| This thesis focuses on the privatization issue in countervailing law.The writing starts from the procedural regulation of subsidyinvestigation, putting an analysis on the procedural rules, substantiverules of countervailing law in the circumstance of privatization takingplace. The main content includes the determination of "a benefit" ofa subsidy, the effect of privatization on the benefit of subsidies andthe methodology to determine in what extent the privatization of anenterprise payoff the prior subsidies.The thesis contains five parts.The first part introduces the main definitions related to this thesis,which includes some basic concepts about subsidies, countervailingmeasures and privatization.The second part focuses on the benefit of subsidy, including astatement of the determination of benefit in subsidy, the allocationmethodology used by Unite States countervailing investigationauthorities. The issue of whether privatization extinguishes a priorsubsidy is once again raised.The fourth part focuses on the analysis of reports by WTO panel aboutthe effect of privatization on subsidy, through which the panel pointsout how the United States methodologies violate the Agreement of Subsidiesand Countervailing Measures. After that the writer makes a comment bothon the argument of United States and European Community.The fifth part outlines the administration of subsidies andcountervailing measures for China as a non-marketing economics country.Finally with a brief of innovation of Chinese state-owned enterprises thethesis points out the valuable suggestion shown in the analysis of thesubject methodologies.The sixth part is the epilogue. |
