IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/rsc/rsceui/2015-64.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

China-Autos: Haven’t We Danced This Dance Before?

Author

Listed:
  • Andrew D. Mitchell
  • Thomas J. Prusa

Abstract

Just as it had in several recent similar disputes, the Panel in China – Autos found several of the challenged issues WTO inconsistent. We believe virtually all of the deficiencies noted by the Panel could be easily addressed with minor changes to MOFCOM practices. The real significance of this dispute lies in what it tell us about the larger trade policy dance between the US and China. On the one hand, with the series of related WTO disputes the US has demonstrated that China must comply with WTO rules. The more vexing challenge, however, is the apparent tit-for-tat motivation for this and other recent Chinese trade policies, and on this point this dispute does little to change the calculus. The prospective nature of WTO relief makes it almost impossible for the WTO to discourage the type of opportunistic protectionist actions exemplified by this case.

Suggested Citation

  • Andrew D. Mitchell & Thomas J. Prusa, 2015. "China-Autos: Haven’t We Danced This Dance Before?," RSCAS Working Papers 2015/64, European University Institute.
    • Handle: RePEc:rsc:rsceui:2015/64
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://cadmus.eui.eu/bitstream/handle/1814/36976/RSCAS_2015_64.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/1814/36976
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Prusa, Thomas J. & Vermulst, Edwin, 2014. "China – Countervailing and Anti-dumping Duties on Grain Oriented Flat-rolled Electrical Steel from the United States: exporting US AD/CVD methodologies through WTO dispute settlement?," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 13(2), pages 229-266, April.
    2. Prusa, Thomas J. & Vermulst, Edwin, 2015. "China – Anti-Dumping and Countervailing Duty Measures on Broiler Products from the United States: How the chickens came home to roost," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 14(2), pages 287-335, April.
    3. Moore, Michael O. & Wu, Mark, 2015. "Antidumping and Strategic Industrial Policy: Tit-for-Tat Trade Remedies and the China–X-Ray Equipment Dispute," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 14(2), pages 239-286, April.
    4. Chad Bown & Kara Reynolds, 2015. "Trade flows and trade disputes," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 10(2), pages 145-177, June.
    5. Bown, Chad P. & Wauters, Jasper, 2008. "United States – Anti-Dumping Measures on Oil Country Tubular Goods (OCTG) from Mexico: a legal-economic assessment of sunset reviews," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 7(1), pages 269-298, January.
    6. Prusa, Thomas J. & Vermulst, Edwin, 2011. "United States – Continued Existence and Application of Zeroing Methodology: the end of Zeroing?," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 10(1), pages 45-61, January.
    7. Huerta-Goldman, Jorge A., 2013. "How Easy Is an Easy Case for a Complainant? Comment on US–Zeroing (Korea) DS402," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 12(2), pages 427-431, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Dukgeun Ahn & Maurizio Zanardi, 2016. "China - HP-SSST: Last Part of Growing Pains?," RSCAS Working Papers 2016/48, European University Institute.
    2. Swati Dhingra & Timothy Meyer, 2021. "Leveling the Playing Field: Industrial Policy and Export-Contingent Subsidies in India-Export Measures," RSCAS Working Papers 2021/15, European University Institute.
    3. Mostafa Beshkar & Jee-Hyeong Park, 2017. "Dispute Settlement with Second-Order Uncertainty: The Case of International Trade Disputes," CAEPR Working Papers 2017-010, Center for Applied Economics and Policy Research, Department of Economics, Indiana University Bloomington.
    4. Tobias D. Ketterer, 2016. "EU Anti-dumping and Tariff Cuts: Trade Policy Substitution?," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(5), pages 576-596, May.
    5. Rosalyn Perkins & Mary Caroline Castaño & Condrad Montemayor, 2018. "Analysis of predictability and accountability transparency practices and FTA on trade growth in selected countries of the Asia-Pacific region: a descriptive-causal approach," Journal of Economic Structures, Springer;Pan-Pacific Association of Input-Output Studies (PAPAIOS), vol. 7(1), pages 1-18, December.
    6. McDaniel, Christine & Vermulst, Edwin, 2021. "United States – Certain Methodologies and Their Application to Anti-Dumping Proceedings Involving China: Re-Litigating through the Backdoor?," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 20(4), pages 546-555, October.
    7. Conconi, Paola & DeRemer, David R. & Kirchsteiger, Georg & Trimarchi, Lorenzo & Zanardi, Maurizio, 2017. "Suspiciously timed trade disputes," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 57-76.
    8. Jeheung Ryu & Randall W. Stone, 2018. "Plaintiffs by proxy: A firm-level approach to WTO dispute resolution," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 13(2), pages 273-308, June.
    9. Aydin B. Yildirim & J. Tyson Chatagnier & Arlo Poletti & Dirk De Bièvre, 2018. "The internationalization of production and the politics of compliance in WTO disputes," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 13(1), pages 49-75, March.
    10. Bown,Chad P. & Crowley,Meredith A & Bown,Chad P. & Crowley,Meredith A, 2016. "The empirical landscape of trade policy," Policy Research Working Paper Series 7620, The World Bank.
    11. Chad P. Bown & Kara M. Reynolds, 2017. "Trade Agreements and Enforcement: Evidence from WTO Dispute Settlement," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 9(4), pages 64-100, November.
    12. Chad Bown & Kara Reynolds, 2015. "Trade flows and trade disputes," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 10(2), pages 145-177, June.
    13. Thomas J. Prusa, 2013. "The Use of Economics in WTO Appellate Body Decisions," EUI-RSCAS Working Papers 12, European University Institute (EUI), Robert Schuman Centre of Advanced Studies (RSCAS).
    14. Timothy Meyer, 2017. "Explaining energy disputes at the World Trade Organization," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 391-410, June.
    15. Robert M. Feinberg & Kara M. Reynolds, 2016. "How Do Countries Respond to Antidumping Filings? Dispute Settlement and Retaliatory Antidumping," Working Papers 2016-04, American University, Department of Economics.
    16. Kyle Bagwell & Chad P. Bown & Robert W. Staiger, 2016. "Is the WTO Passé?," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 54(4), pages 1125-1231, December.
    17. Kamal Saggi & Mark Wu, 2018. "Yet Another Nail in the Coffin of Zeroing: United States – Anti-Dumping Administrative Reviews and Other Measures Related to Imports of Certain Orange Juice from Brazil," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Kamal Saggi (ed.), Economic Analysis of the Rules and Regulations of the World Trade Organization, chapter 18, pages 401-432, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    18. Chad P. Bown & Jennifer A., 2015. "Bird Flu, the OIE, and National Regulation: The WTO’s India – Agricultural Products dispute," RSCAS Working Papers 2015/71, European University Institute.
    19. Ahn, Dukgeun & Levy, Philip I., 2020. "US–OCTG (Korea): Legal Boundary of ‘Political’ Remedy," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 19(2), pages 164-181, April.
    20. Bown, Chad P. & Keynes, Soumaya, 2020. "Why Trump shot the Sheriffs: The end of WTO dispute settlement 1.0," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 42(4), pages 799-819.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    MOFCOM; essential facts; price effects; tit-for-tat protection;
    All these keywords.

    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:rsc:rsceui:2015/64. 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: RSCAS web unit (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/rsiueit.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.