Abstract

International trade is the cornerstone of the global economy, and it implies the cross-border exchange of products and services having as a result enhanced economic growth and development. Nevertheless, the picture of international trade is not as uniformly surface of competitive equality. Governments are in a position to intervene in their economies thereby supporting their local industries through subsidies and other incentive schemes. Such measures of government encourage the development and competitiveness of local industries at the same time though, they can become unfair and can lead to disputes and conflicts in trade.

In the recent times, the growing arguments have been about the unfair competition due to subsidies of the domestic sectors offered by the governments of the particular countries like China. The topic of subsidies and their effect on international trade has indeed risen up in the context of the case of the pneumatic tyre industry, which is the main source of vehicles. This article examines the intricacies of the case and how it made a significant contribution in Indian Trade Law.

I. INTRODUCTION

Pneumatic tyres are very vital components of buses and lorries whereby transportation and mobility can be enhanced. Indian pneumatic tyre market is considerable mainly caused by factors including urbanization, infrastructure development and the boom of commercial activities. On the other hand, the big imports of tyres primarily from China have caused the Indian manufacturers to be paranoid about unfair match in the domestic market. Hence, the reason behind the investigation by the Directorate General of Anti-dumping and Allied (“DGAD”) on behalf of the Indian government into the “New Pneumatic Tyres for Buses and Lorries” which are being imported from the People's Republic of China (“PRC”) is one key thing. The investigation aims to determine whether Chinese manufacturers profit from subsidies given by the Chinese government, leading to unfair competition in the Indian market. This investigation is significant as it highlights the complexities of countervailing duty investigations, the ramifications of subsidies on market dynamics, and the potential implications for the Indian domestic tyre industry. Through investigating evidence of subsidies, market patterns, mechanisms for governing and the possible outcomes, this paper aims at giving overall awareness about the case of DGAD in the area of international trade relations.

A. Regulatory framework

The overall regulation structure administering the international trade, including drawback duty inquiries, is recognized through various international deals and domestic acts. World Trade Organization on Trade-related Subsidies and Countervailing Measures provides norms for investigation and remedial action against unfair trade activities caused by subsidies. Thus, member countries can impose countervailing measures on the imports which are subsidized in the way that material injury was caused by domestic industries.

It is a matter of pride to hear that in India, countervailing duty investigations are managed by the DGAD under the Customs Tariff Act 1975 (the “Act”). DGAD follows a procedure which is transparent and based on the rules where the principles of natural justice and fair process are implemented. In this process, the investigation is introduced; investigation into subsidies and injury is done; countervailing duties are imposed, if needed. In the course of an investigation, where importers, exporters, as well as domestic producers are concerned, they are given the opportunity to be represented during the entire process and also present their documentation in support of their case. Ensuring compliance with the regulatory framework is essential in maintaining the integrity and effectiveness of countervailing duty investigations and upholding the principles of free and fair trade.

II. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE

The Customs Tariff Act 1975 as amended from time to time and the Customs Tariff (Identification, Assessment and Collection of Countervailing Duty on Subsidized Articles and for Determination of Injury) Rules 1995 (the “Rules”) as amended from time to time have been invoked by the Automotive Tyre Manufacturer's Association (“ATMA”) in support of domestic producers, namely Apollo Tyres Ltd., J.K. Tyre Industries Ltd., MRF Ltd., and Ceat Ltd. (collectively referred to as “Domestic Industry”).

DGAD launched an investigation into the importation of “New Pneumatic Tyres for Buses and Lorries” from the PRC into India, prompted by allegations of unfair competition stemming from subsidies provided by the Chinese government to domestic tyre manufacturers. These allegations asserted that Chinese manufacturers such as Zhongce Rubber Group Co. Ltd, Shandong Wanda Boto Tyre Co. Ltd., Triangle Tyre Co. Ltd benefit from various forms of subsidies, including direct cash grants, preferential loans, tax incentives, and subsidized inputs such as raw materials and land. Such subsidies allegedly confer a competitive advantage upon Chinese exporters, enabling them to sell their products in the Indian market at prices lower than their production costs or fair market value.

A. Import volume

B. Share in Imports

While the home market has witnessed sustained growth due to the expanding factors of urbanization, megalopolis development and commercial activities, the tire imports have also helped to significantly alter the Indian tyre market dynamics. Typically, competition of the Indian market for the pneumatic tyres is big but these tyres are more often from China, and the Indian producers are afraid because of played unevenly and distorted market. Consistently, Chinese manufacturers are in the lead in capturing Indian market share through introducing aggressive pricing that is its selling point, thus edge out their local counterparts.

