Experts believe that the European and American countries “throwing stones and asking for directions,†China’s rare earth export policy is facing severe challenges, it is proposed that the introduction of environmental taxes According to foreign media, in the raw materials export case which lasted two years or so, the World Trade Organization preliminary ruling found that China did not implement 9 types of raw materials Legal restrictions on export restrictions. Insiders pointed out that the WTO report undoubtedly poses a huge challenge to China's raw material export policy. However, the industry is even more worried that although this case does not involve rare earth products, but this time the European and American countries "throwing stone" after the move to get WTO support, is likely to lock the next target rare earth.
Behind the WTO mask, in fact, Europe and the United States and other countries compete for my naked interests. The so-called concern for environmental protection and fair trade are all excuses, core or interests. On the one hand, China should be vigilant that in order to pursue its own interests, some countries use the WTO dispute resolution platform to legalize non-compliance interests. On the other hand, they should also be more familiar with and make good use of WTO rules to fight for their own legitimate rights and interests.
The preliminary ruling of China to restrict the export of nine kinds of raw material violations According to Reuters report recently, US trade officials confirmed that the World Trade Organization (WTO) made a preliminary ruling on the United States' complaint of China restricting the export of some industrial raw materials, but said that the United States could not comment on the verdict.
“We can confirm that the WTO Committee has issued an interim confidential report on the United States dispute over China’s dispute over the export restrictions on various industrial raw materials for the production of steel, aluminum and chemical products,†said Nefetilius McPherson, spokesperson for the U.S. Trade Representative Office.
At the same time, she said that at present, the temporary document is a confidential document and will not be made public until the report is issued to WTO members. It is expected that the final report will be issued to WTO members in late spring or early summer this year.
The Wall Street Journal reported on February 18 that quoted informed trade diplomats and lawyers said that on Friday, the WTO will issue a preliminary report judging that China has no legal right to impose export restrictions on nine kinds of raw materials. He also said that the final report will be publicly released in April, when China can appeal, but if it fails, China will have to cancel the export control or face retaliatory sanctions.
Responding to a reporter’s question about the US-European-Meihu v. China’s raw material export restrictions on WTO disputes, the responsible person of the Department of Treaty and Law of the Ministry of Commerce responded on the website of the Ministry of Commerce on the 21st, saying that the WTO expert group distributed it to the parties on February 18. midterm report. According to the WTO Dispute Settlement Procedures, the report is only distributed to the parties and China is inconvenient to provide comments. The contents of the report are still in the confidential phase. China will properly follow up on the case in accordance with relevant procedural requirements.
On June 23, 2009, the United States and the European Union formally submitted a trade dispute request to China within the framework of the WTO, stating that China has a total of nine raw materials for bauxite, coke, fluorspar, magnesium, manganese, metallic silicon, silicon carbide, yellow phosphorus and zinc. The adoption of export quotas, export tariffs, and other price and quantity controls violated China's commitment to China's accession to the WTO in 2001, causing the rest of the world to be at a disadvantage in the production and export of steel, aluminum and other chemical products. Mexico also submitted a trade dispute request on August 21 for similar reasons.
Since then, in accordance with relevant procedures, China and the US, Europe, and the United States have held two rounds of constructive consultations on raw material exports in July and September 2009 respectively. However, in view of the failure to find a mutually satisfactory solution through consultations, the World Trade Organization decided on December 21, 2009 to set up an expert group to investigate the case in which the three parties in the United States, the European Union and Mexico accused China of restricting the export of raw materials.
Pave the way for the next goal of Europe and the United States may lock the rare earth industry insiders pointed out that the WTO report, no doubt on China's raw material export policy is a huge challenge. However, the industry is even more worried that although this case does not involve rare earth products, but this time the European and American countries "throwing stone" after the move to get WTO support, is likely to lock the next target rare earth.
