US – Definitive Anti-dumping and Countervailing Duties on Certain Products from China is the initial WTO dispute in which China claims that US-countervailing duties on certain products from China are inconsistent with the obligations of the United States under the SCM Agreement. The meaning of “public bodies” within Article 1.1 (a) (1) of the SCM Agreement and the question of whether China’s “SOCB” constitute “public bodies” are the heart of the matter. The thesis argues that the theory of the governmental function is more persuasive than that of governmental control in terms of defining “public bodies”. Although the majority ownership of China’s SOCBs has remained in the Chinese government, their policy-oriented nature has been largely marginalized. The conclusion is that the WTO system needs to give developing countries more policy flexibility, and developing countries should also make the best use of their latent comparative advantage and the effects of globalization.

US – Definitive Anti-dumping and Countervailing Duties on Certain Products from China is the initial WTO dispute in which China claims that US-countervailing duties on certain products from China are inconsistent with the obligations of the United States under the SCM Agreement. The meaning of “public bodies” within Article 1.1 (a) (1) of the SCM Agreement and the question of whether China’s “SOCB” constitute “public bodies” are the heart of the matter. The thesis argues that the theory of the governmental function is more persuasive than that of governmental control in terms of defining “public bodies”. Although the majority ownership of China’s SOCBs has remained in the Chinese government, their policy-oriented nature has been largely marginalized. The conclusion is that the WTO system needs to give developing countries more policy flexibility, and developing countries should also make the best use of their latent comparative advantage and the effects of globalization.

Usually people believe that domestic debt in Chinese compare with the GDP is very less, so in this way the government had the ability to issue more treasury bond. So in 1988, when Chinese implement the Rehabilitation of bank balance sheet, in order to write-off state-owned commerce banks system non-performing loan, it uses treasury bond to accumulate capital. Whereas, this kind of implementation does not consider Chinese future financial ability and invisible debt keep soaring, including state-owned enterprises non-performing loan, the debt of the state-owned policy banks. Some scholar also express pessimism, they assume if the government debt continue to increase, this will have a high financial risk resulting in Chinese Economic collapse. So, in calculating the Chinese government debt cause by the state-own financial institution, not only do we consider the figure provided by the Chinese official, but also have to add the Central Government invisible debt. This research is based on time series model in calculating year 2008 Chinese government debt, with Revenue Enhancement, commercial bank behavior and the above two financial policy in making evaluation. Notice: 2008 treasury bond in whatever policy measure is still higher than 60% Basle standard. This implies that in the near future the Chinese will not be able to withstand the huge treasury bond. Simultaneously, this manifest Chinese government debt have been underestimated, and falsely believe it can have the ability to be in the state of solvency, this lead to government continuous issuing of treasury bond. This will hamper the Chinese financial structure. As for the government debt, it only depends on Revenue Enhancement, that is control deficit rate which cannot solve the huge government debt. However, solving the government debt problem, not only with the measure of issuing treasury bond, this will result in raising the debt with the debt. The best method will be to pass resolution in all ways, slowly and steadily in writing off the debt. In this way it can lead Chinese to a Fiscal Sustainability result.