Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Trade protection and market power: evidence from US antidumping and countervailing duties

Contents:

Author Info

  • Laura Rovegno

    ()

Abstract

Contingent protection measures were originally intended to protect domestic producers from what were considered to be “unfairly” cheap imports. However, due to the way in which these policies are designed and implemented, they have been heavily criticised for their greatly disruptive effects on markets, and particularly on competition. The analysis presented in this paper contributes to the debate by studying the impact of US antidumping (AD) and countervailing (CV) duties on domestic producers’ price-cost margins (PCM). To this end, the study takes advantage of a long panel of 4-digit industries in the United States covering 26 years of AD/CV activity, including the periods before and after the changes to AD/CV laws introduced following the Uruguay Round (UR). It finds evidence of a positive effect of AD/CV duties on PCM for the period prior to the UR, but the effect seems to disappear in the years following the UR. The analysis accounts for potential endogeneity in AD/CV duties, as well as the intensity of the protection granted. Copyright Kiel Institute 2013

Download Info

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10290-013-0160-7
Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Bibliographic Info

Article provided by Springer in its journal Review of World Economics.

Volume (Year): 149 (2013)
Issue (Month): 3 (September)
Pages: 443-476

as in new window
Handle: RePEc:spr:weltar:v:149:y:2013:i:3:p:443-476

Contact details of provider:
Postal: Kiellinie 66, D-24105 Kiel
Phone: +49 431 8814-1
Fax: +49 431 8814528
Email:
Web page: http://link.springer.de/link/service/journals/10290/index.htm
More information through EDIRC

Order Information:
Web: http://link.springer.de/orders.htm

Related research

Keywords: Contingent protection; Antidumping; Countervailing duties; Import tariff; Markup; Price-cost margin; Market power; Uruguay Round; C33; D22; D43; F12; F13;

Other versions of this item:

Find related papers by JEL classification:

