Are China's FTAs really making a difference?

自贸协定稳外需、促出口作用初显

文章来源:商务部新闻办公室　 作者:

2009-08-14 15:04:31

　　今年以来，受金融危机冲击，我国外贸发展面临严峻挑战，但我国与自贸伙伴国双边贸易逆势上扬或降速减缓，我国主要出口产品在自贸伙伴国市场份额有所上升，自贸协定在稳定外需、促进出口和保持份额方面发挥了积极作用。 

　　截至目前，共有14个国家与我国签署自贸协定，其中13个已开始实施协定。金融危机中，与其对全球贸易相比，我自贸伙伴国在自贸协定支撑下对华贸易下滑有限甚至逆势上扬；我对自贸伙伴国出口表现明显好于我同期对全球出口。根据目前掌握的部分自贸伙伴国的统计数据，1至4月，巴基斯坦对外贸易总体同比下降4%，但对华贸易上升28%。新西兰对外贸易总体下降3%，但对华贸易上升30%。马来西亚对外贸易总体下降24%，对华贸易仅下降13%。印尼对外贸易总体下降34%，对华贸易仅下降22%。智利对外贸易总体下降38%，但对华贸易仅下降24%。我对自贸伙伴国出口出现上升或降幅较小。巴基斯坦从全球进口同比下降12%，但从华进口上升32%。新西兰从全球进口总额下降8%，但从华进口增长上升11%。智利从全球进口总额下降34%，从华进口下降19%。

　　根据我国海关统计，受金融危机冲击，1至4月，我国主要出口产品对全球出口总额全部出现负增长。但是，我部分主要产品依靠自贸协定，在各自贸伙伴国需求萎缩、融资困难的情况下，逆势实现了出口增长。在10种主要出口商品中，有7种产品对自贸伙伴出口情况好于对全球出口。服装、鞋类、家具、塑料制品、箱包等5种产品实现增长，其中家具、箱包、鞋类增幅高达214%、72%和52%。根据我已实施的自贸协定，2009年恰是上述几种产品关税减让“大年”，降税比例从10%到40%不等，由此可见自贸协定优惠政策对我出口的促进作用。 

　　在有的自贸伙伴国，我主要产品的出口金额和占当地市场的份额双双上升。例如，1至4月，在巴基斯坦主要从华进口产品中，机电产品进口金额同比上升33%，占其从全球进口比重（以下简称“进口比重”）从15%上升至25%；纺织品和服装进口金额上升269%，进口比重从2%上升至21%；钢材及其制品进口金额上升12%，进口比重从5%上升至11%；机车、汽车、船舶及零部件进口金额上升177%，进口比重从3%上升至16%。 

　　在其他自贸伙伴国，虽然我主要产品出口金额有所下降，但是占当地市场的份额却有上升。例如，新加坡从我国进口集成电路金额同比下降25%，但是进口比重由0.35%上升至6.6%; 办公设备零件金额下降24%，但进口比重由6%上升至29%。马来西亚从我国进口金属制品金额下降23%，但进口比重由9%上升至11%；光学科技设备金额下降16%，但进口比重由10%上升至14%。 

　　总体而言，目前，除中国-东盟自贸区实施时间较长外，其他自贸区还处于实施的前半期，降税的高峰尚未到来。可以预见，随着时间的推移，将有更多的自贸协定进入实施阶段或进入实施的后半期，自贸协定在促进出口、稳定外需和保持份额方面的积极作用可望进一步凸现。

China is putting pressure on the tyres

It seems that China is really getting serious on the tyres special safeguard case, with Vice-Minister Zhong Shan from MOFCOM leading a special delegation to the US to hold consultations with several key US agencies before the USTR makes its recommendations to the President. Are tyres really that important for China? Not in terms of trade volume, but China is afraid of the precedent this case would set and the chain reaction that the US could start around the world with this case as the result of the trade-diversion clause in the special safeguard clause. 

