欧盟实践对“一带一路”倡议下中国合规补贴网络基础设施的启示
|
摘要
基于网络民用基础设施和接入服务的不同经济属性,我国在"一带一路"倡议下推进网络基础设施的互联互通时,可鼓励网络接入服务领域的市场竞争,仅将补贴限于网络民用基础设施和接入服务的市场失灵领域。为防范其他世界贸易组织成员方采取反补贴措施,我国可创设"二元化"的补贴模式:在网络民用基础设施领域,分别在使用者和管理者层面,根据公开使用原则和竞争性招投标原则,将网络民用基础设施界定为"一般基础设施";在网络接入服务的市场失灵领域,通过将补贴额度限制在其他企业转位成本的基础上,构建不具有地区专向性的补贴机制。
Based on the different economic attributes of internet infrastructure and accessing-service, China should encourage the competitions in the field of internet accessing-service and provide the subsidies to the internet infrastructure and the market failure of accessing-service in order to promote the connectivity of internet infrastructure under the background of One Belt One Road. To prevent the countervailing-measures created by other members of World Trade Organization, China should construct the dualization pattern of subsidies:define the internet infrastructure as general infrastructure respectively according to the principles of public use and competitive bidding in the sense of the users and managers of internet infrastructure, limit the number of subsidies to transfer cost of enterprises located outside of the designated geographical region in the market failure of internet accessing-service whereby to establish the subsidies mechanism of non-specific geography.
Based on the different economic attributes of internet infrastructure and accessing-service, China should encourage the competitions in the field of internet accessing-service and provide the subsidies to the internet infrastructure and the market failure of accessing-service in order to promote the connectivity of internet infrastructure under the background of One Belt One Road. To prevent the countervailing-measures created by other members of World Trade Organization, China should construct the dualization pattern of subsidies:define the internet infrastructure as general infrastructure respectively according to the principles of public use and competitive bidding in the sense of the users and managers of internet infrastructure, limit the number of subsidies to transfer cost of enterprises located outside of the designated geographical region in the market failure of internet accessing-service whereby to establish the subsidies mechanism of non-specific geography.
引文
[1]European Commission.The XXXIIIrd Annual Competition Report,2003(pp.81-82),paragraphs394-400.http://eur-lex.Europa.eu.
[2]The Panel of World Trade Organization Dispute Settlement Body.United State-Measures Affecting Trade in Large Civil Aircraft,WT/DS353/R,31 March2011,paragraphs.7.444,7.462-7.470.https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds353_e.htm.
[3]Bernhard Von Wendland.Public Funding for Research Infrastructures and EU State Aid Rules-Key Issues,Case Examples and State Aid Reform.European State Aid Law Quarterly,2013(3).
[4]European Commission.Commission Decision N307/2004 on United Kingdom Broadband in Scotland-remote and rural areas.
[5]European Commission.Commission Decision N199/2004 United Kingdom Broadband business fund.Commission Decision N 126/2004 United Kingdom Broadband for SMEs in Lincolnshire-Connecting Rural Business.Commission Decision N 307/2004United Kingdom Broadband in Scotland remote and rural areas.Commission Decision N-57/2005United Kingdom Regional innovative broadband support in Wales.Commission Decision N 267/2005United Kingdom Rural Broadband Access Project.Commission Decision N 131/2005 United Kingdom Fibre speed broadband project Wales.Commission Decision N 508/2008 UK Provision of remote broadband services in Northern Ireland.Commission Decision N 284/2005 on Ireland Regional Broadband Programme:Metropolitan Area Networks.http://ec.europa.eu/competition/index_en.html.
[6]European Commission.Commission Decision N741/2006 Aid for in infrastructure construction and purchase of equipment for the airport in LODZ.http://ec.europa.eu/competition/index_en.html.
[7]K e k e l e k i s M i h a l i s.R e c e n t D e v e l o p m e n t s i n Infrastructure Funding:When Does It Not Constitute State Aid.European State Aid Law Quarterly,2011(3).
[8]Grajek Michal and Roller Lars-Hendrik.Regulation and Investment in Network Industries:Evidence from European Telecoms.Journal of Law&Economics,2012(1).
