It Is Still Difficult For China And The United States To Negotiate And Resolve The 301 &Nbsp Survey.

The United States Trade Representative Office (USTR) starts the clean energy industry in China

This week, a number of international law firms in Washington issued a temporary legal summary to their clients to interpret the case.

Compared with the strong reaction in China, the US trade lawyers' reaction to the case is relatively calm.

"Start 301 survey right.

The statement of the US trade investigation office shows that the office will openly solicit opinions on the case since the investigation started in October 15th, and the deadline for soliciting opinions will be until November 15th.

The "301 investigation" must conform to the WTO principle.

The calm reaction of the American legal community is inseparable from the actual status of the 301 clause.

In September 9th, the American Iron and Steel Workers Union sent a petition to the US trade representative office, calling for a 301 survey of clean energy industry in China.

301 the survey was named after the 301st clause of the 1974 Trade Law of the United States.

The provision provides that if the United States government finds that foreign governments have violated trade agreements, they can investigate these acts and consult with the governments concerned to solve the problems. Finally, the president of the United States has the right to decide whether to take measures such as raising tariffs, restricting imports and stopping relevant agreements, so as to protect the interests of the United States in international trade.

"On the surface, this provision covers a very wide range."

"But because of the conflict between the 301 clause and the subsequent WTO rules, the US government does not stipulate in practice that the measures taken by any 301 investigation must be consistent with the existing international trade law," he told reporters.

This unwritten rule has retained the function of "consultation" of the 301 clause, but has limited its "taxation" function.

The 301 section actually became the tool of the United States trade union to urge the US trade representative office to consult with other governments in the framework of WTO for certain industrial policies.

Because of this, in the current round of prosecution, the American Steelworkers union did not ask the US government to impose punitive tariffs on China's clean energy products, but only asked the US government to consult with the Chinese government to abolish the so-called "illegal" subsidy policy identified in the indictment.

The reason for the prosecution of the American steelworkers association is that the subsidy measures taken by China to support its clean energy sector are non market subsidies. These measures will violate the relevant provisions of the WTO (WTO) and artificially reduce the cost of China's clean energy products, thereby affecting the relevant industries in the United States and causing unemployment.

In the common "double anti" (anti-dumping and countervailing) prosecution, the plaintiff usually proposes that the US government impose punitive tariffs on the relevant Chinese products exported to the United States.

However, the American steelworkers Association, which chose the "301 clause", did not propose to impose punitive tax requirements.

In a 5800 page petition, the "relief request" part only takes up 6 lines.

{page_break}

As Zhang Guobao, deputy director of the China Development and Reform Commission, said, the United Steelworkers' Association has been untruthful. The United States government accepts the prosecution itself for trade protection.

But objectively speaking, it is too early for the US government to intervene in China's clean energy policy through this investigation, because there are still many links in the trial.

First, the initiation of the investigation does not mean that the US trade representative office supports the Union's prosecution.

Since the US Trade Representative Office announced the launch of the investigation in October 15th, the office will have 90 days to determine whether the plaintiff's identification with the Chinese government's subsidies is valid.

"The decision of the US trade representative office to initiate the 301 investigation does not mean that the US government will consult with China through the WTO mechanism in the future (clean energy subsidies)."

Mayor Brown law firm Tim Keeler said.

The office of the United States trade representative only decides that the plaintiff enumerates all or part of the subsidy, so it is possible for the Chinese government to sue WTO in the name of the US government and ask China to cancel the relevant subsidies.

Once we enter the WTO process, the Chinese and American governments will receive 60 days of consultation.

If bilateral talks fail, WTO will set up a dispute resolution team to mediate the compromise between the two governments.

This process usually lasts for 1 to 1 and a half years.

It is unclear whether the US government will accuse the Chinese government of WTO to the case, but even if the Chinese government becomes a defendant, he decided that the two countries would resolve their differences through consultation.

If WTO fails to negotiate and WTO makes a decision against China, the Chinese government can apply for an appeal.