- 學位論文
歐盟課徵反傾銷稅法律問題之研究 －以中國大陸輸出貨物為例
The Study of Anti-Dumping Duty Law of the European Union regarding Imports from China
摘要
中文摘要 鑒於歐盟目前為大陸第一大貿易夥伴，大陸為歐盟第二大貿易夥伴，彼此在雙邊貿易關係中皆扮演著舉足輕重之角色。尤其，大陸貨物大量輸出歐盟市場，對歐盟相關產業造成重大影響。而歐盟不但係最早且對大陸實施反傾銷最多地區，正嚴重影響大陸之外貿發展。 歐盟之反傾銷法雖亦參仿WTO之GATT規範而訂定，但基於WTO反傾銷規則中並未明確規範「非市場經濟國家」，WTO各締約國於此方面具有自由決定之權利。前共產主義國家通常被歐美國家認定為「非市場經濟國家」，而歐盟則根據自己之認定標準判定它們是否屬於非市場經濟國家，進而決定是否課徵反傾銷稅，即有深入探討之價值。 歐盟以第384/96號規則作為現行反傾銷法，近年來雖已承認大陸在經濟改革方面有相當之成就，並訂立新規則〈如1998年歐盟理事會第905/98號規則修改歐盟反傾銷基本法第384/96號規則〉規定，如果大陸企業能滿足新法規中規定之五項標準，則能獲得市場經濟待遇，可採用本地企業產品內銷價格與出口價格進行比較來計算傾銷差額；另在第905/98號規則解釋性之備忘錄附件亦提出評估個案待遇之八項標準〈即可作「個案處理」待遇〉；然觀其反傾銷立法之變化在實踐中仍不盡理想，對於取得「市場經濟待遇」與「個案處理待遇」具有一定困難度。未達標準之企業，仍須適用「替代國制度」、「一國一稅制度」，大陸企業尚有一段艱辛之途。 藉由金屬鈣案、黃磷案及螢光燈案三件個別案例之法律問題研析，可以分別代表大陸被歸為非市場經濟國家之原則處理方式、例外之處理方式及綜合原則與例外之處理方式，反應目前大陸企業貨物出口所面臨之遭受歐盟反傾銷措施三種可能裁決效果。於分析歐盟對大陸反傾銷所依據之法律之過程中發現，執委會與理事會在替代國選擇、傾銷認定甚至市場經濟待遇或個案處理待遇標準認定，大陸須負極重之舉證責任；而執委會與理事會具「廣泛自由裁量權」，並經歐洲法院認可。大陸企業尚面臨不公正及歧視性反傾銷困境，需儘速採取有效對策為要。 本文除重視對歐盟反傾銷法規之認識、熟悉相關案例法律問題之各種不同處理方式外，並提出大陸相關方面宜如何應對反傾銷困境之拙見〈含政府方面、全國性行業協會方面及企業方面之具體對策與建議〉，以供相關方面參考。
並列摘要
Abstract The European Union and China are each other’s main trading partners. EU is now the most important business partner of China, currently the EU remained as China’s biggest trading partner and China remained as the EU’s second biggest trading partner. As in the relation of bilateral trade, each economy represents important partners to another. The great amount of exportations from China to the EU made major impact to the EU industries. The EU is the earliest to establish anti-dumping measures against China, as exportations are seriously affected in China. Regard to the WTO Anti-Dumping Agreement which did not have clear definition to classify non-market economic countries. For this, members of the WTO can make their decision with their own measurements and considerations. Former communist countries are usually classified as non-market economic countries by the US and European countries. The EU uses its own measurement to classify countries that are non-market economy countries and decides to levy the anti-dumping duty; there is deep value that probes into. European Union regards as the current anti-dumping law with the rule No 384/96, has already in recent years admitted that there is a suitable achievement in economic reform in China, conclude new rule regulation based on No 384/96, if the enterprises of China can meet five standards stipulated in the new regulation that obtain market economy treatment can adopt the local price sold inside the country of enterprise products and export price to relatively calculate the difference of dumping margin ; Another also propose assessing eight standards of the individual treatment in the rule memorandum enclosure No 905/98 ; But view change that anti-dumping legislate its in practice still not ideal, for obtaining market economy treatment and individual treatment is still difficult to have. Have not reached standard enterprises , must still be suitable substitute country's institution and country-wide dumping margin, enterprises of China still have a hard way to go . Grind and analyze with the legal question of metal calcium case , yellow phosphorus case and integrated electronic compact fluorescent lamps case, can be belonged to and dealt with way , exceptional treatment way and comprehensive principle and exceptional treatment way for the principle of the countries except market economy the continent separately, what face in the goods exit of continent enterprise at present of the response may be awarded the result by three kinds European Union's anti-dumping measures. Analyzing European Union bases on the course of its law to find the anti-dumping measures against China, the Commission and the Council are substituting the country and choosing, dumps asserting even market economy treatment or individual treatment standard to assert, China must shoulder the extremely heavy burden of proof; And the Commission and the Council have extensive freely judging amount right, and is approved by European Court of Justice. Enterprises of China still face the inequitable and discriminatory anti-dumping predicament; need to adopt the effective countermeasure in order to want as quickly as possible. This text is besides paying attention to dealing with the way the understanding of European Union's anti-dumping regulations, all kinds of familiar with the relevant legal problem of case, and propose ( including the China government, nationwide industrial union and those enterprises) for reference.