[9]Kliemann Annette and Stehmann Oliver.EU State Aid Control in the Broadband Sector-The 2013 Broadband Guidelines and Recent Case Practice.European State Aid Law Quarterly,2013(3).
[10]European Commission.Commission Decision N381/2004 on France project of telecommunication in Pyrenees-Atlantiques.http://ec.europa.eu/competition/elojade/isef/index.cfm?fuseaction=dsp_result.
[11]European Commission.Commission staff working paper,Guidelines on criteria and modilities of implementation of structural funds in support of electronic communications.http://ec.Europa.eu/regional_policy/archive/consultation/telecom_en.htm.
[12]Bartosch Andreas.Clarification or Confusion?How to Reconcile the ECJ’s Rulings in Altmark and Chronopost.European State Aid Law Quarterly,2004(2).
[13]European Commission.Commission decision in case N 196/2010 Estonia Establishment of a Sustainable Infrastructure Permitting Estonia-wide Broadband Internet Connection.http://ec.europa.eu/competition/elojade/isef/index.cfm?fuseaction=dsp_result.
[14]European Court of Justice.Case T-258/10 Orange,formerly France Télécom v European Commission.
[15]European Commission.Commission Decision N282/2003 on United Kingdom for Cumbria Broadband Project Access-Advancing Communication for Cumbria and Enabling Sustainable Services.http://ec.europa.eu/competition/elojade/isef/index.cfm?fuseaction=dsp_result.
[16]European parliament.Communication from the The European parliament,the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions COM(2010)245.http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html.
[17]Koenig Christian and Fechter Sonja.The European Commission’s Hidden Asymmetric Regulatory Approach in the Field of Broadband Infrastructure Funding.European State Aid Law Quarterly,2009(4).
[18]European Court of Justice.C-403/10 P Mediaset SPA v Commission,judgment of 28 July 2011.http://curia.europa.eu/juris/liste.jsf?language=en&num=T-258/10.
[19]Chirico Filomena and Gaal Norbert.A Decade of State Aid Control in the Field of Broadband.European State Aid Law Quarterly,2014(1).
[20]中国经济网.“一带一路”:通信产业发展迎来重大发展机遇[EB/OL].http://www.ce.cn/cysc/newmain/yc/jsxw/201703/16/t20170316_21068024.shtml.
[21]范祚军,何欢.“一带一路”国家基础设施互联互通切入策略[J].世界经济与政治论坛,2016(6).
[22]沈梦溪.“一带一路”基础设施建设的资金瓶颈和应对之策[J].国际贸易,2016(11).
[23]袁佳.“一带一路”基础设施资金需求与投融资模式探究[J].国际贸易,2016(5).
[24]The Panel of World Trade Organization Dispute Settlement Body.European Communities and Certain Member States-Measures Affecting Trade in Large Civil Aircraft,WT/DS 316/R,30 June 2010,paragraph.7.1073.https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds316_e.htm.
[25]李仲平.反补贴中“一般基础设施”法律判断标准探析——基于公共物品理论的视角[J].法学家,2015(6).
[26]工业和信息化部和国务院国有资产监督管理委员会.关于2017年推进电信基础设施共建共享的实施意见[EB/OL].http://news.xinhuanet.com/info/2017-05/31/c_136327621.htm.
[27]林思贵.民间资本运营电信基础设施应遵循的法律规范[J].通信企业管理,2016(10).
[28]张欣,曲创.纵向分离、进入壁垒与电信行业改革[J].经济与管理研究,2017(1).
[29]European Commission.Commission Decision N462/09 on Poland Aid for the construction and operation of the A2 Motorway.http://ec.europa.eu/competition/elojade/isef/index.cfm?fuseaction=dsp_result.
[30]苗圩.“一带一路”共推信息通信基础设施建设[EB/OL].http://www.cnii.com.cn/hygl/2017-05/16/content_1854407.htm.
[31]李仲平.“一带一路”战略下中国对外投资基础设施的法律风险与对策——基于《补贴与反补贴措施协议》的视角[J].中国软科学,2017(5).
