美国国会CRS报告：对特朗普政府对华贸易政策的重大关切摘要

作者/编者：孙磊蔡开明诸葛辰辉

作者单位：大成DENTONS贸易救济团队

创作年代：不详

出处/来源：

学科分类：国际经济法学

文献语种：

摘要

2019年1月28日，美国国会公布了国会研究中心/Congressional Research Service（CRS）报告。CRS报告涉及到美国国会对特朗普政府现行经济贸易政策的若干重大关切。

关键词： 中国美国贸易战贸易政策知识产权贸易赤字 301 232 中国制造2025 一带一路

正文

作者：孙磊、蔡开明，大成DENTONS贸易救济团队合伙人；诸葛辰辉，美国Morris Manning & Martin, LLP北京办公室代表 来源：国际贸易救济法律评论   2019年1月28日，美国国会公布了国会研究中心/Congressional Research Service（CRS）报告。CRS报告涉及到美国国会对特朗普政府现行经济贸易政策的若干重大关切。其中，有关对华贸易政策涉及到以下方面： 贸易赤字——美国国会认为，贸易赤字主要由宏观经济原因导致，现有贸易措施可能导致相反效果； 对华301征税——美国国会和企业界广泛支持政府推动中国改善其知产和创新政策，但对现有措施能否实现这一目的持怀疑态度； 钢铝232征税——美国国会可能通过立法对授予总统以贸易国家安全为由实施单边征税的宪法性权力做出调整； 各国反制措施——美国国会认为，相互加征关税以及将国家安全问题诉诸WTO争端解决，将会动摇现有多边贸易体制； 中国制造2025及产业政策——中国制造2025及产业政策旨在使中国能在高新技术领域获得全球领先优势。美国国会将密切关注现有措施和中美协商情况； 中国知产及创新政策——中国对美国知产和经济安全造成前所未有的威胁，美国国会将通过立法对此加以应对； 一带一路战略——美国国会已经通过BUILD立法应对中国一带一路政策，并将采取进一步有力措施应对中国的影响，以支持美国企业参与全球经济活动。 大成DENTONS贸易救济律师团队在对美国国会研究中心的历史背景和职能进行梳理的基础上，对CRS报告中有关美国国会对特朗普政府就上述重大涉华政策所持的基本态度进行了以下摘要，供参考：   About the CRS/美国国会研究中心 History/背景 In 1914, Congress passed legislation to establish a separate department within the Library of Congress. President Woodrow Wilson signed the bill into law, and CRS, then called the Legislative Reference Service, was born to serve the legislative needs of the Congress.   With the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970, Congress renamed the agency the Congressional Research Service and significantly expanded its statutory obligations. The services provided today by CRS are a direct result of congressional directives and guidance.   Mission/职能 CRS serves the Congress throughout the legislative process by providing comprehensive and reliable legislative research and analysis that are timely, objective, authoritative and confidential, thereby contributing to an informed national legislature.   An abstract for the CRS reports tothe U.S. 116th Congress/美国第116届国会研究中心报告摘要 Main issues in the US 116th Congress/美国第116届国会的主要关切 Duringhis first two years in office, President Trump has focused on reevaluating many U.S. international trade and economic policies and relationships. The President’s focus on these issues could continue over the next two years. Broad policy debates during the 116th Congress may include the impact of trade and trade agreements on the U.S. economy, including U.S. jobs; the causes and consequences of the U.S. trade deficit; the implications of technological developments for U.S. trade policy; and the intersection of economics and national security. Among many others, the potentially more prominent issues in this area that the 116th Congress may consider are: the use and impact of unilateral tariffs imposed by the Trump Administration under various U.S. trade laws, as well as potential legislation that alters the authority granted by Congress to the President to do so; legislation to implement the proposed United States-Mexico-Canada Trade Agreement (USMCA), which would revise and modernize the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA); the Administration’s launch of bilateral trade negotiations with the European Union, Japan, and the United Kingdom, as well as key provisions in trade agreements, including on intellectual property rights, labor, the environment, and dispute settlement; U.S. engagement with the World Trade Organization (WTO), proposals for WTO reform, and the futuredirection of the multilateral trading system; U.S.-China trade relations, including investment issues, intellectual property rights protection, forced technology transfer, currency issues, and market access liberalization; the future of U.S.-Asia trade and economic relations, given President Trump’s withdrawal of the United States from the proposed Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) andChina’s expanding Belt and Road Initiative; the Administration’s use of quotas to achieve some of its trade objectives, and whether these actions represent a shift in U.S. policy towards “managed trade”; monitoring the implementation of legislation passed by the 115th Congress, including changes to the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CIFUS) and expor tcontrols, as well as the creation of a new U.S. International Development Finance Corporation; re-authorization of the Export-Import Bank, the U.S. export credit agency that helps finance U.S. exports; oversight of international trade and finance policies to support foreign policy goals, including sanctionson Iran, North Korea, Russia, and other countries; shifts in U.S. leadership of international economic policy coordination at the Group of 7 (G-7) and theGroup of 20 (G-20) under the Trump Administration; legislation to fund the Administration’s commitment to increase U.S. contributions to the World Bank, as well as potential U.S.