美国对华反倾销及中国的应对策略
|
摘要
自1979年中美建交以来,双边贸易往来日趋频繁。在双边贸易不断发展并各自成为对方重要的贸易伙伴时,中美之间的贸易摩擦也快速发展。据美国商务部统计,截止2010年7月,中国是美国第二大贸易伙伴、第三大出口市场和第一大进口来源地。美国是中国的第二大出口市场和第二大贸易伙伴。1980年7月2日,美国对中国薄荷醇进行首次反倾销调查。此后到2000年,美国对中国的反倾销调查次数达79次。2001年中国入世后,随着中美贸易逆差的急剧扩大,双方之间的贸易矛盾和补救措施也同样增多。在美国对中国发起贸易救济措施中,反倾销多达70%。而在中国遭遇的反倾销调查中,由美国发起的反倾销调查约占总数的1/3。2007美国金融危机的爆发成为中美贸易摩擦的催化剂,美国对华反倾销更加频繁。中美反倾销问题成为一个研究热点。
起初,针对我国的反倾销分布在我国各主要出口领域,如化工产品、机电产品、纺织品、五金产品和轻工业等。1995-2010年间,我国遭遇反倾销调查的部门覆盖面扩展到除武器和弹药类、艺术品与古董类、贵金属宝石类,以及动物或植物油脂类外的各个部门。据WTO统计,2008年至2010年3月,美国共对中国发起反倾销调查170多起,其中20起已经征收惩罚关税。并且,美国成为同一时期对中国发起反倾销调查和采取惩罚性关税措施最多的国家。
反倾销是否有利于中美贸易发展,应该如何看待这种现象呢?这正是这篇论文要解决的问题。该论文分析了美国对华反倾销的现状以及引起反倾销的原因,并针对政府、行业及企业提出了一些应对策略,以推动中美贸易的发展。
论文主体分为五章。
第一章为引言,陈述了双边贸易往来的发展及美国对华反倾销成为一个研究热点。正确看待和处理美国对中国的反倾销问题对促进双边贸易更好发展具有十分重要的意义。此部分对国内外关于反倾销的原因及影响的研究进行了综述,奠定了本文的研究基础。
第二章论述了反倾销的相关理论基础,包括倾销和反倾销的界定标准和市场经济地位问题。中国对倾销和反倾销有自己的界定,而WTO和美国对倾销和反倾销也有着自己的认定标准。本部分分别对以上三种界定标准进行了介绍和比较。
中国对倾销的界定为：倾销是指商品进入一国市场的价格低于其在另一国市场上的销售价格。WTO《关税及贸易总协定》第6条第一款规定,各缔约方认识到,用倾销的手段将一国产品以低于正常价值的办法引入另一国的商业,如因此对一缔约方领土内一已建立的产业造成实质损害或实质损害威胁,或以实质阻碍一国内产业的新建,则倾销应予以谴责。就本条而言,如自一国出口至另一国的一产品的价格符合下列条件,则被视为以低于其正常价值的价格进入一进口国的商业。(a)低于正常贸易过程中出口国中供国内消费时的可比价格,或(b)如无此种国内价格,则低于：(ⅰ)正常贸易过程中同类产品出口至第三国的最高可比价格；或(ⅱ)该产品的原产国的生产成本加上合理的销售成本和利润。根据反倾销协议第二条关于倾销的确定：如果一项产品从一国出口到另一国,该产品的出口价格在正常的贸易过程中,低于出口国旨在用于本国消费的同类产品的可比价格,也即以低于其正常价值的价格进入另一国的商业,则该产品即被认为是倾销。根据美国反倾销法,凡进口产品在美国市场上以低于公平价值销售,就构成倾销。用该产品的出口价格或出口构成价格与正常价值进行公平比较,如出口价格或出口构成价格大于正常价值则不构成倾销；反之则构成倾销。
对中国市场经济地位的认定也同样是基于WTO的规定和美国的法律规定。《中美关于中国加入WTO双边协议反倾销条款》规定,中美两国同意可以维持它目前的反倾销条款,将中国作为非市场经济国家对待,条款的有效期为15年：中国可以要求美国调查当局按照美国法律审查某个特定部门或整个经济体是否属于市场经济导向,从而排除“非市场经济方法”的适用。美国确定进口非市场经济国家产品市场价值主要采用生产要素价值方法,这就是所谓的“非市场经济方法”。《中华人民共和国加入WTO议定书》第15条中关于中国非市场经济地位规定：一旦中国根据该WTO进口成员的国内法证实其是一个市场经济体,则(a)项的规定即应终止,但截至加入之日,该WTO进口成员的国内法中须包含有关市场经济的标准。无论如何, (a)项(ⅱ)目的规定应在加入之日后15年终止。此外,如中国根据该WTO进口成员的国内法证实一特定产业或部门具备市场经济条件,则(a)项中的非市场经济条款不得再对该产业或部门适用。此外,还对美国反倾销调查的过程及美国反倾销法的组成进行了介绍。
第三章分析了美国对华反倾销的现状,美国对华反倾销的特点和美国对中国反倾销的原因。
首先,本章陈述了美国对华反倾销的现状。根据美国商务部和中国商务部及WTO等权威信息分析,中国已成为美国反倾销的首要目标,
其次,本章主要从三个方面分析了美国对华反倾销的特点：反倾销案件数量不断上升,反倾销更加频繁；被诉倾销商品的种类不断增多；在反倾销诉讼中,中国处于不利的地位。
最后,本章分析了美国对中国反倾销的微观和宏观原因。宏观因素主要有以下几个方面：金融危机的爆发；政治因素；为了达到其他经济目的；美国对中国巨大的贸易逆差;WTO体制不完善；中国的非市场经济地位；产业结构的调整。微观原因主要包括：中国企业低价无序出口；我国企业应诉不积极；世界寡头垄断企业阻止中国企业进入国际市场。
第四章陈述了中国应对美国反倾销的策略。这些对策主要是基于反倾销的不同阶段提出。反倾销调查前的预警、反倾销调查发起时应对以及根据贸易的宏观背景提出了几项宏观解决策略,并且针对政府、行业组织以及企业提出了有针对性的策略。首先,政府及行业协会做好出口监管。在我国市场经济地位尚未被主要贸易伙伴承认、对华反倾销频发的情况下,规范行业竞争秩序是从源头上减少国外对我国出口商品的反倾销立案的根本办法。主要从以下几方面入手：统一对外方针,抵制低价出口；完善我国原产地规则；出口企业规范自身行为；实现产业升级,树立品牌意识；完善我国反倾销法律制度；完善反倾销预警机制。其次,积极应对美国的反倾销调查。面对美国对华反倾销的严峻形势,我国政府、行业协会、企业必须共同努力,根据自身的不同角色制定不同的对策,相互配合,通力协作,进行全方位应对,才能取得较好的成效。
第五章为结论。美国对华反倾销已成为美国对中国贸易摩擦的重要方式,积极应对反倾销已刻不容缓。美国“次贷危机”导致美国、欧洲以及全球许多国家经济增速明显放缓甚至停滞。一方面从宏观因素考虑,自奥巴马上任伊始,国内就被经济危机所困扰,失业人数剧增,加之美国工会团体的压力等各种政治因素,加剧了美国对华反倾销。美国同样希望通过反倾销达到人民币升值或者金融市场的更大开放等经济目的。另外,还由于WTO体制的不完善使反倾销措施滥用现象突出。例如,诉讼成本过高、专家小组审理案件的封闭性、协议具有过大的操纵性等等。中国的“非市场经济地位”更是导致了我国企业在反倾销领域遭受不公平待遇。另一方面,微观因素也是影响美国对华反倾销的重要原因,例如中国企业低价无序出口,我国企业应诉不积极,以及世界寡头垄断企业为阻止中国企业进入国际市场等。
基于以上分析,根据贸易出口的各个过程有针对性提出建议。做好政府及行业协会的出口监管工作。当遭遇反倾销调查时企业应在行业协会和政府的帮助下积极应对。另外,从宏观方面提出了几项对策。寻求相关利益集团的帮助,积极争取“市场经济地位”,以及通过扩大内需和实现市场多元化战略减少对美国出口的贸易依存度。
从根本上来说,反倾销是WTO所认可的一种传统贸易救济手段,其实施的目的主要是减轻或消除国外进口产品的倾销行为对本国产业所造成的负面影响。由于反倾销的滥用影响会波及到其他贸易领域或者是贸易以外的领域,影响到中美贸易的正常进行,甚至可能会破坏中美两国的政治关系,这对于双方而言都是得不偿失的。美国需要中国市场,中国也依赖于美国市场,因此,双方都应理性处理中美贸易中存在的问题。
Since Sino-US diplomatic relations were established in 1979, there has been much more bilateral trade. As bilateral trade developed, China and the U.S. became each other's important trade partner, and the trade conflicts also increased at a fast speed. According to the U.S. Department of Commerce, China is US's second largest trade partner, third largest export market and the largest import country, and the U.S. is China's second largest trading partner and the second largest export market. The first antidumping investigation initiated by U.S. was against Chinese Menthol on July 2, 1980. By 2000, the number of antidumping investigations by U.S. against China was up to 79. Since China entered the WTO in 2001, the trade deficit between China and the U.S. has expanded dramatically. Followed by the expanded trade deficit are the increasing trade conflicts and remedy measures. Antidumping accounts for 70% of all the trade remedy measures used by U.S. against China, and 1/3 antidumping investigations against China were initiated by US. What's more, the breakup of the financial crisis in 2007 added a catalyst to the bilateral trade conflicts, and U.S. antidumping investigation turns out to be more frequently applied. Antidumping becomes a hot spot in Sino-US relationship.
