WTO panel report says China should open market to foreign electronic payment providers

Absrtact: "Economic reference newspaper" from the World Trade Organization (WTO) official website learned that the local time on the afternoon of 16th, the WTO on the United States v. China Electronic Payment monopoly issued by the Expert Group report, the first time that UnionPay in renminbi-denominated payment card liquidation transactions have a monopoly,

"Economic reference newspaper" from the World Trade Organization (WTO) official website learned that the local time on the afternoon of 16th, the WTO on the United States v. China Electronic Payment monopoly issued by the Expert Group report, the first time that UnionPay in renminbi-denominated payment card liquidation transactions have a monopoly, violating WTO rules. This will undoubtedly make China's electronic payment market open to face pressure, and may promote China's future electronic payment market pattern changes.

The WTO panel reported that the United States believes China should open its markets to foreign electronic payment providers under the GATS commitments under the terms of financial and other services. The panel did not agree. At the same time, the group suggested that China should fulfil its obligation to open its market to electronic payment providers that already have branches in China and have already provided services in China. In addition, the Panel's report did not fully support China UnionPay's position as a monopoly supplier in all renminbi payment card transactions. But the group also believes that UnionPay does have a monopoly in some types of renminbi-denominated payment card liquidation transactions.

With regard to the complaint of the UnionPay card identification and payment card processing equipment, the panel supports the US side's view. The US complains that China requires all business to have payment card processing equipment in line with China UnionPay's system, a move that would allow other countries ' payment providers to negotiate with businesses for access. At the same time, China requires all renminbi payment cards, including dual-currency cards, to be issued in China with a UnionPay logo, which the US believes is in effect a differential treatment of Chinese suppliers and foreign suppliers.

A person in the industry told the economic reference newspaper that from the report of the WTO Expert Group, it should be said that the Chinese side is "win and lose". At several key points, however, the panel's findings are clearly detrimental to the Chinese side.

Visa and UnionPay have a long-standing dispute. One is the world's largest union of credit cards and traveler's checks, which has stalled in the Chinese market; one is a rising star of the Chinese bank card joint Organization, in the past two years to open up the international market rapid progress. Both sides of the conflict of interest ignited the channel of contention for the "war" and eventually evolved into a national level of trade disputes.

September 2010, the United States Trade Representative office on China's Electronic payment service measures case to the Chinese side of the request for consultations, and formally launched the WTO dispute settlement procedure. In February 2011, the Obama administration announced a formal request for an expert group on electronic payments to the WTO. July 2011 WTO Expert Group was formally established.

Pang, deputy Dean of China's WTO Research Institute, said in an interview with the economic reference newspaper that according to the relevant procedures of the WTO, after the report of the Expert Group, the report of the Expert Group will be considered within one months, during which the Chinese side may appeal and the Appellate Body shall establish and accept the case, And make a ruling within three months. Therefore, even if the time of the Chinese appeal is counted, the final result will be given the end of the year.

In general, it is difficult and unlikely to overturn the panel's report after the appeal, and the final ruling of the WTO will bring pressure to the opening of our electronic payment market. But wt O's ruling does not negate the power of administrative approval, which means that our country will be in accordance with WT O's ruling in the domestic issue of the part of the corresponding changes, but this does not necessarily mean that visa is willing to freely enter the Chinese market.

Pang that on the one hand, the Chinese side should study the Expert Group report carefully, prepare for the appeal, seek more freedom from the legal procedure, on the other hand, China should also reflect on its open market. In his opinion, China's financial services market has always been more cautious, which is understandable in the early development, but with the expansion of the market and the competitiveness of domestic financial services enterprises, the monopoly will lead to inefficient and consumer interests, can further open up the market, through opening up to enhance the competitiveness of the industry, Enhance the efficiency of the industry and economy and improve the ability of the financial sector to serve other sectors of the economy.

Legal advisor to the Supreme Court of New York on Foreign law Beijing AO Asia Great Wall Investment Consulting Co., Ltd., Chief advisor Guan Anping in an interview with the economic reference newspaper, said that the U.S. choice of China UnionPay in the renminbi payment field in the WTO to bring a lawsuit, is a very "diao" point, because this point is very good judgment, but, China's monopoly in the financial sector is more than that. He pointed out that the United States today to choose this point to the WTO, tomorrow may choose another point, China to take the initiative to get out of this "passive beaten" situation, only more quickly to promote the market-oriented process.

16th, in the opening ceremony of China's travel card, the economic reference newspaper reporter on the visa unionpay dispute on the issue of China UnionPay chairman Su Ning, but he did not give a response. On the same day, the reporter telephoned Visa,visa also did not respond.