Study On The Equivalence Of Carbon Tariff And WTO And China 's Countermeasures

After the20th century, countries around the world have been doing their utmostto establish a multilateral cooperation mechanism to slow down the climate change.Through "United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change" and the"Kyoto Protocol", we determined the aim of mitigating climate change, principle of"common but differentiated responsibilities" on climate change governance for thedeveloped and developing countries, and also set reduction targets for the developedcountries.To fulfill these obligations,the developed have to pay more financial andmaterial resources to reduce the greenhouse gas emission, which had effects on thecountries’economic development and resulted in“carbon leakage”and loss ofcompetitiveness of domestic industries.Thus the European Union and the UnitedStates,on behalf of developed countries,proposed the"low carbon economy"theory，which essentially wants the developing countries,in advance to take responsibilitiesfor climate change--the greenhouse gas emission reduction obligations.And theCarbon Tariff is just one of this series conspiracies.On November8th,2008, theEuropean Commission pass a resolution to levy carbon tax on flights after2012. InJune2009, the United States Congress,through the "American Clean Energy andSecurity Act", declared that from2020it will take boarder tax adjustment on theimport products from countries that unfinished carbon emission reduction obligations.All this created a global outcry, and thus set off a Carbon Tariff studies boom.Looking on the present researches, mainstream view is that Carbon Tariff issubstantially a new kind of trade barriers, which would seriously to the disadvantageof the developing countries’external trade even economic development. Most expertshold that Carbon Tariff is in violation of free trade purpose of the WTO,goes againstthe basic principles of the WTO MFN and national treatment,and some othersdiscussed the relations between Carbon Tariff and"common but differentiatedresponsibilities"principle and WTO Schedule of tariff concessions. These researchachievements not only make a great difference in understanding the Carbon Tariffpolicy, but also help to take measures needed.We have to mention that most scholarsCarbon Tariff are on side of national interest when discussing the Carbon Tariff,so thatwe cannot get comprehensive and objective comprehension about it. This article systematically recommend relevant knowledge of the Carbon Tariff, and I as far aspossible demonstrate the Carbon Tariff with neutral attitude. It’s true that there isinconformity discord between Carbon Tariff and WTO, nevertheless we have to admitthat the Carbon Tariff may be in line with the WTO regime.Three independent sections consist this article. The first chapter analysis thebackground,concept,theoretical basis,and nature of the Carbon Tariff, and thenintroduces the development of Carbon Tariff in Europe and the USA.On these basis,Idraw a conclusion that the two may change the Carbon Tariff and strongly put it intoeffect. The following section discusses if the Carbon Tariff is in compliance withWTO. I cited the contradictions with the purposes, the MFN principle, and theprinciple of national treatment of WTO, and the obstacles when quoting exceptionprinciple of GATT Article20, in the meantime, I expounded the possibility that theCarbon Tariff matches the WTO in the four aspects. In the third part,I proposed adialectical view of Carbon Tariff. We’d better react positively rather than criticize it.Combining with the former two parts, I advise to strike back from the internationaland domestic levels.