反倾销税的经济效应:保护主义措施还是贸易救济?

Nakgyoon Choi
{"title":"反倾销税的经济效应:保护主义措施还是贸易救济?","authors":"Nakgyoon Choi","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2916049","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper studied the effects of anti-dumping measures on the imports to investigate whether the trade restriction effect of an anti-dumping duty is dominant in the US, the EU, China, and India from 1996 to 2015. Our results indicate that a 1% increase in the anti-dumping duties decreases the import of the targeted product by about 0.43~0.51%. The actual statistics, however, show that the total import of the targeted products increased by about 30 percent while an anti-dumping duty was in force. That indicates that an anti-dumping duty is just a temporary import relief. This paper also investigated whether an anti-dumping duty is terminated in the case that the injury would not be likely to continue or recur if the duty were removed. The increase in market share, MFN tariff rate, and dumping margin turns out to decrease the hazard of termination of an anti-dumping duty, but the increase in value added increases the hazard of termination. Generally speaking, this result indicates that the WTO member countries have regulated the overuse of an anti-dumping measure. It also implies that anti-dumping duties have been used as a tool for trade remedy. The findings of this paper show that there is a country- and industry-wise heterogeneous characteristic in the effect as well as termination of an anti-dumping duty. To conclude, an anti-dumping duty is not necessarily a protectionist measure if it is effectively controlled by the WTO rules. In this sense, the WTO member countries need to introduce a more transparent mechanism and due process.","PeriodicalId":341686,"journal":{"name":"Korea Institute for International Economic Policy (KIEP) Research Paper Series","volume":"33 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Economic Effects of Anti-Dumping Duties: Protectionist Measures or Trade Remedies?\",\"authors\":\"Nakgyoon Choi\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.2916049\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper studied the effects of anti-dumping measures on the imports to investigate whether the trade restriction effect of an anti-dumping duty is dominant in the US, the EU, China, and India from 1996 to 2015. Our results indicate that a 1% increase in the anti-dumping duties decreases the import of the targeted product by about 0.43~0.51%. The actual statistics, however, show that the total import of the targeted products increased by about 30 percent while an anti-dumping duty was in force. That indicates that an anti-dumping duty is just a temporary import relief. This paper also investigated whether an anti-dumping duty is terminated in the case that the injury would not be likely to continue or recur if the duty were removed. The increase in market share, MFN tariff rate, and dumping margin turns out to decrease the hazard of termination of an anti-dumping duty, but the increase in value added increases the hazard of termination. Generally speaking, this result indicates that the WTO member countries have regulated the overuse of an anti-dumping measure. It also implies that anti-dumping duties have been used as a tool for trade remedy. The findings of this paper show that there is a country- and industry-wise heterogeneous characteristic in the effect as well as termination of an anti-dumping duty. To conclude, an anti-dumping duty is not necessarily a protectionist measure if it is effectively controlled by the WTO rules. In this sense, the WTO member countries need to introduce a more transparent mechanism and due process.\",\"PeriodicalId\":341686,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Korea Institute for International Economic Policy (KIEP) Research Paper Series\",\"volume\":\"33 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-12-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Korea Institute for International Economic Policy (KIEP) Research Paper Series\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2916049\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Korea Institute for International Economic Policy (KIEP) Research Paper Series","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2916049","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

本文通过研究反倾销措施对进口产品的影响,考察1996 - 2015年美国、欧盟、中国和印度的反倾销税的贸易限制效应是否占主导地位。研究结果表明,反倾销税每提高1%,目标产品的进口将减少约0.43~0.51%。然而,实际统计数据显示,在征收反倾销税期间,目标产品的进口总额增长了约30%。这表明,反倾销税只是暂时的进口救济。本文还研究了在取消反倾销税后损害不可能继续或再次发生的情况下,反倾销税是否终止。市场份额、最惠国税率和倾销幅度的增加降低了反倾销税被终止的风险,而增加值的增加增加了反倾销税被终止的风险。总的来说,这一结果表明WTO成员国对反倾销措施的过度使用进行了规范。这也意味着反倾销税已被用作贸易救济的工具。本文的研究结果表明,反倾销税的效果和终止存在国家和行业的异质性特征。综上所述,如果反倾销税受到世贸组织规则的有效控制,就不一定是一种保护主义措施。从这个意义上说,世贸组织成员国需要引入更透明的机制和正当程序。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Economic Effects of Anti-Dumping Duties: Protectionist Measures or Trade Remedies?
This paper studied the effects of anti-dumping measures on the imports to investigate whether the trade restriction effect of an anti-dumping duty is dominant in the US, the EU, China, and India from 1996 to 2015. Our results indicate that a 1% increase in the anti-dumping duties decreases the import of the targeted product by about 0.43~0.51%. The actual statistics, however, show that the total import of the targeted products increased by about 30 percent while an anti-dumping duty was in force. That indicates that an anti-dumping duty is just a temporary import relief. This paper also investigated whether an anti-dumping duty is terminated in the case that the injury would not be likely to continue or recur if the duty were removed. The increase in market share, MFN tariff rate, and dumping margin turns out to decrease the hazard of termination of an anti-dumping duty, but the increase in value added increases the hazard of termination. Generally speaking, this result indicates that the WTO member countries have regulated the overuse of an anti-dumping measure. It also implies that anti-dumping duties have been used as a tool for trade remedy. The findings of this paper show that there is a country- and industry-wise heterogeneous characteristic in the effect as well as termination of an anti-dumping duty. To conclude, an anti-dumping duty is not necessarily a protectionist measure if it is effectively controlled by the WTO rules. In this sense, the WTO member countries need to introduce a more transparent mechanism and due process.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信