Your are the PR officer of MNE in the chemical industry. The National press in your home country alleges that your company is covering up an environmental disaster caused by your subsidiary in India, in which several people died. How do you react?

US anti-dumping against Chinese apple juice concentrate producers The US Commerce Department (in short, 'Commerce") frequently initiates anti-dumping investigations of Chinese imports. In most cases, Chinese producers are found to be guilty of dumping in the USA and suffer high punitive tariffs. However, the tide turned when Chinese apple juice concentrate (AJC) producers took Commerce to court Commerce's probe into AJC production in China started in response to a petition filed by American apple juice producers. They requested a 92% anti-dumping rate and then dropped to 52% after they heard that Chinese AJC producers started to fight by responding. If the Chinese did not respond to the nvestigation, they would obviously lose. 

China was the world's argest producer of AJC, exporting about 90% of its AJC production. The pre- posed anti-dumping rate of 52%, it mposed, would have devastated Chinese AJC producers and apple growers. Among about 30 Chinese AJC producers involved in the US anti-dumping investigation, 15 com- panies agreed to respond and then 11 companies col- lectively hired experienced American lawyers, with one firm dropping out later. The case took tour and a halt years (1999-2004) and cost about US$3.6 milion in legal fees for the Chinese respondents. w US OULUSS.O million in legal fees for the Chinese respondents. 

A key point of contention was how much it would cost to produce AJC in a market economy. Since China was not considered a 'market economy,' Com- merce chose India and other surrogate factors of pro- duction for valuation purposes. Commerce concluded that Chinese AJC exports were sold at less than 'fair market value and the US International Trade Commis.