从多边贸易视角看“汽车轮胎案”的裁决——兼评美国反补贴制度的最新司法实践  

On the Pneumatic OTR Tires Case from a Multilateral Trade Perspective——And analyze the judicial practice of US anti-subsidy law

作　　者：胡加祥[1] 

机构地区：[1]上海交通大学法学院,上海200240

出　　处：《河北法学》2011年第1期43-49,共7页Hebei Law Science

基　　金：上海交通大学文科科研创新计划项目(特色研究项目)<中国参与WTO争端解决机制实证分析研究>(08TS7)的部分研究成果

摘　　要：WTO框架下的非市场经济主体不是一个法律命题,而是源自关贸总协定各缔约方和世贸组织各成员的实践。受"乔治城钢铁案"和"钾碱案"的影响,美国在相当长一段时间里不曾对非市场经济主体采用反补贴制裁措施。这种做法导致中国人有一种误解,以为美国反补贴法不适用于非市场经济主体。近年来发生在中美两国之间的"铜版纸案"、"反补贴与反倾销案",乃至刚刚裁决的"汽车轮胎案",都向人们表明美国的反补贴制度同样适用于非市场经济主体。面对如此严峻的形势,我们除了在争端解决中据理力争之外,更重要的是调整自己的补贴政策,这样才能做到防患于未然。The Non-Market Economy（NME） issue under the WTO is not a legal issue, but one originated from the practice of many GATT contracting parties. Affected by the Georgetown Case and Potash Case, the United States has kept the practice, for a while, not to impose countervailing measures on those nonmarket economies. This has led to the misunderstanding of many Chinese that the US anti-subsidy law does not apply to those non-market economies like China. The recent disputes occurring between China and the United States have proved this misunderstanding. Facing the increasing use of countervailing measures by the United States against the Chinese products, China needs to consider how to adjust its subsidy mechanism apart from the defense in the relevant dispute settlement.

关 键 词：多边贸易体制 非市场经济主体 美国反补贴法 

分 类 号：D925.2[政治法律—诉讼法学]