On March 8, 2008, Fu Donghui and the six CEOs of Chinese companies producing air compressors went to Europe to participate in the last hearing of the anti-dumping case of the European Union's production of air compressors in China. They actively defended their interests. Strive to negate the taxation plan on the EU Anti-Dumping Advisory Committee on March 12, and March 21 is the final date for the EU's case.
Although the European Commission had proposed two non-taxation proposals in September 2007 and January 2008, on February 29, 2008, a new proposal for taxation was proposed and the EU Council voted for it. "If this is the case, it is very likely that we will set a bad precedent for the future." Fu Donghui told the China Economic Times reporter.
EU implements double standards
On December 21, 2006, the European Commission issued an announcement that, on the application of the Italian Compressor Manufacturers Alliance on November 20, 2006, it decided to conduct an anti-dumping investigation against China's exports to the European Union’s small air compressors. The dumping investigation period for this case was from October 1, 2005 to September 30, 2006. The EU selected Brazil as an alternative to calculate the normal value of products involved in the case in China.
Mr. Fu believes that although the amount involved in this case is not large, it is 60 million euros, and this industry is not a big industry, but this case is typical, and the final impact will be great. This case is a typical example of the EU's implementation of "double standards". Domestic enterprises are strongly dissatisfied with this case.
The incident stemmed from the fact that two Italian FIAC companies and FINI companies that produce air compressors in China filed a lawsuit against the European Commission, saying that Chinese domestic companies dumped on the air compressors exported by the European Union. However, from 2003 to 2006, the sales price of EU air compressors increased by 20%, and the price of air compressors exported from China has also risen. From the point of view of damage, it does not hold water. In fact, FIAC and FINI and another Italian-funded Italian investment company ABAC Bama (Shanghai) Air Compressor Co., Ltd., which has supported the prosecution, occupy 35% of China's exports to the EU.
"From this point of view, if there is dumping, who caused the dumping?" said Fu. Not only did the EU not seriously investigate, but in the process of responding, it applied "double standards" to the enterprises involved in the case, excluding Chinese-funded enterprises and favoring Italian investment companies. This seriously violated the non-discrimination principle of the WTO's anti-dumping rules and the Chinese manufacturers. It's very unfair. Because the EU has not yet recognized China’s market economy status, the EU adopts “double standards†under unilateral rules and does not grant Chinese manufacturers a market economy status, but gives two Italian companies market economy status. However, when China was investing in transnational corporations, it gave "super-national treatment" and an Italian company enjoyed preferential policies for exempting land use fees for three years from Jiangmen, Guangdong.
In addition, the EU has strict time limits on Chinese companies. If the company does not respond within two weeks, it will be completely excluded, and FIAC and FINI will be relaxed for two to three months. As long as it is an Italian company, government subsidies can be ignored, accounting and auditing errors can be ignored, and even the companies involved in the case can be automatically obtained without applying for market economy status. On the contrary, as long as Chinese companies have slight problems in this aspect, they constitute “capital crimes,†and this discriminatory phenomenon is almost universal.
The case also has a peculiarity. During the period from January to September of 2007, the EU conducted a major discussion on the "rationality of taking trade protection measures", and China became the main object of discussion. It has become one of the few cases that have pervaded the discussion period.
Chinese companies respond actively
The enterprises involved in this case were located in Guangdong, Shanghai, Fujian, Zhejiang and other places. After receiving the information on the case, Chinese air compressor manufacturing companies took action. In early March 2007, the respondent team was established, and the lawyer team also stationed in various companies. Data collection work to help companies fully respond to complaints. According to lawyer Fu, Chinese companies are very active this time because they have more and more strength, and they also increasingly understand how to safeguard their own interests in global cooperation and competition. "This time to participate in the final defense, although we are sure we will win the case, we still have to do it."
Mr. Fu analyzed that the air compressor case was not of major economic importance to the European Union itself. However, FIAC and FINI announced that if the EU does not impose anti-dumping duties on Chinese air compressor manufacturing companies involved, they will be partially based in Europe. The manufacturers evacuated; on the contrary, they withdrew their investment in China in order to increase European employment opportunities.
This unreasonable demand has made the European Commission difficult. If an anti-dumping ruling is made, it will be a double-lost decision. Because a bad precedent has been set, European companies in China will follow suit and put forward some more disguised and unreasonable demands. This is also a difficult task for the Chinese government. The value of the air compressor is relatively small and will not rise to the political level. However, the hidden dangers behind it cannot be ignored.
It is foreseeable that this case will certainly have a negative impact on China-EU trade development in the future. In 2007, for the first time, the EU surpassed the United States as China’s largest exporter, becoming China’s largest trading partner and the member of the World Trade Organization, which has initiated the most anti-dumping investigations against China. The European Union’s export products to China have been frequently filed in recent years. Under the backdrop of the economic slowdown and even recession of the United States, the depreciation of the U.S. dollar, rising costs, the turmoil in the global financial market, the expected decline in economic growth, and the frustration of consumer confidence, the EU’s trade protection momentum is worth mentioning. stay tuned.
Fu lawyers pointed out that what needs attention is that the Chinese government should give correct guidance when attracting foreign investment, pay attention to the investment strategy of multinational corporations, and always pay close attention to the development trend of domestic industries, and should also solve the problem of trade surplus in a timely manner. "If the government is unwilling to politicize small cases, we can pick up legal weapons and go to the WTO to file a complaint." Mr. Fu said that domestic companies should also upgrade their industries, adjust their structure, develop high value-added products, and develop diversified markets. Enhance efforts to increase export competitiveness.
Although the European Commission had proposed two non-taxation proposals in September 2007 and January 2008, on February 29, 2008, a new proposal for taxation was proposed and the EU Council voted for it. "If this is the case, it is very likely that we will set a bad precedent for the future." Fu Donghui told the China Economic Times reporter.
