外文翻譯--關于歐共體和美國對紡織品和服裝部門的反傾銷手段的濫用

1、<p>　　中文2940字，1820單詞，9950英文字符</p><p><b>　　原文 </b></p><p>　　Abuse of anti-dumping instrument in textiles and clothing sector by EC, US</p><p>　　Material Source:Third

2、 World Economics Author:Chakravarthi Raghavan </p><p>　　GENEVA: The use and abuse of the anti-dumping instrument, in particular by the European Union and the US, to start investigations and harass export

3、ers of textiles and clothing products from developing countries, which are already severely subject to quota restrictions, so as to hit their exports, has been brought out in a communication from 18 developing countries

4、to the WTO Negotiating Group on Rules. </p><p>　　The paper is by Bangladesh, Brazil, China, Colombia, Costa Rica, Egypt, Guatemala, Hong Kong, India, Indonesia, Korea, Macao, Maldives, Pakistan, Paraguay, Pe

5、ru, Thailand and Vietnam. </p><p>　　These 18 developing countries, which are members of the International Textiles and Clothing Bureau ITCB, have highlighted the way the anti-dumping investigations are initi

6、ated, with levy of provisional duties and the complaints subsequently dismissed, only for new investigations to be started on the same products - aimed at harassing the export trade of countries. </p><p>　　T

7、he communication calls for proper disciplines to prevent such misuse of anti-dumping actions. It notes in this connection that at the WTO’s 2001 Ministerial Conference in Doha, in their decision on implementation, the Mi

8、nisters had agreed that members should exercise particular consideration before initiating investigations in the context of anti-dumping remedies against textiles and clothing exports of developing countries. </p>

9、<p>　　While the Agreement on Textiles and Clothing will disappear at the end of 2004, when all the trade in this sector is to be fully integrated into the GATT disciplines, the fact that the major restraining marke

10、ts are keeping to the very last day and minute a substantial majority of quota restraints on imports from developing countries, has created considerable apprehensions in the Third World that instruments like anti-dumping

11、, environment, health protection and other grounds would be invoked to h</p><p>　　From this perspective, and to ‘encourage’ the restructuring of the industry in the North in the two years remaining before it

12、s integration into normal WTO discipline, Third World trade experts believe that perhaps the focus of developing countries should not be on any invoking of special and differential treatment and such ideas, but on denyin

13、g the ability of the importing countries to use such instruments and heavily discouraging the industry groups in the North from invoking them. </p><p>　　The Rules Negotiating Group was mandated by the Doha M

14、inisterial to clarify and improve the WTO rules on anti-dumping and subsidies. It is now at the stage in which participants indicate their positions and the trade-distorting practices that need to be disciplined by clari

15、fying the rules. </p><p>　　The joint developing-country paper focusses on one of the areas relating to anti-dumping, namely, use of the anti-dumping instrument against the textiles and clothing exports from

16、the developing world. </p><p>　　The Negotiating Group is also seized of complaints and calls for clarification and further disciplines on a wider front, with a range of proposals. </p><p>　　Cata

17、logue of complaints </p><p>　　The textiles and clothing sector, the paper of the 18 nations brought out, has seen 197 initiations of anti-dumping actions during 1990-99, ranking it the fifth among all sector

18、s. The EC has been the biggest user in this sector, targeting as many as 53 new investigations during 1994-2001 or the third among all sectors. Of the 53 new initiations by the EC, 46 or 87% targeted imports from develop

19、ing countries, and all but two were initiated on complaints from interested industry associations. </p><p>　　The sector itself has already long been subject to quota restrictions. (As part of the family of W

20、TO agreements, the Agreement on Textiles and Clothing, which provides the framework for liberalization of the trade and phaseout of existing restrictions and full integration into the GATT by 31 December 2004, was conclu

21、ded in April 1994.) </p><p>　　The joint paper brings out, with illustrations and concrete analysis, the egregious practices used by protection-seeking interests in the importing industrialized countries to p

