Publications-學位論文
Article View/Open
Publication Export
-
Google ScholarTM
NCCU Library
Citation Infomation
Related Publications in TAIR
題名 美國歐盟及台灣價格具結措施之比較分析
The comparative analysis of Price Undertakings under the U.S., the EU, and Taiwan’s Anti-dumping law作者 張瑞紋
Chang, Jui Wen貢獻者 莊奕琦
Chuang, Yih Chyi
張瑞紋
Chang, Jui Wen關鍵詞 價格具結
中止協議
反傾銷
Price Undertaking
Suspension Agreement
Anti-Dumping日期 2015 上傳時間 1-Jun-2016 13:56:02 (UTC+8) 摘要 目前，有3件反傾銷案採行價格具結措施，包括原產於中國之毛巾，鞋靴及冷軋不銹鋼等涉案產品。財政部於鞋靴反傾銷案接受82家具結廠商，每季海關人員須監督該等具結廠商履行具結情形，爰該具結措施已造成龐大之行政負擔。本文檢視台灣價格具結實體程序及實務做法後，發現部分做法似不符合反傾銷協定或國際慣例。\n\n歐盟於1981年至2001年時期，經常使用具結措施，但自2006年以來，使用具結措施之頻率急劇下降。美國較常採自願出口限制（數量限制），而較少使用價格具結措施。本文藉由相關文獻說明實施價格具結之經濟福利效果，並探討歐盟與美國有關價格具結相關法律與實務做法、歐盟近年來較少採價格具結之原因及歐盟接受或拒絕價格具結措施之理由等，該等研究分析將提供予台灣反傾銷調查之主管機關參考。
Currently, there are 3 anti-dumping cases settled by using price undertakings including the subject products of towel, certain footwear and cold-rolled stainless steel originating in China or Korea. Among which, Taiwan’s investigating authorities even accepted price undertakings offered by 82 Chinese exporters of certain footwear. Such measure has already caused the considerable administrative burden in monitoring\nrespect. After examining the practices of Taiwan`s price undertaking cases, some procedural and substantive aspects seem inconsistent with Anti-Dumping Agreement or international customary practices.\n\nPrice undertakings were frequently used by the EU during the period from 1981 to 2001, but the frequency has declined sharply since 2006. The U.S. has taken many\nvoluntary export restrictions, but rarely used price undertakings to settle anti-dumping cases. This paper will explore the law and practice of the EU and the U.S. regarding price undertakings. It will also illustrate the reasons for decreasing use of price undertakings, and the grounds for accepting or rejecting price undertakings in the EU anti-dumping proceedings. In addition, this paper will use the relevant literature to elaborate the economic welfare of price undertakings. Finally, it will offer suggestion as the reference for Taiwan`s investigating authorities.參考文獻 References\n1. About the European Commission. Retrieved from: http://ec.europa.eu/about/index_en.htm\n2. An introduction to anti-dumping and other EU trade law measures. Retrieved from:\nhttp://www.nortonrosefulbright.com/knowledge/publications/26849/an-introduction-to-anti-dump\ning-and-other-eu-trade-law-measures\n3. Armin Steinbach (2014). Price Undertakings in EU Anti-dumping Proceedings – an Instrument\nof the Past? Journal of Economic Integration, Vol.29 No.1, 165~187. Retrieved from\nhttp://dx.doi.org/10.11130/jei.2014.29.1.165\n4. Bernard Hoekman(1998). Free Trade and Deep Integration: Antidumping and Antitrust in\nRegional Agreements\n5. Bibek Debroy，Debashis Chakraborty (2007): Anti-dumping: Global Abuse of a Trade Policy\nInstrument.\n6. Belderbos, Vandenbussche & Veugelers (2002). Antidumping duties, undertakings, and foreign\ndirect investment in the EU. Page 1-44\n7. Christoph Herrmann, Bruno Simma, Rudolf Streinz (2015). Trade Policy between\nLaw, Diplomacy and Scholarship. Page 389.391\n8. Edmond McGovern (2015). EU Anti-Dumping and Trade Defense Law and Practice. Page 112\n9. Estela Montado (2006). The determinants of Price Undertakings in the EU, London School of\nEconomics. Page 1-35\n10. Edwin Vermulst (1999). Competition and Anti-dumping: Continued Peaceful Co-existence?\nhttp://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=200616\n11. Frank Montag (2015). European Yearbook of International Economic Law-Price Undertakings in\nAnti-dumping Law: Recent Trends and Considerations from a Competition Law Perspective.\nPage 377-393\n108\n12. Francesco Perone (1995). Settlement of Anti-Dumping Cases by Price Undertaking: The\nEuropean Community and United States Practice. Institute of Comparative Law McGiIl\nUniversity, Montreal\n13. Greg Mastel (1998). Antidumping Laws and the U.S. Economy. Page 13-14.