How Different Are Safeguards from Antidumping? Evidence from US Trade Policies Toward Steel

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

How Different Are Safeguards from Antidumping? Evidence from US Trade Policies Toward Steel How Different are Safeguards from Antidumping? Evidence from US Trade Policies Toward Steel Chad P. Bown†,‡ Department of Economics and International Business School Brandeis University July 2004 Abstract How do the trade impacts of a safeguard measure - which is statutorily designed to follow the most-favored-nation (MFN) principle of equal treatment - compare to explicitly discriminatory measures such as antidumping? We address this question empirically by ex- amining the trade effects of the 2002 US safeguard on steel imports and comparing this with the impact of other US trade remedies on steel imports in the 1990s. We first estimate a fixed-effects model on a dynamic panel of product-level US steel imports over 1989-2003 and examine the potential discriminatory impact on foreign-produced steel of the 2002 “MFN” safeguard that used relatively new tools from the policymakers’ arsenal: country and prod- uct exclusions. A unique data set on the excluded products allows us to document the sizable impact on trade of both forms of preferential treatment. We also exploit higher- frequency (i.e., quarterly) data to examine potential differences in the timing of the foreign export response to policies of differential treatment. With respect to safeguard exclusions, we find that while developed country exporters have a quicker response to an exclusion, the developing-country export response is more persistent. Finally, relative to antidumping measures, country and product exclusions from a safeguard allow the protection-imposing country to target preferential treatment more effectively toward specific foreign countries, much like a preferential trade agreement, or even more narrowly toward a specific foreign firm. Thus costly trade diversion could be an even greater concern with a safeguard than with explicitly discriminatory protection such as antidumping. JEL No. F13 Keywords: MFN, Product Exclusions, Country Exclusions, Safeguards, Antidumping, Trade Diversion † correspondence: Department of Economics, MS 021, Brandeis University, Waltham, MA 02454-9110 USA tel: 781-736-4823, fax: 781-736-2269, email: [email protected], web: http://www.brandeis.edu/˜cbown/ ‡ I gratefully acknowledge financial support from a Brandeis University Perlmutter Fellow- ship and Mazer Award. Thanks to Tom Prusa, Robert Staiger, Pravin Krishna, Michael Moore, Rachel McCulloch, Meredith Crowley, James Durling, Jeff Campbell and seminar participants at Brandeis, Brown, the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, LSE, Rutgers and the 2004 NASMES for helpful comments. Gloria Sheu, Teresa Power and Renee Bowen provided outstanding research assistance. All remaining errors are my own. 1 Introduction In March 2002, the United States government implemented a politically controversial “safeguard” policy under Section 201 of the US trade law. The policy of import tariffs and quotas was designed to shield the domestic steel industry from injurious foreign-produced steel. Conservative estimates presented in table 1 put the aggregate trade impact as a 13.5% reduction in the value of US steel imports in the year following the safeguard in the product categories targeted by the policy, eliminating close to $683 million worth of trade relative to the previous year. While the aggregate trade impact of the massive 2002 steel safeguard is impressive in its own right, the actual impact on imports within the affected categories is perhaps masked by the perception that a safeguard (SG) policy is automatically applied so as to follow the GATT/WTO’s most-favored-nation (MFN) principle. One important way through which the SG policy tool is statutorily distinct and per- haps economically preferable from other trade remedies - the antidumping (AD) or countervailing duty (CVD) laws that are historically more popular with domestic petitioners seeking import protection - is that these “unfair trade” laws apply protection to imports from only one country per petition, thus allowing for the substantial differential and discriminatory treatment across trading partners. On the other hand, the safeguard law is supposed to result in protection being applied through nondiscrimina- tory tariffs on imports, irrespective of the source country.1 From a second-best perspective that takes the implementation of some import protection as given, this is one reason why economists frequently argue that an MFN safeguard may be preferable. The alternative use of AD and CVD measures allows for discrimination across export sources which can lead to trade diversion, or to importers switching to the sourcing of products to higher cost (but non-targeted) foreign producers, thus inducing the welfare losses to the domestic economy initially identified by Viner (1950). Nevertheless, while the US’s Section 201 safeguard statute has the economic appeal of requiring less discrimination than these other forms of import protection, how nondiscriminatory