Ukraine’s Savchenko says wants to run for president in 2019World May 25, 3:38
Putin venerates St Nicholas's relics in Cathedral of the SaviorSociety & Culture May 24, 21:53
Putin points out Russia’s good relations with EgyptRussian Politics & Diplomacy May 24, 21:30
Ukraine names conditions for Minsk accords' political part implementationWorld May 24, 20:44
Blaze-stricken Siberian areas expecting downpours that may quash firesSociety & Culture May 24, 19:45
Contact Group on Ukraine proposes more areas of disengagementWorld May 24, 19:39
Russian Emergencies Ministry says over 70 homes burn down in SiberiaSociety & Culture May 24, 18:49
International Chekhov Theater festival opens its doors for 13th time in MoscowSociety & Culture May 24, 18:44
Putin decorates commandoes for two-day face-to-face clash with militants in SyriaRussian Politics & Diplomacy May 24, 18:31
MOSCOW, April 26 (Itar-Tass) —— Foreign countries had used 72 protective measures against Russian goods as of April 1, 2012, the Ministry of Economic Development Elvira Nabiullina said in a report on socio-economic development in January-March, released on Wednesday, April 25.
These included 38 anti-dumping measures, four special protective measures, 30 other non-tariff regulation measures, including administrative regulation, and four anti-dumping investigations.
Measures against Russian goods for protection of their markets were taken by Australia, Azerbaijan, Armenia, Belarus, Brazil, India, Indonesia, China, Kyrgyzstan, the Republic of Korea, Mexico, Moldova, the United States, Thailand, Turkmenistan, Turkey, Uzbekistan, Ukraine, and EU countries.
The largest number of measures were effective in the EU, Ukraine, the U.S. and Belarus. More than half of all measures were imposed against the import of Russian ferrous metals and products made from them. Fertilizers were second in the list.
As a result of the efforts taken by the Ministry of Economic Development in the first quarter of 2012, seven measures against Russian goods were terminated. According to preliminary expert assessments, these measures might have caused about 40 million U.S. dollars in losses if not prevented.