在WTO框架下对美国反倾销“归零”实践之考量

发布时间：2018-05-26 11:20

本文选题：倾销幅度 + 归零法　；参考：《华东政法大学》2010年硕士论文

【摘要】： 在反倾销调查中,倾销幅度计算过程中的归零计算法是一种备受争议的技术处理方式。归零法一直被以美国为代表的一些国家广泛应用于反倾销调查实践中,有关归零法的争议屡次被提交争端解决,WTO争端解决机构已经否定了归零法的合法性。但由于其司法效力的有限性、裁决执行机制的强制力有待加强,我们很难要求以美国为首的这些坚持归零实践的国家做出改变,特别是美国国内法院的强硬态度也说明这种不公平的贸易实践将会在美国继续存在下去。唯一彻底的解决方法是在多哈回合谈判中修改《反倾销协议》,明文禁止归零法。但当前的谈判情况依然令人担忧,不容乐观。作为世界上遭受反倾销最多的国家,中国饱受归零法之苦,特别是来自美国的反倾销归零调查,因为美国几乎在所有反倾销原审调查阶段都使用归零法。但时至今日,我国并没有就所受到的归零法不公平待遇向WTO争端解决机制提起告诉,仅仅以第三方身份参与了WTO争端解决机构对某些相关案件的审理。归零问题在国内学界尚未引起足够的重视,有关文献也只是做了简要介绍和评论,研究不够全面、系统。鉴于此,本文试图对各种形式的归零计算法做一个全面的介绍,并且深入分析美国的归零计算法的违法性。本文将分三部分进行论述,具体结构如下: 第一部分是对倾销问题的基本概述。这部分首先界定了倾销认定过程中的基本概念。然后,这部分着重介绍了倾销幅度的计算方法,引出正常价值与出口价格比较中的归零计算法,并对归零实践常见的几种类型一一进行介绍。第二部分介绍了美国归零法实践的历史演进。这部分首先介绍了乌拉圭回合协议前美国的归零实践和法院的态度。然后,梳理了WTO争端解决机构对美国归零操作的意见。并且指出,尽管有关国际组织争端解决机制已经认定归零法是对国际条约的错误解读,美国法院的态度却非常强硬,一直维持归零实践在美国的合法性。第三部分是对美国反倾销归零实践的违法性分析。这是本文的核心所在。首先,这部分从美国国内法的角度审视归零法的违法性:首先引出了与国际义务紧密相关的两个重要的美国行政法原则,并在这两个原则之下分析,从国内法的角度,美国的归零法是没有法律依据的。其次,这部分论述了WTO框架下归零计算法的违法性:首先介绍WTO争端解决机制下对反倾销案件的评审标准和条款解释依据,明晰产生归零法争议的法律条款,然后通过对GATT1994和《反倾销协议》相关条款的解读,逐一分析论述了各种归零计算法在WTO框架下的违法性。最后,本文简要介绍了多哈回合谈判中归零计算法的发展趋势。
[Abstract]:In anti-dumping investigation, the method of zero-to-zero in the calculation of dumping margin is a controversial technique. The zeroing law has been widely used in the practice of anti-dumping investigation by some countries represented by the United States. The disputes about the zeroing law have been submitted to the dispute settlement repeatedly. The WTO dispute settlement body has denied the legitimacy of the zeroing law. However, due to its limited judicial effectiveness, the enforcement mechanism of adjudication needs to be strengthened. It is very difficult for us to ask those countries led by the United States to make changes in their practice of returning to zero. In particular, the tough stance of U.S. domestic courts suggests that unfair trade practices will continue to exist in the United States. The only radical solution is to amend the anti-dumping agreement in the Doha Round to explicitly prohibit the return to zero. But the current negotiations are still worrying, not optimistic. As a country that suffered the most anti-dumping in the world, China suffered from zero law, especially from the United States, because the United States used zero law in almost all stages of the original anti-dumping investigation. But up to now, China has not told the WTO dispute settlement mechanism about the unfair treatment of return to zero, and only participated in some related cases of WTO dispute settlement body as a third party. The problem of returning to zero has not been paid enough attention to in the domestic academic circles, and the relevant literature has only made a brief introduction and comments, and the research is not comprehensive and systematic. In view of this, this paper attempts to make a comprehensive introduction to various forms of zeroing calculation method, and deeply analyzes the illegality of American zeroing calculation method. This paper will be divided into three parts, the specific structure is as follows: The first part is the basic overview of dumping. This part first defines the basic concept of dumping identification process. Then, this part mainly introduces the calculation method of dumping margin, leads to the zero calculation method in the comparison of normal value and export price, and introduces several common types of return to zero practice one by one. The second part introduces the historical evolution of the practice of returning to zero in the United States. This part first introduces the zero-return practice of the United States and the attitude of the court before the Uruguay Round Agreement. Then, the author combs the opinion of WTO dispute settlement body on the operation of American return to zero. It is also pointed out that although the dispute settlement mechanism of international organizations has recognized that the zeroing law is a misinterpretation of international treaties, the attitude of American courts is very tough and has always maintained the legitimacy of the practice of returning to zero in the United States. The third part is the analysis of the illegality of American anti-dumping practice. This is the core of this paper. First of all, this part examines the illegality of zeroing law from the angle of American domestic law. Firstly, it draws out two important American administrative law principles closely related to international obligations, and analyzes them from the angle of domestic law. There is no legal basis for zeroing in the United States. Secondly, this part discusses the illegality of zeroing calculation method under the framework of WTO: firstly, it introduces the evaluation criteria and interpretation basis of anti-dumping cases under the WTO dispute settlement mechanism, and clarifies the legal provisions that produce the disputes in the zero-returning law. Then through the interpretation of the relevant articles of GATT1994 and the Anti-dumping Agreement, this paper discusses the illegality of various methods of zero calculation under the framework of WTO one by one. Finally, this paper briefly introduces the trend of zero-to-zero calculation in Doha Round negotiations.
【学位授予单位】：华东政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2010
【分类号】：D996.1;D971.2

【参考文献】