IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Sanctuary Markets and Antidumping: An Empirical Analysis of U.S. Exporters

  • Michael O. Moore

    ()

    (Institute for International Economic Policy, George Washington University)

Registered author(s):

    Antidumping proponents in the U.S. often argue that foreign firms use profits obtained behind home market barriers to "subsidize" "unfair" pricing abroad. This paper examines this "sanctuary market" hypothesis for antidumping petitions against U.S. manufacturing exporters. Econometric results suggest that there is little evidence that U.S. manufacturing firms facing antidumping actions abroad are beneficiaries of a home market sanctuary during the 1994-2007 time period. Instead, U.S. firms in capital- intensive sectors that are successful exporters are more likely to face antidumping petitions abroad. This evidence suggests that current antidumping rules need reform so that firms not benefitting from sanctuary markers may avoid antidumping actions.

    If 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.

    File URL: http://www.gwu.edu/~iiep/assets/docs/papers/MooreIIEP2013-03.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Paper provided by The George Washington University, Institute for International Economic Policy in its series Working Papers with number 2013-3.

    as
    in new window

    Length: 42 pages
    Date of creation: Mar 2013
    Date of revision:
    Handle: RePEc:gwi:wpaper:2013-3
    Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.gwu.edu/~iiep/
    Email:


    More information through EDIRC

    References listed on IDEAS
    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.:

    as in new window
    1. Michael M. Knetter & Thomas J. Prusa, 2000. "Macroeconomic Factors and Antidumping Filings: Evidence from Four Countries," NBER Working Papers 8010, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Robert M. Feinberg, 2005. "U.S. Antidumping Enforcement and Macroeconomic Indicators Revisited: Do Petitioners Learn?," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer, vol. 141(4), pages 612-622, December.
    3. Feinberg, Robert M, 1989. "Exchange Rates and "Unfair Trade."," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 71(4), pages 704-07, November.
    4. Bown, Chad P. & Crowley, Meredith A., 2007. "Trade deflection and trade depression," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(1), pages 176-201, May.
    5. Thomas J. Prusa, 1999. "On the Spread and Impact of Antidumping," NBER Working Papers 7404, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Robert M. Feinberg & Kara M. Reynolds, 2008. "Friendly Fire? The Impact of US Antidumping Enforcement on US Exporters," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer, vol. 144(2), pages 366-378, July.
    7. Maurizio Zanardi, 2002. "Antidumping: What are the Numbers?," Working Papers 2002_15, Business School - Economics, University of Glasgow.
    8. Michael Moore & Maurizio Zanardi, 2011. "Trade Liberalization and Antidumping: Is There a Substitution Effect?," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/136352, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    9. Robert M. Feinberg & Kara M. Olson, 2005. "Tariff Liberalization and Increased Administrative Protection: Is There a Quid Pro Quo?," International Trade 0501001, EconWPA.
    10. Michael Owen Moore & Maurizio Zanardi, 2008. "Does Antidumping Use Contribute to Trade Liberalization in Developing Countries," Working Papers 2008-01, The George Washington University, Institute for International Economic Policy.
    11. Bruce A. Blonigen & Chad P. Bown, 2001. "Antidumping and Retaliation Threats," NBER Working Papers 8576, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gwi:wpaper:2013-3. See general 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: (Kyle Renner)

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.