IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/rsc/rsceui/2019-76.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Subsidy Determination, Benchmarks and Adverse Inferences: Assessing ‘benefit' in US – Coated Paper (Indonesia)

Author

Listed:
  • Eugene Beaulieu
  • Denise Prévost

Abstract

This paper presents a legal-economic analysis of key aspects of the WTO Panel Report involving a challenge by Indonesia against the anti-dumping and countervailing duties imposed by the US on certain coated paper from Indonesia. We focus on the findings in this case relevant to the determination of a ‘benefit’ to the recipient, a core requirement to establish the existence and extent of a subsidy. We examine benchmarking for determining benefit in cases of predominant government ownership of a natural resource and the use of ‘adverse facts available’ against a non-cooperative respondent to infer the existence of a benefit. The benefit analysis in this case may have broader implications. First, it may limit the scope for governments to determine their own policies regarding the ownership and management of natural resources. Second, it may create a loophole allowing investigating authorities to fill gaps in the factual record by intentionally using the ‘facts available’ to the disadvantage of a respondent. In both cases the panel’s findings may open the door to potential misuse of these flexibilities to find a benefit where none exists, or to inflate the margin of benefit to allow for higher countervailing duties.

Suggested Citation

  • Eugene Beaulieu & Denise Prévost, 2019. "Subsidy Determination, Benchmarks and Adverse Inferences: Assessing ‘benefit' in US – Coated Paper (Indonesia)," RSCAS Working Papers 2019/76, European University Institute.
  • Handle: RePEc:rsc:rsceui:2019/76
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://cadmus.eui.eu/bitstream/handle/1814/64864/RSCAS%202019_76.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/1814/64864
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kugler, Kholofelo, 2018. "United States – Anti-Dumping and Countervailing Measures on Certain Coated Paper from Indonesia (US–Coated Paper (Indonesia)), DS491," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 17(2), pages 360-365, April.
    2. Vermulst, Edwin, 2005. "The WTO Anti-Dumping Agreement: A Commentary," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199277070.
    3. Horn, Henrik & Mavroidis, Petros C., 2005. "United States – Preliminary Determination with Respect to Certain Softwood Lumber from Canada: What is a Subsidy?," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 4(S1), pages 220-247, January.
    4. Thomas J. Prusa & Edwin A. Vermulst, 2018. "United States – Certain Methodologies and Their Application to Anti-Dumping Proceedings Involving China: Hitting Nails in the Coffin of Unfair Dumping Margin Calculation Methodologies," RSCAS Working Papers 2018/61, European University Institute.
    5. Janow, Merit E. & Staiger, Robert W., 2003. "US – Export Restraints: United States – Measures Treating Export Restraints as Subsidies," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 2(S1), pages 201-235, January.
    6. Hiau Looi Kee & Cristina Neagu & Alessandro Nicita, 2013. "Is Protectionism on the Rise? Assessing National Trade Policies during the Crisis of 2008," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 95(1), pages 342-346, March.
    7. Bronckers, Marco & Maskus, Keith E., 2014. "China–Raw Materials: a controversial step towards evenhanded exploitation of natural resources," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 13(2), pages 393-408, April.
    8. Eugene Beaulieu, 2018. "North American Free Trade Under Attack: Newsprint is Just the Tip of the Iceberg," SPP Research Papers, The School of Public Policy, University of Calgary, vol. 11(15), May.
    9. Crowley, Meredith A. & Hillman, Jennifer A., 2018. "Slamming the Door on Trade Policy Discretion? The WTO Appellate Body’s Ruling on Market Distortions and Production Costs in EU–Biodiesel (Argentina)," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 17(2), pages 195-213, April.
    10. van Dijk, Michiel & Szirmai, Adam, 2006. "Industrial Policy and Technology Diffusion: Evidence from Paper Making Machinery in Indonesia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 34(12), pages 2137-2152, December.
    11. Elaine Feldman, 2017. "Softwood Lumber – Some Lessons from the Last Softwood (Lumber IV) Dispute," SPP Briefing Papers, The School of Public Policy, University of Calgary, vol. 10(24), October.
    12. Carolyn L. Evans & Shane M. Sherlund, 2011. "Are Antidumping Duties for Sale? Case-Level Evidence on the Grossman-Helpman Protection for Sale Model," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 78(2), pages 330-357, October.
