傾銷與反傾銷措施外文翻譯（可編輯）

1、傾銷與反傾銷措施外文翻譯 外文翻譯原文dumping and anti-dumping measuresmaterial source: international economics,july1984 author: richard senti zurich in recent times, the number of dumping actions has shown a striking correlation with the respective level of economic activity, the following observations convey an over

2、all picture of the dumping actions currently pending and the anti-dumping measures implemented, and look into the current problems faced by the international anti-dumping system. for years, dumping actions have been at the centre of discussions in the trade negotiations between the us, canada, japan

3、 and the member countries of the ec. at the end of 1977, there were twenty dumping actions in progress in the usa. tension eased in 1978 following the introduction of the trigger price system to regulate steel imports on confirmation of the modified cost criterion in the us trade act of 1979, the us

4、 steel firms once again took action against the ec steel producers. in 1980, the trigger price system briefly became temporarily inoperative but was applied again the same year with added force. nevertheless, more dumping actions followed,particularly in the years 1981 and 1982 at the beginning of 1

5、983, the gatt committee on anti-dumping questions published a summary of theanti-dumping proceedings instituted during recent years in the usa, ec, finland, canada, austria and sweden,the provisional and definitive counter-measures and the price agreements reached cf. table 1. the majority of action

6、s are directed at the industrialised nations and only a few against the developing countries. neither withdrawn actions nor those which resulted in a negative decision are included in these figures. table 2 shows between which trade partners dumping negotiations took place during the years 1981/82,

7、i.e. which countries instituted proceedings and which were sitting in the dock as far as was reported to gatt. us anti-dumping legislation as a basis in 1945, immediately after the end of the war, the us state department published the first proposals for a newworld trade order. according to these pr

8、oposals, the members of an international trade organisation still to be created should, among other things,undertake to 188 subscribe to a general definition of the circumstances under which anti-dumping and countervailing duties may properly be applied to products imported from other members. only

9、a year later, the americans submitted the charter for the creation of an international trade organisation containing concrete suggestions on the anti-dumping settlement s which were later adopted by the havana charter s and gatt without undergoing significant alterations. both the basic concept and

10、many individual provisions are in line with the american antidumping legislation of that time. the first us anti-dumping provisions are to be found in the revenue act of 1916. 7 according to this law, the americans imposed something akin to a fine 8 if 1 imports were offered in the usa at a lower pr

11、ice than in the country of origin and 2 as a result american industry was exposed to serious danger intent to destroy or injure. the two criteria underpricing and infliction of damage were later adopted by the actual anti-dumping laws of 1921 and 19309 and still apply today following the supplements

12、 and refinements made in 1974 and 1979. according to american law of 1921 and 1930, dumping has occurred if the goods are offered more cheaply in the usa than on the home market price criterion. - or, where there are no sales on the home market, if the goods are offered more cheaply in the usa than

13、in a third country modified price criterion. - in case no sales are offered outside the country of destination, if the goods are exported below the costs of manufacture in the producing country cost criterion. the legal amendments of 1974 and 1979 brought with them an extension of the cost criterion

14、 to cover cases in which the domestic sales prices in the country of origin no longer cover the costs of productionorigin of gatt provisions and anti-dumping convention in discussions surrounding the reshaping of the world trading system, 12 several delegates demanded going beyond the us regulation

15、of price dumping of that time and incorporating service, exchange-rate and social dumping. service dumping revolves around freight costs, i.e. the cheapening of exports by way of dumped transport services. exchange-rate dumping is the cheapening of exports in the form of parity guarantees and foreig

16、n exchange allowances. 13 social dumping is constituted in cases where products from prison camps or prisons find their way onto the world market at prices with which private entrepreneurs cannot compete. the negotiating delegations finally agreed on the price dumping in line with the us proposal. t

17、here were initial differences of opinion regarding the extent of the damage necessary for counter-measures to be taken. must serious, material or indeterminate injury occur before counter-measures can be taken? does the difference between domestic price and export price have to reach certain dimensi

18、ons e.g. at least 5 % of the domestic price before counter-measures can be justified? can serious injury caused be responded to with something like a punitive measure? must the approval of the ito or of the contracting parties to gatt be obtained before counter-measures are taken? the formulation fi

19、nally agreed upon states that countermeasures may only be taken if the contracting party establishes that the effect of the dumping., is such as to cause or threaten material injury to an established domestic industry, or is such as to retard materially the establishment of a domestic industry. tm i

20、n 1955, article vi of gatt was supplemented the first and only amendment to the gatt wording on dumping to the effect that in cases where delay might cause damage that would be difficult to repair, immediate measures are permitted without the need to seek the prior consent of the contracting parties

21、 to gatt. 15 the dumping question experienced a revival during the kennedy round between 1964 and 1967. theamericans had tried to include also non-tariff barriers in the trade talks. subsequently, they realised much to their annoyance that the negotiating parties werespotlighting the very barriers t

