22.10.2019, 11:10
China Didn't Comment on a Request to WTO for Introduction of Sanctions Against US for $ 2.4 Billion
Source: OREANDA-NEWS
OREANDA-NEWS. Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Hua Chunying on Tuesday at a regular briefing didn't comment on a request by the Chinese authorities to the World Trade Organization (WTO) to introduce retaliatory measures against the United States in the amount of $ 2.4 billion. “You need to send this question to the competent departments”, the diplomat said in response to a corresponding question from journalists.
According to an official letter from the Chinese delegation to the WTO published on Monday, the PRC is seeking a $ 2.4 billion annual response to the United States for not complying with the organization’s rules on duties introduced by the United States in 2007-2012. China's request is expected to be considered by the WTO Dispute Resolution Authority (ODP) on October 28.
The WTO appeals body had previously considered a dispute between China and the United States on US duties on a number of Chinese goods introduced in 2007-2012, and on July 16 this year ruled in favor of China. Instance recommended that the LFS invite the United States to bring its actions in line with the Subsidy and Compensation Arrangement Agreement. Thus, the Appeals Body supported the conclusions of the panel, which had previously considered this issue.
According to an official letter from the Chinese delegation to the WTO published on Monday, the PRC is seeking a $ 2.4 billion annual response to the United States for not complying with the organization’s rules on duties introduced by the United States in 2007-2012. China's request is expected to be considered by the WTO Dispute Resolution Authority (ODP) on October 28.
The WTO appeals body had previously considered a dispute between China and the United States on US duties on a number of Chinese goods introduced in 2007-2012, and on July 16 this year ruled in favor of China. Instance recommended that the LFS invite the United States to bring its actions in line with the Subsidy and Compensation Arrangement Agreement. Thus, the Appeals Body supported the conclusions of the panel, which had previously considered this issue.
Комментарии