After nine months of silence, the EU began to raise anti-dumping "big sticks" on Chinese products at the beginning of September: On September 4 and 5, the EU launched anti-dumping investigations on Chinese-made citric acid and MSG; After 15 months of review, the European Commission has proposed another one-year anti-dumping duty on Chinese-made energy-saving lamps; while Chinese shoe enterprises, which are struggling under anti-dumping swords, have recently ushered in the EU’s anti-circumvention survey……
At the same time, a strong "reflection" voice also sounded from within the EU: EU Trade Commissioner Mandelson publicly stated that although it is often reasonable and correct to impose trade punitive measures such as anti-dumping duties, if anti-dumping measures limit The business strategy of EU companies pursuing reasonable profits, or in the case of China's energy-saving lamps, in flagrant disregard of the EU's energy-saving policies and the reality of European production, will also backfire.
Reflection period brings rare peace
In fact, the EU is currently demonstrating the “reflection†of trade policy: in December 2006, the EU Trade Commission issued a “Green Book†to solicit public opinions and conduct the first large-scale assessment of trade measures including anti-dumping in 10 years. And discussion. The results of the "Green Paper" solicitation will be announced in the near future, when the European Commission will review the trade measures such as anti-dumping.
Looking back at recent years, China’s products have suffered from obvious trade fluctuations from trade surveys from the European Union: in 2005 and 2006, the EU initiated 9 and 12 trade remedy investigations against China respectively, and in 2007, trade remedy investigations from the EU appeared. A rare period of silence.
“The EU internal interest groups have been engaged in a fierce game, the calm of performance, and the sudden increase in trade remedy cases is just an external manifestation of this game,†said Wu Zhenchang, chairman of Panyu Chuangxin Shoes Co., Ltd. In the EU anti-dumping investigation on Chinese footwear products, Wu Zhenchang initiated the organization of the EU anti-dumping response alliance against Chinese footwear products, representing the Chinese shoe enterprises and the European Commission "a few rounds of war." On October 4 last year, the EU finally ruled that the anti-dumping duty of 16.5% on Chinese leather shoes was reduced, and the time limit was reduced to two years from the previous five years.
The double-edged sword effect shows that the game will continue
This year, a series of data changes have once again caught the attention of EU producers: since the introduction of anti-dumping duties, the number of leather shoes exported to Macao has increased significantly. Recently, the European Commission announced the official launch of an anti-circumvention investigation of Chinese leather shoes. The so-called evasion refers to the fact that when a country’s goods are subject to anti-dumping duties by another country, the producers reduce or avoid the imposition of anti-dumping duties by means of detours. Because of the ease of obtaining evidence, the anti-circumvention investigation is often as lethal as the anti-dumping investigation.
“Whether it is anti-dumping or anti-circumvention, the EU has to face the fact that many large European companies have moved their production lines to China, Southeast Asian countries, or global sourcing, and are limited to protecting local industries. Will hurt the interests of European companies." Wu Zhenchang said.
After the European Union issued the Green Paper, in addition to publicly collecting opinions on the Internet, it also specially held a seminar in Beijing to listen to the opinions of Chinese companies. Guo Yuwen of Nanhai Wanbang Shoes Industry once attended the seminar and spoke on behalf of the “Shoe Industry Response Allianceâ€. Guo Yuwen believes that the EU anti-dumping case against Chinese footwear products is a typical case, and the focus of disputes among stakeholders is whether the EU's trade protection policy should protect the industries that have fallen behind, or should protect the overall interests of the EU.
Wu Zhenchang said that the European Union issued a Green Paper to reflect on its trade protection policy, apparently because it noticed the fact that even frequent anti-dumping sticks would only force globalized European companies to move from one production base to another. Base, increase costs and reduce profits. From this point of view, the EU will certainly adapt to the overall situation of globalization and adjust trade protection policies, but this adjustment will not be in place, because the game between different interests will continue.
The policy "just pay attention to one point, not to mention the rest" is debatable
As with the shoe case, more and more trade protection cases have caused the officials of the European Commission to make a dilemma. In 2001, the EU began to impose a five-year anti-dumping duty on Chinese energy-saving light bulbs. When the measure expired in July 2006, the EU launched another 15-month investigation, and the original anti-dumping measures still apply during the investigation. Recently, the European Commission recommended that the anti-dumping duty imposed on China's energy-saving light bulbs for another year will be automatically cancelled after the expiration.
Jia Qiang, general manager of Xiamen Donglin Electronics Co., Ltd. believes that if this proposal is adopted, it will not only harm the interests of Chinese producers, but also cause some European manufacturers to suffer, because most EU lamps and lanterns, including Philips in the Netherlands, produce The majority of the production has been transferred to China, and the anti-dumping duties imposed by the EU have made these companies that are transnational and more competitive suffer. In addition, some environmentalists have criticized that the unequal trade policy of the EU is also manifested in “just pay attention to the rest, regardless of the restâ€. While maintaining the interests of backward producers, it ignores the EU's goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions and reducing energy consumption.
Relevant foreign trade experts pointed out that as more and more EU companies transfer production to a relatively low-cost third country such as China to maintain competitiveness, the concept of "EU enterprises" has been difficult to define, and intensive anti-dumping measures have been protected in Europe. At the same time, industries and enterprises have hurt European companies investing in countries and regions such as China. What the EU needs to reflect is how to adopt trade remedy measures to meet the interests of EU companies and consumers, in order to find a relative balance between multiple interests, and to unfair trade practices from a rational division of supply chain in the context of globalization. Distinguish from it.
Fudan's authoritative report released warm white light and then received support for the national lighting and lighting wholesale market. The survey of Taiwan's investment in the development of Xiamen as a LED photoelectric town of poor quality low-cost wire and cable products can have a market in 2007 China wire and cable industry research report three years later China Semiconductor lighting 100 billion a year
1
