Remarks On China-certain Measures Affecting Electronic Payment Services

On July16,2012, WTO panel released the panel report on “China-certainmeasures affecting electronic payment services”. Neither China nor the U.S filed anappeal. On August31,2012, WTO Dispute Settlement Body adopted the report of theruling, which meant the case entered the implementation phase and China would beobliged to further open up the electronic payment market. The origin of the case is thedispute between China UnionPay and VISA, and it ultimately ended in the WTOpanel report. The continuous development of international trade in services anddispute settlement draws people’s attention again. Since the establishment of WTO,there have not been so many cases of trade in services. This case, as a typical case oftrade in services, makes people think about how to interpret the members’ Schedule ofSpecific Commitments on Services and how to determine whether there is a violationof the specific commitments under the GATS. As to this case, how to interpret thepanel report? How to understand the relevant report of the dispute behind the field ofinternational trade settlement mechanism? Did China seriously violated WTOcommitments related to it? These issues are worth to explore.In this paper, a detailed analysis of the panel report will be given, as well asfurther thinking about dispute settlement of international trade in services. This paper,in addition to the introduction and conclusion, is divided into five parts. The first chapter will introduce the background of the case, including the processand conclusion of the panel report and the focus of controversial cases listed. Afterthat, it is the introduction of trade in services, including service models and servicesectors, thus laying the theoretical foundation of discussion of sub-categories in thepanel report.The second chapter describes the identification of the measures involved in theelectronic payment services dispute. Since the case is related to specific commitmentsin the field of trade in services, we need to understand whether China has made acommitment to the service sector and has taken the controversial measures before wedecide if China broke its promise.The third and fourth chapter will discuss whether those specific measures are inviolation of Chinese GATS market access or national treatment commitments. Theyare the key points of the case. The first part will discuss the specific commitments toelectronic payment services and the second part will analyze the panel report to makea judgment.Finally, it comes to the reflections on the field of international trade in services,including how to interpret specific commitments by members and how to betterinterpret and apply GATS rules.