The hottest coated paper double anti EU trade secr

2022-07-30
  • Detail

Coated paper double countervailing: China EU trade "secret war"

the EU announced the simultaneous imposition of double countervailing duties (anti-dumping duties and countervailing duties) on coated paper imported from China, which is the first time that the EU has used double trade remedies against the same product of China at the same time

it is reported that whether there is industrial injury in accordance with the rules of the world trade organization or the EU's own regulations is a prerequisite for the implementation of trade remedies such as anti-dumping and countervailing

the market share of Chinese coated paper in the EU market is less than 5%. How can such a small market share harm the EU industry? Moreover, our price is not much lower than them. I. The business manager who has been engaged in the paper industry for more than 10 years expressed his incomprehension to the new finance

unlike previous anti-dumping duties, China will not be subject to countervailing duties as the EU has not recognized China's market economy status for a long time

in the interview with new but many manufacturers in order to obtain more profits, many experts worry that as long as the EU is successful this time, it will have a series of chain reactions

On May 18, the Ministry of Commerce published three more trade remedy cases initiated by the EU against China. Since May 16, the Ministry of Commerce has also imposed a countervailing duty of 7.7% to 11.19% on Imported Potato Starch originating in the EU. So far, potato starch has become the first product in China to impose a double anti tax on the EU, and the Sino EU trade is full of smoke

injured coated paper

Shandong Chenming Paper Group Co., Ltd., as one of the enterprises subject to double anti-dumping, was subject to a 4% countervailing differential tax rate and an anti-dumping ruling tax rate as high as 35.1%

on May 18, when new finance asked about the double reverse ruling, Mr. Zheng, who works in Chenming paper, expressed his extreme dissatisfaction with the EU as soon as he opened his mouth. We think it is very unreasonable, and it is also very unfair to China's coated paper production enterprises

in fact, it's hard to think that one company can ldquo; Turn decay into strangeness rdquo; Of high-tech enterprises, it is not only at the enterprise level. On the afternoon of May 16, the China Paper Association issued a statement at its official post, stating that the EU ruling is an obvious trade protectionism, and urging the EU to correct the wrong ruling as soon as possible

according to new financial, the European Commission launched an anti-dumping investigation on Chinese coated paper in February last year, and then launched a countervailing investigation in April of that year. Before making this ruling, the EU conducted a special on-the-spot inspection in China more than a year ago, and Chenming paper was one of the enterprises investigated

as early as last February, the EU began to investigate. Manager Meng, who is in charge of the export business of Chenming paper, told new finance that his investigation involved many departments of the company, and each department provided different information. His department mainly provided the sales of the products involved

however, the result of such a ruling one year later obviously exceeded manager Meng's expectation. Before, no countervailing tax was levied on non market economy countries. I can't understand such a ruling

in an interview with new finance, many experts said that although the direct impact of the ruling on Chinese enterprises is relatively limited, this dangerous precedent will encourage trade protection and is unfair to Chinese enterprises. It is suggested that domestic paper enterprises should join forces and seek other legal channels for the arbitration results together with relevant government departments and industry associations

however, it is understood that not all the enterprises subject to the levy appeal. The above manager Meng told new finance that his company had hired a lawyer to appeal the matter. As for sun paper, another enterprise also engaged in the production of coated paper, an unnamed staff member at its export office told new finance that few of our enterprises exported to the EU, and this time there was no appeal

the person disclosed to new finance that in fact, as early as 2007, the United States had conducted an anti-dumping investigation on Chinese coated paper. Although the investigation was finally concluded without harm, their company adjusted its sales strategy and changed its sales market

in his opinion, if we still stick to the original market, it means that enterprises must further reduce production costs. According to his introduction, at present, the company mainly exports to the Southeast Asian market and the Middle East market

the logic of the EU

in the 210 page English official announcement, the EU Trade Commission has made a detailed discussion on the double anti-dumping ruling. Its core argument is that there are government subsidies and low-cost dumping in China's coated paper. Therefore, it has ruled to impose a countervailing tax rate of 4-12% and an anti-dumping tax rate of 8-35.1% on Chinese enterprises. However, whether it is anti-dumping or countervailing, the enterprises interviewed said it was unreasonable

according to the contents of the official announcement of the European Union, its countervailing investigation on China's coated paper is mainly based on the following points: banks under government intervention provide low interest loans, cheap land use rights and government financial support and tax incentives to coated paper production enterprises

the EU believes that thanks to these subsidies, Chinese enterprises' exports to Europe have increased significantly in recent years, seriously squeezing the living space of EU coated paper manufacturers

however, according to Zhao Wei, Secretary General of China Paper Association, the current import of Chinese coated paper from the EU is less than 5% of the EU market share. So how does such a small market share cause substantial harm to EU paper enterprises

the interviewed experts said that the decline in the sales of coated paper within the EU was more due to the decline in overall demand brought about by the economic downturn than the so-called unfair behavior between Chinese manufacturers and importers

in fact, during the double anti dumping investigation at that time, some export enterprises had refuted the statement of the EU. The damage claimed by the EU actually came from the overcapacity of EU industries. But the EU does not agree

trapped non market

with regard to this double countervailing ruling, Yao Jian, spokesman of the Ministry of Commerce, pointed out that while the EU does not recognize China's market economy status, it adopts a discriminatory and unfair alternative country approach to anti-dumping against China, and insists on launching countervailing investigations against Chinese products, which seriously damages the interests of Chinese enterprises and violates WTO rules