\n14. Ishikawa, J., & Miyagiwa, K. (2007). Price undertakings, VERs, and foreign direct investment:\nThe case of foreign rivalry. Page 1-28\n15. Judith Czako, Johann Human and Jorge Miranda (2003). A Handbook on Anti-Dumping\nInvestigations\n16. Moore, Michael O. (2005), VERs and Price Undertakings under the WTO. Page1-32\n17. Meredith Crowle (2003). An introduction to the WTO and GATT. Page 52\n18. Official Journal of the European Union.\nRetrieved from http://eur-lex.europa.eu/oj/direct-access.html\n19. Prusa, Thomas (1992), “Why are so Many Antidumping Petitions Withdrawn?” Journal of\nInternational Economics, 33, pp. 1-20.\n20. Shih-Jye Wu, Yang-Ming Chang, Hung-Yi Chen (2013). Antidumping duties and price\nundertakings: A welfare analysis. International Review of Economics and Finance. Retrieved\nfrom: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.iref.2013.05.013\n21. The commissioners (2014-2019). Retrieved from:\nhttps://ec.europa.eu/commission/2014-2019_en\n22. The European Commission website. Retrieved from:\nhttp://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/accessing-markets/trade-defence/actions-against-imports-into-the\n-eu/anti-dumping/index_en.htm\n23. Tharakan, P. K. M. (1991). The political economy of anti-dumping undertakings in the European\nCommunities. European Economic Review 35. 1341-1459.\n24. Tavares de Araujo, José (2001), Legal and economic interfaces between antidumping and\ncompetition policy, Division of International Trade and Integration, United\nNations, Santiago, Chile, December.\n25. The official website of the European Parliament. Retrieved http://www.europarl.europa.eu/\n109\n26. Trade Defense Statistics of European Union. Retrieved from\nhttp://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/cfm/doclib_results.cfm?key=anti-dumping%20statistics\n27. United States Department of Commerce.\nRetrieved from: http://enforcement.trade.gov/agreements/index.html\n28. U.S. Antidumping Manual Chapter 17: Terminations and Suspensions of Investigations\n29. U.S. Antidumping Manual Chapter 25: Five-Year (“Sunset”) Review\n30. Veugelers, R. and Hylke Vandenbussche (1999), European Antidumping Policy and the\nProfitability of National and International Collusion, European Economic Review, 43, 1-28.\n31. Vandenbussche (1995). World Competition. Law and Economic Review, 55-74.\n32. Van Bael and Bellis (2011), EC Anti-Dumping an Other Trade Defense Instruments, 5th\nedn., Alphen aan den.\n33. Vandenbuscche, H., & Wauthy, X. (2001). Inflicting injury through product quality: How\nEuropean antidumping policy disadvantages European producers. European Journal of Political\nEconomy, 17, 101–116.\n34. Wilfried Pauwels and Linda Springael (2002). The Welfare Effects of a European Anti-Dumping\nDuty and Price-Undertaking Policy. Atlantic Economic Journal , Vol. 30, issue 2, Pages 121-135\n35. WTO Technical Information on anti-dumping.\nRetrieved from: https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/adp_e/adp_info_e.htm\n36. Yan Luo (2010). Anti-Dumping in the WTO, the EU and China: The rise of legalization in the\ntrade regime and its consequences. Rijn, Kluwer Law International. Page 131.\n37. Zanardi, Maurizio (2004), Anti-Dumping: What are the Numbers to Discuss at Doha? The World\nEconomy, Wiley Blackwell, Vol.27 No.3, Pages 425.\n38. 19 CFR 351.208 - Suspension of investigation\n39. 19 CFR 351.209- Violation of Suspension Agreement.\n40. 19 CFR 351.218- Sunset Reviews under Section 751(c) of the Act\n41. 中華經濟研究院(台灣WTO 中心)(2007):研析各國如何確保反傾銷措施之有效執行 描述 碩士
國立政治大學
亞太研究英語碩士學位學程(IMAS)