At the beginning, the antidumping cases covered the fields of major exports, such as medicine, mechanics and instrument, textile, five minerals, light industry and so on. While from 1995 to 2010, the filed petitions have expanded to cover the fields of firearms and ammunition, arts and antiques, precious metal and gemstone, animal or vegetable organic tissue and so on. What's more, according to WTO statistics, from January 1st,2007 to March 2010,170 antidumping investigations were initiated against China, among which 28 cases were already implemented antidumping measures. The U.S. turns to be the country that has initiated the most anti-dumping investigations against China and implemented the most anti-dumping measures for that period.
Could antidumping be good to the development of Sino-U.S. bilateral trade and how should such a phenomenon be considered? That is just what this paper is written for. This paper depicts the antidumping situation, analyzes the reasons for it, and proposes some counter measures for the Chinese government, industries and enterprises, in order to promote Sino-US bilateral trade.
There are five chapters in this paper.
The introduction chapter reviews the development of Sino-US bilateral trade, which shows that antidumping has become a hot spot in Sino-US relationship. It's of great significance to avoid antidumping investigation and promote Sino-US bilateral trade. This chapter also includes the foreign and domestic literature reviews that are related to the reasons and effects of antidumping, which are the theoretical basis for this paper.
The second chapter is the theoretical basis for antidumping, including the definition of dumping and antidumping and non-market economy status problem. For dumping and antidumping, China has its own definition, while WTO/GATT and the US Tariff Act of 1930 also have defined them in their own standards. This chapter compares these definitions.
China defined dumping as the following:dumping refers to selling same product at different prices, at home and abroad. According to GATT 1994, Article VI Paragraph 1 on Anti-dumping and Countervailing Duties:The contracting parties recognize that dumping, by which products of one country are introduced into the commerce of another country at less than the normal value of the products, is to be condemned if it causes or threatens material injury to an established industry in the territory of a contracting party or materially retards the establishment of a domestic industry. For the purposes of this Article, a product is to be considered as being introduced into the commerce of an importing country at less than its normal value, if the price of the product exported from one country to another (a) is less than the comparable price, in the ordinary course of trade, for the like product when destined for consumption in the exporting country, or, (b) in the absence of such domestic price, is less than either (ⅰ) the highest comparable price for the like product for export to any third country in the ordinary course of trade, or (ⅱ) the cost of production of the product in the country of origin plus a reasonable addition for selling cost and profit. According to PartⅠ:Article 2 of Agreement on Anti-dumping on determination of dumping:a product is to be considered as being dumped, i.e. introduced into the commerce of another country at less than its normal value, if the export price of the product exported from one country to another is less than the comparable price, in the ordinary course of trade, for the like product when destined for consumption in the exporting country. According to the US Antidumping Law, U.S. industries may petition the government for relief from imports that are sold in the United States at less than fair value ("dumped"). With the export price or export price and normal value constitutes a fair comparison, such as the export price or export price is greater than the normal value of form does not constitute dumping; otherwise constitutes dumping.
