农产品出口补贴法律问题研究
|
摘要
WTO下的农产品出口补贴是农产品贸易中的痼疾,基本不受多边贸易法纪约束,直至乌拉圭回合达成的《农产品协定》(AA)与《补贴与反补贴协定》(SCMA)才对农产品出口补贴进行了较为有效地规制。本文剖析了WTO下农产品出口补贴的法律问题,通过探讨WTO农产品出口补贴具体规则,试图解决我国面临的农产品出口补贴问题。
本文分为绪论、正文、结语三部分,正文包括六章。
第一章为农产品出口补贴概论,首先探讨了农产品出口补贴的形成及其原因。出口补贴有损于整体社会福利,对国际贸易扭曲程度最为严重,而其仍在农产品领域盛行的主要原因是农产品出口补贴属于出口国农产品国际贸易保护措施,是国内过度农业保护政策的直接后果。然后介评了农产品出口补贴的GATT/WTO法律规则演进和美欧农产品出口补贴政策,从法律规则和实践政策的角度揭示农产品出口补贴揭示农产品出口补贴是贸易保护主义的产物。
第二章分析了与农产品出口补贴有关的三大协定及其具体的法律适用。在WTO下调整农产品出口补贴的法律文件主要是《农产品协定》、《补贴与反补贴措施协定》和GATT1994第16条。三者的法律地位是平等的,但在实践中,因GATT1994第16条存在的缺陷,主要是前两者对农产品出口补贴进行适用。《农产品协定》和《补贴与反补贴措施协定》是规制农产品出口补贴的两个平行协定,二者的适用对象并不一致,因此它们不是一般法与特别法的关系。在处理具体案件时,必须首先对某一农产品出口补贴进行归类,再确定适用的法律。
第三章论述了农产品出口补贴的实体规则—农产品出口补贴的构成要件和形式。农产品出口补贴可分解为四个构成要素,“补贴提供者”、“财政资助”和“利益”,“视出口实绩”。农产品出口补贴形式可以分为两大类,第一类为AA第9.1(a)条列举的6类农产品出口补贴,要受到AA削减承诺的约束;第二类是除此之外的农产品出口补贴形式,需要遵守第10条反规避规定,并最终受到SCMA调整,包括农产品出口信贷、出口信贷担保或保险,国际粮食援助以及国营贸易企业。
第四章考察了WTO成员对农产品出口补贴可采取的救济措施。WTO成员可采取两种形式的救济措施,多边救济措施和单边救济措施。前者是对出口国的出口补贴合法性问题提出质疑,将其诉诸于WTO下的争端解决机构。后者是成员根据本国国内反补贴税法,对得到出口补贴的农产品采取反补贴措施。
第五章探讨了多哈回合与农产品出口补贴的法纪发展。AA具有临时性,因此多哈回合继续就农业问题进行谈判。目前可以明确的是,发达成员需在2013年平行取消所有形式农产品出口补贴,传统的农产品出口补贴法纪已较为明确,而出口信贷担保、粮食援助及国营贸易企业属于新型的农产品出口补贴仍需进一步在未来谈判中确定。
第六章分析了我国对农产品出口补贴的应对策略。对于其他成员的农产品出补贴行为,我国除了在不违反AA的情况下,通过国营贸易企业对关键农产品进行垄断经营外,也可根据国外农产品出口补贴对我国农产品影响的具体情况,采取多边和单边救济措施。而对其他成员质疑我国仍在维持农产品出口补贴,我国制定农业保护政策要注意不违反AA规则。
Under WTO agricultural export subsidies is a chronic problem in agricultural trade which is not bound by the multilateral trading rules. Until AA and SCMA were reached in the Uruguay Round, agricultural export subsidies began to be regulated. This dissertation analyses the legal issues on the rules of WTO agricultural export subsidies and attempts to resolve some issues that China has been facing by exploring WTO agricultural export subsidies specific rules.
The dissertation is composed of six chapters in addition to the preface and the conclusion.
Chapter I first discusses the existence of agricultural export subsidies and analyses its sources. As the most distorted measures in the international trade, export subsidies policy undermines the overall social welfare. The prevalence of export subsidies in agriculture stems from the fact that the agricultural export subsidies policy is one of international trade protection measures for export countries. In addition, the excessive domestic agricultural protection policy directly causes the export subsidies. Then by reviewing the evolution of the agricultural export subsidies under the GATT / WTO and the agricultural export subsidies policy of United States and Europe , this dissertation reveals that agricultural export subsidies is the ultimate product of trade protectionism
Chapter II examines three main agreements in regarding to agricultural exports subsidies and discusses its application of law to agricultural exports subsidies. The agricultural exports subsidies are mainly disciplined by AA, SCMA and article 6 of GATT 1994 which equally apply to the agricultural exports subsidies. However, in practice, with the defects of article 16 of GATT 1994, the agricultural exports subsidies are mostly regulated by AA, SCMA. They are parallel agreements of agricultural exports subsidies, but their spheres are different, therefore AA should not be regarded as a kind of lex specialis. It is necessary to first classify certain agricultural exports subsidies, then decide the law to be applied on the cases.
Chapter III discusses agricultural export subsidies substantive rules including the elements and the forms of agricultural export subsidies. Agricultural export subsidies policy is composed of four elements,“provider of subsidies”,“financial contribution”,“benefits”and“contingent upon export performance”. Forms of agricultural export subsidies can be divided into two categories, the first category is the agricultural export subsidies listed in Article 9.1 (a) of AA which need to be subject to reduction commitments; the second category is the other agricultural export subsidies which need comply with the anti-circumvention provisions of Article 10 and ultimately regulated by the SCMA, including agricultural export credits, export credit guarantees or insurance, international food aid and state trading enterprises.
Chapter IV inspects the remedies measures which can be taken by WTO members for the agricultural export subsidies. Such measures take two broad forms, multilateral or unilateral remedies measures. The former is a WTO member can challenge the legality of an export subsidy and resort to the DSB. The latter is the Member imposes duties against injurious subsidies according to its domestic countervailing duty laws.
Chapter V discusses the Doha Round and the development of the discipline of agricultural export subsidies. AA is temporary, therefore the Doha Round of WTO negotiations include agricultural issues. It is clear that all forms of export subsidies will be eliminated by the end of 2013, including“parallel”elimination of subsidies in export credit guarantees, food aid, and state trading enterprises. The possible rule of traditional agricultural export subsidies has been definite, but difficult negotiations remain on establishing new disciplines for other forms of export competition.
Chapter VI analyses the possible strategic approaches taken by China for agricultural export subsidies. China could use state trading enterprises on some key agricultural products under the monopoly. In addition China can also choose multilateral or unilateral measures in specific circumstances. In the main time, because other members still challenge some agricultural policies in China as export subsidies, we should prevent the protection policy from violating the rules of AA.
本文分为绪论、正文、结语三部分,正文包括六章。
第一章为农产品出口补贴概论,首先探讨了农产品出口补贴的形成及其原因。出口补贴有损于整体社会福利,对国际贸易扭曲程度最为严重,而其仍在农产品领域盛行的主要原因是农产品出口补贴属于出口国农产品国际贸易保护措施,是国内过度农业保护政策的直接后果。然后介评了农产品出口补贴的GATT/WTO法律规则演进和美欧农产品出口补贴政策,从法律规则和实践政策的角度揭示农产品出口补贴揭示农产品出口补贴是贸易保护主义的产物。
第二章分析了与农产品出口补贴有关的三大协定及其具体的法律适用。在WTO下调整农产品出口补贴的法律文件主要是《农产品协定》、《补贴与反补贴措施协定》和GATT1994第16条。三者的法律地位是平等的,但在实践中,因GATT1994第16条存在的缺陷,主要是前两者对农产品出口补贴进行适用。《农产品协定》和《补贴与反补贴措施协定》是规制农产品出口补贴的两个平行协定,二者的适用对象并不一致,因此它们不是一般法与特别法的关系。在处理具体案件时,必须首先对某一农产品出口补贴进行归类,再确定适用的法律。
第三章论述了农产品出口补贴的实体规则—农产品出口补贴的构成要件和形式。农产品出口补贴可分解为四个构成要素,“补贴提供者”、“财政资助”和“利益”,“视出口实绩”。农产品出口补贴形式可以分为两大类,第一类为AA第9.1(a)条列举的6类农产品出口补贴,要受到AA削减承诺的约束;第二类是除此之外的农产品出口补贴形式,需要遵守第10条反规避规定,并最终受到SCMA调整,包括农产品出口信贷、出口信贷担保或保险,国际粮食援助以及国营贸易企业。
第四章考察了WTO成员对农产品出口补贴可采取的救济措施。WTO成员可采取两种形式的救济措施,多边救济措施和单边救济措施。前者是对出口国的出口补贴合法性问题提出质疑,将其诉诸于WTO下的争端解决机构。后者是成员根据本国国内反补贴税法,对得到出口补贴的农产品采取反补贴措施。
第五章探讨了多哈回合与农产品出口补贴的法纪发展。AA具有临时性,因此多哈回合继续就农业问题进行谈判。目前可以明确的是,发达成员需在2013年平行取消所有形式农产品出口补贴,传统的农产品出口补贴法纪已较为明确,而出口信贷担保、粮食援助及国营贸易企业属于新型的农产品出口补贴仍需进一步在未来谈判中确定。
第六章分析了我国对农产品出口补贴的应对策略。对于其他成员的农产品出补贴行为,我国除了在不违反AA的情况下,通过国营贸易企业对关键农产品进行垄断经营外,也可根据国外农产品出口补贴对我国农产品影响的具体情况,采取多边和单边救济措施。而对其他成员质疑我国仍在维持农产品出口补贴,我国制定农业保护政策要注意不违反AA规则。
Under WTO agricultural export subsidies is a chronic problem in agricultural trade which is not bound by the multilateral trading rules. Until AA and SCMA were reached in the Uruguay Round, agricultural export subsidies began to be regulated. This dissertation analyses the legal issues on the rules of WTO agricultural export subsidies and attempts to resolve some issues that China has been facing by exploring WTO agricultural export subsidies specific rules.
The dissertation is composed of six chapters in addition to the preface and the conclusion.
Chapter I first discusses the existence of agricultural export subsidies and analyses its sources. As the most distorted measures in the international trade, export subsidies policy undermines the overall social welfare. The prevalence of export subsidies in agriculture stems from the fact that the agricultural export subsidies policy is one of international trade protection measures for export countries. In addition, the excessive domestic agricultural protection policy directly causes the export subsidies. Then by reviewing the evolution of the agricultural export subsidies under the GATT / WTO and the agricultural export subsidies policy of United States and Europe , this dissertation reveals that agricultural export subsidies is the ultimate product of trade protectionism
Chapter II examines three main agreements in regarding to agricultural exports subsidies and discusses its application of law to agricultural exports subsidies. The agricultural exports subsidies are mainly disciplined by AA, SCMA and article 6 of GATT 1994 which equally apply to the agricultural exports subsidies. However, in practice, with the defects of article 16 of GATT 1994, the agricultural exports subsidies are mostly regulated by AA, SCMA. They are parallel agreements of agricultural exports subsidies, but their spheres are different, therefore AA should not be regarded as a kind of lex specialis. It is necessary to first classify certain agricultural exports subsidies, then decide the law to be applied on the cases.
Chapter III discusses agricultural export subsidies substantive rules including the elements and the forms of agricultural export subsidies. Agricultural export subsidies policy is composed of four elements,“provider of subsidies”,“financial contribution”,“benefits”and“contingent upon export performance”. Forms of agricultural export subsidies can be divided into two categories, the first category is the agricultural export subsidies listed in Article 9.1 (a) of AA which need to be subject to reduction commitments; the second category is the other agricultural export subsidies which need comply with the anti-circumvention provisions of Article 10 and ultimately regulated by the SCMA, including agricultural export credits, export credit guarantees or insurance, international food aid and state trading enterprises.
Chapter IV inspects the remedies measures which can be taken by WTO members for the agricultural export subsidies. Such measures take two broad forms, multilateral or unilateral remedies measures. The former is a WTO member can challenge the legality of an export subsidy and resort to the DSB. The latter is the Member imposes duties against injurious subsidies according to its domestic countervailing duty laws.
Chapter V discusses the Doha Round and the development of the discipline of agricultural export subsidies. AA is temporary, therefore the Doha Round of WTO negotiations include agricultural issues. It is clear that all forms of export subsidies will be eliminated by the end of 2013, including“parallel”elimination of subsidies in export credit guarantees, food aid, and state trading enterprises. The possible rule of traditional agricultural export subsidies has been definite, but difficult negotiations remain on establishing new disciplines for other forms of export competition.
Chapter VI analyses the possible strategic approaches taken by China for agricultural export subsidies. China could use state trading enterprises on some key agricultural products under the monopoly. In addition China can also choose multilateral or unilateral measures in specific circumstances. In the main time, because other members still challenge some agricultural policies in China as export subsidies, we should prevent the protection policy from violating the rules of AA.
引文
1参见陈立虎:《对外贸易行政法制度》,中国商业出版社2000年版,第4页。
2参见陈立虎:《对外贸易行政法制度》,中国商业出版社2000年版,第9页。
3参见王红、傅思明:《WTO与中国行政法治建设》,中共中央党校出版社2002年版,第25页。
4参见王贵国:《世界贸易组织法》,法律出版社2003年版,第318页。
5经济学领域涉及到农产品出口补贴问题的论著比较有代表性的有:OECD Paper, An Analysis of Officially Supported Export Credits in Agriculture; FAO, Food Aid in the Context of the WTO Negotiations on Agriculture; Dixit, Praveen M. and Tim Josling. 1997.“State Trading in Agriculture: An Analytical Framework,”International Agricultural Trade Research Consortium, working paper;程国强:《农业贸易政策论》,中国经济出版社1996年版;蓝海涛:《国际农业贸易制度解读政策应用》,中国海关出版社2002年版;程国强:《WTO农产品出口补贴规则执行评价》,国务院发展研究中心调查研究报告,2006年6月5日;卢峰:《误读补贴—我国农产品贸易政策与入世谈判》,《国际贸易》2001年第年第5期。
6代表性的论著列举如下: The Law of International Trade in Agricultural Products, from GATT 1947 to the WTO Agreement on Agriculture, Kluwer Law International, 2002; Timothy E. Josling , Stefan Tangermann, T. K. Warley, Agriculture in the GATT, Stanford University Press, 1996;龚宇:《WTO农产品贸易法律制度研究》,厦门大学出版社2005年版。
7李本:《补贴与反补贴制度分析》,北京大学出版社2005年版。甘瑛:《国际货物贸易中的补贴与反补贴法律问题研究》,法律出版社2005年版。
8参见唐青阳:《论WTO争端解决机构的法解释效力》,《广东社会科学》2005年第6期,第183页。
9参见[英]伯纳德.霍克曼、迈克尔.考斯基:《世界贸易体制的政治经济学》,刘平、洪晓东等译,法律出版社1999年版,第200页。
10参见佟家栋主编:《国际经济学》,南开大学出版社1995年版,第135页。
11参见陈宪、石士钧等编著:《国际经济学教程》,立信会计出版社2003年版,第153页。
12参见佟家栋主编:《国际经济学》,南开大学出版社1995年版,第135页。
13参见薛敬孝、佟家栋等编著:《国际经济学》,高等教育出版社2002年版,第109页。
14参见史自力主编:《国际经济学》,郑州大学出版社2002年版,第160页。
15参见程厚思:《出口补贴经济分析》,云南财贸学院学报1997年第1期,第53页。
16参见[美]莫迪查.E.克雷林:《国际经济学:一种政策方法》,方齐云、费剑平等译,北京大学出版社2004年版,第115页。
17参见冯德连主编:《国际经济法学》,中国人民大学出版社2006年版,第161页。
18参见潘盛洲:《中国农业保护问题研究》,中国农业出版社1999年版,第12页。
19参见[英]A.J雷纳、D.科尔曼主编:《农业经济学前沿问题》,唐忠、孔祥智译,中国税务出版社2000年版,第87页。
20参见洪德钦:《WTO法律与政策专题研究》,中国人民大学出版社2004年版,第21页。
21参见程国强:《农业贸易政策论》,中国经济出版社1996年版,第23页;潘盛洲:《中国农业保护问题研究》,中国农业出版社1999年版,第62-63页。
22参见[英]伯纳德.霍克曼、迈克尔.考斯基:《世界贸易体制的政治经济学》,刘平、洪晓东等译,法律出版社1999年版,第201页。
23参见[英]A.J雷纳、D.科尔曼主编:《农业经济学前沿问题》,唐忠、孔祥智译,中国税务出版社2000年版,第28-29页。
24参见张韶军、杨青:《美国对农产品贸易的保护及其对我国的借鉴》,《国际贸易问题》1997年第11期,第
29页。
25 See Melaku Geboye Desta, The Law of International Trade in Agricultural Products, Kluwer Law International, 2002, p.101.
26参见赵维田:《世贸组织(WTO)的法律制度》,吉林人民出版社2000年版,第7-8页。
27参见世贸组织编:《关贸总协定法律及实务指南》,北京大学国际经经济组织研究中心译,上海人民出版社2004年版,第471页。
28参见[美]约翰.H.杰克逊:《世界贸易体制——国际经济关系的法律与政策》,张乃根译,复旦大学出版社2001年版,第42页。
29 See Melaku Geboye Desta, The Law of International Trade in Agricultural Products, from GATT 1947 to the WTO Agreement on Agriculture, Kluwer Law International, 2002, p.103.
30 See Melaku Geboye Desta, The Law of International Trade in Agricultural Products, from GATT 1947 to the WTO Agreement on Agriculture, Kluwer Law International, 2002, p.104.
31比如GATT第16条第3款是基于宪章第28条第1款和第4款;第4款基于宪章第26条1款和第3款。
32参见世贸组织编:《关贸总协定法律及实务指南》,北京大学国际经经济组织研究中心译,上海人民出版社2004年版,第463页。
33 See Melaku Geboye Desta, Law of International Trade in Agricultural Products, from GATT 1947 to the WTO Agreement on Agriculture, Kluwer Law International, 2002, p.114.
35 See Miguel Montana-Mora,International Law and International Relations Cheek to Cheek: An International Law/International Relations Perspective on the U.S./EC Agricultural Export Subsidies Dispute,North Carolina Journal of International Law & Commercial Regulation,Vol.19, p.12.
36参见龚宇:《WTO农产品贸易法律制度研究》,厦门大学出版社2005年版,第62-75页。
37 See Miguel Montana-Mora, International Law and International Relations Cheek to Cheek: An International Law/International Relations Perspective on the U.S./EC Agricultural Export Subsidies Dispute, North Carolina Journal of International Law & Commercial Regulation,Vol.19, pp.20-21.
38 GATT document, Declaration of Ministers Approved at Tokyo, on 14 September 1973, MIN(73)1.
39《反补贴守则》第11条。
40参见龚宇:《WTO农产品贸易法律制度研究》,厦门大学出版社2005年版,第102-106页。
41《反补贴守则》第17条、18条。
42《反补贴守则》第4条。
43参见龚宇:《WTO农产品贸易法律制度研究》,厦门大学出版社2005年版,第115-116页。
44 See Ministerial Declaration on the Uruguay Round, MIN.DEC, 20 September, 1986.
45 See Miguel Montana-Mora,International Law and International Relations Cheek to Cheek: An International Law/International Relations Perspective on the U.S./EC Agricultural Export Subsidies Dispute, North Carolina Journal of International Law & Commercial Regulation, Vol.19, pp.35-41.