[32]中华人民共和国商务部.对原产于美国的进口干玉米酒糟反倾销及反补贴调查最终裁定[EB/OL].http://www.Mofcom.Gov.cn/article/ae/ai/201701/20170102499255.shtml.
[33]The Panel of World Trade Organization Dispute Settlement Body.United States-Definitive AntiDumping and Countervailing Duties on Certain Products from China(Complainant:China),WT/DS379/R,22 October 2010,paras.9.125-9.139.https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds379_e.htm.
[34]何小勇,祁小璇.析WT/DS379案中对华反补贴的法律问题[J].世界贸易组织动态与研究,2011(5).
[35]Sherzod Shadikhodjaev.International regulation of free zones:an analysis of multilateral customs and trade rules.World Trade Review,2011(2).
[36]Thomas J Prusa,Edwin Vermuls.United StatesDefinitive Anti-Dumping and Countervailing Duties on Certain Products from China:passing the buck on pass-through.World Trade Review,2013(2).
[37]Kevin C Kennedy.Worker,Industry And Government Adjustment Under The Canada-U.S.Free Trade Agreement.Detroit College of Law Review,1989(3).
(1)囿于通信基础设施涵括范围较广,本文为论证严谨、集中和便利考虑,特选取网络基础设施作为主要研究对象,但相关研究结论适用于其他各类通信基础设施。
(2)在欧盟,非欧盟成员方政府提供的财政资助被称为“补贴”,受《欧盟理事会2009年6月11日关于对来源于非欧洲共同体国家的补贴进口货物可采取的保护措施第597/2009号条例》的规制;欧盟成员方政府提供的财政资助则被称为“国家援助”,受《欧共体条约》竞争规则的规制。尽管二者在措辞和规则上有所差异,但在本质上并无差别。因此,欧盟委员会在规范欧盟内部网络产业竞争秩序时形成的相关规则,对我国实现网络基础设施补贴与《SCM协议》的有机平衡具有参考价值。
(3)目前,我国对网络产业补贴的研究相对较少,在中国知网上同时输入“网络”和“补贴”这两个关键词,尚未能搜索到相关学术研究文献。
(4)根据国际社会的“分层模式”,网络产业可被分成四个层面:最底层的是物理层面,也即铁塔、光缆等土木建筑;其次是逻辑层面,也即网络接入服务,包括批发和零售接入服务;再次是由消费者所使用的程序和功能组成的应用界面;最后是由所传输的特定数据和信息构成的内容层面。
(1)该案所涉“苏格兰企业”是苏格兰政府的一家区域发展机构,其计划建设一个能够达到13个商业园的网络基础设施,并以公开进入条件向试图为商业园提供网络服务的所有提供者开放。拟建网络基础设施归“苏格兰企业”所有,但由专门的私人资产公司进行管理。网络服务提供者因使用网络基础设施向私人管理者支付的价格由“苏格兰企业”指定,后者预期从该项目中获得6.9%的市场回报。
(2)毫无疑问,补贴会改变市场竞争条件,但却不会自动扭曲市场竞争,尽管其会对市场产生“前竞争效应”。本质上,补贴是否产生扭曲效果,需要比较补贴存在和缺乏情形下的市场竞争条件。在正常市场竞争中,最有效率的企业将总是占据市场优势地位的企业。因此,政府使最有效率的企业获得补贴而实施的竞争性招投标程序,通常不会扭曲市场竞争。
(1)该案所涉法国比利牛斯山地方政府,与私人实体签署了一份特许经营权合同,委托后者建设并运营网络基础设施。双方约定,在特许权协议存续期间,比利牛斯山地方政府向该私人实体提供补贴,后者以固定费用非歧视地向所有网络服务提供者提供接入服务,如果其收入超过一定额度,则须将盈余返还给比利牛斯山地方政府。
(2)该案所涉英格兰西部经济发展署,为了确保北兰开夏郡和坎布里亚郡的民众也能享有经济发达地区的宽带网络服务,试图通过补贴刺激私人网络服务提供者向前述目标区域提供网络服务。根据约定,该私人网络服务提供者须建立一个覆盖范围5公里、90%的公民和企业都能享有的网络服务,并且收取的费用不超过“英国电信”索要的价格(英国网络服务的最低价格)。
(1)在网民数量方面,“一带一路”沿线国家总人口超过43亿,但互联网普及率仅为33%,未上网人数约29亿,占全球未上网人数的四分之三。其中,人口大国印度的未上网人数超过10亿。在网络基础设施方面,2013全球人均带宽为53048bps,而绝大部分“一带一路”沿线国家低于该水平,而且大部分国家低于10000bps,其中包括人口最多的中国和印度。此外,每百人中固定宽带订用数水平也比较低,相当一部分国家在10户以下。
(1)此处“几年”需要结合我国网络接入服务的发展现状、制约因素、补贴力度和技术发展水平等综合因素予以确定。
(1)基于行文简洁,本文一律将“企业或产业”概括为“企业”。
(2)比如,补贴授予机关向指定地区内所有企业提供10%的生产补贴。在该计划之下,补贴利益被授予了所有的企业或产业,这些特定地区的企业或产业获得的补贴不应构成专向性并不可被抵消。
[2]The Panel of World Trade Organization Dispute Settlement Body.United State-Measures Affecting Trade in Large Civil Aircraft,WT/DS353/R,31 March2011,paragraphs.7.444,7.462-7.470.https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds353_e.htm.
