A Research On The Case Of USA V. India-Certain Measures Affecting The Solar Cells Sector

With the growing strain on traditional energy sources,countries all over the world are vigorously developing renewable energy sources such as solar energy and have introduced a series of policies and laws to protect the development of related domestic industries.These policies and laws may create international trade disputes.As early as 2010,the United States began to use solar cells and components produced in India.India,on the other hand,proposed to raise the domestic content requirement for solar film technology.The United States believes that these plans and measures do not comply with the global trade rules.They filed a trade complaint against India's solar energy plan and held that it was based on the Agreement on Trade-related Investment Measures and 1994.The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade,the DCR measure of "domestic content requirements" in India's Nehru National Solar Energy Program is inconsistent with the WTO trade rules,and it forms a discriminatory treatment for American companies.With the increasing importance of renewable energy represented by solar energy and the high cost of solar energy,most countries will support their own solar energy industry.The "domestic content requirements" in various support measures are often an important part.At this stage,however,such measures containing "domestic content requirements" are often caused by trade disputes on the basis of alleged violations of WTO obligations.This paper starts with the " US v.India Solar Cell Case" under the WTO dispute settlement and analyzes in depth the compliance of the DCR measures implemented by India with Article 3.4 of GATT 1994,Article 20 of GATT 1994,and Article 2.1 of the TRIMs Agreement,revealing the compliance of DCR measures.The definition and demonstration will hopefully provide some solutions for China's response to similar trade frictions.The first part of the " U.S.v.India Basic Situation of Solar Cell Measures" case described the DCR measures proposed by the United States on February 6,2013 in relation to the domestic content requirements of India's Nehru National Solar Energy Plan and India's consultations.On February 24,2016,the DSB passed the report of the expert group.In this section,I briefly introduce the basic situation of this case,the expert group's handling of thecase,and the main disputes of the parties concerned.The second part of the "India 'domestic content requirements' of DCR measures violates Article 2.1 of TRIMs and Article 3.4 of GATT 1994" and studies the consistency of DCR measures with national treatment related requirements,pointing out that the DCR measures in India require companies to purchase sources Solar modules in India must comply with relevant regulations.This is inconsistent with Article 2.1 of TRIMS and Article 3.4 of GATT1994.There are certain problems in the formulation of DCR measures.It is proposed that the formulation of subsidy measures in the future requires attention in accordance with international rules.The third part is whether or not the DCR measure is in conformity with the exceptions of GATT 1994 clause 3.8(a),and studies whether the purpose of the DCR measure constitutes a government procurement or commercial resale.It states that the Indian DCR measure is not in conformity with Article 3.8(a)of the GATT 1994.Exceptions to the provisions stipulate that the purpose of DCR measures is not to reduce their responsibilities.It is proposed that the formulation of the purpose of formulating subsidy measures later requires attention to comply with the relevant provisions of GATT.The fourth part is whether or not the DCR measure is in conformity with Article 20(d)of GATT 1994,and whether the DCR measure is a "law or regulation",whether it is necessary for the implementation of the JNNSM plan,and whether it is consistent with GATT 199420(d).The terms are consistent,pointing out that the DCR measure in India is not the only way for India to support the domestic solar energy industry.It is proposed that supporting the development of the solar energy industry requires comprehensive application of various measures.The fifth part of the article is whether or not the DCR measures are in conformity with Article 20(j)of GATT 1994,and studies the identification of general or local supply shortages.It is difficult to identify the shortage of solar energy in India and the DCR measures in India are not in conformity with GATT 1994.In item 20(j),the method for determining "general or local supply shortage" is proposed.The sixth part "Enlightenment of this case to our country" sorts out the current solar energy subsidy measures in China,and puts forward suggestions for improving China's violation of GATT 1994 and TRIMS' related regulations.The main conclusion of this paper is: DCR measures as the main measures to support the solar energy industry in India are not in conformity with the relevant regulations of GATT1994 and TRIMS.The losing process has provided lessons for our country in formulating subsidies for solar energy industry.