22、rompt anti-dumping investigations. </p><p>　　In the EC, the very fact that developing countries accounting for 44 to 67% of EC imports in a range of products were targeted and alleged to be dumping was indic

23、ative of a strong protectionist purpose, the paper by the ITCB members pointed out. </p><p>　　The investigations lasted two years with no determination at the end, though the Tokyo Round code which applied t

24、o cases before 1995 required investigations to be concluded within one year of initiation. The Uruguay Round also required investigations to be concluded within one year, and in any case no more than 18 months. </p>

25、;<p>　　The communication has also brought out that instead of dismissing such complaints which on the face of it were not sustainable, investigations were started for example by the EU’s executive Commission and p

26、rovisional duties levied, only for the investigations to be ended after 18 months to two years with no final orders in effect dismissing the complaints. Then new investigations on the same products were initiated, and by

27、 the same complainants. </p><p>　　The EC has been the most egregious user of the anti-dumping instrument against textiles and clothing exports from developing countries. The US has also been using anti-dumpi

28、ng instruments across a large number of industries in particular the steel industry, but has been using it much less than the EC in the textiles and clothing sectorHowever, even in this sector, the US has been maintainin

29、g for many years the anti-dumping measures put in place from the time of the Tokyo Round codes and continue</p><p>　　Peru, which is the vice-chair of the ITCB, introduced the developing-country paper? and? s

30、aid that developing countries were apprehensive that when the Agreement on Textiles and Clothing expires in the end of 2004, the restrictions under? the agreement would be replaced by? traderemedies,? including anti-dump

31、ing actions. Peru cited some of the abuses and said that “the problem for developing countries? starts from the very complaints and initiation of investigations.” </p><p>　　The analysis in the paper, Peru sa

32、id, brought out that “most often the complaints are lodged with protectionist aims, and once the investigative process starts, the adverse effects on the exporters of developing countries begin to be reflected on trade.”

33、 The investigations also involve a heavy financial burden on the exporters concerned; many of the exporters were small concerns whose exports were about a million dollars in value, and they could not afford to engage cou

34、nsel and defend themselves</p><p>　　In discussions and comments, the EC said that it shared the conclusions about the concerns voiced by the 18-member paper, though it was “l(fā)ess enthusiastic about the facts.

35、” The EC also suggested that the investigations were against some “global players” from the developing world. </p><p>　　India, however, said that while one or two might be big firms - not by US or EU standar

36、ds but their own - most of the others were small and medium enterprises.</p><p>　　Clear protectionist pattern</p><p>　　In explaining the paper, Peru also said that the textiles and clothing trad

37、e has experienced a “significant level of anti-dumping activity, especially in the EC where it ranked third among all sectors in terms of new initiations in recent years.” While there have been attempts to portray the in

38、vestigations as involving a relatively minor share of overall trade, for the developing countries concerned they accounted for a large chunk of exports. </p><p>　　Some analytical data cited in the paper abou

39、t investigations on synthetic fibres, cotton fabrics and bed linen showed that in each of the three product lines, complaints have been lodged by the same industry association in the EC at the same time. There could hard

40、ly be any mistaking the protectionist aim behind the complaints. </p><p>　　The investigations dragged on for two years or even longer, despite clear provisions in the Anti-dumping Agreement that these be con

41、cluded within 18 months. No relief or remedy is available to the affected countries or companies even though the investigations did not result in any affirmative findings. </p><p>　　It was also a matter for

42、reflection, said Peru, that the investigating authorities could not prevent damage to the exporting countries despite the fact that the complainant association grouped a large number of products which could not properly

43、qualify as “l(fā)ike products” of domestic production being hit by the allegedly ‘dumped’ exports. Both on cotton fabrics and synthetic fabrics, a similar group of products were cited. The plain question is “how could highly

44、 processed printed fabric be consid</p><p>　　The second and third investigations in the EC, for which the product coverage was reduced, showed that the product coverage for the first had been misused. </p

45、><p>　　The mere fact of the same industry association persisting with complaints, sometimes even before an earlier one resulted in no action, brought out the clear protectionist pattern and the serious lacuna i

