• International Commerce and Information Review
• /
• v.10 no.3
• /
• pp.143-162
• /
• 2008

The Title 19 of the U.S. Code covers custom duties and is the heart of international trade regulation in the U.S.. Among the provisions in Title 19, is Chapter 4, the Tariff Act of 1930. Under U.S. Antidumping duty law, dumping occurs when `subject merchandise' is imported into the U.S. and sold at less than `fair value.' The administration of U.S. Antidumping duty law is shared between the Department of Commerce('Commerce') and International Trade Commission('USITC'). The U.S. Court of International Trade ("CIT") and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ("CAFC") decided the review of antidumping duty ("AD") determinations and administrative review results issued by the Commerce and the USITC, as well as the review of countervailing duty ("CVD") decisions. In Eurodif S.A. v. United States, the CAFC considered the important issue of whether the antidumping and countervailing duty laws apply to sales and purchases of services--in this case, the sale or purchase of enrichment services. Although the federal courts had considered the issue of whether a sale of enrichment services constitutes a sale of goods, the issue had never arisen in the context of the antidumping and countervailing duty laws. Also this is the first time that the Supreme Court has ever agreed to consider an antidumping case.

• International Commerce and Information Review
• /
• v.9 no.4
• /
• pp.159-175
• /
• 2007

Under U.S. Antidumping law, dumping occurs when 'subject merchandise' is imported into the United States and sold at less than 'fair value'. The administration of U.S. antidumping law is shared between the U.S. Department of Commerce(USDOC) and the U.S. International Trade Commission(USITC). USDOC's task is to determine whether imports are being dumped, and if so, to estimate the margin of dumping. In determining whether an industry in the United States is materially injured or threatened with material injury, or the establishment of an industry in the United States is materially retarded, by reason of the subject imports, the USITC must first define the 'like product' and the 'domestic industry'. One of the crucial factors on antidumping measures is the interpretation's scope of the 'like product' and the 'domestic industry', leading the most controversial issues in U.S. antidumping law. The primary purpose of this paper is to examine the 'domestic industry' and 'like product' considering U.S. antidumping law. Most USITC's determinations regarding like product and industry as flexible conception have been supported by the U.S. Courts.

• International Commerce and Information Review
• /
• v.13 no.4
• /
• pp.375-397
• /
• 2011

Having ahead the Korea-US FfA come into effect by beginning of the 2012, the interest to U.S. trade law has been highly increased. The abuse of U.S. antidumping measures, especially, have been alleged by many developed countries, that's why it need to be studied. For initiating antidumping investigation, the scope of "subject merchandise" has to be determinated. But there is no regulation about the term "subject merchandise(or product under consideration)" on WTO Antidumping Agreement as well as U.S. Antidumping Law. U.S. antidumping law defines domestic like product as "a product that is like, or in the absence of like, most similar in characteristics and uses with, the article subject to an investigation under this title". Thus, the reference point from which the like product analysis begins is "the article subject to an investigation". The Department of Commerce should interpret the subject merchandise in accordance with customary rules, beginning with its ordinary meaning. The note of caution is that the DOC generally exercises 'broad discretion to define and clarify the scope of an antidumping investigation in a manner which reflects the intent of the petition. This paper investigates the survey scope of product in U.S. antidumping law through related regulations and cases. In addition, it was carefully examined because the scope of subject merchandise has effect on antidumping duty order.

• East Asian Economic Review
• /
• v.21 no.3
• /
• pp.231-257
• /
• 2017

The particular market situation provision of the WTO Antidumping Agreement is increasingly invoked against what may be described as "input-dumping," but this potentially violates the current Antidumping Agreement rules. This paper examines the practice and recent changes regarding the PMS provision in the US by critically examining relevant antidumping investigations in the US in light of GATT/WTO jurisprudence. Such US practice has not yet been extensively subjected to scholarly examination. The paper finds that the recent legal change in the US widens the scope and applicability of the PMS provision to cover input subsidies, allowing the use of not only surrogate prices but also surrogate costs. Further, the required standard of evidence to find PMS seems to have been diminished in the recent application. A widespread use of the PMS provision in such a deviant way calls for a fundamental review of the current trade remedy rules of the WTO.

