Font Size: a A A

The Legal Issues Raised From The Application Of Non-discrimination Obligations To The Modification Of GATT Tariff Schedules

Posted on:2020-06-23Degree:MasterType:Thesis
Country:ChinaCandidate:M D YuFull Text:PDF
GTID:2416330626950495Subject:Science of Law
Abstract/Summary:PDF Full Text Request
The principle of tariff concession is one of the basic principles of GATT.It is also the purpose of its original agreement and several rounds of multilateral negotiations.The tariff reduction of GATT is always based on the mutual benefit of the members,that is,it should comply with the obligation of non-discrimination.Tariff concessions are negotiated and the results of the negotiations will be recorded in the tariff schedules.Similarly,the modification of the schedules is carried out through "renegotiation",the procedure and content of which should meet the principle of non-discrimination.In the renegotiation process for the modification of tariff schedules,the primary task is to identify the participants in the negotiations.In accordance with GATT Article 28 and its related provisions,in most cases only parties with "Principle Supplying Interest" are eligible to participate in renegotiation.An important basis for judging whether a Party has " Principle Supplying Interest" is the trade share of the "last three-year representative period" prior to the negotiations,which,in practice,is considered to have a " Principle Supplying Interest" if the share exceeds 10 per cent.In determining the market share of "last three-year representative period," the two most controversial issues are whether the starting time of the representative period should be adjusted year by year as the negotiations.And how to define "discriminatory quantitative restrictions" that can be excluded.In the recent case of European Union-Measures Affecting Tariff Concessions on Certain Poultry Meat Products,the Panel considered that the representative period did not need to be dynamically adjusted and that legitimate quantitative restrictions,such as SPS measures,could not be excluded from calculation.The modification of the tariff schedule deals with the allocation of tariff quotas,which is mainly stipulated in GATT Article 13.Article 13:1,as the principled provision of this article,establishes the rule that "the importation of the like products of all third countries is similarly prohibited or restricted",in order to reflect the core connotation of the obligation of non-discrimination.The practice in the European Communities — Regime for the Importation,Sale and Distribution of Bananas and the case of European Union-Measures Affecting Tariff Concessions on Certain Poultry Meat Products shows that the rule can be interpreted from different aspects,that is,the rule should be interpreted in different contexts in line with the purpose of non-discrimination.Article 13:2(d),is a specific provision on the allocation of tariff quotas,and,as in Article 28,there is a need to identify "Principle Supplying Interest" in quota allocation.However,the provisions and the purposes of the allocation of quota and the concession negotiation of tariff concession are different,so the identification standards for “Principle Supplying Interest” under the two provisions are also different.In European Union-Measures Affecting Tariff Concessions on Certain Poultry Meat Products,the Panel held that China's trade growth in the course of negotiations constitutes a "special factor" and should be given special consideration.As a result,China has been identified as a party with "Principle Supplying Interest" and the EU has given China more quotas for poultry products.Through the study of the WTO case ruling report,it is found that the meaning of the nondiscrimination obligation is different under different provisions.In the modification of the tariff schedules,some of the value of the non-discrimination obligation will sometimes be sacrificed.In view of this situation,China should treat it cautiously in future international trade arrangements and gradually use the rules of the WTO to defend its rights.
Keywords/Search Tags:Modification of tariff schedules, Non-discriminatory obligations, Discriminatory quantitative restrictions, Most recent three-year representation period, Tariff quotas
PDF Full Text Request
Related items