For the non-market economy status, it is also based on the WTO regulations and U.S. laws. The Anti-dumping Clause of Sino-US Bilateral Agreement on China's Accession to WTO provides that the two countries agreed to maintain its current anti-dumping provisions and China will be treated as a non-market economy country. The terms will be valid for 15 years. China can request the United States authorities to investigate on a particular sector or the entire economy of China based on U.S. laws to make sure whether they are market oriented economy, thereby they could be excluded from "non-market economic approach". The U.S. determines the market value of import products from non-market economy countries mainly through the cost of production materials, and this is the so-called "non-market economic approach."
According to Article 15(d) of Protocol on the Accession of the People's Republic of China:Once China has established, under the national law of the importing WTO Member, that it is a market economy, the provisions of subparagraph (a) shall be terminated provided that the importing Member's national law contains market economy criteria as of the date of accession. In any event, the provisions of subparagraph (a) (ii) shall expire 15 years after the date of accession. In addition, should China establish, pursuant to the national law of the importing WTO Member, that market economy conditions prevail in a particular industry or sector, the non market economy provisions of subparagraph (a) shall no longer apply to that industry or sector. Besides, the paper also introduces the process of antidumping investigations and countervailing duty and the structure of the U.S. antidumping law.。
The third chapter analyzes the U.S. antidumping against China and its causes, which include the U.S. antidumping situation against China, the characteristics of the U.S. antidumping and the causes for U.S. antidumping against China.
Firstly, the chapter depicts the U.S. antidumping situation against China. According to Chinese Ministry of Commerce, Commerce Department of U.S., WTO and other authorities, China has become the country that U.S. initiated most antidumping investigations:
Secondly, the characteristics of the U.S. antidumping against China were explained from three aspects:the increasing numbers of antidumping investigations; more concerned goods; Chinese enterprises in disadvantage.
Finally, this chapter analyzes the reasons for antidumping from micro factors and macro factors. The macro factors mainly include:the breakup of financial crisis; political factors; achieving other economic goals; the huge trade deficit; the defects in WTO system; China's non-market economy status; adjustment of industrial structure in the US. The micro factors mainly include:exporting disorder of Chinese enterprises; Chinese inactiveness in responding to the U.S. anti-dumping; preventing Chinese enterprises from entering international market by oligopolistic firms.
The forth chapter proposes some counter measures against U.S. antidumping against China. The proposals are connected with different phases of the antidumping trade policy process:the antidumping warning, investigation countering, and some from the macro aspect. These proposals were raised respectively for the government, industry associations and the enterprises. Firstly, government and trade associations should fulfill their responsibility. China's market economy status has not been recognized by the major trading partners, and there are frequent anti-dumping investigations against China. Therefore, it is essential to avoid anti-dumping against China through regulating export competition. They mainly work through the following ways:adhering to common external policy and resolutely resisting the low price export activity; improving rules of origin; regulating the enterprises'behavior; achieving industrial upgrading and brand building; further improving the antidumping rules; improving the early warning mechanism of anti-dumping. Secondly, responding to U.S. anti-dumping investigations actively. With the severe situation of U.S. anti-dumping, Chinese government, industry associations, and businesses must work together, on basis of their different roles, to coordinate, collaborate, and respond with each other. It is only through the above ways that better results can be achieved.
The fifth chapter is conclusion. U.S. anti-dumping against China has become an important mode of trade friction; therefore, it is important to positively respond to anti-dumping investigations. US "sub-prime crisis" resulted in obvious international economic slowdown or even stagnation in United States, Europe and other many countries. On one hand, it should be considered from the macro aspect. Since Obama was on board, domestic economy was bothered by the financial crisis, and there is a sharp increase in unemployment rate. Together with pressure from U.S. labor unions and other political factors, U.S. anti-dumping against China was exacerbated. The United States also hopes to achieve RMB appreciation or a greater opening up of financial markets and other economic purposes through antidumping. In addition, because of the imperfections in WTO system, the abuse of anti-dumping measures is very obvious, such as the high litigation costs, the closure in expert panel hearing, the excessive handling in the agreement and so on. What's more, China's "non-market economy status" leads to the unfair treatment in U.S. anti-dumping against Chinese enterprises. On the other hand, the micro aspects should also be taken into consideration. The low-price exporting disorder of Chinese enterprises resulted in US anti-dumping investigations. The inactive responding to U.S. antidumping encouraged the U.S. anti-dumping arrogance. Anti-dumping has become strategic behavior that the world oligopoly corporations prevent Chinese enterprises from entering the international market.
Based on the analysis of the above reasons, the counter measures are proposed according to the procedure of export. The government and industry associations should supervise and control the export. When countering anti-dumping investigation, enterprises should respond to antidumping with the help of industrial associations and the government. In addition, several measures are put forward from the macro aspect. The enterprises could seek help from relevant interest groups, and actively strive for a "market economy status". Besides, they should reduce their export dependence on U.S. by expanding domestic demand and achieving market diversification strategy.
Fundamentally, anti-dumping is a traditional trade remedy measure recognized by the WTO, and the implementation of antidumping is primarily intended to reduce or eliminate the negative impact of foreign imports dumping on the domestic industry. However, the abuse of anti-dumping would spread its'influence on other trade areas or areas beyond trade, and even affect the normal Sino-US trade and even bilateral political relations, which are not worth the candle for both sides. The U.S. needs the Chinese market; China is also dependent on the U.S. market. Therefore, both parties should be rational in dealing with Sino-US trade problems.
