Evolving Discretionary Practices of U.S Antidumping Activity
AbstractPrevious literature has discussed the procedural biases that exist in U.S. Department of Commerce (USDOC) dumping margin calculations. This paper examines the evolution of discretionary practices and their role in the rapid increase in average USDOC dumping margins since 1980. Statistical analysis finds that USDOC discretionary practices have played the major role in rising dumping margins. Importantly, the evolving effect of discretionary practices is due not only to increasing use of these practices over time, but apparent changes in implementation of these practices that mean a higher increase in the dumping margin whenever they are applied. While legal changes due to the Uruguay Round are estimated to have reduced the baseline U.S. dumping margin by 20 percentage points, the increasingly punitive discretionary measures used by the USDOC almost completely compensated for this decrease by 2000.
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 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc in its series NBER Working Papers with number 9625.
Date of creation: Apr 2003
Date of revision:
Publication status: published as Blonigen, Bruce A. “Evolving Discretionary Practices of U.S. Antidumping Activity.” Canadian Journal of Economics 39 (August 2006): 874-900.
Contact details of provider:
Postal: National Bureau of Economic Research, 1050 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, MA 02138, U.S.A.
Web page: http://www.nber.org
More information through EDIRC
Other versions of this item:
- Bruce A. Blonigen, 2006. "Evolving discretionary practices of U.S. antidumping activity," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 39(3), pages 874-900, August.
- Bruce A. Blonigen, 2002. "Evolving Discretionary Practices of U.S. Antidumping Activity," University of Oregon Economics Department Working Papers 2003-20, University of Oregon Economics Department, revised 01 Aug 2003.
- F13 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade Policy; International Trade Organizations
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-ALL-2003-04-21 (All new papers)
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.:
- Wendy L. Hansen & Thomas J. Prusa, 1996.
"Cumulation and ITC Decision-Making: The Sum of the Parts is Greater Than the Whole,"
Departmental Working Papers
199422, Rutgers University, Department of Economics.
- 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, vol. 34(4), pages 746-69, October.
- Wendy L. Hansen & Thomas J. Prusa, 1995. "Cumulation and ITC Decision-Making: The Sum of the Parts is Greater thanthe Whole," NBER Working Papers 5062, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Thomas J. Prusa, 1999.
"On the Spread and Impact of Antidumping,"
NBER Working Papers
7404, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Benjamin Liebman, 2004. "ITC voting behavior on sunset reviews," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer, vol. 140(3), pages 446-475, September.
- Douglas A. Irwin, 2003.
"Causing Problems? The WTO Review of Causation and Injury Attribution in U.S. Section 201 Cases,"
NBER Working Papers
9815, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Irwin, Douglas A., 2003. "Causing problems? The WTO review of causation and injury attribution in US Section 201 cases," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 2(03), pages 297-325, November.
- Moore, Michael O., 2005. ""Facts available" dumping allegations: when will foreign firms cooperate in antidumping petitions?," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 185-204, March.
This item has more than 25 citations. To prevent cluttering this page, these citations are listed on a separate page. reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.Access and download statisticsgeneral 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: ().
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.