46 United States Proposal for Negotiations on Agriculture, 7 July 1987, MTN.GNG/NG5 /W/14.
47参见赵维田:《世贸组织(WTO)的法律制度》,吉林人民出版社2000年版,第248-253页。
48 Raj Bhala,World Agricultural Trade in Purgatory: the Uruguay Round Agriculture Agreement and Its Implications for the Doha Round,North Dakota Law Review,Vol.79,2003,p.809.
49 Modalities for The Establishment of Specific Binding Commitments under the Reform Programme, Note by the Chairman of the Market Access Group, 20 December 1993, MTN.GNG/MAIW/24.
50 See Henricus A. Strating, The GATT Agriculture Dispute: A European Perspective, North Carolina Journal of International Law and Commercial Regulation, Vol.18, 1993, p.317-319.
51 Treaty Establishing the European Economic Community, Article 38(2)(4), Article 39(1).
52参见农业部软科学考察团:《欧盟共同农业政策的形成与调整》,《世界农业》2001年第7期,第4页。
53 See Henricus A. Strating, The GATT Agriculture Dispute: A European Perspective, North Carolina Journal of International Law and Commercial Regulation,Vol.18, 1993, pp.321-323.
54参见赵维田:《世贸组织(WTO)的法律制度》,吉林人民出版社2000年版,第244页。
55 Al J. Daniel,Agricultural Reform: The European Community, the Uruguay Round, and International Dispute Resolution, Arkansas Law Review,Vol.46,1994, pp.881.
56参见宋波:《欧盟共同农业政策的改革及其特点》,《国际经济合作》2003年第5期,第20-22页。
57 See GAO, International Trade: Impact of the Uruguay Round Agreement on the Export Enhancement Program, GGD-94-180BR August 5, 1994.
58 CCC是一家由美国农业部管理的联邦公司,设立该公司目的是稳定和维持农业收入和农产品价格。其宪法修正案准许将农产品售往其他政府机构和外国政府,并且可以作为粮食援助捐赠给国内、国外以及国际救济机构。当前,CCC主要是作为一个融资实体,政府通过这一实体为农业计划进行筹资。参见商务部世界贸易组织司、中国政府世贸组织通报咨询局编著:《美国贸易政策—世界贸易组织对美国贸易政策审议》,中国商务出版社2005年版,第123页。
59 See Fact Sheet: Export Enhancement Program, March 2006, http://www.fas.usda.gov/info/ factsheets/eep.asp, at 2008-2-19.
60参见商务部世界贸易组织司、中国政府世贸组织通报咨询局编著:《美国贸易政策—世界贸易组织对美国贸易政策审议》,中国商务出版社2005年版,第121页。
61 David R. Purnell, A Critical Examination of the Targeted Export Assistance Program, Its Transformation into the Market Promotion Program and Its Future, North Carolina Journal of International Law & Commercial Regulation, Vol.18,1993, pp.560-561.
62赵维田:《WTO与国际法》,http://www.iolaw.org.cn/showarticle.asp?id=853,2007-11-18.
63 France Assistance to Exports of Wheat and Wheat Flour, Panel Report adopted on 21 November 1958, L/924 -7S/46.
64 European Communities-Refunds on Exports of Sugar Complaint by Australia, European Communities - Refunds on Exports of Sugar Complaint By Brazil, Report of the Panel, L/4833, L/5011.
65 European Economic Community - Subsidies on Export of Pasta Products, Report of the Panel, SCM /43, May 19 1983,para.3.1-3.2.
66 European Economic Community - Subsidies on Export of Pasta Products, Report of the Panel, SCM /43, May 19 1983,para.4.2.
67 France Assistance to Exports of Wheat and Wheat Flour, Report of Panel, 21 November 1958, L/924 - 7S/46, 1958 GATTPD LEXIS 2, para.14.
68 France Assistance to Exports of Wheat and Wheat Flour, Report of Panel, 21 November 1958, L/924 - 7S/46, 1958 GATTPD LEXIS 2, para.17.
69 France Assistance to Exports of Wheat and Wheat Flour, Report of Panel, 21 November 1958, L/924 - 7S/46, 1958 GATTPD LEXIS 2, para.18-19.
70 European Communities-Refunds on Exports of Sugar Complaint by Australia, European Communities - Refunds on Exports of Sugar Complaint by Brazil, Report of the Panel, L/4833, L/5011.
71 European Communities-Refunds on Exports of Sugar Complaint by Australia, Report of the Panel, 6 November 1979, L/4833, para.4.17.
72 European Communities-Refunds on Exports of Sugar Complaint by Australia, Report of the Panel, 6 November 1979, L/4833, para.5.
74 European Communities-Refunds on Exports of Sugar Complaint by Australia, Report of the Panel adopted on 6 November 1979, L/4833, para.4.10.
75 European Communities-Refunds on Exports of Sugar Complaint by Brazil, Report of the Panel adopted on 7 October 1980, L/5011, para.4.9.
76参见龚宇:《WTO农产品贸易法律制度研究》,厦门大学出版社2005年版,第106页。
77 AA第2条及附件1。
78参见SCMA第3.1(a)“法律或事实上视出口实绩为惟一条件或多种其他条件之一而给予的补贴,包括附件1列举的补贴”。
79参见SCMA第9.2(b)条。
80世界贸易组织秘书处编:《乌拉圭回合协议导读》,索必成、胡盈之译,法律出版社2000年版,第89页。
81 Canada– Measures Affecting the Importation of Milk and the Exportation of Dairy Products WT/DS103/R, WT/DS113/R, 17 May 1999, report of the panel, para.7.27.
82赵维田:《世贸组织(WTO)的法律制度》,吉林人民出版社2000年版,第259页。王贵国:《世界贸易组织法》,法律出版社2003年版,第332页。
83 United States– Tax Treatment for“Foreign Sales Corporations”, Report of the Appellate Body, 24 February 2000,WT/DS108/AB/R,para.151.
84 See Dale E. McNiel, Agricultural Trade Symposium: Furthering the Reforms of Agricultural Policies in the Millennium Round, Minnesota Journal of Global Trade, Vol.9, 2000, p71.
85 See David Morgan and Gavin Goh, Peace in Our Time? An Analysis of Article 13 of the Agreement on Agriculture, Vol.37, 2003, p.977.
86 Brazil - Measures Affecting Desiccated Coconut, Report of the Appellate Body, 20 March 1997, WT/DS22/AB/R, pp. 12-13.
87 United States– Tax Treatment for“Foreign Sales Corporations”, Report of the Panel, 8 October 1999, WT/DS108/R, para.7.80.
88 SCMA第1条“1.2如按第1款定义的补贴依照第2条的规定属专向性补贴,则此种补贴应符合第二部分或符合第三部分或第五部分的规定”。
89参见甘瑛:《国际货物贸易中的补贴与反补贴法律问题研究》,法律出版社2005年版,第98-99页。
90在该条的脚注4、5中出现了“出口补贴”字眼。“4如事实证明补贴的给予虽未在法律上视出口实绩而定,而事实上与实际或预期出口或出口收入联系在一起,则符合此标准。将补贴给予从事出口的企业这一事实本身不得成为被视为属本规定含义范围内的出口补贴的原因。5附件1所指的不构成出口补贴的措施不得根据本规定和本协定任何其他规定而被禁止”。
91见SCMA《出口补贴例示清单》第(b)-(l)项。
92详见本文第四章。
93参见DSU第1条。
94如《实施卫生与植物卫生措施协定》、《纺织品与服装协定》、《技术性贸易壁垒协定》、《关于实施1994年关税与贸易总协定第6条的协定》、《关于实施1994年关税与贸易总协定第7条的协定》、《补贴与反补贴措施协定》《关于金融服务的附件》、《关于空运服务的附件》、《关于GATS部分争端解决程序的决定》。
95参见肖冰:《〈实施卫生与植物卫生措施协定〉研究》,法律出版社2004年版,第34-36页。
96《保障措施协定》第2条:“1.一成员只有在根据下列规定确定正在进口至其领土的一产品的数量与国内生产相比绝对或相对增加,且对生产同类或直接竞争产品的国内产业造成严重损害或严重损害威胁,方可对该产品实施保障措施”。GATT1994第19条规定,“对某些产品进口的紧急措施1.(a)如因不能预见的情况和一缔约方在本协定项下负担包括关税减让在内义务的影响,进口至该缔约方领土的产品数量增加如此之大且情况如此严重,以致对该领土内同类产品或直接竞争产品的国内生产者造成严重损害或严重损害威胁,则该缔约方有权在防止或补救此种损害所必需的限度和时间内,对该产品全部或部分中止义务或撤销或修改减让。”
97张汉林主编:《保障措施争端案例》,经济日报社2003年版,第62-63页。
98 Argentina-Safeguard Measures on Imports of Footwear, Report of the Appellate Body, 14 December 1999, WT/DS121/AB/R, parp.81.
99 Brazil-Measures Affecting Desiccated Coconut, Report of the Appellate Body, 20 March 1997, WT/DS22/AB/R, pp.12-13.
100 United States– Tax Treatment for“Foreign Sales Corporations”, Report of the Panel, 8 October 1999, WT/DS108/R, para.7.79-7.80.
101 United States– Tax Treatment for“Foreign Sales Corporations”, Report of the Appellate Body, 24 February 2000, WT/DS108/AB/R, para.117.
102 [美]约翰.H.杰克逊:《世界贸易体制—国际经济关系的法律与政策》,张乃根译,复旦大学出版社2001年版,第305页。
103 Canada– Measures Affecting the Importation of Milk and the Exportation of Dairy Products, Report of the Panel,
17 May 1999,WT/DS103/R,WT/DS113/R,para.4.301. 104 United States– Tax Treatment for“Foreign Sales Corporations”, Report of the Panel, 8 October 1999, WT/DS108/R, para.7.82.
105 See Melaku Geboye Desta, The law of international trade in Agricultural products, Kluwer Law International, 2002, p.161.
106 United States– Tax Treatment for“Foreign Sales Corporations”, Report of the Panel, 8 October 1999, WT/DS108/R, para.7.150.
107 United States–Tax Treatment for“Foreign Sales Corporations”, Report of the Appellate Body, 24 February 2000, WT/DS108/AB/R, para.141.
108 SCMA《出口补贴例示清单》“(j)政府(或政府控制的特殊机构)提供的出口信贷担保或保险计划、针对出口产品成本增加或外汇风险计划的保险或担保计划,保险费率不足以弥补长期营业成本和计划的亏损。(k)政府(或政府控制的和/或根据政府授权活动的特殊机构)给予的出口信贷,利率低于它们使用该项资金所实际应付的利率(或如果它们为获得相同偿还期和其他信贷条件且与出口信贷货币相同的资金而从国际资本市场借人时所应付的利率),或它们支付的出口商或其他金融机构为获得信贷所产生的全部或部分费用,只要这些费用保证在出口信贷方面能获得实质性的优势。但是,如一成员属一官方出口信贷的国际承诺的参加方,且截至1979年1月1日至少有12个本协定创始成员属该国际承诺的参加方(或创始成员所通过的后续承诺),或如果一成员实施相关承诺的利率条款,则符合这些条款的出口信贷做法不得视为本协定所禁止的出口补贴”。
109 European Communities– Regime for the Importation, Sale and Distribution of Bananas, Report of Appellate Body, 9 September 1997, WT/DS27/AB/R, para.203-204.
110 See Didier Chambovey, How the Expiry of The Peace Clause (Article 13 of The WTO Agreement on Agriculture) Might Alter Discipline on Agricultural Subsidies In The WTO Framework, Journal of world trade, Vol.36, 2002, p.309-310.
111 See H. Steinberg and Timothy E. Josling, When the Peace Ends: the Vulnerability of EC and US Agricultural Subsidies to WTO Legal Challenge. Journal of International Economic Law, Vol.6, 2003, p.376.
112参见周永坤:《法理学》,法律出版社2004年版,第110-113页。
113参见[比]约斯特.鲍威林:《国际公法规则之冲突》,周忠海、周丽瑛等译,法律出版社2005年版,第208-209页。
114 [比]约斯特.鲍威林:《国际公法规则之冲突》,周忠海、周丽瑛等译,法律出版社2005年版,第192-205页。
115参见[比]约斯特.鲍威林:《国际公法规则之冲突》,周忠海、周丽瑛等译,法律出版社2005年版,第208-232页。
116 Didier Chambovey, How the Expiry of The Peace Clause (Article 13 of The WTO Agreement on Agriculture) Might Alter Discipline on Agricultural Subsidies in The WTO Framework, Journal of world trade, Vol.36, 2002, p347.
117 [比]约斯特.鲍威林:《国际公法规则之冲突》,周忠海、周丽瑛等译,法律出版社2005年版,第191-192页。
118 See Richard H. Steinberg and Timothy E. Josling, When the Peace Ends: the Vulnerability of EC and US Agricultural Subsidies to WTO Legal Challenge. Journal of International Economic Law, Vol.6, 2003, p.385.
119 SCMA第5条。
120 See Richard H. Steinberg and Timothy E. Josling, When the Peace Ends: the Vulnerability of EC and US Agricultural Subsidies to WTO Legal Challenge. Journal of International Economic Law, Vol.6, 2003, p.377.
121 Didier Chambovey, How the expiry of the peace clause (Article 13 of the WTO Agreement on Agriculture) might alter discipline on Agricultural subsidies in the WTO framework, Journal of world trade, Vol.36, 2002,p348.
122 Canada– Measures Affecting the Importation of Milk and the Exportation of Dairy Products, Recourse to Article 21.5 of the DSU by New Zealand and the United States , Report of the Appellate Body, 3 December 2001, WT/DS103/AB/RW, WT/DS113/AB/RW,para. 123.
123使用者销售支付是给予高地棉花的一种特殊的市场融资,自1990年以来,通过包括FSRI Act of 2002在内的一系列立法,为适格的国内使用者和出口商提供市场保险证明和现金支付。根据FSRI法案的规定,如果连续四个星期,美国运往北欧的棉花最低价格超过北欧的报价,以及世界市场调节价格不超过市场贷款利率的134%时,Step 2支付即按每磅两者的差价发放。United States–Subsidies on Upland Cotton, WT/DS267/R(2004), para. 7.210-7.211.
124 United States–Subsidies on Upland Cotton, Report of the Panel, 8 September 2004, WT/DS267/R, para. 7.673.
125分析“法律上以出口实绩为条件”的出口补贴问题,重要的一点就是看规定补贴条件的相关法律条款是属于强制性规定还是属于任意性规定。从GATT/WTO专家组的实践来看,一般认为只有强制性规定违反GATT/WTO 规则才可能被认为是法律上违反GATT/WTO规则;如果有关法律规定仅仅给予主管机构自由裁量权,由主管机构根据具体情况确定如何实施该法律规定,那么这样的法律规定本身并不构成在法律上违反GATT/WTO规则。甘瑛:《国际货物贸易中的补贴与反补贴法律问题研究》,法律出版社2005年版,第107页。
126 United States–Subsidies on Upland Cotton, Report of the Panel, 8 September 2004, WT/DS267/R, para.7.678-7.760.
127 See Richard H. Steinberg and Timothy E. Josling, When the Peace Ends: the Vulnerability of EC and US Agricultural Subsidies to WTO Legal Challenge. Journal of International Economic Law, Vol.6, 2003, p. 377.
128 Canada– Measures Affecting the Importation of Milk and the Exportation of Dairy Products, Report of the Panel, 17 May 1999, WT/DS103/R,WT/DS113/R,2.34-2.36.
129 Canada– Measures Affecting the Importation of Milk and the Exportation of Dairy Products, Report of the Panel, 17 May 1999, WT/DS103/R, WT/DS113/R,para. 2.16-2.18,4.315,7.78.
130 Canada– Export Credits and Loan Guarantees for Regional Aircraft, Report of the Panel, 28 January 2002, WT/DS222/R,para.7.
131 United States– Tax Treatment for“Foreign Sales Corporations”(Article 21.5 - EC), Report of the Appellate Body, 14 January 2002, WT/DS108/AB/RW, paras.89-90 and 98.
132 United States– Tax Treatment for“Foreign Sales Corporations”, Report of The Panel, WT/DS108/R, 8 October 1999, para.7.45.
133 United States– Tax Treatment for“Foreign Sales Corporations”, Report of The Panel, WT/DS108/R, 8 October 1999, para.7.98-7.102.
134 United States– Tax Treatment for“Foreign Sales Corporations”(Article 21.5 - EC), Report of the Appellate Body, 14 January 2002,WT/DS108/AB/RW, paras.91-92.
135 United States– Preliminary Determinations with Respect to Certain Softwood Lumber from Canada, Report of the Panel, 27 September 2002, WT/DS236/R, paras. 7.23-7.24.
136 United States– Preliminary Determinations with Respect to Certain Softwood Lumber from Canada, Report of the Panel, 27 September 2002, WT/DS236/R, paras. 7.18, 7.28.
137 Canada-Measures Affecting the Export of Civilian Aircraft, Report of the Appellate Body,2 August 1999,WT/DS70/AB/R, para.149.
138 Canada-Measures Affecting the Export of Civilian Aircraft, WT/DS70/R, Report of the Panel, 14 April 1999, para.5.30.
139 Canada-Measures Affecting the Export of Civilian Aircraft, WT/DS70/R, Report of the Panel, 14 April 1999, para.9.115, 9.119.
140 Canada-Measures Affecting the Export of Civilian Aircraft, Report of the Appellate Body, 2 August 1999, WT/DS70/AB/R, para.154.
141 Canada-Measures Affecting the Export of Civilian Aircraft, Report of the Appellate Body, 2 August 1999, WT/DS70/AB/R, para.157.
143 Canada– Export Credits and Loan Guarantees for Regional Aircraft, Report of the Panel, WT/DS222/R, 28 January 2002, para.7.230-7.235, 7.254.
144 Canada– Certain Measures Affecting the Automotive Industry, Report of the Appellate Body, WT/DS139/AB/R, WT/DS142/AB/R, 31 May 2000, para.100.
145 Canada– Certain Measures Affecting the Automotive Industry, Report of the Panel, WT/DS139/R,WT/DS142/R,11 February 2000, para.10.142.
146 Canada– Certain Measures Affecting the Automotive Industry, Report of the Panel, WT/DS139/R, WT/DS142/R, 11 February 2000, para.10.173-10.201.
147 Canada–Measures Affecting the Export of Civilian Aircraft, WT/DS70/AB/R, Report of the Appellate Body, 2 August 1999, paras. 166-167.
148 Brazil– Export Financing Programme for Aircraft, Report of the Panel, 14 April 1999, WT/DS46/R, para.7.70.
149 Australia– Subsidies Provided to Producers and Exporters of Automotive Leather, Report of the Panel, 25 May 1999, WT/DS126/R, para.2.1-3.2.
150 Australia– Subsidies Provided to Producers and Exporters of Automotive Leather, Report of the Panel, 25 May 1999, WT/DS126/R, para.9.56-9.57.
151 Australia– Subsidies Provided to Producers and Exporters of Automotive Leather, Report of the Panel, 25 May 1999, WT/DS126/R, para.9.72-9.76.