起初,针对我国的反倾销分布在我国各主要出口领域,如化工产品、机电产品、纺织品、五金产品和轻工业等。1995-2010年间,我国遭遇反倾销调查的部门覆盖面扩展到除武器和弹药类、艺术品与古董类、贵金属宝石类,以及动物或植物油脂类外的各个部门。据WTO统计,2008年至2010年3月,美国共对中国发起反倾销调查170多起,其中20起已经征收惩罚关税。并且,美国成为同一时期对中国发起反倾销调查和采取惩罚性关税措施最多的国家。
反倾销是否有利于中美贸易发展,应该如何看待这种现象呢?这正是这篇论文要解决的问题。该论文分析了美国对华反倾销的现状以及引起反倾销的原因,并针对政府、行业及企业提出了一些应对策略,以推动中美贸易的发展。
论文主体分为五章。
第一章为引言,陈述了双边贸易往来的发展及美国对华反倾销成为一个研究热点。正确看待和处理美国对中国的反倾销问题对促进双边贸易更好发展具有十分重要的意义。此部分对国内外关于反倾销的原因及影响的研究进行了综述,奠定了本文的研究基础。
第二章论述了反倾销的相关理论基础,包括倾销和反倾销的界定标准和市场经济地位问题。中国对倾销和反倾销有自己的界定,而WTO和美国对倾销和反倾销也有着自己的认定标准。本部分分别对以上三种界定标准进行了介绍和比较。
中国对倾销的界定为：倾销是指商品进入一国市场的价格低于其在另一国市场上的销售价格。WTO《关税及贸易总协定》第6条第一款规定,各缔约方认识到,用倾销的手段将一国产品以低于正常价值的办法引入另一国的商业,如因此对一缔约方领土内一已建立的产业造成实质损害或实质损害威胁,或以实质阻碍一国内产业的新建,则倾销应予以谴责。就本条而言,如自一国出口至另一国的一产品的价格符合下列条件,则被视为以低于其正常价值的价格进入一进口国的商业。(a)低于正常贸易过程中出口国中供国内消费时的可比价格,或(b)如无此种国内价格,则低于：(ⅰ)正常贸易过程中同类产品出口至第三国的最高可比价格；或(ⅱ)该产品的原产国的生产成本加上合理的销售成本和利润。根据反倾销协议第二条关于倾销的确定：如果一项产品从一国出口到另一国,该产品的出口价格在正常的贸易过程中,低于出口国旨在用于本国消费的同类产品的可比价格,也即以低于其正常价值的价格进入另一国的商业,则该产品即被认为是倾销。根据美国反倾销法,凡进口产品在美国市场上以低于公平价值销售,就构成倾销。用该产品的出口价格或出口构成价格与正常价值进行公平比较,如出口价格或出口构成价格大于正常价值则不构成倾销；反之则构成倾销。
对中国市场经济地位的认定也同样是基于WTO的规定和美国的法律规定。《中美关于中国加入WTO双边协议反倾销条款》规定,中美两国同意可以维持它目前的反倾销条款,将中国作为非市场经济国家对待,条款的有效期为15年：中国可以要求美国调查当局按照美国法律审查某个特定部门或整个经济体是否属于市场经济导向,从而排除“非市场经济方法”的适用。美国确定进口非市场经济国家产品市场价值主要采用生产要素价值方法,这就是所谓的“非市场经济方法”。《中华人民共和国加入WTO议定书》第15条中关于中国非市场经济地位规定：一旦中国根据该WTO进口成员的国内法证实其是一个市场经济体,则(a)项的规定即应终止,但截至加入之日,该WTO进口成员的国内法中须包含有关市场经济的标准。无论如何, (a)项(ⅱ)目的规定应在加入之日后15年终止。此外,如中国根据该WTO进口成员的国内法证实一特定产业或部门具备市场经济条件,则(a)项中的非市场经济条款不得再对该产业或部门适用。此外,还对美国反倾销调查的过程及美国反倾销法的组成进行了介绍。
第三章分析了美国对华反倾销的现状,美国对华反倾销的特点和美国对中国反倾销的原因。
首先,本章陈述了美国对华反倾销的现状。根据美国商务部和中国商务部及WTO等权威信息分析,中国已成为美国反倾销的首要目标,
其次,本章主要从三个方面分析了美国对华反倾销的特点：反倾销案件数量不断上升,反倾销更加频繁；被诉倾销商品的种类不断增多；在反倾销诉讼中,中国处于不利的地位。
最后,本章分析了美国对中国反倾销的微观和宏观原因。宏观因素主要有以下几个方面：金融危机的爆发；政治因素；为了达到其他经济目的；美国对中国巨大的贸易逆差;WTO体制不完善；中国的非市场经济地位；产业结构的调整。微观原因主要包括：中国企业低价无序出口；我国企业应诉不积极；世界寡头垄断企业阻止中国企业进入国际市场。
第四章陈述了中国应对美国反倾销的策略。这些对策主要是基于反倾销的不同阶段提出。反倾销调查前的预警、反倾销调查发起时应对以及根据贸易的宏观背景提出了几项宏观解决策略,并且针对政府、行业组织以及企业提出了有针对性的策略。首先,政府及行业协会做好出口监管。在我国市场经济地位尚未被主要贸易伙伴承认、对华反倾销频发的情况下,规范行业竞争秩序是从源头上减少国外对我国出口商品的反倾销立案的根本办法。主要从以下几方面入手：统一对外方针,抵制低价出口；完善我国原产地规则；出口企业规范自身行为；实现产业升级,树立品牌意识；完善我国反倾销法律制度；完善反倾销预警机制。其次,积极应对美国的反倾销调查。面对美国对华反倾销的严峻形势,我国政府、行业协会、企业必须共同努力,根据自身的不同角色制定不同的对策,相互配合,通力协作,进行全方位应对,才能取得较好的成效。
第五章为结论。美国对华反倾销已成为美国对中国贸易摩擦的重要方式,积极应对反倾销已刻不容缓。美国“次贷危机”导致美国、欧洲以及全球许多国家经济增速明显放缓甚至停滞。一方面从宏观因素考虑,自奥巴马上任伊始,国内就被经济危机所困扰,失业人数剧增,加之美国工会团体的压力等各种政治因素,加剧了美国对华反倾销。美国同样希望通过反倾销达到人民币升值或者金融市场的更大开放等经济目的。另外,还由于WTO体制的不完善使反倾销措施滥用现象突出。例如,诉讼成本过高、专家小组审理案件的封闭性、协议具有过大的操纵性等等。中国的“非市场经济地位”更是导致了我国企业在反倾销领域遭受不公平待遇。另一方面,微观因素也是影响美国对华反倾销的重要原因,例如中国企业低价无序出口,我国企业应诉不积极,以及世界寡头垄断企业为阻止中国企业进入国际市场等。
基于以上分析,根据贸易出口的各个过程有针对性提出建议。做好政府及行业协会的出口监管工作。当遭遇反倾销调查时企业应在行业协会和政府的帮助下积极应对。另外,从宏观方面提出了几项对策。寻求相关利益集团的帮助,积极争取“市场经济地位”,以及通过扩大内需和实现市场多元化战略减少对美国出口的贸易依存度。
从根本上来说,反倾销是WTO所认可的一种传统贸易救济手段,其实施的目的主要是减轻或消除国外进口产品的倾销行为对本国产业所造成的负面影响。由于反倾销的滥用影响会波及到其他贸易领域或者是贸易以外的领域,影响到中美贸易的正常进行,甚至可能会破坏中美两国的政治关系,这对于双方而言都是得不偿失的。美国需要中国市场,中国也依赖于美国市场,因此,双方都应理性处理中美贸易中存在的问题。
Since Sino-US diplomatic relations were established in 1979, there has been much more bilateral trade. As bilateral trade developed, China and the U.S. became each other's important trade partner, and the trade conflicts also increased at a fast speed. According to the U.S. Department of Commerce, China is US's second largest trade partner, third largest export market and the largest import country, and the U.S. is China's second largest trading partner and the second largest export market. The first antidumping investigation initiated by U.S. was against Chinese Menthol on July 2, 1980. By 2000, the number of antidumping investigations by U.S. against China was up to 79. Since China entered the WTO in 2001, the trade deficit between China and the U.S. has expanded dramatically. Followed by the expanded trade deficit are the increasing trade conflicts and remedy measures. Antidumping accounts for 70% of all the trade remedy measures used by U.S. against China, and 1/3 antidumping investigations against China were initiated by US. What's more, the breakup of the financial crisis in 2007 added a catalyst to the bilateral trade conflicts, and U.S. antidumping investigation turns out to be more frequently applied. Antidumping becomes a hot spot in Sino-US relationship.
