ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES

PROJECT WORK ON
ANTIDUMPING MEASURES
SUBMITTED TO: MISS. KIRAN BALA DAS

(FACULTY, ECONOMICS)
SUBMITTED BY: SACHIN PAUL TOPPO

(ROLL NO. 58)

SEMESTER: VI SUBMITTED ON: 12TH MARCH, 2012.

HIDAYATULLAH NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY RAIPUR,(C.G)

1|Page

ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Thanks to the Almighty God who gave me the strength to accomplish the project with sheer hard work and honesty. May I observe the protocol to show my deep gratitude to the venerated Faculty-incharge Miss KIRAN BALA DAS , for his kind gesture in allotting me such a wonderful and elucidating research topic. SIR your sincere and honest approach have always inspired me and pulled me back on track whenever I went astray. It would be very unjust to forget the friends, while expressing thanks to one and all. Honestly speaking I feel pride to have friends. Last, but by no means the least, I would like to thank all the members of HNLU family in general and my blooming and charismatic friends in particular for their wholehearted cooperation throughout the odyssey.

Sachin paul toppo (semester VI)

2|Page

ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES

Object and Research Methodology

The object of this project is to gain a deeper and more holistic understanding of
Antidumping Measure Dumping meaning International rule Antidumping law in India Antidumping: a villain in international trade India next to US in anti-dumping measures Effect of antidumping measures User-Countries in the Global Antidumping Database Anti-dumping measures effectively used to provide relief to domestic industry in post-qr era Doha development round Anti-dumping, Safeguards, Countervailing Duties Debate over the use of antidumping measures Recent events

The method of research adopted is descriptive and analytical in nature. I have referred sources on the net as well as a few books on international law and economics available besides adding my personal views and knowledge of the topic.

3|Page

ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction..5
Dumping meaning

International rules..6 Antidumping law in India..7 Antidumping: a villain in international trade8 India next to US in anti-dumping measures.10 Effect of antidumping measures12 User-Countries in the Global Antidumping Database..14 Anti-dumping measures effectively used to provide relief to domestic industry in post-qr era.14 Doha development round..16
Anti-dumping, Safeguards, Countervailing Duties Debate over the use of antidumping measures Recent events

4|Page

ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES

INTRODUCTION
WTO members have called for negotiations on anti-dumping measures in the Doha Development Round. The desired reforms will be the first since the 1994 Uruguay Round Agreement on AntiDumping. The negotiations aim to clarify ambiguities in the agreement and foster greater transparency in the use and reporting of anti-dumping measures. However, WTO members are negotiating with disparate interests at heart. Some countries want to maintain the strength and efficacy of anti-dumping measures while others want reforms that will curtail the use of such measures.1 "Dumping" is defined as a situation in which the export price of a product is lower than its selling price in the exporting country. A bargain sale, in the sense of ordinary trade, is not dumping. Where it is demonstrated that the dumped imports are causing injury to the importing country within the meaning of the WTO Agreement on Implementation of Article VI of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 ("Anti-dumping Agreement"), pursuant to and by investigation under that Agreement, the importing country can impose anti-dumping measures to provide relief to domestic industries injured by imports.2 Anti-dumping measures are envisaged to deal with the problem of increased imports. Anti-dumping suits, along with safeguards and
countervailing measures, are tools for protecting domestic industries from surges of cheap foreign imports. Although the WTO strives to eliminate all trade barriers, it recognizes that nations require flexibility to adjust to economic shocks as multilateral agreements increasingly liberalize trade. Thus, these measures allow nations to temporarily protect their economies against fluctuations in trading patterns. Although anti-dumping, safeguards, and countervailing measures share an often uneasy relationship with the WTOs core principles, many member nations consider them essential to fostering fair and free trade. Some countries have applied anti-dumping measures in an arbitrary manner to restrict imports, rather than to achieve the limited, remedial objective authorized in the Agreement. In light of this situation, one of the focal points of the Uruguay Round negotiations was to establish disciplines to rein in

A substantial prior literature examines different political-economic features of the government decision to grant antidumping protection in more developed economies. While there are too many to cite them here, prominent examples for the US include Finger, Hall and Nelson (1982), Hansen (1990), and Hansen and Prusa (1997). EU examples include Messerlin and Reed (1995) and Eymann and Schuknecht (1996). A recent investigation of Mexico is Francois and Niels (2004). Blonigen and Prusa (2003) and Nelson (2006) provide extensive surveys. 2 "Injury" includes three cases: material injury to a domestic industry, threat of material injury to a domestic industry, or material retardation of the establishment of such an industry.