22、o trade which applied in the usa, above all the us anti-dumping law. after brief hesitation, the americans attempted to turn the antidumping controversy in their favour with the help of a detailed regulation. thus emerged the anti-dumping code of 1967 which, although it ties the americans hands in m

23、any a procedural question, otherwise hitsparticularly hard at canada and great britain. canadas anti-dumping legislation up to that time did not conform to gatt in that the taking of anti-dumping measures was not bound to the precondition of economic damage. also in great britain - according to the

24、american view- anti-dumping measures at that time were being misused for the protection of the domestic economy. from the us perspective, the advantages associated with the anti-dumping code outweighed the resultant disadvantages which it was felt had to be accepted. the agreement on implementation

25、of article vi of the general agreement on tariffs and trade anti-dumping code is dated 30th june, 1967.16 during the tokyo round, the 1967 anti-dumping code underwent a two-fold amendment: firstly, there was the question of demarcation vis-a-vis the code on subsidies and countervailing duties which

26、was in the process of formation; 17 secondly, changes were made to the existing agreement in terms of ascertainment of damage art. 3: 1-4, the privileged position of the developing countries art. 13 and consultations, arbitration and settlement of disputes art. 15. 18 the currently valid agreement o

27、n anti-dumping was reached on 12th april 1979 in geneva. 9 wherever the antidumping agreement is mentioned in the following, reference is being made to the currently valid version of 1979. definition of dumping in imitation of the american legal system of the 20s and 30s, gatt speaks of dumping when

28、 products of the same kind of one country are introduced into the commerce of another country at less than the normal value of the products. hence,dumping means that the normal domestic value of an article exceeds its export value. how does gatt define the normal domestic value? when is a product of

29、 the same kind when compared with another? how should we interpret export value? the normal value of an article is undercut according to art. vi:i of gatt if the price of the product exported from one country to another a is less than the comparable price, in the ordinary course of trade, for the li

30、ke product when destined for consumption in the exporting country, or b in the absence of such domestic price, is less than either i the highest comparable price for the like product for export to any third country in the ordinary course of trade, or ii the cost of proddction of the product in the c

31、ountry of origin plus a reasonable addition for selling cost and profit. differences in terms and conditions of sale, varying taxation and other differentials influencing the price are to be given due consideration. on the other hand, however, if export prices are lower because of the reimbursement

32、of domestic duties and taxes e.g. by way of the reimbursement of vat, this does not, according to gatt, constitute dumping which would justify counter-measures. the normal domestic value is taken to be exclusive of duties and taxes the gatt definition of dumping applies to all countries which are si

33、gnatories to gatt - apart from one important exception. the us anti-dumping law contains divergent and partly narrower provisions than gatt in two specific areas: should the export product come to be sold in the country of origin, gatt says that dumping is to be determined according to the price cri

34、terion irrespective of the extent of the costs of manufacture. according to american law, however, the costs of manufacture can also be taken into consideration as well as the domestic price. the cost criterion shall apply in cases where there is good reason to suppose that the domestic price remain

35、s lower than the costs of manufacture for substantial quantities of merchandise over a relatively long period of time in this way, the americans succeed in shielding the market from merchandise which has been falsely priced as a result of any production cost contributions, or in taxing them with ant

36、i-dumping duties. they refute the gatt contravention of which they are accused with the argument that gatt talks in terms of normal domestic prices. normal prices, however, cannot be lower than costs of manufacture over longer periods. this is why, in the case of price undercutting over longer perio

37、ds, the cost criterion should be applied in applying the cost criterion, the export prices are, according to gatt, to be compared with the cost of production plus a reasonable addition for selling cost and profit. the addition for profit shall not exceed the profit normally realised on sales of prod

38、ucts of the same general category in the domestic market of the country of origin. by way of contrast, the us anti-dumping law defines the costs taken as a basis for comparison as follows: 1 material and production costs, 2overheads of not less than 10 % of the material and production costs, 3 profi

39、t margin of not less than 8 % of the costs mentioned in points 1 and 2, and 4 packing and loading expenses as defined under the f.o.b, price. when are goods described as being of the same kind? the american proposal of 1 946 for the creation of a world trade organisation spoke of the like and simila

40、r products. 26 during the subsequent negotiations it was decided to limit the definition to like products, products which are identical, homogeneous in practice, however, this terminology proved to be impracticable. slight divergences of quality or differing forms or colourings do not rule out compe

41、tition nor hence the possibility of dumping. to make allowance for this fact, the anti-dumping code holds that such goods are also included which although not alike in all respects, have characteristics closely resembling those of the product under consideration譯文傾銷與反傾銷措施 資料來源: 國際經(jīng)濟學,1984年7月 作者:rich

