IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpj/glecon/v11y2011i2n2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Offsetting Duty Norm and the Simultaneous Application of Countervailing and Antidumping Duties

Author

Listed:
  • Kelly Brian D

    (Seattle University)

Abstract

World Trade Organization (WTO) members have long expressed a norm concerning the trade "remedies" of countervailing (anti-subsidy) duties and antidumping duties: that these measures offset the behavior that gives rise to them, restoring trade to a "level playing field." The WTO agreements provide that the duties imposed should be calculated accordingly, that countervailing duties are measured against subsidies and anti-dumping duties are measured against the excess of a benchmark "normal" value over export price. This paper makes two principle contributions in light of this norm. First, it develops formal models of antidumping and countervailing duty actions conforming to the offsetting duty norm. Economists have often shown little patience with the rationale for these duties, leading to a dearth of formal analysis that takes into account the social welfare function-the offsetting duty norm-incorporated in the WTO agreements; the formal models here provide that analysis. Second, the paper extends this analysis to the simultaneous prosecution of countervailing and antidumping cases. Once rare, simultaneous countervailing and antidumping duty proceedings have become perhaps the most prominent expression of trade protection permitted under WTO rules. The analysis establishes the conditions to identify any overlap in the application of countervailing and antidumping measures and demonstrates that recent practice of WTO members has created excessive application of duties. The analysis also provides the methods for preventing this double-count in simultaneous cases. These results have direct application to current policy debates.

Suggested Citation

  • Kelly Brian D, 2011. "The Offsetting Duty Norm and the Simultaneous Application of Countervailing and Antidumping Duties," Global Economy Journal, De Gruyter, vol. 11(2), pages 1-33, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:bpj:glecon:v:11:y:2011:i:2:n:2
    DOI: 10.2202/1524-5861.1720
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.2202/1524-5861.1720
    Download Restriction: For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2202/1524-5861.1720?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Thomas J. Prusa, 2005. "Anti‐dumping: A Growing Problem in International Trade," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(5), pages 683-700, May.
    2. Alan V. Deardorff & Robert M. Stern, 2009. "Issues of Manufactures Liberalization and Administered Protection in the Doha Round," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Globalization And International Trade Policies, chapter 8, pages 249-261, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    3. Douglas A. Irwin, 2005. "The Rise of US Anti‐dumping Activity in Historical Perspective," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(5), pages 651-668, May.
    4. Swagel, Phillip & Mankiw, N, 2005. "Antidumping: The Third Rail of Trade Policy," Scholarly Articles 2961701, Harvard University Department of Economics.
    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. Haoyuan Ding & Xiao Li & Jiezhou Ying, 2023. "Anti‐dumping Policies and International Portfolio Allocation: The View from the Global Funds," China & World Economy, Institute of World Economics and Politics, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, vol. 31(2), pages 58-83, March.
    2. Dmitri Nizovtsev & Alexandre Skiba, 2016. "Import Demand Elasticity and Exporter Response to Anti-Dumping Duties," The International Trade Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(2), pages 83-114, March.

    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. & 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.
    2. Kokko, Ari & Gustavsson Tingvall, Patrik & Videnord, Josefin, 2017. "Which Antidumping Cases Reach the WTO?," Ratio Working Papers 286, The Ratio Institute.
    3. Rou Li, 2018. "The Research on Factors Which Affect Anti-dumping Investigation: Based on Probit Model," International Journal of Business and Management, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 13(3), pages 252-252, February.
    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. Durling, James P. & Prusa, Thomas J., 2006. "The trade effects associated with an antidumping epidemic: The hot-rolled steel market, 1996-2001," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 675-695, September.
    6. 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.
    7. Yi Liu & Ning Zhang, 2015. "Sustainability of Trade Liberalization and Antidumping: Evidence from Mexico’s Trade Liberalization toward China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(9), pages 1-20, August.
    8. Aksel Erbahar & Yuan Zi, 2015. "Cascading Trade Protection: Theory and Evidence from the U.S," CTEI Working Papers series 04-2015, Centre for Trade and Economic Integration, The Graduate Institute.
    9. Moore, M.O. & Zanardi, M., 2006. "Does Antidumping Use Contribute to Trade Liberalization? An Empirical Analysis," Other publications TiSEM c0a19bf2-9849-4620-b109-e, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    10. Minsoo Lee & Donghyun Park & Antonio Saravia, 2017. "Trade Effects of US Antidumping Actions against China-super-," Asian Economic Journal, East Asian Economic Association, vol. 31(1), pages 3-16, March.
    11. Oatley Thomas, 2010. "Real Exchange Rates and Trade Protectionism," Business and Politics, De Gruyter, vol. 12(2), pages 1-19, August.
    12. Ahmad Ahmad & Temitope J. Laniran, 2021. "FDI, Economic performance and CO2 discharge in Nigeria," International Journal of Research and Scientific Innovation, International Journal of Research and Scientific Innovation (IJRSI), vol. 8(3), pages 50-54, March.
    13. Froese, Marc D., 2006. "Contingent Protection Measures and the Management of the Softwood Lumber Trade in North America," Estey Centre Journal of International Law and Trade Policy, Estey Centre for Law and Economics in International Trade, vol. 7(2), pages 1-26.
    14. CLINCI, Ionut Cristian, 2013. "Eu'S Antidumping Policies Towards China And Their Implications," Academica Science Journal, Economica Series, Dimitrie Cantemir University, Faculty of Economical Science, vol. 2(3), pages 3-9, December.
    15. Andreea C. Nita & Maurizio Zanardi, 2013. "The First Review of European Union Antidumping Reviews," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(12), pages 1455-1477, December.
    16. Lorenzo Trimarchi, 2020. "Trade Policy and the China Syndrome," Working Papers ECARES 2020-15, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    17. Christian Gormsen, 2011. "Antidumping with heterogeneous firms," Post-Print hal-00663024, HAL.
    18. Chia-Lin Chang & Michael McAleer & Dang-Khoa Nguyen, 2016. "US Antidumping Petitions and Revealed Comparative Advantage of Shrimp Exporting Countries," Documentos de Trabajo del ICAE 2016-17, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Empresariales, Instituto Complutense de Análisis Económico.
    19. Chung, Sunghoon & Lee, Joonhyung & Osang, Thomas, 2016. "Did China tire safeguard save U.S. workers?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 22-38.
    20. Evenett, Simon J., 2006. "The simple analytics of U.S. antidumping orders: Bureaucratic discretion, anti-importer bias, and the Byrd amendment," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 732-749, September.

    More about this item

    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:bpj:glecon:v:11:y:2011:i:2:n:2. 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: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.degruyter.com .

    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.