-led reforms to the institution; and major developments infinancial markets, including the impact of other countries’ exchange rate polices on the U.S. economy, high levels of debt in emerging markets, potential economic crises, and the role of the U.S. dollar in the global economy.   U.S.Trade Deficit/贸易赤字 The overall U.S. trade deficit, or more broadly the current account balance, represents an accounting principle that expresses the difference between the country's exports and imports of goods and services. The United States has experienced annual current account deficits since the mid-1970s. Congressional interest in the trade deficit has been heightened by the Trump Administration’s approach to international trade. The Administration has used the U.S. trade deficit as abarometer for evaluating the success or failure of the global trading system, U.S. trade policy, and U.S. trade agreements. It has characterized the trade deficit as a major factor in a number of perceived ills afflicting the U.S. economy—including the rate of unemployment and slow gains in wages—and partially as the result of unfair trade practices by foreign competitors.   Many economists, however, argue that this characterization misrepresents the natureof the trade deficit and the role of trade in the U.S. economy. In general, traditional economic theory holds that the overall U.S. trade deficit stems from U.S. macroeconomic policies and an imbalance between saving and investmentin the U.S. economy. Currently, the demand for capital in the U.S. economy outstrips the amount of gross savings supplied by households, firms, and theg overnment (a savings-investment imbalance). Therefore, many observers argue that attempting to alter the trade deficit without addressing the underlying macroeconomic issues would be counterproductive and create distortions in the economy. A concern expressed by some analysts and policymakers is the debt accumulation associated with sustained trade deficits. They argue that the long-term impact on the U.S. economy of borrowing to finance imports depends on whether those funds are used for greater investments in productive capital withhigh returns that raise future standards of living, or whether they are used for current consumption. These concerns and the various policy approaches that have been used to alter the savings-investment imbalance in the economy are beyond the scope of this report.   Policy Issues for Congress/国会关注的政策问题 Policy debates during the 116th Congress may include the use and impact of unilateral tariffs imposed by the Trump Administration under various U.S. trade laws, as well as potential legislation that alters the authority granted by Congress to the President to do so; U.S.-China trade relations; legislation to implement the proposed United States-Mexico-Canada Trade Agreement (USMCA); and the Administration’s launch of bilateral trade negotiations with the European Union, Japan, and the United Kingdom, among many others.   Tariffs on U.S. Imports from China (Section 301)/对华实施301征税 While some policymakers and many business representatives have expressed support for the Administration’s goals of improving China’s IP and technology policies, they question whether tariff hikes against China can achieve those goals. Several Members of Congress have raised concerns over the impact the current trade conflict is having on their constituents in terms of higher-priced imports from China and lost U.S. export sales.   Tariffs on U.S. Imports of Aluminum and Steel Products (Section 232)/对钢铝产品实施232征税 As Congress continues to debate the Administration’s Section 232 actions, it may consider multiple issues including: potential amendments to the delegation of constitutional authority that Congress gave to the President through Section232, examining the investigation and implementation processes, and exploring opportunities to address specific market-distorting practices that are the root causes of steel and aluminum overcapacity through international forums and trade negotiations.   