[go: up one dir, main page]
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. 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.
    4. Thomas J. Prusa, 2021. "Why are so many antidumping petitions withdrawn?," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Thomas J Prusa (ed.), Economic Effects of Antidumping, chapter 2, pages 1-20, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    5. 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.
    6. Tibor Besedeš & Thomas J. Prusa, 2006. "Ins, outs, and the duration of trade," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, 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 Group, vol. 59(2), pages 306-336, June.
    8. Lu, Yi & Tao, Zhigang & Zhang, Yan, 2013. "How do exporters respond to antidumping investigations?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(2), pages 290-300.
    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/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 43(1), pages 127-151, February.
    11. Bown, Chad P. & Crowley, Meredith A., 2007. "Trade deflection and trade depression," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(1), pages 176-201, May.
    12. Patrick Messerlin, 2001. "Measuring the costs of protection in Europe : European commercial policy in the 2000s," Post-Print hal-03394451, HAL.
    13. Jozef Konings & Hylke Vandenbussche & Linda Springael, 2001. "Import Diversion under European Antidumping Policy," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 1(3), pages 283-299, September.
    14. Vandenbussche, Hylke & Zanardi, Maurizio, 2010. "The chilling trade effects of antidumping proliferation," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 54(6), pages 760-777, August.
    15. 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.
    16. Robert W. Staiger & Frank A. Wolak, 1994. "Measuring Industry-Specific Protection: Antidumping in the United States," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 25(1994 Micr), pages 51-118.
    17. Colin A. Carter & Caroline Gunning‐Trant, 2010. "U.S. trade remedy law and agriculture: trade diversion and investigation effects," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 43(1), pages 97-126, February.
    18. Mélise Jaud & Madina Kukenova & Martin Strieborny, 2009. "Financial dependence and intensive margin of trade," PSE Working Papers halshs-00575005, HAL.
    19. 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.
    20. Peter K. Schott, 2004. "Across-Product Versus Within-Product Specialization in International Trade," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 119(2), pages 647-678.
    21. Thomas J. Prusa, 2021. "On the spread and impact of anti-dumping," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Thomas J Prusa (ed.), Economic Effects of Antidumping, chapter 4, pages 45-65, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    22. Corinne M. Krupp & Patricia S. Pollard, 1996. "Market Responses to Antidumping Laws: Some Evidence from the U.S. Chemical Industry," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 29(1), pages 199-227, February.
    23. Patrick A. Messerlin, 2001. "Measuring the Costs of Protection in Europe: European Commercial Policy in the 2000s," Peterson Institute Press: All Books, Peterson Institute for International Economics, number 102, April.
    24. Marc J. Melitz, 2003. "The Impact of Trade on Intra-Industry Reallocations and Aggregate Industry Productivity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 71(6), pages 1695-1725, November.
    25. 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.
    26. Bruce A. Blonigen & Thomas J. Prusa, 2001. "Antidumping," NBER Working Papers 8398, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    27. 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. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. Felbermayr, Gabriel & Sandkamp, Alexander, 2020. "The trade effects of anti-dumping duties: Firm-level evidence from China," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 122(C).
    4. Sandkamp, Alexander, 2020. "The trade effects of antidumping duties: Evidence from the 2004 EU enlargement," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 123(C).
    5. Thomas Osang & Jaden Warren, 2019. "Retaliatory Antidumping by China: A New Look at the Evidence," Eastern Economic Journal, Palgrave Macmillan;Eastern Economic Association, vol. 45(2), pages 161-178, April.
    6. 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.
    7. Aquilante, Tommaso, 2015. "Bureaucrats or Politicians? Political Parties and Antidumping in the US," MPRA Paper 70359, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Tibor Besedeš & Thomas J. Prusa, 2017. "The Hazardous Effects Of Antidumping," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 55(1), pages 9-30, January.
    2. Bruno Mazzucco & Mauricio Bittencourt, 2022. "Does antidumping drive exporters out of the market? Some evidence from Brazil," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(12), pages 3833-3857, December.
    3. Lu, Yi & Tao, Zhigang & Zhang, Yan, 2013. "How do exporters respond to antidumping investigations?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(2), pages 290-300.
    4. Felbermayr, Gabriel & Sandkamp, Alexander, 2020. "The trade effects of anti-dumping duties: Firm-level evidence from China," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 122(C).
    5. Sandkamp, Alexander, 2020. "The trade effects of antidumping duties: Evidence from the 2004 EU enlargement," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 123(C).
    6. Meng, Ning & Milner, Chris & Song, Huasheng, 2020. "Antidumping and heterogeneous quality adjustment of multi-product firms: Evidence from Chinese exporters," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 147-161.
    7. Laura Rovegno, 2013. "Trade protection and market power: evidence from US antidumping and countervailing duties," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 149(3), pages 443-476, September.
    8. Yan Zhang, 2017. "Impact of Latin-American and Caribbean Antidumping Measures on Chinese Exports," IDB Publications (Working Papers) 97857, Inter-American Development Bank.
    9. Chad P. Bown & Paola Conconi & Aksel Erbahar & Lorenzo Trimarchi, 2020. "Trade Protection along Supply Chains," CESifo Working Paper Series 8812, CESifo.
    10. Kokko, Ari & Gustavsson Tingvall, Patrik & Videnord, Josefin, 2017. "Which Antidumping Cases Reach the WTO?," Ratio Working Papers 286, The Ratio Institute.
    11. Jabbour, Liza & Tao, Zhigang & Vanino, Enrico & Zhang, Yan, 2019. "The good, the bad and the ugly: Chinese imports, European Union anti-dumping measures and firm performance," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 1-20.
    12. Avsar Veysel, 2017. "The Anatomy of Trade Deflection," Global Economy Journal, De Gruyter, vol. 17(4), pages 1-11, December.
    13. Dmitri Nizovtsev & Alexandre Skiba, 2016. "Import Demand Elasticity and Exporter Response to Anti-Dumping Duties," The International Trade Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(2), pages 83-114, March.
    14. Metiu, Norbert, 2021. "Anticipation effects of protectionist U.S. trade policies," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    15. Laura ROVEGNO, 2013. "Endogenous trade restrictions and exporters’ pricing," LIDAM Discussion Papers IRES 2013023, Université catholique de Louvain, Institut de Recherches Economiques et Sociales (IRES).
    16. Gnutzmann-Mkrtchyan, Arevik & Hoffstadt, Martin, 2020. "Use and Abuse of Antidumping by Global Cartels," Hannover Economic Papers (HEP) dp-677, Leibniz Universität Hannover, Wirtschaftswissenschaftliche Fakultät.
    17. Vandenbussche, Hylke & Zanardi, Maurizio, 2010. "The chilling trade effects of antidumping proliferation," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 54(6), pages 760-777, August.
    18. Besedes, Tibor, 2011. "Export differentiation in transition economies," Economic Systems, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 25-44, March.
    19. Magdalene Silberberger & Anja Slany & Christian Soegaard & Frederik Stender, 2022. "The Aftermath of Anti-Dumping: Are Temporary Trade Barriers Really Temporary?," Open Economies Review, Springer, vol. 33(4), pages 677-704, September.
    20. Alexander Sandkamp & Erdal Yalcin, 2021. "Different antidumping legislations within the WTO: What can we learn from China's varying market economy status?," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(5), pages 1121-1147, November.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

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

    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.

    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 bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.html .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.