IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/ecjilt/23885.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Why did the Byrd Amendment Not Fly at the WTO?

Author

Listed:
  • Harris, Ben
  • Devadoss, Stephen

Abstract

Since its passage in 2000, the Byrd Amendment has been the focal point of ongoing disputes over the acceptable scope of antidumping laws and fair protection of domestic industry. Most countries possess antidumping laws that allow for duties to be placed on imported dumped goods. The Byrd Amendment seeks to extend such policies by mandating the redistribution of collected antidumping duties to "affected domestic producers" in the form of "offset" payments. The United States was immediately taken to the WTO by 11 countries who contend that the Byrd Amendment constitutes an unfair "double protection" of domestic industry. This article reviews the history of the dispute, negotiations between the parties, the arguments put forth by each party to the WTO, the WTO's findings and rulings, and retaliations taken by the affected countries. Further, this study shows that the effects of dumping are effectively neutralized by the antidumping duties, and that the payment of offsets introduced by the Byrd Amendment is an unnecessary double protection of U.S. domestic industry.

Suggested Citation

  • Harris, Ben & Devadoss, Stephen, 2005. "Why did the Byrd Amendment Not Fly at the WTO?," Estey Centre Journal of International Law and Trade Policy, Estey Centre for Law and Economics in International Trade, vol. 6(2), pages 1-19.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:ecjilt:23885
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.23885
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/23885/files/06020226.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.23885?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Devadoss, Stephen, 2008. "An Evaluation of Canadian and U.S. Policies of Log and Lumber Markets," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 40(1), pages 1-14, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    International Relations/Trade;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:ecjilt:23885. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/esteyca.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.