Article thumbnail
Location of Repository

The Spread of Antidumping Regimes and the Role of Retaliation in Filings

By Robert M. Feinberg and Kara M. Olson

Abstract

Over the past decade, the world-wide use of antidumping has become very widespread – 41 WTO-member countries initiated antidumping cases over the 1995-2003 period. From another perspective, US exporters were subjected to 139 antidumping cases during this period, by enforcement agencies representing 20 countries. In this context, it is natural to consider whether antidumping filings may be motivated as retaliation against similar measures imposed on a country’s exporters. This is the focus of our study, though we also control for the bilateral export flows involved and non-retaliatory impacts of past cases, with other motivations – macroeconomic, industry-specific and political considerations – dealt with through industry, country and year fixed effects. Applying probit analysis to a WTO database on reported filings, we find strong evidence that retaliation was a significant motive in explaining the rise of antidumping filings over the past decade, though interesting differences emerge in the reactions to traditional and new users of antidumping.antidumping, retaliation

OAI identifier:

Suggested articles

Citations

  1. (2003). Antidumping and Retaliation Threats,"
  2. (2004). Antidumping: What are the Numbers to Discuss at
  3. (1998). Budget Office, “Antidumping Action in the United States and Around the World: An Analysis of International Data,”
  4. (2001). Coming Home to Roost: Proliferating Antidumping Laws and the Growing Threat to U.S. Exports," Cato Institute, Center for Trade Policy Studies,
  5. (2003). Fixed Effects and Bias Due to the Incidental Parameters Problem in the Tobit Model,” Working Paper,
  6. (1989). Industry Rent Seeking and the Filing of ‘Unfair Trade’
  7. (2004). Macro Economic Determinants of Antidumping: A Comparative Analysis of Developed and Developing Countries,” World Development,
  8. (2003). Macroeconomic Factors and Antidumping Filings: Evidence from Four Countries,”
  9. (1994). Measuring Industry Specific Protection: Antidumping
  10. (2004). Modern Commercial Policy: Managed Trade or Retaliation?”
  11. (2001). On the Spread and Impact of Antidumping,"
  12. (2004). Political Influence in a New Antidumping Regime,” Timbergen Institute Discussion Paper,
  13. (2002). The Economic and Strategic Motives for Antidumping Filings,” Weltwirtschaftliches Arhiv,
  14. (1981). The Industry-Country Incidence of Less Than Fair Value Cases in the U.S.
  15. (1987). The International Use of Antidumping:
  16. (2004). Trade Deflection and Trade Depression,” unpublished working paper,
  17. (1992). Why are so many antidumping petitions withdrawn?"

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.