A field study of an EU antidumping proceeding. - The case of Vietnamese footwear.

Sammanfattning: This thesis describes the antidumping duty imposed towards Vietnam on certain footwear and the implications that follows the measure. In an antidumping investigation it is of great importance to establish whether the exporting country is a market economy or not. The EC decision to impose a provisional antidumping duty on imports of certain footwear with uppers of leather originating in Vietnam was based on the conclusion that Vietnam is a Non-Market Economy. The idea of Non-Market Economy (NME) treatment is based on the system where free trade only works if the trading is maintained on a free market. A company can be granted Market Economy Treatment (MET) by the EU and when granted this treatment it will be considered as situated in a market economy even though the country is treated as a Non-Market Economy. No company was granted such treatment in the described case based on the fact that the Vietnamese companies did not pay market rent for the land on which their facilities are situated. The term Non-Market Economy is not widely used which also complicates the implementation. Member States within the European Union (EU) have agreed on a common commercial policy in trade with non Member States (third countries). Articles 131- 134 of the EC Treaty provide for the legal basis for this policy. The EU and its Member States are all Members of the World Trade Organization, WTO, and consequently need to follow the regulations in several international trade agreements (WTO law). EC Courts have however so far sustained that GATT and WTO law does not have direct effect in the EC legal system. Vietnam was recently accessed to the WTO and became the 150th Member. When accessing WTO the main challenge is that it will force the enterprises in the Member state to increase their competiveness and that is especially due to small and medium sized enterprises as the footwear companies. The companies have to meet the demands on international standards and the implementation of certain legislation will increase. The predictability is also an important issue and how the importers and exporters can predict the tariffs on certain goods. Within the WTO there is a right to dispute trial and the AD Agreement also states that all national legislation includes rules that all members should have a trial organ when it comes to final decisions on anti dumping tariffs. In the WTO dispute settlement procedure there is a huge difference though and that is that individual companies cannot have their cases tried, only member states. But this is further complicated by the fact that the EU does not give direct effect to the WTO Law. The EU also gives contradictory conclusions on trade since it embraces free trade but at the same time use trade defence instruments. It is difficult to estimate the effects on exports of Vietnamese footwear but according to the Leather and Footwear Association, LEFASO and the Ministry of Trade in Vietnam, the export will decline. There are also risks that foreign investors will move their production to other countries. The costs for the companies will be much higher for the producing companies in Vietnam that have made investments than the actual positive effects from measures for the Common Industry in the EU.