Heated Skirmishes in the Solar Sector: Do Solar-Pv Feed-In Tariffs Constitute Trade-Related Investment Measures and Subsidies Prohibited under the WTO Regime?
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
I. INTRODUCTIONOn November 5, 2012, the Chinese Ministry of Commerce (China) submitted a request for consultations (complaint) to the World Trade Organization (WTO) alleging that Italy's feed-in- tariff program (FIT or FIT) is inconsistent with Italy's obligations under three WTO Agreements.1 First, China has alleged that the Italian FIT Program violates certain provisions of both the 1994 General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT 1994)2 and the Agreement on Trade-Related Investment Measures (TRIMs Agreement) by providing solar-photovoltaic (solar-PV) generators and components made in the European Union with an advantage that is unavailable to solar-PV generators and components made outside of the European Union.3 To substantiate this allegation, China has pointed to the Fourth and Fifth Italian Energy Bills, in which the Italian legislature agrees to grant ten percent subsidies on electricity produced by solar-PV generators so long as the generators consist of certain components made in the European Union.4 Second, China has alleged that the Italian FIT Program violates certain provisions of the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM Agreement) by providing a prohibited subsidy conditioned upon the use of domestic solar-PV components over imported components.5 As evidence of this allegation, China has submitted that the Italian Government sets a price, guaranteed for twenty years, at which it purchases the electricity produced by Italian solar-PV generators.6 China has claimed that Italy's guaranteed purchase of solar-based electricity confers a benefit upon those solar-PV generators because the guaranteed purchase provides more 4 5 6 than adequate remuneration for the electricity that the generators produce, which is prohibited under the SCM Agreement.7 Italy had sixty days from the date of submission of China's complaint to respond to China's allegations; because the parties have failed to reach an agreement, China may now request that the WTO Dispute Settlement Body establish a panel to review its grievances.8China's complaint to the WTO has important implications for the development of WTO jurisprudence. From a legal standpoint, the complaint raises the question of whether WTO Member States may use policy tools to pursue national human health and environmental initiatives if those initiatives conflict with the free-trade principles of the WTO.9 A majority of EU Member States have already adopted FIT Programs in pursuit of similar national initiatives;10 yet, despite the widespread use of FITs, to date, only one WTO case has addressed the consistency of the FIT with the WTO Agreements.11 As other WTO Member States adopt their own FIT Programs,12 more complaints are likely to follow, and the demand for clear, instructive WTO jurisprudence will only grow.13 For this reason, legal scholarship evaluating the legality of the FIT Program would provide much-needed direction to WTO Member States as they tailor their FITs to comply with the WTO covered agreements.14Given the unclear legal status of the FIT Program, this comment evaluates and predicts the outcome of the current dispute before the WTO. It explores the manner in which the Italian FIT Program likely violates Article 2.1 of the TRIMs Agreement and Article III:4 of the GATT 1994 by mandating that solar-PV generators use a certain percentage of EU-made solar-PV components to be eligible for an increase in the sale price of the electricity that they produce. The same FIT Program, however, is unlikely to violate Articles 3.1(b) and 3.2 of the SCM Agreement because it may fail to confer a benefit upon solar-PV generators as required by Article 1.1(b), and therefore, it will not constitute a subsidy.Part II of this comment begins by providing an overview of the tariff supplied within the Italian FIT Program through the Renewables Decree and the Fourth and Fifth Italian Energy Bills. This part also reviews Canada - Measures, the only case in which a WTO panel has assessed the consistency of a FIT with the WTO covered agreements. …
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».