• International Commerce and Information Review
• /
• v.11 no.3
• /
• pp.265-286
• /
• 2009

Dumping describes the practice of international price discrimination whereby a producer or exporter sells merchandise in an export market at less than fair value. The U.S. antidumping statutory framework is embodied in the Tariff Act of 1930. The Act states that "dumping" refers to the sale or likely sale of goods at less than fair value. 19 U.S.C. $\S$ 1677(34). The Commerce Department and the Commission are jointly responsible for administering the antidumping law. Commerce determines whether foreign merchandise is being sold in the United States at less than fair value, and the Commission determines whether a domestic industry producing a product like the imported merchandise has been materially injured or threatened with material injury by reason of imports of that product. Recently, in U.S. v. Eurodif, the Supreme Court held the question whether the Commerce can reasonably determin that foreign merchandise has been sold within the meaning of the antidumping law in U.S.. Should 19 U.S.C. Section 1673, which calls for "antidumping" duties on foreign goods, but not services, that sell at less than fair value in the U.S., apply to imported low enriched uranium? Yes. In a unanimous opinion written by Justice David H. Souter, the Supreme Court held that the Commerce Department's view of imported low enriched uranium, as the sale of goods rather than services, was permissible. It reasoned that, since 19 U.S.C. Section 1673 did not specify whether it applied to the production of low enriched uranium, it was left to the reasonable interpretation of the Commerce Department to determine. Accordingly, the Court found the Commerce Department interpreted the statute reasonably.

• International Commerce and Information Review
• /
• v.12 no.3
• /
• pp.391-412
• /
• 2010

As traditional import regulations have decreased all over the world in recent decades, the usage of "unconventional" trade protection measures has grown in the developing countries. In particular, antidumping investigations have risen rapidly and have growing in India and China. Therefore, this thesis aims to provide countermeasures to our government and Korean exporting companies by studying characteristics of antidumping. India is one of the most frequent initiators of antidumping cases by protecting their industries and impeding imports from FTA. This year, economic exchanges of Korea and India will be increasing by the conclusion of CEPA. This will lead to the increase of dispute by import regulations. Under such circumstances, to decrease Indian antidumping cases Korea will respond as follows. i)If antidumping laws, system and practice of India have injustice or are different from WTO rules, our government will have to indicate injustice and actively urge Indian government to make corrections. For example, they are continuous bilateral contact about the problems, fallacy of calculation of dumping margin, and intense investigations into cause and effect relationship and losses in dumping market, ect. ii)Our government should give more support to the small and medium exporting company which have difficulties in dealing with trade conflicts, counseling, arbitrating a lawyer. iii)Our government which is in control of domestic trade relief system should strengthen its investigation ability about new regulations and moniter import regulations of India. Over the long time, Korean companies need to export competitive advantage items of a higher value-added business and build solidarity by technology transfer. Accordingly, that will result in the decrease of trade dispute in India.

• International Commerce and Information Review
• /
• v.15 no.3
• /
• pp.245-262
• /
• 2013

The transaction size between South Korea and the European Union (EU) had increased by more than two times among 2003 to 2008. With rapid growth of transaction, the EU was becoming important transaction object of South Korea gradually. EU has used the Antidumping policy as a trade protection tool against Korean products due to reduce the deficit of trade balance of payment, boost the economic growth and protect its weak industries. This paper investigates whether there is a connection between the EU's macroeconomic activity and pressures for protection to Korean products under antidumping measures with using the current data that come from the WTO, World Bank for 2004 to 2012. The result suggests that pressures for protection under Antidumping measure against exporting of Korean products to EU have increased during periods of macroeconomic weakness of low GDP growth, larger deficit of trade balance, however, has not significantly affected during periods of high unemployment.

