CENTRAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH BIHAR

SESSION: 2018-2023

SCHOOL OF LAW AND

GOVERNANCE

INTERNATIONAL TRADE LAW

PROJECT REPORT

ANTIDUMPING AGREEMENT

SUBMITTED BY:
GAUTAM KUMAR
HUMA WASIM
HARIOM
DEEPA SHREE

SUBMITTED TO:
Dr. KUMARI NITU
ASSISTANT PROFESSOR
CENTRAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH BIHAR

1
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

There is always a sense of gratitude one expresses to the other for their helpful and needy
service they render during all phases of life. I wish to express my deep gratitude towards all
of them.

Our deepest thanks to my International Trade Law Professor Dr. Kumari Nitu for guiding
and helping at every stage during the completion of this project with attention and care.

I would like to thank my parents for the financial support. I would also like to thank my
friends, institution and every single person who are related with this project in any way and
without whom this would have been a distant reality.

GAUTAM KUMAR
HUMA WASIM
HARIOM
DEEPA SHREE

2
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

s.no. CONTENTS Pg. no.

1. INTRODUCTION

2. HISTORY

3. DETERMINATION OF DUMPING AND

DETERMINATION OF INJURY

4. INITIATION AND CONDUCT OF

INVESTIGATION

5 PROVISIONAL MEASURES

6. PRICE UNDERTAKING

7 IMPOSITION AND COLLECTION OF DUTY

8. DURATION, TERMINATION AND REVIEW

9. RELEVANT CASE LAWS

10. CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS

3
 INTRODUCTION

Dumping is defined as the situation in which the export price of a product is lower than it’s
selling price in exporting country. it is said to be the most common form of the price
discrimination in the international trade.

Anti-dumping duties were initiated with the intention of nullifying the effects of the market
distortions created due to such unfair trade practices adopted by the aggressive exports. as a
method of protection to domestic industries, anti-dumping duties are thus levied on the
exporting country which has been accused of dumping goods in the another country.as the
anti-dumping duty is only meant to provide protection to the domestic firms in the initial
stage as per the international laws

Anti-dumping can be seen as a protective device available to the states against problem
association with in the free trade. in the recent year, a large number of countries have become
frequent user of anti-dumping. Anti-dumping is not only legal but they are also flexible in
uses. Further, anti-dumping duties can be presented not as protection but as encounter against
unfair competition.

Anti-dumping duties were introduced by the developed countries to protect their industries
again the lower price imports. developing countries support the inclusion of the provision
relating to anti-dumping duties under GATT because they wanted to levy of anti-dumping
duties to be the under international regulations.

DEFINITION OF DUMPING

The definition of dumping according to GATT is: -

The sale of products for export at a price less than the normal value where normal value
means roughly the price for which those same products are sold on the home or exporting
market.

The concept of dumping seems fair because it is recognized that producers may sell their
goods in different markets at different prices and that prices of a goods are influenced by
several market forces and may vary at different times. It may be a perfectly legitimized

4
 business activity like discounts offered by airlines to students or senior citizens etc. There
may not seem anything intrinsically unethical or illegal about dumping.

A standard technical definition of dumping is the act of charging a lower price for a good in a
foreign market than one charge for the same good in a domestic market. This is often referred
to as selling at less than "fair value". Under the World Trade Organization (WTO)
Agreement, dumping is condemned (but is not prohibited), if it causes or threatens to cause
material injury to a domestic industry in the importing country.

HISTORY

The origin of the anti-dumping legislation can be traced back to the 19th
century, when the European sugar industries appealed to their respective
governments for protection against sugar being dumped at unfairly low prices.

In 1902, there was a formal agreement on anti-dumping. Canada adopted the

first anti-dumping law in 1904, followed by the European countries and then the
US in 1916. The US law, as modified in 1921, and the Canadian one, formed
the basis for the original GATT article (Article VI of GATT) on anti-dumping
in 1947. Subsequently, codes on anti-dumping were developed during the
Kennedy Round (1962-67) and Tokyo Round (1973-79). However, these were
not binding on all GATT members; they were open to signature by those
countries that wished to do so. They were plurilateral agreements, not
multilateral ones. Unlike these, the Uruguay Round, (1986-94) anti-dumping
agreement is a multilateral agreement binding on all GATT or WTO member.

