Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Steel: A new round of protectionism in American trade

  • Report
  • Published:
Intereconomics

Abstract

Traditionally the American steel industry is the most protected industrial sector in the USA and internationally it is the largest user of anti-dumping and anti-subsidy proceedings. At the end of 1994 a ruling from the GATT Panel settled the most recent trade dispute in the steel market. A number of the anti-dumping and anti-subsidy proceedings applied for by US integrated steel producers in 1992 remain in effect. The following paper outlines the latest trade dispute in the steel trade, beginning with an overview of the various rounds of protectionism to date, and seeks to analyse the background to and causes of the dispute.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Cf. Richard Boltuck and Robert E. Litan: Down in the Dumps, Washington 1991; pp. 2.

  2. Integrated steelworks are production units in which pig-iron production, subsequent steel production and steel processing are all combined. Cf. Peter Oberender and Georg Rüter: Stahlindustrie, in: Marktökonomie, Munich 1989, p. 39.

  3. Cf. Rainer Kulms: Das Antidumpingrecht im amerikanischen and europäischen Recht, Baden-Baden 1988, pp. 92 ff.; Frank Benyon and Jacques Bourgeois: The European Community—United States Steel Agreement, in: Common Market Law Review 21, 1984, pp. 305–354, here pp. 319 ff.; A. Austmann: Basispreise und Trigger-Preise im Antidumpingrecht, Heidelberg 1989, pp. 158 ff.; Hans Mueller and Hans van der Ven: Perils in the Brussels-Washington Steel Pact of 1982, in: The World Economy, Vol. 5, No. 3, 1982, pp. 259–278; Thomas Grunert: Der transatlantische Stahlstreit in den achtziger Jahren: Integrationsfortschritt über Aussenhandelskonflikte?, in: Integration, Vol. 8, 1/85, pp. 318 ff.; Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, 2nd December 1992, No. 280, p. 38; Stahlmarkt, 5/92, p. 15; and Metal Bulletin Monthly, May 1994, p. 14.

  4. Cf. Stahlmarkt 7/1991, p. 13.

  5. Cf. Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, 12th December 1992, No. 289, p. 14.

  6. Cf. Stahlmarkt, 11/91, p. 15.

  7. Cf. Stahlmarkt, 11/91, pp. 19.

  8. Cf. Stahlmarkt, 5/92, p. 15.

  9. Cf. Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, 18th April 1992.

  10. Ibid.

  11. Germany, Italy, France, UK, Belgium, the Netherlands, Italy and Spain; cf. Stahl und Eisen, 14th September 1992.

  12. Cf. Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, 2nd July 1992.

  13. Cf. Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, 24th June 1993, No. 143, p. 15.

  14. In November 1992 France demanded that the EC Commission take retaliatory measures, but it declined to do so because of the “small scale of the dispute”. Cf. Süddeutsche Zeitung, 30th September 1992; Ruhrnachrichten, 7th October 1992.

  15. Cf. Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, 2nd July 1992.

  16. Cf. Stahlmarkt 9/92, p. 19.

  17. For example, provisional duties on imports of French steel were 11–23% and the final duties 44–79%.

  18. The duty on steel imports from Italy was increased from 59% to 73%. Cf. Metal Bulletin, 24th June 1993, p. 19.

  19. Cf. US International Trade Commission: Steel Semiannual Monitoring Report, September 1994, Publication 2807, Annex E 2.

  20. Cf. Stahlmarkt, 8/92, p. 19.

  21. Cf. Stahlmarkt, 12/92, p. 21.

  22. Cf. Metal Bulletin, 22nd April 1993, p. 22.

  23. Cf. Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, 18th February 1993, No. 41, p. 11.

  24. Cf. Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, 7th June 1993, No. 129, p. 13.

  25. Cf. Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, 24th June 1993, No. 143, p. 15.

  26. “Electrosteel producer” and “minimills” refer to the same class of firms.

  27. Cf. Metal Bulletin, 19th July 1993, p. 19.

  28. Cf. footnote 10. Ct. Stahlmarkt, 11/91, pp. 19.

  29. Cf. Metal Bulletin, 28th March 1994, p. 19.

  30. Cf. Stahlmarkt, 6/92, p. 10.

  31. Cf. United States—General Accounting Office: The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade—Uruguay Round Final Act Should Produce Overall US Economic Gains, Vol. 2, Washington D.C. 1994, p. 173.

  32. Cf. Metal Bulletin, 4th October 1993, p. 19.

  33. Cf. Metal Bulletin, 30th June 1994, p. 17.

  34. Cf. Metal Bulletin Monthly, May 1994, pp. 13–14; Metal Bulletin, 30th June 1994, p. 17.

  35. Cf. EUROPE, 21st September 1992, and 28th May 1993, No. 5989, p. 9.

  36. Prior to amendment by the Uruguay Round.

  37. Agreement on Interpretation and Application of Articles VI, XVI and XXIII of the GATT; and Art. 12, Para. 2; Frank Benyon and Jacques Bourgeois, op. cit., pp. 319 ff.

  38. Cf. Inside U.S. Trade, 21st October 1994, pp. 8–9.

  39. Cf. Metal Bulletin, 28th March 1994, p. 19.

  40. Cf. Stahlmarkt, 11/91, p. 16.

  41. Cf. Stahlmarkt, 6/92, p. 12.

  42. Cf. Stahlmark, 7/92, p. 15.

  43. Cf. Stahlmarkt, 6/92, p. 12.

  44. Cf. Metal Bulletin, 1st February 1993, p. 3.

  45. Cf. Rainer Kulms, op. cit., pas Antidumpingrecht im amerikanischen and europäischen Recht, Baden-Baden 1988, p. 135.

  46. Group representing the interests of European integrated steel producers.

  47. Cf. Metal Bulletin, 1st February 1993, p. 13.

  48. Cf. Metal Bulletin, 1st February 1993, p. 13.

  49. Cf. The Economist, 16th May 1992; and Metal Bulletin, 1st February 1993, p. 3.

  50. Cf. Rainer Kulms, op. cit., Das Antidumpingrecht im amerikanischen and europäischen Recht, Baden-Baden 1988, pp. 78 and 204–205.

  51. Ibid., Das Antidumpingrecht im amerikanischen and europäischen Recht, Baden-Baden 1988, p. 207.

  52. Cf. Michael K. Levine: Inside International Trade Policy Formulation, New York 1985, pp. 13 ff.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Tübingen, Germany

    Christian A. Conrad

Authors
  1. Christian A. Conrad
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

The author has used information acquired during interviews with the International Trade Administration and the International Trade Commission while a “visiting researcher” at Georgetown University (Washington D.C.) in 1994 and while undertaking research at the European Commission.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Conrad, C.A. Steel: A new round of protectionism in American trade. Intereconomics 30, 150–156 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02927270

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02927270

Keywords

Search

Navigation