Abstract Should the US, Europe and Japan give Chinese goods and industries a market economy status treatment? This is a clear, clear, simple thing. In Article 15 of the Protocol on China's Accession to the WTO, two (a) and (d) have made explicit unconditional provisions...
Should the US, Europe and Japan give Chinese goods and industries a market economy status treatment? This is a clear, clear, simple thing. In Article 15 of the Protocol on China's Accession to the WTO, (a) and (d) have clearly and unconditionally provided for this: "In any case, the purpose of (a) (ii) shall be 15 years after the date of accession. termination."
In other words, since China’s official accession to the WTO for 15 years (December 11, 2016), other members cannot continue to adopt “substitute countries†in anti-dumping and countervailing cases against China, but only Can use the Chinese price or cost of the industry under investigation. This is essentially the same as China's enjoyment of market economy status in the domestic market of these members. Since the United States, Europe and Japan signed the Protocol in the same year, they have the obligation to fulfill their above-mentioned international commitments even if they do not explicitly recognize China's market economy status.
Further examination of the US, Europe and Japan Western countries, the reasons for refusing to recognize China's market economy status, contradictions everywhere, the most typical is like the United States. Those who refuse to recognize China's market economy status in the United States, find out the legal basis including the six provisions of the 1930 Tariff Act - including the degree of RMB convertibility, the degree of freedom of Chinese employers and employees to negotiate wages, China's joint ventures or other foreign countries The degree of investment access, the degree of control of the Chinese government's allocation of economic resources, and the extent to which prices and production are determined... But as long as we understand the actual situation of China's current economic operations, it is not difficult to see how it is ridiculous to take these regulations to make China difficult.
Taking "the degree of convertibility of the renminbi" as an example, China has implemented the convertibility of the RMB current account in 1996. In recent years, the convertibility of capital account has also been greatly relaxed, or it has been imported by trillions of dollars a year (about 1.7 trillion US dollars last year). ) How do Chinese inhabitants of hundreds of millions of people leave the country, rapid foreign direct investment, and more and more countries include the renminbi in foreign exchange reserves?
On the issue of government regulation, Uncle Sam is not as introspective as he is closely watching China, because under the banner of “rule of law†and “regulationâ€, the US public power sector has greatly interfered with economic life more than China. It should be noted that during his eight years in office, Obama passed more than 27,000 laws and regulations, and each piece of laws and regulations has a lengthy discussion. Among them, there are more than 2,700 pages in the medical insurance bill. The Supreme Court judges and members of the Supreme Court who approved this large-scale law are not read by one person. It was because of over-regulation that it is now 65 days for a small shop to sell lemonade in New York, and the food hygiene safety permit will take five weeks to complete.
To fulfill the promise of China's market economy status treatment, it does not require much advanced knowledge, only need to be trustworthy; but some trade protectionist forces do not know the dignity of faith, only know the benefits and gains. It is obviously a price to pay for China’s market economy status. After all, China is already one of the world's top import markets, and its import growth rate is among the highest in the world's major economies. What is the price of losing or partially losing this market? Compared with Japan and South Korea, it is not difficult to understand: Japan once dominated China's largest import source country for nearly 30 years, far ahead of South Korea, but was overtaken by South Korea in 2013. As a result, South Korea's per capita GDP rose from 11,948 US dollars in 2000. By 2013, the amount of US$25,977 was only slightly increased from US$37,292 to US$38,634.
Not only that, but also the Chinese countries will further lose the credibility of their trade and political bargaining commitments: China’s economic aggregate or comprehensive national strength is the second largest in the world today, and its commitment to China can be so. Is it not more inappropriate to pledge the promises of other countries? Losing this credibility will inevitably come at a price in the future, and may not be immediate, but it will last for a long time.
(The author is a researcher at the Research Institute of the Ministry of Commerce) (Source: People's Daily Overseas Edition)
Ax Cx Vx Ring Gasket,Vx Ring Gasket,Ax Ring Gasket,Cx Ring Gasket
WENZHOU JINGWEI SEAL TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD , https://www.ringjoint-gasket.com