EFFECTS OF DUMPING
A. On the importing country

1. Domestic industry might be affected adversely by a decline in sales and profits.

2. If dumping is continued for a longer period, survival of the domestic industry may be
threatened.
3. Dumping may create balance of payments problems for the country subjected dumping.
B. On the Exporting Country

5
1. It must be presumed that a producer who dumps benefits from doing so, although in the case
of promotional and predatory dumping, there is an element of risk in that the ultimate
benefits, on which the loss‐making export sales are premised, may not materialize.
2. Provided its home market is shielded against arbitrage or retaliation, and consequent price
drop (which would neutralize the discrimination), dumping can have clear advantages for the
individual exporter.
3. A profitable home market provides a platform which may be used to operate in export
markets at prices much lower than could have been possible without market segregation.
4. The low export prices generate further sales which in turn lower the cost of production, an
advantage which benefits both export and home sales.
5. Dumping can still have beneficial effects on the dumper even in situations where home
market sales are made at a loss.

ADVANTAGES OF DUMPING

The main advantage of dumping is being able to sell at unfairly competitive lower price.
Generally a country will have to give the exporting businesses a huge subsidy to enable them
to sell the export below cost. The country is willing to take a loss on the product to increase
its comparable advantage in that industry. It may do this because it wants to create jobs for its
residents. It often uses dumping as an attack on the other country's industry, in the hopes of
putting that country's producers out of business, and dominating that industry.

DISADVANTAGES OF DUMPING

The main disadvantage of dumping is that it's very expensive to maintain. It can take years
for dumping to work. Meanwhile, the cost of subsidies can add to the export country's
sovereign debt. The second disadvantage is retaliation by the trade partner. This can lead to
trade restrictions and tariffs. The third is censure by international trade organizations, such as
the World Trade Organization (WTO) or the European Union (EU).

6
 DETERMINATION OF DUMPING:
It occurs when the export price of any article which is being imported to India is less than the
normal/original value of the article in the exporting nation.

Meaning of Normal Value:

It is the price at which any article or good are sold, under ordinary trade circumstances, in the
domestic market of the exporter’s territory or country 1. The act provides us with two methods
for determining the normal value of any product, which are –

i. By comparing the export price to some other appropriate country. In this case, an
appropriate country could be any country the goods are being exported to
simultaneously by the exporter. For example, in the dumping case of China, China
was exporting/dumping steel products in India and to the United Kingdom
simultaneously. In this case, the United Kingdom would be the other appropriate
country to tally the export prices with.
ii. By taking the production cost in the country of origin and adding adequate costs of
selling for profit purposes.

Meaning of Export Price and It’s Construction in the Absence of an Export Price:
The price of the goods being imported into India paid for the articles imported by the first
buyer in India is the export price of the article.

In cases where the export price is impossible to determine or isn’t reliable because of some
agreement between the exporter and the importer, then in this scenario, the export price is
evaluated on the basis of the price at which the imported article is resold to a buyer. In cases
where the article isn’t resold in a similar condition as it was imported in, then the export price
will be determined on a reasonable and logical basis.

Meaning Of Margin of Dumping:

It refers to the difference between the normal value of the product in the country it is being
exported from and the export price of the product. This margin of dumping is normally
calculated on the basis of comparing the average normal value with the average of prices of

1
 Article 9A Customs and Tariffs Act, 1975
7
export transactions; another way is comparing the normal value and the export price on a
transaction to transaction basis.

There are multiple factors affecting this comparison of the normal value and the export price,
the prices of export value and the normal value of the goods have to be put on the same
pedestal and then compared which is normally at the ex-factory stage. Factors such as the
physical aspects, levels of trade, the quantity being traded, taxation regimes and the terms of
sale, in way that affects price comparison of the normal value and the export price.

The cause of action when it comes to anti-dumping can only arise if there’s a market for the
articles being dumped into India, there has to be an Indian industry producing ‘like article’
when being put into comparison with the article being dumped. 

Material Injury to the Domestic Industry:

To have a cause of action against the alleged dumping of articles into India, one of the key
requisites that need to be established is ‘material industry to the domestic industry.’ The
injury can’t be based or anticipated on threats, statements, and allegations. There has to be
concrete evidence supporting and proving material or substantial injury. This material injury
can be analysed by the concerned authority in two ways by analysing the effect of the volume
of dumped articles imported into the country, which includes analysing the influx of dumped
imports in comparison with the production and consumption in India and how this import is
going to affect the domestic market of India.

Then comes the analysis of the effect of dumped imports on the prices of ‘like articles’ in the
Indian market, this analysis includes analysing the extent to which dumping is causing a
decrease in prices in the Indian market or if in a way is preventing price increase which
would’ve been possible otherwise.

