IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cdf/wpaper/2008-27.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Anti-Dumping Regulations: Anti-Competitive and Anti-Export

Author

Listed:

Abstract

In a Bertrand duopoly model, it is shown that an anti-dumping regulation can be strategically exploited by the domestic firm to reduce the degree of competition in the domestic market. The domestic firm commits not to export to the foreign market which gives the foreign firm a monopoly in its own market. As a result the foreign firm will increase its price allowing the domestic firm to increase its price and its profits. If the products are sufficiently close substitutes then the higher profits in the domestic market are large enough to compensate for the loss of profits on exports.

Suggested Citation

  • Collie, David R. & Le, Vo Phuong Mai, 2008. "Anti-Dumping Regulations: Anti-Competitive and Anti-Export," Cardiff Economics Working Papers E2008/27, Cardiff University, Cardiff Business School, Economics Section.
    • Handle: RePEc:cdf:wpaper:2008/27
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://carbsecon.com/wp/E2008_27.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Anderson, Simon P. & Schmitt, Nicolas & Thisse, Jacques-Francois, 1995. "Who benefits from antidumping legislation?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(3-4), pages 321-337, May.
    2. Roger Clarke & David Collie, 2003. "Product differentiation and the gains from trade under Bertrand duopoly," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 36(3), pages 658-673, August.
    3. Veugelers, Reinhilde & Vandenbussche, Hylke, 1999. "European anti-dumping policy and the profitability of national and international collusion," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 1-28, January.
    4. Staiger, Robert W. & Wolak, Frank A., 1992. "The effect of domestic antidumping law in the presence of foreign monopoly," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(3-4), pages 265-287, May.
    5. Thomas J. Prusa, 2005. "Anti‐dumping: A Growing Problem in International Trade," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(5), pages 683-700, May.
    6. Thomas J. Prusa, 2021. "Why are so many antidumping petitions withdrawn?," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Thomas J Prusa (ed.), Economic Effects of Antidumping, chapter 2, pages 1-20, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    7. Ronald B. Davies & Benjamin H. Liebman, 2006. "Self‐protection? Antidumping Duties, Collusion, and FDI," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(5), pages 741-757, November.
    8. Webb, Michael, 1992. "The Ambiguous Consequences of Anti-dumping Laws," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 30(3), pages 437-448, July.
    9. Fischer, Ronald D., 1992. "Endogenous probability of protection and firm behavior," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(1-2), pages 149-163, February.
    10. Richard Friberg & Mattias Ganslandt, 2008. "Reciprocal Dumping with Product Differentiation," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(5), pages 942-954, November.
    11. Falvey, Rod & Wittayarungruangsri, Sarut, 2006. "Market size and antidumping in duopolistic competition," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 771-786, September.
    12. Roger Clarke & David R. Collie, 2008. "Maximum‐revenue versus Optimum‐welfare Export Taxes: a Delegation Game," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(5), pages 919-929, November.
    13. Wilfried Pauwels & Hylke Vandenbussche & Marcel Weverbergh, 2001. "Strategic Behaviour under European Antidumping Duties," International Journal of the Economics of Business, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(1), pages 75-99.
    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


    Cited by:

    1. Patrice Bougette and Christophe Charlier, 2018. "Antidumping and Feed-In Tariffs as Good Buddies? Modeling the EU-China Solar Panel Dispute," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 6).
    2. Wilfried Pauwels & Hylke Vandenbussche & Marcel Weverbergh, 2001. "Strategic Behaviour under European Antidumping Duties," International Journal of the Economics of Business, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(1), pages 75-99.
    3. Jones, Sandra C., 2011. "“You wouldn’t know it had alcohol in it until you read the can”: Adolescents and alcohol-energy drinks," Australasian marketing journal, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 189-195.
    4. Bourreau, Marc & Manenti, Fabio M., 2023. "Selling cross-border in online markets: The impact of the ban on geoblocking strategies," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    5. Falvey, Rod & Wittayarungruangsri, Sarut, 2006. "Market size and antidumping in duopolistic competition," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 771-786, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. 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.
    2. Nelson, Douglas, 2006. "The political economy of antidumping: A survey," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 554-590, September.
    3. Falvey, Rod & Wittayarungruangsri, Sarut, 2006. "Market size and antidumping in duopolistic competition," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 771-786, September.
    4. Ray-Yun Chang & Hong Hwang & Cheng-Hau Peng, 2020. "Antidumping protection and welfare in a differentiated duopoly," The Japanese Economic Review, Springer, vol. 71(3), pages 421-446, July.
    5. Belderbos, R. & Vandenbussche, H. & Veugelers, R., 2004. "Antidumping duties, undertakings, and foreign direct investment in the EU," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 429-453, April.
    6. Kokko, Ari & Gustavsson Tingvall, Patrik & Videnord, Josefin, 2017. "Which Antidumping Cases Reach the WTO?," Ratio Working Papers 286, The Ratio Institute.
    7. Jan Haaland & Ian Wooton, 1998. "Antidumping jumping: Reciprocal antidumping and industrial location," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 134(2), pages 340-362, June.
    8. Wu, Shih-Jye & Chang, Yang-Ming & Chen, Hung-Yi, 2014. "Antidumping duties and price undertakings: A welfare analysis," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 29(C), pages 97-107.
    9. Crowley Meredith A., 2010. "Split Decisions in Antidumping Cases," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 10(1), pages 1-26, July.
    10. Martin Theuringer & Pia Weiss, 2001. "Do Anti-Dumping Rules Facilitate the Abuse of Market Dominance?," International Trade 0108002, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Christian Gormsen, 2011. "Antidumping with heterogeneous firms," Post-Print hal-00663024, HAL.
    12. Yoshitomo Ogawa & Yoshiyasu Ono, 2011. "The Byrd Amendment as Facilitating a Tacit International Business Collusion," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 19(5), pages 877-893, November.
    13. Cláudio Roberto Fóffano Vasconcelos & Silvinha Pinto Vasconcelos, 2005. "Medidas Antidumping E Resultados Colusivos: O Caso Do Pebdl Na Economia Brasileira," Anais do XXXIII Encontro Nacional de Economia [Proceedings of the 33rd Brazilian Economics Meeting] 071, ANPEC - Associação Nacional dos Centros de Pós-Graduação em Economia [Brazilian Association of Graduate Programs in Economics].
    14. Patrice Bougette and Christophe Charlier, 2018. "Antidumping and Feed-In Tariffs as Good Buddies? Modeling the EU-China Solar Panel Dispute," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 6).
    15. Christian Gormsen, 2011. "Anti-dumping with heterogeneous firms," International Economics, CEPII research center, issue 125, pages 41-64.
    16. Bruce A. Blonigen & Thomas J. Prusa, 2001. "Antidumping," NBER Working Papers 8398, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    17. Miyagiwa, Kaz & Ohno, Yuka, 2007. "Dumping as a signal of innovation," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(1), pages 221-240, March.
    18. Vandenbussche, Hylke & Zanardi, Maurizio, 2010. "The chilling trade effects of antidumping proliferation," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 54(6), pages 760-777, August.
    19. Gnutzmann-Mkrtchyan, Arevik & Hoffstadt, Martin, 2020. "Use and Abuse of Antidumping by Global Cartels," Hannover Economic Papers (HEP) dp-677, Leibniz Universität Hannover, Wirtschaftswissenschaftliche Fakultät.
    20. Wilfried Pauwels & Hylke Vandenbussche & Marcel Weverbergh, 2001. "Strategic Behaviour under European Antidumping Duties," International Journal of the Economics of Business, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(1), pages 75-99.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    anti-dumping regulations; Bertrand oligopoly; strategic behaviour;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • F13 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade Policy; International Trade Organizations
    • L13 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Oligopoly and Other Imperfect Markets

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:cdf:wpaper:2008/27. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 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: Yongdeng Xu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ecscfuk.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.