References

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
as in new window
  1. R Blundell & Steven Bond, . "Initial conditions and moment restrictions in dynamic panel data model," Economics Papers W14&104., Economics Group, Nuffield College, University of Oxford.
  2. Justin Pierce, 2009. "Plant-Level Responses to Antidumping Duties: Evidence from U.S. Manufacturers," Working Papers 09-38r, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau, revised Jul 2011.
  3. Jozef Konings & Hylke Vandenbussche & Linda Springael, 2001. "Import Diversion under European Antidumping Policy," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 1(3), pages 283-299, September.
  4. Andrew Bernard & J. Bradford Jensen & Peter Schott, 2003. "Falling Trade Costs, Heterogeneous Firms, and Industry Dynamics," IFS Working Papers, Institute for Fiscal Studies W03/10, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
  5. THARAKAN, P. K. Mathew & GREENAWAY, David & THARAKAN, Joe, . "Cumulation and injury determination of the European Community in antidumping cases," CORE Discussion Papers RP -1348, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
  6. Andrew B. Bernard & Jonathan Eaton & J. Bradford Jensen & Samuel Kortum, 2000. "Plants and Productivity in International Trade," Boston University - Institute for Economic Development, Boston University, Institute for Economic Development 105, Boston University, Institute for Economic Development.
  7. Andrew B. Bernard & Stephen Redding & Peter K. Schott, 2006. "Multi-product firms and trade liberalization," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 3684, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
  8. James Nieberding, 1999. "The Effect of U.S. Antidumping Law on Firms' Market Power: An Empirical Test," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer, vol. 14(1), pages 65-84, February.
  9. Moore, Michael O, 1992. "Rules or Politics? An Empirical Analysis of ITC Anti-dumping Decisions," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, Western Economic Association International, vol. 30(3), pages 449-66, July.
  10. Corinne M. Krupp & Patricia S. Pollard, 1996. "Market Responses to Antidumping Laws: Some Evidence from the U.S. Chemical Industry," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 29(1), pages 199-227, February.
  11. Bruce A. Blonigen & Benjamin H. Liebman & Wesley W. Wilson, 2007. "Trade Policy and Market Power: The Case of the US Steel Industry," NBER Working Papers 13671, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  12. VANDENBUSSCHE, Hylke & ZANARDI, Maurizio, . "The chilling trade effects of antidumping proliferation," CORE Discussion Papers RP -2355, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
  13. Andrew Bernard & J. Bradford Jensen & Peter Schott, 2003. "Survival of the best fit: exposure to low-wage countries and the (uneven) growth of US manufacturing plants," IFS Working Papers, Institute for Fiscal Studies W03/12, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
  14. Robert M. Feinberg & Kara M. Reynolds, 2006. "The Spread of Antidumping Regimes and the Role of Retaliation in Filings," Southern Economic Journal, Southern Economic Association, vol. 72(4), pages 877–890, April.
  15. Maurizio Zanardi, 2000. "Antidumping Law as a Collusive Device," Boston College Working Papers in Economics 487, Boston College Department of Economics.
  16. J.M. Finger, 1981. "The Industry-Country Incidence of "Less than Fair Value" Cases in US Import Trade," NBER Chapters, in: Export Diversification and the New Protectionism: The Experience of Latin America, pages 260-279 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  17. Robert C. Feenstra, 1997. "U.S. Exports, 1972-1994: With State Exports and Other U.S. Data," NBER Working Papers 5990, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  18. Miyagiwa, Kaz & Ohno, Yuka, 1999. "Credibility of Protection and Incentives to Innovate," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 40(1), pages 143-63, February.
  19. Marc J. Melitz, 2003. "The Impact of Trade on Intra-Industry Reallocations and Aggregate Industry Productivity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, Econometric Society, vol. 71(6), pages 1695-1725, November.
  20. Wendy L. Hansen & Thomas J. Prusa, 1996. "The Economics and Politics of Trade Policy: An Empirical Analysis of ITC Decision Making," Departmental Working Papers, Rutgers University, Department of Economics 199621, Rutgers University, Department of Economics.
  21. Hansen, Wendy L & Prusa, Thomas J, 1996. "Cumulation and ITC Decision-Making: The Sum of the Parts Is Greater Than the Whole," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, Western Economic Association International, vol. 34(4), pages 746-69, October.
  22. Miyagiwa, K. & Ohno, Y., 1993. "Closing the Technology Gap Under Protection," Discussion Papers in Economics at the University of Washington, Department of Economics at the University of Washington 93-09, Department of Economics at the University of Washington.
  23. Bernard, Andrew B. & Jensen, J. Bradford & Schott, Peter K., 2006. "Trade costs, firms and productivity," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 53(5), pages 917-937, July.
  24. Bruce A. Blonigen & Jee-Hyeong Park, 2000. "Dynamic Pricing in the Presence of Antidumping Policy: Theory and Evidence," University of Oregon Economics Department Working Papers, University of Oregon Economics Department 2001-1, University of Oregon Economics Department, revised 01 Jul 2001.
  25. Justin R. Pierce & Peter K. Schott, 2009. "A Concordance Between Ten-Digit U.S. Harmonized System Codes and SIC/NAICS Product Classes and Industries," NBER Working Papers 15548, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  26. Thomas Prusa & Susan Skeath, 2002. "The economic and strategic motives for antidumping filings," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer, Springer, vol. 138(3), pages 389-413, September.
  27. Steve Bond, 2002. "Dynamic panel data models: a guide to microdata methods and practice," CeMMAP working papers, Centre for Microdata Methods and Practice, Institute for Fiscal Studies CWP09/02, Centre for Microdata Methods and Practice, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
  28. M Arellano & O Bover, 1990. "Another Look at the Instrumental Variable Estimation of Error-Components Models," CEP Discussion Papers dp0007, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
