Humen Xinyi Glass Company wins anti-dumping agains

2022-09-28
  • Detail

Depth: Humen Xinyi Glass Co., Ltd. won the anti-dumping lawsuit against Australia

on the 22nd of this month, the Australian Customs and Border Protection Agency announced that the floating glass originated from or exported from China had not caused substantial harm to the domestic industry in Australia, so it terminated the anti-dumping investigation on the products involved in China launched on April 19

the anti-dumping case was finally settled. Compared with the highly publicized U.S. tire warranty case and the furniture anti-dumping case that caused the earthquake in Dongguan furniture industry, this case seems to be a one-off case

however, in-depth investigation found that Xinyi ultra thin glass (Dongguan) Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "Xinyi Glass") involved in this case has faced anti-dumping investigations four times, and its case has even been written into MBA textbooks

"don't be afraid of anti-dumping." An unnamed person who participated in the anti-dumping response of Xinyi Glass said that don't be intimidated by the high cost of responding to the lawsuit. Responding to the lawsuit is actually an investment that Dongguan enterprises must make in order to maintain and even expand their export market share

fourth victory

this is the fourth victory of anti-dumping in the overseas market of Xinyi Glass so far. Since China joined the WTO, Xinyi Glass has participated in responding to the anti-dumping actions of different foreign countries for four times. The first three times are: responding to the anti-dumping of automobile windscreens in the United States, responding to the anti-dumping of automobile windscreens in Canada, and responding to the anti-dumping of laminated glass for construction in Australia

Xinyi Glass is the largest foreign investment project in Humen. The company covers an area of 1060 Mu and has more than 3000 employees. In order to cover this anti-dumping incident, I visited Xinyi Glass a few days ago. "This is a very straightforward victory." An unnamed person from Xinyi Glass said when introducing the process of the case to him

in March this year, the China building glass and Industrial Glass Association issued a notice to domestic float glass manufacturers such as Xinyi Glass, saying that on February 19, 2010, the Australian Customs and Border Protection Agency sent a letter to the Chinese side, saying that it had received an application from the domestic industry to launch an anti-dumping investigation on the imported float glass from China. The Australian side announced that it would postpone the date of deciding whether to file the case to March 30. Once the case is filed, it will be the first trade remedy investigation launched by Australia to China this year

China architectural glass and Industrial Glass Association reminds relevant enterprises to pay attention to this and prepare for it. China building glass and Industrial Glass Association will also pay close attention to this. New information will be released on the website in time, and actively communicate with the Ministry of Commerce to prepare for it

after several delays, Australia finally filed an anti-dumping investigation on float glass originating in China, Indonesia and Thailand on April 19 at the application of CSR viridian limited

csr viridian Co., Ltd. is currently the only enterprise producing float glass in Australia. The products involved in the complaint are 3mm ~ 12mm float glass. At present, if China and Indonesia have any requirements for Australian float glass, please timely exclude or notify our company that the export tariff is 4%, while Thailand is duty-free

according to the news released by Xinyi Glass, on December 2, 2010, the Australian Customs announced that in the anti-dumping case against float glass originating in China, because the dumping margin of Xinyi ultra-thin glass (Dongguan) Co., Ltd. was less than 2%, there was no substantial damage to the domestic industry in Australia, and there was basically no dumping behavior, so it decided to terminate the anti-dumping investigation against Xinyi Glass. Among the glass enterprises in China, Indonesia and Thailand that were investigated for anti-dumping, Xinyi Glass is the only glass exporter exempted from anti-dumping duties

on the 22nd of this month, the Australian Customs and Border Protection Agency announced that the floating glass originated from or exported from China had not caused substantial damage to the domestic industry in Australia, so the anti-dumping investigation on the products involved in China, which was launched on April 19, was terminated

this is the fourth anti-dumping victory of Xinyi Glass overseas market so far. Since China joined the WTO, Xinyi Glass has participated in responding to the anti-dumping actions of different foreign countries for four times. The first three times are: responding to the anti-dumping of automobile windscreens in the United States, responding to the anti-dumping of automobile windscreens in Canada, and responding to the anti-dumping of laminated glass for construction in Australia. Among them, the U.S. anti-dumping case lasted for 7 years, and the Canadian anti-dumping case lasted for 11 months and 20 days, both of which had a great impact

gorgeous counterattack

after China's accession to the WTO, it has been on the defensive in dealing with various foreign trade barriers. Especially since last year, the United States tire warranty case, steel, textile industries, etc., have suffered from anti-dumping and countervailing games, which are difficult to win a victory for the Chinese people

why can Xinyi win this time

on July 29 this year, more than three months after receiving the Australian anti-dumping investigation, Xinyi Glass received two Australian customs officials on the anti-dumping investigation. The official's investigation results will become an important basis for Australia to determine whether Lutheran is dumping. During the investigation, Xinyi had to prove to two officials that the operation of Xinyi Glass followed the rules of market economy, and under this rule, the price of float glass exported by Xinyi to Australia was higher than the cost price, that is, there was no dumping