46、n initiating investigations simply on receipt of complaints. </p><p>　　In the end, each of these investigations proved to be unfounded and unjustified, but nevertheless they resulted in noticeable damage to

47、exports of the countries concerned. The import shares of affected countries dropped, for example, from 59% before initiation of complaints in the case of cotton fabrics to 38% when the investigations were dropped without

48、 any affirmative duty. Even after the action was dropped, the share of imports from the affected countries could not recover, thus resulting in </p><p>　　Given that the enterprises of the developing countrie

49、s were rather small, could they be capable of dumping and causing injury? Could companies with such small volumes of trade be expected, physically or financially, to defend their interests by taking advantage of any proc

50、edural rights during investigations, even when in theory these rights might be available to them? </p><p>　　The paper also showed that once anti-dumping duties are imposed, they tend to stay, for as long as

51、19 years or more, irrespective of whether trade might have totally disappeared in the meanwhile. </p><p>　　For the developing countries, the problem started with the very complaints and initiation of investi

52、gations. Most often complaints are lodged with protectionist aims, and once the investigation starts the trade is affected, and this involves a heavy financial burden on exporters. </p><p>　　In the textile i

53、ndustry, industry associations of major developed countries “are predisposed to equating any price declines with dumping and applying pressures for anti-dumping actions.” </p><p>　　Detailing some data about

54、the various investigations, the ITCB member-country paper brought out that these data showed the “alacrity” with which investigations were launched, the persistence of a protectionist bias in investigations, as well as f

55、laws in the automatic initiation of such investigations, which resulted in significant distortion on businesses and exporting-developing-country trade. The methodology used by the EC in the investigations had also been d

56、iscredited by the WTO dispute sett</p><p>　　China hoped that the paper by the ITCB members could provide inputs for the negotiations, and help bring more clarity and discipline in the rules. The anti-dumping

57、 actions had now become impediments to market access. Indonesia said that it had been a particular victim of the anti-dumping actions. Pakistan said that the anti-dumping investigations had “chilling effects” on textile

58、exports. </p><p><b>　　譯文 </b></p><p>　　關于歐共體和美國對紡織品和服裝部門的反傾銷手段的濫用</p><p>　　資料來源:第三世界經濟 作者:Chakravarthi Raghavan</p><p>　　日內瓦:使用和濫用反傾銷手段,尤其是歐洲聯盟和美國,

59、已經開始被調查并且影響了發(fā)展中國家的紡織品和服裝產品出口,這些國家已經嚴重受到配額的限制,為了達到出口目的,已經組成了一個來自18個發(fā)展中國家的世貿組織規(guī)則談判小組。 </p><p>　　該文件是由孟加拉國,巴西,中國,哥倫比亞,哥斯達黎加,埃及,危地馬拉,香港,印度,印度尼西亞,韓國,澳門,馬爾代夫,巴基斯坦,巴拉圭,秘魯,泰國和越南一起擬定的。 </p><p>　　這18個發(fā)展中國

60、家,都是國際紡織品及成衣局(ITCB)的成員,強調反傾銷調查進行的方式,關于征收臨時關稅和取消投訴,只是針對同樣產品開始的新的調查,這些產品必須是以損害其他國家出口貿易為目的的。 </p><p>　　這次交流要求用適當的法規(guī)來防止濫用反傾銷行為,意在連接在多哈舉行的世貿組織2001部長級會議。關于實施的決定,部長已經同意成員在調查開始之前針對發(fā)展中國家的紡織品和服裝出口采取反傾銷補救措施。 </p>

61、<p>　　由于紡織品與服裝協議會在2004年底失效,當所有這些領域的貿易都完全適用于關貿總協定的時候,主要的市場對來自發(fā)展中國家的進口配額的絕大多數的制約會持續(xù)到最后一分一秒,這在第三世界造成了巨大的疑慮,如反傾銷,環(huán)境,健康保護和其他理由,都被用來作為刁難貿易的工具。 </p><p>　　從這個角度來看,并且為了“鼓勵”北部行業(yè)在剩下的兩年內,在正式進入世貿組織前作出結構調整,第三世界國家的貿

