Download The Eu's Anti-Dumping Policy Towards China Book in PDF, Epub and Kindle
This dissertation, "The EU's Anti-dumping Policy Towards China: a Discriminatory Policy and Unfair Methodology?" by Joris, Cornelis, was obtained from The University of Hong Kong (Pokfulam, Hong Kong) and is being sold pursuant to Creative Commons: Attribution 3.0 Hong Kong License. The content of this dissertation has not been altered in any way. We have altered the formatting in order to facilitate the ease of printing and reading of the dissertation. All rights not granted by the above license are retained by the author. Abstract: Abstract of thesis entitled "THE EU'S ANTI-DUMPING POLICY TOWARDS CHINA - A DISCRIMINATORY POLICY AND UNFAIR METHODOLOGY?" Submitted by Joris Cornelis For the degree of Doctor of Legal Science at the University of Hong Kong in March 2005 The EU's anti-dumping policy towards China has been criticized for being discriminatory and for applying an unfair methodology. The argument that the EU's anti-dumping policy is discriminatory refers to China's classification as a non-market economy. As a consequence, a special methodology applies to China whereby data from third countries are used to determine the normal value of Chinese imports and a single anti-dumping duty is imposed on all imports. This methodology has been criticized as unfair since it results in unpredictable, inaccurate and inflated dumping margin calculations. This thesis examines the correctness of these claims by analyzing all EU anti-dumping investigations initiated against China. This thesis agrees with the critique that China's classification as a non-market economy is discriminatory. This thesis does not argue China has a market economy because substantial reforms are still needed before the Chinese economy can be considered to be a market economy. However, other non-market economy countries graduated to market economy status despite serious concerns about the market-oriented nature of their economy. The adoption of a more strict approach towards China is therefore discriminatory. In addition, this thesis raises the question whether market economy status will really provide better protection for individual Chinese exporters against trade defense investigations. 1 This thesis also argues that claims about the unfairness of the EU's anti-dumping methodology towards China are overstated. While acknowledging that there are inherent deficiencies in the special methodology that applies to China, this thesis points out that there are possibilities for Chinese exporters to avoid the application of the special methodology by claiming market economy treatment and individual treatment. Such claims have been relatively unsuccessful so far, partly because the criteria are overly strict, particularly with regard to claiming individual treatment, but also because of insufficient cooperation by Chinese exporters. Even when the special methodology applies, there are several possibilities for Chinese exporters to mitigate the inaccuracy and unpredictability of this special methodology, but unfortunately, the level of cooperation by Chinese exporters in this regard has been poor. In addition, the EU investigating authorities have established criteria for the selection of the reference third country and the determination of the normal value, thereby increasing the predictability of the normal value determinations. Finally, the special methodology only applies to the dumping determination. Before anti-dumping measures can be imposed, there also needs to be a finding of injury to an EU industry, a finding of causation and a finding that imposing anti-dumping measures is in the interest of the EU. Chinese exporters are treated the same as exporters from other countries with regard to these findings. The requirement of injury is particularly relevant since anti-dumping measures are based on the injury margin when the injury margin is lower than the dumping margin, thereby mitigating the impact of the sp