华美商贸信息咨询有限公司  Huamei Commercial Information Consulting Co., Ltd.
服务热线: 0311-85278946

新闻资讯

News
( Tel ) 电话
0311-8527 8946
( Fax ) 传真
0311-8527 8948
( E-mail ) 邮箱
hm@huameiconsulting.com

对华反倾销中的单独税率问题(三)

文章来源: 中国商务部
作者:
日期: 2019-01-18
浏览次数: 13

三、美国做法与WTO 的相关规定

 

美国最近修改了其对非市场经济国家单独税率的政策,规定只有在出口企业能够证明其出口行为在法律上,或者事实上没有被政府控制的情况下(…a firm can demonstrate an absence of both de jure and de facto governmental control over its export activities.),才可以给予单独税率。新修改的政策还对出口企业申请单独税率规定了详细的程序和要求。

美国商务部出台新政策前,征求了各方的意见。公平贸易局在两次评论意见中都指出了美国的这种做法违反了其在WTO 框架下承诺的义务。

支持此政策的美国国内企业代表的评论意见中,支持的理由均为给予非市场经济国家单独税率将导致中国的出口商可以从获得低税率的企业出口,从而规避反倾销税。

根据以上对欧盟法律的分析,美国的立法目的仍然是规避反倾销税的考虑,不是 WTO 法律框架下《反倾销协议》第 9.2 条的“impracticable”。WTO 法律文件和中国入世法律文件中涉及非市场经济的条款中没有关于出口价格认定的规定。因此,美国的做法与 WTO 规定不符。

 

附:相关法律条文

 

GATT 1947 第 6 条第 1 款:

 

1. The contracting parties recognize that dumping, by which products of one country are introduced into the commerce of another country at less than the normal value of the products, is to be condemned if it causes or threatens material injury to an established industry in the territory of a contracting party or materially retards the establishment of a domestic industry. For the purposes of this Article, a product is to be considered as being introduced into the commerce of an importing country at less than its normal value, if the price of the product exported from one country to another

(a) is less than the comparable price, in the ordinary course of trade, for the like product when destined for consumption in the exporting country, or,

(b) in the absence of such domestic price, is less than either

(i) the highest comparable price for the like product for export to any third country in the ordinary course of trade, or

(ii) the cost of production of the product in the country of origin plus a reasonable addition for selling cost and profit.

Due allowance shall be made in each case for differences in conditions and terms of sale, for differences in taxation, and for other differences affecting price comparability.*

 

此条的注释和补充规定:

 

2. It is recognized that, in the case of imports from a country which has a complete or substantially complete monopoly of its trade and where all domestic prices are fixed by the State, special difficulties may exist in determining price comparability for the purposes of paragraph 1, and in such cases importing contracting parties may find it necessary to take into account the possibility that a strict comparison with domestic prices in such a country may not always be appropriate.

 

WTO 反倾销协议第 2.7 条和第 6.10 条:

 

2.7 This Article is without prejudice to the second Supplementary Provision to paragraph 1 of Article VI in Annex I to GATT 1994.

 

6.10 The authorities shall, as a rule, determine an individual margin of dumping for each known exporter or producer concerned of the product under investigation. In cases where the number of exporters, producers, importers or types of products involved is so large as to make such a determination impracticable, the authorities may limit their examination either to a reasonable number of interested parties or products by using samples which are statistically valid on the basis of information available to the authorities at the time of the selection, or to the largest percentage of the volume of the exports from the country in question which can reasonably be investigated.

 

 

 

中国加入议定书第 15 条:

 

15. Price Comparability in Determining Subsidies and Dumping

 

Article VI of the GATT 1994, the Agreement on Implementation of Article VI of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 ("Anti-Dumping Agreement") and the SCM Agreement shall apply in proceedings involving imports of Chinese origin into a WTO Member consistent with the following:

(a) In determining price comparability under Article VI of the GATT 1994 and the Anti-Dumping Agreement, the importing WTO Member shall use either Chinese prices or costs for the industry under investigation or a methodology that is not based on a strict comparison with domestic prices or costs in China based on the following rules:

(i) If the producers under investigation can clearly show that market economy conditions prevail in the industry producing the like product with regard to the manufacture, production and sale of that product, the importing WTO Member shall use Chinese prices or costs for the industry under investigation in determining price comparability;

(ii) The importing WTO Member may use a methodology that is not based on a strict comparison with domestic prices or costs in China if the producers under investigation cannot clearly show that market economy conditions prevail in the industry producing the like product with regard to manufacture, production and sale of that product.

(b) In proceedings under Parts II, III and V of the SCM Agreement, when addressing subsidies described in Articles 14(a), 14(b), 14(c) and 14(d), relevant provisions of the SCM Agreement shall apply; however, if there are special difficulties in that application, the importing WTO Member may then use methodologies for identifying and measuring the subsidy benefit which take into account the possibility that prevailing terms and conditions in China may not always be available as appropriate benchmarks. In applying such methodologies, where practicable, the importing WTO Member should adjust such prevailing terms and conditions before considering the use of terms and conditions prevailing outside China.

