With the Lisbon Treaty, the European Commission (Commission) gained a prominent role in antidumping, being empowered to adopt antidumping measures with little interference by the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union. This raises questions on rulemaking accountability and efficacy when sensitive issues are at stake. The controversy underlying antidumping rulemaking is emphasized by the recent surge in antidumping litigation before the courts of the European Union. Through an analysis of the historical evolution of comitology in antidumping, this article identifies the weaknesses of the current mechanisms for securing scrutiny over the Commission’s action in this field. It then considers reform options to address and remedy these weaknesses, including strengthening the legislature’s right of scrutiny, granting observer status to parliamentary representatives and shifting from implementing to delegated acts.
The digital economy is dynamic, fast expanding, and truly global. The legal framework that currently applies to the digital economy is either divided, fragmented, ad hoc, out of date, or nonexistent. Some legal initiatives quixotically aim at stopping cross-border data flows, reflecting consumer fears regarding privacy and security or government fears about losing tax revenue. The fragmented regulatory environment does not help companies ‘scale up’ digital technologies; in turn, this hampers innovation and global economic growth. In addition, some less digitally developed actors complain that current rules allow or even foster unfair competition. This article proposes a new and global legal framework for the digital economy: structured cooperation between states and companies under the administration of an autonomous body. States may resist giving up sovereignty, and citizens may fear erosion of their legal rights. However, uniform, consistent, and enforceable rules would benefit both states and citizens. Tax revenue could be fairly assessed and distributed, for example, and citizens and businesses would no longer face divergent privacy and security rules. Regulation would become more legitimate because both public and private stakeholders would participate in rulemaking, including smaller players and digital latecomers. Companies that subscribe to the framework would receive a global ‘trust mark’ that would boost consumer confidence. In sum, a global legal framework, as contemplated, would match the global character of activities in the digital economy
Rules of Origin (ROO) are in need of reform. Aside from being used for protectionist purposes, they have also become so complicated that they result in companies foregoing trade preferences granted by preferential agreements on a substantial scale. This paper makes the argument for a fundamental reconceptualization of ROO, based on today's Global Value Chains (GVCs). The paper is divided in four sections. First, it surveys the methods currently applied for assigning origin. Existing obstacles to reform are then outlined. A third section briefly examines previous attempts at reforming ROO. Fourth, the contours and possible ramifications of a valueadded approach to determining origin are explored, given that (a) ROO are not suitable for today's world characterized by GVCs; and (b) the tension between bilaterally established rules and multilateral decision-making continues to hamper attempts at harmonization or reform.
The European Court of Justice (CJEU) recently interpreted the rules of the Community Customs Code (CCC) and its Implementing Provisions (CCCIP), regarding the determination of customs value in situations where the seller of goods grants a price reduction to the buyer, pursuant to a contractual warranty, because of a manufacture-related risk that the goods might be defective (X BV v. Staatssecretaris van Financiën). This article provides an overview of the issue of determining customs value in case of warranties, a summary and a legal analysis of the Court’s reasoning, and highlights how this reasoning might coexist with the new Union Customs Code (UCC) and its Implementing Act (UCC IA).
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.