The Notion of a Non-Market Economy in the Context of Anti-Dumping Measures
https://doi.org/10.21686/2410-7395-2025-3-51-65
Abstract
One of the issues, which arouse discussions in the field of trade remedies today, is the issue of whether a normal value may be adjusted while calculating a dumping margin in the case of state intervention in the economy. For the last 10 years the importance of this problem has been growing. A number of countries presume that they have the right to reject or adjust the information submitted by exporters for the calculation of a normal value in anti-dumping investigations on the basis that the economy of the exporting country is non-market/noncompetitive/distorted. Therefore, a dumping margin as well as an antidumping duty, which exporters have to pay, are overstated. The aim of this article is to analyze the problem of application of non-market methodologies in anti-dumping investigations within historical and present background. Taking into account the changes which are happening now in the world economy as well as the crisis of the World Trade Organization due to the non-functioning Appellate Body, the use of the notion «non-market» for anti-dumping measures may not only lose its significance but, on the contrary, may become a widely used instrument in the competition between the countries.
About the Author
K. Е. Dmitrieva
Eurasian Economic Commission
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Kira Е. Dmitrieva, Counselor
3/5, str. 1 Smolenskiy bulvar, Moscow, 119121
References
1. Sidorov A. A. Osobennosti sovremennogo protektsionizma SShA i ES v otnoshenii Rossii [Features of Modern Protectionism of the USA and the EU in Relation to Russia]. Vestnik MGIMO-Universiteta [Bulletin of MGIMO University], 2022, No. 15 (4), pp. 81–101. (In Russ.).
2. Smbatyan A. S. Novelly antidempingovoy politiki ES v svete pravil VTO [Novelties of the EU's Anti-Dumping Policy in the Light of WTO Rules]. Rossiyskiy vneshneekonomicheskiy vestnik [Russian Foreign Economic Bulletin], 2020, No. 11, pp. 16–35. (In Russ.).
3. Khetagurova Z. Kh. Praktika primeneniya antidempingovykh i kompensatsionnykh mer v ES v kontekste VTO [The Practice of Applying Anti-Dumping and Countervailing Measures in the EU in the Context of the WTO]. Torgovaya politika [Trade Policy], 2018, No. 2 (14), pp. 79–131. (In Russ.).
4. Minyou Y., Guan J. The Non-Market Economy Methodology Shall Be Terminated after 2016. Global Trade and Customs Journal, 2017, Vol. 12, No. 1, pp. 16–24.
5. Miranda J. Implementation of the ‘Shift in Burden of Proof’ Approach to Interpreting Paragraph 15 of China’s Protocol of Accession. Global Trade and Customs Journal, 2016, Vol. 11, No. 10, pp. 447–453.
6. O'Connor B. Much Ado about Nothing: 2016, China and Market Economy Status. Global Trade and Customs Journal, 2015, Vol. 10, pp. 176–180.
7. Vermulst E., Sud J. D., Evenett S. J. Normal Value in Anti-Dumping Proceedings against China Post-2016: Are Some Animals Less Equal Than Others? Global Trade and Customs Journal, 2016, Vol. 11, No. 5, pp. 212–228.
Review
For citations:
Dmitrieva K.Е. The Notion of a Non-Market Economy in the Context of Anti-Dumping Measures. International Trade and Trade Policy. 2025;11(3):51-65. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.21686/2410-7395-2025-3-51-65
Views:
20
Email this article 
