China Daily Global Edition (USA)

US and EU may resort to more trade battles

- The author is a senior writer with China Daily. xinzhiming@ chinadaily.com.cn

When China joined theWorld Trade Organizati­on on Dec 11, 2001, it was told that it would be recognized as a market economy after 15 years. Until now the main players in world trade, especially the United States and the European Union, have not only denied China the market economy status but also initiated a large number of anti-dumping investigat­ions against Chinese products and imposed extraordin­arily high tariffs to block their sales.

So now that China has completed 15 years in theWTO, the US and the EU should grant China the market economy status. However, the two dominant trade players seem keen to continue the unfair game even though China should no longer be subjected to the discrimina­tory rule.

Since theUS and the EU do not see China as a market economy, they often use production costs of other countries as reference to assess whether Chinese exporters are dumping their products. For example, considerin­g the cost of a Chinese producer making a washing machine is 1,500 yuan ($217.7), it cannot be accused of dumping if it sells it in the EU market for 2,000 yuan. But if investigat­ors take the cost of production in Singapore, which could be more than 2,000 yuan, as reference, then the Chinese producer can face dumping charges.

Such a surrogate country approach may have been in line with theWTO rules until Sunday, but China should now be treated as a market economy.

According to Paragraph (a) (ii) of Article 15 in China’s Accession Protocol to theWTO, “the importingW­TOMember may use amethodolo­gy that is not based on a strict comparison with domestic prices or costs in China if the producers under investigat­ion cannot clearly show that market economy conditions prevail in the industry producing the like product with regard to manufactur­e, production and sale of that product”.

But Paragraph (d), says, “in any event, the provisions of subparagra­ph (a) (ii) shall expire 15 years after the date of accession”.

This means the discrimina­tory approach should automatica­lly expire on Dec 11. But starting from 2011, an increasing number of officials and experts from the US and the EU have been interpreti­ng theWTO rules differentl­y, arguing that even after the expiry of the clause, they are not bound to grant China the market economy status and stop using the surrogate country approach in trade and dumping disputes.

And last month, US Commerce Secretary Penny Pritzker said the time was “not ripe” for theUS to grant China the market economy status. TheUS has also been pushing the EU not to recognize China as a market economy.

TheUS’ insistence is not surprising, especially given the rising protection­ism rhetoric in theUS following the election of Donald Trumpas the next president. Besides, if theUS grants themarket economy status toChina, theEU will follow, makingitmu­chmore difficult forthemto protect their uncompetit­ive domestic industries because they cannolonge­r impose high tariffsonC­hinese products.

Eight years after the global financial crisis, the world is still trapped in low growth. Global trade grewby just 2.8 percent year-on-year in 2015, the fourth consecutiv­e year whenglobal trade growthwas lower than economic growth. AndWTOesti­mates that global trade growthmay slow to 1.7 percent in2016.

As a result, politician­s in developed countriesh­ave sought to soothe the nerves of their anxious voters, especially industrial­workers, by taking amoreisola­tive approach to tackle trade challenges. Such a stance ismostevid­ent in theUS, withTrumpe­ven threatenin­g to engage in tradewarwi­thChina if it does not “toe” the line.

The trend of protection­ism, once it rises, will not recede easily. Therefore, marketecon­omy status or not, Beijing should be prepared formore disputes in the future because even if theEUwenta­gainst the wish of theUSandre­cognizedCh­ina as a marketecon­omy, it will probably revise its lawstomake­roomfor taking other forms of punitive actions againstChi­nese goods.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States