May 24, 2012

Sino-U.S. Trade: Increasing Government Intervention Leads to Added Friction

The bilateral discussions recently concluded between the United States and China in the context of the Joint Commission on Commerce and Trade (JCCT) highlight the worsening rift between the two trading partners. We are entering a new era of significant trade turmoil and instability with China that may affect not only U.S. exports to China but also the operations of U.S. companies doing business in China.

The recently initiated investigations by the U.S. government of Chinese solar imports into the United States for allegations of unfair pricing and illegal subsidies have led the Chinese government to initiate its own investigation into U.S. subsidization of its green energy industry and to bring trade remedy cases against a number of U.S. imports into China. Europe is rumored to be preparing its own measures against Chinese solar panels and other imports that threaten its industries and member states' economies. Such measures could cause significant diversion and disruption of trade.

Given this rapidly evolving situation, there are real and immediate consequences. U.S. exporters are at risk of being caught in new trade remedy investigations in China as part of the Chinese government's broader retaliatory measures. So far, the industries targeted by Chinese authorities and most at risk are in the automotive, chemical, steel and agricultural sectors. However, all U.S. exports to China are vulnerable. The so-called "green energy" industry (solar, bioenergy, wind, etc.) is particularly exposed to trade remedy actions given the subsidies that this sector has received in most countries to nurture its growth. This means that U.S. exports are vulnerable to trade actions by other countries (China, European nations), as are imports into the United States from U.S. plants in China. Other consequences for companies that source products in China include disruption of supplies and higher tariffs. 

©2012 Greenberg Traurig, LLP. All rights reserved.

About the Author

Shareholder

Philippe Bruno has over 25 years of experience in counseling and representing U.S. and foreign producers, exporters and importers in a wide range of administrative proceedings before the U.S. government and its agencies, as well as before governmental institutions of foreign countries, including the European Commission, Canada, Brazil and China. 

202.331.3193

About the Author

Shareholder

Rosa S. Jeong is a shareholder in Greenberg Traurig's Global Trade Practice Group in Washington, D.C.  Her practice focuses on all aspects of international trade laws, including trade remedy proceedings before the U.S. Department of Commerce, the U.S. International Trade Commission, federal courts, and the World Trade Organization.  She has counseled and represented companies in antidumping and countervailing duty proceedings, and appeals of such cases in the U.S. Court of International Trade and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.  She has also...

202.533.2328

Boost: AJAX core statistics

Legal Disclaimer

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. NLR does not accept advertising from attorneys or law firms. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com  intended to be an advertisement or a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.