The Wall Street Journal also reported that "a successful case may pave the way for the United States to file a complaint against the rare earth policy for the WTO." Prior to this, Europe, USA and Japan have repeatedly pressed China on the issue of rare earths and proposed to sue. WTO dispute settlement mechanism. According to foreign media reports, the EU Trade Commissioner Karel DeGucht once said in November 2010 that although there is no conclusive evidence that China has restricted the export of rare earths has damaged the relevant industries in Europe. However, "if necessary, we will certainly file a complaint with the World Trade Organization."
In 2009, after the United States submitted to the WTO a request for China to restrict the export of nine types of raw materials, John, a former associate deputy trade representative and partner of Covington-Berling Law Firm; Junonu has said that if the U.S. lawsuit wins, the U.S. Trade Representative Office (USTR) will continue to investigate other "Chinese export restrictions" cases.
Yao Jian, the spokesperson of the Ministry of Commerce, repeatedly stated publicly that China's rare earth export quota in 2011 will guarantee the demand in the international market. He also reiterated that "China's export quota restrictions are implemented in accordance with the rules of the WTO in the three areas of exploitation, production, processing, and export. The core purpose is to protect the environment."
Yao Jian said: “In order to protect the demand for rare earths in the international market, we have been facing the pressure of environmental resources for many years and have strived to maintain a considerable amount of rare earth exports. China accounts for about 30% of the world's rare earth reserves, providing 80% of the world's Up to 90% of rare earth production and trade volume."
According to the data of the Ministry of Commerce, from January to November 2010, China exported a total of 35,000 tons of rare earth in kind, an increase of 14.5% and an increase of 171%. In the first nine months of 2010, China exported 16,000 tons to Japan, an increase of 167% year-on-year, ** total exports of rare earths were 49.8%, and exports of rare earths to the United States were 6,200 tons, an increase of 5.5% year-on-year, accounting for 19% of total exports.
On November 9, 2010, Lin Donglu, secretary-general of the Chinese Society of Rare Earths, said in an interview that during the “Twelfth Five-Year Planâ€, China listed rare earth materials as one of the key projects. In the development of rare earth industries, China will avoid overcapacity and adverse competition, further strengthen market stability, and rationally develop and utilize rare earth resources.
Behind the real WTO mask: Experts scrambling for the interests of nakedness The experts interviewed by reporters all said that behind the WTO mask, countries like Europe and the United States are actually competing for my naked interests. The so-called concern for environmental protection and fair trade are all excuses, core or interests, that is, we hope to continue to obtain a large number of rare resources from China at low prices to meet the development needs of its domestic industries, especially high-tech industries.
Hu Tao, head of the Trade and Environment Expert Group of the Ministry of Environmental Protection and researcher of the Environmental and Economic Policy Research Center of the Ministry of Environmental Protection, told reporters that from the case of the EU’s two opposite “accusations†on China’s coke in the export process, it can be seen that the EU What concerns is not environmental protection but benefits.
In 1999, the EU imposed anti-dumping measures on my coke exports. However, with the global recovery of the steel industry, in order to stabilize the coke market and protect the environment, China implemented a coke export licensing system in 2004, while reducing its coke export quota from 12 million tons to 9 million tons. In response, the EU accused China of inappropriately using export quotas and discriminated against EU enterprises, violated the WTO non-discrimination principle, and claimed that it would propose a complaint to the WTO. “The double standard and attitude of the European Union’s export of coke to China precisely reflects that the EU’s position is directly driven by its economic interests.â€
And the United States itself has brought a lawsuit to China, with a lot of "political implications." In response to President Barack Obama’s first case of suing China to the WTO after taking office in China, v. China has restricted the export of nine types of raw materials. Some US experts said that in fact, the Obama administration may have received some internal political pressure when it initiated the lawsuit. Because Obama had already made many promises to the WTO for trade disputes during the election. Compared with the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) in the Bush era, this U.S. U.S. interest is mainly in the settlement of disputes, and it is more "tenacious." It has filed a lawsuit, and it will be difficult to stop if it can't meet the requirements.
