Suchergebnisse

Dumping is defined as the action undertaken by a company in one country, exporting their products into another country, at a selling price that is below the cost of production or below the price of that product in the company's home market (or comparable third market). The principle international trade regulatory body, the World Trade Organisation (WTO) does not condemn the act of dumping. However it is concerned with any anti-dumping measures employed by states and requires that they be compliant with WTO regulations. The Australian Anti-Dumping Framework has been a feature of Australian trade system for over a century. The Australian System has evolved under the guidance of the WTO and its predecessor the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, alongside several domestic reviews of the system. One of the most controversial issues related to the Anti-Dumping System has been the potential adverse effects of measures on local industries and the inclusion of a public interest consideration to address these concerns. These adverse effects include increased of costs for importers and downstream industries, reduction of competition benefits, the propping up of inefficient industries and potential trade retaliation. In order to address these adverse effects there has been a growing movement to incorporate a wider interests consideration in the anti-dumping investigative process. This would ensure that the benefits from imposing a measure are not disproportionate to the potential harm to the wider community. This wider consideration proposal has been heavily debated both internationally and domestically in Australia. Internationally through WTO negotiations, most notably the current lengthy Doha Round of negotiations, states have been divided on whether or not the consideration should be made mandatory and if so how it should be incorporated into the relevant agreements. Although it is highly unlikely that such a mandatory consideration will be included, this debate triggered a similar debate within Australia on whether or not public interest was being addressed. The Productivity Commission in their 2009 report on the system argued that the inclusion of a 'public interest' test is of the paramount importance. However their proposal was opposed heavily by majority stakeholders and by both the previous and current government. These stakeholders argued that current provisions for Minister's discretion to overturn measures on the grounds of national interest and the provision of a lesser duty rule and acceptance of public submissions is sufficient to address wider community interests and counter the potential adverse effects of anti-dumping measures. However considering that the discretion has never been used and the public submission processes is under utilised the report outlines potential reforms to these existing processes to make the current system more enhanced in considering the wider public interest. Through this suggested reform the Australian System will not be crippled by a new costly step in the anti-dumping process, nor will it be reliant on ineffective provisions; instead it would provide a more efficient system whereby public interest is investigated and considered more effectively, thus better able to counter the potential adverse effects of employing anti-dumping measures.