EU implements double standards
On December 21, 2006, the European Commission issued an announcement that, on the application of the Italian Compressor Manufacturers Alliance on November 20, 2006, it decided to conduct an anti-dumping investigation against China's exports to the European Union’s small air compressors. The dumping investigation period for this case was from October 1, 2005 to September 30, 2006. The EU selected Brazil as an alternative to calculate the normal value of products involved in the case in China.
Mr. Fu believes that although the amount involved in this case is not large, it is 60 million euros, and this industry is not a big industry, but this case is typical, and the final impact will be great. This case is a typical example of the EU's implementation of "double standards". Domestic enterprises are strongly dissatisfied with this case.
The incident stemmed from the fact that two Italian FIAC companies and FINI companies that produce air compressors in China filed a lawsuit against the European Commission, saying that Chinese domestic companies dumped on the air compressors exported by the European Union. However, from 2003 to 2006, the sales price of EU air compressors increased by 20%, and the price of air compressors exported from China has also risen. From the point of view of damage, it does not hold water. In fact, FIAC and FINI and another Italian-funded Italian investment company ABAC Bama (Shanghai) Air Compressor Co., Ltd., which has supported the prosecution, occupy 35% of China's exports to the EU.
"From this point of view, if there is dumping, who caused the dumping?" said Fu. Not only did the EU not seriously investigate, but in the process of responding, it applied "double standards" to the enterprises involved in the case, excluding Chinese-funded enterprises and favoring Italian investment companies. This seriously violated the non-discrimination principle of the WTO's anti-dumping rules and the Chinese manufacturers. It's very unfair. Because the EU has not yet recognized China’s market economy status, the EU adopts “double standards†under unilateral rules and does not grant Chinese manufacturers a market economy status, but gives two Italian companies market economy status. However, when China was investing in transnational corporations, it gave "super-national treatment" and an Italian company enjoyed preferential policies for exempting land use fees for three years from Jiangmen, Guangdong.
In addition, the EU has strict time limits on Chinese companies. If the company does not respond within two weeks, it will be completely excluded, and FIAC and FINI will be relaxed for two to three months. As long as it is an Italian company, government subsidies can be ignored, accounting and auditing errors can be ignored, and even the companies involved in the case can be automatically obtained without applying for market economy status. On the contrary, as long as Chinese companies have slight problems in this aspect, they constitute “capital crimes,†and this discriminatory phenomenon is almost universal.
The case also has a peculiarity. During the period from January to September of 2007, the EU conducted a major discussion on the "rationality of taking trade protection measures", and China became the main object of discussion. It has become one of the few cases that have pervaded the discussion period.
Chinese companies respond actively
The enterprises involved in this case were located in Guangdong, Shanghai, Fujian, Zhejiang and other places. After receiving the information on the case, Chinese air compressor manufacturing companies took action. In early March 2007, the respondent team was established, and the lawyer team also stationed in various companies. Data collection work to help companies fully respond to complaints. According to lawyer Fu, Chinese companies are very active this time because they have more and more strength, and they also increasingly understand how to safeguard their own interests in global cooperation and competition. "This time to participate in the final defense, although we are sure we will win the case, we still have to do it."
Mr. Fu analyzed that the air compressor case was not of major economic importance to the European Union itself. However, FIAC and FINI announced that if the EU does not impose anti-dumping duties on Chinese air compressor manufacturing companies involved, they will be partially based in Europe. The manufacturers evacuated; on the contrary, they withdrew their investment in China in order to increase European employment opportunities.
This unreasonable demand has made the European Commission difficult. If an anti-dumping ruling is made, it will be a double-lost decision. Because a bad precedent has been set, European companies in China will follow suit and put forward some more disguised and unreasonable demands. This is also a difficult task for the Chinese government. The value of the air compressor is relatively small and will not rise to the political level. However, the hidden dangers behind it cannot be ignored.
It is foreseeable that this case will certainly have a negative impact on China-EU trade development in the future. In 2007, for the first time, the EU surpassed the United States as China’s largest exporter, becoming China’s largest trading partner and the member of the World Trade Organization, which has initiated the most anti-dumping investigations against China. The European Union’s export products to China have been frequently filed in recent years. Under the backdrop of the economic slowdown and even recession of the United States, the depreciation of the U.S. dollar, rising costs, the turmoil in the global financial market, the expected decline in economic growth, and the frustration of consumer confidence, the EU’s trade protection momentum is worth mentioning. stay tuned.
Fu lawyers pointed out that what needs attention is that the Chinese government should give correct guidance when attracting foreign investment, pay attention to the investment strategy of multinational corporations, and always pay close attention to the development trend of domestic industries, and should also solve the problem of trade surplus in a timely manner. "If the government is unwilling to politicize small cases, we can pick up legal weapons and go to the WTO to file a complaint." Mr. Fu said that domestic companies should also upgrade their industries, adjust their structure, develop high value-added products, and develop diversified markets. Enhance efforts to increase export competitiveness.
We are China manufacturer of high quality grade l7, l43 Threaded Rods and threaded bars in Astm A320 standard. Our advantages and more services of threaded steel rods includes:
1) Wide range of diameters from 1/2" - 4"
2) Customized Length from 100mm to 12000mm
3) Good threads at 60 degree
4) Good straightness: 1mm/m max
5) Even hardness on whole bars
5) Proper mechanical properties
7) Full sets of testing equipment: Surface, Dimenstion. Mechanical properties testing
8) Fast delivery time
Astm A320,Acme Threaded Rod,Stm A320 L7 Equivalent,Astm A320 Threaded Rods
SHANDONG LE REN SPECIAL STEEL CO., LTD. , https://www.lerenspecialsteel.com