近年來,隨著國有企業議題的興起,國有企業主權豁免重新成為國際社會的關注熱點。美國FSIA、英國SIA和UN公約對國有企業主權豁免資格的界定在主體地位及舉證責任方面存在顯著區別。尤其美國模式不但存在法理缺陷,且對中國可能產生不利影響。中國沒有專門的主權豁免立法,僅僅通過外交聲明等方式確定"國家絕對豁免+國企不豁免"的立場。未來應該借鑒UN公約和英國模式,突出國有企業主權豁免"主權權力"行使這一本質屬性。同時針對美國模式對我國的不利影響,可以考慮在中美BIT談判中,明示放棄國企主權豁免的方式換取國企在美國的公平公正待遇的議價空間。

With the including of SOEs issues in TPP and TTIP,the standing of SOEs in sovereign immunity re- attracts the attention of the international community. Significant differences about the standing of SOEs in sovereign immunity exist between the US FSIA,UK SIA and UN Convention.Especially,the US FSIA mode has a negative impact on China. China has no specific legislation sovereign immunity,only diplomatic statement which demonstrate that the state enjoys the absolute immunity and the SOEs do not enjoy immunity. China should unite the UN model and UK model to highlight the exercise of sovereign authority as the essence of the standing of SOEs in sovereign immunity. At the same time,in order to ease the negative impact of US model on China,we can try to give up the immunity of SOEs in the U. S. expressly through Sino- US BIT in order to exchange the fair and equitable treatment for the SOEs.