阿啵呲嘚-
China"s steel industry was the largest anti-dumping investigations industry. Minmetals Import and Export Chamber of Commerce statistics, last year, China"s steel anti-dumping involving a total of 15 cases, involving 1.95 billion yuan, iron and steel industry and color, clothing, footwear, like anti-dumping investigations, one of the key industries. Prior to this, our country there is a lot of steel products export tax rebates, some countries believe that China steel product of government subsidies, in the international market, China"s large market share of steel products, export prices low and the dumping of steel products in China suspected heard.
The first half of 2008, involving China"s iron and steel industry, a new anti-dumping investigation all-time high, which has a new investigation of 9 cases with final decisions have been made to 7, the anti-dumping cases last year than the total number of more , the European Union, the United States, Canada, Mexico, Indonesia and other countries have taken place in China"s iron and steel products for the anti-dumping cases. Taking a panoramic view of the iron and steel industry products, and more anti-dumping cases, the existence of the following three salient features, the following key to the Canadian oil and gas to China seamless pipe brief analysis of anti-dumping as an example:
1. The existence of anti-dumping cases that the problem of non-uniform standards.
Standard anti-dumping cases that the crux of the problem is the fact of dumping and dumping margin found, for dumping the fact that the WTO is by comparing the export price and normal price found that the export price is lower than the normal price dumping, "normal price" is The fact that the existence of dumping of the decisive factors, but the "normal price" of that caliber because of the different statistics, the results are very different.
WTO rules, the normal price is often used to describe conditions in the general trade export of similar products in domestic comparable sales prices, such as the product of the domestic prices under control, often to third-country export prices of similar products to confirm the normal price. As part of the US-led Western countries not to recognize China"s market economy status, the fact that the dumping and the dumping margin found on third-party countries often need to export prices, while the third-party countries to the fact that the dumping, how to determine the normal price There are also the standard problem of non-uniform. Such as: Canada Border Trade Department (CBSA) on February 7, 2008 China"s exports to Canada of seamless oil casing anti-dumping, countervailing case the final decision to determine China"s Tianjin Pipe Group Co., Ltd. and other enterprises involved in the case of six dumping margin of 37% ~ 45%; subsidy of 2% to 7%, other non-respondent enterprises dumping margin was 91%; subsidies for 38 percent; China"s steel association that the CBSA in the absence of data to support a third country, to use in February 2008 magazine published a K55, N80 price of normal price, project L80, P110 casing of high-grade steel prices, as a basis for unilateral presumed the existence of dumping and dumping margin calculation is not right.
2. Anti-dumping and countervailing cases together, the specific implementation of double taxation.
Statistics show that took place in 2008 involving the 9 iron and steel industry in anti-dumping investigations, 5 the issue of anti-subsidy cases involving anti-dumping and countervailing cases have been closely together.
International Iron and Steel of China"s iron and steel industry to accept the challenge of government subsidies. January 8, the League of the United States research group released a report that a large number of government energy subsidies in China become the world"s largest producer and exporter of steel. Reported that in 2007, the Chinese steel industry is about 15.7 billion U.S. dollars of subsidies since 2000, an increase of 3800%. In addition, the CBSA in the casing of our seamless final anti-dumping identified Tianjin Pipe Group Co., Ltd. China, such as the existence of six enterprises involved in the case of 2% ~ 7% subsidy acts.
In the specific implementation of anti-dumping measures, the widespread dumping of international double taxation and subsidies. In today"s world trade, anti-dumping anti-subsidy has become the main means of trade, therefore, for most countries to protect their own industry in violation of WTO provisions, the standard of double taxation. Such as: in the above-mentioned case, in Canada on a double standard there is the issue of double taxation, CBSA to determine China"s Tianjin Pipe Group Co., Ltd. and other enterprises involved in the case of six-dumping rate of 37% ~ 45%; subsidy of 2% ~ 7 %, and other enterprises involved in the case of non-dumping margin was 91%; 38 percent subsidy. This should cause our government departments and relevant enterprises attach great importance to timely respond to the development of programs, organizations related enterprises to actively appeal and, when necessary, can be brought to WTO Dispute Settlement Body arbitration.
3. Anti-dumping cases is a complicated one, both sides involved in the case of information asymmetry, and lasted for a long time, huge amounts of money involved, covering a wide range of individual enterprises is difficult to take countermeasures, the need for government services, trade associations, guidance, steel enterprises to take measures jointly.
The existing framework of WTO, only governments, anti-dumping measures can be taken. Therefore, a country"s trade or industry to pass the Government to initiate anti-dumping procedures. Usually a country"s products if it finds that the existence of dumping practices, would be adopted by the Government to start anti-dumping investigations. If the export product under investigation to investigate a member of a member of dissatisfaction with the actions taken to bring the matter before the WTO can be resolved at this time, exporters must pass the national government would be able to take such action. In addition, the United States, the EU anti-dumping investigation procedures usually last for one year to 15 months, lasted for a long time, and the anti-dumping often involves a number of industry enterprises, the amount of up to several hundred million dollars.
Since 2008, China"s steel industry experienced a number of anti-dumping investigations, of which, the United States, European Union, Canada, represented by the western countries on China"s steel exports a wide range of anti-dumping investigations launched to reduce the domestic steel exports to China has caused great economic losses. While in the "General Agreement on Tariffs and" the issue of anti-dumping made it clear that countries in their own way but still the anti-dumping as a trade war with one of the main instruments of trade protectionism as the rise in the world, iron and steel anti-dumping cases have become worse.