"the materials we provided to the two officials are about more than 40 cm tall, of which only the questionnaires provided by the other party are nearly 20 cm tall." According to an unnamed person of Xinyi Glass, in the face of impeccable materials, the other party finally recognized the market economy status of Xinyi Glass, and gave the investigation results that the dumping margin of Xinyi Glass was less than 2%, which did not cause substantial damage to Australia's domestic industry, and there was basically no dumping behavior

Liu Sheng, the manager of Xinyi Glass export department, also participated in the preparation of this anti-dumping. He said that the price of glass sold by Xinyi Glass to Australia was very reasonable, because the company did not need to sacrifice profits for market share. In addition, the thick materials issued by the company also proved that the company had a very perfect financial system. When the other party conducted spot checks on costs and sales data, Xinyi could issue credible materials

"standardized operation is the foundation for the company to win. In addition, the company has an excellent anti-dumping team, which is also the main reason for winning." An unnamed person from Xinyi Glass said that after receiving the notice of Australia's anti-dumping investigation, the group attached great importance to it. The executive director who had participated in the company's previous three anti-dumping investigations immediately organized and established an anti-dumping team together with Dongguan business department. For many members of the team, this time, they were familiar with the preparation of materials

in addition, Xinyi Glass also hired a local lawyer in Australia and invited the lawyer to Dongguan three times to prepare materials. The unnamed person said that the advantage of inviting Australian lawyers is that their domestic lawyers have a better understanding of local laws and can put forward suggestions that are more in line with their national conditions on the premise of complying with the laws. "The materials we fill in are basically completed with Australian lawyers. Of course, the lawyer's fees will be higher, but in order to improve the odds of winning, this is inevitable."

it is undeniable that the anti-dumping case of float glass has less influence than the major anti-dumping cases at home and abroad in recent years. Therefore, in the game between the two sides, there are few political forces involved. The above unnamed person said that this anti-dumping was launched against float glass, and the products involved were relatively single. Compared with the special tire protection case, the amount involved was not much, and there was only one enterprise in Australia engaged in the production of float glass. Therefore, in this segmented industry, the complexity of the dumping investigation was lower than that of some large industries

don't be afraid of anti-dumping

"enterprises that actively respond to the lawsuit are either ruled not to have dumping behavior, or are ruled to impose lower punitive tariffs. Not responding to the lawsuit can only suffer the greatest loss, and responding to the lawsuit cannot become worse." Said zoujianhua, Professor of international business law and doctoral supervisor of Lingnan College of Sun Yat sen University

"as far as we know, in China's float glass industry, there is no enterprise that will have dumping behavior and do not make money. What are you looking for?" An unnamed person from Xinyi Glass said that the anti-dumping complaints made by foreign competitors or relevant institutions are nothing more than to squeeze competitors out of the domestic market by using trade rules

for many domestic enterprises, facing anti-dumping investigations is indeed a little overwhelmed. For small and medium-sized enterprises in the industry, the first is the litigation cost, which can make them give up. In addition, for the enterprises responding to the lawsuit, they first need to prove their market economy status

as the basic text of China's accession to the WTO in 2001, the agreement on China's accession to the WTO stipulates that other WTO members can continue to regard China as a "non market economy country" within 15 years. In fact, one of the main reasons why China has become the biggest victim of international anti-dumping after its accession to the WTO is that the developed economies in Europe and the United States and even some developing members still regard China as a "non market economy country", and then adopt the "surrogate country system" on the issue of "normal value", which is undoubtedly a kind of discrimination against Chinese exports

the so-called substitute country system refers to that when determining the normal value of commodities from non market economies, the actual cost of commodities in the exporting country is not used, but the price of similar commodities in a third country or importing country of market economy is selected as the method of calculating the normal value. The adopted market economy countries are usually referred to as "substitute countries"

Zhang Junsheng, a WTO expert at China University of international business and economics, said in an interview that this system or means is actually an unfair approach, because importing countries generally do not go to countries with lower production costs, but tend to go to countries with high export prices to propose anti-dumping, "this itself has a great subjective factor in it"

analysts pointed out that under the situation that it is impossible to completely abolish the surrogate country system at present, how to formulate universally applicable and non discriminatory market economy standards, and how to maximize fairness and rationality, Jinan new era Gold Testing Instrument Co., Ltd. scientifically applies the surrogate country system by testing the samples provided by customers, is not only the direction China should strive for, but also a challenge to test the credibility of the WTO

under the relatively unfair rules of the game, whether to respond to the lawsuit or not will undoubtedly torture the decision-making level of the enterprise. "Don't be afraid of anti-dumping." An unnamed person from Xinyi Glass said that this may be the most valuable experience that Xinyi can share in several anti-dumping investigations. He said that not responding to the lawsuit means giving up the market

zoujianhua, Professor of international business law and doctoral supervisor of Lingnan College of Sun Yat sen University, once said that generally speaking, enterprises that actively respond to the lawsuit are either ruled not to have dumping behavior or are ruled to impose lower punitive tariffs. Therefore, as long as the enterprise believes that the international market is important to itself now or in the future, it should actively respond to the lawsuit, because not responding to the lawsuit can only suffer the greatest loss, and responding to the lawsuit cannot become worse

in addition

Copyright © 2011 JIN SHI