Abstract
The note questions the effectiveness and necessity of current antidumping laws in the United States, particularly in light of their detrimental effect on efforts to liberalize trading practices under North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the Canada-United States Free Trade Agreement (FTA). The current source of justification for these laws, found in the principles of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), is questioned. Arguments for maintaining the status quo as well as arguments calling for a change to or abolition of the antidumping laws are examined. This note concludes that the economic interests of the United States, domestic producers and labor, and United States consumers would be better served, and the goals of NAFTA and the FTA more quickly attained, by abandoning the current United States antidumping laws. A more active application of antitrust law under section 2 of the Sherman Act and section 301 remedies, where it is necessary to protect important United States interests, is favored.
Recommended Citation
Bailey, J. Wesley
(1992)
"Trade Law: The Protectionist Use of Antidumping Laws—Should the Law Be Changed?,"
Florida Journal of International Law: Vol. 7:
Iss.
3, Article 7.
Available at:
https://scholarship.law.ufl.edu/fjil/vol7/iss3/7