钢铁行业是我国被反倾销调查最多的行业。五矿进出口商会统计，去年，我国涉及钢材的反倾销案件共15起，涉案金额19.5亿元，钢铁行业与彩电、服装、鞋业一样是反倾销调查的重点行业之一。此前，我国很多钢材产品存在着出口退税，部分国家认为中国钢材产品存在政府补贴，在国际市场上，我国钢材产品市场占有率高，出口价格低，对中国钢铁产品低价倾销的怀疑不绝于耳。
2008年上半年，涉及我国钢铁业的反倾销调查再创新历史新高，其中已经新立案调查的有9起，加上已经做出终裁决定的7起，反倾销案件比去年一年的总数量还多，欧盟、美国、加拿大、墨西哥、印尼等多个国家都发生了针对中国钢铁产品的反倾销事件。纵观钢铁业产品的多起反倾销案件，存在以下三个突出特点，下面重点以加拿大对中国无缝油气管反倾销为例简要剖析：
1.反倾销案件存在认定标准不统一的问题。
反倾销案件认定标准问题的关键是倾销事实和倾销幅度的认定，对于倾销事实的认定世贸组织规定是通过对比出口价格与正常价格来认定，出口价格低于正常价格就是倾销，“正常价格”是认定倾销事实是否存在的起决定性因素，但“正常价格”的认定因为统计口径不同，结果有很大差异。
世贸组织规定，正常价格通常是指在一般贸易条件下出口国国内同类产品的可比销售价格，如该产品的国内价格受到控制，往往以第三国同类产品出口价格来确认正常价格。由于以美国为首的部分西方国家不承认中国的市场经济地位，在倾销事实和倾销幅度的认定上，常需要第三方国出口价格，而以那个第三方国家来认定倾销事实，如何确定正常价格上也存在标准不统一的问题。如：加拿大边境贸易服务署（CBSA）于2008年2月7日对中国出口到加拿大的无缝石油套管反倾销、反补贴案最终裁决，判定中国天津钢管集团股份有限公司等六家应诉企业倾销幅度为37%~45%；补贴为2%~7%，其他非应诉企业倾销幅度为91%；补贴为38%；中国钢管协会认为CBSA在没有第三国数据支持，引用2008年2月某一杂志刊载的K55、N80的价格计算正常价格，推算L80、P110等高钢级套管的价格，单方面以此为依据推定存在倾销和计算倾销幅度是不妥当的。
2.反倾销案件与反补贴案件结合在一起，具体执行过程中存在双重征税的问题。
统计显示，在2008年发生的9起涉及钢铁行业反倾销调查中，有5起涉及反补贴问题，反倾销案件已经和反补贴密切结合在一起。
国际钢铁业存在对中国钢铁接受政府补贴的质疑。1月8日，美国制造联盟调查研究小组发布的一份报告称，大量的政府能源补贴使中国成为世界上最大的钢材生产和出口国。报告称，2007年，中国钢铁业补贴约为157亿美元，自2000年以来增长了3800%。此外，在CBSA在对我国无缝石油套管反倾销终裁中认定中国天津钢管集团股份有限公司等六家应诉企业的存在2％~7％补贴行为。
在反倾销措施具体实施过程中，国际上广泛存在倾销和补贴双重计算征税。当今世界贸易中，反倾销反补贴已经成为贸易战的主要手段之一，因此，为保护本国产业多数国家违反WTO的规定，采取双重计算标准征税。如：在上述案件中，加拿大就存在着双重计算标准双重征税的问题，CBSA判定中国天津钢管集团股份有限公司等六家应诉企业倾销幅度为37%~45%；补贴为2%~7%，其他非应诉企业倾销幅度为91%；补贴为38%。此举应引起我国政府有关部门及相关企业的高度重视，及时制定应对方案，组织相关企业积极上诉，必要时，可以提交WTO争端解决机构仲裁解决。
3.反倾销案件程序复杂，涉案双方信息不对称，且持续时间长，涉案金额巨大、涉及面广，单个企业很难采取对策，需要政府服务、行业协会指导、钢企联合采取措施。
现行世贸组织框架中，只有政府，才能采取反倾销措施。因此，一国的贸易商或产业界必须通过政府来启动反倾销程序。通常一国要是认定它国产品存在倾销行为，会通过政府启动反倾销调查。若出口产品受到调查的成员不满展开调查的成员所采取的行动，可以将问题提交世贸组织解决，此时，出口商必须通过本国政府才能采取这样的行动。此外，美国、欧盟的反倾销调查程序通常持续一年至15个月，持续时间长，且反倾销常涉及行业内多个企业，金额高达数亿元。
2008年以来，我国钢铁业遭遇了多起反倾销调查，其中，美国、欧盟、加拿大为代表的西方国家对我国出口的多种钢材展开了反倾销调查，缩减了国内钢材的出口，给我国造成了巨大的经济损失。虽然在《关税及贸易总协定》中对反倾销问题做了明确规定，但实际上各国各行其是，仍把反倾销做为贸易战的主要手段之一，随着贸易保护主义在世界范围内的抬头，钢铁反倾销案有愈演愈烈之势。
小菜G-
貌似一楼的回答很好，把分给他吧。