首页> 外文OA文献 >Subsidies and countervailing measures under the GATT and the WTO and in the US law and practice : parallel developments and interactions
【2h】

Subsidies and countervailing measures under the GATT and the WTO and in the US law and practice : parallel developments and interactions

机译:关贸总协定和世界贸易组织以及美国法律和实践中的补贴和反补贴措施:平行发展和相互作用

摘要

Although the number of subsidy and countervailing duty cases, both at national and WTO level is declining, they still hold centre stage in the trade wars that are the hallmark of modern international economy. Suffice it to mention the “Foreign Sales Corporations” case, the “softwood lumber” cases and the ongoing “US-EC large civil aircraft” dispute. There are several reasons for this. On the one hand, the multilateral regulation of subsidies can strongly impinge on governmental autonomy in the management of the national economy. On the other, the boundaries of subsidisation are often quite uncertain as subsidies can overlap with quite distinct areas in the public management of the economy, such as taxation. Probably as a result of the foregoing factors, the multilateral discipline on subsidies was slow to develop and it is only with the Uruguay Round that a fully fledged, wide-ranging regime took shape, while the identification of countervailable subsidies and the conditions under which they can be countered have been left for long to domestic countervailing duty proceedings. The United States, for a long time the main user of CVD proceedings, developed a much more sophisticated and detailed regime than the GATTs. The competitive margin provided by US administrative practice has enabled it to impose its perspective on the shaping of the multilateral regime, firstly as a result of the Uruguay Round negotiations, and secondly because of the creative interpretation of the WTO rules, especially by the Appellate Body. On the other hand, in implementing the WTO regime the United States has often been able to withstand attempts to change its domestic regime, although some of its aspects are not necessarily consistent with the WTO rules. The success of the United States, however, has been far from complete as the US has not been able to impose its viewpoint on decisive aspects of the subsidy regulation in the GATT and in the WTO system.
机译:尽管国家和世贸组织层面的补贴和反补贴税案件数量正在下降,但它们仍在贸易战中处于中心地位,而贸易战是现代国际经济的标志。只需提及“外国销售公司”案,“软木”案以及正在进行的“美欧共同体大型民用飞机”之争即可。有几个原因。一方面,对补贴的多边监管会严重影响政府在国民经济管理中的自主权。另一方面,由于补贴可能与经济的公共管理领域中相当不同的领域(如税收)重叠,因此补贴的边界通常非常不确定。可能由于上述因素,多边补贴纪律发展缓慢,只有在乌拉圭回合中,才形成了一个成熟而广泛的政权,同时确定了可反补贴的条件和条件。可以反驳已经留了很长时间的国内反补贴税程序。长期以来,美国是CVD程序的主要使用者,其发展的机制比关贸总协定更为复杂和详细。美国行政实践提供的竞争优势使其能够将自己的观点强加于多边政权的形成,首先是由于乌拉圭回合谈判,其次是由于对世贸组织规则的创造性解释,尤其是上诉机构的解释。另一方面,尽管实施某些世贸组织不一定与世贸组织规则相一致,但美国在执行世贸组织体制时常常能够承受其改变其国内体制的企图。然而,由于美国未能将其观点强加于关贸总协定和世贸组织体系中的补贴法规的决定性方面,美国的成功还远远没有完成。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号