At the beginning, the antidumping cases covered the fields of major exports, such as medicine, mechanics and instrument, textile, five minerals, light industry and so on. While from 1995 to 2010, the filed petitions have expanded to cover the fields of firearms and ammunition, arts and antiques, precious metal and gemstone, animal or vegetable organic tissue and so on. What's more, according to WTO statistics, from January 1st,2007 to March 2010,170 antidumping investigations were initiated against China, among which 28 cases were already implemented antidumping measures. The U.S. turns to be the country that has initiated the most anti-dumping investigations against China and implemented the most anti-dumping measures for that period.
Could antidumping be good to the development of Sino-U.S. bilateral trade and how should such a phenomenon be considered? That is just what this paper is written for. This paper depicts the antidumping situation, analyzes the reasons for it, and proposes some counter measures for the Chinese government, industries and enterprises, in order to promote Sino-US bilateral trade.
There are five chapters in this paper.
The introduction chapter reviews the development of Sino-US bilateral trade, which shows that antidumping has become a hot spot in Sino-US relationship. It's of great significance to avoid antidumping investigation and promote Sino-US bilateral trade. This chapter also includes the foreign and domestic literature reviews that are related to the reasons and effects of antidumping, which are the theoretical basis for this paper.
The second chapter is the theoretical basis for antidumping, including the definition of dumping and antidumping and non-market economy status problem. For dumping and antidumping, China has its own definition, while WTO/GATT and the US Tariff Act of 1930 also have defined them in their own standards. This chapter compares these definitions.
China defined dumping as the following:dumping refers to selling same product at different prices, at home and abroad. According to GATT 1994, Article VI Paragraph 1 on Anti-dumping and Countervailing Duties:The contracting parties recognize that dumping, by which products of one country are introduced into the commerce of another country at less than the normal value of the products, is to be condemned if it causes or threatens material injury to an established industry in the territory of a contracting party or materially retards the establishment of a domestic industry. For the purposes of this Article, a product is to be considered as being introduced into the commerce of an importing country at less than its normal value, if the price of the product exported from one country to another (a) is less than the comparable price, in the ordinary course of trade, for the like product when destined for consumption in the exporting country, or, (b) in the absence of such domestic price, is less than either (ⅰ) the highest comparable price for the like product for export to any third country in the ordinary course of trade, or (ⅱ) the cost of production of the product in the country of origin plus a reasonable addition for selling cost and profit. According to PartⅠ:Article 2 of Agreement on Anti-dumping on determination of dumping:a product is to be considered as being dumped, i.e. introduced into the commerce of another country at less than its normal value, if the export price of the product exported from one country to another is less than the comparable price, in the ordinary course of trade, for the like product when destined for consumption in the exporting country. According to the US Antidumping Law, U.S. industries may petition the government for relief from imports that are sold in the United States at less than fair value ("dumped"). With the export price or export price and normal value constitutes a fair comparison, such as the export price or export price is greater than the normal value of form does not constitute dumping; otherwise constitutes dumping.
