加拿大诉日本关于云杉松规格木材进口税案

V. FINDINGS

5.1 Under its terms of reference established by the Council the Panel had to examine a complaint

by Canada that the application of a tariff duty of 8 per cent on imports of spruce-pine-fir (SPF)

dimension lumber by Japan is not in conformity with the provisions of Article I:1 of the General

Agreement and nullifies and impairs benefits accruing to Canada under the General Agreement,

SPF dimension lumber being a

entering Japan with zero duty.

5.2 The Panel noted that Heading No. 4407.10 of the Japanese Tariff was defined in

conformity with the International Convention on the Harmonized Commodity Description

and Coding System of 14 June 1983 (hereinafter called the Harmonized System) as follows:

4407

sanded or finger-jointed, of a thickness exceeding 6 mm

4407.10

5.3 The Panel further noted that the dispute before the Panel largely focused on the consistency

with Article I:1 of the 8 per cent tariff imposed by Japan under sub- position 4407.10-110 of the

Japanese Tariff:

4407.10-110 1.

pacific silver fir) or Picea spp, (other than Sitka spruce), not more than 160mm in thickness, (1)

planed or sanded.

5.4 According to Canada, Article I:1 required Japan to accord also to SPF dimension lumber the

advantage

of

the

zero

tariff

granted

by

Japan,

under

sub-position

4407.10-320

of

its

Tariff,

to

planed

and

sanded

lumber

of

coniferous

trees,

including

the

genera

cedar

and

other

Chamaecyparis, hemlock (Tsuga), and douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga), and five species excluded from

sub-position No. 4407.10-110.

5.5

The

Panel

noted

that

the

tariff

classification

for

4407.10-110

had

been

established

autonomously by Japan, without negotiation.

5.6 The terms of Article I:1, as far as they are relevant to the issue, read as follows:

General Most-Favored Nation Treatment

contracting party to any product originating in ... any other country ... shall be accorded ... to the

like product originating in ... all other contracting parties.

5.7

In

view

of

analyzing

the

factual

situation

submitted

to

it

under

its

terms

of

reference,

the

Panel had first to consider the legal framework in which the Canadian complaint had been raised.

In substance, Canada complains of the fact that Japan had arranged its tariff classification in such

a

way

that

a

considerable

part

of

Canadian

exports

of

SPF

dimension

lumber

to

Japan

was

submitted to a customs duty of 8 per cent, whereas other comparable types of dimension lumber

enjoy the advantage of a zero- tariff duty. The Panel considered it impossible to appreciate fully

the Canadian complaint if it had not in a preliminary way clarified the bearing of some principles

of the GATT- system in relation to tariff structure and tariff classification.

5.8

The

Panel

noted

in

this

respect

that

the

General

Agreement

left

wide

discretion

to

the

contracting parties in relation to the structure of national tariffs and the classification of goods

in the framework of such structure

(see the report of the Panel on Tariff Treatment of Unroasted

Coffee, BISD 28S/102, at III, paragraph 4.4). The adoption of the Harmonized System, to which

both Canada and Japan have adhered, had brought about a large measure of harmonization in