IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/han/dpaper/dp-665.html

Expired measures, excess duty drawbacks and causation: The Appellate Body report in EU - PET (Pakistan)

Author

Listed:
  • Gnutzmann-Mkrtchyan, Arevik
  • Van Damme, Isabelle

Abstract

The Appellate Body report in EU – PET (Pakistan) raises distinct questions relating to the need for findings in relation to expired measures, the conditions under which duty drawback schemes may constitute subsidies and the causation methodology to apply under the SCM Agreement. We conclude that the report offers no clear guidance on whether the function and design of WTO dispute settlement require or preclude findings in case of expired measures. We welcome the Appellate Body’s conclusion that, in case of duty drawback schemes, the financial contribution element of the subsidy is limited to the excess remission or drawback of import charges. Finally, although the Appellate Body rightly found that authorities are free to choose the methodology for causation analysis provided that the analysis is complete and objective, the methodology used by the investigating authority in this case show a number of deficiencies that were not recognized by the Appellate Body.

Suggested Citation

  • Gnutzmann-Mkrtchyan, Arevik & Van Damme, Isabelle, 2020. "Expired measures, excess duty drawbacks and causation: The Appellate Body report in EU - PET (Pakistan)," Hannover Economic Papers (HEP) dp-665, Leibniz Universität Hannover, Wirtschaftswissenschaftliche Fakultät.
    • Handle: RePEc:han:dpaper:dp-665
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://diskussionspapiere.wiwi.uni-hannover.de/pdf_bib/dp-665.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Elena Ianchovichina, 2007. "Are duty drawbacks on exports worth the hassle?," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(3), pages 881-913, August.
    2. Kara M. Reynolds & Chad P. Bown, 2014. "Trade Flows and Trade Disputes," Working Papers 2014-05, American University, Department of Economics.
    3. Crowley, Meredith A. & Palmeter, David, 2009. "Japan – Countervailing Duties on Dynamic Random Access Memories from Korea (DS 336 and Corr.1, adopted 17 December 2007)," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 8(1), pages 259-272, January.
    4. Horn, Henrik & Mavroidis, Petros C., 2003. "US – Lamb: United States – Safeguard Measures on Imports of Fresh, Chilled or Frozen Lamb Meat from New Zealand and Australia: What Should be Required of a Safeguard Investigation?," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 2(S1), pages 72-114, January.
    5. Grossman, Gene M. & Mavroidis, Petros C., 2005. "United States – Definitive Safeguard Measures on Imports of Circular Welded Carbon Quality Line Pipe From Korea Not for Attribution," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 4(S1), pages 99-132, January.
    6. Chad Bown & Kara Reynolds, 2015. "Trade flows and trade disputes," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 10(2), pages 145-177, June.
    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. Arevik Gnutzmann-Mkrtchyan & Isabelle Van Damme, 2019. "Expired measures, excess duty drawbacks and causation: The Appellate Body report in EU – PET (Pakistan)," RSCAS Working Papers 2019/81, European University Institute.
    2. 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.
    3. Chad Bown & Kara Reynolds, 2015. "Trade flows and trade disputes," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 10(2), pages 145-177, June.
    4. Bown, Chad & Crowley, Meredith A., 2016. "The Empirical Landscape of Trade Policy," CEPR Discussion Papers 11216, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    5. Serrano Caballero, Enriqueta & Ojo, Marianne, 2019. "Trade Negotiations and Global Relations: Emerging Players and Actors," MPRA Paper 92105, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Neha Bhardwaj Upadhayay, 2020. "Uncovering the proliferation of contingent protection through channels of retaliation, gender and development assistance," Erudite Ph.D Dissertations, Erudite, number ph20-02 edited by Julie Lochard & Catherine Bros, December.
    7. 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.
    8. 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.
    9. Beshkar, Mostafa & Chilton, Adam S., 2016. "Revisiting Procedure and Precedent in the WTO: An Analysis of US – Countervailing and Anti-Dumping Measures (China)," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 15(2), pages 375-395, April.
    10. Siwage Dharma Negara & Dionisius A. Narjoko & Kazunobu Hayakawa, 2024. "Impacts of Tariff Rates on Input Source Choice: Evidence from Indonesia," The Developing Economies, Institute of Developing Economies, vol. 62(1), pages 28-44, March.
    11. 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.
    12. 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.
    13. 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.
    14. Grossman, Gene M. & Horn, Henrik, 2012. "Why the WTO? An Introduction to the Economics of Trade Agreements," Working Paper Series 916, Research Institute of Industrial Economics.
    15. Iqra Yaseen & Mohammad Shafi Sofi, 2024. "Anatomy of trade disputes: mapping patterns and trends of WTO dispute initiations (1995–2023)," DECISION: Official Journal of the Indian Institute of Management Calcutta, Springer;Indian Institute of Management Calcutta, vol. 51(4), pages 503-516, December.
    16. Brandt, Loren & Li, Bingjing & Morrow, Peter M., 2021. "Processing trade and costs of incomplete liberalization: The case of China," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    17. 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.
    18. Fabrice Defever & Alejandro Riaño, 2012. "China's Pure Exporter Subsidies," CEP Discussion Papers dp1182, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    19. Michelle Connolly & Kei-Mu Yi, 2015. "How Much of South Korea's Growth Miracle Can Be Explained by Trade Policy?," American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 7(4), pages 188-221, October.
    20. Tatsuo Hatta, 2018. "Revenue-Constrained Combination of an Optimal Tariff and Duty Drawback," Frontiers of Economics in China-Selected Publications from Chinese Universities, Higher Education Press, vol. 13(1), pages 52-67, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • F13 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade Policy; International Trade Organizations
    • F53 - International Economics - - International Relations, National Security, and International Political Economy - - - International Agreements and Observance; International Organizations
    • K33 - Law and Economics - - Other Substantive Areas of Law - - - International Law

    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:han:dpaper:dp-665. 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: Heidrich, Christian (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fwhande.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.