For the non-market economy status, it is also based on the WTO regulations and U.S. laws. The Anti-dumping Clause of Sino-US Bilateral Agreement on China's Accession to WTO provides that the two countries agreed to maintain its current anti-dumping provisions and China will be treated as a non-market economy country. The terms will be valid for 15 years. China can request the United States authorities to investigate on a particular sector or the entire economy of China based on U.S. laws to make sure whether they are market oriented economy, thereby they could be excluded from "non-market economic approach". The U.S. determines the market value of import products from non-market economy countries mainly through the cost of production materials, and this is the so-called "non-market economic approach."
According to Article 15(d) of Protocol on the Accession of the People's Republic of China:Once China has established, under the national law of the importing WTO Member, that it is a market economy, the provisions of subparagraph (a) shall be terminated provided that the importing Member's national law contains market economy criteria as of the date of accession. In any event, the provisions of subparagraph (a) (ii) shall expire 15 years after the date of accession. In addition, should China establish, pursuant to the national law of the importing WTO Member, that market economy conditions prevail in a particular industry or sector, the non market economy provisions of subparagraph (a) shall no longer apply to that industry or sector. Besides, the paper also introduces the process of antidumping investigations and countervailing duty and the structure of the U.S. antidumping law.。
The third chapter analyzes the U.S. antidumping against China and its causes, which include the U.S. antidumping situation against China, the characteristics of the U.S. antidumping and the causes for U.S. antidumping against China.
Firstly, the chapter depicts the U.S. antidumping situation against China. According to Chinese Ministry of Commerce, Commerce Department of U.S., WTO and other authorities, China has become the country that U.S. initiated most antidumping investigations:
Secondly, the characteristics of the U.S. antidumping against China were explained from three aspects:the increasing numbers of antidumping investigations; more concerned goods; Chinese enterprises in disadvantage.
Finally, this chapter analyzes the reasons for antidumping from micro factors and macro factors. The macro factors mainly include:the breakup of financial crisis; political factors; achieving other economic goals; the huge trade deficit; the defects in WTO system; China's non-market economy status; adjustment of industrial structure in the US. The micro factors mainly include:exporting disorder of Chinese enterprises; Chinese inactiveness in responding to the U.S. anti-dumping; preventing Chinese enterprises from entering international market by oligopolistic firms.
The forth chapter proposes some counter measures against U.S. antidumping against China. The proposals are connected with different phases of the antidumping trade policy process:the antidumping warning, investigation countering, and some from the macro aspect. These proposals were raised respectively for the government, industry associations and the enterprises. Firstly, government and trade associations should fulfill their responsibility. China's market economy status has not been recognized by the major trading partners, and there are frequent anti-dumping investigations against China. Therefore, it is essential to avoid anti-dumping against China through regulating export competition. They mainly work through the following ways:adhering to common external policy and resolutely resisting the low price export activity; improving rules of origin; regulating the enterprises'behavior; achieving industrial upgrading and brand building; further improving the antidumping rules; improving the early warning mechanism of anti-dumping. Secondly, responding to U.S. anti-dumping investigations actively. With the severe situation of U.S. anti-dumping, Chinese government, industry associations, and businesses must work together, on basis of their different roles, to coordinate, collaborate, and respond with each other. It is only through the above ways that better results can be achieved.
The fifth chapter is conclusion. U.S. anti-dumping against China has become an important mode of trade friction; therefore, it is important to positively respond to anti-dumping investigations. US "sub-prime crisis" resulted in obvious international economic slowdown or even stagnation in United States, Europe and other many countries. On one hand, it should be considered from the macro aspect. Since Obama was on board, domestic economy was bothered by the financial crisis, and there is a sharp increase in unemployment rate. Together with pressure from U.S. labor unions and other political factors, U.S. anti-dumping against China was exacerbated. The United States also hopes to achieve RMB appreciation or a greater opening up of financial markets and other economic purposes through antidumping. In addition, because of the imperfections in WTO system, the abuse of anti-dumping measures is very obvious, such as the high litigation costs, the closure in expert panel hearing, the excessive handling in the agreement and so on. What's more, China's "non-market economy status" leads to the unfair treatment in U.S. anti-dumping against Chinese enterprises. On the other hand, the micro aspects should also be taken into consideration. The low-price exporting disorder of Chinese enterprises resulted in US anti-dumping investigations. The inactive responding to U.S. antidumping encouraged the U.S. anti-dumping arrogance. Anti-dumping has become strategic behavior that the world oligopoly corporations prevent Chinese enterprises from entering the international market.
Based on the analysis of the above reasons, the counter measures are proposed according to the procedure of export. The government and industry associations should supervise and control the export. When countering anti-dumping investigation, enterprises should respond to antidumping with the help of industrial associations and the government. In addition, several measures are put forward from the macro aspect. The enterprises could seek help from relevant interest groups, and actively strive for a "market economy status". Besides, they should reduce their export dependence on U.S. by expanding domestic demand and achieving market diversification strategy.
Fundamentally, anti-dumping is a traditional trade remedy measure recognized by the WTO, and the implementation of antidumping is primarily intended to reduce or eliminate the negative impact of foreign imports dumping on the domestic industry. However, the abuse of anti-dumping would spread its'influence on other trade areas or areas beyond trade, and even affect the normal Sino-US trade and even bilateral political relations, which are not worth the candle for both sides. The U.S. needs the Chinese market; China is also dependent on the U.S. market. Therefore, both parties should be rational in dealing with Sino-US trade problems.
引文
China Economic and Law Encyclopedia Press of China University of Political Science & Law, 1992. p.997
② Cao Mingjian. International Economic Law. Beijing:Press of China University of Political Science & Law 1999.p.207-208
① Wang Yaotian, The Uruguay round of multilateral trade negotiations, Fudan University Press, 1995.886
① Jia Jianhua and Liu Peiyuan, Capital University of Economics and Business Journal.2005(1):60
①Three top economists agree 2009 worst financial crisis since great depression; risks increase if right steps are not taken. (February 29,2009). Reuters. Retrieved 2009-09-30, from Business Wire News database.
