Anti-dumping is a Necessary Part of International Trade Legislation

1234 Words 5 Pages
Processes of cooperation and integration between countries are very important in the modern world. At the present time, a profound influence and an interrelation between countries is noticeable. The result of these processes in the future should be a fully free transmission of goods, services and subjects of intellectual property, capitals and human resources. At the same time, there is still a big gap in the level of economic development of countries in the world. This imbalance creates a collision between two different policies of world trade. Some countries provide liberalisation of international trade, other countries advocate protectionism to support a domestic market by using barriers and restraints on trade. One manifestation of …show more content…
In 1968, the Anti-dumping Code was validated. At the present time, the relationship concerning international trade among the majority of countries is regulated by the WTO, which has 153 members, covering 97% of the world economy. In 1994, the Anti-dumping Code was displaced by the Agreement on Implementation of Article 4 of GATT, which is better-known as the Anti-dumping Agreement (AA). Anti-dumping regulation is a quite novel area of international law, but developing dynamically. In 1947 Anti-dumping regulation considered only goods, presently it covers exchanging dumping, social dumping, and freight dumping as well. Though the AA is part of international trade legislation, it does not mean that all WTO members are unconditionally members and bound by the AA. Members of the WTO are free to adopt the AA. However, countries those accept it must do as instructed by the AA.

The AA established the Committee of Anti-dumping Practices, which is consist of all WTO members. The Committee is an international authority, that conducts legal investigations of dumping cases. The result of an investigation is anti-dumping measure. Any anti-dumping measure could be imposed only after three facts are proved. First - an unfair price export took place. Second - there was material damage to the domestic economy for that particular industry. The last one is there had to be a cause-and-effect relationship between the first and second
Open Document