IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/eecrev/v154y2023ics0014292123000636.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Robust trade policy to offset foreign market power

Author

Listed:
  • McCalman, Phillip

Abstract

While it is well known that trade policy can be used to counter foreign firm market power, it suffers from a lack of robustness over what form it should take. If the import demand function has a certain curvature then a tariff will improve importer welfare while an import subsidy will lower it. However, the opposite holds if the import demand function has a different shape. Picking the right option is made even more difficult as there is little hope of confidently identifying the curvature of import demand. This paper demonstrates that moving beyond the either/or dichotomy and using a combination of an ad valorem tariff and a specific import subsidy can completely offset a foreign firm’s market power. This policy is not subject to the information constraints that undermine the single instrument choice, making it more robust. Combining it with a simple fiscal neutrality constraint delivers an efficient outcome, which is also robust to; country size; whether the market power is in the hands of a foreign exporter (monopoly) or importer (monopsony); and, more generally, the nature of conduct when more than one foreign firm has market power (oligopoly/oligopsony).

Suggested Citation

  • McCalman, Phillip, 2023. "Robust trade policy to offset foreign market power," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:eecrev:v:154:y:2023:i:c:s0014292123000636
    DOI: 10.1016/j.euroecorev.2023.104434
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0014292123000636
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.euroecorev.2023.104434?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Peter Svedberg, 1979. "Optimal Tariff Policy on Imports from Multinationals," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 55(1), pages 64-67, March.
    2. Delipalla, Sofia & Keen, Michael, 1992. "The comparison between ad valorem and specific taxation under imperfect competition," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(3), pages 351-367, December.
    3. Charles Blackorby & Sushama Murty, 2013. "Unit Versus Ad Valorem Taxes: The Private Ownership of Monopoly in General Equilibrium," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 15(4), pages 547-579, August.
    4. Brander, James A. & Spencer, Barbara J., 1984. "Trade warfare: Tariffs and cartels," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(3-4), pages 227-242, May.
    5. Alan J. Auerbach & James R. Hines Jr., 2001. "Perfect Taxation with Imperfect Competition," NBER Working Papers 8138, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Katrak, Homi, 1977. "Multi-national Monopolies and Commercial Policy," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 29(2), pages 283-291, July.
    7. David Autor & David Dorn & Lawrence F Katz & Christina Patterson & John Van Reenen, 2020. "The Fall of the Labor Share and the Rise of Superstar Firms [“Automation and New Tasks: How Technology Displaces and Reinstates Labor”]," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 135(2), pages 645-709.
    8. Blackorby, Charles & Murty, Sushama, 2007. "Unit versus ad valorem taxes: Monopoly in general equilibrium," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(3-4), pages 817-822, April.
    9. Monika Mrázová & J. Peter Neary, 2017. "Not So Demanding: Demand Structure and Firm Behavior," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(12), pages 3835-3874, December.
    10. Alvin K Klevorick & Alan O Sykes, 2007. "United States Courts and the Optimal Deterrence of International Cartels: A Welfarist Perspective on Empagran," Levine's Bibliography 843644000000000307, UCLA Department of Economics.
    11. Kyle Bagwell & Robert W. Staiger, 2012. "Profit Shifting And Trade Agreements In Imperfectly Competitive Markets," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 53(4), pages 1067-1104, November.
    12. Alvin K. Klevorick & Alan O. Sykes, 2007. "United States Courts and the Optimal Deterrence of International Cartels: A Welfarist Perspective on Empagran," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 1617, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    13. repec:bla:ecorec:v:55:y:1979:i:148:p:64-67 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Keith Head & Barbara J. Spencer, 2017. "Oligopoly in international trade: Rise, fall and resurgence," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 50(5), pages 1414-1444, December.
    15. Maggi, Giovanni, 2014. "International Trade Agreements," Handbook of International Economics, in: Gopinath, G. & Helpman, . & Rogoff, K. (ed.), Handbook of International Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 0, pages 317-390, Elsevier.
    16. Blundell, Richard & Kristensen, Dennis & Matzkin, Rosa, 2014. "Bounding quantile demand functions using revealed preference inequalities," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 179(2), pages 112-127.
    17. Richard Blundell & Martin Browning & Ian Crawford, 2008. "Best Nonparametric Bounds on Demand Responses," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 76(6), pages 1227-1262, November.
    18. McCalman, Phillip, 2020. "International trade, product lines and welfare: The roles of firm and consumer heterogeneity," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    19. McCalman, Phillip, 2010. "Trade policy in a "super size me" world," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 81(2), pages 206-218, July.
    20. John Connor, 2001. "“Our Customers Are Our Enemies”: The Lysine Cartel of 1992–1995," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 18(1), pages 5-21, February.
    21. N. Gregory Mankiw & Michael D. Whinston, 1986. "Free Entry and Social Inefficiency," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 17(1), pages 48-58, Spring.
    22. Alvin K. Klevorick & Alan O. Sykes, 2007. "United States Courts And The Optimal Deterrence Of International Cartels: A Welfarist Perspective On Empagran," Journal of Competition Law and Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 3(3), pages 309-339.