Hence, the quantum of imported tyres has had a negative potential on the local sector in India, which is manifested in the reduction of the share of the market, decrease of profitability, and financial losses. Prolonged integration of foreign producers into the Indian tyre market can destabilize the home industry, warranting a solution of this problem that will likely be adopted by regulators.

III. ARGUMENTS PUT FORTH BY THE DOMESTIC INDUSTRY

A. Subsidy allegations

Indian manufacturers stress that Chinese tyre exports get assistance in forms of grants, preferable loans, tax benefits, and the input costs are relieved from the side of government of China. Supporting actual advantages Chinese manufactures possess plus the option to sell products in the domestic market at the prices which are lower than their production costs or fair market value-making subsidies.

B. Market distortion

Traders pointed that it is mostly due to a high number of subsidized imports that the market is not taking the expected direction. In particular, Indian manufacturers reinforce that Indian tyre market is not a fair game; there is unfair competition due to low level of imports. Chinese businesses have established their niche through the use of aggressive pricing strategies, which in turn, have weakened the domestic production base, by driving down prices.

C. Material injury

Indian local tyre manufacturers complain that the buying patterns of Indian company’s tyre have resulted in the dumping of large number of cheap Chinese tyres which has in turn caused material injury to the Indian domestic tyre industry. This type of material damage is best illustrated by reducing the market share, decrease in profitability, and job losses of the local industries producing similar products to imports. The future of the Indian tyre industry with its sustainability in mind is at the very danger since of the cheap imports to which are being subsidized.

However, the Chinese domestic tyre producers and the Chinese government deny this allegation, saying that such subsidization and practices against its duty to promote free commerce and fair competition.

IV. ARGUMENTS PUT FORTH BY THE CHINESE MANUFACTURERS

A. Absence of Subsidies

Chinese tyre companies and the Government of China deny the use of subsidies and declare that the natural casing of tyres being exported from China to India base on fair price and competitiveness of the exporting goods. The Chinese tyre manufacturers face the competition market while the government does not favour them by conferring subsidies.

B. Market competition

Chinese manufacturers contend that they compete in the Indian market based on the quality and competitiveness of their products, rather than relying on subsidies or unfair practices. They argue that Chinese tyres have gained popularity in India due to their high quality, reliability, and competitive pricing, rather than any unfair advantage conferred by subsidies.

C. Compliance with Trade Rules

Chinese manufacturers and the Chinese government assert that they comply with international trade rules and regulations, including the World Trade Organization’s Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures. They argue that the allegations of subsidies and unfair competition are unfounded and lack sufficient evidence to support punitive measures such as countervailing duties.

These arguments highlight the complexity of the case and the divergent perspectives of the parties involved.

V. DECISION BY DGAD

During the entire process of examination into the abuses of subsidies and in a way of the dump on the Indian market of “New Pneumatic Tyres for Buses and Lorries” from China, DGAD came to its decision stating that the subsidized Chinese pneumatic tyre producers with respect to buses and lorries were actually obtained by the Chinese authorities in different ways to enjoy gains. These subsidies which encompass cash grants on preferential terms, tax incentives and cheap inputs amongst others gave an upper hand at the expense of Indian companies and allowed the Chinese vendors to sell their goods on local market at prices which were lower than their production costs or fair market value. DGAD on the other hand, noticed blurring of the market boundaries and increased imports of the subsidized Chinese tyres thus leading to the concerns of decline in the market share, loss of profitability and inferior employment for the local Indian tyre manufacturers. Thus, DGAD found that the Indian tyre industry had suffered from the pricing of the subsidized imports from China which led the material injury to Indian domestic tyre industry. However, after the preliminary findings, DGAD came to conclude that the Chinese tyres had been the beneficiary of subsidy, which gave it an unfair competitive edge and so recommended the imposition of countervailing duties of imports of Chinese pneumatic tyres to counteract this subsidy and to restore fair competition and protect the interests of domestic producers. This seemingly minute step is, in fact, a crucial one in the course of fighting the problems resulting from unfair trade practices and creating a field of trade that is equal for all industry players in the Indian tyre market.

VI. CASE FINDINGS

The findings of DGAD investigations are crucial to decide the way to approach with the issues that are raised regarding subsidies and their effect on the Indian tyre industry. Key aspects of the findings and their analysis include:

Subsidy Allegations: 

Through the course of investigation, it can be observed that the Chinese tyre makers are provided with various different subsidies every now and then, some of the subsidies are in the form of tax incentives, subsidized loans, as well as preference in the supply of raw materials. This favouring has helped Chinese manufacturers to keep their market in India competitive and gain doubts about the fair trade. Based on the report by the United States International Trade Commission, China’s tire industry has done tremendous job and earned subsidies through some methods like grants, preferential loans, and tax incentives, which have facilitated their deepening into international markets.

