On the evening of July 12, the Ministry of Commerce issued a new statement on the trade war initiated by the US, responding to the "Statement on the 301 Investigation" issued by the US Trade Representative Office on July 10, one by one.
This is the most detailed and comprehensive response of the Ministry of Commerce after the official announcement of the Sino-US trade war, which was 1800 words long after the United States announced a 25% tariff on China's $34 billion imported goods on July 6.
On July 6, the United States imposed tariffs on Chinese goods, which is considered to be the largest trade war in economic history so far. The Ministry of Commerce announced that China 'has to be forced to make the necessary counterattacks' and on the same day The taxation measures officially implemented under the 301 investigation are additional charges to the WTO.
According to the Chinese side, tariffs will be imposed on US products of the same size. The person in charge of customs administration of the General Administration of Customs said in an interview with the media that China’s tariff increase on some imported goods from the United States came into effect at 12:01 Beijing time on the 6th.
China’s relatively tough counter-measures have made the Sino-US trade war more intense.
On July 10, the Office of the US Trade Representative announced a new round of taxation list, indicating that it would impose an additional 10% tariff on Chinese goods valued at US$200 million. This round of tariff measures took effect in September.
In response, the Ministry of Commerce expressed solemn protest on July 11th that the US behavior was 'unacceptable' and the Chinese government would 'have to make the necessary counter-measures'.
In the latest Ministry of Commerce statement released on July 12, the matter has developed to this point, and the responsibility is entirely in the US.
The Ministry of Commerce responds one by one
'Beyond everyone's expectations.' A scholar who has long been engaged in international trade research told the "Chinese Entrepreneur" that according to the US tariff sanctions plan, after the tariffs on China's $34 billion products, it should be followed by $16 billion. Tariff sanctions, but after China’s counter-measures came into effect, the US’s attitude was surprising. '16 billion has not come yet, 200 billion first came. Trump’s blitzkrieg, does not let people have a moment to breathe. 'The scholar Feeling.
The Sino-US trade war began in mid-August 2017 when the United States announced a formal '301 investigation' against China. By March 22, 2018, the Trump administration announced the imposition of tariffs on China's $50 billion in goods, and the US-China trade friction began. Upgrade. Although China and the United States once conducted many rounds of consultations, there was no substantial progress. The tariff sanctions against China came into effect on July 6.
An important reason for the US to impose tariff sanctions on China is that the US believes that there is a huge trade deficit in trade with China, and the US itself is a party that suffers. In response, the Ministry of Commerce responded that the US social economy is deep. The level of problems is entirely caused by structural problems in the United States. The imbalance between China and the United States, the number of trade deficits is overestimated.
According to the "301 Investigation Report" published on March 22, the United States has proposed four major issues in the trade between China and the United States: First, China's compulsory technology transfer of US companies to China; Second, China's foreign-funded enterprises Discriminatory licensing restrictions; Third, the Chinese government intervenes in overseas investment by enterprises; Fourth, China's unauthorized invasion of US commercial computer networks, network infringement of intellectual property rights and sensitive business information.
The US rounds of tariff sanctions against China are mainly aimed at the first article of the report, namely China’s compulsory technology transfer to US companies in China. The US government’s response, the Ministry of Commerce responded that the Chinese government did not Enterprises have put forward such requirements. The technical cooperation and other economic and trade cooperation between Chinese and foreign companies are completely based on the voluntary principle of contractual behavior. Over the years, both companies have gained great benefits.
The second question raised by the report, China’s discriminatory licensing restrictions on foreign-invested companies, the US accused China’s policies and practices of depriving US companies of negotiating with Chinese companies based on market-based, mutually beneficial terms, and China’s Involved in US companies' investment and related actions in China. The US believes that China's technical regulations have deprived American technology owners of bargaining power.
Regarding the second allegation, the Office of the US Trade Representative proposed a consultation with China under the World Trade Organization Dispute Settlement Mechanism at the end of March this year for China's 'discriminatory technology licensing requirements'.
'This is equivalent to the United States telling the WTO to China.' Cui Fan, a professor at the School of International Trade and Economics of the University of International Business and Economics, said in an interview with the reporter of "Chinese Entrepreneur". So far, the WTO has not given corresponding requests for consultations from the US. Ruling.
In the third article of the report, the Chinese government’s intervention in Chinese companies’ foreign investment, the 301 investigation report stated that the US representative trade office determined that the Chinese government unfairly promoted Chinese companies’ systematic investment and acquisition of US companies and assets to obtain cutting-edge technology and Intellectual property. The role of the state in guiding and supporting Chinese companies' foreign investment strategies is everywhere.
Due to China's implementation of 'China Manufacturing 2025' and other industrial policies, there are some de facto support and subsidies for high-tech industries, but the Ministry of Commerce responded. Under the market economy conditions, the Chinese government's implementation of these policies is mainly guiding and leading. And open to all foreign companies.