② "Roubini-10 Risks to Global Growth". Forbes. May 27,2009. http://www.forbes.com/2009/05/27/recession-depression-global-economy-growth-opinions-colu mnists-nouriel-roubini.html
① Wu Jinxi and Wang Hongbing:Historical Origin and Developing Tendency of Antidumping, www.chinatradennews.com.cn
① Wang Xiaofei. Discussion on the Market Economy Standard [J]. Theory Front,2007(4):31-32
① MOFTEC (Ministry of Foreign Trade and Economic Cooperation).Legal Documents for China's Entrance into WTO [M].Beijing:People's Publishing House 2002:183.
① Yang Shihui. International Comparison and Game theory on Antidumping and China's counter measures. [M]. Science Press,2005.
① Zhang Suoyu. Brand Strategy in Foreign Trade from the aspect of "Lining Phenomenon" [J].Economic,2009(8):4
① Song Hong. Non-market Economy and the Development of Foreign Trade [J]. World economics and politics,2004(10):51-56.
① Wang Shichun and Ye Quanliang. Study on" on-market economy" and China's Counter Measures [J]. Finance & Trade Economics,2005(5):59-64.
[1]Ashoka Mody, Is FDI Integrating the World Economy? [J] The World Economy, Vol.27, No.8,Aug 2004
[2]Antidumping and Countervailing Duty orders in Place as of February 4,2004 By Country[Z]. Statistics from International Trade Administration of Department of Commerce.
[3]Berg, A. and Pattillo, C. Predicting Currency Crises:The Indicators Approach and an Alternance,1999,18(4), pp.561-586.
[4]Ciarlone, A and Trebeschi, G, Designing an Early Warning System for Debt Crisis
[5]Demidova, S., and A. Rodriguez-Clare (2007), Trade Policy under firm-level heterogeneity in a small economy, NBER working paper 13688.
[6]Ederington, J., and P. McCalman,2008, Endogenous firm heterogeneity and the dynamics of trade liberalization, Journal of International Economics
[7]Finger, J.M. "The Industry Country Incidence of Less-than-value Causes in the U.S. Import",1981.21, pp.325-340
[8]Gao, X., and K. Miyagiwa,2005, Antidumping protection and R&D competition, Canadian Journal of Economics,38,211-227(17).
[9]H. Fadinger and P. Fleiss,2008,"Trade and Sectoral Productivity", ECORE discussion paper 2008/4.
[10]Romano A, Passiante G, Ella V. Modelling growth clusters in the new web Economy [C], Proceedings of the 45th International Conference on Small Business (JCSB) World Conference. Brisbane (Australia) 2000
[11]Schmitz, H. Collective Efficiency:Growth Path for Small-Scale Industry [J]. The Journal of Development Study, 1995,31(4); 529-566
[12]Xing, Li & Chan, M. W.Luke。Relationship between Foreign Direct Investment, International Trade and Technology Progress:A Case from China [J].Proceedings of the 5th international conference on innovation & management, VOLs Ⅰ and Ⅱ,2008,3166-3172
[13]陈力.国际贸易救济法律制度中的非市场经济规则研究—以美国欧盟为视角：[学位论文]上海：复旦大学,2006.
[14]陈泰锋.中美贸易摩擦根源的反思[J].国际经济合作,2005(9).
[15]邓志涛.我国出口企业应对反倾销的反思与策略调整[J].东南亚纵横,2005(4).
[16]李昌凤.加入世贸组织后对华反倾销的现状及对策研究[J].学习论坛,2004(3).
[17]李晓杰,卜文斌.美国对中国实行反倾销原因及对策探讨[J].北方经贸,2004(8).
[18]李志远.简述反倾销的影响及我国的应对策略[J].科技经济市场,2008,(6)
[19]胡乃艾,初磊.中国企业遭遇国外反倾销制裁的原因探析[J].莱阳农学院报,2005(2).
[20]贾宁.1950-2003年的美国反倾销.国际贸易问题.2007(3)
[21]刘会平.试析我国成为反倾销最大受害国的深层原因[J].理论界,2005(9).
[22]刘立平.WTO建立以来国际反倾销的实证分析,经济理论与经济管理.2006(6)
[23]林云华.国际对华反倾销投诉的现状和原因分析[J].时代经贸,2004(5).
对外经贸,2005,(2).
[24]卢艳玲.加入WTO以来外国对华反倾销的特点原因及对策分析[J].北方经贸,2005(3).
[25]年猛.中国纺织业的现状及其分析[J].商业经济,2009(1)
[26]秦娟,唐静芳.美国对华反倾销原因的国内研究综述[J].时代经贸2006,(6)
[27]王蔚.中国在国外对华反倾销案中被认定为“非市场经济国家”的原因分析[J].黑龙江
[28]吴金希.浅议政府在应对国外对华反倾销中的作用[J].CPA国行政管理,2004,(8).
[29]徐志玲,魏浩.新型贸易壁垒的影响及其应对策略.统计与决策.2005(21)
[30]颜晓旭.反倾销中正常价值确定的会计方法及举证[J].财经视线,2008.
[31]羊剑勇.外国对华反倾销原因和对策思考[J].贵州工业大学学报,2004(3).
[32]杨睿.孙运利.全球化视野下国际经贸法律问题研究—应对国外反倾销策略思考.齐鲁法学文库.2007(9)
[33]赵瑾.中美贸易摩擦的焦点和主要问题[J].世界经济,2004(3).
[34]周华.中国遭受反倾销问题分析[J].商丘师范学院学报,2008,(5).
[35]周撷.WTO时代中国遭受反倾销的国别和商品结构分析.财贸经济.2007(2)[1]周立人.金融危机凌逼下我国经济与外贸的现状与应对策略[J].国际商务研究2009(4)
[36]周晔.中美贸易逆差、相关利益集团与美国对华反倾销[J].华东交通大学学报,2006,(6)
② Cao Mingjian. International Economic Law. Beijing:Press of China University of Political Science & Law 1999.p.207-208
① Wang Yaotian, The Uruguay round of multilateral trade negotiations, Fudan University Press, 1995.886
① Jia Jianhua and Liu Peiyuan, Capital University of Economics and Business Journal.2005(1):60
①Three top economists agree 2009 worst financial crisis since great depression; risks increase if right steps are not taken. (February 29,2009). Reuters. Retrieved 2009-09-30, from Business Wire News database.
