《通胀削减法案》合规性分析与补贴规则再认识  

Compliance Analysis of the Inflation Reduction Act and Further Understanding of the Subsidy Rules

作　　者：胡加祥[1] 孙泽慧 Hu Jiaxiang;Sun Zehui

机构地区：[1]上海交通大学凯原法学院

出　　处：《海关与经贸研究》2023年第6期1-16,共16页Journal of Customs and Trade

基　　金：国家社科基金重大项目“我国转基因食品规制法律体系研究”(项目批准号:18ZDA147)。

摘　　要：美国《通胀削减法案》和欧盟《净零工业法案》的出台标志着竞争性补贴时代的到来。除了进口替代补贴的内容,《通胀削减法案》充斥着大量可诉补贴,其之所以未招致其他成员在WTO争端解决机构提起申诉或采取反补贴措施,是因为补贴规则的制度层面和实践层面都为可诉补贴的违法性认定留下了模糊空间。鉴于先前我国补贴制度被指责违法的先例并不罕见,在面对各国纷纷出台高科技领域的大力度补贴法案时,我们需要重新审视补贴的合法性性质,探寻补贴法案设计的理论基础和实践依据。在严格摒弃禁止性补贴的同时,于补贴的灰色地带探寻中国补贴政策进一步发展的空间。The introduction of the US Inflation Reduction Act and the EU Net-Zero Industry Act marked the arrival of the era of competitive subsidies Apart from the import substitution subsidies in the Inflation Reduction Act,the US subsidy policy is full of actionable subsidies,which have not been complained in the WTO dispute settlement body or encountered countervailing measures by other mem-bers because the institutional and practical levels of subsidy rules have left room for ambiguity in the de-termination of the illegality of actionable subsidies Considering the instances of previous allegations of il-legality surrounding our subsidy rules,especially in the face of the frequent legislation of other WTO Members focusing on the high-tech sector,we need to review the legitimacy of subsidies,explore the theoretical and practical foundations for subsidy rules While strictly abandoning the prohibited subsidies,we need to explore the further development of China’s subsidy policy in the area of actiona-ble subsidies.

关 键 词：《通胀削减法案》 SCM协定 禁止性补贴 可诉性补贴 

分 类 号：D99[政治法律—国际法学] D971.2[政治法律—法学] DD912.29