Author:
GNUTZMANN-MKRTCHYAN AREVIK,LESTER SIMON
Abstract
AbstractThe Panel Report in Ukraine–Passenger Cars provides an opportunity to revisit an old debate over the role of safeguard measures in the WTO. With regard to the legal findings, the Panel followed the established jurisprudence in this area, and found a number of violations of the Safeguards Agreement. With regard to the economics, we delve more deeply into the economic and political background of the safeguards investigation. Ukraine was hit by the economic crisis shortly after its WTO accession that significantly liberalized import tariffs on passenger cars. Next, we offer a de novo look at the injury and causation issues in this case, and discuss the challenges of an industry reliant on offshored production that sees a safeguard as a mechanism to attract foreign direct investment (FDI) for production. We conclude with an assessment of the operation of the WTO's safeguards regime, along with some tentative suggestions for reform. Overall, our examination of the economic analysis by the investigating authority and the legal review by the WTO Panel raises questions about particular aspects of the domestic and WTO processes, but concludes that the system worked well in this case.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
Law,Political Science and International Relations,Economics and Econometrics
Reference25 articles.
1. Nondiscrimination and the WTO Agreement on Safeguards
2. CMS Law-Now (2009), ‘Ukraine: 13% Import Duty Mark-Up’, http://www.law-now.com/ealerts/2009/02/ukraine-13-import-duty-markup?cc_lang=en (accessed 1 June 2016).
3. The Analysis of Causality in Escape Clause Cases
4. Causing problems? The WTO review of causation and injury attribution in US Section 201 cases
5. AUTO-Consulting (2012a), ‘Решение о введении спецпошлин на иномарки будет принимать Петр Порошенко’, http://www.autoconsulting.ua/article.php?sid=23296 (accessed 1 June 2016).
Cited by
14 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献