The fourth question raised by the report is about infringing on intellectual property rights in the United States. The Ministry of Commerce said that the Chinese government has established a relatively complete intellectual property legal protection system on the issue of 'theft of intellectual property rights' and continues to play a leading role in the judicial protection of intellectual property rights. The establishment of intellectual property courts and specialized judicial institutions. In 2017, China's external payment of intellectual property fees reached 28.6 billion US dollars, 15 times more than when it joined the WTO in 2001.
'China is a bit behind in the protection of intellectual property rights, but it is already improving. After all, intellectual property issues have only appeared in China in the 1990s, and people are aware of it lately. 'Tu Xinquan, President of China WTO Research Institute of University of International Business and Economics Tell "Chinese Entrepreneur".
The latest statement issued by the Ministry of Commerce, Wang Yong, a professor at Peking University's National Relations College, is very high. He thinks that the Ministry of Commerce's statement is very good. 'The Ministry of Commerce's refutation of the system accused by the US government is a bit late. The Ministry of Commerce needs more. Voice, to explain China's policy stance at home and abroad with a more open and transparent attitude.'
Past and Present of Section 301
The Ministry of Commerce issued the latest statement aimed at the "Statement on the 301 Investigation" issued by the US Trade Representative Office on July 10, but what is the 301 investigation that has been repeatedly mentioned in the documents of the two countries?
In fact, the legal basis for the '301 investigation' can be traced back to the '301 clause' of the US Trade Act of 1974.
The article stipulates that if goods from the United States, investments in other countries encounter so-called 'unfair', 'unfair', 'unreasonable' and other discriminatory treatment, the United States has the right to terminate the trade agreement and take punitive measures to force other countries Changing policies can include ending trade agreements, increasing import restrictions, and so on.
This bill is the domestic law of the United States. It was revised several times in 1984 and in 1988. The special 301 and 'super 301' clauses were derived from the Comprehensive Trade and Competition Act of 1988. The terms, usually referred to as the 301 clauses after the 1988 revision.
The World Trade Organization (WTO) was established in 1995, which means that the introduction and implementation of the bill was earlier than the establishment of the WTO. 'Before the establishment of the WTO, Article 301 has been used more than 100 times. 'Cui Fan told the Chinese company Family".
This clause is a 'very sensitive, politically meaningful mechanism' for the United States, Cui Fan said. In 1995, in order to persuade Congress to agree to let the United States join the WTO, the government promised Congress not to abolish Article 301, join the WTO. The organization will not affect the 301 clause.
The US government stated in its statement of administrative action with Congress that in the area of WTO jurisdiction, it will be implemented in the form of WTO. 301. That is to say, the US government can investigate, this WTO can not manage it, but can not take Measures. 'Cui Fan said.
On November 25, 1998, the European Union prosecuted the United States on the '301 clause' to the WTO. The EU believes that this clause has caused damage to the EU's interests, jeopardizing the objectives of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade and the World Trade Organization. No corresponding measures were taken, and the WTO final ruling found that the '301 clause' does not violate the relevant provisions of the World Trade Organization and the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade.
Although Section 301 is a unilateral act of the United States, as long as the measures of WTO jurisdiction are not adopted, the US investigation of Section 301 of another country can be regarded as a rule that does not violate the WTO. The US claims that China is in China-US trade. The four main issues raised are not within the jurisdiction of the WTO, but the measures used to sanction China - tariffs, are under the jurisdiction of the WTO.
Therefore, from the perspective of jurisprudence, Article 301, as the domestic law of the United States, uses tariffs to sanction other countries, which is a violation of WTO rules.
'This is definitely a violation.' Cui Fan said.
Despite this, the US has always been tough. Since the United States announced its 301 investigation into China, China and the United States have been negotiating on bilateral economic and trade issues. According to Reuters reported in May, the Trump administration’s negotiating team asked China to reduce its trade by 200 billion U.S. dollars. Deficit, promise not to support the key industries in the 'Made in China 2025' program through government subsidies, and to implement a similar tariff rate with the United States. According to rough estimates, a trade deficit of 200 billion US dollars means that China's GDP will decrease by 0.8%. , China will reduce 35 to 50 million jobs.
A scholar who has long studied international trade told the Chinese Entrepreneur that some of the problems raised in the 301 report against China existed, but in general, this report is biased. Trump’s request is 'lion The big opening', the US request is difficult for China to accept. Therefore, the multiple rounds of negotiations so far can not reach a consensus.
During the Sino-US trade war, people are most concerned about how long this battle will last. How should local enterprises and ordinary people respond? Many scholars interviewed by China Entrepreneur agree that regardless of the attitude of the US, China should continue to expand its openness. .
Yu Yongding, a member of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, wrote that the root cause of the Sino-US trade war is geopolitics. In the long run, the United States and China will compete comprehensively in various fields, and the economy will be the most competitive field. Will be long-term, normalized.