5|Page

ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES
the abuse of anti-dumping measures as tools for protectionism and import restriction. Although considerable progress was seen in this process, many countries still express much concern over this abuse.

INTERNATIONAL RULES

The international anti-dumping rules are provided by (a) GATT Article VI and (b) the Antidumping Agreement under the WTO. The Tokyo Round Anti-dumping Code was revised to become the new Anti-dumping Agreement as a result of the Uruguay Round negotiation. Amendment of the Code was called for because the procedures for investigating prices and costs in order to measure the damage to domestic industry and calculate dumping margins were extremely technical and complex, and since the Tokyo Round Anti-dumping Code lacked sufficient detail to deal with the complexities of current international transactions. The WTO holds two meetings of the Anti-dumping Committee (AD Committee) each year to provide a forum for discussion of antidumping measures. Among the business of the AD Committee is the review of countries' antidumping implementation laws for conformity to the Agreement, the hearing of reports on countries' anti-dumping measures, and the study of issues in anti-dumping policies and practice. The AD Committee is directly subordinate to the Council for Trade in Goods and reports to it each year on the implementation and administration of the AD Agreement. Countries have been amending their domestic anti-dumping implementation legislation to bring it into conformity with the new AD Agreement. The AD Committee is charged with reviewing national legislation, and countries are required both to notify the relevant laws to the Committee and to respond to questions from other countries about their systems. If there are any problems found, countries are obliged to bring their national laws in line with the Agreement.3 Japan must use these kinds of fora to ensure that the domestic laws of other countries are written and applied in conformity with the AD Agreement. Should legislation or discretion contravene the Agreement, Japan should report it immediately to the AD Committee and other GATT/WTO fora to seek appropriate remedies. Therefore, if an anti-dumping measure is suspected of violating the GATT and/or Anti-dumping Agreement, Japan should seek resolution through the GATT/WTO in
3

Van den Bossche, Peter (2005). The Law and Policy of the World Trade Organization. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. pp. 42. ISBN 978-0-511-12392-4. "Dumping, i.e. bringing a product onto the market of another country at a price less than the normal value of that product is condemned but not prohibited in WTO law."

6|Page

ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES dealing with the increased abuse of anti-dumping measures by certain countries. If resolution cannot be reached through bilateral consultations, the abuses should be referred to WTO panels. In the past, there were two viewpoints: first, that panels should have broad discretion, second, that certain standards of review (both objective and impartial) should be set for panel deliberations. Since many cases for resolving disputes were expected to arise due to the newly introduced automaticity in the WTO dispute settlement system, it was considered necessary to specify standards of review for anti-dumping measures. As a result of the Uruguay Round negotiations, the new Anti-dumping Agreement also introduced new standards of review for factual determinations and legal interpretations by the panel. How the standards of review are applied to procedures for resolving disputes will depend on the specific facts of the future actions and on the panelists themselves. ANTI-DUMPING LAW IN INDIA Anti-dumping duty is a measure to rectify the situation arising out of the dumping of goods and its distorting effect on domestic producers of similar goods. The concept of dumping and subsidisation has long been known. Rapid industrialisation has resulted in large-scale production and in this situation dumping enables the producer to establish a dominant position in the market. It is common in international commercial practice for export prices to be lower than the domestic ones so there is, as such, nothing inherently illegal or immoral about the practice of dumping. 4 The effect of dumping has been felt by Indias domestic industries recently with the removal of quantitative restriction and lowering of custom duty. Indian laws were amended with effect from 1 January 1995 to bring them in line with the provisions of the respective GATT agreements. Sections 9A, 9B and 9C of the Customs Tariff Act 1975 as amended in 1995 and the Customs Tariff (Identification, Assessment and Collection of Anti-dumping Duty on Dumped Articles and for Determination of Injury) Rules 1995, form the legal basis for anti-dumping investigations and imposition of duty.

www.financialexpress.com/.../antidumping-measures-by-india

7|Page

ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES Section 9A of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) as amended in 1995 and the Customs Tariff (Identification, Assessment and Collection of anti-dumping Duty on Dumped Articles and for Determination of Injury) Rules, 1995 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules) framed thereunder form the legal basis for anti-dumping investigations and for the levy of anti-dumping duties. These are in consonance with the WTO Agreement on anti-dumping measures. These rules form the legislative framework for all matters relating to dumping of products, which include the substantive rules, rules relating to practice, procedure, regulatory mechanism and administration.

