During the 1960s and 1970s, the European steel industry was near financial collapse. With the support of labor groups, the largest firms were kept alive with government money, low-interest loans, and equity investments from European governments. Many mills became government owned. In the early 1980s, the equivalent of tens of billions of dollars of public money was used to keep the mills running. The money financed operations, revitalized equipment, lowered the firms' debt, trained steelworkers, and permitted the export of low-priced steel. The United States responded with a host of trade remedies, including CVD duties. When the political climate changed in Europe, governments decided to sell off their interests to private investors in free-market stock sales. Since 1988, many large steel mills have been privatized, including British Steel (today Corus), Germany's Saar-stahl, France's Usinor, and others. The new privately owned companies continued to sell steel in America.
1. What is "privatization" and how might it affect a subsidies case?
2. Why did the ITA conclude that the EC steel mills were the "same legal person"?
3. What factors should be considered in determining whether the European mills were still benefitting from earlier subsidies?