152 Canada–Measures Affecting the Export of Civilian Aircraft, WT/DS70/R, Report of the Panel, Accepted at 14 April 1999, para.9.339.
153 Canada–Measures Affecting the Export of Civilian Aircraft, WT/DS70/AB/R,Report of the Appellate Body, adopted at 2 August 1999, para.174.
154 Canada– Measures Affecting the Importation of Milk and the Exportation of Dairy Products, Report of the Panel, 17 May 1999,WT/DS103/R,WT/DS113/R, para.7.46-7.47.
155 Canada– Measures Affecting the Importation of Milk and the Exportation of Dairy Products, WT/DS103/AB/R, WT/DS113/AB/R, Report of the Appellate Body,13 October 1999, para.84-90.
156 Canada– Measures Affecting the Importation of Milk and the Exportation of Dairy Products, WT/DS103/AB/R, WT/DS113/AB/R, Report of the Appellate Body, 13 October 1999, para. 90.
157 Canada– Measures Affecting the Importation of Milk and the Exportation of Dairy Products, Report of the Panel, 17 May 1999, WT/DS103/R, WT/DS113/R,para.7.102.
158 Canada– Measures Affecting the Importation of Milk and the Exportation of Dairy Products, WT/DS103/AB/R, WT/DS113/AB/R, Report of the Appellate Body, 13 October 1999, para.120.
159 Canada– Measures Affecting the Importation of Milk and the Exportation of Dairy Products, Second Recourse to Article 21.5 of the DSU by New Zealand and the United States , Report of the Appellate Body, 20 December 2002, WT/DS103/AB/RW2, WT/DS113/AB/RW2, para.128.
160 Canada– Measures Affecting the Importation of Milk and the Exportation of Dairy Products, Recourse to Article 21.5 of the DSU by New Zealand and the United States, Report of the Appellate Body, 3 December 2001,WT/DS103/AB/RW,WT/DS113/AB/RW, para.112.
161 Canada– Measures Affecting the Importation of Milk and the Exportation of Dairy Products, Second Recourse to Article 21.5 of the DSU by New Zealand and the United States , Report of the Appellate Body, 20 December 2002, WT/DS103/AB/RW2, WT/DS113/AB/RW2, para.132.
162 Canada– Measures Affecting the Importation of Milk and the Exportation of Dairy Products, Recourse to Article 21.5 of the DSU by New Zealand and the United States , Report of the Appellate Body, 3 December 2001, WT/DS103/AB/RW,WT/DS113/AB/RW, para.114-115.
163 United States– Tax Treatment for“Foreign Sales Corporations”, Report of the Panel, 8 October 1999, WT/DS108/R, para.7.155.
164 United States– Tax Treatment for“Foreign Sales Corporations”, Report of the Appellate Body, 24 February 2000,WT/DS108/AB/R,para.129-131.
165 United States– Tax Treatment for“Foreign Sales Corporations”, Report of the Appellate Body, 24 February 2000, WT/DS108/AB/R, para.151-52.
166 United States– Tax Treatment for“Foreign Sales Corporations”, Report of the Appellate Body, 24 February 2000, WT/DS108/AB/R, para.148.
167 United States– Subsidies on Upland Cotton, Report of the Appellate Body, 3 March 2005, WT/DS267/AB/R, para.705.
168 United States– Subsidies on Upland Cotton, Report of the Appellate Body, 3 March 2005, WT/DS267/AB/R, para.704.
169 United States– Subsidies on Upland Cotton, Report of the Appellate Body, 3 March 2005, WT/DS267/AB/R, para.701, 708.
170 United States– Subsidies on Upland Cotton, Report of the Appellate Body, 3 March 2005, WT/DS267/AB/R, para.708-710.
171 Canada– Measures Affecting the Importation of Milk and the Exportation of Dairy Products, Second Recourse to Article 21.5 of the DSU by New Zealand and the United States, Report of the Appellate Body, 20 December 2002, WT/DS103/AB/RW2,WT/DS113/AB/RW2,para.70-75
172 United States– Tax Treatment for“Foreign Sales Corporations”, Report of the Panel, 8 October 1999, WT/DS108/R, para.7.136.
173 United States– Subsidies on Upland Cotton, Report of the Panel, WT/DS267/R, 8 September 2004, para.7.793.
174 United States– Subsidies on Upland Cotton, Report of the Appellate Body, 3 March 2005, WT/DS267/AB/R, para.651.
176参见李仁真主编:《国际金融法学》,复旦大学出版社2004年版,第267页。
177 An Analysis of Officially Supported Export Credits in Agriculture, http://www.agtradepolicy.org/ output/ resource/OECDEC.pdf,at 2008-2-24.
178陈安主主编:《国际货币金融法学》,北京大学出版社1999年版,第56页。
179 OECD, Arrangement on Officially Supported Export Credits (2005 Revision), TD/PG(2005)38/FINAL.
180 Export Credits and Related Facilities, Background Paper by the Secretariat, G/AG/NG/S/13, 26 June 2000.
181 OECD参加方对农产品出口信贷谈判的部分成果,可参见the Chairman's Revised Proposal for A Sector Understanding on Export Credits for Agricultural Products, TD/CONSENSUS(2000)25/REV4.
182 See Carmen G. Gonzalez, Institutionalizing Inequality: The WTO Agreement on Agriculture, Food Security, and Developing Countries, Columbia Journal of Environmental Law, Vol.27, 2002, p.465.
183 Raj Bhala, World Agricultural Trade In Purgatory: the Uruguay Round Agriculture Agreement and Its Implications for the Doha Round, North Dakota Law Review, Vol.79, 2003, p. 819.
184 Melaku Geboye Desta, The Law of International Trade in Agricultural Products, Kluwer Law International, 2002, p.219.
185 William A. Gillon, Agriculture, Drake Journal of Agricultural Law, Vol.10, 2005, p8.
187 United States– Subsidies on Upland Cotton, Report of the Panel, 8 September 2004, WT/DS267/R, 7.236-7.244.
188 United States– Subsidies on Upland Cotton, Report of the Panel, 8 September 2004, WT/DS267/R, para.7.770.
189 DSU第3.2条规定,“各成员认识到该体制适于保护各成员在适用协定项下的权利和义务,及依照解释国际公法的惯例澄清这些协定的现有规定。DSB的建议和裁决不能增加或减少适用协定所规定的权利和义务。”190如SCMA第6.1(a)条规定,以从价补贴总额的最低限度确定产品补贴存在严重损害,“并不适用民用航空器”,因为“预期民用航空器将受专门的多边规则的约束”。同样,第SCMA8.2(a)的注释规定,“因预期民用航空器将受专门的多边规则的约束,本项的规定不适用于该产品”。此外,GATS第十三条“政府采购”规定,“1.第2条、第16条和第17条不得适用于管理政府机构为政府目的而购买服务的法律、法规或要求,此种购买不是为进行商业转售或为供商业销售而在提供服务过程中使用。2.在《WTO协定》生效之日起2年内,应就本协定项下服务的政府采购问题进行多边谈判”。这些例子表明,乌拉圭回合的起草者们清楚地认识到,随着本轮回合的结束,某些领域的国际纪律还不完善,需要进一步制定。他们明确地在适用协定的文本中,特别规定现行法纪不适用于某一特定情况,而留待未来谈判制定的法纪规制。也就是说,如果他们打算从现行法纪中排除某些特定的措施,他们一定会以明确的条文加以规定。
191在乌拉圭回合的谈判中,1991年12月,主席散发的《农产品文本草案》第9.1条规定:“未列入第8条第2款的出口补贴不得以产生或威胁导致规避出口补贴承诺的方式实施;也不得使用非商业性交易以规避此类承诺”。这与现行的AA第10.1条类似,草案第9条第3款接着规定,“就本条而言,对于政府或其机构提供的出口信贷、出口信贷担保或保险计划是否构成出口补贴,应根据SCMA的附件1第(j)项和(k)项进行认定”。此后不久,《乌拉圭回合多边贸易谈判成果最后文本草案》删去了先前文本的第9条第3款,而最后草案第10.2条作了这样的规定,“谈判方承诺不以除符合国际间议定的纪律之外的方式提供出口信贷、出口信贷担保或保险计划”。其随后被现行第10.2条所取代。
192 Aticle10.2: Members undertake to work toward the development of internationally agreed disciplines to govern the provision of export credits, export credit guarantees or insurance programmes and, after agreement on such disciplines, to provide export credits, export credit guarantees or insurance programmes only in conformity therewith.
193 United States– Subsidies on Upland Cotton, Report of the Appellate Body, 3 March 2005, WT/DS267/AB/R, para.763.
194 Food Aid or Hidden Dumping? Oxfam Briefing Paper, March 2005.
195参见王慧英《“剩余品”时代美国的对外粮食援助政策》,《历史研究》2006年第2期,第12-13页。
196 Jonathan Carlson, Symposium: International Law and World Hunger: Hunger, Agricultural Trade Liberalization, and Soft International Law: Addressing the Legal Dimensions of a Political Problem, Iowa Law Review, Vol.70, 1985, p.1254.
197 FAO, Food Aid in the Context of the WTO Negotiations on Agriculture, http://www.fao.org/DOCREP/ 005/ Y3733E/y3733e06.htm, at 2007-11-18.
198 FAO, Reporting Procedures and Consultative Obligations under the FAO Principles of Surplus Disposal: A Guide for Members of the FAO Consultative Subcommittee on Surplus Disposal, 2000, p.2.
199 Food Aid Convention, 1986, Article IV.
200 Technical Information on State Trading Enterprises, http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/ statra_e/ statra_ info_e.htm, 2006-12-28.
201赵维田:《世贸组织(WTO)的法律制度》,吉林人民出版社2000年版,第195-196页。
202 Canada– Measures Relating to Exports of Wheat and Treatment of Imported Grain, Report of the Appellate Body, 30 August 2004, WT/DS276/AB/R, para. 98.
203 WTO Regulation of Subsidies to State-owned Enterprises (SOEs)-A Critical Appraisal of The China Accession Protocol, Journal of International Economic Law, 2004.7, p869.
204 Merlinda Ingco and Francis Ng, Distortionary Effects of State Trading in Agriculture: Issues for the Next Round of Multilateral Trade Negotiations, February 1998.
205 SCMA第10条的脚注明确规定“本协定第二部分或第三部分的规定可以与第五部分的规定平行援引;但是,对于进口成员内市场中一特定补贴的影响,仅可采取一种形式的补救(或是反补贴税,如满足第五部分的要求,或是根据第4条或第7条实行的反措施)”。这里“本协定第二部分或第三部分的规定”与“第五部分的规定”分别是指禁止性补贴、可诉性补贴以及反补贴措施。
206在这里,“《补贴协定》第3条、第5条和第6条”分别是指SCMA中的禁止性补贴、可诉补贴(第5条:不利影响,第6条:严重侵害)。
207参见余敏友、左海聪、黄志雄:《WTO争端解决机制概论》,上海人民出版社2001年版,第158页。
208参见DSU第4.3条、4.4条、4.7条。
209参见SCMA第4.1-4.4条。
210 Australia– Subsidies Provided to Producers and Exporters of Automotive Leather, Report of the Panel, 25 May 1999, WT/DS126/R, para.9.17-9.20.
211 United States– Tax Treatment for“Foreign Sales Corporations”, Report of The Panel, 8 October 1999, WT/DS108/R, para.7.1,7.4.
212 United States– Tax Treatment for“Foreign Sales Corporations”, Report of the Appellate Body, 24 February 2000, WT/DS108/AB/R, para.161.
213参见杨国华、李咏箑等:《WTO争端解决机制中的磋商程序研究(上)》,载《法学评论》2003年第2期,第78页。
214参见杨国华、李咏箑等:《WTO争端解决机制中的磋商程序研究(上)》,载《法学评论》2003年第2期,第79页。
215参见SCMA第4.5条。
216参见SCMA第24.3条。
217 Minutes of the Meeting Held on 6 March 1996, G/SCM/M/8.
218 DSU第8条。实践中,常常是WTO秘书处向当事方推荐专家组成员,当事方并不需要专门向WTO秘书处说明理由,就可以拒绝接受某人担任专家组成员,此时,秘书处就提出新的候选人。参见杨国华、李詠箑等:《WTO争端解决机制中的专家组程序研究(上)》,《法学评论》2004年第3期,第81页。
219参见左海聪:《国际经济法的理论与实践》,武汉大学出版社2003年版,第122页。
220参见DSU第8.8条、8.9条。
221参见杨国华、李詠箑等:《WTO争端解决机制中的专家组程序研究(下)》,《法学评论》2004年第3期,第73页。
222参见DSU第16.4条。
223参见DSU第17条。
224 SCMA第4.9条。
225参见SCMA第4.9条,DSU第14条。
226参见余敏友:《终止不法行为—世贸组织争端解决机制提供的首要救济》,《法学评论》2006年第6期,第84页。
227 Australia– Subsidies Provided to Producers and Exporters of Automotive Leather, Report of the Panel, 25 May 1999, WT/DS126/R,para,para.10.5-10.7.
228 Canada–Measures Affecting the Export of Civilian Aircraft, WT/DS70/R, Report of the Panel, 14 April 1999, para.10.4.
229 Canada–Measures Affecting the Export of Civilian Aircraft, WT/DS70/AB/R, Report of the Appellate Body, 2 August 1999, para.192.
230参见DSU第21.3条。
231参见DSU第22.2条。
232参见DSU第22.2条。
233余敏友:《论世贸组织法律救济的特性》,《现代法学》2006年第6期,第17页。
234参见DSU第22.3条。
235参见SCMA第4.10条。
236 Brazil-Export Financing Programme for Aircraft, Recourse to Arbitration by Brazil under Article 22.6 of the DSU and Article 4.11 of the SCM Agreement, Decision of the Arbitration, 28 August 2000,WT/DS46/ABR, para.3.44.
237 United States– Tax Treatment for“Foreign Sales Corporations”, Recourse to Arbitration by the United States under Article 22.6 of the DSU and Article 4.11 of the SCM Agreement, Decision of the Arbitration, 30 August 2002,WT/DS108/ARB, para.5.4-5.7.
238 Brazil-Export Financing Programme for Aircraft,Recourse to Arbitration by Brazil under Article 22.6 of the DSU and Article 4.11 of the SCM Agreement, Decision of the Arbitration, 28 August 2000,WT/DS46/ABR, para.3.28.
239 United States– Tax Treatment for“Foreign Sales Corporations”, Recourse to Arbitration by the United States under Article 22.6 of the DSU and Article 4.11 of the SCM Agreement, Decision of the Arbitration, 30 August 2002, WT/DS108/ARB, para.5.9, 5.12.
240 Brazil-Export Financing Programme for Aircraft, Recourse to Arbitration by Brazil under Article 22.6 of the DSU and Article 4.11 of the SCM Agreement, Decision of the Arbitration, 28 August 2000, WT/DS46/ABR, para.3.44.-3.54.
241 United States– Tax Treatment for“Foreign Sales Corporations”Recourse to Arbitration by the United States under Article 22.6 of the DSU and Article 4.11 of the SCM Agreement, Decision of the Arbitration, 30 August 2002, WT/DS108/ARB, para.5.15-5.19.
242参见余敏友:《论世贸组织法律救济的特性》,《现代法学》2006年第6期,第21页。
243参见SCMA第11.2条。
244参见《反倾销协定》第3.1条。
245参见SCMA第15.1条。
246 ADA第3.2条规定:“关于倾销进口产品的数量,调查机关应考虑倾销进口产品的绝对数量或相对于进口成员中生产或消费的数量是否大幅增加”。
247 Thailand-Anti-Dumping Duties on Angles, Shapes and Sections of Iron or Non-Alloy Steel and H-Beams from Poland, Report of the Panel, 28 September 2000, WT/DS122/R, para7.161.
248 Guatemala– Definitive Anti-Dumping Measures on Grey Portland Cement from Mexico, Report of the Panel, 24 October 2000, WT/DS156/R, para.8.276.
249 United States– Anti-Dumping Measures on Certain Hot-Rolled Steel Products from Japan, Report of the Appellate Body, 24 July 2001WT/DS184/AB/R, para.223, 227.
250参见甘瑛:《国际货物贸易中的补贴与反补贴法律问题研究》,法律出版社2005年版,第89页。
251参见SCMA第12.1.1条,12.6条。
252参见SCMA第11.11条。
253参见SCMA第13.1条。
254参见朱榄叶:《政府与企业共同面对—中国面临的补贴与反补贴向题研究》,《国际贸易》2005年第4期,第37页。
255参见SCMA第13.3条。
256参见SCMA第17条。
257参见SCMA第20.5条。
258参见SCMA第18.1条。
259参见SCMA第18.2条。
260 United States– Preliminary Determinations with Respect to Certain Softwood Lumber from Canada, Report of the Panel, 27 September 2002, WT/DS236/R, para.7.151.
261参见《补贴守则》第4.9条。
262 SCMA第21.3条。
263 United States– Countervailing Duties on Certain Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products from Germany, Report of the Panel, 3 July 2002,WT/DS213/R,para.8.92-8.95.
264 United States– Countervailing Duties on Certain Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products from Germany, Report of the Panel, 3 July 2002,WT/DS213/R,para.8.96.
265 WTO document, G/AG/NG/W/15.
266 International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD), Agriculture Negotiations at the WTO: Context Setting and Intelligence Report, February-April 2001, at http://www.agtradepolicy.org/output/resource/ agriculturenegotiations3.pdf, 2006-11-17.
267 Proposal for Comprehensive Long-term Agricultural Trade Reform Submission from the United States, G/AG/NG/W/15, 23 June 2000.
268 WTO document, G/AG/NG/W/166, 6 April 2001.
269如美国在1994年至2003年的十年间,粮食援助平均每年达到1000万公吨,See Linda M. Young and Philip C. Abbott, the WTO Negotiations and Disciplines for Food Aid.
270 Special and Differential Treatment for Developing Countries in World Agricultural Trade Submission by ASEAN, 10 November 2000, G/AG/NG/W/55.
271孙振宇主编:《多哈回合谈判中期回顾》,人民出版社2005年版,第3页。
272 International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD),Agriculture Negotiations at the WTO Cancún Outlook Report1 Geneva, April 2003, at http://www.agtradepolicy.org/output/resource/agriculturenegotiations8.pdf, 2006-11-17.
273 Preparations for the Fifth Session of the Ministerial Conference Draft Cancún Ministerial Text Revision, 24 August 2003, JOB(03)/150/Rev.1.
274 Agriculture Negotiations-Status Report Key Issues to Be Addressed, 27 June JOB(05)/126.
275 Doha Work Programme Ministerial Declaration, 18 December 2005,WT/MIN(05)/DEC.
276参见刘昌黎:《WTO谈判冻结及其影响》,《上海对外贸易学院学报》2006年第11期,第3-5页。
277 Revised Draft Modalities for Agriculture, TN/AG/W/4 and Corr.1, 1 August 2007.
278 Revised Draft Modalities for Agriculture, TN/AG/W/4/Rev.1, 8 February 2008.
279 Negotiations on Agriculture Overview, TN/AG/6, 18 December 2002.
280 International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD), Agriculture Negotiations at the WTO Doha Analysis Report1, January 2002, at http://www.agtradepolicy.org/output/resource/ agriculturenegotiations 5.pdf, 2006-12-17.
