Replacing the Non-Market Economy Methodology: Is the European Union's Alternative Approach Justified Under the World Trade Organization Anti-Dumping Agreement?

S. Noël, Weihuan Zhou
{"title":"Replacing the Non-Market Economy Methodology: Is the European Union's Alternative Approach Justified Under the World Trade Organization Anti-Dumping Agreement?","authors":"S. Noël, Weihuan Zhou","doi":"10.54648/gtcj2016071","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The European Commission has announced that it would issue a proposal to amend the European Union (EU) anti-dumping regulation to tackle the forthcoming expiry of the provision in China’s Protocol of Accession to the World Trade Organization (WTO) which allows WTO Members to derogate from the WTO rules on dumping determinations against imports from China. The proposal will include the removal of the ‘non-market economies’ (NME) list, which justifies the use of the ‘analogue country’ methodology, and the adoption of a new, country-neutral methodology to ‘capture distortions linked to State intervention’. This article analyses the consistency of this alternative approach to NME conditions with the WTO anti-dumping rules. It argues that the EU’s approach may amount to a continuous treatment of China as a NME for anti-dumping purposes. Such an approach, however, finds no legal basis under the WTO Antidumping Agreement which does not concern any government intervention per se but concerns a proper comparison between export price and normal value. Moreover, should normal value be constructed, the investigating authority shall take into account costs actually incurred by exporters. It follows that an investigating authority cannot use the WTO anti-dumping rules to sanction all forms of State intervention that results in lower export prices.","PeriodicalId":306925,"journal":{"name":"ORG: Public Sector Organizations (Topic)","volume":"28 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ORG: Public Sector Organizations (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54648/gtcj2016071","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

The European Commission has announced that it would issue a proposal to amend the European Union (EU) anti-dumping regulation to tackle the forthcoming expiry of the provision in China’s Protocol of Accession to the World Trade Organization (WTO) which allows WTO Members to derogate from the WTO rules on dumping determinations against imports from China. The proposal will include the removal of the ‘non-market economies’ (NME) list, which justifies the use of the ‘analogue country’ methodology, and the adoption of a new, country-neutral methodology to ‘capture distortions linked to State intervention’. This article analyses the consistency of this alternative approach to NME conditions with the WTO anti-dumping rules. It argues that the EU’s approach may amount to a continuous treatment of China as a NME for anti-dumping purposes. Such an approach, however, finds no legal basis under the WTO Antidumping Agreement which does not concern any government intervention per se but concerns a proper comparison between export price and normal value. Moreover, should normal value be constructed, the investigating authority shall take into account costs actually incurred by exporters. It follows that an investigating authority cannot use the WTO anti-dumping rules to sanction all forms of State intervention that results in lower export prices.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
替代非市场经济方法论:欧盟在世界贸易组织反倾销协定下的替代方法是否合理?
欧盟委员会宣布,将提出一项修订欧盟反倾销规例的建议,以应对中国加入世界贸易组织(WTO)议定书中允许世贸组织成员不遵守世贸组织对中国进口产品的倾销裁定的规定即将到期的问题。该提案将包括删除“非市场经济体”(NME)名单,该名单证明使用“模拟国家”方法是合理的,并采用一种新的国家中立方法来“捕捉与国家干预有关的扭曲”。本文分析了这种替代性的NME条件与WTO反倾销规则的一致性。中国辩称,欧盟的做法可能相当于出于反倾销目的继续将中国视为新兴市场经济体。然而,这种做法在世贸组织反倾销协定下找不到法律依据,该协定本身不涉及任何政府干预,而是涉及出口价格与正常价值的适当比较。此外,如果推定正常价值,调查机关应考虑出口商实际发生的成本。因此,调查当局不能利用世贸组织反倾销规则制裁导致出口价格降低的一切形式的国家干预。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Designing Zero-based Budgeting for Public Organizations Comparative Statics of Organizational Forms of Public Utilities Replacing the Non-Market Economy Methodology: Is the European Union's Alternative Approach Justified Under the World Trade Organization Anti-Dumping Agreement? Оптимизация Государственного Сектора: Зарубежный Опыт и Рекомендации Для России (Optimizing the Public Sector: Foreign Experience and Recommendations for Russia) Dynamics of National Position in Climate Change Negotiations: An Analysis of Emission, Cost and Regime Support
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1