商务部副部长钟山率团与美国白宫安全委员会、贸易谈判代表办公室和商务部就轮胎特保案进行交涉和磋商

2009-08-19 15:15  文章来源：商务部新闻办公室

文章类型：原创  内容分类：新闻

8月18日，商务部副部长钟山率中国政府代表团继续与美国白宫安全委员会、贸易谈判代表办公室和商务部就轮胎特保案进行交涉与磋商，表达中方坚决反对特保措施的立场。中国政府、业界和民众高度关注此案，因为特保措施具有歧视性，对中方不公平；特保条款中关于贸易转移的规定，会产生传导效应，如美方采取措施，会引发其他国家也采取措施，对中方利益造成危害；在当前国际社会共同应对金融危机的形势下，美方采取特保措施会向世界发出贸易保护主义的错误信号，也会严重影响中美经贸关系的稳定发展。  　  　　钟山表示，希望美方从长远和战略高度以及中美双边关系大局出发，切实落实两国领导人在20国集团峰会、首轮中美战略与经济对话达成的共识，对贸易问题加强沟通和磋商，并积极推动双方业界进行对话与合作，化解贸易摩擦。  　　美方表示，通过会谈磋商充分了解了中方对此案的关注和立场，将认真考虑中方立场和意见，目前该案仍在调查程序中，愿继续与中方保持沟通。 商务部副部长钟山率团赴美就轮胎特保案与美有关部门进行交涉 2009-08-17 12:46  文章来源：商务部新闻办公室 文章类型：原创  内容分类：新闻 　　2009年4月20日，应美国钢铁工人联合会申请，美国国际贸易委员会对我乘用车和轻型卡车轮胎发起特保调查，并于6月29日提出救济措施的初步建议，拟对我轮胎产品连续3年分别加征55%、45%和35%的关税。  　　针对该案，中国商务部会同有关行业协会积极开展应对工作。中国商务部于7月17日与美国贸易代表办公室就救济措施进行磋商。商务部钟山副部长将于8月17至18日在美国与美国白宫安全委员会、财政部、贸易代表办公室、商务部和国务院等部门举行会谈，就轮胎特保案与美方进行交涉和磋商，表达中国政府坚决反对特保措施的立场和关切。  　　根据美调查程序，美国贸易代表办公室将于9月2日前向美总统提出建议，美总统将于9月17日前做出是否采取措施的最终决定。  　　本案是美新政府对我发起的首例特保调查，也是案值最大的一起。根据中方统计，2008年我对美轮胎出口金额约22亿美元。此前美布什政府曾对我发起6起特保调查，最终均未采取特保措施。

 

My Interview on the Films and Books case in the Christian Science Monitor

Long shackled in China's market, Hollywood now sees opening

The World Trade Organization's ruling that Beijing violated trade law with restrictions on distribution of foreign films, books, and music could mean more revenue for US companies.

By Simon Montlake | Correspondent of The Christian Science Monitor

from the August 14, 2009 edition

• Print this
 
• Letter to the Editor
 
• Republish
 
• Email and share
 
• E-mail newsletters
 
• RSS

BEIJING - The US entertainment industry has long complained that sales restrictions and unchecked piracy are locking them out of China's vast marketplace. Movie studios are aggrieved that so few foreign films are screened. Booksellers dislike mandatory tie-ups with state-owned distributors.

In a judgment made public Wednesday the World Trade Organization (WTO) partly concurred. The WTO found that China's controls on the distribution of foreign books, films, and music violate trade rules. China said it may appeal the ruling, the latest in a series of disputes with the US, its largest trading partner.

Hollywood immediately hailed the ruling as a victory.

"The Chinese system for distributing US films to Chinese audiences is among the most restrictive and burdensome in the world.... This ruling represents a positive step in promoting the growth of legitimate US movies," said Dan Glickman, the chair of the Motion Picture Association of America, in a statement.

But Hollywood didn't get everything it wanted. While the WTO told China to open up distribution of home entertainment like DVDs, CDs, and books to foreign competition, which should put more money in US pockets, the WTO didn't disallow China's requirement that foreign studios work with one of two state-owned distributors, who can dictate terms for revenue sharing, or its quota on foreign films. Only 20 are allowed in a year, effectively protecting domestic studios and encouraging coproductions in China.

Music downloads did get a boost, though. The trade body said that foreign companies should be allowed to sell their content directly to Chinese consumers. Internet downloads of music, films, and television shows are hugely popular in China, but are almost invariably free.

PIRACY DAMPENS EFFECTS OF RULING

The ruling won't necessarily fling open the doors to US entertainment companies, says Henry Gao, a law professor at Singapore Management University and a former WTO staffer. "Even if US firms can get involved in distribution services in China, will they be able to sufficiently exploit these opportunities?" he asks.

One reason why they won't, says Mr. Gao, is rampant piracy of films, music, software, and other copyright-protected products in China. Hollywood studios argue that they can't compete with counterfeit DVDs of the latest theatrical releases for $1 apiece. Music companies must also struggle to persuade Chinese consumers to buy their CDs – not pirated copies or free downloads.