ANTIDUMPING: A VILLAIN IN INTERNATIONAL TRADE

Looking back through time, the first antidumping law was meant to remedy unfair trade, namely dumping, but it has become clearer over time that there is nothing wrong with dumping. It benefits people in poor countries by offering lower prices and new varieties of merchandises. Despite its evil name, dumping does a good job. If the world is looking for freer trade, accepting international price discrimination is one step to be taken. Where dumping takes place, a domestic industry may file a petition against foreign dumping firms. The details of antidumping process vary across countries, but in general before antidumping duties can be imposed on allegedly dumped imports, two conditions have to be fulfilled. First, dumping margin must exist. The margin is the price difference between the normal value and that charged by alleged dumpers in the domestic market. Second, there must be evidence that the domestic industry is materially injured by dumping. When both are satisfied, the government can levy antidumping duties, usually equal to the sizes of dumping margins, on imports from the dumping firms. In a way, antidumping duties work like import tariffs. But antidumping is a trickier issue because it is always discriminatory. This implies that the domestic industry can strategically use this instrument to target only foreign firms it views as competitive rivals. And, being selective, antidumping measures also generate more negative effects than tariffs do. Consumers are clearly worse off because they have to bear the cost of duty. Imports become more expensive. Furthermore, there is no guarantee that the domestic producers will keep their prices at the initial levels. Depending on price elasticity, they can obtain higher profits by setting a new price higher than before but lower than those of dumped products.
8|Page

ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES This issue may not be serious if most dumped imports are not intermediate but final ones.looking at the WTO database,5 the two industries most involved with antidumping activities are steel and chemical. One can easily imagine how large the effect of antidumping measure would be. The imposition of antidumping measure seems to benefit no one but the domestic producers whose foreign rivals face an antidumping action. To evaluate if antidumping is an appropriate policy or not, we need to know whether the increase in profits of the domestic firms is large enough to offset the decrease in welfare of all others in the country. Worse than that, antidumping measures can paradoxically hurt the domestic producers themselves. This is due to trade diversion effect. As antidumping is selective, while the dumping firms sell less in the domestic country, exporters from other countries may find an opportunity to compete in the market more aggressively. The evidence supports this argument quite well.

See for example the WTOs website Notifications under the agreement on implementation of Article VI of GATT 1994 at http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/adp_e/antidum3_e.htm ,

9|Page

ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES

INDIA NEXT TO US IN ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES6 With protectionism emerging as a major threat to the global trade flow, data compiled by World Bank shows that India is next only to the US in terms of new anti-dumping measures imposed by their respective governments. Besides, the number of such measures increased substantially in the second half of 2008 in both countries, World Bank has said in its background paper for the G20 Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors Meeting later this week in the United Kingdom. The US imposed over 20 new anti-dumping measures during the July-December period in 2008, followed by 15 such measures by the Indian authorities. As per the data compiled by the multilateral lending agency, India took more than 10 fresh anti-dumping measures in the first half of 2008 -- higher than any other country during that period -- while the US imposed less than five such measures. Other countries where new anti-dumping measures are on the rise include Brazil and Canada , while European Union, South Korea and Egypt saw the number of such initiatives declining in the second half of 2008. China, South Africa , New Zealand and Argentina had imposed some fresh measures in the first half, but no additional steps were announced in the second half. In contrast, Australia and Turkey did not impose any new anti-dumping measures in the first half of 2008, but some steps were announced in the last six months of the year. "Protectionism remains a serious threat in the current environment. Many countries are contemplating, or have already implemented, increased protection, which may be difficult to reverse and will slow the recovery," the World Bank said. According to the World Bank, since the beginning of the financial crisis, roughly 78 trade measures have been proposed or implemented, of which 66 involved trade restrictions. "Of these, 47 measures were actually implemented, including 17 by the G20. In addition, antidumping claims and actions increased 20 per cent in 2008 relative to 2007; and 55 per cent in the second half of 2008 relative to the first half of 2008," it added. The World Bank pointed out that
6