Competency to File an Application:

On receiving a written application from the domestic industry players, a dumping
investigation can be initiated. However, a valid application has two prerequisite conditions
which are to be fulfilled-

8
 a. The domestic market producers filing the application should be holding at least 25%
of the total production of the said article in the Indian domestic industry.
b. The domestic producers in express support of the application must account for more
than 50% of the total production capacity of the said product by those supporting and
those opposing the application for investigation.

Constitution a Domestic Industry:

Includes the totality of Indian producers of the ‘like article’ in question, or it can be deemed as
those producers who are collectively producing a major chunk of the total output being produced
in India. Importers of the like articles or those in relation to the exporters and importers of the like
article are not deemed a part of the domestic industry.

Relief Recourses for the Aggrieved Industry:

1. Anti-dumping Duties: It is a protectionist measure in the form of duty or tariff that is

imposed by the domestic governments on foreign imports, to protect the domestic
industry in question. This can be imposed on ad valorem basis which basically means ‘to
the value.’
2. Lesser Duty: According to the GATT guidelines, duties more than the margin of
dumping can’t be imposed. According to the Indian laws, the designated authority has to
restrict the duty to the lower out of the dumping margin and the injury margin. The injury
margin is basically the difference between the fair selling price of the domestic industry
and the landed cost of the product in contention.

In cases where any exporter’s margin of dumping is below 2% of the export price, will be
excluded from the anti-dumping duties, even when the injury and the causal link has been
known. Also, the investigations against the exporter country shall be terminated in cases
where the dumped imports are less than 3% of the total imports, provided that the sum of
imports from all those countries, who are individually accountable for less than 3% of the
total imports, should not be more than 7% cumulatively. This is known as the De Minimis
margins.2

2
The World Trade Organisation, Third Edition, Mitsuo Matsushita

9
Initiation and Conduct of Investigation in Anti-dumping Agreement

Agreement Article 5 of the Agreement establishes the requirements for the initiation of
investigations. The Agreement specifies that investigations should generally be initiated on
the basis of written request submitted “by or on behalf of” a domestic industry. This
“standing” requirement includes numerical limits for determining whether there is sufficient
support by domestic producers to conclude that the request is made by or on behalf of the
domestic industry, and thereby warrants initiation. The Agreement establishes requirements
for evidence of dumping, injury, and causality, as well as other information regarding the
product, industry, importers, exporters, and other matters, in written applications for anti-
dumping relief, and specifies that, in special circumstances when authorities initiate without a
written application from a domestic industry, they shall proceed only if they have sufficient
evidence of dumping, injury, and causality. In order to ensure that investigations without
merit are not continued, potentially disrupting legitimate trade, Article 5.8 provides for
immediate termination of investigations in the event the volume of imports is negligible or
the margin of dumping is de minimis, and establishes numeric thresholds for these
determinations. In order to minimize the trade-disruptive effect of investigations, Article 5.10
specifies that investigations should be completed within one year, and in no case more than
18 months, after initiation.

Dumping is defined in the Agreement on Implementation of Article VI of the GATT 1994

(The Anti-Dumping Agreement) as the introduction of a product into the commerce of
another country at less than its normal value. Under Article VI of GATT 1994, and the Anti-
Dumping Agreement, WTO Members can impose anti-dumping measures, if, after
investigation in accordance with the Agreement, a determination is made (a) that dumping is
occurring, (b) that the domestic industry producing the like product in the importing country
is suffering material injury, and (c) that there is a causal link between the two. In addition to
substantive rules governing the determination of dumping, injury, and causal link, the

10
Agreement sets forth detailed procedural rules for the initiation and conduct of investigations,
the imposition of measures, and the duration and review of measures.

Provisional measures and price undertakings  

Imposition of provisional measures

Article 7 of the Agreement provides rules relating to the imposition of provisional measures.
These include the requirement that authorities make a preliminary affirmative determination
of dumping, injury, and causality before applying provisional measures, and the requirement
that no provisional measures may be applied sooner than 60 days after initiation of an
investigation. Provisional measures may take the form of a provisional duty or, preferably, a
security by cash deposit or bond equal to the amount of the preliminarily determined margin
of dumping. The Agreement also contains time limits for the imposition of provisional
measures— generally four months, with a possible extension to six months at the request of
exporters. If a Member, in its administration of anti-dumping duties, imposes duties lower
than the margin of dumping when these are sufficient to remove injury, the period of
provisional measures is generally six months, with a possible extension to nine months at the
request of exporters.

