's measure was inconsistent with Article 2.2, the paper shows that the panel's interpretation of ‘particular market situation’ increases the relative attractiveness of using anti-dumping duties instead of countervailing measures. Two key points on the welfare implications of the decision can be made. The first relates to the motivations of the Australian paper industry and the imperfectly competitive market in which Australian Paper operates. The second is the importance of challenging subsidies rather than imposing anti-dumping duties where the subsidies in question have negative environmental effects.

中文翻译：

---

澳大利亚——针对 A4 复印纸的反倾销措施：为更多反倾销调查打开大门

本文分析了澳大利亚——针对 A4 复印纸的反倾销措施专家小组报告，最近的第二起世贸组织争端涉及对印度尼西亚造纸业的挑战。由于印尼政府对木材和纸浆市场的影响和补贴，印尼造纸业受益于成本投入降低。该报告首次对世贸组织《反倾销协定》第2.2条下的“特定市场情况”做出了解释。同时，它提出了关于使用反倾销措施解决基本补贴问题的适当性的问题。虽然专家组最终认定澳大利亚的措施不符合第 2.2 条，但该文件表明，专家组对“特定市场情况”的解释增加了使用反倾销税而非反补贴措施的相对吸引力。关于该决定的福利影响，可以提出两个关键点。第一个与澳大利亚纸业的动机和澳大利亚纸业经营所在的不完全竞争市场有关。第二个是对补贴提出质疑而不是在相关补贴对环境产生负面影响时征收反倾销税的重要性。