www.rediff.com India Business

10 | P a g e

ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES agricultural subsidies, "not counted in these numbers", have increased automatically with the recent fall in commodity prices. "In addition to changes in tariffs, non-tariff barriers, such as licensing requirements and tighter application of product standards, are also being introduced. "Governments are also taking measures to support specific industries through potentially trade distorting measures, including by increasing subsidies as part of fiscal stimulus packages," the paper said. Further, the multilateral lending agency noted that while government's financial support packages do not necessarily distort trade, "public intervention targeted at specific export-oriented industries or competing import industries are akin to protectionism and run the risk of starting a subsidy race among nations". The paper added that there is also a risk that governments providing "bailouts" to domestic banks might exert pressure on those banks to use "those resources within their countries rather than to provide trade finance that would go to foreign countries."7 EFFECTS OF ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES A country that is exposed to dumping will benefit from the lower prices. The consumers of the importing country will have a larger consumer surplus since they have access to a larger supply of goods to a lower price. These consumer benefits will be lost when the importing country imposes an antidumping measure on the low-price imports. When the duties are levied on the imports the products will have the same price-level in both domestic and foreign market. When the price is increased in the foreign market the supply will decrease and the producers have to comply with an inefficient low level of output. The consumers in the importing country have to pay a higher price for the products and have less consumer sur-plus. Other customers will not pay the higher price and are driven out of the market, which leads to a dead-weight social cost (Howse & Trebilcock, 1995).8
7

One reason why the WTOs Agreement on Antidumping is so lenient is likely because of pre-existing variation in how antidumping was administered by the old users who did not want to have too much of their existing procedure changed. For example, Canadas antidumping law was first enacted in 1904, Australias was enacted in 1906, etc. 8 www.sethassociates.com/antidumping-law-in-india.htm

11 | P a g e

ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES Imposing an anti-dumping measure will cause all the consumers and industrial user benefits from dumping to disappear. The importing country will drive the dumped products out of the market if the anti-dumping duties are high enough, or the product might remain in the market at higher prices. If the dumped products leave the market, the domestic firms are able to raise their prices due to lesser competition. If an anti-dumping measure is introduced in a market where the domestic industry is composed of only one producer, it might lead to that producer charging monopoly prices since there will be no competition in the market (Li, 2003).

Trade diversion is another effect of anti-dumping measures. When the dumped imports decrease, the domestic market share, or imports from a third country, increases. By putting duties on the dumped imports, those products will become more expensive. Consumers still want to consume the products but at the lowest price possible. This will benefit the exporters from other countries that are now relatively cheaper. Trade diversion will occur and the trade patterns will change.

When foreign exporters are selling their goods at a lower price level, these low-cost suppliers will eventually drive the domestic producers out of the market. When producers have to leave the market this implies that the domestic workers will loose their jobs and the share holders of the firms will loose capital. With antidumping duties on the imported products, the domestic products will be more attractive to the consumers. The domestic producers will avoid the direct competition with the producers in the foreign country. Therefore, if the anti-dumping duties were removed the consumers will benefit from the lower price lev-el, but on the other hand the producers might be seriously affected by losses from the low priced imports (Howse & Trebilcock, 1995).

12 | P a g e

ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES
Number of Antidumping Investigations, 1995-2004 Number of Antidumping 9 Measures Imposed, 1995-2004

Country

User-Countries in the Global Antidumping Database

Argentina Australia Brazil Canada Colombia China (since 2001)* European Union India Indonesia* Japan* Mexico New Zealand Peru South Africa South Korea Taiwan (since 2000)* Turkey United States Venezuela Subtotal
(share of total)

192 172 116 133 23 99 303 400 60 3 79 47 55 173 77 8 89 354 31 2414 (91.2%)

139 54 62 80 11 52 193 302 23 3 69 14 34 113 43 2 77 219 25 1515 (91.5%)

User -Countries not yet in the Global Antidumping Database Egypt Israel Malaysia Thailand Other WTO Members Subtotal (share of total) 38 27 31 34 102 235 (8.8%) 30 15 18 23 55 221 (8.5%)

Total

2646

1656

Data for the initiations and measures used in this table is taken from WTO (2005a,b). * Indicates data for countries added to the database in version 2.0