was the implemen- tation of the actual safeguard in the 2002 steel case? Anecdotally, the 2002 application of tariffs and quotas appears to have allowed for substantial discrimination. First, the US exempted steel imports from several important exporting countries from the safeguard altogether. Second, the US exempted over a thousand firm-specific products from the safeguard after soliciting requests for such product ex- clusions from domestic steel-consuming industries and foreign exporting firms. Therefore, while overall imports of steel products in affected categories decreased by 13.5% in the twelve months following the safeguard, the magnitude of the import reduction was likely to be far from uniform across export sources and product categories. Indeed, as table 1 indicates, foreign steel exempted in the March 2002 steel safeguard announcement deriving from excluded preferential trade agreement (PTA) countries such as 1This is not the only distinction between SG and AD/CVD. In addition to issue of “fair” versus “unfair” trade, the AD/CVD process is bureaucratic while safeguards allow for Presidential discretion, the injury threshold is higher for SG cases, the duration of safeguards is shorter than AD/CVD, and the use of SG can require compensation to affected countries while AD/CVD does not. For a discussion, see Bown (2002). 1 Canada and Mexico ($16 million), from excluded developing countries ($424 million) or from excluded firm-specific product exemptions ($77 million) actually saw the value of their exports to the US increase in the aftermath of the safeguard, as they continued to face low rates of import protection and now less fierce competition from other foreign rivals.2 One implication is that foreign sources that were not exempted and thus which faced the tariffs and quotas of the March 2002 safeguard saw a much larger reduction in exports than would be expected from looking at the aggregated data. As table 1 confirms, US imports of safeguarded products from producers that did not receive exclusions fell by 30%, or roughly $1.2 billion, from the level of imports received from those same producers in the twelve months prior to the safeguard. In the aftermath of the safeguard, these foreign sources not only faced a competitive disadvantage relative to US steel producers but also relative to other foreign producers that received implicit preferential treatment through exclusions. This paper is the first to econometrically investigate the size and nature of discriminatory treatment across export sources both within and across the steel product categories affected and unaffected by the 2002 safeguard. We use a panel of product-level US steel import data from 1989-2003 to investigate whether the implementation of the safeguard had a discriminatory impact, i.e., whether the suggestive evidence provided in table 1 holds up to a formal econometric analysis. We combine the trade data with detailed information on the products affected by the safeguard, as well as the country exclusions and a unique data set of excluded products derived directly from firm-specific petitions filed with the US Department of Commerce. We then compare the pattern of discrimination across countries and products associated with the 2002 safeguard to the explicitly discriminatory earlier acts of protection that the US steel industry received in the 1990s through its appeal to ADDs, CVDs, suspension agreements, and other trade restricting measures. One goal is to investigate whether the 2002 use of an “MFN” trade policy was any more or less discriminatory than these earlier acts of import protection. This research also contributes to the literature on discrimination versus nondiscrimination in trade policy, initiated by the pioneering work of Viner (1950). More recently, a substantial theoretical literature (including Bagwell and Staiger, 1997, 1999, 2004; Levy, 1997; and Ethier, 2004) examines the role of preferential policy exceptions in multilateral trade agreements.3 On the other hand, empirical papers such as Prusa (1997, 2001) and Konings, Vandenbussche and Springael (2001) examine related questions of discriminatory treatment by investigating the trade effects and potential trade diversion of earlier use of antidumping in the US and EU, respectively. Furthermore, Bown and Crowley (2004) propose and examine an alternative way through which antidumping and safeguards may have a differential trade impact by considering the effects of examples of such US trade policies on Japanese export flows to third country markets, a phenomenon they term “trade deflection.” None of these papers, however, examines 2The data in table 1 underestimates
Recommended publications
  • Chapter 2 New Challenges to the Export Oriented Growth Model