This latest ruling doesn't address piracy. The US filed a separate WTO complaint over lax enforcement of Chinese laws on piracy, which the WTO partially upheld in a ruling issued earlier this year. The US has pushed for more criminal convictions of wholesalers in China and a stop to the resale of seized goods.

Yao Jian, a spokesman for China's foreign ministry, said Thursday that China was studying the verdict and would consider an appeal.

"The channels for foreign publications, films and audio-visual products to enter the Chinese market are extremely open," he said, according to the Associated Press.

US WANTS CENSORSHIP SEPARATE FROM SALES

For China, regulating the distribution of these products is about more than commerce. It also reflects the strict controls put on all news and entertainment for political reasons. China has argued that it needs to screen out offensive content and that it has the right to do so under international trade rules.

The US didn't challenge China's censorship system at the WTO. Instead, it successfully argued that such controls should be separated from sales networks, so that foreign companies can compete with government-run entities.

What galvanizes US studios isn't censorship but the tussle over who profits from blockbusters like "Transformers." In other countries, companies like Warner Brothers own their own theaters and get a huge slice of the box office profits. China has nearly 4,000 movie screens that attract middle-class consumers who can afford $10 a ticket.

But foreign companies can only own minority stakes in movie theaters in China, to the frustration of Hollywood executives. Gross box office receipts totalled $640 million in 2008, with foreign films raking in over one third. That total is up 30 percent on 2007, underscoring the industry's rapid growth, despite the competition from pirates.

Legal experts say the US will be disappointed by the pushback on some points, including the distribution duopoly for movies shown in theaters, and music censorship, neither of which the WTO said violated China's trade obligations.

What the film and publications ruling is not about

In this day and age, misinformation filled the pages of newspapers everyday. It's no surprise that the latest WTO ruling against China also fall victim to that. Before I have time to tell fellow blog readers what the case is about, I thought I should set the record straight by making clear what the case is not about.

Below is a misreported piece from the officially-run China Daily. It claimed that the case would adversely affect the two importers of foreign movies, i.e., China Film Group and Huaxia. This is WRONG as the WTO report did not rule against China on the "duopoly". Instead, according to the panel, the US could not even establish that the Chinese practice is a measure covered by WTO law.

Mixed reaction to WTO ruling
By Ding Qingfen and Liu Wei (China Daily)
Updated: 2009-08-14 07:00
Comments(5) PrintMail

* The ruling, if approved by WTO, would adversely affect the two importers of foreign films. But other companies hailed the ruling.

* It's understandable China takes measures to protect the film industry from being invaded by foreign products, said an associate professor from Beijing Film Academy.

China may appeal a ruling by the World Trade Organization (WTO) that would break up a monopoly of two State-owned firms as the sole foreign audiovisuals importers.

A WTO dispute settlement panel, in a report released yesterday, ruled that China's practices were inconsistent with international trade rules, and that China needs to revise them.

The US filed the case two years ago. The case involves publications, audio and video products, and music download services imported by China.

The ruling, if approved by WTO, would adversely affect the two importers of foreign films. But other companies hailed the ruling.

"It is good news for private companies. We would like to join in. The game was unfair, but I believe complete competition is coming," said Wang Zhonglei, president of Huayi Brothers, China's leading privately owned media company.

The Chinese government has appointed China Film Group and Huaxia Film Distribution to import and distribute audiovisuals from abroad.

This, as the US claimed, has not only run against the fundamental WTO rules requiring equal treatment between local and foreign businesses, but also breached the commitment China made when it joined the WTO to open up sales and distribution.

"China has been performing its duty on publications market access, and we have been providing unblocked access to overseas imports of audiovisual products," the Ministry of Commerce said yesterday on its website.

"We regret the dispute panel did not turn down the US."

China has imported approximately 500,000 titles of publications of all kinds every year since joining the WTO in 2001, as promised in its entry agreement.

Under the WTO framework, the US and China must decide within two months whether to appeal any part of the ruling.

"We will carefully evaluate the report," the ministry said.

The ministry's Department of Treaty and Law, which is responsible for the issue, refused to comment.

Lin Xiaoxia, associate professor from Beijing Film Academy, defended China's policies.

"Film in China can be hardly a pure commercial product. Its educational and social functions are still important. It's understandable China takes measures to protect the film industry from being invaded by foreign products, especially when ours is still too weak to compete," Lin said.

But Tao Jingzhou, a partner of US Jones Day, a leading international law firm, said China has little chance of winning an appeal.