281参见薛荣久、樊英等,《WTO回合与中国》,对外经济贸易出版社2004年版,第9页。
282 WTO Agriculture Negotiations: Backgrounder, the Issues, and Where We are Now, http://www.wto.org/ english/ tratop_e/agric_ e/negs_ bkgrnd00_contents _e.htm, 2006-9-28.
283 Negotiations on WTO Agreement on Agriculture, Proposals by India in the areas of: (i) Food Security, (ii) Market Access, (iii) Domestic Support, and (iv) Export Competition, G/AG/NG/W/102,15 January 2001.
284 Negotiations on Agriculture First Draft of Modalities for the Further Commitments, TN/AG/W/1, February 2003.
285 EC– US Joint Text: Agriculture, 13 August 2003, JOB(03)/157.
286 International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD), Agriculture Negotiations at the WTO Post-Cancun Outlook Report, November 2003, at http://www.agtradepolicy.org/output/resource/ agriculture negotiations9.pdf, 2006-12-19.
287 International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD), Agriculture Negotiations at the WTO‘Framework Phase’Update Report, June 2004, at http://www.agtradepolicy.org/output/resource/agriculture negotiations7.pdf, 2006-11-17.
288 WTO document, G/AG/NG/W/11.
289 International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD), Agriculture Negotiations at the WTO 'Modalities' Phase Update Report, September 2002, at http://www.agtradepolicy.org/output/resource/ agriculture negotiations7.pdf, 2006-11-17.
290 See Negotiations on Agriculture First Draft of Modalities for the Further Commitments, February 2003, TN/AG/W/1 17.
291 EC– US Joint Text: Agriculture, 13 August 2003, JOB(03)/157.
292 WTO Agriculture Negotiations: Backgrounder, the Issues, and Where We Are Now, http://www.wto.org/english/ tratop_e/agric_ e/negs_bkgrnd00_contents_e.htm, 2006-9-28.
293 WTO document, WT/MIN(03)/W/6.
294 Annex A, Doha Work Programme Ministerial Declaration, 18 December 2005, WT/MIN(05)/DEC.
295目前农产品出口补贴的谈判并没有涉及到第10.1条。
296参见《WTO谈判—各方关注“多哈回合谈判妥协方案”》,《WTO经济导刊》2007年第8期,第8页。
297曹海丽:《美欧在香港WTO会议上陷入粮食援助争议战》, http://news.sina.com.cn/w/2005-12-15/- 18108592771.shtml,2007-2-21,2006-8-11。
298《“多哈回合成败难卜多国移情“自由贸易谈判”》, http://www.cacs.gov.cn/ DefaultWebApp/showNews.jsp? newsId=201260002043,2007-12-11。
299 Modalities for The Establishment of Specific Binding Commitments under The Reform Programme, Note by The Chairman of The Market Access Group, 20 December 1993, MTN.GNG/MAIW/24.
300参见赵维田:《世贸组织(WTO)的法律制度》,吉林人民出版社2000年版,第261-262页。
301参见SCMA第9.2(b)条。
302参见世界贸易组织秘书处编:《乌拉圭回合协议导读》,索必成、胡盈之译,法律出版社2000年版第89页。
303 Harry de Gorter,Merlinda Ingco,Lilian Ruiz, Export Subsidies and WTO Trade Negotiations on Agriculture: Issues and Suggestions for New Rules,Prepared for the World Bank’s Agricultural Trade Group, March 2002.
304程国强:《WTO农产品出口补贴规则执行评价》,国务院发展研究中心调查研究报告,2006年6月5日,第8-9页。
305 Modalities for The Establishment of Specific Binding Commitments under The Reform Programme, Note by The Chairman of The Market Access Group, 20 December 1993, MTN.GNG/MAIW/24.
306参见龚宇:《WTO农产品贸易法律制度研究》,厦门大学出版社2005年版,第198页。
307 Modalities for The Establishment of Specific Binding Commitments under The Reform Programme, Note by The Chairman of The Market Access Group, 20 December 1993, MTN.GNG/MAIW/24.
308程国强:《WTO农产品出口补贴规则执行评价》,国务院发展研究中心调查研究报告,2006年6月5日,第6页。
309程国强:《WTO农产品出口补贴规则执行评价》,国务院发展研究中心调查研究报告,2006年6月5日,第11页。
310参见商务部世界贸易组织司、中国政府世贸组织通报咨询局编著:《美国贸易政策—世界贸易组织对美国贸易政策审议》,中国商务出版社2005年版,第120页。
311农业部:《出口补贴问题背景资料》,http://www.agri.gov.cn/ztzl/wto/wtots/backgroud.htm, 2008-2-24。
312参见程国强:《中国农产品出口:增长、结构与贡献》,《管理世界》2004年第11期,第90-93页。
313参见史朝兴、秦淑红:《中国农产品进口的现状、格局和趋势》,《农业经济导刊》2007年第12期,第104-105页。
314参见程国强:《中国农产品出口:增长、结构与贡献》,《管理世界》2004年第11期,第90-93页。
315邹琪等:《反补贴与中国产业安全》,上海财经大学出版社2006年版,第392页。
316乐施会政策文件:《苦涩的糖—中国糖业面对的不公平贸易》,2003年8月,http://www.maketradefair.org.hk/ news/OHK_sugar_report_Chinese_final.pdf,2008-3-1。
317 European Communities– Export Subsidies on Sugar, Report of the Appellate Body, 28 April 2005, WT/DS265/AB/R, WT/DS266/AB/R,WT/DS283/AB/R, p.120.
318参见《欧盟7月1日起实施糖业改革》,《世界贸易组织动态与研究》2006年第5期,第42页。
319参见钟京:《入世后加强农业保护问题》,中国农垦经济2002年第2期。
320参见邹琪等:《反补贴与中国产业安全》,上海财经大学出版社2006年版,第393页。
321参见杨鹏飞、洪民荣等编著:《WTO法律规则与中国农业》,上海财经大学出版社2000年版,第138页。
322参见卢峰:《误读补贴—我国农产品贸易政策与入世谈判》,《国际贸易》2001年第3期,第4-5页。
323赵维田编著:《中国入世议定书条款解读》,湖南科学技术出版社2006年版,第65页。
324商务部世界贸易组织司、中国政府世贸组织通报咨询局编著:《中国履行加入世界贸易组织承诺年度评估(2003年)》,中国商务出版社2005年版,第16页。
325李天一:《浅析我国增值税出口退税制度与WTO反补贴制度》,《税务与经济》,2003年第5期,第77-78页。
326 Trade Policy Review of People's Republic of China, Report by the Secretariat, WT/TPR/S/161, Page 140.
327 Carbon Steel Wire Rod from Poland, 49 Fed. Reg. 19,374 (DOC 1984) Carbon Steel Wire Rod from Poland; Final Negative Countervailing Duty Determination, 49 Fed. Reg. 19374 (May 7, 1984).
328 Preliminary Negative Countervailing Duty Determinations: Oscillating and Ceiling Fans from the People's Republic of China, 57 FR 10011, March 23, 1992.
329参见闫海、史晓丽:《从加拿大对华反补贴案件看中国应对反补贴之道》,莫世健、史晓丽编著:《WTO与公平贸易:现时问题和中国的对策》,人民法院出版社2006年版,第126页。
330 Fact Sheet, Commerce Finds Unfair Dumping and Subsidization of Coated Free Sheet Paper from the People’s Republic of China, http://trade.gov/press/press_releases/2007/china-paper- 101807.pdf, 2007-10-24.
331参见余莹:《WTO国营贸易企业规则与我国农产品国营贸易制度》,《亚太经济》2006年第6期,第112页。
1.赵维田:《世贸组织(WTO)的法律制度》,吉林人民出版社2000年版。
2.龚宇:《WTO农产品贸易法律制度研究》,厦门大学出版社2005年版。
3.甘瑛:《国际货物贸易中的补贴与反补贴法律问题研究》,法律出版社2005年版。
4.肖冰:《〈实施卫生与植物卫生措施协定〉研究》,法律出版社2004年版。
5.张汉林主编:《保障措施争端案例》,经济日报社2003年版。
6.李本:《补贴与反补贴制度分析》,北京大学出版社2005年版。
7.陈立虎:《对外贸易行政法制度》,中国商业出版社2000年版。
8.王红、傅思明:《WTO与中国行政法治建设》,中共中央党校出版社2002年版。
9.王贵国:《世界贸易组织法》,法律出版社2003年版。
10.周永坤:《法理学》,法律出版社2004年版。
11.李仁真主编:《国际金融法学》,复旦大学出版社2004年版。
12.陈安主编:《国际货币金融法学》,北京大学出版社1999年版。
13.余敏友、左海聪、黄志雄:《WTO争端解决机制概论》,上海人民出版社2001年版。
14.左海聪:《国际经济法的理论与实践》,武汉大学出版社2003年版。
15.孙振宇主编:《多哈回合谈判中期回顾》,人民出版社2005年版。
16.薛荣久、樊英等,《WTO回合与中国》,对外经济贸易出版社2004年版。
17.邹琪等:《反补贴与中国产业安全》,上海财经大学出版社2006年版。
18.赵维田编著:《中国入世议定书条款解读》,湖南科学技术出版社2006年版。
19.杨鹏飞、洪民荣等编著:《WTO法律规则与中国农业》,上海财经大学出版社2000年版。
20.商务部世界贸易组织司、中国政府世贸组织通报咨询局编著:《中国履行加入世界贸易组织承诺年度评估(2003年)》,中国商务出版社2005年版。
21.陈宪、石士钧等编著:《国际经济学教程》,立信会计出版社2003年版。
22.薛敬孝、佟家栋等编著:《国际经济学》,高等教育出版社2002年版。
23.佟家栋主编:《国际经济学》,南开大学出版社1995年版。
24.韩立余编著:《(WTO案例及评析(1995-1999)》上下卷,中国人民大学出版社2001年版
25.史自力主编:《国际经济学》,郑州大学出版社2002年版。
26.冯德连主编:《国际经济法学》,中国人民大学出版社2006年版。
27.潘盛洲:《中国农业保护问题研究》,中国农业出版社1999年版。
28.洪德钦:《WTO法律与政策专题研究》,中国人民大学出版社2004年版。
29.程国强:《农业贸易政策论》,中国经济出版社1996年版。
30.史晓丽编著:《WTO与公平贸易:现时问题和中国的对策》,人民法院出版社2006年版。
31.朱榄叶编著:《世界贸易组织国际贸易纠纷案例评析1995-2002(上、下册)》,法律出版社2004年版。
32.王传丽编著:《补贴与反补贴措施协定条文释义》,湖南科学技术出版社2006年版。
33.商务部世界贸易组织司、中国政府世贸组织通报咨询局编著:《美国贸易政策—世界贸易组织对美国贸易政策审议》,中国商务出版社2005年版。
34.张汉林等译著:《反倾销反补贴规则手册》,中国对外经济贸易出版社2003年版。
35.王新奎、刘光溪主编:《WTO与反倾销、反补贴争端》,上海人民出版社2001年版。
36.韩立余译:《美国关税法》,法律出版社1999年版。
37.韩立余著:《美国外贸法》,法律出版社1999年版。
38.朱榄叶编著:《世界贸易组织国际贸易纠纷案例评析》,法律出版社2000年版。
39. [英]伯纳德.霍克曼、迈克尔.考斯基:《世界贸易体制的政治经济学》,刘平、洪晓东等译,法律出版社1999年版。
40. [美]莫迪查.E.克雷林:《国际经济学:一种政策方法》,方齐云、费剑平等译,北京大学出版社2004年版。
41. [英]A.J雷纳、D.科尔曼主编:《农业经济学前沿问题》,唐忠、孔祥智译,中国税务出版社2000年版。
42. [美]约翰.H.杰克逊:《世界贸易体制——国际经济关系的法律与政策》,张乃根译,复旦大学出版社2001年版。
43.世贸组织编:《关贸总协定法律及实务指南》,北京大学国际经经济组织研究中心译,上海人民出版社2004年版。
44.世界贸易组织秘书处编:《乌拉圭回合协议导读》,索必成、胡盈之译,法律出版社2000年版。
45. [比]约斯特.鲍威林:《国际公法规则之冲突》,周忠海、周丽瑛等译,法律出版社2005年版。
46.对外贸易经济合作部世界贸易组织司译:《中国加入世界贸易组织法律文件》,法律出版社2002年版。
47.对外贸易经济合作部国际经贸关系司译:《乌拉圭回合多边贸易谈判结果法律文本》,法律出版社2000年版。
1.唐青阳:《论WTO争端解决机构的法解释效力》,《广东社会科学》2005年第6期。
2.程厚思:《出口补贴经济分析》,云南财贸学院学报1997年第1期。
3.张韶军、杨青:《美国对农产品贸易的保护及其对我国的借鉴》,《国际贸易问题》1997年第11期。
4.农业部软科学考察团:《欧盟共同农业政策的形成与调整》,《世界农业》2001年第7期。
5.宋波:《欧盟共同农业政策的改革及其特点》,《国际经济合作》2003年第5期。
6.王慧英《“剩余品”时代美国的对外粮食援助政策》,《历史研究》2006年第2期。
7.杨国杨、李杨杨等:《WTO争端解决机制中的磋商程序研究(上)》,载《法学评论》2003年第2期。
8.杨国杨、李杨杨等:《WTO争端解决机制中的专家组程序研究(下)》,《法学评论》2004年第3期。
9.余敏友:《终止不法行为—世贸组织争端解决机制提供的首要救济》,《法学评论》2006年第6期。
10.余敏友:《论世贸组织法律救济的特性》,《现代法学》2006年第6期。
11.朱榄叶:《政府与企业共同面对—中国面临的补贴与反补贴向题研究》,《国际贸易》2005年第4期。
12.刘昌黎:《WTO谈判冻结及其影响》,《上海对外贸易学院学报》2006年第11期。
13.程国强:《WTO农产品出口补贴规则执行评价》,国务院发展研究中心调查研究报告,2006年6月5日。
14.程国强:《中国农产品出口:增长、结构与贡献》,《管理世界》2004年第11期。
15.史朝兴、秦淑红:《中国农产品进口的现状、格局和趋势》,《农业经济导刊》2007年第12期。
16.《欧盟7月1日起实施糖业改革》,《世界贸易组织动态与研究》2006年第5期。
17.卢峰:《误读补贴—我国农产品贸易政策与入世谈判》,《国际贸易》2001年第年第5期。
18.李天一:《浅析我国增值税出口退税制度与WTO反补贴制度》,《税务与经济》,2003年3期。
19.赵维田:《对补贴要履行的三项义务—解读〈中国加入世贸组织议定书〉第10条》,《国际贸易》2002年第9期。
20.《WTO谈判—各方关注“多哈回合谈判妥协方案”》,《WTO经济导刊》2007年第8期。
21.赵维田:《WTO与国际法》,http://www.iolaw.org.cn/showarticle.asp?id=853,2007-11-18.
22.曹海丽:《美欧在香港WTO会议上陷入粮食援助争议战》,http://news.sina.com.cn/w/2005-12-15/18108592771.shtml,2007-2-21,2006-8-11。
23.《“多哈回合成败难卜多国移情“自由贸易谈判”》,http://www.cacs.gov.cn/ DefaultWebApp/showNews.jsp?newsId=201260002043,2007-12-11。
24.农业部:《出口补贴问题背景资料》,http://www.agri.gov.cn/ztzl/wto/wtots/ backgroud.htm, 2008-2-24。
25.乐施会政策文件:《苦涩的糖—中国糖业面对的不公平贸易》,2003年8月,http://www.maketradefair.org.hk/news/OHK_sugar_report_Chinese_final.pdf,2008-3-1。
1. Melaku Geboye Desta, The Law of International Trade in Agricultural Products, from GATT 1947 to the WTO Agreement on Agriculture, Kluwer Law International, 2002.
2. John Croome,“Reshaping the World Trading System—A History of the Uruguay Round”, Kluwer Law International, 1999.
3. Henrik Horn and Petros C. Mavroidis ed., The WTO case law of 2003, Cambridge University Press, 2006.
4. Ernst-Ulrich Petersmann ed., International trade law and the GATT/WTO dispute settlement system, Kluwer Law International, 1997.
5. Petros C. Mavroidis, The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade: a Commentary, Oxford University Press, 2005.
6. Timothy E. Josling, Stefan Tangermann, T. K. Warley, Agriculture in the GATT, Stanford University Press, 1996.
1. Miguel Montana-Mora, International Law and International Relations Cheek to Cheek: An International Law/International Relations Perspective on the U.S./EC Agricultural Export Subsidies Dispute, North Carolina Journal of International Law & Commercial Regulation, Vol.19.
2. Raj Bhala, World Agricultural Trade In Purgatory: The Uruguay Round Agriculture Agreement and Its Implications for The Doha Round, North Dakota Law Review,Vol.79, 2003.
3. Henricus A. Strating,The GATT Agriculture Dispute: A European Perspective,North Carolina Journal of International Law and Commercial Regulation, Vol.18, 1993.
4. Al J. Daniel, Agricultural Reform: The European Community, the Uruguay Round, and International Dispute Resolution, Arkansas Law Review, Vol.46, 1994.
5. David R. Purnell, A Critical Examination of the Targeted Export Assistance Program, Its Transformation into The Market Promotion Program and Its Future, North Carolina Journal of International Law & Commercial Regulation, Vol. 18,1993.
6. Didier Chambovey, How the Expiry of the Peace Clause (Article 13 of The WTO Agreement on Agriculture) Might Alter Discipline on Agricultural Subsidies in the WTO Framework,Journal of world trade, Vol.36, 2002.
7. H. Steinberg and Timothy E. Josling, When the Peace Ends: The Vulnerability ofEC and US Agricultural Subsidies to WTO Legal Challenge. Journal of International Economic Law, Vol.6, 2003.
8. Carmen G. Gonzalez, Institutionalizing Inequality: the WTO Agreement on Agriculture, Food Security, and Developing Countries, Columbia Journal of Environmental Law, Vol.27.
9. William A. Gillon, Agriculture, Drake Journal of Agricultural Law, Vol.10, 2005.
10. Jonathan Carlson, Symposium: International Law and World Hunger: Hunger, Agricultural Trade Liberalization, and Soft International Law: Addressing the Legal Dimensions of a Political Problem, Iowa Law Review, Vol.70, 1985.
11. Candace Carmichael, Foreign Sales Corporations - Subsidies, Sanctions, and Trade Wars, Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law, Vol.35, 2002.
12. Matthew Newell, Note: Cotton, U.S. Domestic Policy, and Trade Wars: The Future of WTO Agriculture Negotiations, Minnesota Journal of Global Trade, Vol.14, 2005.
13. Becky L. Jacobs, Brazil's Agricultural Trade War: Success and Failure on the Southern Route to Antarctica, The University of Miami Inter-American Law Review,Vol.36, 2005.
14. Dale E. McNiel ,United States' Agricultural Protectionism After the Uruguay Round: What Remains of Measures to Provide Relief from Surges of Agricultural Imports, North Carolina Journal of International Law & Commercial Regulation,Vol.23,1998.
15. Thomas J. Schoenbaum, Agricultural Trade Wars: A Threat to the GATT and Global Free Trade, St. Mary's Law Journal, Vol.24, 1993.
16. William Petit, Comment: The Free Trade Area of The Americas: Is It Setting The Stage for Significant Change in U.S. Agricultural Subsidy Use? Texas Tech Law Review, Vol.37, 2004.