    Chapter 2 New Challenges to the Export Oriented Growth Model Song Hong Institute of World Economics and Politics (IWEP), Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (CASS) December 2012 This chapter should be cited as Song, H. (2012), ‘New Challenges to the Export Oriented Growth Model’, in Zhang, Y., F. Kimura and S. Oum (eds.), Moving Toward a New Development Model for East Asia- The Role of Domestic Policy and Regional Cooperation . ERIA Research Project Report 2011-10, Jakarta: ERIA. pp.27-54. CHAPTER 2 New Challenges to the Export Oriented Growth Model SONG HONG Institute of World Economics and Politics (IWEP), Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (CASS) The export-oriented strategy played a crucial role for the successful development of East Asian economies after the World War II. They first exported low-technology manufactured goods, then gradually upgraded and transformed their export goods packages and finally caught up with the developed countries. Export oriented strategy in East Asia has been based on a series of internal and external conditions. Those conditions includes an open international environment, the existence of a certain size of external market, a stable supply of raw materials, as well as good and convenient navigation, and some internal conditions. Global financial crisis badly changed some of these conditions. For example, the external market was very unstable and was growing very slow; after the financial crisis, international raw material and energy prices experienced sharp volatility, which caused great challenges to the countries and enterprises seeking to implement an export oriented strategy. However, after the financial crisis the changes in international and domestic environments did not change the nature and trends of globalization, only temporarily slowed the pace of this process.
    [Show full text]
  • Economic Integration, Trade Diversion, and Welfare Change
    Economic Integration, Trade Diversion, and Welfare Change Juyoung Cheong and Kar-yiu Wong University of Washington November 30, 2007 (Version 1.1. Comments Most Welcome) Abstract This paper examines how the volume of trade diverted from a non-member country to a member country during the formation of a new free trade area may be related to the welfare of a member country. The relation is ana- lyzed in the presence of two types of trade: inter-industry trade with perfect competition and intra-industry trade with oligopoly. We found that in the presence of inter-industry trade, a bigger trade volume diverted is generally associated with a smaller change in welfare while in the presence of intra- industry trade with oligopoly, the relation is not so straighforward. We did find that the result in Krishna (1998) that a bigger trade volume diverted implies a higher likelihood of an FTA may not be true. 1 Introduction The welfare impacts of a new preferential trade agreement (PTA) such as a customs union (CU) or a free trade agreement/area (FTA) on the member countries and non-member countries has long been an interesting issue for economists and policy makers. In particular, they want to know how a country may be affected if it chooses to form a new FTA with other countries. For some time, economists had held the position that anything can hap- pen as an PTA represents a movement of a second-best equilibrium to an- other second-best equilibrium, while it is argued that the first-best position of the world is free trade by all countries.1 Viner, in his pioneering work (Viner, 1950), suggested an approach to identifying welfare-improving PTAs and welfare-deteriorating PTAs.
    [Show full text]
  • (Output) Import Tariff Reduction Increase Home Exports? Evidence from Korean Manufacturing Plant–Product Data
    ERIA-DP-2019-29 ERIA Discussion Paper Series No. 315 Does Home (Output) Import Tariff Reduction Increase Home Exports? Evidence from Korean Manufacturing Plant–Product Data Chin Hee HAHN Gachon University, Republic of Korea Ju Hyun PYUN§ Korea University Business School, Republic of Korea February 2020 Abstract: This study examines the effects of domestic output import tariff reduction on domestic plant export dynamics and clarifies the underlying mechanism, using rich plant–product data from the Republic of Korea for 1991–2002. We find that home import liberalisation increases domestic plants’ export market participation (extensive margins), particularly for industry where markup growth is more negative during tariff reductions. However, we do not find evidence that cutting import tariffs significantly affects incumbent home exporters’ export volume (intensive margins). This study unveils a new mechanism – ‘escape competition’ to foreign markets – by showing that reducing import tariffs leads domestic firms under heightened industry competition to look for an opportunity in foreign markets via export inauguration. Keywords: Plant-product level data; output tariff; Lerner symmetry; extensive margin; intensive margin; product scope JEL Classification: F15; F23 Corresponding author: Ju Hyun Pyun, Business School, Korea University, 145 Anam-Ro, Seongbuk- Gu, Seoul 02841, Republic of Korea, Tel: 82-2-3290-2610, E-mail: [email protected] § This research was conducted as part of the 2018 Microdata project of the Economic Research Institute for ASEAN and East Asia (ERIA). The authors are deeply indebted to the members of this project for their invaluable suggestions. The opinions expressed in this paper are the sole responsibility of the authors and do not reflect the views of ERIA.