[3]Bernhard Von Wendland.Public Funding for Research Infrastructures and EU State Aid Rules-Key Issues,Case Examples and State Aid Reform.European State Aid Law Quarterly,2013(3).
[4]European Commission.Commission Decision N307/2004 on United Kingdom Broadband in Scotland-remote and rural areas.
[5]European Commission.Commission Decision N199/2004 United Kingdom Broadband business fund.Commission Decision N 126/2004 United Kingdom Broadband for SMEs in Lincolnshire-Connecting Rural Business.Commission Decision N 307/2004United Kingdom Broadband in Scotland remote and rural areas.Commission Decision N-57/2005United Kingdom Regional innovative broadband support in Wales.Commission Decision N 267/2005United Kingdom Rural Broadband Access Project.Commission Decision N 131/2005 United Kingdom Fibre speed broadband project Wales.Commission Decision N 508/2008 UK Provision of remote broadband services in Northern Ireland.Commission Decision N 284/2005 on Ireland Regional Broadband Programme:Metropolitan Area Networks.http://ec.europa.eu/competition/index_en.html.
[6]European Commission.Commission Decision N741/2006 Aid for in infrastructure construction and purchase of equipment for the airport in LODZ.http://ec.europa.eu/competition/index_en.html.
[7]K e k e l e k i s M i h a l i s.R e c e n t D e v e l o p m e n t s i n Infrastructure Funding:When Does It Not Constitute State Aid.European State Aid Law Quarterly,2011(3).
[8]Grajek Michal and Roller Lars-Hendrik.Regulation and Investment in Network Industries:Evidence from European Telecoms.Journal of Law&Economics,2012(1).
[9]Kliemann Annette and Stehmann Oliver.EU State Aid Control in the Broadband Sector-The 2013 Broadband Guidelines and Recent Case Practice.European State Aid Law Quarterly,2013(3).
[10]European Commission.Commission Decision N381/2004 on France project of telecommunication in Pyrenees-Atlantiques.http://ec.europa.eu/competition/elojade/isef/index.cfm?fuseaction=dsp_result.
[11]European Commission.Commission staff working paper,Guidelines on criteria and modilities of implementation of structural funds in support of electronic communications.http://ec.Europa.eu/regional_policy/archive/consultation/telecom_en.htm.
[12]Bartosch Andreas.Clarification or Confusion?How to Reconcile the ECJ’s Rulings in Altmark and Chronopost.European State Aid Law Quarterly,2004(2).
[13]European Commission.Commission decision in case N 196/2010 Estonia Establishment of a Sustainable Infrastructure Permitting Estonia-wide Broadband Internet Connection.http://ec.europa.eu/competition/elojade/isef/index.cfm?fuseaction=dsp_result.