In fact, the restrictions on the export of resource-based products are almost the concerted actions of all WTO members. Many developed countries have even more cherished their strategic resources. The United States has extremely rich oil resources, but it never relies on the exploitation of local resources, but on imports. The United States has also sealed the largest rare earth mine in the country, the Mountain Pass Mine, and clearly stipulates that the vast majority of timber is not allowed to be cut down; in order to protect resources, Japan has closed all its production-oriented coal mines, leaving only Hokkaido's plutonium in reserve. Road coal mines are used to preserve technology. In 2007, its annual coal output was only 600,000 tons, and the rest was all dependent on imports.
Responding to experts recommending the introduction of environmental taxes and increasing strategic reserves “Many examples have shown that some countries use the WTO rules to legalize the interests of their own non-compliance, and it is a clear power.†Hu Tao said that, for example, Europe and the United States have restricted military products and The export of high-tech products, saying that there is no relevant provision in the WTO, and the United States' large subsidies to domestic agriculture each year, also legalize it within the WTO framework.
In fact, the current rules of the WTO hardly contain any specific principle restrictions on export tariffs; however, China’s commitment to the WTO constitutes part of the WTO rules that China should abide by. It can be seen that as far back as when I joined the WTO, the developed countries have paid sufficient strategic attention to the global market structure of “two high and one capital†products and strategically grasped the export of “two high and one capital†products in China. Development trend.
"At present, China's export restrictions on 'two high and one capital' products adopted in conjunction with macroeconomic control and energy conservation and emission reduction targets are facing the WTO rules and the challenges of China's WTO accession commitments." Hu Tao said that in order to reduce external criticism, it is recommended to cancel Export quotas will be changed to high export borders to regulate environmental taxes, and at the same time, environmental excise duties for domestic users with the same tax rate will be effectively levied; and environmental management systems will continue to be improved, and high-excess emission fees will be imposed.
Hu Tao said that China should pay high attention to trade-related resource and environmental risks and pressures. We should continue to promote and use current export restrictions on the basis of WTO rules and WTO commitments, especially on the basis of simultaneous implementation of policies that restrict domestic production or consumption. To meet the challenge of economic globalization to China's resources and the environment.
Dr. Lei Yanhua from the Department of Commerce of the Ministry of Commerce believes that the proposal for the introduction of resource tax is reasonable, but for strategic resources such as rare earths, simply relying on taxation to raise prices may have little effect on the export sector. It is recommended to increase the degree of concentration in the production process and draw on the practices of Europe, the United States, and Japan to increase the strategic reserve of resource products.
Behind the WTO mask, in fact, Europe and the United States and other countries compete for my naked interests. The so-called concern for environmental protection and fair trade are all excuses, core or interests. On the one hand, China should be vigilant that in order to pursue its own interests, some countries use the WTO dispute resolution platform to legalize non-compliance interests. On the other hand, they should also be more familiar with and make good use of WTO rules to fight for their own legitimate rights and interests.
The preliminary ruling of China to restrict the export of nine kinds of raw material violations According to Reuters report recently, US trade officials confirmed that the World Trade Organization (WTO) made a preliminary ruling on the United States' complaint of China restricting the export of some industrial raw materials, but said that the United States could not comment on the verdict.
“We can confirm that the WTO Committee has issued an interim confidential report on the United States dispute over China’s dispute over the export restrictions on various industrial raw materials for the production of steel, aluminum and chemical products,†said Nefetilius McPherson, spokesperson for the U.S. Trade Representative Office.
At the same time, she said that at present, the temporary document is a confidential document and will not be made public until the report is issued to WTO members. It is expected that the final report will be issued to WTO members in late spring or early summer this year.
The Wall Street Journal reported on February 18 that quoted informed trade diplomats and lawyers said that on Friday, the WTO will issue a preliminary report judging that China has no legal right to impose export restrictions on nine kinds of raw materials. He also said that the final report will be publicly released in April, when China can appeal, but if it fails, China will have to cancel the export control or face retaliatory sanctions.
Responding to a reporter’s question about the US-European-Meihu v. China’s raw material export restrictions on WTO disputes, the responsible person of the Department of Treaty and Law of the Ministry of Commerce responded on the website of the Ministry of Commerce on the 21st, saying that the WTO expert group distributed it to the parties on February 18. midterm report. According to the WTO Dispute Settlement Procedures, the report is only distributed to the parties and China is inconvenient to provide comments. The contents of the report are still in the confidential phase. China will properly follow up on the case in accordance with relevant procedural requirements.