    [Show full text]
  • What Is Really in the Economic Partnership Agreements for the Southern African Region? a Perspective from Botswana's Beef Expo
    Agrekon, Vol 47, No 4 (December 2008) Mbatha & Charalambides What is really in the economic partnership agreements for the Southern African region? A perspective from Botswana’s beef export markets CN Mbatha1 & N Charalambides2 Abstract The signing of the Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs) between the European Union (EU) and the African Caribbean Pacific (ACP) nations dominated the multilateral trade agenda in late 2007 and early 2008. While the Caribbean nations signed the full EPAs, some of the African countries only singed interim agreements with the EU and a number of West African countries chose not to sign any EPA. Using the case of Botswana’s export markets, especially in agriculture, it is argued that the interim Southern African Development Community (SADC) EPA, which was signed by Botswana and her neighbours, with the exception of South Africa, may have been economically sensible in protecting Botswana’s rural poor, at least in the short run. By tracing trade flows from the border to specifically poor sectors of the country, the importance of the beef exports sector to the poor and rural communities was found. The potential effects on the most significant exports of tariff bands associated with preferential agreements with the EU were found to be most beneficial in comparison to the Most Favoured Nation (MFN) and the South Africa-EU Trade Development and Cooperation Agreement (TDCA) tariff bands. But it is also argued that the EPA will most likely have far reaching long run costs on regional economic development and institutional integration, within the SADC and Southern African Customs Union (SACU).
    [Show full text]
  • How Do Exports and Imports Affect the Use of Free Trade Agreements? Firm-Level Survey Evidence from Southeast Asia
    ERIA-DP-2016-01 ERIA Discussion Paper Series How Do Exports and Imports Affect the Use of Free Trade Agreements? Firm-level Survey Evidence from Southeast Asia Lili Yan ING* Economic Research Institute for ASEAN and East Asia (ERIA) and University of Indonesia Shujiro URATA ERIA and Waseda University Yoshifumi FUKUNAGA Economic Research Institute for ASEAN and East Asia (ERIA) January 2016 Abstract: Based on profit estimations, findings from a firm-level survey of 630 manufacturing firms across Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) countries conducted in 2013 showed that a 1 percent increase in the share of exports in total sales will increase the probability of use of free trade agreements (FTAs) by 0.2 percent, whereas a 1 percent increase in the share of imports in total inputs will reduce the probability of use of FTAs by 0.4 percent. Results from locally weighted scatterplot smoothing (LOESS) show that the use of FTAs is tilde-shaped and negative-shaped as a function of exports and imports, respectively. Keywords: Free Trade Agreement, ASEAN, Regional integration, FTA Utilisation JEL: F14, F15, F16, F23, F6 * The authors thank national teams for their work on leading surveys in Southeast Asia – MOFAT for Brunei Darussalam, CICP for Cambodia, LPEM–FEUI for Indonesia, NERI for Lao PDR, MIER Malaysia, YIE for Myanmar, PIDS for the Philippines, SIIA for Singapore, University of Chulalongkorn for Thailand, and CIEM for Viet Nam. The authors thank Ikumo Isono and Archanun Koophaiboon, and participants at the 14th East Asian Economic Association Conference for their comments on an earlier draft, and Robert Herdiyanto for his assistance in data cleaning at an early stage of the survey, and Rully Prassetya and Muhammad Rizqy for checking the use of GSP.
