WTO: US high-quality tariff violations against China's steel and photovoltaics
Jasmine oil, a type of Essential Oil derived from the jasmine flower. It is one of the most popular essential oils and most used essential oil in the world today.
Jasmine oil is a popular natural remedy for improving mood, overcoming stress and balancing hormones. It is extensively used in oil diffusers, massage oils, creams and also directly in the bath.
Jasmine Absolute Essential Oil Jasmine Absolute Essential Oil,Natural Jasmine Absolute Essential Oil,Pure Jasmine Absolute Essential Oil,Healthy Jasmine Absolute Essential Oil Xinhui Gangzhou Flavors&Fragrance Co.,Ltd , https://www.xhgzff.com
At the same time, in another similar case involving unfair pricing of imported products in the United States, India filed a complaint about the taxation of three large companies in the country on US exports of steel products, some of which advocated the support of the WTO.
Trade diplomats pointed out that these two cases reflect the widespread concern of the WTO's 160 member states that the United States is illegally protecting domestic producers.
China VS USA
On the 14th, the WTO announced the report of the expert group on China's v. anti-subsidy measures. The report supported a number of Chinese lawsuits, and found that the anti-subsidy measures initiated by the United States against China were in violation of WTO rules in the determination of public institutions, the identification of land specificity, and the launch of countervailing investigations on export restrictions.
The expert group believes that the United States imposes a so-called “counter-subsidy tax†on the grounds that the Chinese government provides subsidies to exporting enterprises. This practice “passes the boundariesâ€. According to the Marrakesh Agreement establishing the WTO in 1964, countervailing duties can only be imposed if there is clear evidence that the state-owned or part of the state-owned enterprise that reflects the subsidy on the price of the product is a “public institutionâ€.
The expert group said that the US failed to provide sufficient evidence and that the subsidy value of the kitchen shelves, lawn mowers and even citric acid products produced by Chinese companies was incorrect. The WTO has informed the United States to adjust measures to bring it into line with the WTO Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM).
In addition, the expert group believes that the United States does not violate the WTO rules in the use of the unfavorable facts, the calculation of subsidy benefits, and the determination of subsidy specificity in the countervailing investigation.
In May 2012, China made a request for a counter-subsidy investigation into 22 US anti-subsidy investigations on oil well pipes, coated paper, steel wheels, etc. in the WTO, and believed that the US abuse of trade remedy rules damaged the behavior. The legitimate rights and interests of Chinese companies. In August 2012, China and the WTO dispute settlement agency filed a request for the establishment of an expert group. In September of the same year, the expert group was established.
The head of the Department of Treaty and Law of the Ministry of Commerce of China said on the evening of the 14th that the case involved 22 types of products, with an annual export value of about 7.2 billion US dollars, involving China's major trade interests. China urges the US to respect the WTO ruling and correct the misuse of trade remedy measures as soon as possible to ensure a fair competition for Chinese companies.
In response, the United States responded that it is assessing the various options. US Trade Representative Michael Froman said that the panel rejected some of the Chinese complaints, which is a victory for American companies and workers. "As for the other contents mentioned in the report, the US government is conducting a careful evaluation and we will take all appropriate measures. To ensure that the US remedy against unfair subsidies is strong and effective."
Many members of the WTO, including the European Union and Japan, claim to be stakeholders in this Sino-US trade dispute, but they refuse to explain whether they support China or the US.
India VS United States
The WTO ruling is slightly ambiguous against India’s complaint. The panel said that the US approach "does not comply with" some of the provisions of the WTO Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM) and unfairly reduces India's trade income. The US should follow the content of the agreement. In addition, many of the technical claims of the Indian side were rejected.
From the WTO's ruling, Froman expressed his welcome and approval, but he also admitted that this is a "complex result." “The vast majority of litigations filed by India were rejected by the panel of experts. This is a major victory for the US and US related manufacturing companies.â€