Pricing Practices: 

Chinese tyre exporters especially make use of the aggressive pricing strategy in the Indian market that even when underselling it takes huge accessions to market share by foreigners. When the subsidies could be enjoyed by the exporters of Chinese products, their pricing strategy will be based on the principle of selling these products at prices which are coming out below of the manufacturing costs. If this is accepted by the Indian producers, they will continually face financial losses. As per an analysis conducted by the Indian Tyre Manufacturers’ Association, the quantities of Chinese tyre imports have gone up drastically, with their prices less than the domestically produced tyres. Such a trend has now become a reality, which has resulted in diminished profits and market share for domestic tyre producers.

Impact on Indian Industry: 

The tyre market in India is getting undesirable effects of the arrival of subsidized imports which cause the decrease of market share of the local producers, cash flows to diminish and the layoffs to happen. Domestic producers struggle to compete with artificially low-priced imports, jeopardizing their long-term viability and investment prospects. Data from the Ministry of Commerce and Industry, Government of India highlights the adverse effects of subsidized tyre imports on the domestic industry, including a decline in capacity utilization, profitability, and employment.

A. Causal relationship between material injury and subsidized imports

DGAD points out that the following factors demonstrate a causal relationship between subsidized imports from China PR and material harm to the home industry...

• India is receiving significant amounts of China PR-subsidized imports.
• China PR's subsidized imports are undercutting domestic industry prices.
• China PR's subsidized imports are stifling domestic industry pricing and averting price hikes that would have happened in the absence of dumping.
• During the Period of Investigation (“POI”), the domestic industry's performance declined in terms of Return on Investment, cash flow, and profitability.

B. Risk of Material Injury

The manufacturers of the goods being evaluated in China PR are receiving countervailing subsidies. All of the participating Chinese PR producers and exporters have subsidy margins that are higher than de-minimis. Throughout the course of the investigation, there has been a downward tendency in the subject goods' imports from the subject nation.

The Authority observes that the application of Anti-Dumping Duty on the subject goods from the subject nation and the rise in the basic customs duty rates by the Government of India on the subject goods have resulted in a further decrease in the imports of the subject goods during the post-POI period.

Based on the findings of the investigation, several potential outcomes may ensue:

Imposition of Countervailing Duties: 

If the investigation confirms the existence of subsidies and their adverse impact on the Indian market, the DGAD may recommend the imposition of countervailing duties on imports of Chinese pneumatic tyres. These duties are designed to offset the unfair advantage gained by subsidized imports, thereby restoring fair competition and protecting domestic producers.

Remedial Measures: 

In addition to countervailing duties, the Indian government may explore other remedial measures, such as trade agreements, negotiations with the Chinese government, or domestic policy initiatives to support the domestic tyre industry. The Indian government has implemented various measures to promote the competitiveness of domestic industries, including the Automotive Mission Plan and the Make in India initiative, aimed at enhancing manufacturing capabilities and promoting domestic production.

Dismissal of Allegations: 

Conversely, if the investigation fails to substantiate the allegations of subsidies or their detrimental impact on the Indian market, the case may be dismissed, and no countervailing duties would be imposed. This outcome would necessitate continued monitoring of market dynamics and trade practices to safeguard the interests of domestic producers.

Appeal and Dispute Resolution: 

Parties aggrieved by the outcome of the investigation may seek recourse through appeal mechanisms or dispute resolution mechanisms available under domestic or international law. Effective dispute resolution mechanisms are essential in addressing trade disputes and fostering a rules-based trading system.

VII. CRITICAL ANALYSIS

The case thus sleights at the fact that trade policies as well as trade relations of countries play a vital role in shaping their economies. It emphasizes that claim of subsidies and unfair competition would spark further investigation that may lead to a termination of unlimited exportation of domestic industries to other countries and the dynamic of the trade at a global level. The second issue is the investigation process, which the DGAD employs to achieve a fair result. Knowledge of the disciplinary processes such as data –collection, subsidy verification, injury assessment, and stakeholder consultations introduces the community to the stringent and thorough analytical tools utilized to rule on trade disputes. Over this assessment, learners can able to critically come up with their own opinions of whether the investigative process is effective and fair enough, they can also go ahead and suggest possible enhancements in these areas. The last point is that the effects of the DGAD decision on Indian domestic tyre industry also suffice the cause of generating important questions about the ramifications of trade policies on the whole of the society. Additionally, the case will usher in a new direction of in depth researches on the topics like roles of subsidies in international trade, the appropriate legal and regulatory frameworks, and the anatomy of the tyre industries.