  29. Windmeijer, Frank, 2005. "A finite sample correction for the variance of linear efficient two-step GMM estimators," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 126(1), pages 25-51, May.
  30. Thomas J. Prusa, 1996. "The Trade Effects of U.S. Antidumping Actions," Departmental Working Papers, Rutgers University, Department of Economics 199603, Rutgers University, Department of Economics.
  31. Bruce A. Blonigen & Chad P. Bown, 2001. "Antidumping and Retaliation Threats," NBER Working Papers 8576, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  32. Fabio Spadi, 2002. "Discriminatory Safeguards in the Light of the Admission of the People's Republic of China to the World Trade Organization," Journal of International Economic Law, Oxford University Press, vol. 5(2), pages 421-443, July.
  33. Nina Pavcnik, 2002. "Trade Liberalization, Exit, and Productivity Improvements: Evidence from Chilean Plants," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 69(1), pages 245-276.
  34. Konings, Jozef & Vandenbussche, Hylke, 2008. "Heterogeneous Responses of Firms to Trade Protection," CEPR Discussion Papers 6724, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  35. Nelson, Douglas, 2006. "The political economy of antidumping: A survey," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 554-590, September.
  36. David Roodman, 2009. "How to do xtabond2: An introduction to difference and system GMM in Stata," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, StataCorp LP, vol. 9(1), pages 86-136, March.
  37. Meredith A. Crowley, 2002. "Do safeguard tariffs and antidumping duties open or close technology gaps?," Working Paper Series, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago WP-02-13, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago.
  38. Feinberg, Robert M. & Hirsch, Barry T., 1989. "Industry rent seeking and the filing of unfair trade complaints," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 7(3), pages 325-340.
  39. René Belderbos, 1997. "Antidumping and tariff Jumping: Japanese firms’ DFI in the European union and the United States," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer, Springer, vol. 133(3), pages 419-457, September.
  40. Michael M. Knetter & Thomas J. Prusa, 2000. "Macroeconomic Factors and Antidumping Filings: Evidence from Four Countries," NBER Working Papers 8010, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  41. Bruce A. Blonigen & Stephen E. Haynes, 2002. "Antidumping Investigations and the Pass-Through of Antidumping Duties and Exchange Rates," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(4), pages 1044-1061, September.
  42. Arellano, Manuel & Bond, Stephen, 1991. "Some Tests of Specification for Panel Data: Monte Carlo Evidence and an Application to Employment Equations," Review of Economic Studies, Wiley Blackwell, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(2), pages 277-97, April.
  43. Edward C. Kokkelenberg & Donna R. Sockell, 1985. "Union membership in the United States, 1973û1981," Industrial and Labor Relations Review, ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 38(4), pages 497-543, July.
  44. Prusa, Thomas J., 1992. "Why are so many antidumping petitions withdrawn?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(1-2), pages 1-20, August.
  45. Chad P. Bown & Meredith Crowley, 2004. "Policy externalities: how U.S. antidumping affects Japanese exports to the EU," Working Paper Series, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago WP-04-12, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago.
  46. Eric J. Bartelsman & Wayne Gray, 1996. "The NBER Manufacturing Productivity Database," NBER Technical Working Papers 0205, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  47. Gallaway, Michael P. & Blonigen, Bruce A. & Flynn, Joseph E., 1999. "Welfare costs of the U.S. antidumping and countervailing duty laws," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(2), pages 211-244, December.
  48. Robert C. Feenstra & John Romalis & Peter K. Schott, 2002. "U.S. Imports, Exports, and Tariff Data, 1989-2001," NBER Working Papers 9387, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  49. Robert Baldwin & Jeffrey Steagall, 1994. "An analysis of ITC decisions in antidumping, countervailing duty and safeguard cases," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer, Springer, vol. 130(2), pages 290-308, June.
  50. Anderson, T. W. & Hsiao, Cheng, 1982. "Formulation and estimation of dynamic models using panel data," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 47-82, January.
  51. Robert M. Feinberg, 2005. "U.S. Antidumping Enforcement and Macroeconomic Indicators Revisited: Do Petitioners Learn?," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer, Springer, vol. 141(4), pages 612-622, December.
  52. Finger, J M & Hall, H Keith & Nelson, Douglas R, 1982. "The Political Economy of Administered Protection," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 72(3), pages 452-66, June.
  53. Robert C. Feenstra, 1996. "U.S. Imports, 1972-1994: Data and Concordances," NBER Working Papers 5515, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  54. Roeger, Werner, 1995. "Can Imperfect Competition Explain the Difference between Primal and Dual Productivity Measures? Estimates for U.S. Manufacturing," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, University of Chicago Press, vol. 103(2), pages 316-30, April.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

Citations

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

Cited by:
  1. Michel DE VROEY, 2013. "What can civil society expect from academic macroeconomics?," Discussion Papers (IRES - Institut de Recherches Economiques et Sociales) 2013022, Université catholique de Louvain, Institut de Recherches Economiques et Sociales (IRES).
  2. Laura ROVEGNO, 2013. "Endogenous trade restrictions and exporters’ pricing," Discussion Papers (IRES - Institut de Recherches Economiques et Sociales) 2013023, Université catholique de Louvain, Institut de Recherches Economiques et Sociales (IRES).

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:weltar:v:149:y:2013:i:3:p:443-476. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Guenther Eichhorn) or (Christopher F Baum).

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.

If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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