IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/rsc/rsceui/2016-48.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

China - HP-SSST: Last Part of Growing Pains?

Author

Listed:
  • Dukgeun Ahn
  • Maurizio Zanardi

Abstract

In December 2012 Japan requested the establishment of a World Trade Organization (WTO) Panel regarding AD duties that China had imposed on high-performance stainless steel seamless tubes (HP-SSST). The European Union joined as a complainant in June 2013. To some degree, this dispute follows earlier ones involving China, as similar procedural and substantial issues were raised in previous cases. However, this is the first time that the WTO Panel rejected some important claims, only for those decisions to be reversed by the Appellate Body. Now that various rulings have clarified these legal issues, it remains to be seen if HP-SSST represents the last part of growing pains for Chinese authorities to learn about AD legal procedures.

Suggested Citation

  • Dukgeun Ahn & Maurizio Zanardi, 2016. "China - HP-SSST: Last Part of Growing Pains?," RSCAS Working Papers 2016/48, European University Institute.
    • Handle: RePEc:rsc:rsceui:2016/48
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://cadmus.eui.eu/bitstream/handle/1814/43544/RSCAS_2016_48.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/1814/43544
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Petros C. Mavroidis & Patrick A. Messerlin & Jasper M. Wauters, 2008. "The Law and Economics of Contingent Protection in the WTO," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 12731.
    2. Prusa, Thomas J. & Vermulst, Edwin, 2014. "China – Countervailing and Anti-dumping Duties on Grain Oriented Flat-rolled Electrical Steel from the United States: exporting US AD/CVD methodologies through WTO dispute settlement?," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 13(2), pages 229-266, April.
    3. Prusa, Thomas J. & Vermulst, Edwin, 2015. "China – Anti-Dumping and Countervailing Duty Measures on Broiler Products from the United States: How the chickens came home to roost," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 14(2), pages 287-335, April.
    4. Blonigen, Bruce A. & Bown, Chad P., 2003. "Antidumping and retaliation threats," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(2), pages 249-273, August.
    5. Moore, Michael O. & Wu, Mark, 2015. "Antidumping and Strategic Industrial Policy: Tit-for-Tat Trade Remedies and the China–X-Ray Equipment Dispute," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 14(2), pages 239-286, April.
    6. Zanardi, M., 2005. "Antidumping : A Problem in International Trade," Other publications TiSEM 4db69e8e-f10c-4098-a644-f, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    7. Mitchell, Andrew D. & Prusa, Thomas J., 2016. "China–Autos: Haven't We Danced this Dance Before?," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 15(2), pages 303-325, April.
    8. Zanardi, Maurizio, 2006. "Antidumping: A problem in international trade," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 591-617, September.
    9. Dan Wei, 2013. "Antidumping in Emerging Countries in the Post-crisis Era: A Case Study on Brazil and China," Journal of International Economic Law, Oxford University Press, vol. 16(4), pages 921-958, December.
    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. Qin, Julia & Vandenbussche, Hylke, 2017. "China–GOES (Article 21.5): Time to Clarify the Standard for Price Suppression and Price Depression in AD/CVD Investigations," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 16(2), pages 203-226, April.

    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. 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.
    2. Tobias D. Ketterer, 2016. "EU Anti-dumping and Tariff Cuts: Trade Policy Substitution?," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(5), pages 576-596, May.
    3. Jan Baran, 2015. "The impact of antidumping on EU trade," IBS Working Papers 12/2015, Instytut Badan Strukturalnych.
    4. Moore, M.O. & Zanardi, M., 2006. "Does Antidumping Use Contribute to Trade Liberalization? An Empirical Analysis," Other publications TiSEM c0a19bf2-9849-4620-b109-e, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    5. 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.
    6. Mitchell, Andrew D. & Prusa, Thomas J., 2016. "China–Autos: Haven't We Danced this Dance Before?," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 15(2), pages 303-325, April.
    7. Feinberg Robert M., 2011. "Antidumping as a Development Issue," Global Economy Journal, De Gruyter, vol. 11(3), pages 1-17, September.
    8. Nelson, Douglas, 2006. "The political economy of antidumping: A survey," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 554-590, September.
    9. Zanardi, Maurizio, 2006. "Antidumping: A problem in international trade," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 591-617, September.
    10. Wu, Shih-Jye & Chang, Yang-Ming & Chen, Hung-Yi, 2014. "Antidumping duties and price undertakings: A welfare analysis," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 29(C), pages 97-107.
    11. Crowley Meredith A., 2010. "Split Decisions in Antidumping Cases," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 10(1), pages 1-26, July.
    12. Colin A. Carter & Caroline Gunning-Trant, 2010. "U.S. trade remedy law and agriculture: trade diversion and investigation effects," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 43(1), pages 97-126, February.
    13. Yanyun Li & Faqin Lin, 2022. "Beyond tariff evasion: bypass effect of FTAs to circumvent technical barriers," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 158(4), pages 1085-1105, November.
    14. Lorenzo Trimarchi, 2020. "Trade Policy and the China Syndrome," Working Papers ECARES 2020-15, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    15. Christian Gormsen, 2011. "Antidumping with heterogeneous firms," Post-Print hal-00663024, HAL.
    16. Patrice Bougette and Christophe Charlier, 2018. "Antidumping and Feed-In Tariffs as Good Buddies? Modeling the EU-China Solar Panel Dispute," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 6).
    17. repec:wsr:pbrief:y:2021:i:050 is not listed on IDEAS
    18. Christian Gormsen, 2011. "Anti-dumping with heterogeneous firms," International Economics, CEPII research center, issue 125, pages 41-64.
    19. Bown, Chad P., 2014. "Trade policy instruments over time," Policy Research Working Paper Series 6757, The World Bank.
    20. 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.
    21. Gianpaolo Rossini, 2019. "State Owned Enterprises (SOEs) and Non Transparent Trade Policies," Italian Economic Journal: A Continuation of Rivista Italiana degli Economisti and Giornale degli Economisti, Springer;Società Italiana degli Economisti (Italian Economic Association), vol. 5(3), pages 433-453, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Antidumping; WTO trade disputes; impact analysis; essential fact; price undercutting; non-attribution; China;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • F13 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade Policy; International Trade Organizations
    • K33 - Law and Economics - - Other Substantive Areas of Law - - - International Law

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:rsc:rsceui:2016/48. 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: RSCAS web unit (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/rsiueit.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.