□ 文/本刊記者 陳麗冰

從日本普惠制 “畢業(yè)”，中馬泰如何“天天向上”

□ 文/本刊記者 陳麗冰

日本本田在泰國(guó)的分工廠

據(jù)《日本經(jīng)濟(jì)新聞》報(bào)道，2016年11月24日，日本財(cái)務(wù)省正式宣布重新調(diào)整“特惠關(guān)稅”制度的對(duì)象國(guó)，按照新標(biāo)準(zhǔn)將中國(guó)、泰國(guó)、馬來(lái)西亞、墨西哥、巴西5個(gè)國(guó)家從發(fā)展中國(guó)家關(guān)稅減免名單中剔除。這是繼2014年從歐盟普惠制“畢業(yè)”后，又一個(gè)普惠制給惠國(guó)把中國(guó)、馬來(lái)西亞、泰國(guó)剔除出受惠國(guó)行列。

作為“10+6”主要成員國(guó)之一，近年來(lái)日本與中國(guó)、東盟的經(jīng)貿(mào)合作日益密切。在此背景下，日本普惠制紅利的消失將給中國(guó)、馬來(lái)西亞、泰國(guó)帶來(lái)哪些影響？相關(guān)企業(yè)又將如何未雨綢繆才能規(guī)避“畢業(yè)”機(jī)制所帶來(lái)的影響？

中國(guó)—東盟自貿(mào)區(qū)升級(jí)版于2015年11月22日完成談判，目前，自貿(mào)區(qū)內(nèi)90%以上種類的產(chǎn)品實(shí)現(xiàn)了零關(guān)稅

“畢業(yè)”后帶來(lái)的影響

普惠制是工業(yè)發(fā)達(dá)國(guó)家對(duì)發(fā)展中國(guó)家或地區(qū)出口的制成品和半制成品給予普遍的、非歧視的、非互惠的關(guān)稅制度，當(dāng)受惠國(guó)產(chǎn)品在國(guó)際市場(chǎng)上顯示較強(qiáng)競(jìng)爭(zhēng)力時(shí)，其優(yōu)惠資格取消，即所謂的“畢業(yè)”。

據(jù)了解，在日本2015年度適用優(yōu)惠稅率的進(jìn)口產(chǎn)品當(dāng)中，約60%來(lái)自中國(guó)。不過(guò)，日本“特惠關(guān)稅”一旦取消，約2000多個(gè)HS編碼（也稱海關(guān)編碼）的中國(guó)產(chǎn)品進(jìn)入日本將被重新征收3%以上的關(guān)稅，這必將增加出口企業(yè)關(guān)稅成本，縮小利潤(rùn)空間。

在這方面，泰國(guó)、馬來(lái)西亞同樣也將面臨此類問(wèn)題。據(jù)泰國(guó)商業(yè)部國(guó)際貿(mào)易廳透露，日本調(diào)整對(duì)發(fā)展中國(guó)家取消提供普遍優(yōu)惠制條件的政策后，將導(dǎo)致泰國(guó)14項(xiàng)商品在2019年4月1日被日本撤銷普惠制優(yōu)惠待遇。而根據(jù)2016年11月30日數(shù)據(jù)顯示，該14項(xiàng)商品的貿(mào)易價(jià)值約1579萬(wàn)美元。在14項(xiàng)商品中，約有6項(xiàng)商品將因?yàn)楸怀蜂N特惠關(guān)稅而受影響，分別為山梨糖醇、無(wú)咖啡因咖啡、沒(méi)有轉(zhuǎn)變形態(tài)的乙醇、木合板、木層壓板及木塊芯板。

