Antidumping Law

Countries continuously attempt to protect their domestic industries, and a coalition of foreign Exporters and domestic Free Traders have always worked to stop restrictions against Trade. This said, Protectionists are not all bad, with Free Traders all good. This Fact instigated original Antidumping laws, and maintains them to this Day. The Author has just finished reading parts of two Works from the Cato Institute:


Free Trade Bulletin No. 11 April 27, 2004:
Antidumping’s Flawed Methodology under Fire
by Dan Ikenson, policy analyst,
Center for Trade Policy Studies, Cato Institute

and


Trade Policy Analysis No. 21 December 11, 2002
Reforming the Antidumping Agreement:A Road Map for WTO Negotiations
by Brink Lindsey and Dan Ikenson

This Author did not read all of the later, simply because he became bored with the constant harping against established Rules, and American reliance on them. He is not a Free Trader, and has never accepted the acclaimed merits of Trade whole-Hog. Trade does not adequately account Transportation Costs, Communication Costs, and Distribution Costs; simply adjusting final end-Cost Sale purchases, without examination of Cost-inflation in Production practice. The two Above Works, though Free Trade, make exactly the same argument against Antidumping law. There is sharp criticism of the practice of 'Zeroing' of negative statistical evidence of Dumping, and assertion that Production Profits(constructed value) should be eliminated from consideration in the Dumping equation.

Their proposal of adding statistical negatives to the Dumping evaluation would allow Dumpers to average their Exports--allowing them to maintain below-Average production by mixing it in with normal profit Production. Domestic industry would suffer discrimination, as they are expected to maintain foreign inferior Production through reduced Sales and Production of their own. The elimination of normal Profits from the evaluation directly discriminates against domestic industry, who are expected to maintain normal Profits in Operations, without extraordinary balancing act. The listed Papers both actually advocate discrimination against domestic industry, and exhibit inferiority to normal Cato Institute product. lgl