SHERP

WTO 보조금협정상 수입대체보조금과 GATT 3:4
Import Substitution Subsidies under the WTO Subsidies Agreement and GATT 3:4

Cited 0 time in webofscience Cited 0 time in scopus
Authors
장승화; 조인영
Issue Date
2003
Publisher
서울대학교 법학연구소
Citation
법학, Vol.44 No1 pp.1-23
Keywords
보조금협정SCM협정수출보조금Foreign Sales Corporation(FSC)
Abstract
One of the most frequently litigated provision of the WTO Agreements is
Article 3 of the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (“SCM
Agreement”). Article 3 of the SCM Agreement prohibits export subsidies and
import substitution subsidies. In contrast with export subsidies, import
substitution subsidies have not been successfully invoked under the WTO
dispute settlement procedures. This paper examines the underlying reasons for
the virtually dormant provision, and demonstrates how this problem can be
addressed.
In a few WTO dispute settlement cases, complainants actually invoked
Article 3:1(b) that prohibits import substitution subsidies. The United States ―
Foreign Sales Corporation case is an example. Nonetheless, nether parties
actively argued on Article 3:1(b), and the panel did not address this issue,
relying on the judicial economy. Instead, the panel resolved the same issue on
the basis of Article Ⅲ:4 of the GATT.
In the authors' view, this is due to the lack of clarity in the substantive
standards determining the contingency requirement under Article 3:1(b) of the
SCM Agreement. In contrast, Article Ⅲ:4 of the GATT has relatively clearer
standards, and that is the reason why both the parties and the panel relied on
the latter. This tendency, however, poses some systemic problems. First, two
provisions have something in common, whereas both pursue different goals. In
addition, the SCM Agreement provides for special dispute settlement
procedures for cases involving import substitution subsidies. Therefore,...
ISSN
1598-222X
Language
Korean
URI
http://lawi.snu.ac.kr/

http://hdl.handle.net/10371/9141
Files in This Item:
Appears in Collections:
College of Law/Law School (법과대학/대학원)The Law Research Institute (법학연구소) 법학법학 Volume 44, Number 1/4 (2003)
  • mendeley

Items in S-Space are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Browse