China had strictly fulfilled its commitment after its entry to the World Trade Organization (WTO), professionals said, adding that its policies set up for joint ventures had been totally constant with relevant WTO rules, and consequently the US accusations were totally groundless.
The comments came as the US now not only unilaterally initiated and escalated the exchange warfare towards China by way of slapping extra tariffs on imported Chinese goods, however also groundlessly criticized China for “forcing overseas investors of joint ventures to switch science ”.
The US accused China of setting necessities for foreign agencies to start joint ventures and cooperate with Chinese corporations in certain areas, limiting ratio of overseas equity, and requiring administrative approval procedures, but the truth was that China as a WTO member had the right to loosen up or limit market access, stated Li Yong, deputy director of the China Association of International Trade Expert Committee, adding that this was once included in each country’s commitments to the WTO.
He clarified that China’s necessities on joint ventures and equity caps in sure areas had been the consequence of negotiations with different WTO members, along with the US. Therefore, they conformed to WTO policies and China’s commitments,.
After becoming a member of the WTO, China cleared up and accelerated Chinese Law on Sino overseas joint venture, the Law on Chinese and foreign cooperative business firms and the Law on foreign-funded enterprises, as properly as particular rules for implementing the laws involving eliminating the foreign exchange balancing requirement, primarily based on the precept of country wide therapy and most-favored-nation treatment, stated Gao Lingyun, a researcher of the Institute of World Economics and Politics below the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences.
“China has lived up to its commitments to the WTO, and its requirements on foreign-funded enterprises are totally in line with WTO rules,” Gao pointed out.
The so-called “forced technology transfer” accusation against China proposed in the Section 301 investigations cannot preserve water, said Tu Xinquan, director of the China Institute for WTO Studies at the University of International Business and Economics.
There is no such law in China that forces foreign organisations to transfer their applied sciences to their Chinese partners, Tu added.
The WTO policies did not ban ordinary technology transfers for industrial purposes, stated Xing Houyuan, deputy director of the provider outsourcing lookup middle of the Ministry of Commerce.
She stated the WTO regulations on intellectual property rights had been supposed to facilitate rather than restrict the spread of technology. Therefore, the WTO regulations need to now not be abused or taken by the US as a tool of alternate protectionism.
Xing said joint ventures were a famous way for China to appeal to foreign capital. In these companies, the foreign investors supply capital and applied sciences while the Chinese side gives factories, land and low-priced labor force.
The director pointed out that serious and careful negotiations are the foundation for the agreements on establishing joint ventures, which is totally in line with the contract spirit.
“Technology transfers between businesses are absolutely primarily based on contracts, illustrating that both the assignors and the receivers are inclined to switch and be given respectively with a reasonable pay . The government have to not intervene in the voluntary behaviors,” Xing said.
The so-called technology transfer did not motive issues , but was a regular industrial exercise of foreign-funded companies, Gao said.
“The Chinese legal guidelines permit foreign corporations to make contributions applied sciences in setting up joint ventures, and Chinese companies are delighted to be given new technologies and are inclined to pay reasonable mental property royalties”, he explained, adding that foreign corporations may want to make a massive earnings out of it to cover associated lookup and development funding and fund new projects.
Gao stated the improvement of foreign-funded businesses in China conformed to financial theories that when coming into a new and unfamiliar market, foreign traders are now not in all likelihood to establish companies on their own, because it is extra costly to get acquainted with the local markets by myself than to cooperate with nearby companies, though the latter ought to convey about charges made by means of cultural shocks.
Quoting data from the World Investment Report 2018 issued by the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), the researcher said China ranked the 2nd in attracting foreign direct funding in 2017, and China couldn’t have made such achievement if overseas agencies had been now not rewarded, or China failed to provide equal and truthful enterprise environment.
Currently, China was once a most important investment vacation spot for the US, stated Tu. According to the 2018 Business Climate Survey Report launched via the American Chamber of Commerce in China, about 60 percentage surveyed US organizations considers China as one of the pinnacle three investment destinations.
About forty six percentage of them consider the Chinese market will be further opened up to foreign capital in the subsequent three years, higher than the 34 percent in 2016.
It indicated that China is enhancing its overseas investment surroundings and US organizations are becoming more assured about China’s future openness, Tu said, including that sixty two percent of the US enterprises admitted that China’s policy-making and communication had been turning into greater and greater transparent.
China dealt with home and foreign capital equally in phrases of industrial policies, regional policies, innovation policies, fiscal and tax policies and employment policies, Xing said.
She delivered that structures such as pilot free change zones and national economic and technological improvement zones were embracing more overseas investment, which would help combine the Chinese economic system into that of the world and construct a more fascinating funding market.