    [Show full text]
  • Global Political Economy Theory and Practice Seventh Edition THEODORE H. COM IM R Routledge Taylor & Francis Grou P NEW YORK
    Global Political Economy Theory and Practice Seventh Edition THEODORE H. COM IM Routledge R Taylor & Francis Grou p NEW YORK AND LONDON DETAILED CONTENTS Preface xiii Acknowledgments xvii Acronyms and Abbreviations xix PART I Introduction and Overview 1 CHARTER 1 Introduction 2 What is International Political Economy? 3 The IPE Theoretical Perspectives 4 Purposes and Themes ofThis Book 6 Globalization 6 • North-North Relations 8 • North-South Relations 10 Focus of this Book 12 Questions 13 * Key Terms 14 • Further Reading 14 • Notes 14 CHARTER 2 Managing the Global Economy Since World War II: The Institutional Framework 17 Global Economic Relations Before World War II 18 The Mercantilist Period 18 • The Industrial Revolution and British Hegemony 29 • The Decline of British Hegemony and World War I 20 • The Interwar Period 20 • The Institutional Framework Before World War II 21 The Functions of the IM F, World Bank, and GATT 21 The KIEOs and the United Nations 22 The Postwar Economic Institutions and Changing North-South Relations 23 The IMF, World Bank, and WTO 26 • The OECD 28 •The G5, G7, G8, andG20 29 The Postwar Economic Institutions and International Development 31 The KIEOs and the Centrally Planned Economies 39 IMonstate Actors 42 The 2008 Global Financial Crisis: A Turning Point? 43 Questions 44 • Key Terms 45 • Further Reading 45 • Notes 46 vi DETAILED CONTENTS VÜ PART II Theoretical Perspectives 51 CHARTERS Neomercantilism 55 BasicTenets of Neomercantilism 55 The Role of the Individual, the State, and Societal Groups 55 • The Nature and Purpose of International Economic Relations 56 • The Relationship Between Politics and Economics 56 • The Causes and Effects of Globalization 57 The Mercantilists 57 Neomercantilism and the Industrial Revolution 58 Neomercantilism in the Interwar Period 59 Neomercantilism After World War II 60 The Revival of Neomercantilist IRE 60 Hegemonie Stability Theory and U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Dumping, Protectionism and Free Trade
    DUMPING, PROTECTIONISM AND FREE TRADE Ron Sheppard Catherine Atkins Views expressed in Agribusiness and Economics Research Unit Discussion Papers are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Director, other members of staff, or members of the Management Committee Discussion Paper No.140 September 1994 Agribusiness & Economics Research Unit PO Box 84 Lincoln University CANTERBURY Telephone No: (64) (3) 325 2811 Fax No: (64) (3) 325 3847 ISSN 1170-7607 ISBN 0-909042-01-2 AGRIBUSINESS & ECONOMICS RESEARCH UNIT The Agribusiness and Economics Research Unit (AERU) operates The major research areas supported by the AERU include trade from Lincoln University providing research expertise for a wide policy, marketing (both institutional and consumer), accounting, range of organisations concerned with production, processing, finance, management, agricultural economics and rural sociol­ distribution, finance and marketing. ogy. In addition to the research activities, the AERU supports conferences and seminars on topical issues and AERU staff are The AERU operates as a semi-commercial research agency involved in a wide range of professional and University related Research contracts are carried out for clients on a commercial extension activities. basis and University research is supported by the AERU through sponsorship of postgraduate research programmes. Research Founded as the Agricultural Economics Research Unit in 1962 clients include Government Departments, both within New from an annual grant provided by the Department of Scientific and Zealand and from other countries, international agencies, New Industrial Research (DSIR), the AERU has grown to become an Zealand companies and organisations, individuals and farmers. Independent, major source of business and economic research Research results are presented through private client reports, expertise.
