U.s. Anti-dumping Trade Effects And Non-trade Effect

Anti-dumping (AD) has been frequently used against Chinese companies in recent years US-China trade frictions. This paper analyzes this phenomenon by using various methodologies such as descriptive statistics, comparative analysis and etc through both theoretical research and empircal test, to understand the trade effects and non-trade effects of AD from the perspective of multi-stakeholders and the whole industrial chain.First, based on the perspective of different stakeholders and the perspective of industrial chain, this paper studied the trade effects and non-trade effects of AD through a theoretical framework, and verified this theory through descriptive statistics and comparative analysis. AD's trade effects from the entire AD process of view:before the AD measures actually implemented, there does have obvious investigation effect, the final ruling effect and trade diversion effects; after the 1-3 years, when the AD measures actually implemented, China would response with retaliatory AD actions, and other importing countries may follow the U.S and response with echoing AD actions. AD's non-trade effects from the industrial chain of view:after the AD investigation started, the US importing price from China appears prices upward effects, and Chinese company may apply jumping investment to avoid possible AD duty levied. There are also industrial relevance effect of both downstream and the industry itself.Second, this paper investigated trade effects and non-trade effects of AD, using the paper industry as an example. This paper started from the differences between characteristics of the U.S. paper industry and Chinese paper industry, to study the real effect resulting from the U.S. AD protection. The results showed that, what led to the frequent AD actions from U.S. to China's paper product since 2004 is, mainly due to the boom of Chinese domestic paper industry and the decline of American paper industry. For China, the trade depression effect and the echoing effect of AD serionsly hurt the the industry's export economy. For the United States, in short term, the trade diversion effect of AD weakened the practical effect of protection, when China's retaliatory AD also depressed the industry's exports; in long term, this protection from the United States did not able to revive the industry, only to maintain employment within the industry from continue to deteriorate. Finally, the paper summarized the research conclusion and made suggestions on future policies. Due to the high winning rate for the U.S. in the adjudication and the strategic arrangement characteristic of AD, the paper suggested that China should actively involve in the WTO rule-making and adjustment, fundamentally improve international environment for export enterprises; against the industry relevance effects, the paper concluded that China should focus on the consolidation and update of the industry chain to buffer the industrial impact to domestic industries from the AD. Furthermore, to minimum the negative AD effects on the domestic economics, as stated in the paper, industry associations should emphasis on AD prosecution response guide and action, and provide dumping early warning. For the companies, they should follow the long-term strategies, to invest oversea is one of the best ways to avoid AD prosecute.