首页> 外文期刊>Inside U.S. Trade >China prevails in WTO challenge of U.S. Section 301 tariffs
【24h】

China prevails in WTO challenge of U.S. Section 301 tariffs

机译:中国在美国的挑战中占有盛派对301条关税

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

Posted 9/15/2020. A World Trade Organization dispute settlement panel on Tuesday ruled U.S. Section 301 tariffs on Chinese goods violate WTO rules, rejecting U.S. claims that the two sides had reached a mutual resolution to the case and that the duties were needed to protect public morals. U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer, however, said the ruling justified the Trump administration's actions by proving the WTO was unable to address China's illicit trade practices. "This panel report confirms what the Trump Administration has been saying for four years: The WTO is completely inadequate to stop China's harmful technology practices," Lighthizer said in a statement. "Although the panel did not dispute the extensive evidence submitted by the United States of intellectual property theft by China, its decision shows that the WTO provides no remedy for issue do not explain the relationship between the chosen measures - additional duties applied to a range of specified products - and the public morals objective pursued by the United States, the report said. "The United States has also not provided any other evidence in support of its assertion that the products on which it imposed additional duties benefitted from practices of China that the United States considered to be contrary to its public morals, nor evidence that would more generally demonstrate how the products it selected for additional duties treatment contributed to its public morals objective."
机译:发表于9/15/2020。周二的世界贸易组织争端解决小组统治了美国。第301条关于中国货物的关税违反了WTO规则,拒绝美国,索赔,双方达成了案件的相互解决,并需要履行公共道德。然而,美国贸易代表罗伯特Lightizer表示,通过证明WTO的裁决证明了特朗普政府的行为无法解决中国的非法贸易实践。 “本小组报告证实了特朗普政府一直在说什么四年:世贸组织完全不足以阻止中国的有害技术实践,”在一份声明中表示。 “虽然小组没有通过中国盗窃美国知识产权盗窃的广泛证据,但其决定表明,世贸组织不提供问题,不解释所选措施之间的关系 - 额外的职责适用于各种职责报告称,指定的产品 - 以及美国追求的公共道德客观。“美国也没有提供任何其他证据,以支持其主张,即它对中国施加额外职责的产品施加了额外的职责美国认为,违背其公共道德,也没有证据表明,更普遍展示所选产品的额外职责的待遇是如何促成其公共道德目标。“

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号