China'S Shoe Enterprises' Anti-Dumping Campaign Will Finally Come To A Successful Conclusion.

October 28th, the world

Taking AOKANG company as a sample, the company and its attorney, Pu Ling Hui, the association and the government departments, have the following reasons.

Plea: running in Europe

The EU and Chinese shoe "Vice" began in July 2005.

At that time,

Substantive action took place in April 7, 2006.

On that day, the European Union announced that the import of Chinese leather shoes should be curbed temporarily in the form of "temporary anti-dumping duty". This measure lasted for six months in accordance with the EU anti-dumping law.

The biggest trade partner's conflict has made Chinese shoe enterprises uneasy.

They found that not only the shrinking orders caused by the global financial tsunami, but also the visible strong pressure imposed by international trade partners.

"At that time, there were two reactions to Chinese shoe enterprises. One was the ability to raise questions: why do I say dumping? I have my own profits and I am not cheap."

Pu Lingchen told reporters.

The idea of shoe companies began to collide with each other.

Activists, such as AOKANG, have begun to think about whether we can break the EU's hostile ice with collective synergy and collective wisdom.

At the same time, China Light Industry Arts and crafts import and Export Chamber of Commerce began with the support of the Ministry of Commerce calling on shoe enterprises to form a defence group.

After all, fighting for survival is better than waiting for death.

Dozens of shoe companies such as AOKANG shoes have joined the defence group.

After holding together, we have the courage to face the unknown.

At the beginning of May, the defense group went to the European Union Brussels to participate in the hearing "anti-dumping hearing on shoes products in China".

This means that China has begun to face up to this international trade dispute.

At the meeting, AOKANG expressed its views on behalf of Chinese shoe enterprises, stressing that the price of Chinese leather shoes exported to the EU was very high, and it did not constitute dumping at all. It was also an unfair decision made by the European Trade Commission to protect its industries.

The European Union delegates were all sad at the meeting.

Since then, footsteps have not ceased.

A few days later, hundreds of shoe manufacturers gathered together to talk about countermeasures against EU anti-dumping, and formed a protest against the EU footwear anti-dumping declaration "Chongqing declaration".

China's footwear industry's response to EU anti-dumping is further demonstrated.

"We also try to participate in the related activities of the European Union countries, such as Spain, taking the opportunity to express anti-dumping duties at the meeting, which are unfavorable to China and Europe, and hope to win support from some countries within the European Union."

In June 15, 2006, under the invitation of Calvo, chairman of the European footwear Federation, Wang Zhentao, chairman of AOKANG footwear, took part in the footwear industry forum in the Spanish city of Spain as a representative of Chinese footwear enterprises. This has been seen as a great opportunity for Chinese shoe makers to make a sound.

{page_break}

Prosecuting the European Commission: the European Union Court

From a cold shoulder to a great care, hundreds of Chinese shoe enterprises have decided to go back to the road of breaking through.

Unexpectedly, the hostile feelings inside the European Union were still forced to vent.

In October 7, 2006, the European Union officially launched a 16.5% anti-dumping duty on leather shoes originating in China, with a period of two years.

More than 1200 Chinese shoe companies have been shut down in the European market.

The power of anti-dumping measures is immediate.

"In the second months when the European Union formally imposed anti-dumping duties, Wenzhou exported 430 pairs of leather shoes products to the EU, 2 million 437 thousand and 800 pairs and 21 million 470 thousand and 900 US exports, down 32.71%, 37.80% and 19.80% respectively compared with the same period in 2005.

And from the fourth quarter of 2006, many small and medium-sized shoe-making enterprises have no orders.

Wenzhou a shoe enterprise boss told reporters.

Then take a lawsuit.

"If we simply acquiesce and tolerate, the EU may become more aggressive, and the export of Chinese shoe companies will be even more difficult then."

Wang Zhentao felt that there was always an end to the gloomy road. We must try our best to fight for the dawn.

The "anti dumping first lawyer" Pu Ling dust was pushed to the front desk. As AOKANG's attorney, Pu Ling dust opened his 5 years' running road.

"From the entity analysis, in terms of" damage identification ", the decision of the European Trade Commission does not conform to the WTO regulations, nor does it comply with the provisions of the national anti-dumping law.

