IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/reveco/v96y2024ipcs105905602400697x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cost asymmetry, commodity taxes and antidumping policies

Author

Listed:
  • Wang, Kuang-Cheng Andy
  • Chou, Ping-Yao
  • Liang, Wen-Jung

Abstract

We examine how the presence of a commodity tax affects the superiority of an antidumping duty and a price undertaking policy under cost asymmetry between the foreign and domestic firms. We obtain several interesting results as follows. First, the domestic welfare under a price undertaking is higher than that under an antidumping duty, if the domestic firm is more efficient than the foreign firm and the normal value is large. Second, the presence of a commodity tax usually leads the domestic government to be more likely to choose an antidumping duty. Third, the presence of a commodity tax leads the foreign firm to prefer a price undertaking to an antidumping duty. The first two results show that the domestic firm's lower efficiency and the commodity tax can explain why the cases involving adopting a price undertaking are far fewer than those concerned with an antidumping duty in the real world.

Suggested Citation

  • Wang, Kuang-Cheng Andy & Chou, Ping-Yao & Liang, Wen-Jung, 2024. "Cost asymmetry, commodity taxes and antidumping policies," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 96(PC).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:reveco:v:96:y:2024:i:pc:s105905602400697x
    DOI: 10.1016/j.iref.2024.103705
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S105905602400697X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.iref.2024.103705?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. Anderson, Simon P. & de Palma, Andre & Kreider, Brent, 2001. "The efficiency of indirect taxes under imperfect competition," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 81(2), pages 231-251, August.
    2. Veugelers, Reinhilde & Vandenbussche, Hylke, 1999. "European anti-dumping policy and the profitability of national and international collusion," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 1-28, January.
    3. Wilfried Pauwels & Hylke Vandenbussche & Marcel Weverbergh, 2001. "Strategic Behaviour under European Antidumping Duties," International Journal of the Economics of Business, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(1), pages 75-99.
    4. Xiwang Gao & Kaz Miyagiwa, 2005. "Antidumping protection and R&D competition," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(1), pages 211-227, February.
    5. Wu, Shih-Jye & Chang, Yang-Ming & Chen, Hung-Yi, 2014. "Antidumping duties and price undertakings: A welfare analysis," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 29(C), pages 97-107.
    6. 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.
    7. Dinlersoz, Emin & Dogan, Can, 2010. "Tariffs versus anti-dumping duties," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 436-451, June.
    8. Kuang-Cheng Andy Wang & Ping-Yao Chou & Wen-Jung Liang, 2018. "Specific versus ad valorem taxes in the presence of cost and quality differences," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 25(5), pages 1197-1214, October.
    9. Vandenbussche, Hylke & Wauthy, Xavier, 2001. "Inflicting injury through product quality: how European antidumping policy disadvantages European producers," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 17(1), pages 101-116, March.
    10. Jan Haaland & Ian Wooton, 1998. "Antidumping jumping: Reciprocal antidumping and industrial location," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 134(2), pages 340-362, June.
    11. Kuang-Cheng Andy Wang & Ping-Yao Chou & Wen-Jung Liang, 2022. "Commodity taxes and rent extraction," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 135(3), pages 285-297, April.
    12. Miyagiwa, Kaz & Ohno, Yuka, 2007. "Dumping as a signal of innovation," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(1), pages 221-240, March.
    13. Belderbos, R. & Vandenbussche, H. & Veugelers, R., 2004. "Antidumping duties, undertakings, and foreign direct investment in the EU," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 429-453, April.
    14. 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.
    15. Xiwang Gao & Kaz Miyagiwa, 2005. "Antidumping protection and R&D competition," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 38(1), pages 211-227, February.
    16. Falvey, Rod & Wittayarungruangsri, Sarut, 2006. "Market size and antidumping in duopolistic competition," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 771-786, September.
    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. 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.
    2. Wu, Shih-Jye & Chang, Yang-Ming & Chen, Hung-Yi, 2014. "Antidumping duties and price undertakings: A welfare analysis," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 29(C), pages 97-107.
    3. Kao, Kuo-Feng & Peng, Cheng-Hau, 2016. "Anti-dumping protection, price undertaking and product innovation," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 53-64.
    4. Chang, Yang-Ming & Raza, Mian F., 2023. "Dumping, antidumping duties, and price undertakings," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(1), pages 131-151.
    5. Cassagnard Patrice & Thiam Mamadou, 2024. "How does consumer quality misperception change European Union antidumping actions?," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 160(4), pages 1247-1275, November.
    6. Mukunoki, Hiroshi, 2021. "Trade liberalization and incentives to implement antidumping protection," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 422-437.
    7. MIYAGIWA, Kaz & SONG, Huasheng & VANDENBUSSCHE, Hylke, 2010. "Innovation, antidumping and retaliation," LIDAM Discussion Papers CORE 2010064, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    8. Patrice Bougette and Christophe Charlier, 2018. "Antidumping and Feed-In Tariffs as Good Buddies? Modeling the EU-China Solar Panel Dispute," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 6).
    9. Falvey, Rod & Wittayarungruangsri, Sarut, 2006. "Market size and antidumping in duopolistic competition," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 771-786, September.
    10. David R. Collie & Vo Phuong Mai Le, 2010. "Antidumping Regulations: Anti‐Competitive and Anti‐Export," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(5), pages 796-806, November.
    11. Kaz Miyagiwa & Huasheng Song & Hylke Vandenbussche, 2016. "Accounting for Stylised Facts about Recent Anti-dumping: Retaliation and Innovation," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(2), pages 221-235, February.
    12. Bruce A. Blonigen & Thomas J. Prusa, 2001. "Antidumping," NBER Working Papers 8398, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Cheng‐Hau Peng & Hong Hwang & Kuo‐Feng Kao, 2023. "Is price undertaking a more friendly protection policy than an anti‐dumping duty?," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(1), pages 120-134, January.
    14. Arastou Khatibi & Wouter Vergote, 2018. "Antidumping as a signaling device under the WTO’s ADA non-disclosure clause," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 154(4), pages 649-673, November.
    15. Miyagiwa, Kaz & Ohno, Yuka, 2007. "Dumping as a signal of innovation," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(1), pages 221-240, March.
    16. Mukunoki, Hiroshi, 2016. "Preferential trade agreements and antidumping actions against members and nonmembers," IDE Discussion Papers 611, Institute of Developing Economies, Japan External Trade Organization(JETRO).
    17. Hiroshi MUKUNOKI, 2017. "Does Trade Liberalization Promote Antidumping Protection? A theoretical analysis," Discussion papers 17031, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    18. Crowley Meredith A., 2010. "Split Decisions in Antidumping Cases," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 10(1), pages 1-26, July.
    19. Li, Wanli & Li, Yue & Jacoby, Gady & Wu, Zhenyu, 2022. "Antidumping, firm performance, and subsequent responses," Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    20. Yasukazu Ichino, 2013. "Antidumping Petition, Foreign Direct Investment, and Strategic Exports," Research in World Economy, Research in World Economy, Sciedu Press, vol. 4(1), pages 22-34, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Price undertaking; Antidumping duty; Commodity taxes; Cost differential;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • H20 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - General
    • F13 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade Policy; International Trade Organizations

    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:eee:reveco:v:96:y:2024:i:pc:s105905602400697x. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/620165 .

    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.