Trump Ended WTO Dispute Settlement. Trade Remedies are Needed to Fix it.

24 Pages Posted: 23 Feb 2022

See all articles by Chad P. Bown

Chad P. Bown

Peterson Institute for International Economics; Centre for Economic Policy Research (CEPR)

Multiple version iconThere are 2 versions of this paper

Date Written: January 19, 2022

Abstract

Unhappy with the rulings of the WTO dispute settlement system, which disproportionately targeted US use of trade remedies, the United States ended the entire system in 2019. There are multiple hurdles to agreeing to new terms of trade remedy use and thus potentially restoring some form of binding dispute settlement. First, a change would affect access to policy flexibility by the now large number of users of trade remedies. Second, although China’s exports are the overwhelming target of trade remedies, exporters in other countries increasingly find themselves caught up in trade remedy actions linked to China. Third, critical differences posed by China’s economic model may call for new rules for trade remedies, but no consensus on those rules has emerged. Even some of the most promising reforms have practical limitations, create additional challenges, or may be politically unviable.

Keywords: WTO, dispute settlement, Appellate Body, trade remedies, antidumping, countervailing duties, safeguards, US, China

JEL Classification: F13

Suggested Citation

Bown, Chad P., Trump Ended WTO Dispute Settlement. Trade Remedies are Needed to Fix it. (January 19, 2022). Peterson Institute for International Economics Working Paper No. 22-1, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4013017 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4013017

Chad P. Bown (Contact Author)

Peterson Institute for International Economics ( email )

1750 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20036
United States

Centre for Economic Policy Research (CEPR)

London
United Kingdom

Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?

Paper statistics

Downloads
41
Abstract Views
229
PlumX Metrics