Pu Lingchen, a partner of Beijing Zhonglun law firm, known as the first person in China's anti-dumping, believes that no matter whether this third-party substitute country is reasonable or not, it is not the domestic price after all, so it is difficult to be comparable in an absolute sense

since the EU has so far refused to recognize China's market economy status, in anti-dumping cases, the EU often arbitrarily selects a substitute country to calculate the normal price of the products involved, which is usually higher than China's domestic price, and then uses this normal price to measure whether China's products are dumped at a low price in the EU market and calculate the dumping margin for determining the anti-dumping tax rate

in the EU's anti-dumping investigation on China's ceramic tiles last June, the EU used the United States as China's substitute to calculate the anti-dumping margin. In the eyes of many people, it is precisely because of this non market economy status that China has become one of the countries that have suffered the most anti-dumping investigations over the years, and is also the biggest victim of trade remedy measures such as anti-dumping. Many experts pointed out that for the above reasons, the rapid and comprehensive recognition of China's market economy status has always been the theme of China US and China EU high-level talks

however, due to its refusal to recognize China's market economy status, the EU has always followed the practice of not applying countervailing measures to non market economies

since the market economy status is not given, but the product subsidies are countervailed according to the conditions of market economy countries, the EU standard is vague, because countervailing is judged according to the conditions of market economy countries. In terms of applicable principles and standards, this is not very appropriate. Ligang, director of the European Research Office of the Research Institute of the Ministry of Commerce, told New Finance

in Ligang's opinion, in the past, when exercising trade remedy measures, we have always believed that the EU also pays more attention to rules and acts in accordance with the rules. This time, the EU is following the US trade strategy towards China, which is a bad sign

it is understood that, according to the earlier US law, countervailing measures will not target non market economy countries, but this situation changed in 2006. According to Fengjun, business director of Shanghai WTO affairs consulting center, the formulation of the energy and environment development strategy of the United States' double anti investigation on Chinese products on November 20 of that year broke such a practice in order to contain the expanding Sino US trade deficit. After that, the number of double jeopardy cases began to increase significantly. According to statistics, in 2009, the United States initiated the most intensive double jeopardy cases against China, with a total of 10 cases, involving a total amount of $4.544 billion

the boundary of subsidies

some analysts believe that, with the automatic invalidation of China's non market economy status in 2016, the anti-dumping measures in the European and American trade sanctions against China will be limited, while the anti subsidy will be more comfortable to use. After that, it seems that the EU did try to carry out anti-dumping investigations

On June 30, 2010, the European Commission launched an anti-dumping and safeguard measures investigation on Chinese wireless data cards (also known as wireless broadband network modems)

on September 16 of the same year, the European Commission launched a countervailing investigation on the product. This case sets a precedent for the EU to conduct three kinds of trade remedy investigations on the same product of China, including anti-dumping, countervailing and safeguard measures. The export volume of Chinese enterprises is about US $4.1 billion. This is by far the largest trade remedy investigation involving China

although the investigation was finally terminated, it exposed the tendency of EU countervailing. Compared with anti-dumping and safeguard measures (import restrictions based on the principle of non discrimination), countervailing, as a new type of trade barrier, is more harmful to a country's foreign trade export and economic development. The threat of anti-dumping and safeguard measures mainly targets enterprises and specific industries, while anti subsidy will affect the trade and industrial policies, macroeconomic policies and even the overall economic strategy of the investigated country

in addition, the scope of countervailing is more extensive, and the investigation scope may be the downstream enterprises and even the entire industrial chain that accept government subsidies, which is more harmful

in Pu Lingchen's opinion, subsidies are not a bad thing in themselves, nor are all subsidies illegal. Every country subsidizes, but subsidies that cause damage to others will be investigated

according to Ligang, according to the subsidy and countervailing agreement, some subsidies are reasonable and allowed, while the prohibited subsidies are mainly for the circulation field. However, there are still many vague areas on how to define whether subsidies are in the field of production or circulation

in the opinion of some experts, compared with export tax rebate and other policies, cheap export credit and distorted factor price resources under price control are indeed important reasons for China's manufacturing industry to highlight its price competitive advantage. If Europe and the United States highlight the impact of these policies on trade in the future, it will bring China a lot of trouble

post subsidy era

fair trade of Shandong Provincial Department of Commerce

Copyright © 2011 JIN SHI