62、易專家認為,發(fā)展中國家的重點不應放在類似于特殊和差別待遇的調用等想法上,而應著重于否定進口國家能夠使用這些工具和勸阻大量調用北部的產業(yè)集團。 </p><p>　　規(guī)則談判小組的任務是在多哈部長級會議,澄清和改善反傾銷和補貼的WTO規(guī)則。這是一個適當的平臺,參與者標明他們的立場,需要通過明確的規(guī)則約束貿易扭曲的做法。 </p><p>　　參與的發(fā)展中國家專注于關于反傾銷的某一領域,即針對

63、紡織品和服裝出口的反傾銷手段的使用。 </p><p>　　談判組還查獲許多投訴和澄清要求,并且有更廣安的紀律要求和一系列的建議。 </p><p><b>　　投訴目錄 </b></p><p>　　紡織品和服裝部門,由18個國家提出的文件,自1990到1999年已發(fā)起197起反傾銷行動,居各行業(yè)第五。歐盟委員會是這一領域的最大用戶,針對自1

64、994年至2001年多達53個新調查,占各行業(yè)的三分之一。在歐共體的53個新調查中,46或87%從發(fā)展中國家進口的目標,但有2起是從感興趣的行業(yè)協會新開展的投訴。 </p><p>　　該行業(yè)本身已經長期受到配額的限制。(作為世貿組織協議家族的一部分,關于紡織品和服裝的協議,在1994年4月提供了貿易自由化的框架,現有限制的淘汰和在2004年12月31日前進入關貿總協定的全面整合。) 參與者提出的文件配有插圖和具

65、體分析,還有在進口工業(yè)化國家保護尋求利益以提示反傾銷調查的令人震驚的行為。 </p><p>　　在歐共體的一系列進口產品中,發(fā)展中國家占了44%至67%的比例,據稱傾銷是一個強大的保護主義目的的指示,這是由ITCB各位成員的文件指出的。 </p><p>　　調查歷時兩年沒有最后確定,雖然東京回合守則在應用于案件是被要求必須在調查發(fā)起后一年內結束。烏拉圭回合也被要求在調查開始后一年內結束

66、,任何情況下不能超過18個月。 </p><p>　　該交流還提出了用臨時征收關稅取代了撤銷表面上看是不可持續(xù)的此類投訴,那些僅在被調查的18個月后結束,在兩年內并沒有最終訂單的投訴(實際上是駁回投訴)。在相同的產品,啟動了新的調查,并有同一投訴人發(fā)起。 </p><p>　　歐共體已成為對來自發(fā)展中國家的紡織品和服裝出口使用反傾銷手段最惡劣的用戶。美國也在大量行業(yè)(特別是鋼鐵行業(yè))使用反

67、傾銷手段,但在紡織品和服裝部門比歐盟少得多。然而,即使是在這些方面,美國也在世貿組織的規(guī)則下從東京回合后多年持續(xù)使用反傾銷手段。 </p><p>　　秘魯,ITCB的副主席,介紹了發(fā)展中國家的文件,并且說發(fā)展中國家擔心紡織品和服裝協議到期(在2004年年底)時,該協議下的限制將改為貿易救濟措施,包括反傾銷行動。秘魯列舉了一些弊端并表示“發(fā)展中國家的問題從投訴和調查的發(fā)起開始?！?</p><

68、p>　　秘魯說,文件中的分析指出“最常提出的投訴是出于保護主義目的的,一旦調查程序開始,對發(fā)展中國家出口商的負面效應就開始反應在貿易上?！痹撜{查還涉及對有關出口商早點的沉重的經濟負擔;許多的出口商,其出口價值約一百萬美元是小問題,但他們卻沒有能力聘請辯護律師和在調查當局面前捍衛(wèi)自身權益。 </p><p>　　在討論中,歐盟說它承認18成員的關切文件的結論,雖然它“缺少對事實的熱情”。歐盟委員會還建議調查一

