Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T16:17:42.016Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

7 - United States – Definitive Safeguard Measures on Imports of Circular Welded Carbon Quality Line Pipe From Korea

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 July 2010

Gene M. Grossman
Affiliation:
Professor of International Economics, Princeton University
Petros C. Mavroidis
Affiliation:
Professor of Law, University of Neuchâtel and Columbia University
Henrik Horn
Affiliation:
Stockholms Universitet
Petros C. Mavroidis
Affiliation:
Université de Neuchâtel, Switzerland
Get access

Summary

Facts of the Case

This dispute concerns the imposition of a definitive safeguard measure by the United States on imports of circular welded carbon quality line pipe (“line pipe”) from Korea (WTO DOC. WTO/DS 202/AB/R). The measure was imposed following an investigation conducted by the US International Trade Commission (USITC). The USITC determined in a safeguard investigation initiated on 29 July 1999 that “circular welded carbon quality line pipe … is being imported into the United States in such increased quantities as to be a substantial cause of serious injury or the threat of serious injury.” In its investigation, the USITC identified a number of factors apart from increased imports that might have caused serious injury or threat of serious injury to the domestic line pipe industry. The Commission concluded that increased imports were “a cause which is important and not less than any other cause” and that, therefore, the statutory requirement of “substantial cause” had been met.

By Proclamation of the President of the United States dated 11 February 2000, the United States imposed a definitive safeguard measure on imports of line pipe in the form of a duty increase for three years applicable to imports above 9,000 short tons from each source country, effective 1 March 2000. The applicable duty was increased by 19 percent ad valorem in the first year, 15 percent in the second year, and 11 percent in the third year.

Type
Chapter
Information
The WTO Case Law of 2002
The American Law Institute Reporters' Studies
, pp. 99 - 132
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2005

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Baldwin, Richard E. and Robert-Nicoud, Frédéric. 2001. Entry and Asymmetric Lobbying: Why Governments Pick Losers. Manuscript, Graduate Institute for International Studies, Geneva.
Burtless, Gary, Lawrence, Robert Z., Litan, Robert E. and Shapiro, Robert J. 1998. Globaphobia: Confronting Fears About Open Trade. The Brookings Institution: Washington.Google Scholar
Cassing, James H. and Ochs, Jack. 1978. International Trade, Factor Market Distortions, and the Optimal Dynamic Subsidy: Comment. American Economic Review 68, 950–955.Google Scholar
Davidson, Carl and Matusz, Stephen J. 2001. On Adjustment Costs. Manuscript, Michigan State University.
Davidson, Carl and Matusz, Stephen J. 2002. An Overlapping Generations Model of Escape Clause Protection. Manuscript, Michigan State University.
Deardorff, Alan V. 1987. Safeguards Policy and the Conservative Social Welfare Function. pp. 22–40 in Kierzkowski, H., ed., Protection and Competition in International Trade: Essay in Honor of W. Max Corden. Blackwell Publishers: Oxford.Google Scholar
Feenstra, Robert C. 1992. How Costly is Protection?Journal of Economic Perspectives 12, 159–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grossman, Gene M. 1986. Imports as a Cause of Injury: The Case of the U.S. Steel Industry. Journal of International Economics 121, 201–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grossman, Gene M. and Helpman, Elhanan. 1994. Protection for Sale. American Economic Review 84, 833–850.Google Scholar
Grossman, Gene M. and Mavroidis, Petros C. 2003. Here Today, Gone Tomorrow? Privatization and the Injury Caused by Non-Recurring Subsidies. A Discussion of the Appellate Body Report on United States – Imposition of Countervailing Duties on Certain Hot-Rolled Lead and Bismuth Carbon Steel Products Originating in the United Kingdom in Horn, H. and Mavroidis, P. C., eds., The WTO Case Law of 2001. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge UK.Google Scholar
Horn, Henrik and Mavroidis, Petros C. 2003. What Should be Required of a Safeguard Investigation? A Discussion of the Appellate Body Report On United States – Safeguard Measures on Imports of Fresh, Chilled or Frozen Lamb Meat from New Zealand and Australia in Horn, H. and Mavroidis, P. C., eds., The WTO Case Law of 2001. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge UK.Google Scholar
Hufbauer, Gary Clyde and Elliot, Kimberly Ann. 1994. Measuring the Costs of Protection in the United States. Institute of International Economics: Washington DC.Google Scholar
Irwin, Douglas A. 2002. Causing Problems? The WTO Review of Causation and Injury Attribution in U.S. Section 201 Cases. NBER Working Paper No. 9815, Cambridge MA.
Kelly, Kenneth. 1988. The Analysis of Causality in Escape Clause Cases. Journal of Industrial Economics, 37, 187–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lapan, Harvey. 1976. International Trade, Factor Market Distortions, and the Optimal Dynamic Subsidy. American Economic Review, 66, 335–346.Google Scholar
Messerlin, Patrick A. 2001. Measuring the Costs of Protection in Europe: European Commercial Policy in the 2000s. Institute of International Economics: Washington DC.Google Scholar
Mussa, Michael. 1982. Government Policy and the Adjustment Process. pp. 73–120 in Bhagwati, Jagdish, ed., Import Competition and Response. University of Chicago Press: Chicago.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mussa, Michael. 1984. The Adjustment Process and the Timing of Trade Liberalization. NBER Working Paper No. 1458, Cambridge MA.
Neary, J. Peter. 1982. Intersectoral Capital Mobility, Wage Stickiness, and the Case for Adjustment Assistance. pp. 39–67 in Bhagwati, Jagdish, ed., Import Competition and Response. University of Chicago Press: Chicago.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rousslang, Donald J. 1988. Import Injury in U.S. Trade Law: An Economic View. International Review of Law and Economics 8, 177–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sazanami, Yoko, Urata, Shujiro, and Kawai, Hiroki. 1995. Measuring the Costs of Protection in Japan. Institute of International Economics: Washington DC.Google Scholar
Sykes, Alan O. 1991. Protectionism as a ‘Safeguard’: A Positive Analysis of GATT Escape Clause with Normative Speculations. University of Chicago Law Review, 58, 255–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sykes, Alan O. 2003. The Safeguards Mess: A Critique of WTO Jurisprudence. John M. Olin Law & Economics Working Paper No. 187 (2D Series), University of Chicago Law School.

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×