Reciprocity and Retaliation in U.S. Trade Policy
AbstractThe increasing use of activist unilateral policies by the United States to open foreign markets or deter unfair trading practices is highly controversial. This study reexamines the arguments for and against reciprocity and retaliation in light of actual experience since the early 1980s, especially the more aggressive use by the United States of section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, which gives the president broad authority to retaliate against "unjustifiable, unreasonable, or discriminatory" foreign trade practices. It analyzes the advantages and disadvantages of these policies and the circumstances under which they are likely to succeed or fail. The study contains an empirical assessment of all section 301 cases concluded between 1975 and 1993. It also provides detailed case studies of various trade conflicts including the Super 301 negotiations involving Japan, Brazil, India, Taiwan, and Korea, financial services disputes with Japan and the European Union, the US-EU conflict over oilseeds, and the US-Japan beef and citrus negotiations.The authors recommend against the future use of Super 301 and urge that the United States pursue a strategy of aggressive multilateralism in the new World Trade Organization.
Download InfoIf 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.
Bibliographic InfoThis book is provided by Peterson Institute for International Economics in its series Peterson Institute Press: All Books with number 78 and published in 1994.
You can help add them by filling out this form.
CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
- Bown, Chad P. & Prusa, Thomas J., 2010. "U.S. antidumping: much ado about zeroing," Policy Research Working Paper Series 5352, The World Bank.
- Siroën, Jean-Marc, . "Choix de la politique commerciale dans le cas de la concurrence imparfaite," Economics Papers from University Paris Dauphine 123456789/6629, Paris Dauphine University.
- kishore gawande & pravin krishna, 2005. "The Political Economy of Trade Policy: Empirical Approaches," International Trade 0503003, EconWPA.
- Bruce A. Blonigen & Robert C. Feenstra, .
"Protectionist Threats And Foreign Direct Investment,"
Department of Economics
96-01, California Davis - Department of Economics.
- Bruce A. Blonigen & Robert C. Feenstra, 1997. "Protectionist Threats and Foreign Direct Investment," NBER Chapters, in: The Effects of U.S. Trade Protection and Promotion Policies, pages 55-80 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Bruce A. Blonigen & Robert C. Feenstra, 1996. "Protectionist Threats and Foreign Direct Investment," NBER Working Papers 5475, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Robert Feenstra & Bruce A. Blonigen & Harris Dellas, 2003. "Protectionist Threats and Foreign Direct Investment," Working Papers 961, University of California, Davis, Department of Economics.
- Maxim Engers & Jonathan Eaton, 1999. "Sanctions: Some Simple Analytics," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(2), pages 409-414, May.
- Daniela Benavente, 2010. "Constraining and supporting effects of the multilateral trading system on U.S. unilateralism," IHEID Working Papers 09-2010, Economics Section, The Graduate Institute of International Studies.
- Kenneth Kasa, 1995. "Gaiatsu," FRBSF Economic Letter, Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, issue sep15.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Peterson Institute webmaster).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.