    13. Horn, Henrik & Mavroidis, Petros C., 2006. "United States – Final Determination with Respect to Certain Softwood Lumber from Canada (AB-2003-6, WT/DS257/AB/R)," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 5(S1), pages 130-145, January.
    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. 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.
    2. Jennifer A. Hillman & Kara M. Reynolds, 2020. "Article 21.5 DSU Appellate Body Report United States—Measures Affecting Trade in Large Civil Aircraft (Second Complaint): Spillovers from Defense R&D Add to the Tug-of-War Between Panels and the WTO A," RSCAS Working Papers 2020/89, European University Institute.
    3. Patrice Bougette & Christophe Charlier, 2019. "Subsidies and Countervailing Measures in the EU Biofuel Industry: A Welfare Analysis," Post-Print halshs-02306022, HAL.
    4. Dmitri Kirpichev & Enrique Moral-Benito, 2018. "The costs of trade protectionism: evidence from Spanish firms and non-tariff measures," Working Papers 1814, Banco de España.
    5. Jacobo, Alejandro D. & Jalile, Ileana R., 2020. "The Great Recession and the Determinants of Tariff and Antidumping Restrictions in Argentina, Brazil and Mexico: A Retrospective Study," Economia Internazionale / International Economics, Camera di Commercio Industria Artigianato Agricoltura di Genova, vol. 73(1), pages 107-130.
    6. Bown, Chad P. & Crowley, Meredith A., 2014. "Emerging economies, trade policy, and macroeconomic shocks," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 261-273.
    7. Mostafa Beshkar & Adam S. Chilton, 2015. "Revisiting Procedure and Precedent in the WTO: An Analysis of US – Countervailing and Anti-Dumping Measures (China)," RSCAS Working Papers 2015/68, European University Institute.
    8. Chen, Natalie & Juvenal, Luciana, 2018. "Quality and the Great Trade Collapse," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 59-76.
    9. Andrea Goldstein & Alessia Amighini & Bernard Hoekman, 2016. "Revitalizing the Global Trading System: What Could the G20 Do?," China & World Economy, Institute of World Economics and Politics, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, vol. 24(4), pages 34-54, July.
    10. Ramani, Shyama V. & Urias, Eduardo, 2018. "When access to drugs meets catch-up: Insights from the use of CL threats to improve access to ARV drugs in Brazil," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(8), pages 1538-1552.
    11. William F. Lincoln & Andrew H. McCallum & Michael Siemer, 2017. "The Great Recession and a Missing Generation of Exporters," Finance and Economics Discussion Series 2017-108, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
    12. James Lake & Maia Linask, 2016. "Domestic political competition and pro-cyclical import protection," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(3), pages 564-591, August.
    13. Lake, James & Linask, Maia K., 2016. "Could tariffs be pro-cyclical?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 124-146.
    14. Arne J. Nagengast & Robert Stehrer, 2016. "The Great Collapse in Value Added Trade," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(2), pages 392-421, May.
    15. Bown, Chad P. & Crowley, Meredith A., 2013. "Import protection, business cycles, and exchange rates: Evidence from the Great Recession," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(1), pages 50-64.
    16. Luisa Kinzius & Alexander Sandkamp & Erdal Yalcin, 2019. "Trade protection and the role of non-tariff barriers," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 155(4), pages 603-643, November.
    17. Dennis Novy & Alan M. Taylor, 2020. "Trade and Uncertainty," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 102(4), pages 749-765, October.
    18. Laurijssen, Jobien & De Gram, Frans J. & Worrell, Ernst & Faaij, Andre, 2010. "Optimizing the energy efficiency of conventional multi-cylinder dryers in the paper industry," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 35(9), pages 3738-3750.
    19. Beyza Ural Marchand, 2019. "Inequality and Trade Policy: The Pro‐Poor Bias of Contemporary Trade Restrictions," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 65(S1), pages 123-152, November.
    20. Nicholas Crafts & Peter Fearon, 2010. "Lessons from the 1930s Great Depression," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 26(3), pages 285-317, Autumn.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    WTO dispute; Indonesia paper; Benefit analysis; Facts available; Countervailing;
    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:2019/76. 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.