17. Joseph A. Mcmahon, The Uruguay Round and Agriculture: Charting a New Direction? The International Lawyer, Vol.29, 1995.
18. Cody A. Thacker, Agricultural Trade Liberalization in the Doha Round: The Search for a Modalities Draft, Georgia Journal of International and Comparative Law, Vol.33, 2005.
19. Melaku Geboye Desta, The Bumpy Ride Towards the Establishment of“a Fair and Market Oriented Agricultural Trading System”at the WTO: Reflections Following the Cancun Setback, Drake Journal of Agricultural Law, Vol.8, 2003.
20. Jason G. Buhi, Comment: Serious Prejudice: The Decline and Fall of Agricultural Subsidies After the World Trade Organization's Upland Cotton Decision, Penn StateInternational Law Review,Vol.24,2005.
21. David Morgan and Gavin Goh, Peace in Our Time? An Analysis of Article 13 of the Agreement on Agriculture, Vol.37, 2003.
22. Harry de Gorter, Merlinda Ingco, Lilian Ruiz, Export Subsidies and WTO Trade Negotiations on Agriculture: Issues and Suggestions for New Rules,Prepared for the World Bank’s Agricultural Trade Group, March 2002.
23. Food Aid or Hidden Dumping? Oxfam Briefing Paper, March 2005.
24. FAO, Reporting Procedures and Consultative Obligations under the FAO Principles of Surplus Disposal: A Guide for Members of the FAO Consultative Subcommittee on Surplus Disposal.
25. FAO, Food Aid in the Context of the WTO Negotiations on Agriculture, http://www.fao.org/DOCREP/ 005/Y3733E/y3733e06.htm, at 2007-11-18.
26. Linda M. Young and Philip C. Abbott, the WTO Negotiations and Disciplines for Food Aid.
27. Merlinda Ingco and Francis Ng, Distortionary Effects of State Trading in Agriculture: Issues for the Next Round of Multilateral Trade Negotiations, February 1998.
28. GAO, International Trade: Impact of the Uruguay Round Agreement on the Export Enhancement Program, GGD-94-180BR August 5, 1994.
29. Fact Sheet: Export Enhancement Program,March 2006, http://www.fas.usda.gov /info/factsheets/eep.asp,at 2008-2-19.
30. Fact Sheet, Commerce Finds Unfair Dumping and Subsidization of Coated Free Sheet Paper from the People’s Republic of China, http://trade.gov/press/press_releases/2007/china-paper- 101807.pdf, 2007-10-24.
31. An Analysis of Officially Supported Export Credits in Agriculture, http://www.agtradepolicy.org/output/resource/OECDEC.pdf,at 2008-2-24.
32. International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD), Agriculture Negotiations at the WTO: Context Setting and Intelligence Report, February-April 2001, at http://www.agtradepolicy.org/output/resource/agriculture negotiations3.pdf, 2006-11-17.
33. International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD),Agriculture Negotiations at the WTO Cancún Outlook Report Geneva, April 2003 , at http://www.agtradepolicy.org/output/resource/ agriculturenegotiations 8.pdf, 2006-11-17.
34. International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD), Agriculture Negotiations at the WTO Doha Analysis Repor, January 2002.at http://www.agtradepolicy.org/output/resource/ agriculturenegotiations 5.pdf, 2006-12-17
35. International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD), Agriculture Negotiations at the WTO Post-Cancun Outlook Report, November 2003, at http://www.agtradepolicy.org/output/resource/agriculturenegotiations9.pdf, 2006-12-19.
36. International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD), Agriculture Negotiations at the WTO‘Framework Phase’Update Report, June 2004, at http://www.agtradepolicy.org/output/resource/agriculturenegotiations7.pdf, 2006-11-17.
37. International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD), Agriculture Negotiations at the WTO 'Modalities' Phase Update Report, September 2002, at http://www.agtradepolicy.org/output/resource/ agriculturenegotiations7.pdf, 2006-11-17.
38. WTO Agriculture Negotiations: Backgrounder, the Issues, and Where We are Now, http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/agric_e/negs_bkgrnd00_contents_e.htm, 2006- 9-28.
39. Technical Information on State Trading Enterprises, at http://www.wto.org/ english/tratop_e/ statra_e/statra_info_e.htm, 2006-12-28.
1. GATT document, Declaration of Ministers Approved at Tokyo, on 14 September 1973, MIN(73)1.
2. Ministerial Declaration on the Uruguay Round, MIN.DEC, 20 September, 1986.
3. United States Proposal for Negotiations on Agriculture, 7 July 1987, MTN.GNG/NG5 /W/14.
4. Modalities for The Establishment of Specific Binding Commitments under the Reform Programme,Note by the Chairman of the Market Access Group, 20 December 1993, MTN.GNG/MAIW/24.
5. Minutes of the Meeting Held on 6 March 1996, G/SCM/M/8.
6. Export Credits and Related Facilities, Background Paper by the Secretariat, G/AG/NG/S/13, 26 June 2000.
7. Proposal for Comprehensive Long-Term Agricultural Trade Reform Submission from the United States, 23 June 2000,G/AG/NG/W/15.
8. Special and Differential Treatment for Developing Countries In World Agricultural Trade Submission by ASEAN, 10 November 2000,G/AG/NG/W/55.
9. Preparations for the Fifth Session of the Ministerial Conference Draft Cancún Ministerial Text Revision, 24 August 2003, JOB(03)/150/Rev.1.
10. Agriculture Negotiations-Status Report Key Issues to Be Addressed, 27 JuneJOB(05)/126.
11. Doha Work Programme Ministerial Declaration, 18 December 2005, WT/MIN(05)/DEC.
12. Negotiations on WTO Agreement on Agriculture, Proposals by India in the areas of: (i) Food Security, (ii) Market Access, (iii) Domestic Support, and (iv) Export Competition, 15 January 2001,G/AG/NG/W/102.
13. Negotiations on Agriculture Overview,TN/AG/6,18 December 2002.
14. EC– US Joint Text: Agriculture, 13 August 2003, JOB(03)/157.
15. Negotiations on Agriculture First Draft of Modalities for the Further Commitments, February 2003, TN/AG/W/1 17.
16. Trade Policy Review of People's Republic of China, Report by the Secretariat, WT/TPR/S/161.
17. Revised Draft Modalities for Agriculture,1 August 2007,TN/AG/W/4 and Corr.1.
18. Revised Draft Modalities for Agriculture,8 February 2008,TN/AG/W/4/Rev.1.
2参见陈立虎:《对外贸易行政法制度》,中国商业出版社2000年版,第9页。
3参见王红、傅思明:《WTO与中国行政法治建设》,中共中央党校出版社2002年版,第25页。
4参见王贵国:《世界贸易组织法》,法律出版社2003年版,第318页。
5经济学领域涉及到农产品出口补贴问题的论著比较有代表性的有:OECD Paper, An Analysis of Officially Supported Export Credits in Agriculture; FAO, Food Aid in the Context of the WTO Negotiations on Agriculture; Dixit, Praveen M. and Tim Josling. 1997.“State Trading in Agriculture: An Analytical Framework,”International Agricultural Trade Research Consortium, working paper;程国强:《农业贸易政策论》,中国经济出版社1996年版;蓝海涛:《国际农业贸易制度解读政策应用》,中国海关出版社2002年版;程国强:《WTO农产品出口补贴规则执行评价》,国务院发展研究中心调查研究报告,2006年6月5日;卢峰:《误读补贴—我国农产品贸易政策与入世谈判》,《国际贸易》2001年第年第5期。
6代表性的论著列举如下: The Law of International Trade in Agricultural Products, from GATT 1947 to the WTO Agreement on Agriculture, Kluwer Law International, 2002; Timothy E. Josling , Stefan Tangermann, T. K. Warley, Agriculture in the GATT, Stanford University Press, 1996;龚宇:《WTO农产品贸易法律制度研究》,厦门大学出版社2005年版。
7李本:《补贴与反补贴制度分析》,北京大学出版社2005年版。甘瑛:《国际货物贸易中的补贴与反补贴法律问题研究》,法律出版社2005年版。
8参见唐青阳:《论WTO争端解决机构的法解释效力》,《广东社会科学》2005年第6期,第183页。
9参见[英]伯纳德.霍克曼、迈克尔.考斯基:《世界贸易体制的政治经济学》,刘平、洪晓东等译,法律出版社1999年版,第200页。
10参见佟家栋主编:《国际经济学》,南开大学出版社1995年版,第135页。
11参见陈宪、石士钧等编著:《国际经济学教程》,立信会计出版社2003年版,第153页。
12参见佟家栋主编:《国际经济学》,南开大学出版社1995年版,第135页。
13参见薛敬孝、佟家栋等编著:《国际经济学》,高等教育出版社2002年版,第109页。
14参见史自力主编:《国际经济学》,郑州大学出版社2002年版,第160页。
15参见程厚思:《出口补贴经济分析》,云南财贸学院学报1997年第1期,第53页。
16参见[美]莫迪查.E.克雷林:《国际经济学:一种政策方法》,方齐云、费剑平等译,北京大学出版社2004年版,第115页。
17参见冯德连主编:《国际经济法学》,中国人民大学出版社2006年版,第161页。
18参见潘盛洲:《中国农业保护问题研究》,中国农业出版社1999年版,第12页。
19参见[英]A.J雷纳、D.科尔曼主编:《农业经济学前沿问题》,唐忠、孔祥智译,中国税务出版社2000年版,第87页。
20参见洪德钦:《WTO法律与政策专题研究》,中国人民大学出版社2004年版,第21页。
21参见程国强:《农业贸易政策论》,中国经济出版社1996年版,第23页;潘盛洲:《中国农业保护问题研究》,中国农业出版社1999年版,第62-63页。
22参见[英]伯纳德.霍克曼、迈克尔.考斯基:《世界贸易体制的政治经济学》,刘平、洪晓东等译,法律出版社1999年版,第201页。
23参见[英]A.J雷纳、D.科尔曼主编:《农业经济学前沿问题》,唐忠、孔祥智译,中国税务出版社2000年版,第28-29页。
24参见张韶军、杨青:《美国对农产品贸易的保护及其对我国的借鉴》,《国际贸易问题》1997年第11期,第
29页。
25 See Melaku Geboye Desta, The Law of International Trade in Agricultural Products, Kluwer Law International, 2002, p.101.
26参见赵维田:《世贸组织(WTO)的法律制度》,吉林人民出版社2000年版,第7-8页。
27参见世贸组织编:《关贸总协定法律及实务指南》,北京大学国际经经济组织研究中心译,上海人民出版社2004年版,第471页。
28参见[美]约翰.H.杰克逊:《世界贸易体制——国际经济关系的法律与政策》,张乃根译,复旦大学出版社2001年版,第42页。
29 See Melaku Geboye Desta, The Law of International Trade in Agricultural Products, from GATT 1947 to the WTO Agreement on Agriculture, Kluwer Law International, 2002, p.103.
30 See Melaku Geboye Desta, The Law of International Trade in Agricultural Products, from GATT 1947 to the WTO Agreement on Agriculture, Kluwer Law International, 2002, p.104.
31比如GATT第16条第3款是基于宪章第28条第1款和第4款;第4款基于宪章第26条1款和第3款。
32参见世贸组织编:《关贸总协定法律及实务指南》,北京大学国际经经济组织研究中心译,上海人民出版社2004年版,第463页。
33 See Melaku Geboye Desta, Law of International Trade in Agricultural Products, from GATT 1947 to the WTO Agreement on Agriculture, Kluwer Law International, 2002, p.114.
35 See Miguel Montana-Mora,International Law and International Relations Cheek to Cheek: An International Law/International Relations Perspective on the U.S./EC Agricultural Export Subsidies Dispute,North Carolina Journal of International Law & Commercial Regulation,Vol.19, p.12.
36参见龚宇:《WTO农产品贸易法律制度研究》,厦门大学出版社2005年版,第62-75页。
37 See Miguel Montana-Mora, International Law and International Relations Cheek to Cheek: An International Law/International Relations Perspective on the U.S./EC Agricultural Export Subsidies Dispute, North Carolina Journal of International Law & Commercial Regulation,Vol.19, pp.20-21.
38 GATT document, Declaration of Ministers Approved at Tokyo, on 14 September 1973, MIN(73)1.
39《反补贴守则》第11条。
40参见龚宇:《WTO农产品贸易法律制度研究》,厦门大学出版社2005年版,第102-106页。
41《反补贴守则》第17条、18条。
42《反补贴守则》第4条。
43参见龚宇:《WTO农产品贸易法律制度研究》,厦门大学出版社2005年版,第115-116页。
44 See Ministerial Declaration on the Uruguay Round, MIN.DEC, 20 September, 1986.
45 See Miguel Montana-Mora,International Law and International Relations Cheek to Cheek: An International Law/International Relations Perspective on the U.S./EC Agricultural Export Subsidies Dispute, North Carolina Journal of International Law & Commercial Regulation, Vol.19, pp.35-41.
46 United States Proposal for Negotiations on Agriculture, 7 July 1987, MTN.GNG/NG5 /W/14.
47参见赵维田:《世贸组织(WTO)的法律制度》,吉林人民出版社2000年版,第248-253页。
48 Raj Bhala,World Agricultural Trade in Purgatory: the Uruguay Round Agriculture Agreement and Its Implications for the Doha Round,North Dakota Law Review,Vol.79,2003,p.809.
49 Modalities for The Establishment of Specific Binding Commitments under the Reform Programme, Note by the Chairman of the Market Access Group, 20 December 1993, MTN.GNG/MAIW/24.
50 See Henricus A. Strating, The GATT Agriculture Dispute: A European Perspective, North Carolina Journal of International Law and Commercial Regulation, Vol.18, 1993, p.317-319.
51 Treaty Establishing the European Economic Community, Article 38(2)(4), Article 39(1).
52参见农业部软科学考察团:《欧盟共同农业政策的形成与调整》,《世界农业》2001年第7期,第4页。
53 See Henricus A. Strating, The GATT Agriculture Dispute: A European Perspective, North Carolina Journal of International Law and Commercial Regulation,Vol.18, 1993, pp.321-323.
54参见赵维田:《世贸组织(WTO)的法律制度》,吉林人民出版社2000年版,第244页。
55 Al J. Daniel,Agricultural Reform: The European Community, the Uruguay Round, and International Dispute Resolution, Arkansas Law Review,Vol.46,1994, pp.881.
56参见宋波:《欧盟共同农业政策的改革及其特点》,《国际经济合作》2003年第5期,第20-22页。
57 See GAO, International Trade: Impact of the Uruguay Round Agreement on the Export Enhancement Program, GGD-94-180BR August 5, 1994.
58 CCC是一家由美国农业部管理的联邦公司,设立该公司目的是稳定和维持农业收入和农产品价格。其宪法修正案准许将农产品售往其他政府机构和外国政府,并且可以作为粮食援助捐赠给国内、国外以及国际救济机构。当前,CCC主要是作为一个融资实体,政府通过这一实体为农业计划进行筹资。参见商务部世界贸易组织司、中国政府世贸组织通报咨询局编著:《美国贸易政策—世界贸易组织对美国贸易政策审议》,中国商务出版社2005年版,第123页。
59 See Fact Sheet: Export Enhancement Program, March 2006, http://www.fas.usda.gov/info/ factsheets/eep.asp, at 2008-2-19.
60参见商务部世界贸易组织司、中国政府世贸组织通报咨询局编著:《美国贸易政策—世界贸易组织对美国贸易政策审议》,中国商务出版社2005年版,第121页。
61 David R. Purnell, A Critical Examination of the Targeted Export Assistance Program, Its Transformation into the Market Promotion Program and Its Future, North Carolina Journal of International Law & Commercial Regulation, Vol.18,1993, pp.560-561.
62赵维田:《WTO与国际法》,http://www.iolaw.org.cn/showarticle.asp?id=853,2007-11-18.
63 France Assistance to Exports of Wheat and Wheat Flour, Panel Report adopted on 21 November 1958, L/924 -7S/46.
64 European Communities-Refunds on Exports of Sugar Complaint by Australia, European Communities - Refunds on Exports of Sugar Complaint By Brazil, Report of the Panel, L/4833, L/5011.
65 European Economic Community - Subsidies on Export of Pasta Products, Report of the Panel, SCM /43, May 19 1983,para.3.1-3.2.
66 European Economic Community - Subsidies on Export of Pasta Products, Report of the Panel, SCM /43, May 19 1983,para.4.2.
67 France Assistance to Exports of Wheat and Wheat Flour, Report of Panel, 21 November 1958, L/924 - 7S/46, 1958 GATTPD LEXIS 2, para.14.
68 France Assistance to Exports of Wheat and Wheat Flour, Report of Panel, 21 November 1958, L/924 - 7S/46, 1958 GATTPD LEXIS 2, para.17.
69 France Assistance to Exports of Wheat and Wheat Flour, Report of Panel, 21 November 1958, L/924 - 7S/46, 1958 GATTPD LEXIS 2, para.18-19.
70 European Communities-Refunds on Exports of Sugar Complaint by Australia, European Communities - Refunds on Exports of Sugar Complaint by Brazil, Report of the Panel, L/4833, L/5011.
71 European Communities-Refunds on Exports of Sugar Complaint by Australia, Report of the Panel, 6 November 1979, L/4833, para.4.17.
72 European Communities-Refunds on Exports of Sugar Complaint by Australia, Report of the Panel, 6 November 1979, L/4833, para.5.
74 European Communities-Refunds on Exports of Sugar Complaint by Australia, Report of the Panel adopted on 6 November 1979, L/4833, para.4.10.
75 European Communities-Refunds on Exports of Sugar Complaint by Brazil, Report of the Panel adopted on 7 October 1980, L/5011, para.4.9.
76参见龚宇:《WTO农产品贸易法律制度研究》,厦门大学出版社2005年版,第106页。
77 AA第2条及附件1。
78参见SCMA第3.1(a)“法律或事实上视出口实绩为惟一条件或多种其他条件之一而给予的补贴,包括附件1列举的补贴”。
79参见SCMA第9.2(b)条。
80世界贸易组织秘书处编:《乌拉圭回合协议导读》,索必成、胡盈之译,法律出版社2000年版,第89页。
81 Canada– Measures Affecting the Importation of Milk and the Exportation of Dairy Products WT/DS103/R, WT/DS113/R, 17 May 1999, report of the panel, para.7.27.
82赵维田:《世贸组织(WTO)的法律制度》,吉林人民出版社2000年版,第259页。王贵国:《世界贸易组织法》,法律出版社2003年版,第332页。
83 United States– Tax Treatment for“Foreign Sales Corporations”, Report of the Appellate Body, 24 February 2000,WT/DS108/AB/R,para.151.
84 See Dale E. McNiel, Agricultural Trade Symposium: Furthering the Reforms of Agricultural Policies in the Millennium Round, Minnesota Journal of Global Trade, Vol.9, 2000, p71.
85 See David Morgan and Gavin Goh, Peace in Our Time? An Analysis of Article 13 of the Agreement on Agriculture, Vol.37, 2003, p.977.
86 Brazil - Measures Affecting Desiccated Coconut, Report of the Appellate Body, 20 March 1997, WT/DS22/AB/R, pp. 12-13.
87 United States– Tax Treatment for“Foreign Sales Corporations”, Report of the Panel, 8 October 1999, WT/DS108/R, para.7.80.