另外，由于日本在取消對(duì)中馬泰等國(guó)家普惠制待遇的同時(shí)，卻保留越南、印尼、柬埔寨等國(guó)家的普惠制待遇。在此背景下，不管是對(duì)于中國(guó)，還是泰國(guó)、馬來(lái)西亞的外貿(mào)企業(yè)來(lái)說(shuō)，隨著普惠制的取消，將會(huì)削減部分輸日產(chǎn)品的競(jìng)爭(zhēng)力，及改變中國(guó)、泰國(guó)及馬來(lái)西亞等國(guó)家本土外貿(mào)企業(yè)或是日資企業(yè)的投資方向。

“對(duì)于具體出口行業(yè)和企業(yè)而言，可能會(huì)在短期形成一定沖擊。由于不再給予優(yōu)惠關(guān)稅，一些對(duì)出口價(jià)格比較敏感的低值類日用品、輕工產(chǎn)品可能會(huì)轉(zhuǎn)向東南亞，如越南、印尼等仍然可以享受特惠關(guān)稅的國(guó)家?！敝袊?guó)商務(wù)部研究院國(guó)際服務(wù)貿(mào)易研究所研究員、副所長(zhǎng)李俊在接受本刊記者采訪時(shí)表示。

“畢業(yè)”企業(yè)何去何從

日本“特惠關(guān)稅”紅利的消失，相關(guān)“畢業(yè)”的出口企業(yè)確實(shí)會(huì)受到或多或少的影響。不過(guò)目前看來(lái)，中馬泰從日本普惠制“畢業(yè)”已是一個(gè)不可避免的趨勢(shì)。在此情形下，業(yè)內(nèi)專家分析認(rèn)為，相關(guān)企業(yè)要早做準(zhǔn)備，采用市場(chǎng)多元化策略，才能避免因政策調(diào)整造成的利益受損、客戶流失。

對(duì)此，李俊認(rèn)為，相關(guān)企業(yè)一方面可以提高出口產(chǎn)品的品質(zhì)、品牌，走以質(zhì)取勝的道路，通過(guò)培育境外消費(fèi)者的品牌忠實(shí)度，讓其對(duì)出口產(chǎn)品的價(jià)格不再敏感，而是更多關(guān)注產(chǎn)品的品質(zhì)和品牌。這樣，即使多征收一些關(guān)稅，也不會(huì)影響相關(guān)產(chǎn)品的國(guó)外銷售。另外，則可以適度開展國(guó)際化生產(chǎn)布局，利用部分東盟國(guó)家仍然享受日本特惠關(guān)稅的優(yōu)勢(shì)，嘗試開展國(guó)際化生產(chǎn)，如利用越南、印尼等原產(chǎn)地開展對(duì)日出口。同時(shí)，在國(guó)內(nèi)主要發(fā)展品牌運(yùn)營(yíng)、財(cái)務(wù)結(jié)算、研發(fā)設(shè)計(jì)等高端功能，將有利于中馬泰三國(guó)在全球價(jià)值鏈的分工中優(yōu)化升級(jí)。

除此之外，還應(yīng)當(dāng)看到，近年來(lái)隨著東盟共同體和中國(guó)—東盟自貿(mào)區(qū)升級(jí)版的成立，包括東盟在內(nèi)的新興經(jīng)濟(jì)體的消費(fèi)市場(chǎng)增長(zhǎng)速度更快、潛力更大。因此，中馬泰國(guó)家的相關(guān)企業(yè)除了可以“曲線”利用普惠制原產(chǎn)地規(guī)則，到越南、印尼、柬埔寨等東盟國(guó)家投資建廠外，還應(yīng)把更多的目光轉(zhuǎn)回?fù)碛?9億人口，且諸多產(chǎn)品優(yōu)勢(shì)互補(bǔ)的中國(guó)—東盟市場(chǎng)，以更好地“抱團(tuán)取暖”。

