비시장경제 상품에 대한 상계관세 부과와 관련한 WTO 체제에서의 법적 쟁점 연구 = 미국-중국 간 WTO 분쟁 중 공공기관 및 시장기준의 문제를 중심으로

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

This paper addresses the issues of public body and market benchmark that may occur in the process of subsidy investigations. For this purpose, it carefully examines the reasoning deployed by the panel and the Appellate Body in the US-China dispute over the US' countervailing duty imposed on certain products from China.
In 2007, the United States reversed its long-standing policy of not imposing countervailing duties on products from NME and imposed countervailing duties on four products from China. China brought a case against the US challenging the determination of Department of Commerce. While the WTO panel rejected China's claim on public body by interpreting the term as any entity controlled by a government, the Appellate Body reversed the panels' ruling. The Appellate Body interpreted the term to mean an entity that is vested with governmental authority to exercise governmental functions. On the issue of benchmark to calculate benefit, both the panel and the Appellate Body found that an out of country benchmark can be used when the investigating authority establish that the domestic private prices are distorted because of the predominant role of the government in the market as a provider of the same or similar products. However, the Appellate Body failed to provide clear definition of terms such as governmental authority and governmental functions. Nor did it provide sufficient guideline that investigating authorities can refer to when they conduct subsidy investigation. Therefore, the Appellate Body, in fact opened the door for further disputes involving public body and market benchmark.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 한국국제경제법학회, "신국제경제법" 박영사 2012

2 외교통상부, "반덤핑 바로 알기"

3 법무부, "WTO 보조금협정 연구" 2003

4 Ahn, Dukgeun, "United States-Definitive Anti-Dumping and Countervailing Duties on Certain Products from China" 105 (105): 761-, 2011

5 Prusa, Thomas J., "United States - Definitive Anti-Dumping and Countervailing Duties on Certain Products from China: Passing the Buck on Pass-through" 12 (12): 197-, 2013

6 Pauwelyn, Joost, "Treaty Interpretation or Activism? comment on the AB Report on United States - ADs and CVDs on Certain Products from China" 12 (12): 235-, 2013

7 Stoler, Andrew L., "Treatment of China as a Non-Market Economy: Implications for Antidumping and Countervailing Measures and Impact on Chinese Company Operations in the WTO Framework" 2003

8 Jones, Vivian C., "Trade Remedy Legislation: Applying Countervailing Action to Nonmarket Economy Countries" 2007

9 Pregelj, Vladimir N., "Trade Remedy Legislation: Applying Countervailing Action to Nonmarket Economy Countries" 2005

10 Zheng, Wentong, "The Remedies and Non-Market Economies: The WTO Appellate Body's Report in United States-Definitive Antidumping and Countervailing Duties on Certain Products from China" 15 (15): 1-, 2011

11 "Protocol on the Accession of the People's Republic of China to the Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization" 2001

12 "Panel Report, United States-Definitive Anti-Dumping and Countervailing Duties on Certain Products from China" 2011

13 "Appellate Body Report, United States-Definitive Anti-Dumping and Countervailing Duties on Certain Products from China" 2011

14 Smith, Jane M., ".S. Trade Remedy Laws and Nonmarket Economies: A Legal Overview" Congressional Research Service 2013