69、些來自于發(fā)展中國家的“全球玩家”。 </p><p>　　然而,印度表示,雖然有可能是一兩個大公司?不是美國或歐盟標準,但自己?大多數還是中小型企業(yè)。 </p><p><b>　　清除保護主義模式 </b></p><p>　　在解釋文件的時候,秘魯還提到,紡織品和服裝貿易已經歷了一個反傾銷活動的高潮,尤其是在歐盟在近些年已經在所有部門發(fā)起的

70、新案件中排名第三?！北M管他們調查在總體貿易份額相對較少,但對發(fā)展中國家來說,占到出口比例的很大部分。 </p><p>　　一些分析數據中引用的文件(關于對合成纖維,棉面料及床上用品的調查)標明,在每三個產品線中,在同一時間已被同一行業(yè)協會(在歐共體內)提出投訴。在投訴背后可能難以有誤投訴背后的貿易保護主義目的。 </p><p>　　該調查持續(xù)了兩年甚至更長的時間,盡管在反傾銷協定中有必

71、須要在18個月內結束的明確規(guī)定。即使調查沒有任何肯定的結果,受影響的國家或企業(yè)也沒有任何的救濟或補救辦法。 這也是一個值得思考的問題,秘魯表示,調查機構不能阻止出口國遭受的損害,盡管申訴人協會分組的大量產品可能不能正確符合“同類產品”的國內生產被“傾銷”的出口破壞。對于棉織物和化纖織物,被一組類似的產品引用。通常的問題是“怎么可能高度加工的印花面料被視為像產品原料,面紗面料?然而,調查將繼續(xù)!” </p><p>

72、;　　在歐盟,產品的覆蓋面減少,第二個和第三個調查顯示第一個調查的產品覆蓋面被誤用了。 </p><p>　　在同行業(yè)協會的投訴堅持這一事實,有時甚至更早的一個不采取行動的結果,帶出了清晰的貿易保護主義格局和只是在接到投訴后開始調查的嚴重缺陷。 </p><p>　　最終,這些調查被證明是毫無根據的和沒有道理的,但盡管如此,它們還是造成了明顯的損害有關國家的出口。受影響的國家的進口份額下降

73、,例如,從投訴開始之前(在棉織物的情況下)的59%到38%是,調查沒有任何積極的義務減少。即使在行動減少后,受影響國家的進口份額可能沒法恢復,因此對這些國家的利益造成的持久的損害沒有任何公正的待遇。 </p><p>　　鑒于發(fā)展中國家的企業(yè)都比較小,它們有傾銷和造成損害的能力嗎?無論是企業(yè)本身還是經濟上,這些小企業(yè)在調查中能通過采取保護訴訟權利的優(yōu)勢,即使在理論上這些權利對他們有用嗎? </p>

74、<p>　　該文件還顯示,一旦反傾銷稅征收,他們往往持續(xù)長達19年以上,不論貿易是否有可能完全與此同時小時。 </p><p>　　對于發(fā)展中國家來說,問題開始于非常投訴和發(fā)起調查。最常見的投訴遞交出于保護主義的目的,一旦調查開始,貿易即被影響,這涉及到出口商沉重的財政負擔。在紡織行業(yè),主要發(fā)達國家的行業(yè)協會“是傾向于等同傾銷和申請反傾銷行動的任何價格下跌的壓力?！?</p><p&

75、gt;　　詳細說明有關各種調查的一些數據,ITCB成員的國內文件指出,這些數據顯示該調查推出“敏捷”,在調查中的一個持久性保護主義偏見,以及這種調查的缺陷,導致發(fā)展中國家出口貿易的失真。歐盟在調查中使用的方法也受到WTO爭端解決小組的非議,歐盟委員會提出上訴。 </p><p>　　中國希望通過ITCB各位議員的文件可以為談判提供參考,幫助實現更清晰的規(guī)則和紀律。反傾銷行為已成為市場準入的阻礙。印尼說,它一直是反