88 SCMA第1条“1.2如按第1款定义的补贴依照第2条的规定属专向性补贴,则此种补贴应符合第二部分或符合第三部分或第五部分的规定”。
89参见甘瑛:《国际货物贸易中的补贴与反补贴法律问题研究》,法律出版社2005年版,第98-99页。
90在该条的脚注4、5中出现了“出口补贴”字眼。“4如事实证明补贴的给予虽未在法律上视出口实绩而定,而事实上与实际或预期出口或出口收入联系在一起,则符合此标准。将补贴给予从事出口的企业这一事实本身不得成为被视为属本规定含义范围内的出口补贴的原因。5附件1所指的不构成出口补贴的措施不得根据本规定和本协定任何其他规定而被禁止”。
91见SCMA《出口补贴例示清单》第(b)-(l)项。
92详见本文第四章。
93参见DSU第1条。
94如《实施卫生与植物卫生措施协定》、《纺织品与服装协定》、《技术性贸易壁垒协定》、《关于实施1994年关税与贸易总协定第6条的协定》、《关于实施1994年关税与贸易总协定第7条的协定》、《补贴与反补贴措施协定》《关于金融服务的附件》、《关于空运服务的附件》、《关于GATS部分争端解决程序的决定》。
95参见肖冰:《〈实施卫生与植物卫生措施协定〉研究》,法律出版社2004年版,第34-36页。
96《保障措施协定》第2条:“1.一成员只有在根据下列规定确定正在进口至其领土的一产品的数量与国内生产相比绝对或相对增加,且对生产同类或直接竞争产品的国内产业造成严重损害或严重损害威胁,方可对该产品实施保障措施”。GATT1994第19条规定,“对某些产品进口的紧急措施1.(a)如因不能预见的情况和一缔约方在本协定项下负担包括关税减让在内义务的影响,进口至该缔约方领土的产品数量增加如此之大且情况如此严重,以致对该领土内同类产品或直接竞争产品的国内生产者造成严重损害或严重损害威胁,则该缔约方有权在防止或补救此种损害所必需的限度和时间内,对该产品全部或部分中止义务或撤销或修改减让。”
97张汉林主编:《保障措施争端案例》,经济日报社2003年版,第62-63页。
98 Argentina-Safeguard Measures on Imports of Footwear, Report of the Appellate Body, 14 December 1999, WT/DS121/AB/R, parp.81.
99 Brazil-Measures Affecting Desiccated Coconut, Report of the Appellate Body, 20 March 1997, WT/DS22/AB/R, pp.12-13.
100 United States– Tax Treatment for“Foreign Sales Corporations”, Report of the Panel, 8 October 1999, WT/DS108/R, para.7.79-7.80.
101 United States– Tax Treatment for“Foreign Sales Corporations”, Report of the Appellate Body, 24 February 2000, WT/DS108/AB/R, para.117.
102 [美]约翰.H.杰克逊:《世界贸易体制—国际经济关系的法律与政策》,张乃根译,复旦大学出版社2001年版,第305页。
103 Canada– Measures Affecting the Importation of Milk and the Exportation of Dairy Products, Report of the Panel,
17 May 1999,WT/DS103/R,WT/DS113/R,para.4.301. 104 United States– Tax Treatment for“Foreign Sales Corporations”, Report of the Panel, 8 October 1999, WT/DS108/R, para.7.82.
105 See Melaku Geboye Desta, The law of international trade in Agricultural products, Kluwer Law International, 2002, p.161.
106 United States– Tax Treatment for“Foreign Sales Corporations”, Report of the Panel, 8 October 1999, WT/DS108/R, para.7.150.
107 United States–Tax Treatment for“Foreign Sales Corporations”, Report of the Appellate Body, 24 February 2000, WT/DS108/AB/R, para.141.
108 SCMA《出口补贴例示清单》“(j)政府(或政府控制的特殊机构)提供的出口信贷担保或保险计划、针对出口产品成本增加或外汇风险计划的保险或担保计划,保险费率不足以弥补长期营业成本和计划的亏损。(k)政府(或政府控制的和/或根据政府授权活动的特殊机构)给予的出口信贷,利率低于它们使用该项资金所实际应付的利率(或如果它们为获得相同偿还期和其他信贷条件且与出口信贷货币相同的资金而从国际资本市场借人时所应付的利率),或它们支付的出口商或其他金融机构为获得信贷所产生的全部或部分费用,只要这些费用保证在出口信贷方面能获得实质性的优势。但是,如一成员属一官方出口信贷的国际承诺的参加方,且截至1979年1月1日至少有12个本协定创始成员属该国际承诺的参加方(或创始成员所通过的后续承诺),或如果一成员实施相关承诺的利率条款,则符合这些条款的出口信贷做法不得视为本协定所禁止的出口补贴”。
109 European Communities– Regime for the Importation, Sale and Distribution of Bananas, Report of Appellate Body, 9 September 1997, WT/DS27/AB/R, para.203-204.
110 See Didier Chambovey, How the Expiry of The Peace Clause (Article 13 of The WTO Agreement on Agriculture) Might Alter Discipline on Agricultural Subsidies In The WTO Framework, Journal of world trade, Vol.36, 2002, p.309-310.
111 See H. Steinberg and Timothy E. Josling, When the Peace Ends: the Vulnerability of EC and US Agricultural Subsidies to WTO Legal Challenge. Journal of International Economic Law, Vol.6, 2003, p.376.
112参见周永坤:《法理学》,法律出版社2004年版,第110-113页。
113参见[比]约斯特.鲍威林:《国际公法规则之冲突》,周忠海、周丽瑛等译,法律出版社2005年版,第208-209页。
114 [比]约斯特.鲍威林:《国际公法规则之冲突》,周忠海、周丽瑛等译,法律出版社2005年版,第192-205页。
115参见[比]约斯特.鲍威林:《国际公法规则之冲突》,周忠海、周丽瑛等译,法律出版社2005年版,第208-232页。
116 Didier Chambovey, How the Expiry of The Peace Clause (Article 13 of The WTO Agreement on Agriculture) Might Alter Discipline on Agricultural Subsidies in The WTO Framework, Journal of world trade, Vol.36, 2002, p347.
117 [比]约斯特.鲍威林:《国际公法规则之冲突》,周忠海、周丽瑛等译,法律出版社2005年版,第191-192页。
118 See Richard H. Steinberg and Timothy E. Josling, When the Peace Ends: the Vulnerability of EC and US Agricultural Subsidies to WTO Legal Challenge. Journal of International Economic Law, Vol.6, 2003, p.385.
119 SCMA第5条。
120 See Richard H. Steinberg and Timothy E. Josling, When the Peace Ends: the Vulnerability of EC and US Agricultural Subsidies to WTO Legal Challenge. Journal of International Economic Law, Vol.6, 2003, p.377.
121 Didier Chambovey, How the expiry of the peace clause (Article 13 of the WTO Agreement on Agriculture) might alter discipline on Agricultural subsidies in the WTO framework, Journal of world trade, Vol.36, 2002,p348.
122 Canada– Measures Affecting the Importation of Milk and the Exportation of Dairy Products, Recourse to Article 21.5 of the DSU by New Zealand and the United States , Report of the Appellate Body, 3 December 2001, WT/DS103/AB/RW, WT/DS113/AB/RW,para. 123.
123使用者销售支付是给予高地棉花的一种特殊的市场融资,自1990年以来,通过包括FSRI Act of 2002在内的一系列立法,为适格的国内使用者和出口商提供市场保险证明和现金支付。根据FSRI法案的规定,如果连续四个星期,美国运往北欧的棉花最低价格超过北欧的报价,以及世界市场调节价格不超过市场贷款利率的134%时,Step 2支付即按每磅两者的差价发放。United States–Subsidies on Upland Cotton, WT/DS267/R(2004), para. 7.210-7.211.
124 United States–Subsidies on Upland Cotton, Report of the Panel, 8 September 2004, WT/DS267/R, para. 7.673.
125分析“法律上以出口实绩为条件”的出口补贴问题,重要的一点就是看规定补贴条件的相关法律条款是属于强制性规定还是属于任意性规定。从GATT/WTO专家组的实践来看,一般认为只有强制性规定违反GATT/WTO 规则才可能被认为是法律上违反GATT/WTO规则;如果有关法律规定仅仅给予主管机构自由裁量权,由主管机构根据具体情况确定如何实施该法律规定,那么这样的法律规定本身并不构成在法律上违反GATT/WTO规则。甘瑛:《国际货物贸易中的补贴与反补贴法律问题研究》,法律出版社2005年版,第107页。
126 United States–Subsidies on Upland Cotton, Report of the Panel, 8 September 2004, WT/DS267/R, para.7.678-7.760.
127 See Richard H. Steinberg and Timothy E. Josling, When the Peace Ends: the Vulnerability of EC and US Agricultural Subsidies to WTO Legal Challenge. Journal of International Economic Law, Vol.6, 2003, p. 377.
128 Canada– Measures Affecting the Importation of Milk and the Exportation of Dairy Products, Report of the Panel, 17 May 1999, WT/DS103/R,WT/DS113/R,2.34-2.36.
129 Canada– Measures Affecting the Importation of Milk and the Exportation of Dairy Products, Report of the Panel, 17 May 1999, WT/DS103/R, WT/DS113/R,para. 2.16-2.18,4.315,7.78.
130 Canada– Export Credits and Loan Guarantees for Regional Aircraft, Report of the Panel, 28 January 2002, WT/DS222/R,para.7.
131 United States– Tax Treatment for“Foreign Sales Corporations”(Article 21.5 - EC), Report of the Appellate Body, 14 January 2002, WT/DS108/AB/RW, paras.89-90 and 98.
132 United States– Tax Treatment for“Foreign Sales Corporations”, Report of The Panel, WT/DS108/R, 8 October 1999, para.7.45.
133 United States– Tax Treatment for“Foreign Sales Corporations”, Report of The Panel, WT/DS108/R, 8 October 1999, para.7.98-7.102.
134 United States– Tax Treatment for“Foreign Sales Corporations”(Article 21.5 - EC), Report of the Appellate Body, 14 January 2002,WT/DS108/AB/RW, paras.91-92.
135 United States– Preliminary Determinations with Respect to Certain Softwood Lumber from Canada, Report of the Panel, 27 September 2002, WT/DS236/R, paras. 7.23-7.24.
136 United States– Preliminary Determinations with Respect to Certain Softwood Lumber from Canada, Report of the Panel, 27 September 2002, WT/DS236/R, paras. 7.18, 7.28.
137 Canada-Measures Affecting the Export of Civilian Aircraft, Report of the Appellate Body,2 August 1999,WT/DS70/AB/R, para.149.
138 Canada-Measures Affecting the Export of Civilian Aircraft, WT/DS70/R, Report of the Panel, 14 April 1999, para.5.30.
139 Canada-Measures Affecting the Export of Civilian Aircraft, WT/DS70/R, Report of the Panel, 14 April 1999, para.9.115, 9.119.
140 Canada-Measures Affecting the Export of Civilian Aircraft, Report of the Appellate Body, 2 August 1999, WT/DS70/AB/R, para.154.
141 Canada-Measures Affecting the Export of Civilian Aircraft, Report of the Appellate Body, 2 August 1999, WT/DS70/AB/R, para.157.
143 Canada– Export Credits and Loan Guarantees for Regional Aircraft, Report of the Panel, WT/DS222/R, 28 January 2002, para.7.230-7.235, 7.254.
144 Canada– Certain Measures Affecting the Automotive Industry, Report of the Appellate Body, WT/DS139/AB/R, WT/DS142/AB/R, 31 May 2000, para.100.
145 Canada– Certain Measures Affecting the Automotive Industry, Report of the Panel, WT/DS139/R,WT/DS142/R,11 February 2000, para.10.142.
146 Canada– Certain Measures Affecting the Automotive Industry, Report of the Panel, WT/DS139/R, WT/DS142/R, 11 February 2000, para.10.173-10.201.
147 Canada–Measures Affecting the Export of Civilian Aircraft, WT/DS70/AB/R, Report of the Appellate Body, 2 August 1999, paras. 166-167.
148 Brazil– Export Financing Programme for Aircraft, Report of the Panel, 14 April 1999, WT/DS46/R, para.7.70.
149 Australia– Subsidies Provided to Producers and Exporters of Automotive Leather, Report of the Panel, 25 May 1999, WT/DS126/R, para.2.1-3.2.
150 Australia– Subsidies Provided to Producers and Exporters of Automotive Leather, Report of the Panel, 25 May 1999, WT/DS126/R, para.9.56-9.57.
151 Australia– Subsidies Provided to Producers and Exporters of Automotive Leather, Report of the Panel, 25 May 1999, WT/DS126/R, para.9.72-9.76.
152 Canada–Measures Affecting the Export of Civilian Aircraft, WT/DS70/R, Report of the Panel, Accepted at 14 April 1999, para.9.339.
153 Canada–Measures Affecting the Export of Civilian Aircraft, WT/DS70/AB/R,Report of the Appellate Body, adopted at 2 August 1999, para.174.
154 Canada– Measures Affecting the Importation of Milk and the Exportation of Dairy Products, Report of the Panel, 17 May 1999,WT/DS103/R,WT/DS113/R, para.7.46-7.47.
155 Canada– Measures Affecting the Importation of Milk and the Exportation of Dairy Products, WT/DS103/AB/R, WT/DS113/AB/R, Report of the Appellate Body,13 October 1999, para.84-90.
156 Canada– Measures Affecting the Importation of Milk and the Exportation of Dairy Products, WT/DS103/AB/R, WT/DS113/AB/R, Report of the Appellate Body, 13 October 1999, para. 90.
157 Canada– Measures Affecting the Importation of Milk and the Exportation of Dairy Products, Report of the Panel, 17 May 1999, WT/DS103/R, WT/DS113/R,para.7.102.
158 Canada– Measures Affecting the Importation of Milk and the Exportation of Dairy Products, WT/DS103/AB/R, WT/DS113/AB/R, Report of the Appellate Body, 13 October 1999, para.120.
159 Canada– Measures Affecting the Importation of Milk and the Exportation of Dairy Products, Second Recourse to Article 21.5 of the DSU by New Zealand and the United States , Report of the Appellate Body, 20 December 2002, WT/DS103/AB/RW2, WT/DS113/AB/RW2, para.128.
160 Canada– Measures Affecting the Importation of Milk and the Exportation of Dairy Products, Recourse to Article 21.5 of the DSU by New Zealand and the United States, Report of the Appellate Body, 3 December 2001,WT/DS103/AB/RW,WT/DS113/AB/RW, para.112.
161 Canada– Measures Affecting the Importation of Milk and the Exportation of Dairy Products, Second Recourse to Article 21.5 of the DSU by New Zealand and the United States , Report of the Appellate Body, 20 December 2002, WT/DS103/AB/RW2, WT/DS113/AB/RW2, para.132.
162 Canada– Measures Affecting the Importation of Milk and the Exportation of Dairy Products, Recourse to Article 21.5 of the DSU by New Zealand and the United States , Report of the Appellate Body, 3 December 2001, WT/DS103/AB/RW,WT/DS113/AB/RW, para.114-115.
163 United States– Tax Treatment for“Foreign Sales Corporations”, Report of the Panel, 8 October 1999, WT/DS108/R, para.7.155.
164 United States– Tax Treatment for“Foreign Sales Corporations”, Report of the Appellate Body, 24 February 2000,WT/DS108/AB/R,para.129-131.
165 United States– Tax Treatment for“Foreign Sales Corporations”, Report of the Appellate Body, 24 February 2000, WT/DS108/AB/R, para.151-52.
166 United States– Tax Treatment for“Foreign Sales Corporations”, Report of the Appellate Body, 24 February 2000, WT/DS108/AB/R, para.148.
167 United States– Subsidies on Upland Cotton, Report of the Appellate Body, 3 March 2005, WT/DS267/AB/R, para.705.
168 United States– Subsidies on Upland Cotton, Report of the Appellate Body, 3 March 2005, WT/DS267/AB/R, para.704.
169 United States– Subsidies on Upland Cotton, Report of the Appellate Body, 3 March 2005, WT/DS267/AB/R, para.701, 708.
170 United States– Subsidies on Upland Cotton, Report of the Appellate Body, 3 March 2005, WT/DS267/AB/R, para.708-710.
171 Canada– Measures Affecting the Importation of Milk and the Exportation of Dairy Products, Second Recourse to Article 21.5 of the DSU by New Zealand and the United States, Report of the Appellate Body, 20 December 2002, WT/DS103/AB/RW2,WT/DS113/AB/RW2,para.70-75
172 United States– Tax Treatment for“Foreign Sales Corporations”, Report of the Panel, 8 October 1999, WT/DS108/R, para.7.136.
173 United States– Subsidies on Upland Cotton, Report of the Panel, WT/DS267/R, 8 September 2004, para.7.793.
174 United States– Subsidies on Upland Cotton, Report of the Appellate Body, 3 March 2005, WT/DS267/AB/R, para.651.
176参见李仁真主编:《国际金融法学》,复旦大学出版社2004年版,第267页。
177 An Analysis of Officially Supported Export Credits in Agriculture, http://www.agtradepolicy.org/ output/ resource/OECDEC.pdf,at 2008-2-24.
178陈安主主编:《国际货币金融法学》,北京大学出版社1999年版,第56页。
179 OECD, Arrangement on Officially Supported Export Credits (2005 Revision), TD/PG(2005)38/FINAL.
180 Export Credits and Related Facilities, Background Paper by the Secretariat, G/AG/NG/S/13, 26 June 2000.
181 OECD参加方对农产品出口信贷谈判的部分成果,可参见the Chairman's Revised Proposal for A Sector Understanding on Export Credits for Agricultural Products, TD/CONSENSUS(2000)25/REV4.
182 See Carmen G. Gonzalez, Institutionalizing Inequality: The WTO Agreement on Agriculture, Food Security, and Developing Countries, Columbia Journal of Environmental Law, Vol.27, 2002, p.465.
183 Raj Bhala, World Agricultural Trade In Purgatory: the Uruguay Round Agriculture Agreement and Its Implications for the Doha Round, North Dakota Law Review, Vol.79, 2003, p. 819.
