After imposing anti-dumping tariffs on Chinese and Vietnamese shoes in April 2006 to counter the flood of imports (see Euractiv 24 March 2006), the Commission is now proposing a follow-up plan in which anti-dumping duties currently levied would be scrapped, but only on a limited number of imports.
The initial anti-dumping charges (respectively 19,4% and 16,8% for all shoes originating in China and Vietnam, except children's shoes) were introduced for a 6 month period after investigations suggested that the two Asian countries were exporting footwear at below cost-prices.
According to EU sources, the new 'deferred duty system' would allow just 140 million pairs of shoes from China and 80 million from Vietnam to enter the EU free of any anti-dumping duty, under a 12% tariff. Over that amount, tariffs of 23% for China and 29,5% for Vietnam would be levied to correct the injurious effects of dumping. There would be “no limit on what volumes of shoes could come in”, according to the Commissioner Mandelson’s spokesman, Peter Power.
The plan aims to help European manufacturers contend with low-cost imports from China and Vietnam, but European Commissioner Peter Mandelson will also be attempting to avoid a repeat of the crisis caused last summer when millions of garments made in China were blocked from entering the EU after trade quotas negotiated in June 2005 were exceeded (see EurActiv 24 August 2005).
Beijing has dismissed the proposal saying that the introduction of a quota-based system would be incompatible with World Trade Organisation rules. "The only reasonable thing for the EU to do is to end the anti-dumping duties," said Mei Xinyu, a researcher with the Chinese Academy of International Trade and Economic Cooperation, a Ministry of Commerce think tank. Chinese officials have not ruled out going to the WTO's dispute-settlement body over the issue.
European retailers and importers are against these measures highlighting the fact that current plans would, for the first time, impose a surcharge on children’s shoes too, hitting poor households in particular.