On June 23, 2009, the United States and the European Union formally submitted a trade dispute request to China within the framework of the WTO, stating that China has a total of nine raw materials for bauxite, coke, fluorspar, magnesium, manganese, metallic silicon, silicon carbide, yellow phosphorus and zinc. The adoption of export quotas, export tariffs, and other price and quantity controls violated China's commitment to China's accession to the WTO in 2001, causing the rest of the world to be at a disadvantage in the production and export of steel, aluminum and other chemical products. Mexico also submitted a trade dispute request on August 21 for similar reasons.
Since then, in accordance with relevant procedures, China and the US, Europe, and the United States have held two rounds of constructive consultations on raw material exports in July and September 2009 respectively. However, in view of the failure to find a mutually satisfactory solution through consultations, the World Trade Organization decided on December 21, 2009 to set up an expert group to investigate the case in which the three parties in the United States, the European Union and Mexico accused China of restricting the export of raw materials.
Pave the way for the next goal of Europe and the United States may lock the rare earth industry insiders pointed out that the WTO report, no doubt on China's raw material export policy is a huge challenge. However, the industry is even more worried that although this case does not involve rare earth products, but this time the European and American countries "throwing stone" after the move to get WTO support, is likely to lock the next target rare earth.
The Wall Street Journal also reported that "a successful case may pave the way for the United States to file a complaint against the rare earth policy for the WTO." Prior to this, Europe, USA and Japan have repeatedly pressed China on the issue of rare earths and proposed to sue. WTO dispute settlement mechanism. According to foreign media reports, the EU Trade Commissioner Karel DeGucht once said in November 2010 that although there is no conclusive evidence that China has restricted the export of rare earths has damaged the relevant industries in Europe. However, "if necessary, we will certainly file a complaint with the World Trade Organization."
In 2009, after the United States submitted to the WTO a request for China to restrict the export of nine types of raw materials, John, a former associate deputy trade representative and partner of Covington-Berling Law Firm; Junonu has said that if the U.S. lawsuit wins, the U.S. Trade Representative Office (USTR) will continue to investigate other "Chinese export restrictions" cases.
Yao Jian, the spokesperson of the Ministry of Commerce, repeatedly stated publicly that China's rare earth export quota in 2011 will guarantee the demand in the international market. He also reiterated that "China's export quota restrictions are implemented in accordance with the rules of the WTO in the three areas of exploitation, production, processing, and export. The core purpose is to protect the environment."
Yao Jian said: “In order to protect the demand for rare earths in the international market, we have been facing the pressure of environmental resources for many years and have strived to maintain a considerable amount of rare earth exports. China accounts for about 30% of the world's rare earth reserves, providing 80% of the world's Up to 90% of rare earth production and trade volume."
According to the data of the Ministry of Commerce, from January to November 2010, China exported a total of 35,000 tons of rare earth in kind, an increase of 14.5% and an increase of 171%. In the first nine months of 2010, China exported 16,000 tons to Japan, an increase of 167% year-on-year, ** total exports of rare earths were 49.8%, and exports of rare earths to the United States were 6,200 tons, an increase of 5.5% year-on-year, accounting for 19% of total exports.
On November 9, 2010, Lin Donglu, secretary-general of the Chinese Society of Rare Earths, said in an interview that during the “Twelfth Five-Year Planâ€, China listed rare earth materials as one of the key projects. In the development of rare earth industries, China will avoid overcapacity and adverse competition, further strengthen market stability, and rationally develop and utilize rare earth resources.
Behind the real WTO mask: Experts scrambling for the interests of nakedness The experts interviewed by reporters all said that behind the WTO mask, countries like Europe and the United States are actually competing for my naked interests. The so-called concern for environmental protection and fair trade are all excuses, core or interests, that is, we hope to continue to obtain a large number of rare resources from China at low prices to meet the development needs of its domestic industries, especially high-tech industries.
