Canada–EFTA Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act (S.C. 2009, c. 6)
Full Document:
Assented to 2009-04-29
Marginal note:2001, c. 28, s. 21
18. Section 21.1 of the Act is replaced by the following:
Definition of “complaint”
21.1 In sections 23 to 30, “complaint” means a written complaint filed with the Tribunal under subsection 23(1), (1.01), (1.02), (1.03), (1.04), (1.05), (1.06), (1.07), (1.08), (1.09), (1.091) or (1.092) and, for the purposes of those subsections, a complaint is properly documented if the Tribunal is satisfied that it contains or is accompanied by the information required by section 23.
19. Section 23 of the Act is amended by adding the following after subsection (1.08):
Marginal note:Filing of complaint — Iceland Tariff
(1.09) Any domestic producer of goods that are like or directly competitive with any goods being imported into Canada and that are entitled to the Iceland Tariff, or any person or association acting on behalf of such a domestic producer, may file a written complaint with the Tribunal alleging that, as a result of that entitlement, the imported goods are being imported in such increased quantities and under such conditions as to alone constitute a cause of serious injury, or threat of serious injury, to domestic producers of like or directly competitive goods.
Marginal note:Filing of complaint — Norway Tariff
(1.091) Any domestic producer of goods that are like or directly competitive with any goods being imported into Canada and that are entitled to the Norway Tariff, or any person or association acting on behalf of such a domestic producer, may file a written complaint with the Tribunal alleging that, as a result of that entitlement, the imported goods are being imported in such increased quantities and under such conditions as to alone constitute a cause of serious injury, or threat of serious injury, to domestic producers of like or directly competitive goods.
Marginal note:Filing of complaint — Switzerland–Liechtenstein Tariff
(1.092) Any domestic producer of goods that are like or directly competitive with any goods being imported into Canada and that are entitled to the Switzerland–Liechtenstein Tariff, or any person or association acting on behalf of such a domestic producer, may file a written complaint with the Tribunal alleging that, as a result of that entitlement, the imported goods are being imported in such increased quantities and under such conditions as to alone constitute a cause of serious injury, or threat of serious injury, to domestic producers of like or directly competitive goods.
Marginal note:2001, c. 28, s. 23
20. Paragraph 25(2)(c) of the Act is replaced by the following:
(c) in the case of a complaint filed under subsection 23(1.03), (1.06), (1.08), (1.09), (1.091) or (1.092), send to the Minister a copy of the complaint and the information examined by the Tribunal in making its determination.
21. Paragraph 26(1)(a) of the Act is amended by striking out the word “or” at the end of subparagraph (i.8) and by adding the following after that subparagraph:
(i.9) in the case of a complaint filed under subsection 23(1.09), the goods that are entitled to the Iceland Tariff are, as a result of that entitlement, being imported in such increased quantities and under such conditions that they alone constitute a cause of serious injury, or threat of serious injury, to domestic producers of like or directly competitive goods,
(i.91) in the case of a complaint filed under subsection 23(1.091), the goods that are entitled to the Norway Tariff are, as a result of that entitlement, being imported in such increased quantities and under such conditions that they alone constitute a cause of serious injury, or threat of serious injury, to domestic producers of like or directly competitive goods,
(i.92) in the case of a complaint filed under subsection 23(1.092), the goods that are entitled to the Switzerland–Liechtenstein Tariff are, as a result of that entitlement, being imported in such increased quantities and under such conditions that they alone constitute a cause of serious injury, or threat of serious injury, to domestic producers of like or directly competitive goods, or
22. Subsection 27(1) of the Act is amended by striking out the word “or” at the end of paragraph (a.8) and by adding the following after that paragraph:
(a.9) in the case of a complaint filed under subsection 23(1.09), the goods that are entitled to the Iceland Tariff are, as a result of that entitlement, being imported in such increased quantities and under such conditions that they alone constitute a principal cause of serious injury, or threat of serious injury, to domestic producers of like or directly competitive goods;