“企業(yè)要繼續(xù)保持在發(fā)達(dá)國(guó)家出口優(yōu)勢(shì)的同時(shí)，也要把市場(chǎng)開拓的重點(diǎn)逐步轉(zhuǎn)移到新興經(jīng)濟(jì)體，尤其是與中國(guó)簽署自由貿(mào)易協(xié)定（FTA），享受協(xié)定優(yōu)惠稅率的經(jīng)濟(jì)體。目前，中國(guó)—東盟自貿(mào)區(qū)升級(jí)版建設(shè)為中國(guó)企業(yè)開拓東盟市場(chǎng)提供了機(jī)遇，90%以上產(chǎn)品實(shí)現(xiàn)了零關(guān)稅，因此，企業(yè)要充分利用FTA提供的政策優(yōu)勢(shì)，開拓對(duì)這些國(guó)家的出口市場(chǎng)，彌補(bǔ)發(fā)達(dá)國(guó)家經(jīng)濟(jì)衰退，貿(mào)易市場(chǎng)低迷以及特惠關(guān)稅政策取消帶來(lái)的市場(chǎng)缺口?！崩羁∪缡钦f(shuō)道。

從長(zhǎng)遠(yuǎn)發(fā)展來(lái)看，如今日本宣布對(duì)包括中國(guó)、泰國(guó)、馬來(lái)西亞等國(guó)家取消“特惠關(guān)稅”，只不過(guò)是讓相關(guān)企業(yè)較早地失去了“保護(hù)傘”。但從另一個(gè)層面來(lái)看，這其實(shí)也是在為即將“畢業(yè)”的企業(yè)醞釀一個(gè)離開溫室，到外面世界吸取更多陽(yáng)光的機(jī)遇。因此，不管是更新?lián)Q代產(chǎn)品，提高企業(yè)的國(guó)際競(jìng)爭(zhēng)力，還是“曲線”利用第三國(guó)的成本優(yōu)勢(shì)和優(yōu)惠待遇，亦或是轉(zhuǎn)變銷售市場(chǎng)方向，在距離普惠制紅利正式消失還有兩年的時(shí)間里，相關(guān)企業(yè)還應(yīng)提前未雨綢繆，才能將負(fù)面影響降到最低。

·聯(lián)系編輯：78724815@qq.com

I nformation and communications technology (ICT) now appears to be as crucial for economic growth as transportation and energy infrastructure. Footloose entrepreneurs and Internetsavvy consumers are using small-scale mobile applications to create virtual markets and circumvent regulations. At the same time, developing countries are using ICT to leap-frog traditional growth stages in boosting market connectivity and industrial productivity. ICT proliferation has even been interpreted as a binding force, with international connections among cities and industrial regions having a pacifying effect on geopolitics. Developing countries in ASEAN have already targeted the productivity boost of urbanization and globalization, and ICT is the next frontier. However, there are significant disparities in broadband reliability and penetration across ASEAN. Efforts to create a structurally cohesive and globally competitive bloc, as embodied by the new ASEAN Economic Community, can be enhanced by regional collaboration in ICT and broadband infrastructure development.

ICT in Asia: Mixed performance

In the Asia-Pacific region 41.9 percent of the population uses the Internet, roughly half the percentage in Europe and 23 percentage points behind the Americas. Further, the region’s fixed broadband penetration is only one third that of Europe, with a majority accounted for by East and Northeast Asia (74 percent). Unsurprisingly, China far outpaces all Asian countries in fixed broadband penetration, expanding from a minimal level in 2002 to over 40 million subscriptions by 2015. Only Japan achieved comparable growth over the same period, but growth has flattened in recent years and subscription rates are still only one sixth of China’s.

