scholarly journals Dumping – Unfair Trade Practice

2021 ◽  
Vol 92 ◽  
pp. 06033
Author(s):  
Roman Serences ◽  
Dagmar Kozelova
Keyword(s):  
International Trade ◽  
Trade Policy ◽  
Price Discrimination ◽  
Imperfect Competition ◽  
Economies Of Scale ◽  
Value Added ◽  
Graphical Analysis ◽  
Unfair Trade ◽  
Trade Practice ◽  
Unfair Trade Practice

Research background: The Globalisation gradually has removed the protection that has existed to protect producers against unfair trade practices. Existence of imperfect competition within an international trade is presented by descending curve of average costs while increasing economies of scale; it often leads some producers not to adjust the price in relation to the marker. In this case, we speak about dumping. Purpose of the article: The article deals with dumping issue – an unfair trade practice analysing EU trade policy including antidumping, related Slovak legislation, price discrimination and dumping model. Methods: From a methodological point of view, the article is divided into four parts; description of trade policy, antidumping and its legislation, price discrimination and dumping model. Methods of synthesis, critical thinking and graphical analysis were used. Findings & Value added: In practice, accounting of different prices to the various consumers is called a price discrimination. The most common type of price discrimination in foreign trade is a dumping. It is a price practice when a company accounts lower price for exported goods compared to the same goods sale at home. World Trade Organization (WTO) allow counter such injury via trade defence instruments (TDIs). The EU TDIs are appropriate to tackle new challenges to international trade, because the Commission had done to modernise the EU’s basic Anti-Dumping (AD) Regulations.

scholarly journals The Basic for Trade According to International Trade Theories and Their Relation with Trade Policies

Ekonomika ◽  
1999 ◽  
Vol 47 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gražina Jatuliavičienė
Keyword(s):  
International Trade ◽  
Competitive Advantage ◽  
Comparative Advantage ◽  
Imperfect Competition ◽  
Economies Of Scale ◽  
Export Performance ◽  
Trade Policies ◽  
Theoretical Evaluation

In the article is presented an overview over some of the competing theories aimed at explaining the basis and gains of international trade. Key classical concepts such as absolute and comparative advantage are explained and extended to include modern-day realities. The article also deals with important new trade theories, which base trade on economies of scale and imperfect competition, as well as on competitive advantage. This leads to the theoretical evaluation of a country’s trade policies and their impact on export performance.

scholarly journals Comparative Advertising in India: Need to Strengthen Regulations

2005 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 67-76 ◽  
Author(s):  
Akhileshwar Pathak
Keyword(s):  
Consumer Protection ◽  
Final Decision ◽  
Comparative Advertising ◽  
Adequate Knowledge ◽  
Consumer Protection Act ◽  
Unfair Trade ◽  
Trade Practice ◽  
Long Time ◽  
The Law ◽  
Unfair Trade Practice

With the liberalization and globalization of the Indian economy, firms have been aggressively and vigorously promoting their products and services. In a comparative environment, every representation of a product or service is about what ‘others are not.’ These practices raise questions about truthfulness and fairness of representation of products and services. This paper explores regulations on comparative advertising of products and services in the context of globalization and liberalization in India. The Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices (MRTP) Act, 1969, was amended in 1984 to introduce a chapter on unfair trade practices. One of the provisions constitutes any representation which ‘gives false or misleading facts disparaging the goods, services or trade of another person’ to be an unfair trade practice. The MRTP Commission and the Supreme Court have given shape to the provision. Most comparative advertisements refer to rival products as ‘ordinary,’ instead of specifically mentioning names of products. Aggrieved firms have claimed that ‘ordinary’ refers to all products other than the advertised one. The MRTP Commission, however, has maintained that the wording in the law �goods of another person� implies disparagement of an identifiable product of a specific manufacturer. Further, only if the disparagement is based on ‘false and misleading facts’ that the advertisement becomes an unfair trade practice. Establishing facts often requires detailed scientific and technical assessment of the products. Our courts are not equipped to deal with this. As courts can take a long time to settle a dispute, what has become crucial is whether a court would award intermediate injunction or not. This is restraining the party from advertising pending a final decision by the court. In fact, by the time interim injunction is granted, the advertisement may have abready done the damage. The law makes provision for compensating the party for ‘loss of business and profit.’ The courts, however, have found computing losses to be not free from ‘complications and complexities.’ Thus, courts have not been awarding compensation. All these factors together have left the field of comparative advertisement effectively unregulated. The major findings of this study in this context are: The opening up of the economy, on its own, is not going to create and sustain competition. Protection against unfair trade practices has been available under the Consumer Protection Act. Thus, the repeal of the MRTP Act would not be of any significance. Not only the consumers but even the firms need adequate law against unfair trade practices to have some �rules of the game� for competing among themselves. But, within the structure of the Consumer Protection Act, competing firms cannot be �consumers� to approach a consumer forum. The state would need to develop adequate knowledge of the working of businesses in a free economy, enact laws, and create infrastructure and mechanisms for sustaining competition.

