EU Investigates Chinese Footwear "Customs Fraud"

It has been nearly a year since the Chinese footwear industry was imposed anti-dumping duties by the European Union. Chinese companies seem to see the opportunity to turn the rules by using international rules.

However, the anti circumvention investigation is coming quietly, and the EU is trying to label the Chinese shoes with "Customs fraud".

The situation of Chinese leather shoes in Europe is precisely a sample of China's manufacturing situation in the world.

In some countries' demonized Chinese manufacturing environment, Chinese enterprises must learn to make use of international rules to get rid of the predicament faced by China's manufacturing industry.

October 17th will be a sensitive time for the EU to announce 1st anniversary of the anti-dumping decision on Chinese leather shoes.

According to convention, after a year of anti-dumping duty, Chinese enterprises can get the chance to re apply for lowering the tax rate, but now, the chance of rebirth is suddenly changing.

Macao shoemaking enterprises exporting products to the EU are facing serious scrutiny.

The EU suspects that Chinese leather shoes are being exported to Europe by way of Macao to avoid anti-dumping investigations from the European Union.

In response, the EU is responding to the "anti circumvention investigation" (also known as the REACH bill), and the future of China's leather shoes is again confusing.

Zhang Yi, a partner of Beijing small tilling law firm, told reporters: "this anti circumvention investigation launched by the European Union is mainly aimed at those who are taken anti-dumping measures to avoid anti-dumping measures and then export them to the state of investigation through the third country after processing or assembling the goods, or to export the parts directly to the countries of investigation, then assemble them, or re export through third countries."

Reporters learned that the EU "anti circumvention investigation" is mainly directed against Macao.

A shoe company owner from Panyu, Guangdong, told reporters that Macao shoe enterprises are basically affiliated enterprises of mainland enterprises.

The current situation shows that there are two main manifestations of this association. One is that it has not been produced in Macao at all, but that it has obtained the certificate of origin or OEM by means of improper means. The two is the completion of the bonding process in Macao or the pportation of shoes into Macao, and the completion in Macao is only the final packaging process.

In this way, the leather shoes originally produced by the mainland can have third party status or origin labels through the re export of Macao, thereby circumventing the punitive tariffs imposed and imposed by the European Union on anti-dumping duties on the Chinese footwear industry.

However, in accordance with the EU's regulations on the status or origin label of the third country, only when the added value of the local production must reach over 25% of the value of the product can we obtain the certificate of origin recognized by the European Union. Obviously, no matter what the above conditions are, we can not reach this standard of the European Union.

"In fact, the anti circumvention investigation is an effective means for the EU to ensure that the anti-dumping measures continue to be lethal. It can not only ensure the continuous effectiveness of the 16.5% anti-dumping duty on Chinese footwear enterprises, but also impose anti-dumping duties on the parts of the reprocessing countries, assembly countries or products involved."

Zhang Yi lawyer told reporters.

An unnamed shoe company owner told reporters: "after 16.5% of the anti-dumping duty rate has been implemented, the profits of the enterprises have been minimal.

Many of the enterprises involved in the original plan were reluctant to support the EU for a year before they could reduce the anti-dumping duty rate with the help of the EU's review opportunities.

The "trade figures" have always been considered to be very "covert" Macao pshipment routes. How did the EU find out?

In fact, this is not difficult, and the open trade figures are enough to arouse the suspicion of the European Union.

"In fact, the EU's approach to finding these problems is very simple. It is easy to see from the trade figures of both sides.

Over the past year, the number of leather shoes exported to Europe in mainland China has decreased significantly, while the number of leather shoes exported from Macao to Europe has suddenly increased.

However, as we all know, Macao is not the production base of leather shoes at all. It is easy for the European Union to judge that many shoes are pferred from the mainland by way of Macao to Europe.

Ministry of Commerce Fair Trade Bureau sources.

In addition, the EU's concern about the trade figures between China and Europe has lasted for a long time. From last year's anti-dumping investigation of up to 12 cases, the anti-dumping investigation of citric acid and MSG was carried out until the beginning of the September, and the EU's anti-dumping duties continued. The European Union took the anti-dumping stick under the stimulation of "trade figures".

Moreover, according to the first quarter figures this year, the EU has become China's largest trading partner. The output and export volume of China's shoes also rank first in the world. These figures have stimulated the sensitive nerves of the European Union, especially the EU competition enterprises. They expect that the anti-dumping trade remedy can adjust these figures.

"The object of the EU anti circumvention investigation is Macao enterprises, not mainland enterprises that we understand. Therefore, if mainland enterprises do not circumvent anti-dumping duties by borrowing Macao's re exports to Europe, they will not be affected."

Cheng Yonghe, director of the Fair Trade Bureau of the Ministry of Commerce, said.

This clearly confirms the logic of "Macao's export trade data sparking EU suspicion".

"However, EU enterprises are worried about Chinese enterprises' anti retaliation, so they are launched in the name of the industry, and will no longer stand up to the fault of Chinese enterprises as before."

The Ministry of Commerce's Fair Trade Bureau told reporters.

Who is suffering from "fatal impact", however, a large number of Macao enterprises are actually Chinese mainland shoe related companies.

"However, a problem that needs to be explained clearly is that these affiliated enterprises are not necessarily evasive. Some enterprises have set up formal processing plants in Macao, and the production value is very large. The shoes they produce are re exported to Europe and are fully in line with the normal trade category."

A shoemaking boss told reporters.

In view of this, Cheng Yonghe, director of the import and Export Fair Trade Bureau of the Ministry of Commerce, said that the Ministry of Commerce was concerned that the EU investigation might "hurt innocent people", so it had been investigated in advance to safeguard the interests of shoe companies in normal trade between the mainland and Macao.

He also reminded that shoe manufacturers in factories with factories in Macao must manage the raw data and information in order to cope with the verification.

Whether the anti circumvention investigation will affect the plan of Chinese shoe enterprises to apply for the adjustment of anti-dumping duty rate with the help of the EU review procedure, another person from the Ministry of Commerce said: "there should be no influence. Enterprises without" circumvention "can still apply for the adjustment of anti-dumping duty rate through the EU's review process in the coming year.

"However, enterprises that are related to the" evasion "survey are bound to be affected by the time of application for approval. At the same time, even if there is no evasion, the trend of EU strengthening censorship is inevitable.

As of press release, the news from the Ministry of Commerce showed: "although many enterprises have initiated anti-dumping review procedures before, there is still no official application."

"The key is that we have to calculate clearly what the costs and costs of starting the review process and the target rate of anti-dumping duty are, which is more advantageous to the enterprise."

A boss who intends to put forward a review of shoes is saying.