反倾销归零法律问题研究
发布时间:2019-04-30 20:26
【摘要】:近年来,反倾销“归零法则”日益成为反倾销调查中的一个热点问题。它被以美国为代表的少数国家在国内反倾销调查过程中屡屡使用,在国际贸易的实践中一直受到各其他多数会员国的不满和争议。自1997年“印度诉欧共体床单反倾销案”以来,有关反倾销归零的案件在WTO争端解决机构那里一直未断。虽然专家小组和WTO争端解决机构在许多个案例中都对“归零法则”的使用作出了否定性的裁定,但是也仅仅只是让使用归零法的国家稍稍收敛一些,以一个低一些的关税替代之前的天价关税,并没有从根本上遏止住这种不公平计算方法的使用。相关争议也一直没有停止,这种“归零法”的使用在一些国家屡禁不止的原因是多方面的,但最关键的原因是,在WTO关于反倾销的相关立法文件中,许多地方规定的不够具体,模棱两可,存在漏洞,于是就给了那些贸易保护主义者以可乘之机和为自己辩护的口实 随着对外开放程度的日益加大,中国也逐渐成为国际贸易中的关键角色,当然也就不可避免的成为受“归零法则”侵害最为严重的国家之一,国内的许多出口型贸易企业就成为了牺牲品,慢慢的淡出国际市场,这也使我们国家损失了很多参与国际分工和赚取外汇的机会。然而,更为不容乐观的状况是,目前中国国内对于在反倾销调查中使用“归零法则”的相关问题研究仍然处在一个相对落后的阶段,一些学术理论方面的著作虽不算少,但大多数都是以介绍和评论相关案例为主,或者仅仅涉及“归零法则”的个别方面,较少有对“归零法则”进行系统的介绍,这将是本文论述的重点。文中也摘取了两个典型案例进行了评析,头一尾渐近式的展现了反倾销中“归零法则”在具体实践过程中的遭遇,并以此为基础,最后将我国首次向WTO争端解决机构告诉,原因是受到美国反倾销调查中使用“归零法”的不公平待遇的案件进行了简单的评析和预测。 本文共分五部分,第一部分介绍了反倾销“归零法则”的相关理论,包括“归零法则”的概念、种类和本质,第二部分介绍了“归零法则”的具体应用。第三部分选取了三个典型的“归零法则”的案例加以介绍;重点的第四部分,对“归零法则”进行了违法性分析;最后的第五部分,对我国以后如何免受“归零法则”的侵害提出了几点建议。
[Abstract]:In recent years, the "return to zero rule" of anti-dumping has increasingly become a hot issue in anti-dumping investigation. It has been frequently used in domestic anti-dumping investigations by a few countries represented by the United States and has been dissatisfied and disputed by most other member States in the practice of international trade. Since the Anti-dumping case of India v. EC sheet in 1997, the case of anti-dumping returning to zero has not been broken in the WTO dispute settlement body. Although the Panel of experts and the WTO dispute settlement body have made negative decisions on the use of the "return to zero" rule in many cases, it has only allowed countries using the law of return to zero to converge a little bit. Replacing the previous tariff with a lower tariff did not fundamentally curb the use of this unfair method of calculation. The related disputes have not been stopped, and the use of this "returning to zero law" has many reasons for repeated prohibitions in some countries, but the most crucial reason is that in the relevant legislative documents of the WTO on anti-dumping, many local regulations are not specific enough. Because of ambiguity and loopholes, China has gradually become a key player in international trade as protectionists are given the opportunity to take advantage of it and defend themselves. With the increasing openness to the outside world, China has become a key player in international trade. Of course, it will inevitably become one of the countries most seriously affected by the rule of returning to zero, and many domestic export-oriented trading enterprises have become victims and gradually fade out of the international market. This also cost our country a lot of opportunities to participate in the international division of labor and earn foreign exchange. However, the more unoptimistic situation is that at present, the domestic research on the use of the "return to zero rule" in anti-dumping investigations is still in a relatively backward stage, and some academic theoretical works are still in a relatively backward stage, although there are quite a few works on some academic theories. However, most of them focus on introducing and commenting on the relevant cases, or only involve the individual aspects of the "return to zero rule", and rarely systematically introduce the "return to zero rule", which will be the focus of this paper. In this paper, two typical cases are also selected and analyzed. The first and last step-by-step approach shows the encounter of the "return to zero rule" in the concrete practice of anti-dumping, and based on this, finally, it tells the WTO dispute settlement body for the first time that our country has been told to the dispute settlement body of China for the first time. The reason is that the unfair treatment cases using the "return to zero law" in the anti-dumping investigation of the United States are simply evaluated and predicted. This paper is divided into five parts. The first part introduces the relevant theories of anti-dumping "return to zero rule", including the concept, type and essence of "return to zero rule", and the second part introduces the concrete application of "return to zero rule". The third part selects three typical cases of "return to zero rule" to introduce; the fourth part focuses on the illegal analysis of "returning to zero rule"; In the last part, the author puts forward some suggestions on how to avoid the rule of return to zero in the future.