100926014資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0100926014 資料類型 thesis dc.contributor.advisor 莊奕琦 zh_TW dc.contributor.advisor Chuang, Yih Chyi en_US dc.contributor.author (Authors) 張瑞紋 zh_TW dc.contributor.author (Authors) Chang, Jui Wen en_US dc.creator (作者) 張瑞紋 zh_TW dc.creator (作者) Chang, Jui Wen en_US dc.date (日期) 2015 en_US dc.date.accessioned 1-Jun-2016 13:56:02 (UTC+8) - dc.date.available 1-Jun-2016 13:56:02 (UTC+8) - dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 1-Jun-2016 13:56:02 (UTC+8) - dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G0100926014 en_US dc.identifier.uri (URI) https://ah.lib.nccu.edu.tw/item?item_id=109449 - dc.description (描述) 碩士 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 亞太研究英語碩士學位學程(IMAS) zh_TW dc.description (描述) 100926014 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) 目前，有3件反傾銷案採行價格具結措施，包括原產於中國之毛巾，鞋靴及冷軋不銹鋼等涉案產品。財政部於鞋靴反傾銷案接受82家具結廠商，每季海關人員須監督該等具結廠商履行具結情形，爰該具結措施已造成龐大之行政負擔。本文檢視台灣價格具結實體程序及實務做法後，發現部分做法似不符合反傾銷協定或國際慣例。\n\n歐盟於1981年至2001年時期，經常使用具結措施，但自2006年以來，使用具結措施之頻率急劇下降。美國較常採自願出口限制（數量限制），而較少使用價格具結措施。本文藉由相關文獻說明實施價格具結之經濟福利效果，並探討歐盟與美國有關價格具結相關法律與實務做法、歐盟近年來較少採價格具結之原因及歐盟接受或拒絕價格具結措施之理由等，該等研究分析將提供予台灣反傾銷調查之主管機關參考。 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) Currently, there are 3 anti-dumping cases settled by using price undertakings including the subject products of towel, certain footwear and cold-rolled stainless steel originating in China or Korea. Among which, Taiwan’s investigating authorities even accepted price undertakings offered by 82 Chinese exporters of certain footwear. Such measure has already caused the considerable administrative burden in monitoring\nrespect. After examining the practices of Taiwan`s price undertaking cases, some procedural and substantive aspects seem inconsistent with Anti-Dumping Agreement or international customary practices.\n\nPrice undertakings were frequently used by the EU during the period from 1981 to 2001, but the frequency has declined sharply since 2006. The U.S. has taken many\nvoluntary export restrictions, but rarely used price undertakings to settle anti-dumping cases. This paper will explore the law and practice of the EU and the U.S. regarding price undertakings. It will also illustrate the reasons for decreasing use of price undertakings, and the grounds for accepting or rejecting price undertakings in the EU anti-dumping proceedings. In addition, this paper will use the relevant literature to elaborate the economic welfare of price undertakings. Finally, it will offer suggestion as the reference for Taiwan`s investigating authorities. en_US dc.description.tableofcontents TABLE OF CONTENTS\nChapter 1: Introduction 1\n1.1 Research Background 5\n1.2 Research Motivation 12\nChapter 2: Price Undertakings in the GATT System 15\n2.1 Article 8 of GATT Anti-Dumping Agreement 16\n2.2 Related Literatures of Price Undertakings 18\n2.2.1 Economic Effects of Anti-Dumping Duties and Price Undertakings 19\n2.2.2 Voluntary Export Restraints (VERs) and Price Undertakings 20\n2.2.3 The Effects of Price Undertakings on Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) 21\n2.2.4 Price Undertakings vs. Product Quality 22\nChapter 3: Suspension Agreements under the U.S. Anti-Dumping Law 23\n3.1 The U.S. Anti-Dumping Proceedings 23\n3.2 Suspension Agreements in the U.S. Anti-Dumping Proceedings 28\n3.3 Types of Suspension Agreements 31\n3.3.1 Cessation of Exports 31\n3.3.2 Elimination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value 32\n3.3.3 Elimination of Injurious Effect 32\n3.3.4 Special Rule for NME Suspension Agreements 34\n3.4 Investigation Procedures and Effects of Suspension Investigation 35\n3.4.1 Time Frame and Requirements for Acceptance of Undertakings 35\n3.4.2 Liquidation of Entries 37\n3.4.3 Continuations of Investigations 38\n3.4.4 Violations of the Agreements 39\n3.4.5 Five-Year (“Sunset”) Review of Suspended Investigation 41\n3.5 Suspension Agreements and Antitrust 41\nChapter 4: Price Undertakings under the EU Anti-Dumping Law 43\n4.1 The EU Anti-Dumping