Pu Lingchen thought the lawsuit could be fought.

In December 28, 2006, 5 companies of AOKANG, Tamar, Jin Lu, and new HK dollar and WAN Bang formally submitted the prosecution materials to the European Union Court in Brussels, Belgium.

"Formally accepting litigation requests is only the beginning of a long lawsuit."

Pu Ling said that after the initiation of the proceedings, the European Commission and the Chinese enterprises will carry out two rounds of written defense in turn. After the conclusion, there will be another round of oral defense. Finally, the European Court will make a ruling on this basis.

The main reply is written, and the written defense time of each round should be between 3 and 5 months.

It is estimated that a set of procedures may take about two years.

The worries of the industry came one after another: "two years of litigation has not yet been completed, the tax time may have ended."

Some manufacturers believe that this is a seemingly no result or has been doomed to "loss" of the lawsuit.

However, EU countries began to hear the voice of Chinese enterprises in court.

This voice is a desire for rights and an unyielding struggle.

{page_break}

Prepare for sunset review

In the twinkling of an eye, two years ago, Pu Ling had forgotten how many times he flew to Europe.

In October 2008, when the EU anti-dumping duties on Chinese leather shoes expired, the EU Trade Commission also displayed a "sunset review" banner.

"Sunset review" is a review procedure carried out by the European Trade Commission after the expiration of anti-dumping. According to the results of the review, it is decided whether to cancel or continue to levy anti-dumping duties. The period is 12 months to 15 months, and the anti-dumping duty is still levied during the review period.

Pu Ling dust explains.

China's shoe enterprises are agitated again.

"Surprisingly, how can this European Union be so popular?" in an interview with reporters, Han Tai Yu, general manager of Guangzhou Er Tai shoes recalls.

The grim situation can not allow Chinese shoe companies to take pity on themselves.

In Zhejiang, Guangdong and Fujian, the three major shoe making bases, the relevant Chinese government departments have convened to deal with the coordination meeting, appealed to shoe enterprises to go all out to respond positively.

Zhou Xiaoyan, director of the Fair Trade Bureau of the Ministry of Commerce, urged that Chinese footwear enterprises in Zhejiang, Guangdong and Fujian should act collectively and step by step to prevent the "sunset review" from falling into a passive position again.

"Under the advocacy of all parties, more than 60 footwear companies in the country submitted material applications to participate in the sample survey process before the deadline for submission of the sampling table in October 2008.

Pu Ling dust recalls.

According to the procedure, the European Trade Commission sampled further investigation.

In November 7th, the Ministry of Commerce and the import and Export Fair Trade Bureau received the European Union's "sunset review" sampling letter. 7 shoe companies, including Zhejiang AOKANG, Fujian Jian Yue, Guangdong Yuyuan industry, Panyu Chuangxin, Panyu Huajian, Tong Jia and Foshan Nanhai gold shoes, were selected to be the EU's comprehensive procedures for the investigation and verification of the field, and were asked to make written pleas.

"In October 30th, the company received the anti-dumping investigation form of the European Commission's mail on specific leather shoes produced in People's Republic of China and Vietnam."

AOKANG Group Import and export company disclosed that the questionnaire was quite strict, up to 80 pages, covering almost all aspects of the company's exports to the European Union, and the investigation authorities stipulated that the sampling enterprises must submit the form before December 8th.

No one dared to take it lightly, and the united front of collective defense began to take shape.

At home, the four Association of Fujian, Zhejiang, Guangdong and Guangdong three places (China Light Industry Import and Export Chamber of Commerce, China Leather Association, Wenzhou shoe leather association, Guangdong shoe industry anti dumping Union) join together to join the European Union for the first hearing, representing the industry "no damage defense" on behalf of Chinese leather shoes enterprises; in foreign countries, two European law firms have been unified as agents to cooperate with China to complete the defense work together.

In December 2, 2008, the data and arguments of the antidumping questionnaire were formally submitted to the EU Trade Commission by 7 enterprises in which the sample was sampled.

In January 9, 2009, the EU Trade Commission investigator embarked on the capital airport in Beijing and started field inspections of seven Chinese enterprises.

