Dissertation > Excellent graduate degree dissertation topics show

On the Analog Country of EU’s Anti-dumping Against China

Author: HouZhe
Tutor: HeZhiPeng
School: Jilin University
Course: Legal
Keywords: EU Anti-dumping Analog Country the Principle of Fairness
CLC: D996
Type: Master's thesis
Year: 2009
Downloads: 304
Quote: 1
Read: Download Dissertation

Abstract

Entering the epoch of economic globalization, there has been a great development in the area of international trade. Within the system of international law, the economy intercourse was strengthened in every country and every area, which play a positive role in the worldwide accumulation of wealth and the whole development of human society. It means great challenges and opportunities for china to join in the WTO. Chinese government fulfilled every commitment of WTO positively with domestic legislation. Meanwhile, the industry organizations and companies established“new rules”and competed fairly with foreign companies in the international market. What they have done contributed a lot to not only the development of Chinese economy but also the world trade. However, besides the achievement of foreign trade China has gained, the conflicts of benefit has occurred between China and other countries accordingly, and the trade conflicts take place frequently in which the anti-dumping top the list. Since the first EU’s anti-dumping act against China about the issue of saccharin happened, China has become the primary goal of EU’s anti-dumping system. Compared with other countries, there always has been a high level in the quantity, the scale of products and the account of the money in China. So this has become a block for the development of Chinese economy.Following the rules of Council Regulation (EC) No 384/96, the import country is divided into two different kinds of countries according to the difference of economic system and the nature of their markets by EU. They are Market Economy country (ME) and Non-Market Economy country (NME). The“normal value”is measured by the domestic price if the products come from an ME country. But when the products come from a NME country, the“normal value”is measured by the price of the like product in a ME country. Accordingly, this kind of price is called“analog country price”. On the one hand, form the legislation of EU’s analog country system during anti-dumping, we can learn that the problem of China’s stage of NME is the main reason of analog country system. On the other hand, from the practice of EU’s analog country system during anti-dumping against China, when measuring the normal value, the primary considerations of EU’s analog country system are the comparabilities between quality, competition of products, and quantity. As a“legal”trade remedy, anti-dumping should be altered and regulated by the primary principles of international economic law within the legal system of international economic relation. The principle of fairness in the international economic law requires that every sovereignty should not only possess equal legal state at the same level, but also take part in the intercourse of international trade, and at the same time, manage the foreign economic activities. Otherwise, some difference should be allowed in favor of“disadvantaged group”in a reasonable manner , so the equality and mutual benefit can be acquired between all countries and then the true equity can be realized. Firstly, the theory of“fair justice”put forward by John Rawls has provided a theoretical basis for the premise that“it’s legitimate to give difference treatment for developing countries”. Although gaining the equal legal state with developed countries and given the equal opportunities under the new economic structure, the developing countries still belong to“disadvantaged group”because of the differences about“natural factors”caused by history, politics, and economic structure between them. The gap caused by that differences between the wealthy and the poor can only be shorten by the unilateral aid of the developed countries. Only in this way, the developed and the developing can develop and benefit together at the same level. Secondly, the problem of“China’stage of NME”is a issue relateing to history and reality. Although a lot of changes can be seen, that China has gained the independence in policies and law, and the country’s the comprehensive qualities has strengthened a lot, as we’ll as China has gain a place in the international relationship, the difference still exist compared to developed countries and China’status of NME has not changed in nature. As a result, in the relationship of international economiy, China is still belonged to“disadvantaged group”. Taking into two considerations talking above, only the developed countries give different treatment to developing ones, can the standard of justice and the principle of fairness be get.During the anti-dumping, in order to realize the true equity, the principle of fairness requires that the developed countries should consider the“special situation”of developing countries especially and give the difference for them. But in fact, EU’s analog country system of anti-dumping against China has obeyed the the value and the aim of this principle and it has not realized the true equity and justice. The inequity of analog country system can be seen as follows: firstly, as the main reason of analog country system, EU’s regulation on“the problem of NME”lags behind the reality, and it doesn’t consistent with the true development of China’s economic system. Secondly, analog country system always neglects the difference of economic development standard between China and the analog country. EU prefers“industry comparison”more than the difference caused by marocstandard between them. Thirdly, also, analog country system neglect the difference caused by some comparative advantages, such as the cost of raw materials and labour force, natural conditions and technics. From three aspects talking above, EU’s analog system doesn’t give China“special consideration”as to China’s“special situation”, and it doesn’t produce special benefit for China as well. The result of analog system is to meet the need for protecting the maket in EU, and to maintain the benefit of EU itself, but it doesn’t bring benefit and development for China. So, the analog country system doesn’t consistent with the principle of fairness, and it doesn’t realize the true“mutual benefit”.Taking into all accounts talking above, we can safely get the conclusion that, within the sructure of international relationship of economy, the nature of EU’s analog country system is a means of trade protection which seems equal but unfair in fact. Further, analog country system is a kind of activity in violation of the spirit of“equality and mutual benefit”which the principle of fairness has been pursuing for a long time. The result of EU’s analog country system during anti-dumping is the realization of the equality needed by“trade liberalization”. But in fact, the system doesn’t take the“special situation”of China into consideration, and it doesn’t give the difference benefit for China, and of course , it doesn’t realize the true mutual benefit and only EU’s own benefit can be acquired at last. All in all, EU’s analog country system during anti-dumping couldn’t meet the standard of fairness and it is inconsistent with the spirit of justice.

On the Analog Country of EU’s Anti-dumping Against China

Abstract

Related Dissertations