1、中文 3110 字 本科毕业论文外文翻译 外文题目： Shoes and Toys: Victims of Anti-Dumping 出 处： CHINAS FOREIGN TRADE, 2009, (12): 30-31 作 者： Guo Liqin 原文： Shoes and Toys: Victims of Anti-Dumpling Guo Liqin The anti-dumping duties imposed on China have long been a subject of intense dispute. According to statistics released
2、 by the WTO, China is the country most frequently targeted by other countries for anti-dumping investigation against its exports. Analyzed by Lehman Lee&Xu, the third largest corporate commercial law firm in China, foreign anti-dumping measures against Chinese goods has the following characteristics
3、. The variety of Chinese goods brought under anti-dumping measures is increasing. Since the first anti-dumping case against Chinese exports, most Chinese goods under anti-dumping investigations go to labor-intensive products or easily processed products, involving textile products, clothing, light i
4、ndustry products, home electric appliances, hardware, chemical products, mineral products, medicine and agricultural products. Many countries have filed anti-dumping lawsuits against China, such as Germany, France, Italy, Japan, Mexico, Argentina, Venezuela, South Africa, Nigeria, South Africa, Nige
5、ria, India, South Korea, New Zealand and Turkey. Some countries impose duties at a very high rate on Chinese exports. In 1993, Mexico launched large-scale anti-dumping investigations against Chinese exports, imposing temporary anti-dumping duties 315% percent on toys and 1,105% on footwear, the high
6、est rate ever set. More and more countries are also beginning to bring re-exports under the scope of anti-dumping investigations. This means that exports originally made in China and directly or indirectly exported through Hong Kong or other regions to the target country are also becoming their anti
7、-dumping investigation targets as more countries are adopting the rule of the origin of products as being the target of anti-dumping suits. Toys, pressure also from developing countries Indias Federation of Chambers of Commerce and Industry said on June 14 a survey of 110 small-and medium-sized manu
8、facturers found that about two-thirds had suffered a serious erosion of their Indian market share over the past year, because of cheaper Chinese products. In its statement, FICCI said the Chinese imports were between 10 and 70 percent cheaper than comparable Indian products, a price differential tha
9、t it said was “huge and difficult to explain”. Amit Mitra, the FICCIs secretary-general, said Indian industries were being hurt by “typical Chinese predatory pricing” intended to drive rivals out of business so that Chinese companies could capture the marketand then raise prices to more normal level
10、s. Indian manufacturers face serious competitive disadvantages in comparison with China, including poor infrastructure and rigid labor laws that perversely discourage companies from growing and instead promote inefficient fragmentation. China exported US$8.4 billion to India in the first four months
11、 this year, 13 percent decline compared with the last year, according to the data from Chinas Ministry of Commerce. Meanwhile, statistics from Indias Ministry of Commerce and Industry also show that its import from China still remain stable, taking up over one tenth of its total import, despite of t
12、he context of global economic crisis. In January, New Delhi announced a six-month ban on the import of Chinese toys, citing concerns about their safety, after Indian toymakers complained that such playthings had grabbed the lions share of the countrys US$2.5bn toy market. However, the ban was lifted
13、 after just two months, after Beijing threatened to take the issue to the WTO. Indias small and medium enterprises have warned that they are suffering because of cheap imports from China. They are urging New Delhi to accelerate antidumping investigations and impose tougher safety and quality checks
14、on Chinese products. The appeal for greater government protection came amid rising tensions between New Delhi and Beijing over trade, after a high-profile dispute over an Indian ban on Chinese made toys. Not only India, increased protectionism in the US and the EU, where most of Guangdongs toys have
15、 been exported, Russia, Mexico, Brazil and Argentina have for the time being introduced anti-dumping measures against toy imports from China, citing various excuses, according to Li Zhuoming, deputy chairman of the Guangdong Toy Association. Actually, starting from 2006, Chinese toy manufactures had
16、 felt the pinch from diverse-edged pressures. “We have worries every year. We worried about the short supply of workers last year and now we are concerned about the foreign market shrinking due to trade protectionism in many western countries,” Lin Ruorong, owner of a toy factory in the city of Zhon
17、gshan said. His factory manufactures stuffed toys for export to Europe and the United States. “The USs toy imports from China have been decreasing over the past couple of years and the European Union has raised its market threshold for Chinas toy products,” he said. “That means my business is hardly
18、 able to survive.” What was worse, Li said, was that the price rise of raw materials and the rise in workers wage would further narrow profit. There is consensus that tapping into domestic market and resort to innovation of the whole industry is the only way out. To Chinas delight, many toy manufact
19、urers in Shantou, Guangdong province have successfully upgraded their products and even thrive during the international financial crisis. Footwear, price advantage encounters challenges Chinese leather shoes are for long time the victim of EU anti-dumping sanctions, and the relevant barriers take pl
20、ace frequently. On October 7, 2006, the European Union on Chinese shoes anti-dumping sanctions on Chinese leather shoes originating in the introduction of the product for a period of 2 years of 16.5 percent antidumping duties, despite MOFCOM spokesman Chong Quan said that there was no dumping in exp
21、ort of Chinese shoes, and the exported shoes did not cause essential damage to EU industry. It is remarkably discrimination to refuse recognizing the economic status and legal basis of all Chinese enterprises who responded to the anti-dumping case and decided to implement “all others rate” to all involved enterprises. At the same time,