42、ard senti zurich 在最近的時代,傾銷行動的次數(shù)已經(jīng)呈現(xiàn)出與各自的經(jīng)濟活動水平顯著相關(guān)性,以下意見反映了目前未決訴訟和反傾銷措施實施的總體情況,并查看到當前面臨的國際反傾銷制度問題。 多年來,傾銷行動已在中,美,加拿大,日本和歐盟成員國的貿(mào)易談判中成為討論的中心。截至1977年底,共有二十個國家在美國傾銷行動的進展范圍之內(nèi)。在1978年,隨著觸發(fā)價格體系以規(guī)管進口鋼材,緊張局勢有所緩和。 關(guān)于在1979年美國貿(mào)易法案修改成本的確認標準,美國鋼鐵公司再次發(fā)生了一起針對歐盟鋼鐵生產(chǎn)商的行動。 1980年,觸發(fā)價格體系變得簡單,但暫時無法工作,同年再次應(yīng)用與補充力量。然而,隨后發(fā)生了更

43、多的傾銷行為,特別是在1981年和1982年。 在1983年開始,關(guān)于反傾銷問題上,關(guān)貿(mào)總協(xié)定委員會公布了這一期間,美國,歐共體,芬蘭,加拿大,奧地利和瑞典,臨時和最終關(guān)于反措施和價格方面達成的協(xié)議(見附表1)。 大多數(shù)傾銷的行動都是針對工業(yè)化國家,只對少數(shù)發(fā)展中國家。表2顯示了在1981/82年貿(mào)易伙伴之間關(guān)于傾銷談判的情況,即哪些國家提起訴訟的,哪些是被訴訟的(據(jù)據(jù)關(guān)貿(mào)總協(xié)定的報道)。 美國反傾銷立法的基礎(chǔ): 1945年,戰(zhàn)爭結(jié)束后,美國國務(wù)院立即發(fā)表了一臺有關(guān)貿(mào)易秩序的第一批建議。根據(jù)這些建議,一個國際貿(mào)易組織的成員仍然要創(chuàng)建應(yīng),除其他事項外,承諾在一般定義下,反傾銷和反補貼稅可以適當?shù)?/p>

44、適用于從“其他成員的進口產(chǎn)品”。 僅僅一年后,美國人提出了為國際貿(mào)易創(chuàng)造一個有組織能具體解決反傾銷問題的憲章,后來通過哈瓦那章程的,沒有經(jīng)歷關(guān)貿(mào)總協(xié)定顯著的變化。無論是基本概念和許多個別條款,都是為了以合美國當時的反傾銷法例。 第一個美國反傾銷條款是在1916年的稅收法案中被確立的。 根據(jù)這項法律,美國人強加一個類似于罰款的條例。如果進口了比美國國內(nèi)價格低的產(chǎn)品(意圖破壞或傷害),美國相關(guān)行業(yè)會面臨嚴重的危險。這兩個標準“抑價“和“施加的損害”,后來通過實際反傾銷案例在1921年和1930成為法律,在1974年和1979年作出補充和改進,仍適用繼今天。 根據(jù)美國1921年和1930年法,如果有

45、以下情況說明傾銷已經(jīng)發(fā)生: 如果進口的商品比美國國內(nèi)市場的價格更便宜(價格標準)。 如果貨物在國內(nèi)市場上沒有銷售,在美國比在第三國更便宜(修改價格標準)。 如果貨物銷售到目的地國家,貨物出口價格低于在生產(chǎn)國制造成本(成本標準)。制造費用是在此基礎(chǔ)上計算材料和生產(chǎn)成本的確切數(shù)據(jù),以及間接費用和利潤計算。 1974年和1979年帶來的法律修正案,一個標準的成本擴展到包括案件中,國內(nèi)銷售價格(在原籍國)不再支付生產(chǎn)成本。 關(guān)貿(mào)總協(xié)定條款的起源與反傾銷公約: 在討論中圍繞重塑世界的交易系統(tǒng)的重心,一些代表要求將美國以外的價格傾銷,應(yīng)及時調(diào)控并結(jié)合服務(wù),匯率和社會傾銷。服務(wù)傾銷圍繞貨運,即由傾銷的方式出口掉價運輸服務(wù)。匯率傾銷是在降價的出口擔保形式的平價和外匯津貼。 社會傾銷在構(gòu)成產(chǎn)品的情況下,從戰(zhàn)俘營或監(jiān)獄找到世界市場上的價格的方式與這些民營企業(yè)家無法競爭。該談判代表團最后商定的價格傾銷與美國的建議路線達成一致。 在對于何種損害程度有必要作出反對措施的意見上存在著初步分歧。必須認真指出的是,在反對措施實施以前,應(yīng)明確有哪些材料以及發(fā)生了哪些不確定的傷害。是否國內(nèi)價格與出口的價格之間的差異一定要達到一定的量(比如至少是國內(nèi)價格的百分之五)才采取的反對措施才是合理的呢?這些嚴重的損害是否可以用懲