【学位授予单位】:辽宁大学
【学位级别】:硕士
【学位授予年份】:2012
【分类号】:D996.1
本文编号:2468994
[Abstract]:In recent years, the "return to zero rule" of anti-dumping has increasingly become a hot issue in anti-dumping investigation. It has been frequently used in domestic anti-dumping investigations by a few countries represented by the United States and has been dissatisfied and disputed by most other member States in the practice of international trade. Since the Anti-dumping case of India v. EC sheet in 1997, the case of anti-dumping returning to zero has not been broken in the WTO dispute settlement body. Although the Panel of experts and the WTO dispute settlement body have made negative decisions on the use of the "return to zero" rule in many cases, it has only allowed countries using the law of return to zero to converge a little bit. Replacing the previous tariff with a lower tariff did not fundamentally curb the use of this unfair method of calculation. The related disputes have not been stopped, and the use of this "returning to zero law" has many reasons for repeated prohibitions in some countries, but the most crucial reason is that in the relevant legislative documents of the WTO on anti-dumping, many local regulations are not specific enough. Because of ambiguity and loopholes, China has gradually become a key player in international trade as protectionists are given the opportunity to take advantage of it and defend themselves. With the increasing openness to the outside world, China has become a key player in international trade. Of course, it will inevitably become one of the countries most seriously affected by the rule of returning to zero, and many domestic export-oriented trading enterprises have become victims and gradually fade out of the international market. This also cost our country a lot of opportunities to participate in the international division of labor and earn foreign exchange. However, the more unoptimistic situation is that at present, the domestic research on the use of the "return to zero rule" in anti-dumping investigations is still in a relatively backward stage, and some academic theoretical works are still in a relatively backward stage, although there are quite a few works on some academic theories. However, most of them focus on introducing and commenting on the relevant cases, or only involve the individual aspects of the "return to zero rule", and rarely systematically introduce the "return to zero rule", which will be the focus of this paper. In this paper, two typical cases are also selected and analyzed. The first and last step-by-step approach shows the encounter of the "return to zero rule" in the concrete practice of anti-dumping, and based on this, finally, it tells the WTO dispute settlement body for the first time that our country has been told to the dispute settlement body of China for the first time. The reason is that the unfair treatment cases using the "return to zero law" in the anti-dumping investigation of the United States are simply evaluated and predicted. This paper is divided into five parts. The first part introduces the relevant theories of anti-dumping "return to zero rule", including the concept, type and essence of "return to zero rule", and the second part introduces the concrete application of "return to zero rule". The third part selects three typical cases of "return to zero rule" to introduce; the fourth part focuses on the illegal analysis of "returning to zero rule"; In the last part, the author puts forward some suggestions on how to avoid the rule of return to zero in the future.
【学位授予单位】:辽宁大学
【学位级别】:硕士
【学位授予年份】:2012
【分类号】:D996.1
【参考文献】
相关期刊论文 前10条
1 王日波;关于反倾销的评析与思考[J];山东工商学院学报;2003年03期
2 张蕾;;我国对外反倾销现状与思考[J];合作经济与科技;2010年04期
3 刘翠英;杨桂花;阎忠昌;马珍珍;;论反倾销中的会计理念[J];经济论坛;2008年19期
4 韩谷乔;;从WTO案例看“归零法”的违法性[J];经济研究导刊;2009年30期
5 荣德昱;;浅析WTO反倾销规则对于“倾销”和“损害”的新确认[J];吉林广播电视大学学报;2005年04期
6 张宏乐;;WTO《反倾销协议》中的公平价格比较——最近案例中对归零方法的否定[J];世界贸易组织动态与研究;2004年07期
7 刘勇;;多哈回合反倾销规则改革的最新成果探析[J];世界贸易组织动态与研究;2008年08期
8 张媛媛;;欧美反规避立法比较研究[J];山西煤炭管理干部学院学报;2007年04期
9 ;反倾销中的归零之辩——印度诉欧盟床单案[J];WTO经济导刊;2006年07期
10 ;再谈反倾销的归零问题——加拿大诉美国软木反倾销案[J];WTO经济导刊;2006年08期
相关硕士学位论文 前1条
1 张璐;提升企业反倾销应诉能力的政府责任[D];上海交通大学;2008年
,本文编号:2468994
本文链接:https://www.wllwen.com/falvlunwen/guojifa/2468994.html