CAJ | 학술논문

上网电价制度是否构成补贴，这一问题目前在WTO项下已经产生但尚无结论。欧盟在国家援助审查当中对此进行了回答。欧盟在十余起裁决当中先后树立了“资金来源”、“国家权力”、“国私企业是否一视同仁”三项标准。在欧盟项下，上网电价即便构成补贴，也会因特别法规定而获得合法性豁免。但在WTO项下，即便上网电价未必合法，目前各国也仍然通过“君子协定”维持其默示合规性。对于中国而言，目前可以充分利用上网电价制度，但应同时注重可再生能源激励机制的市场化。
상망전개제도시부구성보첩，저일문제목전재WTO항하이경산생단상무결론。구맹재국가원조심사당중대차진행료회답。구맹재십여기재결당중선후수립료“자금래원”、“국가권력”、“국사기업시부일시동인”삼항표준。재구맹항하，상망전개즉편구성보첩，야회인특별법규정이획득합법성활면。단재WTO항하，즉편상망전개미필합법，목전각국야잉연통과“군자협정”유지기묵시합규성。대우중국이언，목전가이충분이용상망전개제도，단응동시주중가재생능원격려궤제적시장화。
Whether FIT constitutes subsidies is a question raised under WTO but unsolved. EU has answered this question in State Aid scrutinies. In over ten decisions, EU has established a series of 3 criteria including the source of funding, the exercise of State Power, and the equal treatment between SOEs and private corporations. Under EU directives, even if FIT may constitute subsidies, it could still get exemption by special stipulations. Under WTO law, however, even if FIT might not be legal under subsidy rules, currently countries implicitly keep it unchallenged as a"gentlemen’s agreement". For China’s State interests, while taking advantage of FIT ar-rangements is a must, it’s still advisable to pursue the marketisation of stimulation mechanism.