13 | P a g e

ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES EFFECTIVELY USED TO PROVIDE RELIEF TO DOMESTIC INDUSTRY IN POST-QR ERA India is today one of the major players amongst the WTO member countries who are effectively using anti-dumping measures in a manner that is transparent and compatible with the multilateral trade rules. Indeed, in terms of initiating anti-dumping action, India is the most important new user of anti-dumping action. While the number of anti-dumping investigations up to mid-90s remained in single digit, the number of cases initiated increased to 19 in 1999-2000 and 30 in 2001-02..10 An analysis contained in the Report of the impact of imposition of anti-dumping duty in respect of the five products investigated and studied by the Directorate shows that the domestic industry has been able to enhance its production capacity consequent to the imposition of anti-dumping duty. This has led to higher production of Indian goods, higher investments leading in turn to growth in employment avenues. Further, imposition of anti-dumping duty has not led to protection of monopolies as the domestic producers continue to face competition in the global economy. Imposition of anti-dumping duty has also not caused any decline of exports of the products investigated and competitiveness of the domestic industry has improved to some extent, although due to the continuance of dumping the profitability of the domestic industry has been eroded in some cases. India now compares favourably with all the major users of anti-dumping action in the world. In 2001-2002, India initiated 30 cases, which is the highest number of cases initiated in a year so far. According to the WTO report for January to June 2001, India stands third in terms of action initiated with 16 cases after US (39 cases) and Canada (23 cases). In spite of the timely disposal of cases, the investigations conducted by DGAD have been very fair and transparent11 With the withdrawal of QRs and slashing of import duties, dumping into India has become an even more important issue. This was reflected in the increase in the number of cases being
10

www.sethassociates.com/antidumping-law-in-india.htm www.eximguru.com/.../indian.../anti-dumping.../anti-dumping-duty-.

11

14 | P a g e

ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES handled by the Directorate. The interpretation and administration of these regulations has an important bearing not only on the trade of the particular commodity/like article (which is the subject matter of an investigation) but also on the various interested parties whether domestic industry, user industry/association or the concerned exporters. To enhance transparency and bring about a general level of awareness, the Designated Authority made concerted attempts to disseminate information on the various concepts and legal and operational aspects of trade remedial measures and on the administrative infrastructure/mechanism prevailing in India. The domestic industry was sensitized regarding the nature of inputs required to be filed in a fully documented petition before the Designated Authority for expediting these investigations. This was done through a series of interactive sessions with various segments of domestic and user industry and other organizations in the course of the last one year. All efforts were successfully made during the year for dealing with the rising number of cases, expediting the investigation, maintaining transparency and fairness and disseminating information on anti-dumping laws, practice and procedures among the public in general and domestic industry in particular, the Report states. DOHA DEVELOPMENT ROUND WTO members have called for negotiations on anti-dumping measures in the Doha Development Round. The desired reforms will be the first since the 1994 Uruguay Round Agreement on AntiDumping. The negotiations aim to clarify ambiguities in the agreement and foster greater transparency in the use and reporting of anti-dumping measures. However, WTO members are negotiating with disparate interests at heart. Some countries want to maintain the strength and efficacy of anti-dumping measures while others want reforms that will curtail the use of such measures.12 Anti-dumping, Safeguards, Countervailing Duties

Anti-dumping suits, along with safeguards and countervailing measures, are tools for protecting domestic industries from surges of cheap foreign imports. Although the WTO strives to eliminate
12

www.cid.harvard.edu/cidtrade/issues/antidumping.html

15 | P a g e

ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES all trade barriers, it recognizes that nations require flexibility to adjust to economic shocks as multilateral agreements increasingly liberalize trade. Thus, these measures allow nations to temporarily protect their economies against fluctuations in trading patterns. Although antidumping, safeguards, and countervailing measures share an often uneasy relationship with the WTOs core principles, many member nations consider them essential to fostering fair and free trade. The three tools of domestic protection target sudden influxes of imports in different ways. In an anti-dumping suit, a nation retaliates against specific trading partners who are found to be exporting goods at prices lower than those dominant in the domestic market. To prove an antidumping case, there must be proof of dumped imports, material injury to a domestic industry, and a causal link between the two. Once a nation proves a case, it may levy a compensatory duty to bring the price of the imports up to the domestic level. Safeguards allow nations to erect duties on certain goods when a deluge of imports threatens to damage domestic producers. To put safeguards in place, a nation must demonstrate that the market share of imports would rise substantially in the absence of some kind of domestic protection. Instead of targeting imports from specific trading partners, safeguards set a quantitative restriction on the allowable market share of all imports. Finally, nations use countervailing measures (i.e. import tariffs) to neutralize the effect of foreign subsidy programs. Debate Over the Use of Anti-dumping Measures

Although protective measures like anti-dumping can be considered a good pressure valve for countries undergoing rapid trade liberalization, they can also create political and economic tension. Political tension stems from debate over the recent rise in anti-dumping suits. The WTO saw a record high of 328 suits in 2001, sparking concern that while negotiations dismantle transparent and stable tariff barriers, members are substituting discriminatory, unpredictable antidumping suits. Developing countries object to the proliferation of anti-dumping and safeguards because they are particularly vulnerable to unpredictable shifts in market access. However,