In ASEAN countries, mobile connectivity is rapidly increasing but large gaps in Internet penetrationpersist. Cambodia, Vietnam, and Thailand have ASEAN’s highest number of mobile Internet connections as a percentage of national population, and eight of ASEAN’s ten countries exceed the global average. However, ASEAN still lags East and Northeast Asia in broadband penetration, evident from recent data published by the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP). In fixed broadband subscriptions per 1,000 inhabitants, Singapore leads ASEAN at 26.5 but lags South Korea’s 40.2. Thailand and Malaysia hold distant second and third place in the region (9.2 and 9.0, respectively), followed by Vietnam (8.1) and Brunei (8.0). ASEAN’s laggards are Myanmar (0.3), Laos and Cambodia (0.5), Indonesia (1.1), and the Philippines (3.4). The latter occupy the Asia-Pacific region’s bottom half for the same measure. However, there is some sign of progress. Brunei, Malaysia, and Thailand made notable improvements in fixed broadband penetration between 2005 and 2015. Other measures are less promising. Between 2008 and 2014, the Philippines, Thailand, Vietnam, and Cambodia regressed in government online service scores despite improving telecommunications infrastructure. This illustrates the well-worn adage that technology is only as good as its application; investment is wasted without an understanding of how hardware helps achieve meaningful outcomes.

Improved broadband infrastructure would enable ASEAN countries to embrace more leading-edge technologies and related innovations in application. Uptake for the Internet of Things, an emerging application through which objects communicate with one another, is measured often through number of mobile-to-mobile (M2M) subscriptions per standard mobile subscription. By this metric, the greatest gains have been in advanced economies, with Sweden achieving more than twice the uptake as second-place New Zealand. Among Asian countries, only South Korea (18th) ranks among the top-20. This is surprising given South Korea’s highly advanced ICT infrastructure; it is the only country where 100 percent of fixed broadband connections have a speed at or above 10 megabits per second. Asian countries must not fall any further behind on M2M technologies. While Northeast Asia has the technological capacity to catch up quickly, ASEAN will not be globally competitive in leading-edge technologies such as the“Internet of Things” without improving broadband connectivity.

Towards a regional solution

The independent pursuit of broadband development within countries has resulted in sizable regional differences in connection speeds. To most people who rely on the Internet for at least part of their work, the link between Internet speed and productivity is clear. Internet speeds in South Korea, Japan, and Hong Kong are among the top-10 fastest in the world, but ASEAN and China are lagging. As mobile applications become more sophisticated, the potential for business development and scaling of entrepreneurial activities is growing. Providing basic infrastructure for broadband connectivity — and normalizing speeds across countries —is an urgent regional policy imperative. Incorporating such an infrastructure initiative into the collaborative apparatus that already exists for ASEAN is a viable strategy to close the connectivity gap between ASEAN and high-performing countries in Asia, Europe, and North America.

TheASEAN ICT Masterplan 2020proposes three initiatives: improve access and connectivity, manage disaster threats, and promote cloud computing. While the plan aims to reduce disparities and improve interoperability, there is no explicit commitment to establish region-wide standards or targets for broadband speed, penetration, and reliability. ASEAN has an opportunity to be the world’s first ICT bloc, boasting tight strategic coordination, common standards for performance, and a funding facility for infrastructure within and across borders. The national-scale institutional elements of ICT (regulation, management, education, etc.) are receiving due attention from domestic policymakers, but elevating regional broadband capacity to global standard— an essential catalyst for industrial transformation — is fundamentally about hard infrastructure.

The way forward is challenging. Development of a regional broadband infrastructure platform would require thorough accounting of the bottlenecks typically attending major public works projects; these include not only financing and geography but also local and national politics. Improving infrastructure through regional initiative also introduces the specter of institutional and administrative complexity. For example, the regional rail corridor proposed for Southeast Asia is dependent on the participation of all contiguous nations— there is little collective benefit if one precocious nation completes its segment while other nations are mired in political and administrative gridlock. The dynamic is similar for ICT, and urgency for efficient collaboration is growing with upcoming investments in additional submarine cable systems. Broadband infrastructure must be developed and managed as a regional resource, lest cross-country performance gaps widen. In the collective spirit of the recently implemented ASEAN Economic Community, institutions and infrastructure underpinning economic growth are “everybody’s business.” Even ASEAN’s most successful economies will not achieve their potential without well-connected and competitive neighbors

· Source: www.thediplomat.com

ASEAN’s Broadband Infrastructure Imperative

By Kris Hartley