不合理利润的离奇案例:美国-OCTG(韩国)

IF 1.1 4区 社会学 Q3 ECONOMICS Journal of World Trade Pub Date : 2021-09-01 DOI:10.54648/trad2021032
Hyuntaik Lee
{"title":"不合理利润的离奇案例:美国-OCTG(韩国)","authors":"Hyuntaik Lee","doi":"10.54648/trad2021032","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Anti-dumping investigations involve a highly technical process of dumping margin calculations that use voluminous and complex data. Investigating authorities often find that ideal sources of such data enabling accurate calculations are unavailable. While the WTO Anti-Dumping Agreement (ADA) sets out the basic rules on anti-dumping investigations, it provides a certain level of flexibility and discretion to investigating authorities. However, such flexibility may lead to disputes and abuse by investigating authorities. Article 2.2.2 of the ADA, which establishes the rules regarding the calculation of a reasonable amount of profit for constructed value, is one such example. The provision envisages situations in which the actual data of relevant profit are unavailable and provides three alternative sources of data to be used in such situations. In the US – OCTG (Korea) case in 2017, the key issue was the US investigating authority’s use of a controversial source for the calculation of a reasonable amount of profit under one such alternative. While the panel ruled that the US investigating authority’s use of the source was inconsistent with Article 2.2.2, the issues raised in the case and the difficult questions the panel did not answer laid bare the ambiguities and incoherence in the ADA that can be abused by investigating authorities.\nWTO Anti-Dumping Agreement, WTO Panels, Constructed Value, CV Profit, USDOC, Anti-Dumping Investigation, US – OCTG (Korea), Reform, Best Information Available","PeriodicalId":46019,"journal":{"name":"Journal of World Trade","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Curious Case of Unreasonable Profit: US – OCTG (Korea)\",\"authors\":\"Hyuntaik Lee\",\"doi\":\"10.54648/trad2021032\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Anti-dumping investigations involve a highly technical process of dumping margin calculations that use voluminous and complex data. Investigating authorities often find that ideal sources of such data enabling accurate calculations are unavailable. While the WTO Anti-Dumping Agreement (ADA) sets out the basic rules on anti-dumping investigations, it provides a certain level of flexibility and discretion to investigating authorities. However, such flexibility may lead to disputes and abuse by investigating authorities. Article 2.2.2 of the ADA, which establishes the rules regarding the calculation of a reasonable amount of profit for constructed value, is one such example. The provision envisages situations in which the actual data of relevant profit are unavailable and provides three alternative sources of data to be used in such situations. In the US – OCTG (Korea) case in 2017, the key issue was the US investigating authority’s use of a controversial source for the calculation of a reasonable amount of profit under one such alternative. While the panel ruled that the US investigating authority’s use of the source was inconsistent with Article 2.2.2, the issues raised in the case and the difficult questions the panel did not answer laid bare the ambiguities and incoherence in the ADA that can be abused by investigating authorities.\\nWTO Anti-Dumping Agreement, WTO Panels, Constructed Value, CV Profit, USDOC, Anti-Dumping Investigation, US – OCTG (Korea), Reform, Best Information Available\",\"PeriodicalId\":46019,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of World Trade\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of World Trade\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.54648/trad2021032\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of World Trade","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54648/trad2021032","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

反倾销调查涉及使用大量复杂数据计算倾销幅度的高度技术性过程。调查当局经常发现,无法获得能够进行准确计算的理想数据来源。虽然世贸组织《反倾销协定》规定了反倾销调查的基本规则,但它为调查当局提供了一定程度的灵活性和自由裁量权。然而,这种灵活性可能导致调查当局的争议和滥用。《美国残疾人法》第2.2.2条规定了建筑价值合理利润额的计算规则,就是这样一个例子。该条款设想了无法获得相关利润的实际数据的情况,并提供了在这种情况下使用的三种替代数据来源。在2017年美国OCTG(韩国)案中,关键问题是美国调查机构使用有争议的来源来计算一种替代方案下的合理利润。虽然专家组裁定美国调查机构对来源的使用不符合第2.2.2条,但本案中提出的问题以及专家组没有回答的棘手问题暴露了调查机构可能滥用的《反倾销法》中的模糊性和不连贯性。WTO反倾销协议、WTO小组、构建价值、CV利润、USDOC、反倾销调查、美国-OCTG(韩国)、改革、最佳信息
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
A Curious Case of Unreasonable Profit: US – OCTG (Korea)
Anti-dumping investigations involve a highly technical process of dumping margin calculations that use voluminous and complex data. Investigating authorities often find that ideal sources of such data enabling accurate calculations are unavailable. While the WTO Anti-Dumping Agreement (ADA) sets out the basic rules on anti-dumping investigations, it provides a certain level of flexibility and discretion to investigating authorities. However, such flexibility may lead to disputes and abuse by investigating authorities. Article 2.2.2 of the ADA, which establishes the rules regarding the calculation of a reasonable amount of profit for constructed value, is one such example. The provision envisages situations in which the actual data of relevant profit are unavailable and provides three alternative sources of data to be used in such situations. In the US – OCTG (Korea) case in 2017, the key issue was the US investigating authority’s use of a controversial source for the calculation of a reasonable amount of profit under one such alternative. While the panel ruled that the US investigating authority’s use of the source was inconsistent with Article 2.2.2, the issues raised in the case and the difficult questions the panel did not answer laid bare the ambiguities and incoherence in the ADA that can be abused by investigating authorities. WTO Anti-Dumping Agreement, WTO Panels, Constructed Value, CV Profit, USDOC, Anti-Dumping Investigation, US – OCTG (Korea), Reform, Best Information Available
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
12.50%
发文量
35
期刊介绍: Far and away the most thought-provoking and informative journal in its field, the Journal of World Trade sets the agenda for both scholarship and policy initiatives in this most critical area of international relations. It is the only journal which deals authoritatively with the most crucial issues affecting world trade today.
期刊最新文献
Rethinking Test Data Protection in China-US Trade War: Integrating Empirical and Normative Analysis The WTO and Using Digital Economy Technologies: Surviving the Race With Preferential Trade Agreements A Tale of Too Little: Anti-dumping Tariff Between SAFTA Contracting Parties Game Analysis of Different Source Disclosure Model for Genetic Resources and Implications for China Improving Export Credit Agency Impact Through Full Faith and Credit
×
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