• International Commerce and Information Review
• /
• v.14 no.1
• /
• pp.3-22
• /
• 2012

China has used the Antidumping policy as a trade protection tool against Japanese products due to reduce the deficit of trade balance of payment, boost the economic growth and protect its weak industries. This paper investigates whether there is a connection between the China's macroeconomic activity and pressures for protection to Japanese products under antidumping measures with using the current data that come from the WTO, World Bank for 1997 to 2010. The result suggests that pressures for protection under Antidumping measure against exporting of Japanese products to China have increased during periods of macroeconomic weakness like high unemployment, larger deficit of trade balance and decreased during periods of macroeconomic strength.

• Journal of Korea Trade
• /
• v.25 no.1
• /
• pp.1-17
• /
• 2021

Purpose - The global trend of protectionism has expanded since the onset of US President Donald Trump's administration in 2017. This global phenomenon has led to a significant reduction in world trade volume and a negative impact on economic development in some countries where the external sector accounts for a large proportion of GDP. Although Korea is a country vulnerable to this deteriorating trade environment, few studies have examined the relationship between protectionism and its business cycles based on Korean data. Thus, this paper investigates the impact of protectionism on Korea's business cycle. Design/methodology - To identify future implications, we conduct a structural vector autoregression (VAR) analysis using monthly Korean data from 1994 to 2015. Macroeconomic variables in the model include the industrial production index, inflation rates, exports (or net exports), interest rates, and exchange rates. For the identification of the shock reflecting the expansion of protectionism, we use an antidumping investigation (ADI) data. Since ADIs are followed generally by the imposition of antidumping tariffs, they have no contemporaneous impact on tariffs and are also contemporaneously exogenous to other endogenous variables in the VAR model. We examine two kinds of ADI shocks i) shocks on Korean exports imposed by Korea's trading partners (ADI-imposed shocks) and ii) shocks on imports imposed by the Korean government (ADI-imposing shocks). Findings - We find that Korea's exports decline sharply due to ADI-imposed shocks; the lowest point at the third month after the initial shock; and do not recover until 24 months later. Simultaneously, the inflation rate decreases. Therefore, the ADI-imposed shock can be regarded as a negative shock on the demand curve where both production and price decrease. In contrast, the ADI-imposing shock generates a different response. The net exports decline, but the inflation rate increases. These can be seen as standard responses with respect to the negative shock on the supply curve. Originality/value - We shed light on the relationship between protectionism and Korea's economic fluctuations, which is rarely addressed in previous studies. We also consider the effects of both protective policy measures on imports to Korea imposed by the Korean government and on policy measures imposed by Korea's trading partner countries on its exports.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.41
• /
• pp.237-266
• /
• 2009

KORUS-FTA are consist of articles 8. In order to the subjects are, application of a safeguard measures, conditions and limitations, provisional measures, compensation, global safeguard actions, definitions, antidumping and countervailing duties, committee on trade remedies. In especially, regarding application of a safeguard measures under KORUS-FTA, if as a result of the reduction or elimination of a customs duty under this agreement, an originating good of the other party is being imported into the territory of a party in such increased quantities, in absolute terms or relative to domestic production, and under such conditions that the imports of such originating good from the other party constitute a substantial cause of serious injury, or threat thereof, to a domestic industry producing a like or directly competitive good, the party may: suspend the further reduction of any rate of customs duty on the good provided for under this agreement; increase the rate of customs duty on the good to a level not to exceed the lesser of: the most-favored-nation (MFN) applied rate of duty on the good in effect at the time the action is taken; and the MFN applied rate of duty on the good in effect on the day immediately preceding the date this Agreement enters into force; or in the case of a customs duty applied to a good on a seasonal basis, increase the rate of duty to a level that, for each season, does not exceed the lesser of: the MFN applied rate of duty on the good in effect for the corresponding season immediately preceding the date of application of the safeguard measure; and the MFN applied rate of duty on the good in effect for the corresponding season immediately preceding the date this agreement enters into force.