Here is the study (pdf)

Although Chinese companies are seen as innovative, government subsidies that violate the rules of the World Trade Organization (WTO) are also thought to be behind the high competitive pressure.

German firms estimate the probability of a trade war with China due to the Taiwan conflict in the next ten years to be high at around 70 per cent.

The companies’ approval rates for tariffs on subsidized Chinese e-cars and the possible prevention of sensitive technology transfer, which threatens to transfer high technology from German companies to the Chinese military, are also remarkably high.

  • Around 80 per cent of German companies consider tariffs on Chinese products, including e-cars, as justified or partially justified, according to a survey by The German Economic Institute in Cologne. The business community’s high approval rates for a tougher approach towards China are based on threats its technology could be used by China for military purposes and the “extraordinarily high and widespread subsidies in China”, which suggests that “the ability of Chinese firms to offer much lower prices is not the result of fair competition alone”, the study authors says.
  • “The use of trade defense instruments has nothing to do with protectionism,” the study says, adding that “these instruments are legitimized by the World Trade Organization (WTO)”. The aim of an anti-subsidy investigation is precisely to distinguish between fair and unfair (subsidy-induced) competitive pressure.
  • “Given the lack of transparency of subsidies in Chinese state capitalism, [subsidy investigation] is a certain challenge,” the researcher say. However, should the EU investigation infer subsidies that are higher than in reality, China would have the opportunity to provide evidence to the contrary.
  • For now, however, “China’s subsidization is a violation of the rules and ultimately a protectionist measure”. The researchers add: “All too often, statements by high-ranking German politicians suggest that the EU and Germany are putting themselves in the wrong by using anti-subsidy measures. The opposite is the case.”
  • At least half of the companies (this also applies to the various depicted subgroups) state that Chinese competitors offering comparable products undercut their prices by more than 20 per cent. Chinese companies even enter the market with prices that are more than 30 per cent lower than those of the companies surveyed. This applies to 63 per cent of companies that feel strong competitive pressure from China, but also to 37 per cent of innovative companies, i.e. firms that continuously conduct research and development.
  • China’s subsidy regime has consequences for industrial employment in Germany, the researchers claim. Although Chinese companies are seen as innovative, government subsidies are also thought to be behind the high competitive pressure.
  • The researchers add that in view of China’s export offensive, it is “important to show that the EU is prepared, if necessary, to use its toolbox against Chinese distortions of competition and Chinese threats”.
  • TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    Who on Earth refers to electric vehicles as “e-cars”? Lol

    EVs or BEVs is the terminology I’ve always heard.

    That aside, I don’t really see how European companies can compete at the low end without slapping tariffs on Chinese goods. Europe doesn’t have the benefit of things like forced labour.

    Also, I think it’s unwise to allow our reliance on China to grow even further. We’ve seen from Russia that making a hostile nation integral to our economies not only makes us reluctant to hold them to account properly, but it also causes us tremendous disruption if we do go about severing ties.

  • Foni@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    100% agree with this, we have to put tariffs on China and assume the consequences when they respond with a little courage, if at the first increase they make in tariffs on wine or pork we cower, this will fall on us

      • Foni@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        Of course, the problem is to expect the industry to “come back” we must not let it go, for the issue of cars the example of solar panels should be instructive, if the factories close today, they will not reopen tomorrow, when China has the monopoly of a sector we will not be able to have a part again, We must act quickly and forcefully

        • VirtualOdour
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          5 months ago

          Or maybe we could see that china invested money and had an actual plan, it’s so dumb everyone gets mad at china fir doing the right thing.

          We need to move away from oil, all the major players should be investing in solar production to lower the price and increase adoption- all the world leaders say this at their climate conferences. China actually does it and all anyone cares about is how to shut them down.

          Ask yourself if you hate climate change or Chinese people more, it’s shocking how many people pick the latter. Cheap solar is good, if your country wants to make solar then invest in it like china did.

          • Foni@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            5 months ago

            The problem with China is not that it invests in one sector or another, we can invest in moving away from oil as much as you want, I would support that. The problem with china is that we can’t compete with their labor costs.

            So as long as they do not have paid vacations and health insurance for their employees at the European level, we have to compensate for that cost difference with tariffs or our companies compete with one hand tied behind their backs.