Proceedings 43\n4.2 The European Community Authorities of Anti-Dumping Proceedings 47\n4.3 Price Undertakings in the EU Anti-Dumping Proceedings 50\n4.4 Investigation Procedures and Effects of Price Undertakings 51\n4.4.1 Exemption from Imposition Provisional or Definitive Anti-Dumping Duties 51\n4.4.2 Time Limit of Seeking or Accepting Undertakings 52\n4.4.3 Discretion of the European Commission 53\n4.4.4 Termination of Investigation 53\n4.4.5 Continuations of Investigations 54\n4.4.6 Expiry, Withdrawal or Violation of Undertakings 54\niii\n4.5 Reasons for the Decrease of Price Undertakings in the EU 58\n4.6 Lesser Duty Rule Applied to Price Undertakings 65\n4.7 Contents of Undertakings 70\n4.8 Grounds for Accepting or Rejecting Undertakings 77\n4.9 Antitrust Aspects of Price Undertakings 82\nChapter 5: Price Undertaking under Taiwan’s Anti-Dumping Law 84\n5.1 Taiwan’s Anti-Dumping Proceedings 84\n5.2 Price Undertakings in the Taiwan’s Anti-Dumping Proceedings 89\n5.2.1 before the Amendment of Implementation Regulations 89\n5.2.2 after the Amendment of Implementation Regulations 90\n5.3 The Anti-Dumping Measures of Chinese Certain Footwear 92\n5.4 An Examination of Taiwan’s Price Undertaking Measures 95\n5.5 Acceptances of Undertakings 99\n5.6 Contents of Undertakings 100\n5.7 Withdrawal, Expiry or Violation of Undertaking 100\n5.8 The Comparative Analysis of Undertakings in the U.S., the EU and Taiwan . 102\nConclusion and Suggestion 105\nReferences 107\nAppendix 1 110\nAppendix 2 115\nAppendix 3 120\nAppendix 4 130\nAppendix 5 136 zh_TW dc.format.extent 3214400 bytes - dc.format.mimetype application/pdf - dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0100926014 en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) 價格具結 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 中止協議 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 反傾銷 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) Price Undertaking en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Suspension Agreement en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Anti-Dumping en_US dc.title (題名) 美國歐盟及台灣價格具結措施之比較分析 zh_TW dc.title (題名) The comparative analysis of Price Undertakings under the U.S., the EU, and Taiwan’s Anti-dumping law en_US dc.type (資料類型) thesis en_US dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) References\n1. About the European Commission. Retrieved from: http://ec.europa.eu/about/index_en.htm\n2. An introduction to anti-dumping and other EU trade law measures. Retrieved from:\nhttp://www.nortonrosefulbright.com/knowledge/publications/26849/an-introduction-to-anti-dump\ning-and-other-eu-trade-law-measures\n3. Armin Steinbach (2014). Price Undertakings in EU Anti-dumping Proceedings – an Instrument\nof the Past? Journal of Economic Integration, Vol.29 No.1, 165~187. Retrieved from\nhttp://dx.doi.org/10.11130/jei.2014.29.1.165\n4. Bernard Hoekman(1998). Free Trade and Deep Integration: Antidumping and Antitrust in\nRegional Agreements\n5. Bibek Debroy，Debashis Chakraborty (2007): Anti-dumping: Global Abuse of a Trade Policy\nInstrument.\n6. Belderbos, Vandenbussche & Veugelers (2002). Antidumping duties, undertakings, and foreign\ndirect investment in the EU. Page 1-44\n7. Christoph Herrmann, Bruno Simma, Rudolf Streinz (2015). Trade Policy between\nLaw, Diplomacy and Scholarship. Page 389.391\n8. Edmond McGovern (2015). EU Anti-Dumping and Trade Defense Law and Practice. Page 112\n9. Estela Montado (2006). The determinants of Price Undertakings in the EU, London School of\nEconomics. Page 1-35\n10. Edwin Vermulst (1999). Competition and Anti-dumping: Continued Peaceful Co-existence?\nhttp://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=200616\n11. Frank Montag (2015). European Yearbook of International Economic Law-Price Undertakings in\nAnti-dumping Law: Recent Trends and Considerations from a Competition Law Perspective.