The American Chamber of Commerce China also hailed the ruling.

China - Publications

The long-awaited panel report in the China - Publications and
Audiovisual Products case is out. I discussed the legal issues in that
case in my 2007 article in the Asian Journal of WTO & International
Health Law and Policy Interested readers can download the whole paper
from http://ssrn.com/abstract=1019394. I will try to post more on this case in the coming days.

The Tyres Special Safeguard Case Hearing

轮胎特保听证 中国居上风

（香港）   (2009-08-09)

（联合早报网讯）香港大公网报道，中国输美轮胎特保案听证会七日在位于华盛顿的美国贸易代表办公室举行，中美各界代表各抒己见。除来自美国钢铁工人联合会的少数人士作证支持对中国轮胎实施制裁外，大多数作证的美国业界代表认为对中国轮胎的制裁建议纯属得不偿失。

　　据新华社华盛顿七日消息：按照美国国际贸易委员会此前的建议，今后三年，美方应对中国输美轮胎逐年分别加征百分之五十五、百分之四十五和百分之三十五的惩罚性关税。

　　美钢铁工会漫天要价

　　在听证会上，美国钢铁工人联合会国际业务主席利奥．杰勒德声称，第一年百分之五十五的高关税仍不能削弱中国轮胎的竞争力，美国政府当年的惩罚性关税应该达到百分之七十五至百分之八十。

　　杰勒德说，这是因为大量进口中国轮胎损害了美国轮胎产业的利益。按照美国钢铁工人联合会的统计，在二○○四年到二○○八年期间，共有五家美国轮胎厂关门倒闭，五千一百名美国工人失业，今年又有三千名美国工人下岗。他认为，美国轮胎工业正处于转捩点，只有采取救济措施，“才能决定相关工业的未来。”

　　代表美国轮胎自由贸易联合会作证的轮胎经销商德尔．纳特公司总裁詹姆斯．梅菲尔德说，美国钢铁工人联合会强调的是就业问题，但假如政府接受制裁建议，“在行销领域将有数千美国人因此失业，而制造业领域也不会因此产生新的就业岗位。”

　　梅菲尔德解释说，这是因为，美国的轮胎制造商已经不再生产低端轮胎产品，他们不会因为中国轮胎进口受阻而开启新的生产线，经销商只能转向韩国、巴西、墨西哥等第三国，这在短期内会造成市场混乱。

　　美国罗格斯大学经济学教授托马斯．普吕萨在听证会上指出，根据他的研究，美国如果借助轮胎特保措施保住一个就业岗位，结果将会损失二十五个就业岗位，总计美国将会因此损失二万五千个就业岗位，这对美国就业市场是雪上加霜。

　　代表通用、福特、佳士拿三大汽车商利益的美国汽车贸易政策委员会副总裁查尔斯．奥瑟斯说，对中国轮胎进行制裁将抬高美国汽车成本，损害美国汽车业的竞争力，也不会给美国轮胎产业带来好处。

　　中国业界代表据理力争

　　针对美国钢铁工人联合会将“原罪”推给中国轮胎的做法，特意从北京赶来作证的中国橡胶工业协会副秘书长徐文英反驳说，美国轮胎工厂关闭的原因并不是中国输美轮胎增加，而是因为美国轮胎制造商采取产品升级战略，放弃了利润较少的低端轮胎市场，而中国轮胎大多是低端产品，并不构成对美国轮胎的威胁。

　　她还说，如果美国真对中国轮胎实行百分之五十五的高关税，实质就是将中国轮胎产品拒之门外，对中国相关产业造成打击，也不利于美国消费者的利益。

　　代理中国轮胎工业的美国律师戴维．斯普纳说，中国输美轮胎完全是合法、正当的交易，这当中既不存在低价倾销，也不存在非法补贴，而工会拟议的特保制裁实质上是一种保护主义行为，“工会只是在从特保案中渔利”。

　　轮胎制造商选择沉默

　　值得注意的是，这次特保案的起诉方不是轮胎制造商，而是所谓代表工人利益的美国钢铁工人联合会。对这起特保案，作为重要关联方的美国制造商选择了沉默。

　　据相关人士透露，实际上，在中国输美轮胎中，有相当一部分是美国制造商在华工厂生产或在华贴牌生产，特保案不符合美国制造商的利益；但由于当前轮胎工人正在进行劳资谈判，美国制造商面临强大压力，因此选择三缄其口。

　　中通社引述相关评论人士认为，中方代表团参加听证会就说明这一事件还有“翻盘”的可能。另外，美方内部反对、争议的声音也很强大，特保案通过还是不通过，概率各占一半。

　　谈判专家指出，即使特保案调查得以成立，还要过美国总统奥巴马审批这一关。奥巴马或许会为回报工会在竞选期间的支持而同意，也或许会考虑到中美经贸大局出发加以否决。

　　据悉，按照美方目前的调查程序，美国贸易代表办公室在谘询财政部、劳工部、商务部等部门意见后，将于九月二日向美国总统奥巴马提出相关建议，奥巴马预计将在九月十七日前就此案作出最终决定。

MOFCOM getting tough on auto-related cases

商务部进出口公平贸易局负责人 就欧盟拟对中国铝合金轮毂发起反倾销调查表示严重关切 2009-08-07 19:01  文章来源：商务部新闻办公室 文章类型：原创  内容分类：新闻 　　8月7日，商务部进出口公平贸易局负责人就欧盟拟对中国铝合金轮毂发起反倾销调查发表谈话。  　　该负责人表示，欧洲轮毂制造商协会（EUWA）代表欧盟6家铝合金轮毂生产商于6月底向欧委会递交了对中国铝合金轮毂产品发起反倾销调查的申诉书，日前，欧委会照会中方并称拟于近日发起调查。中方对此表示严重关切，希望欧方慎重行事。  　　该负责人强调，中方注意到，欧洲轮毂制造商协会递交的申诉书在申请人资格、替代国选择等方面存在问题，不符合WTO反倾销协议的有关规定，欧委会应该进行严格的审查。中国企业以高于国内市场的价格出口铝合金轮毂，并没有倾销。同时，据中国海关统计，2008年7月至2009年5月，中国对欧出口的铝合金轮毂占欧盟市场份额不足8%，不会对欧产业造成损害，对华发起反倾销调查没有必要。  　　该负责人进一步表示，中国铝合金轮毂产品被奔驶、宝马、大众、奥迪等大型跨国公司作为汽车零配件广泛使用，并深受欢迎。中国的铝合金轮毂产品满足了欧盟市场的需求，欧盟对华铝合金轮毂反倾销将会对中欧汽车零配件贸易造成严重不利影响，而且不利于欧盟汽车跨国公司的全球产业分工、布局和供应链管理，容易造成双输的局面。

商务部公平贸易局负责人就美国业界反对对中国轮胎产品采取特保限制措施发表谈话

2009-08-03 16:08  文章来源：商务部新闻办公室

文章类型：原创  内容分类：新闻

近期，美国轮胎产业协会、美国轮胎自由贸易联盟、美国汽车贸易政策理事会和美国零售业领导者协会等业界组织纷纷就美国对华轮胎特保调查案表态，反对对中国轮胎产品采取特保限制措施。中国商务部公平贸易局负责人对此发表谈话，希望美国政府认真研究考虑来自美国国内业界的呼声，客观公正地做出不采取措施的决定。  　　该负责人表示，中方注意到，7月10日美国轮胎产业协会公开致函奥巴马总统，并抄送美国贸易代表柯克，强烈要求奥巴马总统否决任何对中国轮胎采取限制措施的建议。该协会在信中表示，美国国际贸易委员会所建议的救济措施对于保护美国制造业工人就业机会毫无意义，反而会导致美国轮胎消费者在目前经济危机背景下面临更高的价格与更少的选择，从而损害美国消费者和轮胎贸易商的利益。如果美国政府采取限制措施，不但达不到救济美产业的目的，反而会引起市场扰乱。美国轮胎产业协会由遍布全美50个州的6000多家小企业组成，代表美国轮胎生产、维修、零售、批发、售后服务、翻新、回收企业以及为轮胎产业提供设备、原材料或服务的企业与个人的利益。  　　7月21日，由美国6家轮胎进口商组成的美国轮胎自由贸易联盟致函美国贸易代表柯克，明确反对美对中国轮胎产品采取特保限制措施，并要求与柯克举行会谈。该联盟指出，若美总统接受美国国际贸易委员会提出的救济措施建议，将会严重损害美轮胎分销和零售从业者的利益。该联盟估算，本案一旦采取措施将导致轮胎分销和零售领域近25000人失业，措施每“保护”一个就业岗位，就将额外损失25个岗位。此外，救济措施将导致消费者每年多支出6-7亿美元，迫使消费者在经济困难时期不得不推迟更换轮胎，而这不仅威胁消费者人身安全，还将进一步阻碍轮胎产业的发展。  　　7月27日，代表克莱斯勒、福特和通用三大美国汽车巨头利益的美国汽车贸易政策理事会致函美国贸易代表柯克，反对对中国输美原配轮胎（汽车原装配套轮胎）采取特保限制措施。该理事会指出，由于汽车原配胎为定制产品，必须根据不同车型满足特定的技术标准，若美国限制进口中国产原配轮胎，美汽车制造商将耗费大量资源重新寻找轮胎替代来源，这将涉及大量机械装备的投资，每种车型约需花费100万美元，而且需要18至30个月才能完成。  　　7月27日，代表美国规模最大的零售商、产品制造商和服务供应商利益的美国零售业领导者协会也致函美国贸易代表柯克，要求美国贸易代表办公室不要向奥巴马总统提出限制进口中国轮胎产品的救济措施建议。该协会表示，如果在经济困难时期限制轮胎进口，大量消费者为节省支出将放弃或推迟更换汽车轮胎，这将严重威胁消费者的人身安全。自中国进口的轮胎主要集中在美国的低端市场，一旦限制中国轮胎产品进口，将迫使消费者选择中高端轮胎产品，这对消费者利益和交通安全的危害都是巨大的。  　　该负责人强调，美国国际贸易委员会6月29日向美国贸易代表办公室提出的救济措施建议缺乏合理性和客观依据，中方坚决反对美国采取限制进口中国轮胎产品的歧视性特保措施，中国政府在与美国相关部门的交涉和磋商中已多次表达上述立场。对中国轮胎产品采取特保限制措施，不仅损害中国轮胎产业的利益，阻碍中美双边贸易的正常开展，而且也将损害美国的整体经济利益。

You screw us, we screw you.

China filed a complaint against the EU in the WTO on Friday. This is the first complaint ever filed by China against any WTO Member other than the US. I first heard of this case when I met with my friends at Crowell & Moring in Brussels last November. The case would be very interesting to watch. Guess some people at the EU Trade Commission will have to cancel their summer holiday.

China in EU trade spat over screw imports

By Daniel Igra in Brussels and Jamil Anderlini in Beijing

Published: July 31 2009 13:57 | Last updated: July 31 2009 18:23

China has sparked a row with the European Union after complaining to the world's trade watchdog that EU anti-dumping duties on Chinese screws and bolts are breaking global commerce rules.

The world's second-largest exporter lodged its first complaint against the EU with the World Trade Organisation on Friday, protesting that EU tariffs of up to 85 per cent were "neither impartial nor transparent" and were damaging business for hundreds of Chinese companies.

The move signals Beijing's willingness to defend its trade-related interests more aggressively through multilateral institutions, as well as its implicit acceptance of the authority of those western-dominated institutions. 

The European Commission said the duties, imposed in January on goods worth some €575m ($812m) a year, complied with WTO rules and served to protect European businesses from unfairly priced Chinese goods.

Under WTO rules, a country imposing anti-dumping duties must prove its domestic industry has been injured by cheap imports from a specific country.

The dispute comes only days after EU trade officials approved pre-emptive penalties on imports of steel pipe from China, viewed by some as a protectionist move intended to mitigate the effects of the economic downturn within the 27-state bloc. 

In a statement from its WTO mission in Geneva, China said the commission had failed to comply with the trade watchdog's rules when it investigated the imports and imposed the measures.

"The determinations made are neither impartial nor transparent, which infringes the legitimate commercial interests of over 1,700 Chinese fastener producers," it said. 

It said the EU had been inconsistent in its application of the rules given that two Chinese subsidiaries of European firms – Italy's Agrati and Celo of Spain – were exempt from the duties. 

However, the European Commission said the measure was fully in line with WTO rules. "Anti-dumping measures are not about protectionism, they are about fighting unfair trade.

"The decision to impose measures was taken on the basis of clear evidence that unfair dumping of Chinese products has taken place with state distortion of raw material prices," Lutz Guellner, trade spokesman, said.

Between last September and June, other WTO members, particularly the US, India and European countries, brought 77 cases worth a total of $9.8bn against China, more than double the number of cases in the same period a year earlier, Chinese state media reported.

Until recently, China has been reluctant to use the WTO to defend its interests. However, it has now decided to engage more directly to ­protect its businesses, according to reported comments from Zhou Xiaoyan, deputy director of the China Bureau of Fair Trade for Imports and Exports.

Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2009