Regional trade agreements and the new theory of trade

2011 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 49-63 ◽  
Author(s):  
Neelesh Gounder ◽  
Biman Chand Prasad
Keyword(s):  
International Trade ◽  
Trade Policy ◽  
Imperfect Competition ◽  
Trade Agreements ◽  
Regional Trade Agreements ◽  
Trade Policies ◽  
Regional Trade ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Gains And Losses

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to explore the two issues of regional trade agreements (RTAs) and the new theory of international trade and draw conclusions for Pacific Island countries (PICs). The authors provide a deeper conceptual treatment of the consequences of RTAs and analyse the new theory of international trade to explore its implications for trade policy in PICs.Design/methodology/approachWith regard to RTAs, the argument is developed in the context of the conjecture that questions the benefits from adopting more open trade policies with neighbours while maintaining restrictive policies towards the rest of the world. The authors draw on international and regional analytical literature and on recent modelling work to review critically the possible gains and losses of RTAs for PICs. In the latter issue, the focus is on the roles of imperfect competition and scale economies and their relevance to PICs.FindingsFreeing up trade gradually and unilaterally and realizing the benefits of comparative advantage remains the best way to maximise welfare. PICs could be worse off under a complex system of overlapping RTAs and existence of RTAs by Australia and New Zealand outside the region has the possibility of marginalizing weak PICs economies.Practical implicationsPICs are currently at a critical juncture in terms of trade policy making with various trade agreements being thrown in the region and this paper has the capacity to provide some answers to policy makers on the approach to take.Originality/valueThe paper offers insights into regional trade agreements and the new theory of trade.

Anti-Dumping Duties in Canada

1966 ◽  
Vol 4 ◽  
pp. 131-160
Author(s):  
K. C. Mackenzie
Keyword(s):  
Price Discrimination ◽  
Technical Problems ◽  
Unfair Trade ◽  
Trade Practice ◽  
International Price ◽  
The Government ◽  
National Boundaries ◽  
National Governments ◽  
Domestic Economies ◽  
Considerable Pressure

The regulation of international price discrimination, commonly referred to as “dumping,” has been one of the most vexing technical problems to trouble international trade in this century. A favourite weapon of a firm or cartel bent on coercing or eliminating competition has been the price war — sales at below cost for the purpose of driving competitors into line or out of the market. This type of unfair trade practice is not limited by national boundaries, but the normal techniques of controlling it, through antitrust or anti-combines legislation, are largely confined to domestic economies as national governments lack authority to regulate competitors operating exclusively in foreign jurisdictions.Canadian manufacturers have been particularly sensitive to dumping because of the presence next door of large and powerful American competitors and of the close economic proximity of the industries of Britain and continental Europe. Consequently, it is not surprising that Canada pioneered in the field of legislation against dumping, enacting the original provisions in 1904. At that time the government was under considerable pressure from Canadian industry to increase tariffs generally and the introduction of anti-dumping legislation was designed to pacify this group without resorting to an overall increase in customs duties.