(c) The importing WTO Member shall notify methodologies used in accordance with subparagraph (a) to the Committee on Anti-Dumping Practices and shall notify methodologies used in accordance with subparagraph (b) to the Committee on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures.

(d) Once China has established, under the national law of the importing WTO Member, that it is a market economy, the provisions of subparagraph (a) shall be terminated provided that the importing Member's national law contains market economy criteria as of the date of accession. In any event, the provisions of subparagraph (a)(ii) shall  expire 15 years after the date of accession. In addition, should China  establish, pursuant to the national law of the importing WTO Member, that market economy conditions prevail in a particular industry or sector, the non-market economy provisions of subparagraph (a) shall no longer apply to that industry or sector.

 


上一篇:无下一篇:无
相关新闻: / 相关新闻: More
2020 - 08 - 28
中国一直是贸易救济调查的最大目标国,且连年屡创新高。据中国贸易救济信息网统计显示,2019年国外对中国产品启动的反倾销调查63起、反补贴调查9起、保障措施调查30起。2020年截止8月28日,国外对中国产品启动的反倾销调查61起、反补贴调查17起、保障措施调查13起。中国已连续25年成为全球遭遇反倾销调查最多的国家,连续14年成为全球遭遇反补贴调查最多的国家。中国企业在面对美国双反调查的过程中,应以平常心对待,积极采取应对措施,参与到调查程序当中,并积极进行举证和抗辩,通过应诉证明不存在倾销或补贴,或争取低税率,保护出口市场、争取竞争优势。 2016年10月,美国挂车制造商Cheetah公司等多家美国制造企业向美国商务部提出申请,要求调查来自中国特定集装箱骨架车上的轮胎是否有违“双反”规定中相关可豁免的条件,经过两轮抗辩,2017年1月,美国商务部裁定Cheetah申请要求被驳回...
2020 - 06 - 01
根据中国贸易救济信息网的数据统计,截止2020年5月31日,印度对中国发起的贸易救济案件共计302起,涉及24个行业的约260种商品。在4类贸易救济案件中,占主体地位的是反倾销案,共245起,占比81.13%,其次是保障措施案39起,占比12.91%。按立案年份统计的各类案件数见表1:印度对华贸易调查案件统计表。仔细观察上表,可以看出印度对中国的贸易调查大致以8年为一个周期,至今已走过3个周期。第一个周期,1995年——2002年。2000年——2002年是印度对华贸易调查的第一次高峰期。1995年,印度发布1995年版关税规则。2001年12月11日,中国正式成为世贸组织成员。 第二个周期,2003年——2010年。2008年——2010年是印度对华贸易调查的第二次高峰期。2008年美国爆发的次贷危机席卷全球,也波及到了印度。 第三个周期,2011年——2018年。2014年、2016年...
2020 - 05 - 15
2019年9月23日,美国商务部公布了惠锋公司在美国国际贸易法庭起诉美国商务部获胜;2020年3月10日,此案公布了最终结果:惠锋获0%关税。这一结果,彻底否定了美国商务部之前判罚中国金刚石工具行业82.05%的惩罚性关税。 2020年1月10日,惠锋参与独立应诉的第九期反倾销案也公布了初裁结果:美国商务部裁定惠锋0%关税。 在国际贸易关系复杂、多变的大背景下,成都惠锋公司连续获得的两个“0关税”,让中国的金刚石工具行业乃至中国的民营企业,在面对美国的贸易争端和国际诉讼时,勇气和信心都倍受鼓舞。  近年来,全球经济增长乏力,贸易摩擦日益增多。据统计,美国市场是惠锋近5-7年来高速成长的市场,仅以2016~2018年为例,公司每年的出口总额均在300万美元以上。但是,正是这耀眼的成绩使得惠锋陷入了贸易摩擦的“漩涡”。近年来美国商务部接二连三的“反倾销调...
2020 - 04 - 20
反倾销和反补贴,都是进口国的合规性贸易壁垒,成为在国际贸易中进口国保护自身利益,避免被他国扰乱市场秩序的重要手段。 初识反倾销 Q:什么是反倾销?A:要说反倾销,需要先说说什么是倾销。倾销就是用低于正常市场价格的价格,大量抛售商品,以便击败竞争对手独占市场,然后再大大提高商品价格,以获取垄断高额利润。在国际贸易中,倾销就是指甲国经营者低于市场价格向乙国市场大量销售其产品,目的在于抢占乙国市场。当地的经营者发现自己的产品没有成本优势,企业面临破产窘境,无法从经济上战胜对手,便寻求本国有关部门通过行政手段干预进口价格,于是就有了反倾销。 Q:什么是反补贴?A:举个例子来说,甲国向乙国出口纺织品,由于生产成本等方面影响,在乙国市场价格较高,影响销量,甲国赚不到利润。甲国政府为了鼓励出口,给予出口企业一定的优惠政策,甚至是资金支持,这样出口企业才能把销售价格降下来,甲...
Copyright © 2001 - 2018 石家庄市华美商贸信息咨询有限公司   冀ICP备18011442号
犀牛云提供企业云服务