    [Show full text]
  • Trade Facilitation and the EU-ACP Economic Partnership Agreements
    Journal of Economic Integration 23(3), September 2008; 518-546 Trade Facilitation and the EU-ACP Economic Partnership Agreements Maria Persson Lund University Abstract This paper assesses the potential effects from trade facilitation in terms of increased trade flows both on average and specifically for the six regional groups of ACP countries negotiating Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs) with the EU. Data from the World Bank’s Doing Business Database on the time required to export or import are used as indicators of cross-border transaction costs, and a gravity model on two-way bilateral trade between 22 EU countries and 100 developing countries is estimated using a sample selection approach. The results suggest that time delays on the part of the exporter and the importer generally significantly decrease trade flows, but also that this effect is not constant, in the sense that the elasticity of trade with respect to border delays declines at higher levels of time requirements. On average, lowering border delays in the exporting country by one day from the sample mean would yield an export-increasing effect of about 1 percent, while the same reduction in the importing country would increase imports by about 0.5 percent. Significant negative effects are also found of both export and import transaction costs for most EPA groups, and the effects tend to be at least as large as the average or larger. The results are generally robust for a number of alternative estimation methods such as Poisson estimation, IV estimation taking sample selection into account and the sample selection approach suggested by Helpman et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Research Paper 57 GLOBALIZATION, EXPORT-LED GROWTH and INEQUALITY: the EAST ASIAN STORY
    Research Paper 57 November 2014 GLOBALIZATION, EXPORT-LED GROWTH AND INEQUALITY: THE EAST ASIAN STORY Mah-Hui Lim RESEARCH PAPERS 57 GLOBALIZATION, EXPORT-LED GROWTH AND INEQUALITY: THE EAST ASIAN STORY Mah-Hui Lim* SOUTH CENTRE NOVEMBER 2014 * The author gratefully acknowledges valuable inputs and comments from the following persons: Yılmaz Akyüz, Jayati Ghosh, Michael Heng, Hoe-Ee Khor, Kang-Kook Lee, Soo-Aun Lee, Manuel Montes, Pasuk Phongpaichit, Raj Kumar, Rajamoorthy, Ikmal Said and most of all the able research assistance of Xuan Zhang. The usual disclaimer prevails. THE SOUTH CENTRE In August 1995 the South Centre was established as a permanent inter- governmental organization of developing countries. In pursuing its objectives of promoting South solidarity, South-South cooperation, and coordinated participation by developing countries in international forums, the South Centre has full intellectual independence. It prepares, publishes and distributes information, strategic analyses and recommendations on international economic, social and political matters of concern to the South. The South Centre enjoys support and cooperation from the governments of the countries of the South and is in regular working contact with the Non-Aligned Movement and the Group of 77 and China. The Centre’s studies and position papers are prepared by drawing on the technical and intellectual capacities existing within South governments and institutions and among individuals of the South. Through working group sessions and wide consultations, which involve experts from different parts of the South, and sometimes from the North, common problems of the South are studied and experience and knowledge are shared. NOTE Readers are encouraged to quote or reproduce the contents of this Research Paper for their own use, but are requested to grant due acknowledgement to the South Centre and to send a copy of the publication in which such quote or reproduction appears to the South Centre.
