Whether China’s State-Owned Commercial Banks Constitute “Public Bodies” within the Meaning of Article 1.1 (a) (1)
US – Definitive Anti-dumping and Countervailing Duties on Certain Products from China is the initial WTO dispute in which China claims that US-countervailing duties on certain products from China are inconsistent with the obligations of the United States under the SCM Agreement. The meaning of “publ...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Other Authors: | |
| Language: | en_ca |
| Published: |
2013
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://hdl.handle.net/1807/43081 |
| Summary: | US – Definitive Anti-dumping and Countervailing Duties on Certain Products from China is the initial WTO dispute in which China claims that US-countervailing duties on certain products from China are inconsistent with the obligations of the United States under the SCM Agreement. The meaning of “public bodies” within Article 1.1 (a) (1) of the SCM Agreement and the question of whether China’s “SOCB” constitute “public bodies” are the heart of the matter. The thesis argues that the theory of the governmental function is more persuasive than that of governmental control in terms of defining “public bodies”. Although the majority ownership of China’s SOCBs has remained in the Chinese government, their policy-oriented nature has been largely marginalized. The conclusion is that the WTO system needs to give developing countries more policy flexibility, and developing countries should also make the best use of their latent comparative advantage and the effects of globalization. |
|---|