Measuring Industry Specific Protection: Antidumping in the United States
This paper provides estimates of the trade impacts of U.S. antidumping law and the determinants of suit filing activity from 1980-1985. We study three possible channels through which the threat or mere possibility of antidumping duties can restrict trade which we believe, when combined with the direct effects of duties, capture most of the trade effects of antidumping law. We refer to these three non-duty effects as the investigation effect, the suspension effect, and the withdrawal effect. Investigation effects occur when an antidumping investigation takes place; suspension effects occur under so-called "suspension agreements", and withdrawal effects occur after a petition is simply withdrawn without a final determination. We find substantial trade restrictions associated with the first two effects, but not with the third. Finally, we find evidence suggesting that some firms initiate antidumping procedures for the trade restricting investigation effects alone.
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.:
- Robert W. Staiger & Frank A. Wolak, 1990.
"The Effect of Domestic Antidumping Law in the Presence of Foreign Monopoly,"
NBER Working Papers
3254, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Staiger, Robert W. & Wolak, Frank A., 1992. "The effect of domestic antidumping law in the presence of foreign monopoly," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(3-4), pages 265-287, May.
- Anderson, James E, 1992. "Domino Dumping, I: Competitive Exporters," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 82(1), pages 65-83, March.
- Harrison, Ann, 1991. "The new trade protection : price effects of antidumping and countervailing measures in the United States," Policy Research Working Paper Series 808, The World Bank.
- Salvatore, Dominick, 1987. "Import penetration, exchange rates, and protectionism in the United States," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 9(1), pages 125-141.
- J. M. Finger, 1981. "The Industry-Country Incidence of "Less than Fair Value" Cases in US Import Trade," NBER Chapters, in: Export Diversification and the New Protectionism: The Experience of Latin America, pages 260-279 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- John M. Abowd, 1990. "The NBER Immigration, Trade, and Labor Markets Data Files," NBER Working Papers 3351, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Patrick A. Messerlin, 1990. "Anti-Dumping Regulations or Pro-Cartel Law? The EC Chemical Cases," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(4), pages 465-492, December.
- Prusa, Thomas J., 1992. "Why are so many antidumping petitions withdrawn?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(1-2), pages 1-20, August.
- Thomas J. Prusa, 1991. "The Selection of Antidumping Cases for ITC Determination," NBER Chapters, in: Empirical Studies of Commercial Policy, pages 47-74 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Hartigan, James C & Kamma, Sreenivas & Perry, Philip R, 1989. "The Injury Determination Category and the Value of Relief from Dumping," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 71(1), pages 183-86, February.
- Robert W. Staiger & Frank A. Wolak, 1989. "Strategic Use of Antidumping Law to Enforce Tacit International Collusion," NBER Working Papers 3016, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wpa:wuwpit:9410004. 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: (EconWPA)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.