184 Melaku Geboye Desta, The Law of International Trade in Agricultural Products, Kluwer Law International, 2002, p.219.
185 William A. Gillon, Agriculture, Drake Journal of Agricultural Law, Vol.10, 2005, p8.
187 United States– Subsidies on Upland Cotton, Report of the Panel, 8 September 2004, WT/DS267/R, 7.236-7.244.
188 United States– Subsidies on Upland Cotton, Report of the Panel, 8 September 2004, WT/DS267/R, para.7.770.
189 DSU第3.2条规定,“各成员认识到该体制适于保护各成员在适用协定项下的权利和义务,及依照解释国际公法的惯例澄清这些协定的现有规定。DSB的建议和裁决不能增加或减少适用协定所规定的权利和义务。”190如SCMA第6.1(a)条规定,以从价补贴总额的最低限度确定产品补贴存在严重损害,“并不适用民用航空器”,因为“预期民用航空器将受专门的多边规则的约束”。同样,第SCMA8.2(a)的注释规定,“因预期民用航空器将受专门的多边规则的约束,本项的规定不适用于该产品”。此外,GATS第十三条“政府采购”规定,“1.第2条、第16条和第17条不得适用于管理政府机构为政府目的而购买服务的法律、法规或要求,此种购买不是为进行商业转售或为供商业销售而在提供服务过程中使用。2.在《WTO协定》生效之日起2年内,应就本协定项下服务的政府采购问题进行多边谈判”。这些例子表明,乌拉圭回合的起草者们清楚地认识到,随着本轮回合的结束,某些领域的国际纪律还不完善,需要进一步制定。他们明确地在适用协定的文本中,特别规定现行法纪不适用于某一特定情况,而留待未来谈判制定的法纪规制。也就是说,如果他们打算从现行法纪中排除某些特定的措施,他们一定会以明确的条文加以规定。
191在乌拉圭回合的谈判中,1991年12月,主席散发的《农产品文本草案》第9.1条规定:“未列入第8条第2款的出口补贴不得以产生或威胁导致规避出口补贴承诺的方式实施;也不得使用非商业性交易以规避此类承诺”。这与现行的AA第10.1条类似,草案第9条第3款接着规定,“就本条而言,对于政府或其机构提供的出口信贷、出口信贷担保或保险计划是否构成出口补贴,应根据SCMA的附件1第(j)项和(k)项进行认定”。此后不久,《乌拉圭回合多边贸易谈判成果最后文本草案》删去了先前文本的第9条第3款,而最后草案第10.2条作了这样的规定,“谈判方承诺不以除符合国际间议定的纪律之外的方式提供出口信贷、出口信贷担保或保险计划”。其随后被现行第10.2条所取代。
192 Aticle10.2: Members undertake to work toward the development of internationally agreed disciplines to govern the provision of export credits, export credit guarantees or insurance programmes and, after agreement on such disciplines, to provide export credits, export credit guarantees or insurance programmes only in conformity therewith.
193 United States– Subsidies on Upland Cotton, Report of the Appellate Body, 3 March 2005, WT/DS267/AB/R, para.763.
194 Food Aid or Hidden Dumping? Oxfam Briefing Paper, March 2005.
195参见王慧英《“剩余品”时代美国的对外粮食援助政策》,《历史研究》2006年第2期,第12-13页。
196 Jonathan Carlson, Symposium: International Law and World Hunger: Hunger, Agricultural Trade Liberalization, and Soft International Law: Addressing the Legal Dimensions of a Political Problem, Iowa Law Review, Vol.70, 1985, p.1254.
197 FAO, Food Aid in the Context of the WTO Negotiations on Agriculture, http://www.fao.org/DOCREP/ 005/ Y3733E/y3733e06.htm, at 2007-11-18.
198 FAO, Reporting Procedures and Consultative Obligations under the FAO Principles of Surplus Disposal: A Guide for Members of the FAO Consultative Subcommittee on Surplus Disposal, 2000, p.2.
199 Food Aid Convention, 1986, Article IV.
200 Technical Information on State Trading Enterprises, http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/ statra_e/ statra_ info_e.htm, 2006-12-28.
201赵维田:《世贸组织(WTO)的法律制度》,吉林人民出版社2000年版,第195-196页。
202 Canada– Measures Relating to Exports of Wheat and Treatment of Imported Grain, Report of the Appellate Body, 30 August 2004, WT/DS276/AB/R, para. 98.
203 WTO Regulation of Subsidies to State-owned Enterprises (SOEs)-A Critical Appraisal of The China Accession Protocol, Journal of International Economic Law, 2004.7, p869.
204 Merlinda Ingco and Francis Ng, Distortionary Effects of State Trading in Agriculture: Issues for the Next Round of Multilateral Trade Negotiations, February 1998.
205 SCMA第10条的脚注明确规定“本协定第二部分或第三部分的规定可以与第五部分的规定平行援引;但是,对于进口成员内市场中一特定补贴的影响,仅可采取一种形式的补救(或是反补贴税,如满足第五部分的要求,或是根据第4条或第7条实行的反措施)”。这里“本协定第二部分或第三部分的规定”与“第五部分的规定”分别是指禁止性补贴、可诉性补贴以及反补贴措施。
206在这里,“《补贴协定》第3条、第5条和第6条”分别是指SCMA中的禁止性补贴、可诉补贴(第5条:不利影响,第6条:严重侵害)。
207参见余敏友、左海聪、黄志雄:《WTO争端解决机制概论》,上海人民出版社2001年版,第158页。
208参见DSU第4.3条、4.4条、4.7条。
209参见SCMA第4.1-4.4条。
210 Australia– Subsidies Provided to Producers and Exporters of Automotive Leather, Report of the Panel, 25 May 1999, WT/DS126/R, para.9.17-9.20.
211 United States– Tax Treatment for“Foreign Sales Corporations”, Report of The Panel, 8 October 1999, WT/DS108/R, para.7.1,7.4.
212 United States– Tax Treatment for“Foreign Sales Corporations”, Report of the Appellate Body, 24 February 2000, WT/DS108/AB/R, para.161.
213参见杨国华、李咏箑等:《WTO争端解决机制中的磋商程序研究(上)》,载《法学评论》2003年第2期,第78页。
214参见杨国华、李咏箑等:《WTO争端解决机制中的磋商程序研究(上)》,载《法学评论》2003年第2期,第79页。
215参见SCMA第4.5条。
216参见SCMA第24.3条。
217 Minutes of the Meeting Held on 6 March 1996, G/SCM/M/8.
218 DSU第8条。实践中,常常是WTO秘书处向当事方推荐专家组成员,当事方并不需要专门向WTO秘书处说明理由,就可以拒绝接受某人担任专家组成员,此时,秘书处就提出新的候选人。参见杨国华、李詠箑等:《WTO争端解决机制中的专家组程序研究(上)》,《法学评论》2004年第3期,第81页。
219参见左海聪:《国际经济法的理论与实践》,武汉大学出版社2003年版,第122页。
220参见DSU第8.8条、8.9条。
221参见杨国华、李詠箑等:《WTO争端解决机制中的专家组程序研究(下)》,《法学评论》2004年第3期,第73页。
222参见DSU第16.4条。
223参见DSU第17条。
224 SCMA第4.9条。
225参见SCMA第4.9条,DSU第14条。
226参见余敏友:《终止不法行为—世贸组织争端解决机制提供的首要救济》,《法学评论》2006年第6期,第84页。
227 Australia– Subsidies Provided to Producers and Exporters of Automotive Leather, Report of the Panel, 25 May 1999, WT/DS126/R,para,para.10.5-10.7.
228 Canada–Measures Affecting the Export of Civilian Aircraft, WT/DS70/R, Report of the Panel, 14 April 1999, para.10.4.
229 Canada–Measures Affecting the Export of Civilian Aircraft, WT/DS70/AB/R, Report of the Appellate Body, 2 August 1999, para.192.
230参见DSU第21.3条。
231参见DSU第22.2条。
232参见DSU第22.2条。
233余敏友:《论世贸组织法律救济的特性》,《现代法学》2006年第6期,第17页。
234参见DSU第22.3条。
235参见SCMA第4.10条。
236 Brazil-Export Financing Programme for Aircraft, Recourse to Arbitration by Brazil under Article 22.6 of the DSU and Article 4.11 of the SCM Agreement, Decision of the Arbitration, 28 August 2000,WT/DS46/ABR, para.3.44.
237 United States– Tax Treatment for“Foreign Sales Corporations”, Recourse to Arbitration by the United States under Article 22.6 of the DSU and Article 4.11 of the SCM Agreement, Decision of the Arbitration, 30 August 2002,WT/DS108/ARB, para.5.4-5.7.
238 Brazil-Export Financing Programme for Aircraft,Recourse to Arbitration by Brazil under Article 22.6 of the DSU and Article 4.11 of the SCM Agreement, Decision of the Arbitration, 28 August 2000,WT/DS46/ABR, para.3.28.
239 United States– Tax Treatment for“Foreign Sales Corporations”, Recourse to Arbitration by the United States under Article 22.6 of the DSU and Article 4.11 of the SCM Agreement, Decision of the Arbitration, 30 August 2002, WT/DS108/ARB, para.5.9, 5.12.
240 Brazil-Export Financing Programme for Aircraft, Recourse to Arbitration by Brazil under Article 22.6 of the DSU and Article 4.11 of the SCM Agreement, Decision of the Arbitration, 28 August 2000, WT/DS46/ABR, para.3.44.-3.54.
241 United States– Tax Treatment for“Foreign Sales Corporations”Recourse to Arbitration by the United States under Article 22.6 of the DSU and Article 4.11 of the SCM Agreement, Decision of the Arbitration, 30 August 2002, WT/DS108/ARB, para.5.15-5.19.
242参见余敏友:《论世贸组织法律救济的特性》,《现代法学》2006年第6期,第21页。
243参见SCMA第11.2条。
244参见《反倾销协定》第3.1条。
245参见SCMA第15.1条。
246 ADA第3.2条规定:“关于倾销进口产品的数量,调查机关应考虑倾销进口产品的绝对数量或相对于进口成员中生产或消费的数量是否大幅增加”。
247 Thailand-Anti-Dumping Duties on Angles, Shapes and Sections of Iron or Non-Alloy Steel and H-Beams from Poland, Report of the Panel, 28 September 2000, WT/DS122/R, para7.161.
248 Guatemala– Definitive Anti-Dumping Measures on Grey Portland Cement from Mexico, Report of the Panel, 24 October 2000, WT/DS156/R, para.8.276.
249 United States– Anti-Dumping Measures on Certain Hot-Rolled Steel Products from Japan, Report of the Appellate Body, 24 July 2001WT/DS184/AB/R, para.223, 227.
250参见甘瑛:《国际货物贸易中的补贴与反补贴法律问题研究》,法律出版社2005年版,第89页。
251参见SCMA第12.1.1条,12.6条。
252参见SCMA第11.11条。
253参见SCMA第13.1条。
254参见朱榄叶:《政府与企业共同面对—中国面临的补贴与反补贴向题研究》,《国际贸易》2005年第4期,第37页。
255参见SCMA第13.3条。
256参见SCMA第17条。
257参见SCMA第20.5条。
258参见SCMA第18.1条。
259参见SCMA第18.2条。
260 United States– Preliminary Determinations with Respect to Certain Softwood Lumber from Canada, Report of the Panel, 27 September 2002, WT/DS236/R, para.7.151.
261参见《补贴守则》第4.9条。
262 SCMA第21.3条。
263 United States– Countervailing Duties on Certain Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products from Germany, Report of the Panel, 3 July 2002,WT/DS213/R,para.8.92-8.95.
264 United States– Countervailing Duties on Certain Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products from Germany, Report of the Panel, 3 July 2002,WT/DS213/R,para.8.96.
265 WTO document, G/AG/NG/W/15.
266 International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD), Agriculture Negotiations at the WTO: Context Setting and Intelligence Report, February-April 2001, at http://www.agtradepolicy.org/output/resource/ agriculturenegotiations3.pdf, 2006-11-17.
267 Proposal for Comprehensive Long-term Agricultural Trade Reform Submission from the United States, G/AG/NG/W/15, 23 June 2000.
268 WTO document, G/AG/NG/W/166, 6 April 2001.
269如美国在1994年至2003年的十年间,粮食援助平均每年达到1000万公吨,See Linda M. Young and Philip C. Abbott, the WTO Negotiations and Disciplines for Food Aid.
270 Special and Differential Treatment for Developing Countries in World Agricultural Trade Submission by ASEAN, 10 November 2000, G/AG/NG/W/55.
271孙振宇主编:《多哈回合谈判中期回顾》,人民出版社2005年版,第3页。
272 International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD),Agriculture Negotiations at the WTO Cancún Outlook Report1 Geneva, April 2003, at http://www.agtradepolicy.org/output/resource/agriculturenegotiations8.pdf, 2006-11-17.
273 Preparations for the Fifth Session of the Ministerial Conference Draft Cancún Ministerial Text Revision, 24 August 2003, JOB(03)/150/Rev.1.
274 Agriculture Negotiations-Status Report Key Issues to Be Addressed, 27 June JOB(05)/126.
275 Doha Work Programme Ministerial Declaration, 18 December 2005,WT/MIN(05)/DEC.
276参见刘昌黎:《WTO谈判冻结及其影响》,《上海对外贸易学院学报》2006年第11期,第3-5页。
277 Revised Draft Modalities for Agriculture, TN/AG/W/4 and Corr.1, 1 August 2007.
278 Revised Draft Modalities for Agriculture, TN/AG/W/4/Rev.1, 8 February 2008.
279 Negotiations on Agriculture Overview, TN/AG/6, 18 December 2002.
280 International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD), Agriculture Negotiations at the WTO Doha Analysis Report1, January 2002, at http://www.agtradepolicy.org/output/resource/ agriculturenegotiations 5.pdf, 2006-12-17.
281参见薛荣久、樊英等,《WTO回合与中国》,对外经济贸易出版社2004年版,第9页。
282 WTO Agriculture Negotiations: Backgrounder, the Issues, and Where We are Now, http://www.wto.org/ english/ tratop_e/agric_ e/negs_ bkgrnd00_contents _e.htm, 2006-9-28.
283 Negotiations on WTO Agreement on Agriculture, Proposals by India in the areas of: (i) Food Security, (ii) Market Access, (iii) Domestic Support, and (iv) Export Competition, G/AG/NG/W/102,15 January 2001.
284 Negotiations on Agriculture First Draft of Modalities for the Further Commitments, TN/AG/W/1, February 2003.
285 EC– US Joint Text: Agriculture, 13 August 2003, JOB(03)/157.
286 International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD), Agriculture Negotiations at the WTO Post-Cancun Outlook Report, November 2003, at http://www.agtradepolicy.org/output/resource/ agriculture negotiations9.pdf, 2006-12-19.
287 International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD), Agriculture Negotiations at the WTO‘Framework Phase’Update Report, June 2004, at http://www.agtradepolicy.org/output/resource/agriculture negotiations7.pdf, 2006-11-17.
288 WTO document, G/AG/NG/W/11.
289 International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD), Agriculture Negotiations at the WTO 'Modalities' Phase Update Report, September 2002, at http://www.agtradepolicy.org/output/resource/ agriculture negotiations7.pdf, 2006-11-17.
290 See Negotiations on Agriculture First Draft of Modalities for the Further Commitments, February 2003, TN/AG/W/1 17.
291 EC– US Joint Text: Agriculture, 13 August 2003, JOB(03)/157.
292 WTO Agriculture Negotiations: Backgrounder, the Issues, and Where We Are Now, http://www.wto.org/english/ tratop_e/agric_ e/negs_bkgrnd00_contents_e.htm, 2006-9-28.
293 WTO document, WT/MIN(03)/W/6.
294 Annex A, Doha Work Programme Ministerial Declaration, 18 December 2005, WT/MIN(05)/DEC.
295目前农产品出口补贴的谈判并没有涉及到第10.1条。
296参见《WTO谈判—各方关注“多哈回合谈判妥协方案”》,《WTO经济导刊》2007年第8期,第8页。
297曹海丽:《美欧在香港WTO会议上陷入粮食援助争议战》, http://news.sina.com.cn/w/2005-12-15/- 18108592771.shtml,2007-2-21,2006-8-11。
298《“多哈回合成败难卜多国移情“自由贸易谈判”》, http://www.cacs.gov.cn/ DefaultWebApp/showNews.jsp? newsId=201260002043,2007-12-11。
299 Modalities for The Establishment of Specific Binding Commitments under The Reform Programme, Note by The Chairman of The Market Access Group, 20 December 1993, MTN.GNG/MAIW/24.
300参见赵维田:《世贸组织(WTO)的法律制度》,吉林人民出版社2000年版,第261-262页。
301参见SCMA第9.2(b)条。
302参见世界贸易组织秘书处编:《乌拉圭回合协议导读》,索必成、胡盈之译,法律出版社2000年版第89页。
303 Harry de Gorter,Merlinda Ingco,Lilian Ruiz, Export Subsidies and WTO Trade Negotiations on Agriculture: Issues and Suggestions for New Rules,Prepared for the World Bank’s Agricultural Trade Group, March 2002.
304程国强:《WTO农产品出口补贴规则执行评价》,国务院发展研究中心调查研究报告,2006年6月5日,第8-9页。
305 Modalities for The Establishment of Specific Binding Commitments under The Reform Programme, Note by The Chairman of The Market Access Group, 20 December 1993, MTN.GNG/MAIW/24.
306参见龚宇:《WTO农产品贸易法律制度研究》,厦门大学出版社2005年版,第198页。
307 Modalities for The Establishment of Specific Binding Commitments under The Reform Programme, Note by The Chairman of The Market Access Group, 20 December 1993, MTN.GNG/MAIW/24.
308程国强:《WTO农产品出口补贴规则执行评价》,国务院发展研究中心调查研究报告,2006年6月5日,第6页。
309程国强:《WTO农产品出口补贴规则执行评价》,国务院发展研究中心调查研究报告,2006年6月5日,第11页。
310参见商务部世界贸易组织司、中国政府世贸组织通报咨询局编著:《美国贸易政策—世界贸易组织对美国贸易政策审议》,中国商务出版社2005年版,第120页。
311农业部:《出口补贴问题背景资料》,http://www.agri.gov.cn/ztzl/wto/wtots/backgroud.htm, 2008-2-24。
312参见程国强:《中国农产品出口:增长、结构与贡献》,《管理世界》2004年第11期,第90-93页。
313参见史朝兴、秦淑红:《中国农产品进口的现状、格局和趋势》,《农业经济导刊》2007年第12期,第104-105页。
314参见程国强:《中国农产品出口:增长、结构与贡献》,《管理世界》2004年第11期,第90-93页。
315邹琪等:《反补贴与中国产业安全》,上海财经大学出版社2006年版,第392页。
316乐施会政策文件:《苦涩的糖—中国糖业面对的不公平贸易》,2003年8月,http://www.maketradefair.org.hk/ news/OHK_sugar_report_Chinese_final.pdf,2008-3-1。
317 European Communities– Export Subsidies on Sugar, Report of the Appellate Body, 28 April 2005, WT/DS265/AB/R, WT/DS266/AB/R,WT/DS283/AB/R, p.120.
318参见《欧盟7月1日起实施糖业改革》,《世界贸易组织动态与研究》2006年第5期,第42页。
319参见钟京:《入世后加强农业保护问题》,中国农垦经济2002年第2期。
320参见邹琪等:《反补贴与中国产业安全》,上海财经大学出版社2006年版,第393页。
321参见杨鹏飞、洪民荣等编著:《WTO法律规则与中国农业》,上海财经大学出版社2000年版,第138页。
322参见卢峰:《误读补贴—我国农产品贸易政策与入世谈判》,《国际贸易》2001年第3期,第4-5页。
323赵维田编著:《中国入世议定书条款解读》,湖南科学技术出版社2006年版,第65页。
324商务部世界贸易组织司、中国政府世贸组织通报咨询局编著:《中国履行加入世界贸易组织承诺年度评估(2003年)》,中国商务出版社2005年版,第16页。
325李天一:《浅析我国增值税出口退税制度与WTO反补贴制度》,《税务与经济》,2003年第5期,第77-78页。
326 Trade Policy Review of People's Republic of China, Report by the Secretariat, WT/TPR/S/161, Page 140.
327 Carbon Steel Wire Rod from Poland, 49 Fed. Reg. 19,374 (DOC 1984) Carbon Steel Wire Rod from Poland; Final Negative Countervailing Duty Determination, 49 Fed. Reg. 19374 (May 7, 1984).
