【摘要】：歐盟是世界上發(fā)起反傾銷調(diào)查最多的地區(qū)之一,歐盟反傾銷法中非市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)規(guī)則在反傾銷法中有著重要的地位,它使一些非市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)國家的出口產(chǎn)品深受影響,本文的主體部分是歐盟反傾銷法中的非市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)規(guī)則的主要內(nèi)容及適用,以提出我國應(yīng)對(duì)歐盟反傾銷的非市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)規(guī)則的對(duì)策為目的,將論文共分三個(gè)部分。 第一部分為歐盟反傾銷法中非市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)規(guī)則的概述,歐盟反傾銷法中的非市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)規(guī)則是在一定的法律淵源基礎(chǔ)上逐步形成的。歐盟反傾銷法中的非市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)規(guī)則以非市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)國家為適用對(duì)象,1998年歐盟理事會(huì)通過《第905/98號(hào)條例》將原來一部分非市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)國家列為轉(zhuǎn)型經(jīng)濟(jì)國家,傳統(tǒng)的非市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)國家發(fā)生演化。 論文第二部分具體介紹了歐盟反傾銷法中非市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)規(guī)則的主要內(nèi)容和實(shí)踐中的案例。歐盟對(duì)于非市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)國家產(chǎn)品的正常價(jià)值要依據(jù)替代國的產(chǎn)品價(jià)格來確定,而不能依據(jù)本國國內(nèi)產(chǎn)品的價(jià)格。針對(duì)中國等轉(zhuǎn)型經(jīng)濟(jì)國家,歐盟反傾銷立法發(fā)生變化,規(guī)定了有條件的市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)待遇規(guī)則,這些國家的涉案企業(yè)并不自動(dòng)適用市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)國家的反傾銷規(guī)則,而要對(duì)其市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)地位進(jìn)行審核。如果涉案企業(yè)生產(chǎn)經(jīng)營狀況符合市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)地位的5條判斷標(biāo)準(zhǔn),則應(yīng)該排除適用替代國制度,在確定正常價(jià)值時(shí)采用涉案企業(yè)所在國的產(chǎn)品價(jià)格和成本,從這個(gè)意義來說歐盟并未完全承認(rèn)轉(zhuǎn)型經(jīng)濟(jì)國家的市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)地位。歐盟在反傾銷法中對(duì)非市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)國家又一歧視性規(guī)定是一國一稅及單獨(dú)稅率的規(guī)定。確定反傾銷稅時(shí),歐盟原則上對(duì)涉案企業(yè)被征收統(tǒng)一的反傾銷稅率,例外情況下,非市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)國家的企業(yè)符合單獨(dú)稅率規(guī)定的苛刻條件才能使用本企業(yè)產(chǎn)品的出口價(jià)格,征收單獨(dú)的反傾銷稅率。值得慶幸的是我國向WTO起訴歐盟對(duì)華緊固件采取的反傾銷措施案中,WTO專家組發(fā)布裁決報(bào)告裁定歐盟反傾銷基礎(chǔ)條例第9條第5款違反WTO《反傾銷協(xié)議》6.10和9.2條。 第三部分為我國應(yīng)對(duì)歐盟反傾銷法中非市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)規(guī)則的對(duì)策,中國的非市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)地位源于《中國入世議定書》第15條,其規(guī)定對(duì)中國企業(yè)產(chǎn)生了不利的影響。為了扭轉(zhuǎn)歐盟對(duì)華反傾銷的不利局面,本文提出了一些法律對(duì)策來應(yīng)對(duì)。當(dāng)歐盟反傾銷主管當(dāng)局對(duì)我國企業(yè)調(diào)查時(shí),我國企業(yè)首先應(yīng)該積極主動(dòng)應(yīng)訴,才能獲得無傾銷和較低傾銷幅度的理想結(jié)果,當(dāng)涉案企業(yè)無法獲得市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)待遇時(shí),選擇合適的替代國具有現(xiàn)實(shí)的重大意義。另外行政復(fù)審、司法審查和WTO爭(zhēng)端解決機(jī)制也是中國對(duì)歐盟因我國的非市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)地位而作出不公正裁決的有效救濟(jì)途徑。
[Abstract]:The EU is one of the most widely investigated areas in the world. The non market economic rules of the EU anti-dumping law have an important position in the antidumping law. It makes the export products of some non market economies deeply affected. The main part of this article is the main content and application of the non market economic rules in the EU anti-dumping law. The paper is divided into three parts for the purpose of putting forward countermeasures to deal with the EU's anti-dumping rules.
The first part is an overview of the non market economic rules in the EU anti-dumping law. The non market economic rules in the EU anti-dumping law are gradually formed on the basis of certain legal origins. The non market economic rules of the EU anti-dumping law are applied to non market economic countries. In 1998, the EU Council passed regulation No. 905/98. The former part of the non market economy countries are classified as a transitional economic country, and the traditional non market economy countries have evolved.
The second part of the paper introduces the main contents of the non market economic rules in the EU anti-dumping law and the cases in practice. The normal value of the EU's products for non market economy countries should be determined according to the price of the products of the alternative countries, but not the domestic products. The changes in the marketing legislation stipulate the conditional rules for the treatment of the market economy. The enterprises involved in these countries do not automatically apply the anti-dumping rules of the market economy countries, but should examine their market economic status. If the production and operation status of the enterprises in accordance with the 5 criteria of market economy status, the applicable replacement should be excluded. In the sense, the EU does not fully recognize the market economy status of the countries in transition economy. In this sense, the EU does not fully recognize the market economy status of the countries in transition economy. The EU's discriminatory provisions on non market economies in the anti-dumping law are the provisions of one country, one tax and a separate tax rate. In the case of tax, the EU has a unified anti dumping tax rate on the companies involved in the case. Exceptions, the enterprises in non market economies meet the harsh conditions of the individual tax rate to use the export prices of their products and impose a separate anti-dumping duty rate. Fortunately, our country is thankful to take the anti firm firmware of the EU to the WTO in our country. In the Dumping Measures Case, the WTO Expert Group issued a ruling finding that Article 9, paragraph 5, of the EU Anti-dumping Basic Regulations violated Articles 6.10 and 9.2 of the WTO Anti-dumping Agreement.
The third part is the Countermeasures for China to deal with the non market economic rules of the EU anti-dumping law. China's non market economic status originates from the China Accession Protocol fifteenth, which has a negative impact on Chinese enterprises. In order to reverse the adverse situation of EU anti-dumping against China, this article puts forward some legal countermeasures to deal with. When the anti-dumping authorities investigate our enterprises, the enterprises in our country should first take active action to obtain the ideal result of undumping and lower dumping margin. When the enterprises involved in the case are unable to obtain the treatment of the market economy, it is of great significance to choose the appropriate alternative countries. In addition, the administrative review, judicial review and the WTO dispute settlement are also used. The mechanism is also an effective way for China to make unfair decisions on the EU's non market economy status.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：遼寧大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2011
【分類號(hào)】：D996.1

