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

Ahn, Dukgeun; Zanardi, Maurizio

doi:10.2139/ssrn.2879333

Cited by 3 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Because trends analysis heavily relies on visual inspection of trends, it is considered as 'more art than science' (Prusa and Sharp, 2001). While these trends are clearcut in our hypothetical example, such is not always the case in reality (Ahn and Zanardi, 2016).…”

Section: Trends Analysismentioning

confidence: 93%

China–GOES (Article 21.5): Time to Clarify the Standard for Price Suppression and Price Depression in AD/CVD Investigations

Qin

Vandenbussche

2017

World Trade Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This dispute concerns the measures China took to implement the Dispute Settlement Body's rulings inChina–GOES, which had found a number of violations with respect to China's antidumping and countervailing duties imposed on grain oriented flat-rolled electrical steel (GOES) imported from the United States. In this compliance proceeding, the United States claimed that the Redetermination issued by China's Ministry of Commerce (MOFCOM) continued to violate WTO law. At the center of the dispute were MOFCOM's findings that the US imports had the effect of suppressing and/or depressing the prices of domestic like products. While the Panel reached the conclusion that the MOFCOM findings were inconsistent with WTO rules, it did not clarify the criteria for determining such price effects. In this comment, we call for the adoption of a clearer and more objective standard for determining price suppression and price depression in antidumping and countervailing duty investigations, via the tools of economic modeling.

show abstract

Section: Trends Analysismentioning

confidence: 93%

China–GOES (Article 21.5): Time to Clarify the Standard for Price Suppression and Price Depression in AD/CVD Investigations

Qin

Vandenbussche

2017

World Trade Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There are a number of analyses of OCTG-related WTO disputes. See e.g., Grossman and Mavroidis (2005), Bown and Wauters (2008), Grossman and Wauters (2008), Prusa and Vermulst (2013), Ahn and Zanardi (2017). The other two cases involve Taiwanese steel exportation, steel nails (A-583-854) and corrosion-resistant steel products (A-583-856).…”

Section: Factual Background For Octg Industrymentioning

confidence: 99%

“… 4 There are a number of analyses of OCTG-related WTO disputes. See e.g., Grossman and Mavroidis (2005), Bown and Wauters (2008), Grossman and Wauters (2008), Prusa and Vermulst (2013), Ahn and Zanardi (2017). …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

US–OCTG (Korea): Legal Boundary of ‘Political’ Remedy

Ahn

Levy

2020

World Trade Review

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The United States – Anti-Dumping Measures on Certain Oil Country Tubular Goods from Korea (US–OCTG (Korea)) Panel decision concerned the latest in a long line of antidumping (AD) disputes about Oil Country Tubular Goods. It was notable for a broadly permissive approach by the Panel – on all major legal issues but one, the Panel sided with the United States over Korean objections. The case itself was also notable for the US reversal of a negative preliminary determination, something that had occurred in less than 1% of prior cases. Finally, the case was notable for unusual behaviour outside of the investigative process, including both vocal political complaints and a curious decision by Korea not to appeal. We discuss the legal determinations made by the Panel and offer a new interpretation of how to think about whether AD practices are justifiable. We also describe the broader diplomatic context in which Korea and the United States interacted and consider the implications if political pressures play an increased role in determining dispute outcomes.

show abstract

“…2 There are a number of analyses of OCTG-related WTO disputes. See e.g., Grossman and Mavroidis (2005), Bown and Wauters (2008), Grossman and Wauters (2008), Prusa and Vermulst (2013), Ahn and Zanardi (2017). ,249,251,252,253,254,258,259 are merged in one panel and Appellate Body proceeding.…”

Section: Factual Background For Octg Industrymentioning

confidence: 99%

US – OCTG (Korea): Legal Boundary of 'Political' Remedy

Ahn

Levy

2019

SSRN Journal

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies, created in 1992 and currently directed by Professor Brigid Laffan, aims to develop inter-disciplinary and comparative research on the major issues facing the process of European integration, European societies and Europe's place in 21 st century global politics.The Centre is home to a large post-doctoral programme and hosts major research programmes, projects and data sets, in addition to a range of working groups and ad hoc initiatives. The research agenda is organised around a set of core themes and is continuously evolving, reflecting the changing agenda of European integration, the expanding membership of the European Union, developments in Europe's neighbourhood and the wider world.For more information: http://eui.eu/rscasThe EUI and the RSCAS are not responsible for the opinion expressed by the author(s).The Global Governance Programme is one of the flagship programmes of the Robert Schuman Centre. It is a community of outstanding professors and scholars, that produces high quality research and engages with the world of practice through policy dialogue. Established and early-career scholars work on issues of global governance within and beyond academia, focusing on four broad and interdisciplinary areas: Global Economics, Europe in the World, Cultural Pluralism and Global Citizenship.The Programme also aims to contribute to the fostering of present and future generations of policy and decision makers through its executive training programme: the Academy of Global Governance, where theory and 'real world' experience meet and where leading academics, top-level officials, heads of international organisations and senior executives discuss on topical issues relating to global governance. For more information: http://globalgovernanceprogramme.eui.euThe European University Institute and the Robert Schuman Centre are not responsible for the opinions expressed by the author(s). AbstractThe US-OCTG panel decision concerned the latest in a long line of antidumping (AD) disputes about Oil Country Tubular Goods. It was notable for a broadly permissive approach by the panel; on all major legal issues but one, the panel sided with the United States over Korean objections. The case itself was also notable for the U.S. reversal of a negative preliminary determination, something that had occurred in fewer than 1 percent of prior cases. Finally, the case was notable for unusual behavior outside of the investigative process, including both vocal political complaints and a curious decision by Korea not to appeal. We discuss the legal determinations made by the panel and offer a new interpretation of how to think about whether AD practices are justifiable. We also describe the broader diplomatic context in which Korea and the United States interacted and consider the implications if political pressures play an increased role in determining dispute outcomes.

show abstract

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

Cited by 3 publications

References 9 publications

China–GOES (Article 21.5): Time to Clarify the Standard for Price Suppression and Price Depression in AD/CVD Investigations

China–GOES (Article 21.5): Time to Clarify the Standard for Price Suppression and Price Depression in AD/CVD Investigations

US–OCTG (Korea): Legal Boundary of ‘Political’ Remedy

US – OCTG (Korea): Legal Boundary of 'Political' Remedy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About