  Due process rights; one could derive from this an obligation to analyse and counteract
subsidies and dumping fairly and squarely. However, the Appellate Body looked for a
specific hook to reject the imposition of a ‘double burden’ on products from non-market
economies (NME); it held that ‘the offsetting of the same subsidization twice by the
concurrent imposition of anti-dumping duties calculated on the basis of an NME
methodology and countervailing duties3 was incompatible with SCM (Agreement on
Subsidies and Countervailing Measures)( Article 19.3)

Under Article 19.3 of the SCM Agreement, the appropriateness of the amount of
countervailing duties cannot be determined without having regard to antidumping duties
imposed on the same product to offset the same subsidization. The amount of a
countervailing duty cannot be “appropriate” in situations where that duty represents the full
amount of the subsidy and where anti-dumping duties, calculated at least to some extent on

3
US-Anti-Dumping and Countervailing Duties (China) (Appellate Body), para. 583, rejecting US— Anti-
Dumping and Countervailing Duties (China) (Panel), para. 14.128 et seq

11
the basis of the same subsidization, are imposed concurrently to remove the same injury to
the domestic industry. Dumping margins calculated based on an NME methodology are, for
the reasons explained above, likely to include some component that is attributable to
subsidization.4

Price undertakings

Article 8 of the Agreement contains rules on the offering and acceptance of price
undertakings, in lieu of the imposition of anti-dumping duties. It establishes the principle that
undertakings between any exporter and the importing Member, to revise prices, or cease
exports at dumped prices, may be entered into to settle an investigation, but only after a
preliminary affirmative determination of dumping, injury and causality has been made. It also
establishes that undertakings are voluntary on the part of both exporters and investigating
authorities. In addition, an exporter may request that the investigation be continued after an
undertaking has been accepted, and if a final determination of no dumping, no injury, or no
causality results, the undertaking shall automatically lapse.

Imposition and Collection of Antidumping Duties

Imposition of antidumping duty is optional. After an antidumping investigation is initiated,

imports of the products under investigation may suddenly increase in anticipation of the
imposition of an antidumping duty. Such a sudden increase in imports may cause damage to a
domestic industry. When such an increase is likely to occur, national antidumping authorities
may impose a provisional measure.

Article 7 of the Antidumping Agreement regulates the imposition of provisional measures by

national antidumping authorities. National antidumping authorities may apply provisional
measures only after making a preliminary affirmative determination of dumping and
determining that provisional measures are necessary to prevent damage that may occur during
the period of investigation. In general, provisional measures may be applied for no more than
four months. Provisional measures may be applied for six months, however, if so, requested
by exporters that account for a substantial portion of the transactions in question.
4
Anti-Dumping and Countervailing Duties (China) (Appellate Body), para. 582.

12
There is a “lesser duty rule” which states that the authorities impose duties at level lower than
the margin of dumping but adequate to remove injury. It simply means the maximum amount
of antidumping duty is the difference between the domestic price and the export price. If a
duty less than this can effectively eliminate the harm of dumping to a domestic industry, a
lesser duty is regarded as desirable.5 The collection of duty in a non-discriminatory basis on
imports of product from all sources found to be dumped and causing injury except imports
from those sources from which price undertakings have been accepted.

The authorities shall name the supplier or suppliers of the dumped product. In case several
suppliers from more than one country, the authorities may name either all supliers involved
or all supplying countries involved.

When antidumping is assessed on retrospective basis

The determination of final liability for the payment of antidumping duties shall take place as
soon as possible, normally within 12 months, and in no case more than 18 months, after the
date on which a request of final assessment of the amount of antidumping duty has been
made.

When antidumping duty is assessed on prospective basis

Provisions shall be made for a prompt refund upon request, of any duty paid in excess of the
margin of dumping. Refund of any such duty paid in excess of the actual margin of dumping
shall normally take place within 12 months and in no case more than 18 months, after the
date on which a request for a refund has been made by an importer of the product subject to
antidumping duty.

