AOKANG Appealed To EU For Fair And Free Competition

Recently, Zhejiang

The limited company received the verdict issued by the high court of the European Union, and finally ruled that the court of first instance of the European Union in the trial of AOKANG's defense against EU anti-dumping cases, the individual legal provisions were misused, and there was a lack of justice. The final judgment was that China AOKANG won the lawsuit.

The court decided that the European Commission's compensation for AOKANG's appeal to the European Union's primary and high court costs would be more than 500 yuan.

Importers and exporters who have trade relations with AOKANG can refund the anti-dumping duties imposed on them for 6 years from the EU concerned.

This is indeed a great event for Chinese enterprises to celebrate.

The success of AOKANG not only marks a shoe enterprise's final defense in law, but also marks the victory of the EU's anti-dumping on leather shoes, which also indicates that Chinese enterprises dare to appeal and insist on appeals, and can confidently and firmly apply legal means to face the protection of trade directly.

In fact, the AOKANG incident has precedent.

Since joining the WTO, China has actively prosecuted a total of 11 cases. Up to now, 8 have had final verdicts and results, and China has won the majority of cases.

In Wenzhou, Zhejiang,

In 2010, Wen Tong Chen Wu Sheng [micro-blog], China LED technology group and Wenzhou three Mongolia technology electric company, after 3 years' rights protection, also successfully passed the judicial lawsuit against the US Trade Commission (ITC), breaking the trade barrier caused by ITC's wrong ruling. This is the first time that Chinese enterprises have won a victory over the US government agencies.

These events and data show that in the past thirty years since reform and opening up, some enterprises in China have been able to operate in an international perspective. They can read rules and use rules, cope with the international market competition with their own strength, and Chinese enterprises are growing.

However, while applauding the winning of AOKANG, we should also have some reflection and vigilance.

Did AOKANG really win? The AOKANG incident started in October 2006.

The trade friction between the EU and the European Union decided that the EU decided to impose a 16.5% anti-dumping duty on Chinese leather shoes for a period of two years. After the anti-dumping duty was expired, the anti-dumping measures would be extended for another 15 months in the name of sunset review. AOKANG and other 5 Chinese enterprises rose to protest and appealed to the EU junior court. In April 2010, when the court of first instance of the European Union dismissed the claim from 5 Chinese shoe companies and announced that China's shoe enterprises failed in the first instance, the remaining 4 shoe companies announced their abandonment of the appeal, while AOKANG continued to appeal to the high court of the European Union, and finally won the lawsuit.

From the beginning of the incident to the present, it has been exactly 6 years. In the past 6 years, the losses suffered by Chinese shoe enterprises, the lost market, the lost opportunities and the time and space for enterprises to grow and grow have been compensated.

With the rise and development of China, it has become the second largest economy in the world and the largest exporter. It has also become the hardest hit area of Global trade friction. It has been the largest anti-dumping investigation in the world for 17 consecutive years.

According to WTO statistics, from 2001 to 2010, China suffered 574 anti-dumping cases, accounting for 27% of the total number of anti-dumping cases in the world. Among them, the United States initiated 101 anti-dumping cases against China and 96 from the European Union, while India ranked 137 as the most anti-dumping country against China and Argentina 82.

There were 692 trade relief investigations involving a total of about $40 billion.

In 2011, China's exports suffered nearly 100 trade protection measures, involving about 6 billion US dollars.

In the first three quarters of 2012, China's exports suffered 55 foreign trade relief surveys, an increase of 38%, involving an increase of nearly 24 billion 300 million times the amount of 24 billion 300 million dollars.

According to the "world trade early warning" project of the center for economic policy research of the think tank in Britain, 40% of the world's trade protectionism measures were directed against China since the outbreak of the international financial crisis in 2008.

The change of industrial competitiveness is the main reason for China's increasing trade frictions.

As China is in the stage of accelerated development of industrialization, the supporting capacity of production is relatively strong, and its scale economy is obvious. China, as the main undertaking place of international industrial pfer, has led to the continuous increase of exports, which makes China undertake on the one hand.

On the one hand, it will also suffer from the trade friction caused by the increase of industrial conflicts.

The rapid development of export competitive advantage will inevitably bring about dissatisfaction and restrictions on China's exports by major economic powers and trading powers. Therefore, there are obvious trade protection colors in many cases of trade friction encountered by China.

This is also true of the European and American antidumping investigations into China's photovoltaic industry not long ago.

In November 7, 2012, hours after Obama announced his re-election, the US International Trade Commission made a final ruling that the crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells and components imported from China substantially hurt us related industries. The United States will impose anti-dumping duties of 18.32% to 249.96% and 14.78% to 15.97% countervailing duties on such products.

Prior to that, in September 6, 2012, the European Union also announced anti-dumping investigations into China's photovoltaic products. This is the largest trade lawsuit initiated by the European Union to China. The annual amount involved is more than 20 billion US dollars (about 130 billion yuan), and 7 has become the pressure for Chinese PV enterprises to survive.

The reason is that as China's photovoltaic industry gradually occupied the half of the global market by virtue of "the integrity of the industrial chain, complete supporting industries and the comprehensive technological level in the world", the market share of the US and Europe has gradually shrunk. For example, the US market share has shrunk from 47% in 90s to 7% in the last century.

In ancient China, there was a saying that "trees attract the wind".

The rapid development of China's international influence has increased dramatically. The developed countries in Europe and the United States have been very keen in restraining and restricting China's development. From 2009 to 2012, the United States launched more than 50 trade surveys with China, almost double the sum of the 2006~2009 years' double counter survey.

Trade protection measures in Europe and the United States have shifted from traditional tariffs, quotas and licensing restrictions to intellectual property protection, exchange rate system and investment environment of foreign-funded enterprises.

The AOKANG incident and the European and American PV events in China should alert China and alert the world. China needs a fair and free competition environment. The world needs to re enact new rules against trade protection and trade friction.

According to a World Bank report,

It may bring some benefits to the countries that have been launched, but in the long run it will drag down the prosperity of the economy and aggravate the impoverishment of the region.

In fact, the initiator of trade protection is still the government. Governments not only protect their own industry and trade interests in international competition, but also directly intervene in the competition between domestic enterprises and foreign enterprises.

Therefore, in the world economic downturn and recession, trade protectionism will be very difficult to eradicate. Unless the United States led developed countries can resist and give up trade protection first and form a new concept of harmonious and inclusive global economic development, Global trade protectionism can really be eradicate and the world economy can achieve a truly free, fair and vigorous cycle.