16 | P a g e

ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES industrialized countries insist that conditional domestic protection is key to gradually liberalizing international trade.13 The WTO has expressed concern that as stable, transparent tariffs are eliminated, countries are increasingly substituting discriminatory anti-dumping measures as domestic protection. Even though the number of anti-dumping cases has dropped somewhat since they reached a record high of 328 in 2001, the widespread use of temporary protections still seems at odds with WTO principles. Thus, Doha round negotiations will focus on clarifying when and how nations can impose temporary protections. Recent Events

Aside from the debate surround the ubiquity of anti-dumping suits, WTO members disagree on the specific conditions and procedures that should allowed. Recently, the EU and Australia along with 8 other nations brought a case against the US for anti-dumping legislation that they claim is unfair. The US law allows the anti-dumping duties collected on imports to be given to competing American firms. The concern is that this procedure acts as an incentive for domestic industries to lobby harder for inappropriate anti-dumping suits. The WTO ruled that the law must be abolished and refused the US request for an appeal. Although the most common argument in favor of strong and effective anti-dumping measures is that it relieves the competitive tension of free trade, many nations uphold that the measures protect the safety of their citizens. Recently, anti-dumping cases and issues of food safety have overlapped. The EU has had to raise import duties on certain foods that it must inspect for certain antibiotics and hormones it has banned for food safety reasons. For example, shrimp imports from ASEAN countries now take longer and are more expensive to ship to EU nations. The ASEAN countries clamor that this is a discriminatory barrier to trade that takes a grave toll on their developing economies.14

13

www.wto.org trade topics

14

www.meti.go.jp/english/report/data/gCT9905e.html

17 | P a g e

ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES Overall, the Agreement on Anti-dumping stands to be purged of its vague wording and revamped to include specific restrictions and procedures agreed to be WTO members. Whether antidumping becomes a weaker and limited option or a strong and oft-used tool for protection depends greatly on the negotiations leading up the fifth ministerial meeting in September 2003.

Share of selected countries in world antidumping initiations : 1995-2000

Country United States EC Canada Korea Argentina Brazil Mexico India World Share in total initiation 0.12 0.15 0.05 0.03 0.09 0.05 0.03 0.12 100.00 Incidence* 0.03 0.02 0.06 0.06 0.73 0.24 0.07 0.69 0.06

Note: * Incidence is defined as cases per billion $ of imports. It is calculated for 1995-1999. Sources: WTO database; World Economic Outlook.

18 | P a g e

ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES

CONCLUSION
The present study focuses on antidumping measures. Broadly speaking a product is said to have been dumped if it is introduced into the commerce of another country at less than the normal value of the product and it causes/threatens material injury to an established industry of the country. Article VI of the GATT stipulates that in order to offset or prevent dumping a contracting party may levy on any dumped product an antidumping duty not greater in amount than the margin of dumping in respect of such countries. Almost all WTO member countries have adopted/amended their antidumping legislation largely in accordance with the GATT provisions to deal with dumped imports. Some of the countries that are not members of WTO. have also acquired their antidumping legislation15. Almost 90% of total world imports are now entering countries in which anti-dumping laws are in place. India is today one of the major players amongst the WTO member countries who are effectively using anti-dumping measures in a manner that is transparent and compatible with the multilateral trade rules. India now compares favourably with all the major users of anti-dumping action in the world

15

WTO (2001) : Rules Division Antidumping Measures database, WTO Secretariat.

19 | P a g e

ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES

BIBLIOGRAPHY Articles
Seth associates- advocates and legal consultants- anti dumping law in India Global trade negotiation- antidumping summary The limits of the use of antidumping measures- by Guillermo Erasmus & Keith Hendry

Websites
www.unctad.org/en/docs/edmmisc232add14_en.pdf www.meti.go.jp/english/report/data/gCT9905e.html www.wto.org trade topics www.cid.harvard.edu/cidtrade/issues/antidumping.html www.sethassociates.com/antidumping-law-in-india.htm icrier.org/pdf/antiDump.pdf www.expressindia.com/.../India...of...antidumping-measures.../23482 www.rediff.com India Business www.financialexpress.com/.../antidumping-measures-by-india www.eximguru.com/.../indian.../anti-dumping.../anti-dumping-duty-.

20 | P a g e