Status-
Besucher
| Heute: |
|
329 |
| Gestern: |
|
589 |
| Gesamt: |
|
15033763 |
-
Benutzer & Gäste
4930 Benutzer registriert, davon online: 72 Gäste
|
|
|
| 18575 Beiträge & 12638 Themen in 21 Foren |
Keine neuen Beiträge, seit Ihrem letzten Besuch am 25.04.2026 - 12:53.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Autor |
|
|
|
| trade protectionism is one of the important reasons which |
|
|
| 676 Beiträge - Alter Hase
|
|
|
锘? Chinese Ambassador to the World Trade Organization on April 20 formally requested the WTO set up expert groups to investigate and rule EU shoe anti dumping measures taken in violation of international trade rules. Day meeting of the WTO Dispute Settlement Body meeting nike juvenate tilbud , the Chinese delegation pointed out that the EUs shoe anti dumping measures, whether procedural or substantive violation of WTO related agreements at all. The author believes that the EU anti dumping measures on China shoes is the essence of trade protectionism, in violation of World Trade Organization agreements, undermine the international free trade order, not only harm China related industries, but also the interests of the EU member states caused by consumers loss of certain benefits. First, EU shoe anti dumping cases the basic situation of starting from October 2006, the EU began to impose on Chinese leather goods 16.5% anti dumping duties; Chinese shoe exports to Europe, production has been reduced by 20%, resulting in some of China 20,000 workers lose their jobs. October 2008, at the expiry of anti dumping measures in the occasion of the EU regardless of the interests of consumers and the strong opposition from China, but also initiated a review of the final. The European Union on Dec. 22, 2009, announced the decision to extend production to China and Vietnam have imposed punitive tariffs on footwear period of 15 months. The Chinese government on February 4, 2010 the EUs shoe anti dumping cases to resort to the WTO, the two sides on the case then launched a 60 day bilateral consultations. The two sides on March 31 in view of the recent round of consultations was held unable to find a mutually satisfactory solution, China on April 20 formally requested WTO dispute settlement body set up expert groups to ensure that Chinas legitimate rights and interests are protected. Day meeting, the Chinese side requests the EU expressed regret, and in accordance with procedures to prevent the establishment of expert groups. As long as China was held in the next month again at the Dispute Settlement Body request to set up an expert group, the group will automatically set up. Second, the EU anti dumping measures on China shoes procedures and physical analysis of improper
(A) the nature of international trade protectionism. Extend the EUs unfair anti dumping measures on China shoes, in essence asics gel noosa tri 9 dame , the post crisis era and its frequent implementation of trade protectionism, Chinas continuing policy inertia ??. Of the EU footwear industry has been going on for 14 years of trade protection, at present there is no damage to the EU footwear industry conditions, to extend anti dumping measures the EU footwear industry would not benefit, only harm the interests of related industries in China and EU consumers. November 19, 2009, at the European Commission anti dumping advisory committee, the representatives of EU member states the majority of the facts from an objective, anti dumping measures against the further extension. But the EU eventually succumb to the pressure of trade protectionism, insisting on Chinese made shoes to extend anti dumping measures, indicating the path of trade protectionism, the more lines farther. Breach of international commitments, the EU openly implement its policy of trade protectionism, the Chinese shoes anti dumping investigations and decisions, in violation of WTO rules related to the detriment of the legitimate rights and interests of Chinese enterprises, in fact, both the EU member states punish consumers and can harm the EUs long term political economic and trade relations with Chinas healthy development. (B) in violation of WTO related rules of procedure. EU Trade Commission in violation of anti dumping investigations trade principle of fairness, the Chinese shoe enterprises ignore the evidence submitted, the program obviously inappropriate. European Court of Justice in the Interpretation of anti dumping law Tiaokuan process, is entirely based on the European Union in December 2009 announced the sunset review of Chinas ruling shoes, mainly based on field verification of the case the EU does not comply with WTO related rules of procedure. In the case of the review process, of Chinese partner by the EU Trade Commission of unfair treatment, do not get enough right to justify anti dumping charges asics gel noosa tri 8 dame , the EU ruling, of course also with departure from the principle of equality seriously. The author believes that the reason why the EU to extend anti dumping measures on China shoes, trade protectionism is one of the important reasons which, on the other hand the EU market economy status and application of standard procedures identified a key reason for the confusion is. In fact, in the review process of investigation, exporters, importers, exporters and representatives of the Community producers on the issues raised in the review set, the right of rebuttal or comment by undue restrictions, the Chinese enterprises, relevant enterprises and consumers in the EU interest demands have not been given due attention.The European Unions decision procedure in another member of its decision not to discuss, simply by a rubber stamp approach by not only being a member of the opposition half, has also been related to the European mainland enterprises in China protest . The fundamental reason lies in its decision process is neither fair nor transparent, a serious violation of the WTO principle of fair and transparent. (C) in violation of WTO rules related entities. According to WTO Anti Dumping Agreement requirement, the minimum dumping constitutes a large, serious harm to the domestic industry, dumping and injury, causal relationship between. The EUs shoe anti dumping measures, in fact, did not have these conditions. Substantial evidence that the fact that there is no dumping, dumping damage is nonsense; there is no reasonable evidence that, within the meaning of the number of dumped imports and the price level and the C .
|
| Beitrag vom 30.12.2015 - 08:20 |
|
|
|