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 吳秋芬;;淺談歐盟反傾銷法中的非市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)問題[J];中國高新技術(shù)企業(yè);2007年03期

2 孫西汀;;淺析歐盟反傾銷法對(duì)中國企業(yè)市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)地位的認(rèn)定[J];黑龍江教育學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2008年09期

3 吳振宇;;歐盟對(duì)華反傾銷中市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)問題淺析[J];法制與社會(huì);2008年03期

4 陳凌;歐盟反傾銷法探析[J];企業(yè)經(jīng)濟(jì);2004年01期

5 希強(qiáng);論歐盟反傾銷法的最新修正[J];外國經(jīng)濟(jì)與管理;1996年02期

6 吳喜梅;析歐盟反傾銷法特點(diǎn)[J];法律適用;2003年06期

7 王濤;;歐盟反傾銷法中的公共利益原則及對(duì)中國的啟示[J];天水行政學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2006年03期

8 王曉曄,陶正華;歐盟反傾銷法及其對(duì)中國的影響[J];法學(xué)評(píng)論;1999年03期

9 葉秋華,王云霞;歐盟反傾銷法的歷史與現(xiàn)狀[J];中國人民大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2002年02期

10 王曉丹;;歐盟反傾銷法中公共利益問題研究[J];法制與社會(huì);2007年12期

相關(guān)會(huì)議論文 前1條

1 李浩;;淺析中國“市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)地位”問題[A];當(dāng)代法學(xué)論壇（二○○九年第3輯）[C];2009年

相關(guān)重要報(bào)紙文章 前10條

1 中國人民大學(xué)國際關(guān)系學(xué)院 王帆;歐盟反傾銷法淺談[N];科技日?qǐng)?bào);2001年

2 （中國貿(mào)易促會(huì)經(jīng)濟(jì)信息部提供）;歐盟反傾銷法律之“損害”規(guī)定[N];國際商報(bào);2002年

3 陳貴華;歐盟反傾銷法律的立法原則[N];國際商報(bào);2003年

4 劉瑛;歐盟反傾銷法律制度[N];中國貿(mào)易報(bào);2001年

5 國家經(jīng)貿(mào)委反傾銷辦供稿;歐盟反傾銷法律制度[N];中國民族報(bào);2001年

6 本報(bào)記者 陳東升　本報(bào)通訊員 王海龍;奧康向歐盟高等法院提起上訴[N];法制日?qǐng)?bào);2010年

7 陳東星;歐盟反傾銷法中新出口商審查制度[N];國際商報(bào);2003年

8 記者 崔悅;中汽協(xié)：堅(jiān)決反對(duì)歐盟對(duì)我鋁合金輪轂發(fā)起反傾銷[N];國際商報(bào);2009年

9 陳貴華;歐盟反傾銷日落復(fù)審案件的操作規(guī)程（四）[N];國際商報(bào);2003年

10 本報(bào)記者 楊凱;“反傾銷”——中國鋁車輪企業(yè)必須能承受之重[N];中國冶金報(bào);2009年

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 陳力;國際貿(mào)易救濟(jì)法律制度中的非市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)規(guī)則研究[D];復(fù)旦大學(xué);2006年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前10條

1 項(xiàng)思麗;歐盟反傾銷法中的非市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)規(guī)則研究[D];遼寧大學(xué);2011年

2 張?chǎng)握?歐盟反傾銷法價(jià)值取向的法經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)研究[D];浙江工商大學(xué);2012年

3 王慧;論美國對(duì)華反傾銷中的非市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)規(guī)則及其濫用[D];華東政法大學(xué);2010年

4 林雅聰;非市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)規(guī)則下歐盟對(duì)華反傾銷問題研究[D];西北大學(xué);2012年

5 夏侯寅初;試論突破反傾銷中非市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)規(guī)則的關(guān)鍵[D];華東政法大學(xué);2011年

6 王衛(wèi)鋒;美國對(duì)華反傾銷的非市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)規(guī)則分析[D];山東大學(xué);2011年

7 黃華;歐盟反傾銷法公共利益條款研究[D];西南政法大學(xué);2011年

8 尹紅;歐盟反傾銷法研究[D];吉林大學(xué);2004年

9 張西鋒;歐盟反傾銷法中替代國制度研究[D];中國政法大學(xué);2003年

10 武瑩;淺談反傾銷法中的公共利益條款[D];吉林大學(xué);2006年

，

本文編號(hào)：2162127