Li Haijun, AOKANG's foreign trade salesman, remembered very clearly that in the cold winter morning, he got up very early to meet the "international friends" at the airport.

According to the procedures, EU officials will return to China to collect, analyze and appraise the situation with the field inspection obtained in China.

At the same time, they will also conduct on-site verification of the EU's local importers and prosecuting industries.

Two months later, that is, early March 2009, a comprehensive summary of data and evaluation results will be released. The second hearing of China and Europe will be held on this basis.

{page_break}

Hardship: China's failure to return steadily

Hearing is crucial in early March 2009.

"This is an important procedure of" sunset review ". The European Union will take the evaluation results as an important evidence to make a final decision on whether to extend the anti-dumping duty of 16.5%.

This is a matter of future livelihood for Chinese shoe companies. "

Pu Lingchen said.

Unlike the first hearing, this time, Chinese shoe companies are mainly concerned about the law and technology.

"The footwear industry alliance of Guangdong is the main body, and the co sampling enterprises and the China Leather Association will make a defense."

Pu Lingchen told reporters that it is a good time for Chinese shoe companies to argue again.

What surprised and surprised the shoe companies is that there seems to be a "internal infighting" in the domestic members of the European Union: "I wonder if we are so sensible that the trade officials of most member countries are beginning to oppose the extension of anti-dumping duties."

For this reason, enterprises have been excited for quite a while, and they expect that the anti-dumping duty is likely to be abolished.

However, half a year after he returned home, the results of his and Chinese shoe companies were quite different from those of previous optimism: the EU Trade Commission decided to extend anti-dumping duties, ignoring the protests of the Chinese side and its majority of Member States.

"In October 12, 2009, a formal letter from the European Trade Commission was received. The EU Trade Commission proposed to extend anti-dumping duties on shoes imported from China and Vietnam for at least 15 months and maintain a 16.5% rate unchanged."

Han Yuxin said.

5 shoe companies responded quickly.

In the following week, under the organization of the China Leather Association, 5 shoe companies prepared a lot of data to entrust lawyers with the last defense.

"At that time, the association organized AOKANG and Tamar and other Chinese shoe companies to make a final decision. At the same time, they negotiated with the European Union and formed an alliance with the European buyers and retailers to intensify their lobbying for Member States. On the other hand, it suggested that the government should intensify negotiations."

Wei Yafei, director of the office of China Leather Association, told reporters.

But the outcome has not been reversed.

In December 22, 2009, the European Union formally announced the extension of anti-dumping measures for 15 months.

The more gloomy news is still behind.

In March 2010, the European Court of justice initially rejected the lawsuit filed by 5 Chinese shoe companies against the EU Trade Commission, and supported the EU Trade Commission to continue to impose anti-dumping duties on footwear products from China.

"This is unfair judgment."

Pu Ling dust is obviously angry, "the European Court of justice in the interpretation of anti-dumping legal provisions in the process is entirely based on the EU last January to AOKANG and other Chinese shoe enterprises verification situation.

In December 2009, the European Union released a ruling on the "sunset review" of China's leather shoes, and the most important basis was the EU's on-site verification.

The result of the two verdict of the European Court of justice and the European Trade Commission is the same basis, but ignoring the evidence submitted by Chinese shoe companies in judicial proceedings is unfair to Chinese shoe companies.

{page_break}

Appeal: AOKANG's "riding a thousand miles"

Chinese officials have been working hard on the way of hard safeguarding rights.

On February 4, 2010, the permanent WTO delegation of China lodge a request for negotiation under the WTO dispute settlement mechanism on anti-dumping measures taken by the EU on Chinese leather shoes, and the WTO dispute settlement procedure was officially launched.

3 months later, WTO formally set up an expert group to investigate whether EU anti-dumping measures against Chinese leather shoes violated international trade rules.

In contrast, 4 of the 5 shoe companies that initially walked into the judicial process gave up the fight again.

"Confidence has been completely destroyed."

Han Yuxin said, "a lot of shoe companies want to move forward, which is extremely difficult, whether it is time cost or money cost."

AOKANG, however, unexpectedly took the lead in individual assault.

Wang Zhentao's ideas are large and small.

"At a large level, the latest statistics from the China Leather Industry Association showed that the previous anti-dumping duty resulted in a 20% reduction in the output of Chinese leather shoes exported to Europe.