    [Show full text]
  • In Lieu of MIL (Political Science) Politics of Globalization Study Material : Unit I-V
    B.Com. (Prog.) Semester-III/IV In Lieu of MIL (Political Science) Politics of Globalization Study Material : Unit I-V SCHOOL OF OPEN LEARNING UNIVERSITY OF DELHI Department of Political Science Editor : Prof. Tapal Biswal Dr. Mangal Deo Graduate Course In Lieu of MIL B.Com Semester III/IV POLITICS OF GLOBALIZATION CONTENTS Unit-I : The Concept of Globalization and its Debate Dr. Rukmani Unit-II : Approaches to Understanding Globalization Lesson-1 : Liberal Approach Anwita Lesson-2 : Radical Approach Anwita Unit-III : Issues in Globalization : Alternative Perspectives on Globalization: Nature and Character Inder Sekhar Yadav Unit-IV : Globalization and Politics in Developing Countries Lesson-1 : Globalization and the Social Movements Dr. Abhishek Nath Lesson-2 : Globalization and the Demise of Nation-State Nishant Yadav Lesson-3 : Globalization and Human Migration Nishant Yadav Unit-V : The Inevitability of Globalization: Domestic and Deepika Global Responses Edited by: Prof. Tapan Biswal Dr. Mangal Deo SCHOOL OF OPEN LEARNING UNIVERSITY OF DELHI 5, Cavalry Lane, Delhi-110007 Unit-I The Concept of Globalization and its Debate Outline Student Learning Outcomes Introduction Understanding of Globalization- Globalists, Sceptics, and Transformationalists Dimensions of Globalization – Economic, Political, Cultural The Globalization Debate – Argument in Favor and Against Conclusion Summary Probable Questions Suggested Readings Student Learning Outcomes Student will be able to define the Concept of Globalization Student will be able
    [Show full text]
  • Anti-Dumping 127 Agreement on Implementation Of
    ANTI-DUMPING 127 AGREEMENT ON IMPLEMENTATION OF ARTICLE VI OF THE GENERAL AGREEMENT ON TARIFFS AND TRADE The Parties to this Agreement (hereinafter referred to as "Parties"), Recognizing that anti-dumping practices should not constitute an unjustifiable impediment to international trade and that anti-dumping duties may be applied against dumping only if such dumping causes or threatens material injury to an established industry or materially retards the establishment of an industry; Considering that it is desirable to provide for equitable and open procedures as the basis for a full examination of dumping cases; Taking into account the particular trade, development and financial needs of developing countries; Desiring to interpret the provisions of Article VI of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (hereinafter referred to as "General Agreement" or "GATT") and to elaborate rules for their application in order to provide greater uniformity and certainty in their implementation; and Desiring to provide for the speedy, effective and equitable settlement of disputes arising under this Agreement; Hereby agree as follows: PART I ANTI-DUMPING CODE Article 1 Principles The imposition of an anti-dumping duty is a measure to be taken only under the circumstances provided for in Article VI of the General Agreement and pursuant to investigations initiated1 and conducted in accordance with the provisions of this Code. _______________ 1The term "initiated" as used hereinafter means the procedural action by which a Party formally commences an investigation as provided in paragraph 6 of Article 6. ANTI-DUMPING 128 The following provisions govern the application of Article VI of the General Agreement in so far as action is taken under anti-dumping legislation or regulations.
    [Show full text]
  • The Impact of US Tariffs Against China on US
    Discussion Paper Deutsche Bundesbank No 46/2019 The impact of US tariffs against China on US imports: Evidence for trade diversion? Philipp Meinen Patrick Schulte (Deutsche Bundesbank and (Deutsche Bundesbank) European Central Bank) Simone Cigna Nils Steinhoff (European Central Bank) (École polytechnique) Discussion Papers represent the authors‘ personal opinions and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Deutsche Bundesbank or the Eurosystem. Editorial Board: Daniel Foos Thomas Kick Malte Knüppel Vivien Lewis Christoph Memmel Panagiota Tzamourani Deutsche Bundesbank, Wilhelm-Epstein-Straße 14, 60431 Frankfurt am Main, Postfach 10 06 02, 60006 Frankfurt am Main Tel +49 69 9566-0 Please address all orders in writing to: Deutsche Bundesbank, Press and Public Relations Division, at the above address or via fax +49 69 9566-3077 Internet http://www.bundesbank.de Reproduction permitted only if source is stated. ISBN 97 8–3–95729–652–8 (Printversion) ISBN 97 8–3–95729–653–5 (Internetversion) Non-technical summary Research Question In light of the recent increase of protectionist policies, such as those in the context of the trade dispute between China and the US, interest in quantifying their effects has risen. Besides assessing the direct implications for the trading partners involved in the trade conflict, both researchers and policymakers are also interested in the effects on third countries and the question of whether other countries might even benefit from such actions due to trade diversion effects, replacing the targeted country's exports with own exports. While simulation results suggest that such effects may materialise even within the first year, less is known empirically about the importance of trade diversion effects in the short run.
    [Show full text]