Retroactive imposition of dumping duties

As a general rule, antidumping duties cannot be imposed retroactively, but may be applied
only after all requirements for the imposition of antidumping duties have been fulfilled. 6 If
the imposition of duties is based on the finding of material injury, as opposed to the threat of
material injury antidumping duties may be collected as of provisional measures were
imposed. Means, where a final determination of injury (but not threat or material retardation)
5
AGREEMENT ON IMPLEMENTATION OF ARTICLE VI OF THE GENERAL AGREEMENT ON
TARIFFS AND TRADE 1994, Art. 9.
6
AGREEMENT ON IMPLEMENTATION OF ARTICLE VI OF THE GENERAL AGREEMENT ON
TARIFFS AND TRADE 1994, Art. 10.1 and 10.4.

13
is made, duties may be applied retroactively to the date of provisional measures. 7 Where a
final determination is negative, any cash and bonds deposited must be refunded.8

Retroactive application of the final duties to a date not more than 90 days prior to the
application of provisional measures in certain exceptional circumstances involving a history
of dumping, massive dumped imports and potential undermining of remedial effects of the
final duty.

DURATION, TERMINATION AND REVIEW OF ANTIDUMPING MEASURES

Duration: The general rule says that the antidumping duties shall remain in force only so
long as and to the extent necessary to counteract the dumping that is causing injury. 9 The
term “necessary” here determines the conjunction with a finding of whether the continued
imposition of the duty is needed to offset dumping and whether the dumping and the injury
would be ‘likely to recur’ if the duty were removed.10

Termination: “Sunset” requirement for dumping duties shall normally terminate no later
than 5 years11 unless a review investigation establishes that expiry of the duty would likely
lead to continuation or reoccurrence of dumping injury.12

Review: There is also an obligation to review the need for continued antidumping duties after
‘a reasonable period of time’.13 After their imposition or after the date of their most recent
review unless it is determined that the expiry of the duty would be likely to lead to a
continuation or recurrence of dumping and injury.14

CASE LAWS:

India v. China
7
AGREEMENT ON IMPLEMENTATION OF ARTICLE VI OF THE GENERAL AGREEMENT ON
TARIFFS AND TRADE 1994, Art. 10.2.
8
AGREEMENT ON IMPLEMENTATION OF ARTICLE VI OF THE GENERAL AGREEMENT ON
TARIFFS AND TRADE 1994, Art. 10.5.
9
Mitsuo Matsushita, Thomas J. Schoenbaum, et.al. The World Trade Organisation Law Practice and Policy
491 (Oxford University Press, UK, 3rd Edition 2015)
10
Mitsuo Matsushita, Thomas J. Schoenbaum, et.al. The World Trade Organisation Law Practice and Policy
491 (Oxford University Press, UK, 3rd Edition 2015)
11
AGREEMENT ON IMPLEMENTATION OF ARTICLE VI OF THE GENERAL AGREEMENT ON
TARIFFS AND TRADE 1994. Art. 11.3.6
12
Ibid
13
AGREEMENT ON IMPLEMENTATION OF ARTICLE VI OF THE GENERAL AGREEMENT ON
TARIFFS AND TRADE 1994. Art. 11.2.
14
Mitsuo Matsushita, Thomas J. Schoenbaum, et.al. The World Trade Organisation Law Practice and Policy
491 (Oxford University Press, UK, 3rd Edition 2015).

14
The Designated Authority (hereinafter referred to as the “Authority”) received an application
from M/s Cabot Sanmar Limited (hereinafter also referred to as “the applicant” or “the
petitioner” or “the domestic industry”) in accordance with the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, as
amended from time to time (hereinafter also referred to as the Act) and the Customs Tariff
(Identification, Assessment and Collection of anti-dumping Duty on Dumped Articles and for
Determination of Injury) Rules, 1995, as amended from time to time (hereinafter also referred
to as “the Rules” or “the AD Rules”) thereof for imposition of anti-dumping duty on the
imports of “Untreated Fumed Silica” (hereinafter also referred to as “the product under
consideration” or “the PUC” or “the subject goods”) from China PR and Korea RP
(hereinafter also referred to as the “subject countries”)15.

Having regard to the lesser duty rule followed by the Authority, the Authority recommends
the imposition of the anti-dumping duty equal to the lesser of margin of dumping and the
margin of injury so as to remove the injury to the domestic industry. Accordingly, the
Authority recommends imposition of the antidumping duty on the imports of the subject
goods, originating in or exported from the subject countries, from the date of the notification
to be issued in this regard by the Central Government, equal to the amount mentioned in Col.
7 of the duty table appended below. The landed value of imports for this purpose shall be
assessable value as determined by the Customs under Customs Act, 1962 and applicable level
of custom duties except duties levied under Section 3, 3A, 8B, 9, 9A of the Customs Tariff
Act,1975.
 India slaps anti-dumping duty on steel from China, Vietnam, Korea

The duty is applicable on products originating from or exported from China, Vietnam
and Korea and imported into India. In a bid to curtail cheaper imports of flat steel in the
value-added segment, the government on Monday announced anti-dumping on flat-rolled
product of steel, plated or coated with aluminium and zinc.However, the duty is applicable on
products originating from or exported from China, Vietnam, and South Korea and imported
into India. The anti-dumping duty will be effective for a period of five years from the date of
imposition of provisional anti-dumping effective October 15, 2019, and shall be payable in
Indian currency.

