1 / 9

AD investigations sorted by complaining country (continued)

AD investigations sorted by complaining country (continued). Source : Journal of World Trade, 32(5), 5-71,1998; Rowe & Mauw, Global Trade Protection Report 1999. Investigations - complainants vs. defendants. Reporting (complaining) countries. Affected countries .

pandora
Download Presentation

AD investigations sorted by complaining country (continued)

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. AD investigations sorted by complaining country (continued) Source : Journal of World Trade, 32(5), 5-71,1998; Rowe & Mauw, Global Trade Protection Report 1999.

  2. Investigations - complainants vs. defendants Reporting (complaining) countries Affected countries Source : Journal of World Trade, 32(5), 5-71,1998

  3. Investigations by sector Source : Journal of World Trade, 32(5), 5-71,1998

  4. According to the GATT antidumping code’s Article VI:1, dumping is said to have occurred if: “[…] if the export price of the product exported from one country to another a) is less than the comparable price, in the ordinary course of trade, for the like product when destined for consumption in the exporting country, or, b) in the absence of such a domestic price, is less than either 1. the highest comparable price for the like product for export to any third country in the ordinary course of trade, or 2. the cost of production of the product in the country of origin plus a reasonable addition for selling costs and profit.”

  5. COUNTRY 1 Firm A Firm B Firm C Firm D COUNTRY 2 COUNTRY 3 • Alternative (sufficient) definitions of dumping on country 2’s market: • price AC < price AB • price AC < price AD • price AC < average cost

  6. Dumping margin calculations: old method Exporter’s domestic market (Turkey) Exporter’s foreign market (EU) Prices Transaction 1 120 Transaction 2 95 Transaction 3 85 __________________ Normal value 100 Prices Dumping margins Transaction 1 120 n/a Transaction 2 95 5 Transaction 3 85 15 ______________________________ Average dumping margin10

  7. Dumping margin calculations: new method Exporter’s domestic market (Turkey) Exporter’s foreign market (EU) Normal values MFA cat . 2015 120 MFA cat . 2016 95 MFA cat . 2017 85 Average Dumping export margins prices MFA cat . 2015 100 20 MFA cat . 2016 100 n/a MFA cat . 2017 100 n/a

  8. Is the slope difference statistically significant? Assessing “causation” from employment data Employment data for the complaining firms lag Beginning of the alleged dumping

  9. Key messages • 1. Definitional/conceptual issues • The correct criteria for predatory dumping are • a) Ex ante: dominant position, no restraint on monopoly power • b) Ex post: loser’s exit and exploitation of monopoly power by the winner. • By these criteria, there is very little predatory dumping going on (notable exceptions: transatlantic airlines cartel, Japanese semi-conductors,…) • “Natural” (non-predatory) pricing strategies can be actionable under current anti-dumping rules: • a) pricing more aggressively where you have no brand recognition • b) pricing more aggressively where demand is more elastic.

More Related