论文部分内容阅读
随着国际交往日益增多,国外对中国的反倾销案件呈上升趋势,如何应对反倾销已成为每个企业关注的热点。应对反倾销是一项耗时费力的工作,加之对应诉程序不熟悉,有些企业往往放弃应诉,这是十分有害的。例如1999年美国苹果商会对中国30多家浓缩苹果汁企业提起反倾销诉讼,山东中鲁、烟台源通等10家企业应诉。2000年美国国际贸易委员会裁决对中国浓缩苹果汁企业加征反倾销税,应诉企业税率为14.88%,没有应诉企业高达51.74%。2002年11月15日美方又恢复应诉的10家企业产品为零税率,而其他未应诉的20多家企业仍为51.74%的高额税率。这个案例很能说明问题。本期我们刊发攀钢、马钢应对反倾销案件的两篇文章,他们有许多很好的经验值得借鉴,其中,面对反倾销积极应诉、充分准备的精神,首先是我们要学习的。
With the increasing international contacts, foreign anti-dumping cases against China are on the rise. How to deal with anti-dumping has become a hot issue for every business. Anti-dumping is a time-consuming and painstaking work, coupled with the corresponding unfamiliar with the procedure, some companies often give up the respondent, which is very harmful. For example, in 1999 the U.S. Apple Chamber of Commerce filed an anti-dumping lawsuit against more than 30 Chinese apple juice concentrate enterprises, and ten enterprises in Shandong Zhonglu and Yantai Yuantong filed suit. In 2000, the United States International Trade Commission ruled that anti-dumping duties should be levied on Chinese apple juice concentrate enterprises at a rate of 14.88%. There is no 51.74% respondent enterprises. On November 15, 2002, the U.S. side resumed 10 zero-tariff products against the respondent, while the other 20 non-responding companies remained at a high tax rate of 51.74%. This case is very illustrative of the problem. In this issue, we published two articles on anti-dumping cases in Panzhihua Iron and Steel and Magang. Many of them have good experience to learn from. Among them, in the face of the positive response to anti-dumping and the full preparations, we must first learn from it.