    23. Eric W. Bond, 2013. "Trade policy and competition policy: conflict vs. mutual support," Chapters, in: Manfred Neumann & Jürgen Weigand (ed.), The International Handbook of Competition – Second Edition, chapter 4, pages 108-126, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    24. Andrew B. Bernard & J. Bradford Jensen & Peter K. Schott, 2009. "Importers, Exporters and Multinationals: A Portrait of Firms in the U.S. that Trade Goods," NBER Chapters, in: Producer Dynamics: New Evidence from Micro Data, pages 513-552, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    25. Alan V. Deardorff & Indira Rajaraman, 2009. "Buyer Concentration in Markets for Developing Country Exports," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(2), pages 190-199, May.
    26. D. B. Suits & R. A. Musgrave, 1953. "Ad Valorem and Unit Taxes Compared," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 67(4), pages 598-604.
    27. McCalman, Phillip, 2022. "Trade policy with FANG's (aka trade policy and multi-sided platforms)," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    28. Skeath, Susan E. & Trandel, Gregory A., 1994. "A Pareto comparison of ad valorem and unit taxes in noncompetitive environments," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 53-71, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Valido, Jorge & Pilar Socorro, M. & Hernández, Aday & Betancor, Ofelia, 2014. "Air transport subsidies for resident passengers when carriers have market power," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 388-399.
    2. de Rus, Ginés & Socorro, M. Pilar, 2022. "Subsidies in air transport markets: The economic consequences of choosing the wrong mechanism," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    3. Kojun Hamada & Takao Ohkawa & Makoto Okamura, 2022. "Optimal taxation in a free‐entry Cournot oligopoly: The average cost function approach," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 55(2), pages 1166-1192, May.
    4. Laszlo Goerke, 2011. "Commodity tax structure under uncertainty in a perfectly competitive market," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 103(3), pages 203-219, July.
    5. Charles Blackorby & Sushama Murty, 2013. "Unit Versus Ad Valorem Taxes: The Private Ownership of Monopoly in General Equilibrium," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 15(4), pages 547-579, August.
    6. Kuang-Cheng Andy Wang & Ping-Yao Chou & Wen-Jung Liang, 2022. "Commodity taxes and rent extraction," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 135(3), pages 285-297, April.
    7. Christos Kotsogiannis & Konstantinos Serfes, 2014. "The Comparison of ad Valorem and Specific Taxation under Uncertainty," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 16(1), pages 48-68, February.
    8. Hiroshi Aiura & Hikaru Ogawa, 2019. "Indirect taxes in a cross-border shopping model: a monopolistic competition approach," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 128(2), pages 147-175, October.
    9. Olena SOKOLOVSKA & Dmytro SOKOLOVSKYI, 2016. "Modeling Of Consumption Taxes For Different Market Framework: The Case Of Ukraine," ECONOMIC COMPUTATION AND ECONOMIC CYBERNETICS STUDIES AND RESEARCH, Faculty of Economic Cybernetics, Statistics and Informatics, vol. 50(4), pages 75-92.
    10. X. Wang & Jingang Zhao, 2009. "On the efficiency of indirect taxes in differentiated oligopolies with asymmetric costs," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 96(3), pages 223-239, April.
    11. Francisco Galera & Isabel Rodríguez-Tejedo & Juan C. Molero, 2012. "Technology Choice and Unit vs Ad Valorem Tax," Faculty Working Papers 18/12, School of Economics and Business Administration, University of Navarra.
    12. Clément Carbonnier, 2011. "Shifting on prices of per unit and ad valorem consumption taxes, estimation on prices of alcoholic beverages in France," THEMA Working Papers 2011-20, THEMA (THéorie Economique, Modélisation et Applications), Université de Cergy-Pontoise.
    13. Lapan, Harvey E. & Hennessy, David A., 2007. "Unit Vs. Ad Valorem Taxes in Multi-Product Cournot Oligopoly," Staff General Research Papers Archive 12780, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    14. repec:zbw:rwirep:0019 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Anderson, Simon P. & de Palma, Andre & Kreider, Brent, 2001. "The efficiency of indirect taxes under imperfect competition," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 81(2), pages 231-251, August.
    16. François Boldron, 2003. "Le choix entre taxe unitaire et taxe ad valorem," Revue Française d'Économie, Programme National Persée, vol. 17(3), pages 109-128.
    17. Auerbach, Alan J. & Hines, James Jr., 2002. "Taxation and economic efficiency," Handbook of Public Economics, in: A. J. Auerbach & M. Feldstein (ed.), Handbook of Public Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 21, pages 1347-1421, Elsevier.
    18. Blackorby, Charles & Murty, Sushama, 2007. "Unit versus ad valorem taxes: Monopoly in general equilibrium," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(3-4), pages 817-822, April.
    19. Jörg Plewka, 2007. "Fiscal Discrimination Between Consumer Groups: Tax Burden Distribution Under Price Discrimination," Ruhr Economic Papers 0019, Rheinisch-Westfälisches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Universität Dortmund, Universität Duisburg-Essen.
    20. Clément Carbonnier, 2011. "Shifting on prices of per unit and ad valorem consumption taxes," Working Papers halshs-00872477, HAL.
    21. Henrik Vetter, 2017. "Commodity taxes and welfare under endogenous market conduct," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 122(2), pages 137-154, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Market power; Trade policy;

    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:eee:eecrev:v:154:y:2023:i:c:s0014292123000636. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/eer .

    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.