简论CompleteACompleteVictory?
最后更新时间：2024-03-04
作者：用户投稿
本站原创
点赞:2831
浏览:7148
本站原创
点赞:2831
浏览:7148
论文导读：oemakingenterprisesinfutureanti-dumpingcasesandothertradedisputes.Forthemedia,thewinprovidedhopeforChinesemanufacturersconfrontedwithprotectioni.ZhangLi,associateresearcherattheChineseAcademyofInternationalTradeandEconomicCooperation(CAITEC),saidshecou
The European Court of Justice (ECJ) on November 18 ruled in for of Zhejiang-based shoe manufacturer Aokang against anti-dumping claims by the European Union (EU), ending a six-year long battle.
Following the verdict, some in the media said that since the EU is China’s second largest export destination for shoes, the victory has provided a legal precedent for Chinese shoemaking enterprises in future anti-dumping cases and other trade disputes.
For the media, the win provided hope for Chinese manufacturers confronted with protectioni.
Zhang Li, associate researcher at the Chinese Academy of International Trade and Economic Cooperation (CAITEC), said she could understand the media’s ecstatic tone. Because the United States and the EU adopt frequent trade protectioni measures against Chinese products, every victory on the Chinese side is worthy of celebration.
Now that the party’s over, the media should reflect on whether some Chinese industries can sustain their competitive edge and seize the capacity to advance their industrial development.
Aokang’s victory
Since the 1980s, Chinese-made leather shoes he been sold to EU countries, and their sales volume has been increasing. In 1995, some European countries came together to impose an “import quota” on Chinese-made shoes in the name of protecting their domestic shoemakers and safeguarding prices.
After China’s accession to the WTO in 2001, the quota limit was dropped since no import limits could apply to member nations. The EU then readjusted its policy and launched anti-dumping investigations against Chinese-made shoes.
In October 2006 the European Commission (EC) began to impose a two-year 16.5-percent duty on leather shoes originating from China.
Wang Zhentao, President of Aokang Group Co., said the anti论文导读：ortsofChineseshoestoEuropedeclinedbymorethan20percent,resultinginadirectlossof20,000jobs.源于：论文参考文献www.7ctime.com源于：论文结论范文www.7ctime.com上一页12
-dumping duty had led to unprofitable outcomes for Chinese shoemakers in the EU market. Most of the 1,200 affected Chinese companies pulled out of the EU market. Five Chinese shoe manufacturers, headed by Aokang, brought the EC to the European General Court (EGC).
In April 2010, the EGC diissed the case. Four of the源于：论文格式字体www.7ctime.com
companies felt it would be too difficult to win on appeal and pulled out. Only Aokang decided to appeal to the ECJ.
After the anti-dumping duty expired in 2009, the EU launched its “sunset review”and decided to extend the anti-dumping duty for another 15 months until March 31, 2011.
According to figures from the Ministry of Commerce (MOFCOM), from 2006 to the expiration of the EU’s anti-dumping duty, exports of Chinese shoes to Europe declined by more than 20 percent, resulting in a direct loss of 20,000 jobs.源于：论文参考文献www.7ctime.com
源于：论文结论范文www.7ctime.com
The European Court of Justice (ECJ) on November 18 ruled in for of Zhejiang-based shoe manufacturer Aokang against anti-dumping claims by the European Union (EU), ending a six-year long battle.
Following the verdict, some in the media said that since the EU is China’s second largest export destination for shoes, the victory has provided a legal precedent for Chinese shoemaking enterprises in future anti-dumping cases and other trade disputes.
For the media, the win provided hope for Chinese manufacturers confronted with protectioni.
Zhang Li, associate researcher at the Chinese Academy of International Trade and Economic Cooperation (CAITEC), said she could understand the media’s ecstatic tone. Because the United States and the EU adopt frequent trade protectioni measures against Chinese products, every victory on the Chinese side is worthy of celebration.
Now that the party’s over, the media should reflect on whether some Chinese industries can sustain their competitive edge and seize the capacity to advance their industrial development.
Aokang’s victory
Since the 1980s, Chinese-made leather shoes he been sold to EU countries, and their sales volume has been increasing. In 1995, some European countries came together to impose an “import quota” on Chinese-made shoes in the name of protecting their domestic shoemakers and safeguarding prices.
After China’s accession to the WTO in 2001, the quota limit was dropped since no import limits could apply to member nations. The EU then readjusted its policy and launched anti-dumping investigations against Chinese-made shoes.
In October 2006 the European Commission (EC) began to impose a two-year 16.5-percent duty on leather shoes originating from China.
Wang Zhentao, President of Aokang Group Co., said the anti论文导读：ortsofChineseshoestoEuropedeclinedbymorethan20percent,resultinginadirectlossof20,000jobs.源于：论文参考文献www.7ctime.com源于：论文结论范文www.7ctime.com上一页12
-dumping duty had led to unprofitable outcomes for Chinese shoemakers in the EU market. Most of the 1,200 affected Chinese companies pulled out of the EU market. Five Chinese shoe manufacturers, headed by Aokang, brought the EC to the European General Court (EGC).
In April 2010, the EGC diissed the case. Four of the源于：论文格式字体www.7ctime.com
companies felt it would be too difficult to win on appeal and pulled out. Only Aokang decided to appeal to the ECJ.
After the anti-dumping duty expired in 2009, the EU launched its “sunset review”and decided to extend the anti-dumping duty for another 15 months until March 31, 2011.
According to figures from the Ministry of Commerce (MOFCOM), from 2006 to the expiration of the EU’s anti-dumping duty, exports of Chinese shoes to Europe declined by more than 20 percent, resulting in a direct loss of 20,000 jobs.源于：论文参考文献www.7ctime.com
源于：论文结论范文www.7ctime.com