Document kDrDXJxyByb7yp1r0Egz2G5mD

Page 55 FN64. Appellate Body Report, Japan - Alcoholic Beverages, supra, footnote 58, at 112 and 113. See, also, Appellate Body Report, Canada - Periodicals, supra, footnote 48, at 473. FN65. Appellate Body Report, Japan - Alcoholic Beverages, supra, footnote 58, at 111. FN66. Ibid. FN67. The meaning of the second sentence of Article 111:2 is elaborated upon in the Interpretative Note to that provision. This note indicates that the second sentence of Article III:2 supplies to "directly competitive or substitutable product[s]". FN68. Supra, footrxote 58, at 112 and 113. FN69. Appellate Body Report, Japan - Alcoholic Beverages, supra, footnote 58, at 109 and 110. FN70. Ibid., at 11_1. FN71. Appellate Body Report, Japan - Alcoholic Beverages, supra, footnote 58, at 114. FN72. Appellate Body Report, Japan - Alcoholic Beverages, supra, footnote 58, at 113 . FN73. See, further-. Appellate Body Report, Japan - Alcoholic Beverages, supra, footnote 58, at 11.3 and, in particular, footnote 46. See, also, Panel Report, United States - Gasoline, supra, footnote 15, para. 6.8, where the approach set forth in the Border Tax Adj ustment case was adopted in a dispute concerning Article III:4 of the GATT 1994 by a. panel. This point was not appealed in that case. FN74. The fourth criterion, tariff classification, was not mentioned by the Working i Party on Border Ta.x Adjustments, but was included by subsequent panels (see, for | instance, EEC - Arrimal Feed, supra, footnote 58, para. 4.2, and 1987 Japan - i Alcoholic Beverages, supra, footnote 58, para. 5.6). FN75. European Corntnunities' other appellant's submission, para. 33. FN76. Panel Report , paras. 8.114 and 8.115. FN77. Ibid.,, para. 8.126. FN78. Ibid., paras . 8.123, 8.124 and 8.126. i