Eastern Economic Journal

, Volume 45, Issue 2, pp 161–178 | Cite as

Retaliatory Antidumping by China: A New Look at the Evidence

  • Thomas OsangEmail author
  • Jaden Warren
Original Article


China is the most frequent target of antidumping (AD) filings and the sixth most frequent user of antidumping duties. In this paper, we investigate the factors that influence China’s decision to retaliate using AD filings from 1995 to 2015. We consider an AD filing by China to be retaliatory if it occurs within 1 year of an initial AD filing against them and determine the factors that explain retaliatory antidumping filings. We find that higher levels of China’s country-specific imports, lower growth rates of Chinese GDP, and China’s WTO membership increase the likelihood of retaliation. In contrast, higher import growth reduces AD retaliation.


Antidumping Retaliation Trade China WTO 

JEL Classification

F1 F13 F14 



We would like to thank Richard Nugent, Maurizio Zanardi, an anonymous referee, as well as seminar participants at the Eastern Economic Association meetings and the Midwest Economic Theory and International Trade conference for useful comments and suggestions.


  1. Bao, Xiaohua, and Larry Qiu. 2011. Is China’s Antidumping More Retaliatory than that of the US. Review of International Economics 19(2): 374–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Besedes, Tibor, and Thomas Prusa. 2013. Antidumping and the Death of Trade. National Bureau of Economic Research. Working Paper 19555.Google Scholar
  3. Blonigen, Bruce, and Thomas Prusa. 2015. Dumping and Antidumping Duties. National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper 21573. p. 2.Google Scholar
  4. Bown, Chad. 2016. Global Antidumping Database. Geneva: World Trade Organization.Google Scholar
  5. Bown, Chad, and Meredith Crowley. 2016. The Empirical Landscape of Trade Policy. World Bank Group Policy Research Working Paper 7620.Google Scholar
  6. Curran, Enda. 2015. State Companies: Back on China’s To-Do List. Bloomberg Businessweek.Google Scholar
  7. Feinberg, Robert, and Kara Reynolds. 2006. The Spread of Antidumping Regimes and the Role of Retaliation in Filings. Southern Economic Journal 72(4): 884.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Feinberg, Robert, and Kara Reynolds. 2018. How Do Countries Respond to Antidumping Filings? Dispute Settlement and Retaliatory Antidumping. World Economy 41(5): 1251–1268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Finger, Michael. 1993. Antidumping: How It Works and Who Gets Hurt. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gleditsch, Kristian. 2016. Distance Between Capital Cities. Essex: University of Essex.Google Scholar
  11. Ministry of Commerce, People’s Republic of China. 2017. Anti-dumping Regulation of the People’s Republic of China (Revised on March 31, 2004). Ministry of Commerce, People’s Republic of China.Google Scholar
  12. Oanda. 2018. Historical Currency Convertor. New York: Oanda.Google Scholar
  13. Prusa, Thomas, and Susan Skeath. 2002. The Economic and Strategic Motives for Antidumping Filings. Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv 138(3): 389–413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Prusa, Thomas, and Susan Skeath. 2005. Modern Commercial Policy: Managed Trade or Retaliation? Chapter 12: Handbook of International Trade: Economic and Legal Analyses of Trade Policy and Institutions, Volume II, pp. 358–382.Google Scholar
  15. World Bank. 2018. China. World Bank Open Data.Google Scholar
  16. World Trade Organization. 2016. Time Series on International Trade. World Trade Organization Statistics Database.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© EEA 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of EconomicsSouthern Methodist UniversityDallasUSA
  2. 2.University of Texas at AustinAustinUSA

Personalised recommendations