[14]European Court of Justice.Case T-258/10 Orange,formerly France Télécom v European Commission.
[15]European Commission.Commission Decision N282/2003 on United Kingdom for Cumbria Broadband Project Access-Advancing Communication for Cumbria and Enabling Sustainable Services.http://ec.europa.eu/competition/elojade/isef/index.cfm?fuseaction=dsp_result.
[16]European parliament.Communication from the The European parliament,the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions COM(2010)245.http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html.
[17]Koenig Christian and Fechter Sonja.The European Commission’s Hidden Asymmetric Regulatory Approach in the Field of Broadband Infrastructure Funding.European State Aid Law Quarterly,2009(4).
[18]European Court of Justice.C-403/10 P Mediaset SPA v Commission,judgment of 28 July 2011.http://curia.europa.eu/juris/liste.jsf?language=en&num=T-258/10.
[19]Chirico Filomena and Gaal Norbert.A Decade of State Aid Control in the Field of Broadband.European State Aid Law Quarterly,2014(1).
[20]中国经济网.“一带一路”:通信产业发展迎来重大发展机遇[EB/OL].http://www.ce.cn/cysc/newmain/yc/jsxw/201703/16/t20170316_21068024.shtml.
[21]范祚军,何欢.“一带一路”国家基础设施互联互通切入策略[J].世界经济与政治论坛,2016(6).
[22]沈梦溪.“一带一路”基础设施建设的资金瓶颈和应对之策[J].国际贸易,2016(11).
[23]袁佳.“一带一路”基础设施资金需求与投融资模式探究[J].国际贸易,2016(5).
[24]The Panel of World Trade Organization Dispute Settlement Body.European Communities and Certain Member States-Measures Affecting Trade in Large Civil Aircraft,WT/DS 316/R,30 June 2010,paragraph.7.1073.https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds316_e.htm.
[25]李仲平.反补贴中“一般基础设施”法律判断标准探析——基于公共物品理论的视角[J].法学家,2015(6).
[26]工业和信息化部和国务院国有资产监督管理委员会.关于2017年推进电信基础设施共建共享的实施意见[EB/OL].http://news.xinhuanet.com/info/2017-05/31/c_136327621.htm.
[27]林思贵.民间资本运营电信基础设施应遵循的法律规范[J].通信企业管理,2016(10).
[28]张欣,曲创.纵向分离、进入壁垒与电信行业改革[J].经济与管理研究,2017(1).
[29]European Commission.Commission Decision N462/09 on Poland Aid for the construction and operation of the A2 Motorway.http://ec.europa.eu/competition/elojade/isef/index.cfm?fuseaction=dsp_result.
[30]苗圩.“一带一路”共推信息通信基础设施建设[EB/OL].http://www.cnii.com.cn/hygl/2017-05/16/content_1854407.htm.
[31]李仲平.“一带一路”战略下中国对外投资基础设施的法律风险与对策——基于《补贴与反补贴措施协议》的视角[J].中国软科学,2017(5).
[32]中华人民共和国商务部.对原产于美国的进口干玉米酒糟反倾销及反补贴调查最终裁定[EB/OL].http://www.Mofcom.Gov.cn/article/ae/ai/201701/20170102499255.shtml.
[33]The Panel of World Trade Organization Dispute Settlement Body.United States-Definitive AntiDumping and Countervailing Duties on Certain Products from China(Complainant:China),WT/DS379/R,22 October 2010,paras.9.125-9.139.https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds379_e.htm.
[34]何小勇,祁小璇.析WT/DS379案中对华反补贴的法律问题[J].世界贸易组织动态与研究,2011(5).
[35]Sherzod Shadikhodjaev.International regulation of free zones:an analysis of multilateral customs and trade rules.World Trade Review,2011(2).
[36]Thomas J Prusa,Edwin Vermuls.United StatesDefinitive Anti-Dumping and Countervailing Duties on Certain Products from China:passing the buck on pass-through.World Trade Review,2013(2).
[37]Kevin C Kennedy.Worker,Industry And Government Adjustment Under The Canada-U.S.Free Trade Agreement.Detroit College of Law Review,1989(3).
