| Summary: | 在推展全球化貿易下，面對市場逐漸開放之際，世界貿易組織為了減緩世界各國貿易自由化過程中所受到衝擊，允許會員國實施暫時性的保護措施，以矯正不公平貿易行為，其中又以反傾銷制度最為重要，為各國最常採用方式，但卻造成已開發國家如美國、歐盟過度濫用反傾銷措施，致過度保護本國產業。因此本研究以中國毛巾傾銷案作為研究對象，並運用美國國際貿易委員會所發展的COMPAS模型，來探討中國毛巾傾銷行為對我國毛巾產業之影響。除此之外，由於各國對於反傾銷稅的課徵是否過高頗有爭議，本研究因此進一步檢視我國在中國毛巾傾銷案中所課徵之反傾銷稅稅率是否過高？是否符合WTO反傾銷協定「公平貿易」之規範？若不符合，則在滿足「公平貿易」的前提下，其稅率訂定應該為何？
由實證結果顯示，整體而言，傾銷對我國國內同類產品的產出、價格與收益，確實有負面的影響，國內市場佔有率則因受到低價傾銷進口品的替代，而呈現逐年下滑趨勢。在反傾銷稅課徵方面，在目前課徵稅率下（204.1％），確實可為國內廠商帶來正面的影響，然而本研究發現目前課徵稅率過高，而可能導致過度保護本國廠商，進而違反WTO「公平貿易」之規範。若將目前所課徵的稅率調降為符合「公平貿易」規範下之稅率（75.7％），其稅額會較採用傾銷差額課徵為低，不僅符合WTO 「較低稅率原則」，同時也可避免過度保護本國產業，對於整體社會福利之損失也較小。因此，本研究對政策的建議是反傾銷稅率訂定除了參考傾銷差率外，更須考量國內廠商之受損害程度，以課徵足以消除國內產業所受損害之稅率即可，來減少因稅賦所帶來之扭曲以及對國際貿易損害，而進一步傷害社會福利。
=== At the same time of expanding global trade and increasing openness of the market, World Trade Organization (WTO) has been trying to decrease the impacts on Members during the process of liberalization and has permitted Members to practice temporary measures of protection and to correct unfair trade. Among these measures, anti-dumping is the most important and common one. However, it has abused by several developed countries, such as the USA and European Union (EU), which lead to over-protection of their domestic industries. Therefore, the research chooses the dumping case of Chinese towels as its subject and applies a model of Commercial Policy Analysis System (COMPAS) developed by United States International Trade Commission to evaluate the impacts on domestic towel industry due to import dumping from China. In addition, it is still controversial over the levels of antidumping duty to remain fair trade. Thus, the research will estimate further that if the rate of the present anti-dumping duty on the dumping case of Chinese towels is overrated or meets the principles of “fair trade” under WTO Anti-Dumping Agreement. Besides, if it is not, what is the rate should be to meet the principles of “fair trade” under WTO.
The empirical results showed that dumping does have a negative impact on the price, output, and revenue of the domestic industry. The domestic market share has been decreasing year after year because of the substitute effect from dumped imports. As for imposing anti-dumping duty, the empirical results indicate that imposing anti-dumping duty under the present duty rate (204.1%) has a positive effect on domestic industry. However, according to the finding of this research, the present duty rate is too high. Overcharging of the anti-dumping duty could lead to over-protection of domestic industry and to further violation of the principles of “fair trade” under WTO. If the present duty rate can be reduced to meet the principles of “fair trade” (the rate is 75.7%), the tax will be less than the dumping margin. At the same time, it will conform to the“lesser duty rule”under WTO, avoid over-protection of domestic industry and contribute the minimum loss to the social welfare. Hence, this research suggests that the government imposing anti-dumping duty rate should refer to the dumping margin and evaluate the depth of injury to domestic firms. It should only impose an appropriate duty to remove the injury to domestic industry. It is significant to reduce the distortion of the tax and the injury to the international trade, and further harm of social welfare.
|
|---|
