【摘要】：2009年6月,美國眾議院通過了《美國清潔能源與安全法案》(American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009)。國際社會對于該法案中關(guān)于“碳關(guān)稅”的立法反響強(qiáng)烈。雖然該法案最終沒有被接納為正式的法律并實(shí)施,但也影響巨大,預(yù)示了歐盟及美國在未來可能采取的單邊的迫使發(fā)展中國家減排的措施。我們在積極質(zhì)疑和反對碳關(guān)稅的同時(shí),更應(yīng)該積極地研究碳關(guān)稅在WTO法律框架下的合法性,并積極地開展國際對話和談判,討論應(yīng)對措施。 文章選取了兩種角度對碳關(guān)稅的合法性進(jìn)行了分析:對一般意義上的碳關(guān)稅措施是否存在符合WTO規(guī)則的可能性以及具體的碳關(guān)稅立法議案的具體條款是否符合WTO規(guī)則。并得出結(jié)論:對于一般意義上的碳關(guān)稅而言,雖然與現(xiàn)有WTO邊境稅收調(diào)節(jié)規(guī)則存在潛在沖突,但卻與GATT第20條是相符的,可以通過WTO的環(huán)境例外獲得豁免,具有WTO法律框架下的合法性。但對于具體的碳關(guān)稅措施,如利伯曼-華納法案,其碳關(guān)稅立法的具體條款與GATT的國民待遇原則及最惠國待遇原則不符,與現(xiàn)有的WTO規(guī)則是相沖突的。
[Abstract]:In June 2009, the US House of Representatives passed the Clean Energy and Security Act (American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009). The international community reacted strongly to the bill's legislation on carbon tariffs. Although the bill was not eventually accepted as a formal law and implemented, it also had a huge impact, heralding future unilateral efforts by the European Union and the United States to force developing countries to cut emissions. While actively questioning and opposing carbon tariffs, we should also actively study the legitimacy of carbon tariffs under the legal framework of WTO, and actively engage in international dialogue and negotiations to discuss measures to deal with them. This paper analyzes the legality of carbon tariff from two aspects: the possibility of whether the carbon tariff measures conform to the WTO rules in general sense and whether the specific provisions of the specific carbon tariff legislation accord with the WTO rules. It is concluded that for carbon tariffs in the general sense, although there is a potential conflict with the existing WTO border tax regulation rules, it is consistent with Article 20 of GATT and can be exempted through the environmental exception of WTO. It has the legitimacy under the legal framework of WTO. However, for specific carbon tariff measures, such as Lieberman-Warner Act, the specific provisions of its carbon tariff legislation are inconsistent with the principle of GATT's national treatment and most-favoured-nation treatment, and conflict with the existing WTO rules.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：蘇州大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2011
【分類號】：D996

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 馬華;;碳關(guān)稅法理邏輯批判[J];北方經(jīng)濟(jì);2010年09期

2 苑路佳;;WTO框架下“碳關(guān)稅”條款芻議[J];法學(xué)雜志;2010年08期

3 梁詠;;WTO框架下碳關(guān)稅可能引致的貿(mào)易爭端與解決[J];法學(xué);2010年07期

4 李曉玲;陳雨松;;“碳關(guān)稅”與WTO規(guī)則相符性研究[J];國際經(jīng)濟(jì)合作;2010年03期

5 那力;王淼;;GATT第20條a、b、d款及GATS第14條的“必需”問題:變化與發(fā)展[J];國際貿(mào)易;2010年08期

6 謝來輝;陳迎;;碳泄漏問題評析[J];氣候變化研究進(jìn)展;2007年04期

7 賈鳳蘭;;碳關(guān)稅[J];求是;2010年02期

8 陳迎;氣候變化的經(jīng)濟(jì)分析[J];世界經(jīng)濟(jì);2000年01期

9 何娟;;碳關(guān)稅:新的綠色貿(mào)易壁壘抑或WTO環(huán)境保護(hù)豁免[J];世界貿(mào)易組織動態(tài)與研究;2010年03期

10 馬媛婧;;國際貿(mào)易中隱含碳與碳關(guān)稅、碳稅征收之探析[J];山西省政法管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2010年03期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 謝來輝;應(yīng)對氣候變化的邊境調(diào)節(jié)稅研究[D];中國社會科學(xué)院研究生院;2008年

，

本文編號：2169213