Hu Tao, head of the Trade and Environment Expert Group of the Ministry of Environmental Protection and researcher of the Environmental and Economic Policy Research Center of the Ministry of Environmental Protection, told reporters that from the case of the EU’s two opposite “accusations†on China’s coke in the export process, it can be seen that the EU What concerns is not environmental protection but benefits.
In 1999, the EU imposed anti-dumping measures on my coke exports. However, with the global recovery of the steel industry, in order to stabilize the coke market and protect the environment, China implemented a coke export licensing system in 2004, while reducing its coke export quota from 12 million tons to 9 million tons. In response, the EU accused China of inappropriately using export quotas and discriminated against EU enterprises, violated the WTO non-discrimination principle, and claimed that it would propose a complaint to the WTO. “The double standard and attitude of the European Union’s export of coke to China precisely reflects that the EU’s position is directly driven by its economic interests.â€
And the United States itself has brought a lawsuit to China, with a lot of "political implications." In response to President Barack Obama’s first case of suing China to the WTO after taking office in China, v. China has restricted the export of nine types of raw materials. Some US experts said that in fact, the Obama administration may have received some internal political pressure when it initiated the lawsuit. Because Obama had already made many promises to the WTO for trade disputes during the election. Compared with the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) in the Bush era, this U.S. U.S. interest is mainly in the settlement of disputes, and it is more "tenacious." It has filed a lawsuit, and it will be difficult to stop if it can't meet the requirements.
In fact, the restrictions on the export of resource-based products are almost the concerted actions of all WTO members. Many developed countries have even more cherished their strategic resources. The United States has extremely rich oil resources, but it never relies on the exploitation of local resources, but on imports. The United States has also sealed the largest rare earth mine in the country, the Mountain Pass Mine, and clearly stipulates that the vast majority of timber is not allowed to be cut down; in order to protect resources, Japan has closed all its production-oriented coal mines, leaving only Hokkaido's plutonium in reserve. Road coal mines are used to preserve technology. In 2007, its annual coal output was only 600,000 tons, and the rest was all dependent on imports.
Responding to experts recommending the introduction of environmental taxes and increasing strategic reserves “Many examples have shown that some countries use the WTO rules to legalize the interests of their own non-compliance, and it is a clear power.†Hu Tao said that, for example, Europe and the United States have restricted military products and The export of high-tech products, saying that there is no relevant provision in the WTO, and the United States' large subsidies to domestic agriculture each year, also legalize it within the WTO framework.
In fact, the current rules of the WTO hardly contain any specific principle restrictions on export tariffs; however, China’s commitment to the WTO constitutes part of the WTO rules that China should abide by. It can be seen that as far back as when I joined the WTO, the developed countries have paid sufficient strategic attention to the global market structure of “two high and one capital†products and strategically grasped the export of “two high and one capital†products in China. Development trend.
"At present, China's export restrictions on 'two high and one capital' products adopted in conjunction with macroeconomic control and energy conservation and emission reduction targets are facing the WTO rules and the challenges of China's WTO accession commitments." Hu Tao said that in order to reduce external criticism, it is recommended to cancel Export quotas will be changed to high export borders to regulate environmental taxes, and at the same time, environmental excise duties for domestic users with the same tax rate will be effectively levied; and environmental management systems will continue to be improved, and high-excess emission fees will be imposed.
Hu Tao said that China should pay high attention to trade-related resource and environmental risks and pressures. We should continue to promote and use current export restrictions on the basis of WTO rules and WTO commitments, especially on the basis of simultaneous implementation of policies that restrict domestic production or consumption. To meet the challenge of economic globalization to China's resources and the environment.
Dr. Lei Yanhua from the Department of Commerce of the Ministry of Commerce believes that the proposal for the introduction of resource tax is reasonable, but for strategic resources such as rare earths, simply relying on taxation to raise prices may have little effect on the export sector. It is recommended to increase the degree of concentration in the production process and draw on the practices of Europe, the United States, and Japan to increase the strategic reserve of resource products.