VIII. CONCLUSION

The extensive investigation by DGAD aiming at implementation of countervailing duty and anti-subsidy measures against buses and lorry new pneumatic tyres imports from China leads to the serious impact on the Indian tyre industry and bilateral trade with China. The results of the investigation lead people to conclude that subsidies are globally spread and cause serious distortions in markets and harm to national industries. The revelation of the Indian tyre producers and the corroboration of DGAD indicate that subsidies granted by the Chinese government play an important part in the benefit policy of Chinese manufacturers. Chinese subsidies are leading to their competition hold over Indian market and hence Chinese firms export at less price because of the subsidies they receive as compared to domestic players. Therefore, increase in the volume of imported low-priced Chinese tyres has resulted in substantial loss of market share, reduced profitability and consequent job losses for the domestic producers of tyres with the potential of putting the sustainable growth of the Indian tyre industry at stake. DGAD’s recommendation to impose anti-dumping duties on pneumatic tyre imports from China clearly indicates a crucial step forward to fighting against disturb trade practices in the Indian domestic market and to create a fair competition arena. The countervailing duties which are intended at levelling the unfair advantage gained by subsidized imports are purposely designed to promote the fair competition, national competitiveness as well as the correctness of the rule-based trading system. Nevertheless, the long-term effects of such a decision are not only limited to the offenders of the tyre market but also cover the broader aspects of trade policy, economic development, and international relations.

The annulment of the case serves the purpose of the protection of the countries which face unfair trade practices and for maintaining a level playing field among market participants. It also calls for increased transparency, accountability, and conformity with the international trade rules and principles. Hence, trade promotes sustainability and an equitable status for all. It emphasizes the necessity to take on pre-emptive measures aimed at dealing with trade unfairness, preserving the industry’s competitiveness and developing a supportive economic background for a sustainable growth of the country. Integrated actions are required which include reinforcing collaboration between countries, updating the regulatory frameworks and finally, striving towards the construction of a trade system that is rule-based and provides an equitable and mutually beneficial environment for all stakeholders.

The case reflects a crucial judgment in negotiating the problem of subsidized imports and preserving the fundamental characteristics of free and fair trade in the meantime. It highlights the fact that the world is integrated and therefore, the countries should base their policies on facts and respect international trade laws and rules, dictating proactive steps aimed to safeguard the interests of the local producers as well as to facilitate inclusive economic growth. The growing universal market is just one example that could benefit. The truth remains the same in the face of such changes of the international trade relations and the rules that govern global commerce.

.    .    .

References:

• Pneumatic Tires Market Size, Share and Statistics - 2034, MARKET RESEARCH REPORTS | BUSINESS INTELLIGENCE CONSULTING - FACT.MR, https://www.factmr.com.
• Countervailing duty/anti-subsidy investigation concerning imports of new pneumatic tyres for buses and lorries from People’s Republic Of China, Case No. : 6/8/2018-DGAD
• India Tyre Market Forecast and Opportunities, 2017, PR NEWSWIRE: PRESS RELEASE DISTRIBUTION, TARGETING, MONITORING AND MARKETING (Mar. 15, 2013), https://www.prnewswire.com/in.
• AGREEMENT ON SUBSIDIES AND COUNTERVAILING MEASURES, WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION - HOME PAGE - GLOBAL TRADE (1994), https://www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/24-scm.pdf.
• FINAL FINDINGS, F. No.6/8/2018-DGAD, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA MINISTRY OF COMMERCE & INDUSTRY DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE (DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF TRADE REMEDIES) (Mar. 2019), https://www.dgtr.gov.in/sites/default/.
• FINAL FINDINGS, F. No.6/8/2018-DGAD, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA MINISTRY OF COMMERCE & INDUSTRY DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE (DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF TRADE REMEDIES) (Mar. 2019), https://www.dgtr.gov.in/sites.
• CHINA: EFFECTS OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY INFRINGEMENT AND INDIGENOUS INNOVATION POLICIES ON THE U.S. ECONOMY, (INVESTIGATION NO. 332-519, USITC PUBLICATION 4226 2011).
• ‘TRACTION’, VOL.- XI (ISSUE-11), (2022).
• ANNUAL REPORT 2022-23, (2023).
• Sarthak Takyar, Make in India: Promoting domestic manufacturing for the renewables sector - Renewable Watch, RENEWABLE WATCH (Dec. 10, 2023), https://renewablewatch.in.
• INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMPLIANCE UPDATE (COVERING CUSTOMS AND OTHER IMPORT REQUIREMENTS, EXPORT CONTROLS AND SANCTIONS, TRADE REMEDIES, WTO AND ANTI-CORRUPTION) (2018),