Literature Review of EU Anti-dumping Papers on China's Footwear Trade! Urgent! There is an absolute additional high score that can be used directly!

How to deal with EU anti-dumping against China

abstract

From 65438 to 0979, the EU initiated anti-dumping against China for the first time, which was also the first anti-dumping accusation against China in the world. Since then, the EU has frequently filed anti-dumping charges against China, and the number has been increasing, the scope of anti-dumping products has been expanding, and the anti-dumping tax rate has been increasing. In this regard, this paper mainly analyzes the current situation of EU anti-dumping against China and puts forward relevant countermeasures.

From 65438 to 0978, China and the EU signed the first China-EU trade agreement, which has been more than 20 years. For more than 20 years, China has become one of the main trading partners of EU 15 countries, but it has also become the first target of anti-dumping. From 1979 to 65438+February 2002, the EU initiated 94 anti-dumping investigations against China, involving a total amount of 5.5 billion US dollars. Therefore, it is necessary to analyze the EU's anti-dumping against China.

First, the status quo of EU anti-dumping against China

Judging from the EU's anti-dumping cases against China over the years, its anti-dumping against China mainly has the following characteristics:

(1) The EU is the first region to initiate anti-dumping against China.

From 65438 to 0979, the European Union filed anti-dumping charges against China's mechanical alarm clock and saccharin sodium. This is not only the first anti-dumping by the EU against China, but also the first anti-dumping suffered by China in the world. It can be said that the EU took the lead in launching anti-dumping against China, which opened the door to foreign anti-dumping against China.

(B) China has become the primary target of EU anti-dumping.

According to 1998, except for 1998 and 200 1, the average proportion of EU anti-dumping cases against China was above 12%, reaching 42.8% in 2003. From 1995 to the first half of 2003, the EU took 27 anti-dumping measures against China products (including Hongkong, China, but excluding Taiwan Province Province, China), with India 15, Thailand 14, South Korea and Russia1kloc-0/,and China ranked first. It can be seen that China has become the main target of EU anti-dumping.

(3) The number of anti-dumping actions against China has increased rapidly.

From the first case to the end of 2003, the overall trend of EU anti-dumping investigation against China is on the rise. Especially in the 1990s, the number of cases increased rapidly. Among them, "199 1 4, 1993 4, 1995 5 5, 1997 5, 1999 actually reached 6544. It is not difficult to see that the number of EU anti-dumping cases against China is increasing.

(4) The product range of anti-dumping against China has been gradually expanded.

At first, EU anti-dumping cases against China mainly focused on primary products such as Minmetals and chemicals, and later extended to textiles, mechanical and electrical products and steel products. In recent years, its target has been extended to China's traditional bulk export products, mainly bicycles, color TVs, shoes and microwave ovens. This large-scale, large-scale anti-dumping has seriously restricted China's export trade to the European Union, at the same time, it has also seriously damaged China's industrial development and had a very adverse impact on China's adjustment of export product structure.

(E) The anti-dumping tax rate against China is high

The EU anti-dumping tax rate is sometimes as high as several times, ten times or even dozens of times. Not to maintain normal trade order, offset and prevent dumping, but to impose high anti-dumping duties, so that China products lose competitiveness in the EU and eventually withdraw from the EU market. For example, China color TV was sued for anti-dumping in the European Union. Since 199 1, the European Commission has imposed punitive tariffs on China color TV sets to 15.3%, 1995 to 25.6%, and 1998 to 44.6%, resulting in the total export of China color TV sets in the EU in 2000.

(6) There is obvious unfairness in anti-dumping against China.

This unfairness is reflected in many aspects, such as 1, which does not recognize China's market economy status, but implements conditional market economy treatment and looks for a substitute country for China when determining its normal value. 2. Implement the policy of one country, one tax to China. In addition, there are many unfair practices, such as the EU's adoption of surrogate country measures against China and its refusal to allow China to inquire about relevant information of surrogate countries in accordance with relevant regulations.

Second, the reasons for the EU's anti-dumping against China

The reasons why the EU's anti-dumping against China is so active are various and complicated, including:

(A) the relevant enterprises are not familiar with the anti-dumping "rules of the game"

China has not been a member of the World Trade Organization for a long time, and China enterprises are not very familiar with international anti-dumping laws and practices, not to mention the relevant anti-dumping legislation of the European Union, so they lack the confidence and experience and skills to deal with EU anti-dumping lawsuits. EU anti-dumping and its related laws and regulations are formed after years of deposition, with strong professionalism, and are constantly updated. As a "novice" who just joined the WTO, China can't fully grasp it in a short time.

