A Study On The "Public Institutions" Of State - Owned Commercial Banks Under WTO Anti - Subsidy Rules

China is the country which suffers the greatest number of countervailing investigations all over the world. China’s state-owned commercial banks (SOCBs) were often determined as "public body" during the countervailing investigations filed by the United States, Canada and EU. However, the WTO agreements provide none definition for the term "public body". The Appellate Body’s Report on the US-AD/CVD against Chinese products has, however rejected the Government Control Theory indicated by the U.S, described "public body"as an entity that possess, exercise or is vested with government authority. Right after the landmark ruling of the Appellate Body, EU has timely changed its standard for "public body" determination. Its new practices on "public body", which reflect the new trend on the further interpretation of "public body", is however working against China’s interest. Therefore, China’s continued involvement in the coming discussion on the interpretation of "public body" is required.In the AD/CVD case, the finding of DSB that SOCBs constituted public bodies was out of an incorporation of USDOC’s determination in the previous CFS Paper investigation. After the CFS Paper investigation, the reform of China’s banking system is steadily pushing forward. Despite that some institutional problems remain to be solved, the market-oriented reform in Chinese banking system has produced some effect. Hence, this article hold that defensing in the coming WTO disputes settlement for the incorrect finding of "public body" identity of SOCBs, revising relevant provisions under the Commercial Banking Law and deepening the reform of China’s commercial banking system is considered as the very measures we should take, for the purpose that SOCBs get rid of subsidy provider challenges in the future.This article is divided into four chapters. The first chapter discusses the definition of "public body". After a brief introduction for the origin and development of "public body", the exploration turn to the definition of "public body", firstly studying the definition of "subsidy" under SCMA, secondly based on the WTO practices, exploring the interpretation of "public body" under SCMA. The second chapter studies practices of member states on "public body" under domestic laws, analyzing its determination standards in the US, Canada, and EU, discussing in depth on the new practice of EU regarding "public body" subsequent to the ruling of the AD/CVD case. The third chapter explores WTO dispute settlements related to SOCBs’"public body" identity, started with a discussion about DSB’s practices of "public body" on Korean SOCBs, then analyzing DSB’s practices with Chinese SOCBs on the "public body" issue. The last chapter puts forward some suggestions for SOCBs’response to subsidy provider challenges, studying the current situation of SOCBs’reform, exploring the legislative background of the Commercial Banking Law and the current subsidies provision in SOCBs, finally this article gives some suggestions for SOCBs’ getting rid of the "public body" accusations.