② "Roubini-10 Risks to Global Growth". Forbes. May 27,2009. http://www.forbes.com/2009/05/27/recession-depression-global-economy-growth-opinions-colu mnists-nouriel-roubini.html
① Wu Jinxi and Wang Hongbing:Historical Origin and Developing Tendency of Antidumping, www.chinatradennews.com.cn
① Wang Xiaofei. Discussion on the Market Economy Standard [J]. Theory Front,2007(4):31-32
① MOFTEC (Ministry of Foreign Trade and Economic Cooperation).Legal Documents for China's Entrance into WTO [M].Beijing:People's Publishing House 2002:183.
① Yang Shihui. International Comparison and Game theory on Antidumping and China's counter measures. [M]. Science Press,2005.
① Zhang Suoyu. Brand Strategy in Foreign Trade from the aspect of "Lining Phenomenon" [J].Economic,2009(8):4
① Song Hong. Non-market Economy and the Development of Foreign Trade [J]. World economics and politics,2004(10):51-56.
① Wang Shichun and Ye Quanliang. Study on" on-market economy" and China's Counter Measures [J]. Finance & Trade Economics,2005(5):59-64.
[1]Ashoka Mody, Is FDI Integrating the World Economy? [J] The World Economy, Vol.27, No.8,Aug 2004
[2]Antidumping and Countervailing Duty orders in Place as of February 4,2004 By Country[Z]. Statistics from International Trade Administration of Department of Commerce.
[3]Berg, A. and Pattillo, C. Predicting Currency Crises:The Indicators Approach and an Alternance,1999,18(4), pp.561-586.
[4]Ciarlone, A and Trebeschi, G, Designing an Early Warning System for Debt Crisis
[5]Demidova, S., and A. Rodriguez-Clare (2007), Trade Policy under firm-level heterogeneity in a small economy, NBER working paper 13688.
[6]Ederington, J., and P. McCalman,2008, Endogenous firm heterogeneity and the dynamics of trade liberalization, Journal of International Economics
[7]Finger, J.M. "The Industry Country Incidence of Less-than-value Causes in the U.S. Import",1981.21, pp.325-340
[8]Gao, X., and K. Miyagiwa,2005, Antidumping protection and R&D competition, Canadian Journal of Economics,38,211-227(17).
[9]H. Fadinger and P. Fleiss,2008,"Trade and Sectoral Productivity", ECORE discussion paper 2008/4.
[10]Romano A, Passiante G, Ella V. Modelling growth clusters in the new web Economy [C], Proceedings of the 45th International Conference on Small Business (JCSB) World Conference. Brisbane (Australia) 2000
[11]Schmitz, H. Collective Efficiency:Growth Path for Small-Scale Industry [J]. The Journal of Development Study, 1995,31(4); 529-566
[12]Xing, Li & Chan, M. W.Luke。Relationship between Foreign Direct Investment, International Trade and Technology Progress:A Case from China [J].Proceedings of the 5th international conference on innovation & management, VOLs Ⅰ and Ⅱ,2008,3166-3172
[13]陈力.国际贸易救济法律制度中的非市场经济规则研究—以美国欧盟为视角：[学位论文]上海：复旦大学,2006.
[14]陈泰锋.中美贸易摩擦根源的反思[J].国际经济合作,2005(9).
[15]邓志涛.我国出口企业应对反倾销的反思与策略调整[J].东南亚纵横,2005(4).
[16]李昌凤.加入世贸组织后对华反倾销的现状及对策研究[J].学习论坛,2004(3).
[17]李晓杰,卜文斌.美国对中国实行反倾销原因及对策探讨[J].北方经贸,2004(8).
[18]李志远.简述反倾销的影响及我国的应对策略[J].科技经济市场,2008,(6)
[19]胡乃艾,初磊.中国企业遭遇国外反倾销制裁的原因探析[J].莱阳农学院报,2005(2).
[20]贾宁.1950-2003年的美国反倾销.国际贸易问题.2007(3)
[21]刘会平.试析我国成为反倾销最大受害国的深层原因[J].理论界,2005(9).
[22]刘立平.WTO建立以来国际反倾销的实证分析,经济理论与经济管理.2006(6)
[23]林云华.国际对华反倾销投诉的现状和原因分析[J].时代经贸,2004(5).
对外经贸,2005,(2).
[24]卢艳玲.加入WTO以来外国对华反倾销的特点原因及对策分析[J].北方经贸,2005(3).
[25]年猛.中国纺织业的现状及其分析[J].商业经济,2009(1)
[26]秦娟,唐静芳.美国对华反倾销原因的国内研究综述[J].时代经贸2006,(6)
[27]王蔚.中国在国外对华反倾销案中被认定为“非市场经济国家”的原因分析[J].黑龙江
[28]吴金希.浅议政府在应对国外对华反倾销中的作用[J].CPA国行政管理,2004,(8).
[29]徐志玲,魏浩.新型贸易壁垒的影响及其应对策略.统计与决策.2005(21)
[30]颜晓旭.反倾销中正常价值确定的会计方法及举证[J].财经视线,2008.
[31]羊剑勇.外国对华反倾销原因和对策思考[J].贵州工业大学学报,2004(3).
[32]杨睿.孙运利.全球化视野下国际经贸法律问题研究—应对国外反倾销策略思考.齐鲁法学文库.2007(9)
[33]赵瑾.中美贸易摩擦的焦点和主要问题[J].世界经济,2004(3).
[34]周华.中国遭受反倾销问题分析[J].商丘师范学院学报,2008,(5).
[35]周撷.WTO时代中国遭受反倾销的国别和商品结构分析.财贸经济.2007(2)[1]周立人.金融危机凌逼下我国经济与外贸的现状与应对策略[J].国际商务研究2009(4)
[36]周晔.中美贸易逆差、相关利益集团与美国对华反倾销[J].华东交通大学学报,2006,(6)