Legal Responses to Economic Liberalization: The Case of Unfair Trade Practices

2004 ◽  
Vol 29 (3) ◽  
pp. 59-70
Author(s):  
Akhileshwar Pathak
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Restrictive Trade ◽  
Legal Responses ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Unfair Trade ◽  
Trade Practice ◽  
Information Work ◽  
Almost All ◽  
Rules Of The Game ◽  
Unfair Trade Practice

This paper traces the evolution of law and practices in the past 20 years focusing on one aspect of unfair trade practices — unfairness in holding of games, contests, lotteries, and similar schemes for promoting sales and services in the context of India transitioning from a state controlled to a liberalized economy. With competition in the economy, firms have got into aggressive and competitive trade practices to entice the customers. These practices raise questions about the truthfulness and fairness of representation of products, services, advertisements, and schemes and modalities for promotion of products and services. There is a need for adequate law against unfair trade practices and a justice delivery system to have some ‘rules of the game’ to compete among themselves. The Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices (MRTP) Act, 1969, was amended in 1984 to introduce a chapter on unfair trade practices. One of the provisions pertained to the holding of games and lotteries. It stated that ‘the conduct of any contest, lottery, game of chance or skill’ for promoting sales, services or business interest was an unfair trade practice and should, therefore, be disallowed. Following the provision, the MRTP Commission had stopped almost all promotion schemes which had an element of draw or lottery. For example, Whirlpool Ltd. had launched a ‘Scratch a Gift Scheme’ and Coca-Cola Ltd. had introduced a promotional scheme for Coke. Considering them to be lottery schemes, the Commission had restrained the companies. The judgement of the Supreme Court in the ‘Horlicks Hidden Wealth Prize Offer’ changed the entire scenario. The Commission considered this scheme to be a kind of lottery and, thus, an unfair trade practice. However, the Supreme Court, in its short judgement in 1998, commented that this was not a case of lottery as there was no draw of lots or that a price was charged for participation in the draw. The fact that some bottles of Horlicks contained a slip of paper which entitled the buyer to a prize is not a lottery in the ordinary sense of the word. Following the judgement, in all the pending cases before the Commission, the parties successfully argued that their schemes did not attract the provision of unfair trade practice as they had not charged extra for participation in the scheme. Ever since, there has been no restraint on holding of such promotion schemes. In this context, the firms would need to do the following: objectively examine if such schemes have any effect on the promotion of products demonstrate the genuineness of a scheme by disclosing vital information work towards formulating appropriate regulations.

scholarly journals USA - China: bad peace is better than a good “trade war”

2020 ◽  
Vol 28 (2) ◽  
pp. 273-287
Author(s):  
Stepan A. Ushanov ◽  
Sayar Akhmad Reshad
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Trade ◽  
Unfair Trade ◽  
Trade Practice ◽  
Key Features ◽  
Trade War ◽  
Good Trade ◽  
Better Than ◽  
Unfair Trade Practice

Article is dedicated to the trade and economic links of USA and China. The authors tried to find out key features and characteristics of these cooperation. At the same time the authors tried to analyze the logic and the reasons of the trade war that has been escalated by USA against China. It needs to underline that the unfair trade practice of China foreign trade and transfer of technologies led to the American Administration protectionism policy.

Reconciling Israeli Antidumping Law With WTO/GATT International Trade Law Rules

1998 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 81-138 ◽  
Author(s):  
Talia Einhorn
Keyword(s):  
International Trade ◽  
Price Discrimination ◽  
Export Market ◽  
Home Market ◽  
Domestic Industry ◽  
Playing Field ◽  
Trade Law ◽  
International Trade Law ◽  
Trade Practice ◽  
Gatt 1994

Dumping is defined, basically, as the sale of goods to an export market at a price below that charged for comparable goods in the exporter's home market. The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) does not forbid such action, not even when injurious to the competing domestic industry. However, it has taken the view that dumping constitutes an unfair trade practice. Under GATT, Article VI Contracting Parties (or Members, as they are now termed in the GATT 1994 Agreements) are authorized, as an exception to other GATT obligations, to unilaterally impose antidumping (hereinafter: AD) duties to counteract the effects of dumping. The duties should create a level playing field in which producers all over the world will be able to compete fairly with each other. The principles sound simple and straightforward, yet their application is one of the most contentious topics in international trade law.The economic coherence of AD rules is controversial. In international trade, price discrimination between national markets is typically made possible when the exporter has a powerful position in the home market and re-exportation to that market is not feasible. In the domestic arena price discrimination is countered by the laws of competition and antitrust. International trade law offers states a very different remedy, that first and foremost protects the competing local industry, regardless of the procompetitive or anticompetitive effects of dumping on the market as a whole.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document