本文選題：反傾銷 + 非市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)規(guī)則��； 參考：《西北大學(xué)》2012年碩士論文

【摘要】：非市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)規(guī)則是反傾銷法中的一項(xiàng)特殊的規(guī)則,用以確定來自非市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)國家產(chǎn)品的傾銷幅度及反傾銷稅。各成員國對(duì)華適用非市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)規(guī)則的主要依據(jù)是中國在入世時(shí)在《入世議定書》中做出的承諾,即其他成員國在入世后15年內(nèi)可視中國為非市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)國家。雖然中國是歐盟最緊密的貿(mào)易合作伙伴之一,但中歐之間的貿(mào)易摩擦也頻頻發(fā)生。在歐盟對(duì)華發(fā)起的反傾銷調(diào)查中,調(diào)查當(dāng)局通常將我國視為非市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)國家,并適用非市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)規(guī)則,僅給予少數(shù)滿足相應(yīng)條件的中國企業(yè)以市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)地位或分別裁決待遇,這使得我國出口企業(yè)遭受巨大損失。冰凍三尺非一日之寒,我們應(yīng)該認(rèn)識(shí)到,要?dú)W盟放棄對(duì)在華反傾銷中適用的非市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)規(guī)則,并非能在短時(shí)間內(nèi)徹底解決的問題。 本文正文包括五章。第一章對(duì)非市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)規(guī)則做了簡要介紹,并從宏觀角度分析了歐盟非市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)規(guī)則對(duì)中國所產(chǎn)生的影響。第二章介紹了非市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)規(guī)則中的替代國規(guī)則,包括替代國選擇及依據(jù)替代國規(guī)則計(jì)算正常價(jià)值的方法、個(gè)別審查問題以及替代國規(guī)則的具體影響。第三部份闡述了另一具體的市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)規(guī)則——一國一稅規(guī)則,對(duì)其合理性提出質(zhì)疑,詳述其對(duì)我國的影響。第四部分主要論證的是非市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)規(guī)則下歐盟反傾銷的救濟(jì)問題,分別闡述了我國企業(yè)由于非市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)規(guī)則而在歐盟反傾銷各行政復(fù)審中所遇到的阻礙,并通過案例分析非市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)規(guī)則下中國企業(yè)在歐盟反傾銷司法審查中的不利地位。第五部分分別從政府和企業(yè)兩方面就歐盟非市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)規(guī)則的具體規(guī)則提出應(yīng)對(duì)之策：政府應(yīng)發(fā)揮其行政職能,爭(zhēng)取中國企業(yè)在應(yīng)對(duì)歐盟反傾銷時(shí)的合理待遇；企業(yè)應(yīng)完善自身的管理,預(yù)防并積極應(yīng)對(duì)歐盟的反傾銷調(diào)查。另外,該部分還就行政復(fù)審和司法審查的可行性和具體操作提出筆者看法。
[Abstract]:Non-market economy rule is a special rule in anti-dumping law to determine the dumping margin and anti-dumping duty of products from non-market economy countries. The main basis for the application of non-market economic rules to China by all member countries is the promise made by China in the Protocol of accession to the WTO, that is, other member countries may regard China as a non-market economy country within 15 years after China's accession to the WTO. Although China is one of the EU's closest trading partners, trade frictions between China and Europe are also frequent. In the anti-dumping investigation initiated by the European Union against China, the investigating authorities usually regard China as a non-market economy country and apply the non-market economy rules, and only a few Chinese enterprises meeting the corresponding conditions are given market economy status or separately adjudicated treatment. This makes our export enterprises suffer huge losses. Since it is not a day before the ice freezes, we should realize that it is not a problem that can be solved completely in a short period of time if the EU should abandon the non-market economic rules applicable in anti-dumping against China. The text of this paper includes five chapters. The first chapter gives a brief introduction to the rules of non-market economy, and analyzes the influence of the rules of non-market economy of EU on China from the macro point of view. The second chapter introduces the surrogate country rule in the non-market economy rule, including the method of selecting the surrogate country and calculating the normal value according to the surrogate country rule, the individual examination problem and the concrete influence of the surrogate country rule. The third part expounds another specific market economy rule-one country, one tax rule, questions its rationality, and details its influence on our country. The fourth part mainly discusses the relief of EU anti-dumping under the non-market economy rules, and expounds the obstacles encountered by Chinese enterprises in the EU anti-dumping administrative review because of the non-market economy rules. It also analyzes the unfavorable position of Chinese enterprises in EU anti-dumping judicial review under the rules of non-market economy. In the fifth part, the author puts forward some countermeasures on the specific rules of EU non-market economy from the government and enterprises: the government should give full play to its administrative function and strive for the reasonable treatment of Chinese enterprises when dealing with EU anti-dumping; Enterprises should improve their own management, prevent and actively respond to EU anti-dumping investigations. In addition, this part also puts forward the author's opinion on the feasibility and concrete operation of administrative review and judicial review.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：西北大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2012
【分類號(hào)】：D996.1

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 張新娟;;歐盟反傾銷法非市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)規(guī)則研究[J];法學(xué)家;2003年06期

2 江鴻;;反傾銷中的替代國制度及我國的應(yīng)對(duì)措施[J];法制與社會(huì);2011年21期

3 王曉非;評(píng)歐盟反傾銷法及實(shí)踐中替代國方法的消極性[J];國際貿(mào)易問題;2003年08期

4 蔡慶輝;歐盟對(duì)華鉬鐵反傾銷案研究[J];國際貿(mào)易問題;2005年04期

5 劉軍;從一國一稅制談中國應(yīng)對(duì)反傾銷的策略[J];國際經(jīng)濟(jì)評(píng)論;2004年04期

6 馬海濤;李小玲;;歐盟對(duì)華反傾銷司法審查中的非市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)問題探析[J];公民與法(法學(xué));2011年01期

7 李濤;;反傾銷調(diào)查中“單獨(dú)稅率”問題分析[J];東方企業(yè)文化;2011年02期

8 陳立鵬;;第九回 為分別稅率而戰(zhàn)[J];大經(jīng)貿(mào);2006年09期

9 王秀玲;歐共體對(duì)我國反傾銷措施中的分別裁決問題[J];河北法學(xué);2004年08期

10 回穎;;中歐關(guān)于“市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)地位”問題之爭(zhēng)的法律分析[J];河北工程大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2010年03期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 韓曉委;歐洲法院反傾銷判例研究：中國視角[D];北京大學(xué);2005年

，

本文編號(hào)：1900226