The agreement on subsidies and countervailing measures: tying one's hands through the WTO
AbstractWhy would governments agree to restrict their own discretion in setting domestic policies as part of a trade agreement? This paper examines the welfare consequences of the GATT's Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM). If countries which join a trade agreement are given free reign over the use of domestic production subsidies, then after negotiating tariff reductions, governments could undermine the agreement by introducing production subsidies to import-competing producers that effectively act as trade barriers. The SCM restricts the use of domestic subsidies by countries which have joined the WTO. Specifically, governments may not use sector-specific subsidies (agriculture is an exception) but they may subsidize their producers if they offer the same subsidy to all producers in their economies. ; I show that through an agreement like the SCM, governments can better achieve their goals of maximizing domestic welfare. This occurs because terms-of-trade concerns lead to subsidies in import- competing sectors that are higher than globally optimal and in export sectors that are lower than globally optimal. Therefore, a rule to require that subsidies be the same in all sectors forces a country to partially internalize these terms of trade externalities (by reducing subsidies to import-competing sectors and increasing subsidies to export sectors).
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 InfoPaper provided by Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago in its series Working Paper Series with number WP-06-22.
Date of creation: 2006
Date of revision:
Contact details of provider:
Postal: P.O. Box 834, 230 South LaSalle Street, Chicago, Illinois 60690-0834
Web page: http://www.chicagofed.org/
More information through EDIRC
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
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.:
- Pinelopi K. Goldberg & Michael M. Knetter, 1995.
"Causes and Consequences of the Export Enhancement Program for Wheat,"
NBER Working Papers
5359, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Pinelopi Koujianou Goldberg & Michael M. Knetter, 1997. "Causes and Consequences of the Export Enhancement Program for Wheat," NBER Chapters, in: The Effects of U.S. Trade Protection and Promotion Policies, pages 273-296 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Bagwell,K. & Staiger,R.W., 2000.
"Strategic trade, competitive industries and agricultural trade disputes,"
11, Wisconsin Madison - Social Systems.
- Kyle Bagwell & Robert W. Staiger, 2001. "Strategic Trade, Competitive Industries and Agricultural Trade Disputes," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(2), pages 113-128, 07.
- Kyle Bagwell & Robert W. Staiger, 2000. "Strategic Trade, Competitive Industries and Agricultural Trade Disputes," NBER Working Papers 7822, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Ronald D. Fischer & Thomas J. Prusa, 2003. "WTO Exceptions as Insurance," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 11(5), pages 745-757, November.
- Kyle Bagwell & Robert W. Staiger, 1997.
"Reciprocity, Non-discrimination and Preferential Agreements in the Multilateral Trading System,"
NBER Working Papers
5932, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Bagwell, Kyle & Staiger, Robert W., 2001. "Reciprocity, non-discrimination and preferential agreements in the multilateral trading system," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 281-325, June.
- Dixit, Avinash, 1988. "Anti-dumping and countervailing duties under oligopoly," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 55-68, January.
- Grossman, Gene & Helpman, Elhanan, 1993.
"Protection for Sale,"
CEPR Discussion Papers
827, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Grossman, G.M. & Helpman, E., 1992. "Protection for Sale," Papers 21-92, Tel Aviv.
- Grossman, G.M. & Helpman, E., 1992. "Protection for Sale," Papers 162, Princeton, Woodrow Wilson School - Public and International Affairs.
- Gene M. Grossman & Elhanan Helpman, 1992. "Protection For Sale," NBER Working Papers 4149, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Jeffrey J. Schott, 1994. "Uruguay Round: An Assessment," Peterson Institute Press: All Books, Peterson Institute for International Economics, number 64, July.
- Baldwin, Richard, 1987. "Politically realistic objective functions and trade policy PROFs and tariffs," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 287-290.
- Giovanni Maggi & Pinelopi Koujianou Goldberg, 1999.
"Protection for Sale: An Empirical Investigation,"
American Economic Review,
American Economic Association, vol. 89(5), pages 1135-1155, December.
- Staiger, Robert W., 1995.
"International rules and institutions for trade policy,"
Handbook of International Economics,
in: G. M. Grossman & K. Rogoff (ed.), Handbook of International Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 29, pages 1495-1551
- Robert W. Staiger, 1994. "International Rules and Institutions for Trade Policy," NBER Working Papers 4962, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Collie, D., 1990.
"Export Subsidies And Countervailing Tariffs,"
The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS)
353, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
- Michael O. Moore, 1996. "The Rise and Fall of Big Steel’s Influence on U.S. Trade Policy," NBER Chapters, in: The Political Economy of Trade Protection, pages 15-34 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Kyle Bagwell & Robert W. Staiger, 2001.
"Domestic Policies, National Sovereignty, And International Economic Institutions,"
The Quarterly Journal of Economics,
MIT Press, vol. 116(2), pages 519-562, May.
- Kyle Bagwell & Robert W. Staiger, 1999. "Domestic Policies, National Sovereignty and International Economic Institutions," NBER Working Papers 7293, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Barbara J. Spencer, 1988.
"Capital Subsidies and Countervailing Duties in Oligopolistic Industries,"
NBER Working Papers
2519, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Spencer, Barbara J., 1988. "Capital subsidies and countervailing duties in oligopolistic industries," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(1-2), pages 45-69, August.
- Brian R. Copeland, 1990. "Strategic Interaction among Nations: Negotiable and Non-negotiable Trade Barriers," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 23(1), pages 84-108, February.
- Kyle Bagwell & Robert W. Staiger, 2005.
"Will international rules on subsidies disrupt the world trading system?,"
0405-21, Columbia University, Department of Economics.
- Kyle Bagwell & Robert W. Staiger, 2006. "Will International Rules on Subsidies Disrupt the World Trading System?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(3), pages 877-895, June.
- Bruce Gardner, 1996. "The Political Economy of the Export Enhancement Program for Wheat," NBER Chapters, in: The Political Economy of Trade Protection, pages 61-70 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Pascal L. Ghazalian, 2012. "Home Bias in Primary Agricultural and Processed Food Trade: Assessing the Effects of National Degree of Uncertainty Aversion," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 63(2), pages 265-290, 06.
- Pascal Ghazalian & Ryan Cardwell, 2010. "Did the Uruguay Round Agreement on Agriculture Affect Trade Flows? An Empirical Investigation for Meat Commodities," International Advances in Economic Research, Springer, vol. 16(4), pages 331-344, November.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Bernie Flores).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.