\nPage 377-393\n108\n12. Francesco Perone (1995). Settlement of Anti-Dumping Cases by Price Undertaking: The\nEuropean Community and United States Practice. Institute of Comparative Law McGiIl\nUniversity, Montreal\n13. Greg Mastel (1998). Antidumping Laws and the U.S. Economy. Page 13-14.\n14. Ishikawa, J., & Miyagiwa, K. (2007). Price undertakings, VERs, and foreign direct investment:\nThe case of foreign rivalry. Page 1-28\n15. Judith Czako, Johann Human and Jorge Miranda (2003). A Handbook on Anti-Dumping\nInvestigations\n16. Moore, Michael O. (2005), VERs and Price Undertakings under the WTO. Page1-32\n17. Meredith Crowle (2003). An introduction to the WTO and GATT. Page 52\n18. Official Journal of the European Union.\nRetrieved from http://eur-lex.europa.eu/oj/direct-access.html\n19. Prusa, Thomas (1992), “Why are so Many Antidumping Petitions Withdrawn?” Journal of\nInternational Economics, 33, pp. 1-20.\n20. Shih-Jye Wu, Yang-Ming Chang, Hung-Yi Chen (2013). Antidumping duties and price\nundertakings: A welfare analysis. International Review of Economics and Finance. Retrieved\nfrom: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.iref.2013.05.013\n21. The commissioners (2014-2019). Retrieved from:\nhttps://ec.europa.eu/commission/2014-2019_en\n22. The European Commission website. Retrieved from:\nhttp://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/accessing-markets/trade-defence/actions-against-imports-into-the\n-eu/anti-dumping/index_en.htm\n23. Tharakan, P. K. M. (1991). The political economy of anti-dumping undertakings in the European\nCommunities. European Economic Review 35. 1341-1459.\n24. Tavares de Araujo, José (2001), Legal and economic interfaces between antidumping and\ncompetition policy, Division of International Trade and Integration, United\nNations, Santiago, Chile, December.\n25. The official website of the European Parliament. Retrieved http://www.europarl.europa.eu/\n109\n26. Trade Defense Statistics of European Union. Retrieved from\nhttp://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/cfm/doclib_results.cfm?key=anti-dumping%20statistics\n27. United States Department of Commerce.\nRetrieved from: http://enforcement.trade.gov/agreements/index.html\n28. U.S. Antidumping Manual Chapter 17: Terminations and Suspensions of Investigations\n29. U.S. Antidumping Manual Chapter 25: Five-Year (“Sunset”) Review\n30. Veugelers, R. and Hylke Vandenbussche (1999), European Antidumping Policy and the\nProfitability of National and International Collusion, European Economic Review, 43, 1-28.\n31. Vandenbussche (1995). World Competition. Law and Economic Review, 55-74.\n32. Van Bael and Bellis (2011), EC Anti-Dumping an Other Trade Defense Instruments, 5th\nedn., Alphen aan den.\n33. Vandenbuscche, H., & Wauthy, X. (2001). Inflicting injury through product quality: How\nEuropean antidumping policy disadvantages European producers. European Journal of Political\nEconomy, 17, 101–116.\n34. Wilfried Pauwels and Linda Springael (2002). The Welfare Effects of a European Anti-Dumping\nDuty and Price-Undertaking Policy. Atlantic Economic Journal , Vol. 30, issue 2, Pages 121-135\n35. WTO Technical Information on anti-dumping.\nRetrieved from: https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/adp_e/adp_info_e.htm\n36. Yan Luo (2010). Anti-Dumping in the WTO, the EU and China: The rise of legalization in the\ntrade regime and its consequences. Rijn, Kluwer Law International. Page 131.\n37. Zanardi, Maurizio (2004), Anti-Dumping: What are the Numbers to Discuss at Doha? The World\nEconomy, Wiley Blackwell, Vol.27 No.3, Pages 425.\n38. 19 CFR 351.208 - Suspension of investigation\n39. 19 CFR 351.209- Violation of Suspension Agreement.\n40. 19 CFR 351.218- Sunset Reviews under Section 751(c) of the Act\n41. 中華經濟研究院(台灣WTO 中心)(2007):研析各國如何確保反傾銷措施之有效執行 zh_TW