The reduction of about 40 million pairs of shoes to export to the EU has caused about 20000 workers to lose their jobs.

At a small level, the average export price of AOKANG's leather shoes is over $20, and the price of products exported to the EU is even higher. We firmly believe that there is absolutely no dumping behavior.

Since there is no dumping, we must safeguard our rights and export markets, and others will slander ourselves. We must continue to express our views and show the attitude of Chinese enterprises.

He said.

"By reading the verdict of the European Court of first instance, we found that the verdict was unfair."

In May 2010, Pu Ling Chen came to Wenzhou again to report to Wang Zhentao on the situation of the court of first instance of the European Union. "In calculating the magnitude of damage, the practice of the European Trade Commission actually violated the first article of the EU anti-dumping regulations. When commenting on the change of the measures and calculation methods of the EU Trade Commission, the EU Trade Commission gave the Chinese enterprises 5 days of deliberation, which did not meet the 10 day deadline stipulated by the regulations.

In view of these legal doubts, we can appeal to the high court of the European Union and request the high court to review the trial procedure of the court of first instance.

AOKANG still has a chance to win. "

In June 2010, AOKANG filed an appeal to the high court of the European Union for the result of the anti-dumping case against leather shoes which was first heard by the court of first instance.

At this point, China's official and civil "two pronged" safeguard the export rights and interests of the prologue officially opened.

{page_break}{page_break}

Good: see the light again

In March 2011, the EU's "sunset review" decided to extend the anti-dumping tax date for 15 months.

As from December 2009, the anti-dumping duty will expire again in that month.

Will the EU launch a "sunset review" again and extend the anti-dumping duty again?

In the waiting breath of all parties, the EU has not seen any movement.

At the beginning of March, Wei Ya Fei, director of the shoe making office of China Leather Association, revealed that the European Union of footwear industry (CEC) recently issued a news bulletin on leather shoes re examination. It was announced that the EU footwear Federation had negotiated with the EU Trade Commission several times and decided to give up seeking "sunset review" on anti-dumping measures from the Chinese leather shoes being implemented and about to expire at the end of March.

As a "professional" person, Pu Ling dust excited, he is very clear, from the EU's legal proceedings, if the EU Trade Commission after the expiry of the initiative does not initiate a review, the anti-dumping measures against China will be terminated as scheduled.

Sure enough, at the end of March, the European Union formally announced the lifting of anti-dumping duties on Chinese leather shoes.

"Let me see the importance of Chinese shoe companies using legal weapons to safeguard their rights and interests, and let the European Commission see the importance of a regularized and internationalized Chinese shoe enterprises.

We are winners in this lawsuit, no matter what the outcome is, and we have learned a lot from this lawsuit.

Wang Zhentao said.

"I think this outcome is the result of continuous pressure from the Chinese government and enterprises."

Pu Ling said that the continued appeal of AOKANG after the defeat of the European Court of first instance has played a crucial role in the whole process. The tough attitude of Chinese enterprises has led the European Commission to reconsider and make a decision in the long term.

7 months after the EU formally cancelled anti-dumping duties against China, the good news of Chinese shoe companies came again.

In October 28th, WTO issued a panel of experts on WTO anti-dumping case against China EU leather shoes.

The report of the panel of experts ruled that ninth (5) of the basic anti-dumping regulations of the European Union violated the relevant rules of the WTO.

At the same time, the anti-dumping authorities of the European Union also violated the requirements of pparency and other aspects of WTO's Anti-dumping Agreement in the original trial and retrial investigation.

Mei Xinyu, an Associate Research Fellow of the Ministry of Commerce, said in an interview with reporters that the Chinese shoe enterprises are undoubtedly of great significance to the EU's anti dumping good results. This not only marks the increase of China's right to speak in Europe, but also marks the 10 year after China's accession to the WTO, it has been able to rectify the unreasonable trading rules of other major trading partners through WTO channels. This is a very significant progress.

5 years of anti-dumping duties, Chinese shoe enterprises have been bitterness and exhaustion all the way.

Happily, after the storm, the sky of Chinese shoe enterprises in the EU market is undoubtedly clearer than before.