IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/19555.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Antidumping and the Death of Trade

Author

Listed:
  • Tibor Besedeš
  • Thomas J. Prusa

Abstract

We investigate the extent to which antidumping actions eliminate trade altogether. Using quarterly export data for products involved in U.S. antidumping cases we find that antidumping actions increase the hazard rate by more than fifty percent. We find strong evidence of investigation effects with the impact during the initiation and preliminary duty phases considerably larger than during the final duty phase. There are also important differences with respect to the size of duties. Cases with higher duties face a much higher hazard in the preliminary phase but there is little additional effect when the final duty is actually levied. By contrast, cases with lower duties have a smaller but more persistent effect on the hazard, which proves to be highly detrimental in the long run as many trade relationship cease during the duration of the order. Given the literature on heterogeneous firms and trade, our results imply antidumping protection imposes greater costs than previously recognized.

Suggested Citation

  • Tibor Besedeš & Thomas J. Prusa, 2013. "Antidumping and the Death of Trade," NBER Working Papers 19555, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:19555
    Note: ITI
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w19555.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sueyoshi, Glenn T, 1995. "A Class of Binary Response Models for Grouped Duration Data," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 10(4), pages 411-431, Oct.-Dec..
    2. Besedes, Tibor & Prusa, Thomas J., 2006. "Product differentiation and duration of US import trade," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(2), pages 339-358, December.
    3. Bruce A. Blonigen, 2006. "Evolving discretionary practices of U.S. antidumping activity," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 39(3), pages 874-900, August.
    4. Wolfgang Hess & Maria Persson, 2011. "Exploring the duration of EU imports," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 147(4), pages 665-692, November.
    5. Vandenbussche, Hylke & Zanardi, Maurizio, 2010. "The chilling trade effects of antidumping proliferation," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 54(6), pages 760-777, August.
    6. Tibor Besedes & Thomas Prusa, 2006. "Ins, outs, and the duration of trade," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 39(1), pages 266-295, February.
    7. Tibor Besedeš, 2013. "The Role of NAFTA and Returns to Scale in Export Duration," CESifo Economic Studies, CESifo, vol. 59(2), pages 306-336, June.
    8. Thomas J. Prusa, 2001. "On the spread and impact of anti-dumping," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 34(3), pages 591-611, August.
    9. Peter Egger & Douglas Nelson, 2011. "How Bad Is Antidumping? Evidence from Panel Data," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 93(4), pages 1374-1390, November.
    10. Kathy Baylis & Jeffrey M. Perloff, 2010. "Trade diversion from tomato suspension agreements," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 43(1), pages 127-151, February.
    11. Volker Nitsch, 2009. "Die another day: duration in German import trade," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 145(1), pages 133-154, April.
    12. Bown, Chad P. & Crowley, Meredith A., 2007. "Trade deflection and trade depression," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(1), pages 176-201, May.
    13. Prusa, Thomas J., 1992. "Why are so many antidumping petitions withdrawn?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(1-2), pages 1-20, August.
    14. Pierce, Justin R., 2011. "Plant-level responses to antidumping duties: Evidence from U.S. manufacturers," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(2), pages 222-233.
    15. Bruce A. Blonigen & Thomas J. Prusa, 2001. "Antidumping," NBER Working Papers 8398, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Mélise Jaud & Madina Kukenova & Martin Strieborny, 2009. "Financial dependence and intensive margin of trade," PSE Working Papers halshs-00575005, HAL.
    17. Colin A. Carter & Caroline Gunning-Trant, 2010. "U.S. trade remedy law and agriculture: trade diversion and investigation effects," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 43(1), pages 97-126, February.
    18. Michael O. Moore, 2006. "An Econometric Analysis of U.S. Antidumping Sunset Review Decisions," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 142(1), pages 122-150, April.
    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. Alexander-Nikolai Sandkamp, 2018. "The Trade Effects of Antidumping Duties: Evidence from the 2004 EU Enlargement," ifo Working Paper Series 261, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich.
    2. Chia-Lin Chang & Michael McAleer & Dang-Khoa Nguyen, 2016. "US Antidumping Petitions and Revealed Comparative Advantage of Shrimp Exporting Countries," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 16-083/III, Tinbergen Institute.
    3. repec:bla:reviec:v:25:y:2017:i:1:p:148-164 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Besedes, Tibor, 2014. "The Effects of European Integration on the Stability of International Trade: A Duration Perspective," MPRA Paper 59626, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Tibor Besedeš & Matthew T. Cole, 2017. "Distorted Trade Barriers: A Dissection of Trade Costs in a “Distorted Gravity” Model," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(1), pages 148-164, February.
    6. Aquilante, Tommaso, 2015. "Bureaucrats or Politicians? Political Parties and Antidumping in the US," MPRA Paper 70359, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • F13 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade Policy; International Trade Organizations
    • F14 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Empirical Studies of Trade

    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:nbr:nberwo:19555. 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: (). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.html .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.