(B) China-EU trade development is unbalanced

Since 1978, China-EU trade has increased by more than 30 times. The import and export situation with Europe changed from a deficit of $2,679.02 million in 1987 to a surplus of $5,799.42 million in 2002. Moreover, since 1 99965438+1October1Euro was issued, the exchange rate of the euro has strengthened, and the relative depreciation of RMB against the euro has enhanced China's export competitiveness to the EU. After China's entry into WTO, the decline of the exchange rate was completely offset by the rise of the euro exchange rate. Therefore, although the tariff rate was reduced, it had little impact on the China market of EU products. China's export to the EU has a comparative advantage, so it naturally becomes one of the main targets of anti-dumping.

(C) the impact of the global anti-dumping boom

From a global perspective, anti-dumping fever. This is also a problem that cannot be ignored, because the big environment will affect the small environment. If there were no international anti-dumping competition, China products would not be subject to repeated anti-dumping by the EU. According to the data of WTO, the number of anti-dumping cases filed worldwide was 703 in the five-year period of 1980- 1984, 699 in the five-year period of 1985- 1989 and 6994 in the period of 1994.

(D) The relevant anti-dumping laws and regulations in China are not perfect.

China didn't have its own anti-dumping system before 1997, and lacked the countermeasures to deal with foreign anti-dumping against China, which made the EU often have nothing to hide when carrying out anti-dumping against China. However, at present, China's anti-dumping laws and regulations are abstract and vague, lacking maneuverability, and there are no clear provisions on anti-circumvention and judicial review, and some provisions have not yet fully integrated with international rules. For example, 1, the anti-dumping investigation period in China is relatively long, from the date of filing the investigation announcement to the date of final ruling announcement 12 months, which can be extended to 18 months under special circumstances, 2-3 times longer than the corresponding period in developed countries; 2. How to compare the normal value of dumping with the export price of China, and what kind of price is applicable, is not stipulated in the Anti-dumping Regulations, and what is "domestic identical or similar products" when determining the damage is not clear; 3. In terms of procedure, the organization is unreasonable, and the responsibilities, execution procedures, behavior definition, reward and punishment measures between government departments are vague. This makes the sued enterprises have doubts and makes the EU have no scruples.

(5) The EU has a discriminatory policy towards China.

This is mainly manifested in the system of "substitute country" and "one country, one tax". The fundamental reason is that China's market economy status is not recognized. Foreign countries, especially the European Union, discriminate against China's "non-market economy" and use the surrogate country system to make it fearless. In addition, the EU also implements the "one country, one tax" system for China. This is all unreasonable. Although the EU admitted in 1998 that China is not a non-market economy country, this did not fundamentally change the EU's discriminatory treatment of China's non-market economy status.

Third, the EU's anti-dumping strategy against China.

The EU is not only a big partner of China's foreign trade, but also frequently initiates anti-dumping charges against China. In this case, how should China respond to the EU's anti-dumping charges against China?

(A) enterprises should actively respond to the EU's anti-dumping litigation.

First, active defense is not only a right, but also a legal obligation. Article 18 of the EU Anti-dumping Law stipulates the way to deal with "uncooperative companies": if the litigants refuse to accept the investigation, fail to provide necessary materials on time, or obviously hinder the investigation, the anti-dumping authorities may make a ruling based on "available information". In addition, the Ministry of Foreign Economic Cooperation of China promulgated the Provisions on Responding to Anti-dumping Cases of China's Export Products Abroad on April 4 1994, which clearly stipulated the scope, rights and obligations of responding to the lawsuit, as well as the encouragement measures for responding to the lawsuit and the punishment measures for not implementing the provisions. Secondly, responding actively is the best way to reduce losses, and it is also the main form for interested parties to defend themselves. For example, "In the US anti-dumping case against China color TV in 2003, among the responding enterprises, the dumping margin of Xoceco was 4.35%, Konka was 1 1.36%, TCL was 22.36%, Changhong was 24.38%, and the weighted average tax rate of other responding enterprises was 21.49.

(B) give play to the positive role of the government

Our government should pay attention to establishing cooperation mechanism with foreign governments, especially with administrative law enforcement departments investigating anti-dumping safeguard measures. For example, the bilateral agreement reached between Australia and New Zealand in 1990 stipulates that anti-dumping measures are no longer applicable to the trade of locally produced goods between the two countries, and trade behavior is instead restricted by the competition law. In addition, it is necessary to strengthen product export management. China government should seriously implement the "Regulations on Punishing Cheap Exports" and severely punish low-priced dumping enterprises. We will deepen the reform of the foreign trade system, carry out export management in accordance with the laws of the market economy, strengthen macro-control over the quantity of export products, adjust preferential and encouraging policies for enterprises, and strictly control export tax rebates. Customs can be given special rights to supervise the possible low-price dumping of color TV sets. In short, the government should play its due role.

(3) Use the WTO to strive for more equal treatment.