328 Preliminary Negative Countervailing Duty Determinations: Oscillating and Ceiling Fans from the People's Republic of China, 57 FR 10011, March 23, 1992.
329参见闫海、史晓丽:《从加拿大对华反补贴案件看中国应对反补贴之道》,莫世健、史晓丽编著:《WTO与公平贸易:现时问题和中国的对策》,人民法院出版社2006年版,第126页。
330 Fact Sheet, Commerce Finds Unfair Dumping and Subsidization of Coated Free Sheet Paper from the People’s Republic of China, http://trade.gov/press/press_releases/2007/china-paper- 101807.pdf, 2007-10-24.
331参见余莹:《WTO国营贸易企业规则与我国农产品国营贸易制度》,《亚太经济》2006年第6期,第112页。
1.赵维田:《世贸组织(WTO)的法律制度》,吉林人民出版社2000年版。
2.龚宇:《WTO农产品贸易法律制度研究》,厦门大学出版社2005年版。
3.甘瑛:《国际货物贸易中的补贴与反补贴法律问题研究》,法律出版社2005年版。
4.肖冰:《〈实施卫生与植物卫生措施协定〉研究》,法律出版社2004年版。
5.张汉林主编:《保障措施争端案例》,经济日报社2003年版。
6.李本:《补贴与反补贴制度分析》,北京大学出版社2005年版。
7.陈立虎:《对外贸易行政法制度》,中国商业出版社2000年版。
8.王红、傅思明:《WTO与中国行政法治建设》,中共中央党校出版社2002年版。
9.王贵国:《世界贸易组织法》,法律出版社2003年版。
10.周永坤:《法理学》,法律出版社2004年版。
11.李仁真主编:《国际金融法学》,复旦大学出版社2004年版。
12.陈安主编:《国际货币金融法学》,北京大学出版社1999年版。
13.余敏友、左海聪、黄志雄:《WTO争端解决机制概论》,上海人民出版社2001年版。
14.左海聪:《国际经济法的理论与实践》,武汉大学出版社2003年版。
15.孙振宇主编:《多哈回合谈判中期回顾》,人民出版社2005年版。
16.薛荣久、樊英等,《WTO回合与中国》,对外经济贸易出版社2004年版。
17.邹琪等:《反补贴与中国产业安全》,上海财经大学出版社2006年版。
18.赵维田编著:《中国入世议定书条款解读》,湖南科学技术出版社2006年版。
19.杨鹏飞、洪民荣等编著:《WTO法律规则与中国农业》,上海财经大学出版社2000年版。
20.商务部世界贸易组织司、中国政府世贸组织通报咨询局编著:《中国履行加入世界贸易组织承诺年度评估(2003年)》,中国商务出版社2005年版。
21.陈宪、石士钧等编著:《国际经济学教程》,立信会计出版社2003年版。
22.薛敬孝、佟家栋等编著:《国际经济学》,高等教育出版社2002年版。
23.佟家栋主编:《国际经济学》,南开大学出版社1995年版。
24.韩立余编著:《(WTO案例及评析(1995-1999)》上下卷,中国人民大学出版社2001年版
25.史自力主编:《国际经济学》,郑州大学出版社2002年版。
26.冯德连主编:《国际经济法学》,中国人民大学出版社2006年版。
27.潘盛洲:《中国农业保护问题研究》,中国农业出版社1999年版。
28.洪德钦:《WTO法律与政策专题研究》,中国人民大学出版社2004年版。
29.程国强:《农业贸易政策论》,中国经济出版社1996年版。
30.史晓丽编著:《WTO与公平贸易:现时问题和中国的对策》,人民法院出版社2006年版。
31.朱榄叶编著:《世界贸易组织国际贸易纠纷案例评析1995-2002(上、下册)》,法律出版社2004年版。
32.王传丽编著:《补贴与反补贴措施协定条文释义》,湖南科学技术出版社2006年版。
33.商务部世界贸易组织司、中国政府世贸组织通报咨询局编著:《美国贸易政策—世界贸易组织对美国贸易政策审议》,中国商务出版社2005年版。
34.张汉林等译著:《反倾销反补贴规则手册》,中国对外经济贸易出版社2003年版。
35.王新奎、刘光溪主编:《WTO与反倾销、反补贴争端》,上海人民出版社2001年版。
36.韩立余译:《美国关税法》,法律出版社1999年版。
37.韩立余著:《美国外贸法》,法律出版社1999年版。
38.朱榄叶编著:《世界贸易组织国际贸易纠纷案例评析》,法律出版社2000年版。
39. [英]伯纳德.霍克曼、迈克尔.考斯基:《世界贸易体制的政治经济学》,刘平、洪晓东等译,法律出版社1999年版。
40. [美]莫迪查.E.克雷林:《国际经济学:一种政策方法》,方齐云、费剑平等译,北京大学出版社2004年版。
41. [英]A.J雷纳、D.科尔曼主编:《农业经济学前沿问题》,唐忠、孔祥智译,中国税务出版社2000年版。
42. [美]约翰.H.杰克逊:《世界贸易体制——国际经济关系的法律与政策》,张乃根译,复旦大学出版社2001年版。
43.世贸组织编:《关贸总协定法律及实务指南》,北京大学国际经经济组织研究中心译,上海人民出版社2004年版。
44.世界贸易组织秘书处编:《乌拉圭回合协议导读》,索必成、胡盈之译,法律出版社2000年版。
45. [比]约斯特.鲍威林:《国际公法规则之冲突》,周忠海、周丽瑛等译,法律出版社2005年版。
46.对外贸易经济合作部世界贸易组织司译:《中国加入世界贸易组织法律文件》,法律出版社2002年版。
47.对外贸易经济合作部国际经贸关系司译:《乌拉圭回合多边贸易谈判结果法律文本》,法律出版社2000年版。
1.唐青阳:《论WTO争端解决机构的法解释效力》,《广东社会科学》2005年第6期。
2.程厚思:《出口补贴经济分析》,云南财贸学院学报1997年第1期。
3.张韶军、杨青:《美国对农产品贸易的保护及其对我国的借鉴》,《国际贸易问题》1997年第11期。
4.农业部软科学考察团:《欧盟共同农业政策的形成与调整》,《世界农业》2001年第7期。
5.宋波:《欧盟共同农业政策的改革及其特点》,《国际经济合作》2003年第5期。
6.王慧英《“剩余品”时代美国的对外粮食援助政策》,《历史研究》2006年第2期。
7.杨国杨、李杨杨等:《WTO争端解决机制中的磋商程序研究(上)》,载《法学评论》2003年第2期。
8.杨国杨、李杨杨等:《WTO争端解决机制中的专家组程序研究(下)》,《法学评论》2004年第3期。
9.余敏友:《终止不法行为—世贸组织争端解决机制提供的首要救济》,《法学评论》2006年第6期。
10.余敏友:《论世贸组织法律救济的特性》,《现代法学》2006年第6期。
11.朱榄叶:《政府与企业共同面对—中国面临的补贴与反补贴向题研究》,《国际贸易》2005年第4期。
12.刘昌黎:《WTO谈判冻结及其影响》,《上海对外贸易学院学报》2006年第11期。
13.程国强:《WTO农产品出口补贴规则执行评价》,国务院发展研究中心调查研究报告,2006年6月5日。
14.程国强:《中国农产品出口:增长、结构与贡献》,《管理世界》2004年第11期。
15.史朝兴、秦淑红:《中国农产品进口的现状、格局和趋势》,《农业经济导刊》2007年第12期。
16.《欧盟7月1日起实施糖业改革》,《世界贸易组织动态与研究》2006年第5期。
17.卢峰:《误读补贴—我国农产品贸易政策与入世谈判》,《国际贸易》2001年第年第5期。
18.李天一:《浅析我国增值税出口退税制度与WTO反补贴制度》,《税务与经济》,2003年3期。
19.赵维田:《对补贴要履行的三项义务—解读〈中国加入世贸组织议定书〉第10条》,《国际贸易》2002年第9期。
20.《WTO谈判—各方关注“多哈回合谈判妥协方案”》,《WTO经济导刊》2007年第8期。
21.赵维田:《WTO与国际法》,http://www.iolaw.org.cn/showarticle.asp?id=853,2007-11-18.
22.曹海丽:《美欧在香港WTO会议上陷入粮食援助争议战》,http://news.sina.com.cn/w/2005-12-15/18108592771.shtml,2007-2-21,2006-8-11。
23.《“多哈回合成败难卜多国移情“自由贸易谈判”》,http://www.cacs.gov.cn/ DefaultWebApp/showNews.jsp?newsId=201260002043,2007-12-11。
24.农业部:《出口补贴问题背景资料》,http://www.agri.gov.cn/ztzl/wto/wtots/ backgroud.htm, 2008-2-24。
25.乐施会政策文件:《苦涩的糖—中国糖业面对的不公平贸易》,2003年8月,http://www.maketradefair.org.hk/news/OHK_sugar_report_Chinese_final.pdf,2008-3-1。
1. Melaku Geboye Desta, The Law of International Trade in Agricultural Products, from GATT 1947 to the WTO Agreement on Agriculture, Kluwer Law International, 2002.
2. John Croome,“Reshaping the World Trading System—A History of the Uruguay Round”, Kluwer Law International, 1999.
3. Henrik Horn and Petros C. Mavroidis ed., The WTO case law of 2003, Cambridge University Press, 2006.
4. Ernst-Ulrich Petersmann ed., International trade law and the GATT/WTO dispute settlement system, Kluwer Law International, 1997.
5. Petros C. Mavroidis, The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade: a Commentary, Oxford University Press, 2005.
6. Timothy E. Josling, Stefan Tangermann, T. K. Warley, Agriculture in the GATT, Stanford University Press, 1996.
1. Miguel Montana-Mora, International Law and International Relations Cheek to Cheek: An International Law/International Relations Perspective on the U.S./EC Agricultural Export Subsidies Dispute, North Carolina Journal of International Law & Commercial Regulation, Vol.19.
2. Raj Bhala, World Agricultural Trade In Purgatory: The Uruguay Round Agriculture Agreement and Its Implications for The Doha Round, North Dakota Law Review,Vol.79, 2003.
3. Henricus A. Strating,The GATT Agriculture Dispute: A European Perspective,North Carolina Journal of International Law and Commercial Regulation, Vol.18, 1993.
4. Al J. Daniel, Agricultural Reform: The European Community, the Uruguay Round, and International Dispute Resolution, Arkansas Law Review, Vol.46, 1994.
5. David R. Purnell, A Critical Examination of the Targeted Export Assistance Program, Its Transformation into The Market Promotion Program and Its Future, North Carolina Journal of International Law & Commercial Regulation, Vol. 18,1993.
6. Didier Chambovey, How the Expiry of the Peace Clause (Article 13 of The WTO Agreement on Agriculture) Might Alter Discipline on Agricultural Subsidies in the WTO Framework,Journal of world trade, Vol.36, 2002.
7. H. Steinberg and Timothy E. Josling, When the Peace Ends: The Vulnerability ofEC and US Agricultural Subsidies to WTO Legal Challenge. Journal of International Economic Law, Vol.6, 2003.
8. Carmen G. Gonzalez, Institutionalizing Inequality: the WTO Agreement on Agriculture, Food Security, and Developing Countries, Columbia Journal of Environmental Law, Vol.27.
9. William A. Gillon, Agriculture, Drake Journal of Agricultural Law, Vol.10, 2005.
10. Jonathan Carlson, Symposium: International Law and World Hunger: Hunger, Agricultural Trade Liberalization, and Soft International Law: Addressing the Legal Dimensions of a Political Problem, Iowa Law Review, Vol.70, 1985.
11. Candace Carmichael, Foreign Sales Corporations - Subsidies, Sanctions, and Trade Wars, Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law, Vol.35, 2002.
12. Matthew Newell, Note: Cotton, U.S. Domestic Policy, and Trade Wars: The Future of WTO Agriculture Negotiations, Minnesota Journal of Global Trade, Vol.14, 2005.
13. Becky L. Jacobs, Brazil's Agricultural Trade War: Success and Failure on the Southern Route to Antarctica, The University of Miami Inter-American Law Review,Vol.36, 2005.
14. Dale E. McNiel ,United States' Agricultural Protectionism After the Uruguay Round: What Remains of Measures to Provide Relief from Surges of Agricultural Imports, North Carolina Journal of International Law & Commercial Regulation,Vol.23,1998.
15. Thomas J. Schoenbaum, Agricultural Trade Wars: A Threat to the GATT and Global Free Trade, St. Mary's Law Journal, Vol.24, 1993.
16. William Petit, Comment: The Free Trade Area of The Americas: Is It Setting The Stage for Significant Change in U.S. Agricultural Subsidy Use? Texas Tech Law Review, Vol.37, 2004.
17. Joseph A. Mcmahon, The Uruguay Round and Agriculture: Charting a New Direction? The International Lawyer, Vol.29, 1995.
18. Cody A. Thacker, Agricultural Trade Liberalization in the Doha Round: The Search for a Modalities Draft, Georgia Journal of International and Comparative Law, Vol.33, 2005.
19. Melaku Geboye Desta, The Bumpy Ride Towards the Establishment of“a Fair and Market Oriented Agricultural Trading System”at the WTO: Reflections Following the Cancun Setback, Drake Journal of Agricultural Law, Vol.8, 2003.
20. Jason G. Buhi, Comment: Serious Prejudice: The Decline and Fall of Agricultural Subsidies After the World Trade Organization's Upland Cotton Decision, Penn StateInternational Law Review,Vol.24,2005.
21. David Morgan and Gavin Goh, Peace in Our Time? An Analysis of Article 13 of the Agreement on Agriculture, Vol.37, 2003.
22. Harry de Gorter, Merlinda Ingco, Lilian Ruiz, Export Subsidies and WTO Trade Negotiations on Agriculture: Issues and Suggestions for New Rules,Prepared for the World Bank’s Agricultural Trade Group, March 2002.
23. Food Aid or Hidden Dumping? Oxfam Briefing Paper, March 2005.
24. FAO, Reporting Procedures and Consultative Obligations under the FAO Principles of Surplus Disposal: A Guide for Members of the FAO Consultative Subcommittee on Surplus Disposal.
25. FAO, Food Aid in the Context of the WTO Negotiations on Agriculture, http://www.fao.org/DOCREP/ 005/Y3733E/y3733e06.htm, at 2007-11-18.
26. Linda M. Young and Philip C. Abbott, the WTO Negotiations and Disciplines for Food Aid.
27. Merlinda Ingco and Francis Ng, Distortionary Effects of State Trading in Agriculture: Issues for the Next Round of Multilateral Trade Negotiations, February 1998.
28. GAO, International Trade: Impact of the Uruguay Round Agreement on the Export Enhancement Program, GGD-94-180BR August 5, 1994.
29. Fact Sheet: Export Enhancement Program,March 2006, http://www.fas.usda.gov /info/factsheets/eep.asp,at 2008-2-19.
30. Fact Sheet, Commerce Finds Unfair Dumping and Subsidization of Coated Free Sheet Paper from the People’s Republic of China, http://trade.gov/press/press_releases/2007/china-paper- 101807.pdf, 2007-10-24.
31. An Analysis of Officially Supported Export Credits in Agriculture, http://www.agtradepolicy.org/output/resource/OECDEC.pdf,at 2008-2-24.
32. International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD), Agriculture Negotiations at the WTO: Context Setting and Intelligence Report, February-April 2001, at http://www.agtradepolicy.org/output/resource/agriculture negotiations3.pdf, 2006-11-17.
33. International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD),Agriculture Negotiations at the WTO Cancún Outlook Report Geneva, April 2003 , at http://www.agtradepolicy.org/output/resource/ agriculturenegotiations 8.pdf, 2006-11-17.
34. International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD), Agriculture Negotiations at the WTO Doha Analysis Repor, January 2002.at http://www.agtradepolicy.org/output/resource/ agriculturenegotiations 5.pdf, 2006-12-17
35. International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD), Agriculture Negotiations at the WTO Post-Cancun Outlook Report, November 2003, at http://www.agtradepolicy.org/output/resource/agriculturenegotiations9.pdf, 2006-12-19.
36. International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD), Agriculture Negotiations at the WTO‘Framework Phase’Update Report, June 2004, at http://www.agtradepolicy.org/output/resource/agriculturenegotiations7.pdf, 2006-11-17.
37. International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD), Agriculture Negotiations at the WTO 'Modalities' Phase Update Report, September 2002, at http://www.agtradepolicy.org/output/resource/ agriculturenegotiations7.pdf, 2006-11-17.
38. WTO Agriculture Negotiations: Backgrounder, the Issues, and Where We are Now, http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/agric_e/negs_bkgrnd00_contents_e.htm, 2006- 9-28.
39. Technical Information on State Trading Enterprises, at http://www.wto.org/ english/tratop_e/ statra_e/statra_info_e.htm, 2006-12-28.
1. GATT document, Declaration of Ministers Approved at Tokyo, on 14 September 1973, MIN(73)1.
2. Ministerial Declaration on the Uruguay Round, MIN.DEC, 20 September, 1986.
3. United States Proposal for Negotiations on Agriculture, 7 July 1987, MTN.GNG/NG5 /W/14.
4. Modalities for The Establishment of Specific Binding Commitments under the Reform Programme,Note by the Chairman of the Market Access Group, 20 December 1993, MTN.GNG/MAIW/24.
5. Minutes of the Meeting Held on 6 March 1996, G/SCM/M/8.
6. Export Credits and Related Facilities, Background Paper by the Secretariat, G/AG/NG/S/13, 26 June 2000.
7. Proposal for Comprehensive Long-Term Agricultural Trade Reform Submission from the United States, 23 June 2000,G/AG/NG/W/15.
8. Special and Differential Treatment for Developing Countries In World Agricultural Trade Submission by ASEAN, 10 November 2000,G/AG/NG/W/55.
9. Preparations for the Fifth Session of the Ministerial Conference Draft Cancún Ministerial Text Revision, 24 August 2003, JOB(03)/150/Rev.1.
10. Agriculture Negotiations-Status Report Key Issues to Be Addressed, 27 JuneJOB(05)/126.
11. Doha Work Programme Ministerial Declaration, 18 December 2005, WT/MIN(05)/DEC.
12. Negotiations on WTO Agreement on Agriculture, Proposals by India in the areas of: (i) Food Security, (ii) Market Access, (iii) Domestic Support, and (iv) Export Competition, 15 January 2001,G/AG/NG/W/102.
13. Negotiations on Agriculture Overview,TN/AG/6,18 December 2002.
14. EC– US Joint Text: Agriculture, 13 August 2003, JOB(03)/157.
15. Negotiations on Agriculture First Draft of Modalities for the Further Commitments, February 2003, TN/AG/W/1 17.
16. Trade Policy Review of People's Republic of China, Report by the Secretariat, WT/TPR/S/161.
17. Revised Draft Modalities for Agriculture,1 August 2007,TN/AG/W/4 and Corr.1.
18. Revised Draft Modalities for Agriculture,8 February 2008,TN/AG/W/4/Rev.1.
© 2004-2018 中国地质图书馆版权所有 京ICP备05064691号 京公网安备11010802017129号 地址：北京市海淀区学院路29号 邮编：100083 电话：办公室：(+86 10)66554848；文献借阅、咨询服务、科技查新：66554700 |