Skip to main content
×
×
Home

United States – Anti-Dumping Measures on Oil Country Tubular Goods (OCTG) from Mexico: a legal-economic assessment of sunset reviews

  • CHAD P. BOWN (a1) and JASPER WAUTERS (a2)
Abstract
Abstract

This paper reviews the WTO Appellate Body Report on United States – Anti-Dumping Measures on Oil Country Tubular Goods (OCTG) from Mexico (WT/DS282/AB/R 2 November 2005). This dispute concerns the disciplines imposed by the Anti-Dumping Agreement on WTO Members seeking to extend their anti-dumping measures beyond the original five-year period through a so-called sunset review. Our analysis focuses on the Appellate Body's finding in this case that no causation analysis is required in sunset reviews, and addresses the AB's approach towards the legal instrument that provides for the US policy in terms of sunset reviews, the Sunset Policy Bulletin. We conclude that the Anti-Dumping Agreement, as interpreted by the Appellate Body in this and other similar cases, imposes only minimal disciplines of a general nature on Members wishing to extend the anti-dumping measure beyond its original five-year period. We argue that the ‘textual’ argument relied on to support this deferential approach is weak and has resulted in undermining the practical effect of, what was considered to be, one of the major achievements of the Uruguay Round Anti-Dumping Agreement: limiting the life span of an anti-dumping measure to five years. From an economic perspective, Panels and the Appellate Body are simply debating the wrong type of questions. The prospective nature required by a sunset review analysis raises questions such as why exporters engaged in dumping in the first place, and what the conditions of the industry were so that the dumped imports caused injury. At the moment, sunset reviews seem adrift as panels and the Appellate Body fail to give guidance to Members on how to do a more economically sound and informed review.

Copyright
References
Hide All
Blonigen Bruce A. and Ohno Yuka (1998), ‘Endogenous Protection, Foreign Direct Investment, and Protection-Building Trade’, Journal of International Economics, 46: 205227.
Blonigen Bruce A. and Park Jee-Hyeong (2004), ‘Dynamic Pricing in the Presence of Anti-dumping Policy: Theory and Evidence’, American Economic Review, 94: 134154.
Cadot Olivier, de Melo Jaime, and Tumurchudur Bolormaa (2007), ‘Anti-Dumping Sunset Reviews: The Uneven Reach of WTO Disciplines’, University of Geneva manuscript, February.
Durling James P. and McCullough Matthew P. (2004), ‘Teaching Old Laws New Tricks: The Legal Obligation of Non-Attribution and the Need for Economic Rigor in Injury Analyses under US Trade Law’, in Hartigan James and Choi E. Kwan (eds) Handbook of International Trade, Vol. II, New York: Blackwell.
Francois Joseph and Hall Keith (1993), ‘COMPAS: Commercial Policy Analysis System’, US International Trade Commission, May.
Grossman Gene M. (1986), ‘Imports as a Cause of Injury: The Case of the US Steel Industry’, Journal of International Economics, 20: 201223.
Gupta Poonam and Panagariya Arvind (2006), ‘Injury Investigations in Antidumping and the Super-Additivity Effect: A Theoretical Explanation’, Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv/Review of World Economics, 142: 151164.
Hansen Wendy L. and Prusa Thomas J. (1996), ‘Cumulation and ITC Decision-Making: The Sum of the Parts is Greater Than the Whole’, Economic Inquiry, 34: 746769.
Howse Robert and Staiger Robert W. (2006), ‘United States – Sunset Review of Anti-Dumping Duties on Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products From Japan: A Legal and Economic Analysis of the Appellate Body Ruling’, in Mavroidis Petros C. and Horn Henrik (eds) The WTO Case Law of 2003, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Irwin Douglas A. (2003), ‘Causing Problems? The WTO Review of Causation and Injury Attribution in US Section 201 Cases’, World Trade Review, 2: 297325.
Kelly Kenneth (1988), ‘The Analysis of Causality in Escape Clause Cases’, The Journal of Industrial Economics, 37: 187207.
Moore Michael O. (2006), ‘An Econometric Analysis of US Antidumping Sunset Review Decisions’, Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv/Review of World Economics, 142: 122150.
Pindyck Robert S. and Rotemberg Julio J. (1987), ‘Are Imports to Blame? Attribution of Injury under the 1974 Trade Act’, Journal of Law and Economics, 30: 101122.
Prusa Thomas J. and Sharp David C. (2001), ‘Simultaneous Equations in Antidumping Investigations’, Journal of Forensic Economics, 14: 6378.
Tharakan P. K. M., Greenaway D., and Tharakan J. (1998), ‘Cumulation and Injury Determination of the European Community in Antidumping Cases’, Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv/Review of World Economics, 134: 320339.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

World Trade Review
  • ISSN: 1474-7456
  • EISSN: 1475-3138
  • URL: /core/journals/world-trade-review
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 1
Total number of PDF views: 13 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 328 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 15th December 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.