(1)囿于通信基础设施涵括范围较广,本文为论证严谨、集中和便利考虑,特选取网络基础设施作为主要研究对象,但相关研究结论适用于其他各类通信基础设施。
(2)在欧盟,非欧盟成员方政府提供的财政资助被称为“补贴”,受《欧盟理事会2009年6月11日关于对来源于非欧洲共同体国家的补贴进口货物可采取的保护措施第597/2009号条例》的规制;欧盟成员方政府提供的财政资助则被称为“国家援助”,受《欧共体条约》竞争规则的规制。尽管二者在措辞和规则上有所差异,但在本质上并无差别。因此,欧盟委员会在规范欧盟内部网络产业竞争秩序时形成的相关规则,对我国实现网络基础设施补贴与《SCM协议》的有机平衡具有参考价值。
(3)目前,我国对网络产业补贴的研究相对较少,在中国知网上同时输入“网络”和“补贴”这两个关键词,尚未能搜索到相关学术研究文献。
(4)根据国际社会的“分层模式”,网络产业可被分成四个层面:最底层的是物理层面,也即铁塔、光缆等土木建筑;其次是逻辑层面,也即网络接入服务,包括批发和零售接入服务;再次是由消费者所使用的程序和功能组成的应用界面;最后是由所传输的特定数据和信息构成的内容层面。
(1)该案所涉“苏格兰企业”是苏格兰政府的一家区域发展机构,其计划建设一个能够达到13个商业园的网络基础设施,并以公开进入条件向试图为商业园提供网络服务的所有提供者开放。拟建网络基础设施归“苏格兰企业”所有,但由专门的私人资产公司进行管理。网络服务提供者因使用网络基础设施向私人管理者支付的价格由“苏格兰企业”指定,后者预期从该项目中获得6.9%的市场回报。
(2)毫无疑问,补贴会改变市场竞争条件,但却不会自动扭曲市场竞争,尽管其会对市场产生“前竞争效应”。本质上,补贴是否产生扭曲效果,需要比较补贴存在和缺乏情形下的市场竞争条件。在正常市场竞争中,最有效率的企业将总是占据市场优势地位的企业。因此,政府使最有效率的企业获得补贴而实施的竞争性招投标程序,通常不会扭曲市场竞争。
(1)该案所涉法国比利牛斯山地方政府,与私人实体签署了一份特许经营权合同,委托后者建设并运营网络基础设施。双方约定,在特许权协议存续期间,比利牛斯山地方政府向该私人实体提供补贴,后者以固定费用非歧视地向所有网络服务提供者提供接入服务,如果其收入超过一定额度,则须将盈余返还给比利牛斯山地方政府。
(2)该案所涉英格兰西部经济发展署,为了确保北兰开夏郡和坎布里亚郡的民众也能享有经济发达地区的宽带网络服务,试图通过补贴刺激私人网络服务提供者向前述目标区域提供网络服务。根据约定,该私人网络服务提供者须建立一个覆盖范围5公里、90%的公民和企业都能享有的网络服务,并且收取的费用不超过“英国电信”索要的价格(英国网络服务的最低价格)。
(1)在网民数量方面,“一带一路”沿线国家总人口超过43亿,但互联网普及率仅为33%,未上网人数约29亿,占全球未上网人数的四分之三。其中,人口大国印度的未上网人数超过10亿。在网络基础设施方面,2013全球人均带宽为53048bps,而绝大部分“一带一路”沿线国家低于该水平,而且大部分国家低于10000bps,其中包括人口最多的中国和印度。此外,每百人中固定宽带订用数水平也比较低,相当一部分国家在10户以下。
(1)此处“几年”需要结合我国网络接入服务的发展现状、制约因素、补贴力度和技术发展水平等综合因素予以确定。
(1)基于行文简洁,本文一律将“企业或产业”概括为“企业”。
(2)比如,补贴授予机关向指定地区内所有企业提供10%的生产补贴。在该计划之下,补贴利益被授予了所有的企业或产业,这些特定地区的企业或产业获得的补贴不应构成专向性并不可被抵消。