15
https://taxguru.in/custom-duty/anti-dumping-investigation-imports-untreated-fumed-silica-2.html

15
India v. European Communities. (EC bed linen Case)

MEASURE AND PRODUCT AT ISSUE

• Measure at issue: Definitive anti-dumping duties imposed by the European Communities,

including the European Communities' zeroing method used in calculating the dumping
margin.

• Product at issue: Cotton-type bed linen imports from India.

The Appellate Body upheld the Panel's finding that the practice of “zeroing”, as applied by
the European Communities in this case in establishing “the existence of margins of
dumping”, was inconsistent with Art. 2.4.2. By “zeroing” the “negative dumping margins”,
the European Communities had failed to take fully into account the entirety of the prices of
some export transactions. As a result, the European Communities did not establish “the
existence of margins of dumping” for cotton-type bed linen on the basis of a comparison of
the weighted average normal value with the weighted average of prices of all transactions
involving all models or types of cotton-type bed linen.

The Appellate Body reversed the Panel's finding and found that the method set out in
Art. 2.2.2(ii) for calculating amounts for administrative, selling and general costs and profits
cannot be applied where there is data for only one other exporter or producer. The Appellate
Body also found that, in calculating amounts for profits, sales by other exporters or producers
not made in the ordinary course of trade may not be excluded. The Appellate Body, therefore,
concluded that the European Communities acted inconsistently with Art. 2.2.2(ii).

The Panel dismissed India's claim related to ADA Art. 6, on the grounds that India failed to
identify that provision in its panel request and, thus, denied the responding party and third
parties of notice. The Panel did not accept India's reliance on the fact that this provision
(Art. 6) was included in its consultations request and was actually discussed during
consultations, considering that consultations are a tool to clarify a dispute and often issues
discussed during consultations will not be brought in the actual case.

16
 The Appellate Body upheld the Panel's decision not to examine India's claim on “other
factors” under ADA Art. 3.5, as it had been resolved by the original panel (i.e. the claim was
dismissed as India had failed to make a prima facie case) and thus was outside the Panel's
terms of reference. The Appellate Body concluded that the original panel's finding, which
was not appealed and was adopted by the DSB, provided a “final resolution” of the dispute
between the parties regarding that particular claim and that specific component of the
implementation measure.

CONCLUSION

No country in world today is self-suffering.in facts, every country is dependent on one or

another directly or indirectly. At the same time, it is important to have a free and fair trade to
ensure equal conditions and opportunities for all the countries to prospectus. dumping in one
such practices hamper this prospectus.

Article VI of GATT accepts the proposition that dumping is an unfair trade practice.it states
that remedy against dumping in the anti-dumping duty which is to be imposed only upon
finding of injury caused by the dumped imports. Today large number of countries have
become frequent users of antidumping measures. The rampant use of antidumping measures
is criticized as limiting the objective of WTO. On one hand many countries support it because
it can be used to counter the unfair trade and on the hand there is a fear that antidumping
measures are being used as protectionist measures. Therefore, this process should be more
transparent. Dumping is so broadly defined in Article VI and the Antidumping Agreement
that conduct that is normal behaviour may be regarded as dumping. It may be rational
behaviour for an enterprise to set a high price in the domestic market if the elasticity of
demand for a product is small, and to set a lower price in an export market where elasticity is
greater. One might argue that antidumping should be replaced by measures developed in
competition law, such as the control of predatory pricing. In the long run, this should be the
goal. In the short term, however, we must live with differences of market conditions and of
competition policies among trading nations. There are many imperfections in both national
and international markets. Politically, the constituency for antidumping is different from that
for competition law. Accordingly, a proposal that antidumping be abolished is probably not
possible. In light of this situation, we propose that the Antidumping Agreement be amended
to incorporate concepts that have developed in competition law.

17
BIBLIOGRAPHY

18