200 likes | 436 Views
ANTI-DUMPING: A NEW SOLUTION. Presented by: Catalina Guáqueta Farida Kerouani Adrian Senyszyn. Anti-Dumping. Explanation Proposal Broader Implications Futures Challenges Bibliography. Article VI of GATT 1994 :
E N D
ANTI-DUMPING: A NEW SOLUTION Presented by: Catalina GuáquetaFarida KerouaniAdrian Senyszyn
Anti-Dumping • Explanation • Proposal • Broader Implications • Futures Challenges • Bibliography
Article VI of GATT 1994: A product is said to be dumped when its export price is less than its normal value, that is less than the sale of a like product in the domestic market in the exporting country. What is Anti-Dumping?
Anti-Dumping Litigation • World Trade Organization • Countries are responsible for bringing a case to the WTO Dispute Resolution System. • U.S. Court of International Trade • Commerce Department determines if anti-dumping occurred. • International Trade Commission (ITC) determines if material injury occurs.
Anti-Dumping Globally • Anti-dumping measures taken by WTO members have increased from 129 in 1994 to 236 in 2000; 83%. • Dec. 2000 - 1119 anti-dumping measures in place globally. • New users: Argentina, India, Brazil, South Africa. • Traditional users: Canada, U.S., European Union, Australia, Mexico. • Most affected industries: Metal, Chemical, plastic, textiles, machinery and equipment, agriculture and food.
Most Affected Sectors Source: WTO Secretariat, Rules Division Anti-dumping Database
Statistics (January - June 2002) • 30% less investigations for this period in comparison with last year at the same period of time. • 37 cases initiated by developed countries and 63 by developing countries. • So far we have the similar trend for steel and chemical sectors. • Out of 22 AD initiations in the US 16 involved metal products.
U.S. As Complainant • 1 of 59 complaints made by the U.S. were related to anti-dumping. • Case: Mexico – Anti-Dumping Duties on High Fructose Corn Syrup • U.S. prevailed in litigation.
U.S. As Respondent • 7 of 69 cases that have been brought against the U.S. are related to anti-dumping. • Case lost: Anti-dumping – Steel plate from India. • 6 of 8 cases in consultations are Anti-dumping related.
Pros Prevents Monopolies Protects Vulnerable Industries Allows Firms Time to Compete Preserves Jobs Cons Against Free Trade Concept Trade Barrier – Lowers Economic Growth Distorts the Market Protects Firms from Competition Hurts Consumers Impact of Anti-Dumping Laws
Proposal • Reform Anti-dumping procedure in the U.S. • Negotiate minor changes to the WTO Anti-dumping Agreement.
Reform the U.S. Anti-Dumping Law • Department of Commerce must review the concept of anti-dumping. • Review the methodology of anti-dumping. • ITC must define material injury and be a more partial judge. • Material injury is broad and subject to interpretation. • Congress must ensure that the ITC is cognizant of WTO negotiated agreements.
Changes to WTO Agreement • Penalize WTO members for abuse of anti-dumping law. • Amend article 9, Imposition and Collection of Anti-Dumping Duties • Negotiate the industry specific, incremental decrease of anti-dumping laws globally. • Revise article 11, Duration and Review of Anti-Dumping and Price Undertakings. • Tie in to a compromise on IPR agreements, or other U.S. interests.
In Favor Consumers Exporters WB/IMF Economists Regional Agreements (NAFTA) Against US currently protected industries US Labor Unions (AFL/CIO) Countries who want to protect their domestic market Stakeholders
Benefits for the U.S. • Reduce the number of cases brought against the U.S. • U.S. wins as a Complainant, and loses as a Respondent. • Better defense in anti-dumping cases. • U.S. law closer to WTO agreements. • Hold other nations accountable.
Broader Implications • Increase competition, which will increase productivity and efficiency. • Greater economic prosperity for all WTO members. • Lower prices for consumers. • Higher national income.
Future Challenges • Negotiating a change to WTO anti-dumping agreements. • Altering the Dispute Settlement System to award damages. • Convincing the American public that reform is critical for continuing U.S. success.
Bibliography • 1 Harvard International Review. National Sovereignty in the World Trading System. Winter 2001. • The Economist.Our Law, Your Law. June 27, 2002 • Association for Consumer Research. Global Trade Policy: Agenda for Change. September/October • 2001. • 4 President George W. Bush. Remarks by The President at Signing of the Trade Act of 2002. August 6, • 2002. • Chemical Week. Trade Barriers Start to Fall Following WTO Entry. September 4, 2002. • 6 Director General Supachai Panitchpakdi. Trade and Sustainable Development: The Doha Development • Agenda. Johannesburg, South Africa. September 3, 2002. • The Financial Times. Playground Rules that Promote Protectionism. September 3, 2002. • The Economist. The Dumping Dilemma. May 30, 2002. • http://www.fin.gc.ca/activty/pubs/antidmp01_e.html • WTO Secretariat, Rules Division Anti-dumping Database • Dump our Anti-Dumping Law, Michael S. Knoll, Foreign Policy Briefing No. 11 July 25, 1991 • Anti-dumping Law is discriminatory, Brink Lindsey, CTPS Articles • WTO: Trading to the Future • 14. http://www.ustr.gov/enforcement/snapshot.html