(a.91) in the case of a complaint filed under subsection 23(1.091), the goods that are entitled to the Norway Tariff are, as a result of that entitlement, being imported in such increased quantities and under such conditions that they alone constitute a principal cause of serious injury, or threat of serious injury, to domestic producers of like or directly competitive goods;
(a.92) in the case of a complaint filed under subsection 23(1.092), the goods that are entitled to the Switzerland–Liechtenstein Tariff are, as a result of that entitlement, being imported in such increased quantities and under such conditions that they alone constitute a principal cause of serious injury, or threat of serious injury, to domestic producers of like or directly competitive goods; or
R.S., c. 1 (2nd Supp.)Customs Act
Marginal note:2001, c. 28, s. 26(1)
23. (1) The definitions “free trade agreement” and “free trade partner” in subsection 2(1) of the Customs Act are replaced by the following:
“free trade agreement”
« accord de libre-échange »
“free trade agreement” means NAFTA, CCFTA, CCRFTA, CEFTA or CIFTA;
“free trade partner”
« partenaire de libre-échange »
“free trade partner” means
(a) a NAFTA country,
(b) Chile,
(c) Costa Rica,
(d) Israel or another CIFTA beneficiary, or
(e) an EFTA state;
(2) Subsection 2(1) of the Act is amended by adding the following in alphabetical order:
“CEFTA”
« ALÉCA »
“CEFTA” has the same meaning as “Agreement” in subsection 2(1) of the Canada–EFTA Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act;
“EFTA state”
« État de l’AELÉ »
“EFTA state” has the same meaning as in subsection 2(1) of the Canada–EFTA Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act;
“Iceland”
« Islande »
“Iceland” has the same meaning as in subsection 2(1) of the Customs Tariff;
“Liechtenstein”
« Liechtenstein »
“Liechtenstein” has the same meaning as in subsection 2(1) of the Customs Tariff;
“Norway”
« Norvège »
“Norway” has the same meaning as in subsection 2(1) of the Customs Tariff;
“Switzerland”
« Suisse »
“Switzerland” has the same meaning as in subsection 2(1) of the Customs Tariff;
“preferential tariff treatment under CEFTA”
« traitement tarifaire préferentiel de l’ALÉCA »
“preferential tariff treatment under CEFTA” means, in respect of goods, entitlement to the rates of customs duty under the Customs Tariff in respect of one of the following tariffs:
(a) the Iceland Tariff,
(b) the Norway Tariff, or
(c) the Switzerland–Liechtenstein Tariff;
(3) Subsection 2(1.2) of the Act is amended by striking out the word “or” at the end of paragraph (c), by adding the word “or” at the end of paragraph (d) and by adding the following after paragraph (d):
(e) preferential tariff treatment under CEFTA.
Marginal note:1997, c. 14, s. 38
24. (1) The portion of paragraph 42.1(1)(a) of the Act before subparagraph (i) is replaced by the following:
(a) conduct a verification of origin of goods for which preferential tariff treatment under a free trade agreement, other than CEFTA, is claimed
(2) Section 42.1 of the Act is amended by adding the following after subsection (1):
Marginal note:Method of verification under CEFTA
(1.1) Any officer, or any officer within a class of officers, designated by the President for the purposes of this section, or any person, or any person within a class of persons, designated by the President to act on behalf of such an officer, may, subject to any prescribed conditions, conduct a verification of origin of goods for which preferential tariff treatment under CEFTA is claimed by requesting in writing that the customs administration of the EFTA state of export conduct a verification and provide an opinion as to whether the goods are originating within the meaning of Annex C of CEFTA.
Marginal note:1997, c. 14, s. 38
(3) Subsection 42.1(2) of the Act is replaced by the following:
Marginal note:Withdrawal of preferential tariff treatment
(2) If an exporter or producer of goods that are subject to a verification of origin under paragraph (1)(a) fails to comply with the prescribed requirements or, in the case of a verification of origin under subparagraph (1)(a)(i), does not consent to the verification of origin in the prescribed manner and within the prescribed time, preferential tariff treatment under a free trade agreement, other than CEFTA, may be denied or withdrawn from the goods.
Marginal note:Withdrawal of preferential tariff treatment under CEFTA
(3) Preferential tariff treatment under CEFTA may be denied or withdrawn from the goods
(a) if the EFTA state of export fails to conduct a verification or provide an opinion as to whether the goods are originating;
(b) if an officer or other person designated under subsection (1.1) is unable to determine whether the goods are originating; or
(c) in any other prescribed circumstances.
- Date modified: