跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(18.97.14.86) 您好!臺灣時間:2025/02/08 02:01
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果 :::

詳目顯示

我願授權國圖
: 
twitterline
研究生:劉怡莎
研究生(外文):I-Sha Liu
論文名稱:WTO禁止性補貼制度之檢討:兼論現行規定在特定產業之適用
論文名稱(外文):WTO Prohibited Subsidies and Its Implication in Specific Sectors
指導教授:羅昌發羅昌發引用關係
指導教授(外文):Chang-Fa Lo
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立臺灣大學
系所名稱:法律學研究所
學門:法律學門
學類:一般法律學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2007
畢業學年度:95
語文別:中文
論文頁數:132
中文關鍵詞:世界貿易組織補貼暨平衡稅協定禁止性補貼出口補貼進口替代補貼特別附加規則與程序
外文關鍵詞:World Trade OrganizationAgreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measuresexport subsidiesimport substitution subsidiesspecial and additional rules and procedures
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:6
  • 點閱點閱:572
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:0
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:1
從GATT成立以來,補貼一直是會員最關切的議題之一,尤其是在SCM協定下兩種被完全禁止的補貼—出口補貼及進口替代補貼—經常成為爭端的焦點。有鑑於此,本文旨在釐清兩種禁止性補貼定義之疑義、檢討在救濟過程曾引發的問題以及現行規定在特定產業適用(漁業、航空器製造業等)之適當性。
與出口或者使用國內產品有法律上或事實上條件關係的補貼都會構成禁止性補貼。因為認定事實上條件關係的標準並未明文化,需由爭端解決機構根據全部事實綜合判斷,造成認定上的不確定性,因此澳洲等會員曾多次提案修正現行條文,本文認為,為保持事實上條件關係在認定上的彈性,不宜以列舉方式將其要件明文化,但可嘗試以例示的方式列出一定會被小組或上訴機構納入考慮的事實,除此之外,將系爭補貼的貿易效果,也就是所造成的出口競爭力的提升作為認定事實上出口補貼的一個要件是值得考慮的,這對於倚賴出口貿易的會員將是比較公平的作法。
禁止性補貼的救濟引發了許多相當有趣的問題,包括WTO爭端解決機構是否可以要求會員採行回溯性的救濟、是否可以採取懲罰性損害賠償等等,本文認為,若欲容許禁止性補貼有不同於一般違反WTO協定之措施的救濟方法,必須先說明禁止性補貼何以嚴重於其他違法措施,否則,貿然容許在SCM協定第4條之下採取回溯性救濟與懲罰性損害賠償,將破壞WTO爭端救濟體系的一致性,並且可能會牴觸DSU的立法精神。
除非農業協定有特別規定,否則SCM協定應該一體適用於所有產業,本文認為應例外容許漁業與航空器製造業不適用SCM協定,並針對這兩個產業制訂特殊的補貼規範。就漁業而言,現有的兩種禁止性補貼並非漁業補貼常見的措施,因此與漁業資源枯竭無直接關聯,而就航空器製造業而言,適用SCM協定將扼殺此產業的發展與進步。
Prohibited subsidies, namely export subsidies and import substitution subsidies, have long been the focus of WTO dispute settlement mechanism since WTO’s inception. In view of this, this thesis aims to clarify the interpretation of the definition of prohibited subsidies, to examine the remedies under Article 4 of the SCM Agreement, and further, to call for specific subsidies rules for fisheries and aircraft manufacturing.
One of the elements of prohibited subsidies is de jure or de facto contingency on importation or using domestic products over imported goods. However, de facto contingency is sometimes a vague idea and can only be established based on all the facts surrounding the provision of the disputed subsidy. It has been proposed by members that elements of de facto contingency should be enumerated in Article 3 of the SCM Agreement so that the rule can be more predictable. It is the view of the author that enumerating elements of de facto contingency could limit the flexibility on establishing this point. But it would be helpful if certain important elements are listed in the SCM Agreement so that DSB’s decision can be more predictable and consistent. And the author also argues that it would be fairer for members who rely heavily on export if the level of export competitiveness can be one of the elements of de facto export subsidies.
Article 4 of the SCM Agreement is a special and additional rules and procedures on dispute settlement under the meaning of Article 1.2 of the DSU. As decided by the Panel in Australia-Leather, Article 4 allows retrospective remedies. And as interpreted by the author, the Arbitrators in Canada-Aircraft 22.6 authorized Brazil to impose punitive measure. The author believes that without further elaboration on the severity of prohibited subsidies - how is it more trade-damaging than other WTO-inconsistent measures - such interpretation can not be justified.
Under WTO Agreements, all subsidies are governed by the SCM Agreement, unless AOA contains “specific provisions dealing specifically with the same matter.” However, like agriculture, there are some industries where the SCM Agreement, especially the rules on prohibited subsidies, does not really “fit.” For example, fisheries subsidies have led to overcapacity and overfishing, but they do not usually come in the form of export subsidy or import substitution subsidy. Thus, current rules on prohibited subsidies do not effectively solve problems caused in this field, whereas in aircraft manufacturing, applying the SCM Agreement would kill the industry, because it is an industry that all producers need financial aid from their governments. Therefore, the author believes that there should be specific subsidies rules for certain industries.
WTO禁止性補貼制度之檢討:兼論現行規定在特定產業之適用
目 錄

謝 辭 i
摘 要 iii
ABSTRACT v
第一章 緒論 1
第一節 研究動機與目的 1
第二節 研究範圍與方法 2
第二章 WTO補貼規範 4
第一節 GATT時代 4
第一項 1955年之前 4
第二項 1955年之後 5
第三項 1976年東京回合補貼規則 6
第二節 SCM協定 8
第一項 補貼之定義 8
第二項 特定性 9
第三項 補貼分類 10
第三章 出口補貼 13
第一節 SCM協定關於出口補貼之一般性規定 14
第一項 法律上的出口補貼 14
第二項 事實上的出口補貼 17
第二節 SCM協定附件一之例示清單(Illustrative List) 20
第一項 附件一d款 21
第二項 附件一e款 22
第三項 附件一j款 23
第四項 附件一k款 25
第三節 SCM協定第3.1條a款與例示清單之關係 30
第一項 例示清單的性質 31
第二項 附註5的適用 31
第四節 開發中會員的特殊且差異之待遇(S&D待遇) 32
第一項 案例 33
第二項 延展程序 34
第五節 轉型經濟 35
第六節 現行制度檢討 35
第一項 事實上的出口補貼關係 36
第二項 附件一例示清單 39
第三項 開發中會員的S&D待遇 42
第四章 進口替代補貼 46
第一節 進口替代補貼之構成 46
第一項 定義 46
第二項 案例 48
第二節 進口替代補貼規範之適用 49
第三節 開發中與低度開發會員的S&D待遇 51
第四節 現行制度之檢討 52
第一項 進口替代補貼作為一種禁止性補貼 52
第二項 對於開發中會員的S&D待遇 53
第三項 加入價值的要求 54
第五章 禁止性補貼之救濟 56
第一節 多邊機制 - WTO爭端解決機制 56
第一項 組成小組前的程序 57
第二項 小組裁決 58
第三項 反制措施(countermeasures) 66
第二節 單邊行為 – 平衡稅 76
第一項 程序規定 78
第二項 實體要件 79
第三項 課徵平衡稅 84
第四項 暫時性措施 85
第五項 具結 86
第六項 平衡稅審查 87
第六章 現行規定之可行性評估 89
第一節 在特定部門的適用 89
第一項 漁業 89
第二項 航空器製造業 99
第三項 鋼鐵工業及造船工業 104
第四項 小結 107
第二節 其他修正的呼聲 108
第一項 美國提案 109
第二項 歐盟提案 112
第七章 結論 115
參考文獻 119
中文專書
1.陳聰富、陳忠五、 沈冠伶、許士宦:美國懲罰性賠償金判決之承認及執行,台北市,學林文化,2004。
2.曾更瑩:特定性要件於補貼規範之適用,臺灣大學法律研究所,碩士論文,1995。
3.羅昌發:國際貿易法:世界貿易組織下之法律新秩序:國際貿易法研究(五), 台北市,元照出版有限公司,2002。

中文期刊
1.牛惠之,論由WTO之「補貼暨平衡稅措施協定」規範漁業補貼之法理,經社法制論叢,32期,頁67-114。
2.林彩瑜,開發中國家與WTO「特殊且差異之待遇」條款,臺大法學論叢,第31卷第1期,頁289-335。

外文專書
1.The New Shorter Oxford English Dictionary, Clarendon Press, 1993.
2.Benitah, M. The Law of Subsidies under the GATT/WTO System, Kluwer International, 2001
3.Chen, T. and P. Wu. Reconsidering Prohibited Subsidies in Doha Negotiations in the WTO Trade Remedy System: East Asian Perspectives, M. Matsushita, D. Ahn and T. Chen, Cameron May: 337-355, 2006.
4.Desta, M. G. The Law of International Trade in Agricultural Products - from GATT 1947 to the WTO Agreement on Agriculture, Kluwer Law International, 2002.
5.Jackson, J. H. Legal Problems of International Economic Relations, West Publishing Co., 1977.
6.Jackson, J. H. The World Trading System: Law and Policy of International Economic Relations, MIT Press, 1997.
7.Howse, R. and D. J. Neven. Canada - Export Credits and Loan Guarantees for Regional Aircraft (WT/DS222/R): A Comment in the WTO Case Law of 2002, H. Horn and P. Mavroidis, Cambridge University Press: 88-98, 2005.
8.Koul, A. K. Guide to the WTO and GATT - Economics, Law, and Politics, Kluwer Law International, 2005.
9.Lowenfeld, A. F. International Economic Law, Oxford University Press, 2003.
10.Matsushita, M., T. J. Schoenbaum and P. Mavroidis. The World Trade Organization: law, practice and policy, Oxford University Press, 2003.
11.Mavroidis, P. The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade: A Commentary, Oxford University Press, 2005.
12.Nordstrom, H. and S. Vaughan. Trade and Environment - WTO Special Studies 4, WTO, 1999.
13.Palmeter, D. and S. A. Alexandrov. "Inducing Compliance" in WTO Dispute Settlement in the Political Economy of International Trade Law - Essays in Honor of Robert E. Hudec, D. L. M. Kennedy and J. D. Southwick, Cambridge University Press: 646-666, 2002.
14.Tams, C. J. Enforcing Obligations Erga Omnes in International Law Cambridge University Press, 2005.
15.Trebilcock, M. J. and R. Howse. The Regulation of International Trade, Routledge, 2005.
16.WTO. The Results of the Uruguay Round of Multilateral Trade Negotiations, Cambridge University Press, 1999.

外文期刊及網路資源
1.Bagwell, K. "Remedies in the WTO: An Economic Perspective." http://www.columbia.edu/~kwb8/Remedies%20in%20the%20WTO%20010907.pdf (2007).
2.Benitah, M. "Ongoing WTO Negotiations on Fisheries Subsidies." http://www.asil.org/insights/insigh136.htm (2004).
3.Carbaugh, R. J. and J. Olienyk. "Boeing - Airbus Subsidy Dispute: A Sequel." Global Economy Journal 4(2) (2004).
4.Chambovey, D. "How the Expiry of the Peace Clause (Article 13 of the WTO Agreement on Agriculture) Might Alter Disciplines on Agricultural Subsidies in the WTO Framework." Journal of World Trade 36(2) (2002).
5.Chang, S. W. "WTO Disciplines on Fisheries Subsidies: A Historic Step Towards Sustainability?" Journal of International Economic Law 6(4) (2003).
6.Charnovitz, S. "The WTO''s Problematic ‘Last Resort’ Against Noncompliance. " http://www.worldtradelaw.net/articles/charnovitzlastresort.pdf (2003).
7.Delvos, O. "WTO Disciplines and Fisheries Subsidies - Should the "SCM Agreement" Be Modified?" Victoria University of Wellington Law Review 37 (2006).
8.Goh, G. and A. R. Ziegler. "Retrospective Remedies in the WTO after Automotive Leather." Journal of International Economic Law 6(3) (2003).
9.Howse, R. and D. J. Neven. "United States – Tax treatment for ‘Foreign Sales Corporations’ Recourse to Arbitration by the United States under Article 22.6 of the DSU and Article 4.11 of the SCM Agreement (WT/DS108/ARB): A Comment." World Trade Review 4(1) (2005).
10.International Law Commission, Report of the International Law Commission on the Work of its Fifty-second Session, 1 May – 9 June and 10 July - 18 August 2000 Official Records of the General Assembly, Firty-fifth Session, Supplment No.10. http://untreaty.un.org/ilc/reports/2000/repfra.htm (2002).
11.Lee, R. "Dogfight: Criticizing the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures amidst the Largest Disputes in World Trade Organization History " North Carolina Journal of International Law and Commercial Regulation 32 (2006).
12.Lin, T. "Remedies for Prohibited Export Subsidies under Artile 4 of SCM Agreement: Some Observations from A Dispute Settlement Procedural Sense." 2007 International Conference on Policy and Laws of Asia and WTO Rules and Practices of Dispute Settlement Mechanism. Taipei, Taiwan (2007).
13.Magnus, J. R. "Legal Issues in the Aircraft Subsidies Dispute." American Enterprise Institute Conference. Washington, D.C. http://www.worldtradelaw.net/articles/magnusaircraft.pdf (2005).
14.Mavroidis, P. "Remedies in the WTO Legal System: Between a Rock and a Hard Place." European Journal of International Law 11(4) (2000).
15.Pauwelyn, J. "Enforcement and Countermeasures in the WTO: Rules are Rules - Toward a More Collective Approach " the American Journal of International Law 94(2) (2000).
16.Pauwelyn, J. "The Nature of WTO Obligations." http://ideas.repec.org/p/erp/jeanmo/p0001.html (2002).
17.Meiers-Kaienburg, N. "The WTO''s ‘Toughest’ Case: An Examination of the Effectiveness of the WTO Dispute Resolution Procedure in the Airbus-Boeing Dispute over Aircraft Subsidies." Journal of Air Law and Commerce 71(2006).
18.Porter, G. et al. "Analyzing the Resource Impact of Fisheries Subsidies: A Matrix Approach." http://www.unep.ch/etu/Fisheries%20Meeting/AnaResImpFishSubs.pdf (2004).
19.Siuves, H. N. "The Expiry of the Peace Clause on Agricultural Export Subsidies - the Outlook Post-Cancun." Legal Issues of Economic Integration 31(1) (2004).
20.Spamann, H. "The Myth of ‘Rebalancing Retaliation’ in WTO Dispute Settlement Practice." Journal of International Economic Law 9(1) (2006).
21.Steinberg, R. H. and T. E. Josling. "When the Peace Ends: the Vulnerability of EC and US Agricultural Subsidies to WTO Legal Challenge." Journal of International Economic Law 6(2) (2003).
22.Sykes, A. O. "The Economics of WTO Rules on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures." http://www.law.uchicago.edu/Lawecon/workshop-papers/sykes.pdf (2003).

GATT爭端解決案件
1.Panel Report. European Economic Community - Subsidies on Export of Wheat Flour (March 21, 1983).
2.Panel Report. United States - Imposition of Countervailing Duties on Certain Hot-Rolled Lead and Bismouth Carbon Steel Products Originating in France, Germany and the United Kingdom (November 15, 1994).
3.Panel Report. United States - Tax Legislation (DISC) (November 2, 1976).

WTO爭端解決案件

小組裁決報告
1.Panel Report. Australia - Subsidies Provided to Producers and Exporters of Automotive Leather (adopted June 16, 1999).
2.Panel Report. Australia - Subsidies Provided to Producers and Exporters of Automotive Leather - Recourse to Article 21.5 of the DSU by the United States (adopted February 11, 2000).
3.Panel Report. Brazil - Export Financing Programme for Aircraft (adopted August 20, 1999 (with AB Report)).
4.Panel Report. Brazil - Export Financing Programme for Aircraft - Recourse by Canada to Article 21.5 of the DSU (adopted August 4, 2000).
5.Panel Report, Canada - Certain Measures Affecting the Automotive Industry (adopted June 19, 2000 (with AB Report)).
6.Panel Report, Canada - Export Credits and Loan Guarantees for Regional Aircraft (adopted February 19, 2002).
7.Panel Report, Canada - Measures Affecting the Export of Civilian Aircraft (adopted August 20, 1999 (with AB report)).
8.Panel Report. Canada - Measures Affecting the Export of Civilian Aircraft - Recourse by Brazil to Article 21.5 of the DSU (adopted August 4, 2000 (with AB Report)).
9.Panel Report. Canada - Measures Affecting the Importation of Milk and the Exportation of Dairy Products (adopted October 27, 1999 (with AB Report)).
10.Panel Report. Canada - Measures Affecting the Importation of Milk and the Exportation of Dairy Products - Second Recourse to Article 21.5 of the DSU by New Zealand and the United States (adopted July 26, 2002).
11.Panel Report. European Communities - Countervailing Measures on Dynamic Random Access Memory Chips from Korea (adopted August 3, 2005).
12.Panel Report. European Communities - Regime for the Importation, Sale and Distribution of Bananas - Recourse to Article 21.5 by Ecuador (adopted May 6, 1999).
13.Panel Report. Indonesia - Certain Measures Affecting the Automobile Industry (adopted July 23, 1998).
14.Panel Report. Korea - Measures Affecting Trade in Commercial Vessels (adopted April 11, 2005).
15.Panel Report. Mexico - Definitive Anti-dumping Measures on Beef and Rice (Complaint with respect to Rice) (adopted December 20, 2005 (with AB Report)).
16.Panel Report. United States - Continued Dumping and Subsidy Offset Act of 2003 (adopted January 27, 2003 (with AB Report)).
17.Panel Report. United States - Countervailing Duties on Certain Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products from Germany (adopted December 19, 2002 (with AB Report)).
18.Panel Report. United States - Countervailing Duty Investigation on Dynamic Random Access Memory Semiconductors (DRAMs) from Korea (adopted March 19, 1999).
19.Panel Report. United States - Countervailing Measures concerning Certain Products from the European Communities (adopted January 8, 2003).
20.Panel Report. United States - Investigation of the International Trade Commission in Softwood Lumber from Canada (adopted April 26, 2004).
21.Panel Report. United States - Investigation of the International Trade Commission in Softwood Lumber from Canada - Recourse to Article 21.5 of the DSU by Canada (adopted May 9, 2006 (with AB Report)).
22.Panel Report. United States - Preliminary Determinations with respect to Certain Softwood Lumber from Canada (adopted November 1, 2002).
23.Panel Report. United States - Section 301-310 of the Trade Act of 1974 (adopted January 27, 2000).
24.Panel Report. United States - Subsidies on Upland Cotton (adopted March 21, 2005 (with AB Reports)).
25.Panel Report. United States - Tax Treatment for "Foreign Sales Corporations" (adopted March 20, 2000 (with AB Report)).
26.Panel Report. United States - Tax Treatment for "Foreign Sales Corporations" - Recourse to Article 21.5 of the DSU by the European Communities (adopted January 29, 2002 (with AB Report)).

上訴機構裁決報告
1.Appellate Body Report. Brazil - Export Financing Programme for Aircraft (adopted August 20, 1999).
2.Appellate Body Report. Brazil - Export Financing Programme for Aircraft - Recourse by Canada to Article 21.5 of the DSU (adopted August 4, 2000).
3.Appellate Body Report, Canada - Certain Measures Affecting the Automotive Industry (adopted June 19, 2000).
4.Appellate Body Report. Canada - Measures Affecting the Export of Civilian Aircraft (adopted August 20, 1999).
5.Appellate Body Report. European Communities - Anti-dumping Duties on Malleable Cast Iron Tube or Pipe Fittings from Brazil (adopted August 18, 2003).
6.Appellate Body Report. European Communities - Regime for the Importation, Sale and Distribution of Bananas (adopted September 25, 1997).
7.Appellate Body Report. India - Patent Protection for Pharmaceutical and Agricultural Chemical Products (adopted January 16, 1998).
8.Appellate Body Report. Japan - Taxes on Alcoholic Beverages (adopted November 1, 1996).
9.Appellate Body Report. Mexico - Definitive Anti-dumping Measures on Beef and Rice (Complaint with respect to Rice) (adopted December 20, 2005).
10.Appellate Body Report. United States - Continued Dumping and Subsidy Offset Act 0f 2000 (adopted January 27, 2003).
11.Appellate Body Report. United States - Countervailing Duties on Certain Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products from Germany (adopted December 19, 2002).
12.Appellate Body Report. United States - Final Countervailing Duty Determination with Respect to Certain Softwood Lumber from Canada (adopted Febuary 17, 2004).
13.Appellate Body Report. United States - Imposition of Countervailing Duties on Certain Hot-Rolled Lead and Bismuth Carbon Steel Products Originating in the United Kingdom (adopted June 7, 2000).
14.Appellate Body Report. United States - Investigation of the International Trade Commission in Softwood Lumber from Canada - Recourse to Article 21.5 of the DSU by Canada (adopted May 9, 2006).
15.Appellate Body Report. United States - Subsidies on Upland Cotton (adopted March 21, 2005).
16.Appellate Body Report. United States - Tax Treatment for "Foreign Sales Corporations" (adopted March 20, 2000).
17.Appellate Body Report, United States - Tax Treatment for "Foreign Sales Corporations" - Recourse to Article 21.5 of the DSU by the European Communities (adopted January 29, 2002).

仲裁人裁決報告
1.Decision by the Arbitrators. Brazil - Export Financing Programme for Aircraft - Recourse to Arbitration by Brazil under Article 22.6 of the DSU and Article 4.11 of the SCM Agreement (adopted December 12, 2000).
2.Decision by the Arbitrators. Canada - Export Credits and Loan Guarantees for Regional Aircraft - Recourse to Arbitration by Canada under Article 22.6 of the DSU and Article 4.11 of the SCM Agreement (adopted May 18, 2003).
3.Decision by the Arbitrators. European Communities - Regime for the Importation, Sale and Distribution of Bananas - Recourse to Arbitration by the European Communities under Article 22.6 of the DSU (adopted April 19, 1999).
4.Decision by the Arbitrators. United States - Tax Treatment for "Foreign Sales Corporations" - Recourse to Arbitration by the United States under Article 22.6 of the DSU and Article 4.11 of the SCM Agreement (adopted May 7, 2003).

WTO協商文件
1.Committee on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures, Procedures for Extensions under Article 27.4 for Certain Developing Country Members, G/SCM/39, November 20, 2001.
2.Dispute Settlement Body, Minutes of Meeting, WT/DSB/M/75, March 7, 2000.
3.Doha Ministerial Conference, Implementation-related Issues and Concerns, WT/MIN(01)/17, November 14, 2001.
4.Proposal by Antigua and Barbuda, Belize, Fiji Islands, Guyana, the Maldives, Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands, St Kitts and Nevis, Fisheries Subsidies, TN/RL/W/136, July 14, 2003.
5.Proposal by Australia, General Contribution to the Discussion of the Negotiating Group on Rules on the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Duty Measures, TN/RL/W/85, April 30, 2003.
6.Proposal by Australia, Comments by Australia on the United States’ Paper on Subsidies Disciplines Requiring Clarification and Improvement (Document TN/RL/W/78), TN/RL/W/89, May 1, 2003.
7.Proposal by Australia, Further Contribution to the Discussion of the Negotiating Group on Rules on the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Duty Measures, TN/RL/W/139, July 18, 2003.
8.Proposal by Australia, Prohibited Export Subsidies, TN/RL/GEN/22, October 19, 2004.
9.Proposal by Australia, Subsidies: Withdrawal of a Subsidy, TN/RL/GEN/35, March 23, 2005.
10.Proposal by Australia, Subsidies: Withdrawal of a Subsidy, TN/RL/GEN/97, January 20, 2006.
11.Proposal by Australia, Subsidies: Withdrawal of a Subsidy, TN/RL/GEN/115, April 21, 2006.
12.Proposal by Brazil, Export Credits in the WTO, TN/RL/W/5, April 26, 2002.
13.Proposal by Brazil, Contribution to the Discussion on the Framework for Disciplines on Fisheries Subsidies, TN/RL/W/176, March 31, 2005.
14.Proposal by Brazil, Treatment of Government Support for Export Credits and Guarantees under the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures, TN/RL/W/177, March 31, 2005
15.Proposal by Brazil, Treatment of Government Support for Export Credits and Guarantees under the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures, TN/RL/GEN/66, October 11, 2005.
16.Proposal by Brazil, De Facto Export Contingency, TN/RL/GEN/88, November 18, 2005.
17.Proposal by Canada, Improved Disciplines under the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures and the Anti-Dumping Agreement, TN/RL/W/1, April 15, 2002.
18.Proposal by Chile, Possible Approaches to Improved Disciplines on Fisheries Subsidies, TN/RL/W/115, June 10, 2003.
19.Proposal by Egypt, India, Kenya and Pakistan, Improvement and Clarification in Articles 27.5 and 27.6 of the ASCM regarding Export Competitiveness, TN/RL/GEN/136, May 16, 2006.
20.Proposal by the European Communities, WTO Negotiations concerning the WTO Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures, TN/RL/W/30, November 21, 2002.
21.Proposal by the European Communities, Submission of the European Communities to the Negotiating Group on Rules - Fisheries Subsidies, TN/RL/W/82, April 23, 2003.
22.Proposal by the European Communities, Subsidies, TN/RL/GEN/135, April 24, 2006.
23.Proposal by India, Proposals on Implementation Related Issues and Concerns, TN/RL/W/4, April 25, 2002.
24.Proposal by Japan, Fisheries Subsidies: Proposed Structure of Discussio, TN/RL/W/159, June 7, 2004.
25.Proposal by Japan, Proposal on Fiseries Subsidies, TN/RL/W/164, September 27, 2004.
26.Proposal by Japan, Fisheries Subsidies – Subsidies for Vessel Construction and Modification, TN/RL/W/201, March 6, 2006.
27.Proposal from Japan, the Republic of Korea, and the Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu, Contribution to the Discussion on the Framework for the Disciplines on the Fisheries Subsidies, TN/RL/W/172, February 22, 2005.
28.Proposal from New Zealand, Fisheries Subsidies: Overcapacity and Overexploitation, TN/RL/W/154, April 26, 2004.
29.Proposal from New Zealand, Subsidies to Fisheries Infrasturcture, TN/RL/GEN/70, October 14, 2005.
30.Proposal by the Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu Fisheries, Subsidies for Social Security and Welfare, TN/RL/W/202, March 6, 2006.
31.Proposal by the United States, Environmentally-harmful and Trade-distorting Subsidies in Fisheries, WT/CTE/W/154, July 4, 2000.
32.Proposal by the United States, Special and Differential Treatment and the Subsidies Agreement, TN/RL/W/33, December 2, 2002.
33.Proposal by the United States, Possible Approaches to Improved Disciplines on Fisheries Subsidies, TN/RL/W/77, March 19, 2003.
34.Proposal by the United States, Subsidies Disciplines Requiring Clarification and Improvement, TN/RL/W/78, March 19, 2003.
35.Proposal by the United States, Additional Views on the Structure of the Fisheries Subsidies Negotiations, TN/RL/W/169, December 13, 2004.
36.Proposal by the United States, Expanding the Prohibited “Red Light” Subsidy Category, TN/RL/GEN/94, January 16, 2006.
37.Proposal by Venezuela, Observations and Comments by Venezuela on Document TN/RL/W/78 Submitted by the United States concerning Prohibited Subsidies and Other Subjects under the WTO Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures, TN/RL/W/107, May 13, 2003.

GATT協商文件
1.Note by the Secretariate, Meeting of 26-27 September 1989, MTN.GNG/NG10/W/13, October 16, 1989
2.Proposal by Canada, Elements of the Framework for Negotiations, MTN.GNG/NG10/W/25, October 6, 1989.
3.Proposal by Japan, Elements of the Framework for Negotiations, MTN.GNG/NG10/W/27, October 6, 1989.
4.Proposal by the United States, Elements of the Framework for Negotiations, MTN.GNG/NG10/W/29, November 22, 1989.
5.Proposal by the United States, Elements of the Framework for Negotiations, MTN.GNG/NG10/W/39, September 27, 1990.

ICJ案件
1.ICJ Reports (1997). Case Concerning the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Project (Hungary v Slovakia).
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top