评阿根廷诉欧盟生物柴油反倾销案——WTO上诉机构对“成本替代”规则裁决的得失

Comment on the Case between Argentina and European about the Anti-Dumping Measures on Boidiesel——Loss and Gain in the Appellate Body Report for Cost Substitution

使用构成价确定“正常价值”是《反倾销协议》所允许的方式之一,不过对于构成价格时使用的各种价格要素,《反倾销协议》第2.2条、第2.2.1. 1条和第2.2.2条都有明确、严格的规定。在阿根廷诉欧盟的生物柴油反倾销案件(DS473)中,欧盟在构成价中对于价格要素的使用表面上突破了《反倾销协议》的相关规定,对于这一“突破做法”该怎么评价,上诉机构的裁决是具有一定的权威性的。不过,遗憾的是上诉机构不但没有对欧盟的做法作出全面、准确的分析,而且其裁决对《反倾销协议》相关规定的适用产生了负面影响。

To establish the normal value of the product,the Anti-Dumping Agreement permits that an investigating authority can construct the normal price,the agreement also provides the elements which used to calculate the normal value,and these elements are included in article 2. 2,2. 2. 1. 1 and 2. 2. 2 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement. In the case between Argentina and European about the anti-dumping measures on boidiesel( DS473),when European authority constructs the normal value,they did not follow the Anti-Dumping Agreement. The WTO Appellate Body should determine whether European authority did right or not. But it is so regretful that Appellate Body did not give its analysis on the base of clear and accurate words,the worse thing is that Appellate Body Report imposes negative effects to application of the Anti-Dumping Agreement.