First of all, actively participate in the revision and improvement of WTO anti-dumping law, promote its healthy development and fair implementation, and curb the fierce momentum of foreign anti-dumping against China. Second, use the WTO dispute settlement mechanism to adjudicate foreign discriminatory anti-dumping cases against China. Because under the dispute settlement mechanism, China also has the opportunity to state its opinions and protect its legitimate rights and interests. Third, use the international forum of WTO to expose the irrationality of substitute country system and discriminatory practices against non-market economy countries, and urge foreign countries to abandon discriminatory anti-dumping policies. Moreover, "in 200 1 year, the development degree of China's market economy was 69%, which exceeded the international critical level of 60%. China is a developing market economy country, not a so-called "non-market economy country" in some countries. This shows that China should no longer be discriminated against by foreign "non-market economy". Now that China is a member of the World Trade Organization, we should make use of the membership and the evaluation mechanism of the WTO to strive for market economy status.

Actively apply the principle of "public interest" to deal with anti-dumping.

In the practice of EU's anti-dumping, if it can be proved that anti-dumping measures are not in the interest of EU, anti-dumping measures can also be organized. To levy anti-dumping duties, it is not enough to point out the existence of dumping (the export price is lower than the domestic market price) and the damage caused by dumping, but also to show that it is in the interest of the EU to take anti-dumping measures. For example, 1992, the EU accepted the application of Portuguese manufacturers for anti-dumping investigation on rosin imported from China. It is preliminarily determined that the dumping margin of China rosin is 17.4%, which has caused substantial damage to the EU industry. However,1February 1994, the European Commission announced the termination of the anti-dumping investigation against China rosin on the grounds that anti-dumping was not in line with the interests of the contracting party.

(five) the establishment of special anti-dumping management agencies and special funds.

China has no special authority to deal with foreign anti-dumping. The state mainly organizes seven chambers of commerce to respond to lawsuits, but this is not enough, because there is no organizational strength of the government and there is not enough software and hardware equipment. Therefore, it is necessary to set up a special institution-the National Anti-dumping Committee, to organize and assist enterprises to respond to the lawsuit with the power of the government. Moreover, it costs a lot of money to deal with anti-dumping, which is also a very main reason why many enterprises are unwilling to respond. In this regard, a special anti-dumping fund can be set up, one is to subsidize the respondent enterprises, and the other is to reward the enterprises that actively respond to the lawsuit.

(6) Attach importance to administrative reconsideration.

Once all kinds of rechecked products are taxed, enterprises can overturn the original judgment of the European Commission through various rechecks and resume exports to the EU. There are three kinds of review: new exporter review, temporary review and sunset review. After the imposition of the final anti-dumping duty, if the export enterprise can prove that it has not exported any similar products to the EU during the investigation period, and has no connection with the original taxed enterprise, and has signed a large number of irrevocable export contracts, the export enterprise may request the new exporter to review and strive to be exempted from the anti-dumping duty. 1 After the imposition of the final anti-dumping duty, the exporter may request a temporary review of the final anti-dumping duty if he can provide sufficient evidence to prove that it is unnecessary to impose the anti-dumping duty again, or the damage will not continue or happen again after the tax is stopped. If EU producers do not propose sunset review, the final anti-dumping duty will automatically stop after five years. Exporters don't have to take the initiative to file a sunset review, but enterprises must actively respond after the EU producers file a review, and strive for a favorable result.

Four. conclusion

The EU is a very important trading partner of China. When dealing with trade disputes, the practice of "answer blows with blows" can easily lead to trade wars. Although there are many unsatisfactory aspects in EU's anti-dumping against China, we should take reasonable and legal measures to fight for our own interests. We should resolutely fight back against its anti-dumping

To annotate ...

Wu Jinxi? Yu yongda The deep-seated reasons and countermeasures of frequent foreign anti-dumping against China [J]. Reform, 2004(3)

Annual report on EU anti-dumping and countervailing submitted by the European Commission to the European Parliament

China Trade Relief Information Network's information about the US anti-dumping of color TV sets against China in 2003.

Report of the Ministry of Commerce on the Development of Market Economy in China in 2003.

?

refer to

[1] Deng Dexiong. "Comparison should be fair-zero practice of European anti-dumping and its controversy" [J]. International trade, 200 1(5)

[2] Li Shengjing. Anti-dumping law and litigation agency [M]. Law Press, 2000

[3] Wang Yungui. "The Curse of Market Restriction-the Barriers to China's Export Trade after China's Entry into WTO" [J]. International Trade, 200 1( 1)

[4] Yang. "Comparative Study on Anti-dumping of Foreign Exports to China" [J]. Statistical Research, 2000 (1)

[5] Jiang Xiaohong. European Anti-dumping Law and Sino-European Trade [M]. Beijing: Social Science Literature Publishing House, 2004.