{"id":25877,"title":"Diffusing the Conflict Around Industrial Subsidies","link":"https:\/\/bst-europe.eu\/de\/globalization\/wto-reform-industrial-subsidies\/","date":"3. M\u00e4rz 2020","date_unix":1583260243,"date_modified_unix":1686567635,"date_iso":"2020-03-03T18:30:43+00:00","content":"

 <\/p>\n

\"factory\"<\/a>
Photo by Kateryna Babaieva from Pexels<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

The US is accusing China of distorting international competition<\/strong> through industrial subsidies to private and state-owned enterprises. This is one of the core elements of the trade conflict<\/strong> between the two nations. Multilateral rules<\/strong> disciplining the use of industrial subsidies<\/strong> are currently not very far developed \u2013 but could be a key feature<\/strong> in assuring a level playing field amongst trading nations. In two new publications, GED looks into whether multilateral disciplines on subsidies are indeed needed and if yes, how the trade community should go about negotiating them.<\/em><\/p>\n

The Global Trade Alert database<\/a> lists subsidies are one of the internationally most widespread sources of distorting trade outcomes. It\u2019s not just China; many countries make use of subsidies, including developed economies. And there can be a good economic reason<\/strong> to make use of subsidies, and they can help to address market failures and help to proper economic development in areas \u2013 such as climate-friendly technologies, for example. But subsidies can also be harmful<\/strong>, for example, when they are used to keep unprofitable enterprises alive or when they lead to overcapacity in certain sectors. Dealing with the subject of subsidies requires a subtle approach, not quick and easy, hard, and fast rules.<\/p>\n

As this is one of the main bones of contention, GED has looked into this matter in three publications.<\/strong><\/p>\n