Trading Partner Retaliation and Countermeasures/各国反制措施 Some analysts fear this escalating series of unilateral tariff actions, retaliations, and resulting WTO disputes may threaten the stability of the multilateral trading system, given the political sensitivity of a potential WTO panel ruling on issues related to national security (Section 232) and the possibility of countries potentially disregarding WTO rulings not in theirfavor   Industrial Policies and Made in China 2025/中国制造2025及产业政策 From the U.S. perspective, tensions over various economic and trade issues stem largely from China’s incomplete transition to an open-market economy. While China has significantly liberalized its economic and trade regimes over the past three decades—especially since joining the World Trade Organization (WTO) in 2001—it continues to maintain or has recently imposed a number of policies to support and protect domestic firms, especially state-owned enterprises (SOEs). Major Chinese government practices of concern to U.S. stakeholders include subsidies, tax breaks, and low-cost loans given to Chinese firms, foreign trade and investment barriers, discriminatory intellectual property and technology policies, and the lack of the rule of law. An American Chamber of Commerce in China business climate survey in 2018 found that 75% said that foreign businesses in China were “less welcomed” there than before, compared to 44% who felt that way in 2014. Several recently issued economic plans, such as the “Made in China 2025”(MIC 2025) initiative, which seeks to make China a global leader in advanced manufacturing in 10 designated industries, appear to indicate a sharply expanded government role in the economy. U.S. business representatives have raised concerns over the potentially distortionary and discriminatory aspects of the MIC 2025 plan, and the Trump Administration’s Section 301 actions against China appear to be largely aimed at curbing the initiative (see sectionon Tariffs on U.S. Imports from China). More recently, Presidents Trump and Xi agreed to negotiations to address issues of concern. The 116th Congress may monitor ongoing 301 actions and any potential bilateral agreement to resolve U.S. trade concerns.   China’s Policies on Technology, Innovation, and Intellectual Property/中国的知产及创新政策 In November 2018, FBI Director Christopher Wray stated: “No country presents abroader, more severe threat to our ideas, our innovation, and our economic security than China.” Then U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions proclaimed that “Chinese economic espionage against the United States has been increasing—and it has been increasing rapidly.” On December 1, 2018, U.S. Assistant Attorney General John C. Demers statedat a Senate hearing that from 2011 to 2018, China was linked to more than 90% of the Department of Justice’s cases involving economic espionage andtwo-thirds of its trade secrets cases. The 116th Congress may consider how to address the threats outlined by senior government officials, including through possible legislation.   Belt and Road Initiative (BRI)/一带一路战略 China’s growing economic influence was cited as a motivation for Congress to pass the Better Utilization of Investments Leading to Development (BUILD) Act (P.L.115-254), signed into law in October 2018. The 116th Congress may hold further hearings on Chinese economic practices and BRI, and it may consider new tools to counter Chinese influence and better support U.S. firms involved in economic activities abroad. As part of its oversight and approval of funding for U.S. participation in multilateral development banks and international financial institutions, Congress may also exercise oversight of institutions involved in BRI and implementation of the BUILD Act, as well as consider possible multilateral cooperation on debt transparency issues.   报告：【附件2】 <a href="https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R45474">点此查看</a> 阅读全文

278 Bytes

【附件1】美国国会CRS报告：对特朗普政府对华贸易政策的重大关切摘要正文.pdf