and made substantial changes in procedures for the administation of the law, inter alia, strict time limits for the various phases, and instructed the President to submit a reorganization plan to improve enforcement of the unfair import laws. The question posed in that study was not if there was injury, but rather the magnitude of the injury.

The US International Trade Commission made decisions on 221 cases. There was very good information on 179 of those cases to make an assessment of the magnitude of the injury. Of those 179 cases, only 53, or less than one third, induced a loss in domestic revenues as the resuLt of unfairly traded imports that could be greater than 5 %. Of those, only 21 cases involved a loss in revenue that could be greater than 10%. Moreover, the study went to great lengths to overstate the cases in favor of injury. Therefore, the reported injury. levels are an upper bound. Industries are diverse, from agriculture and consumer goods to raw materials and industral products and in the analysis, the benefits consumer derived from purchasing at lower pdces was not considered.

Another undesirable by-product of anti-dumrpi-ng measures is its potential use as a collusion instrument. The EC experience shows that anti-dumping actions have come to be used as a means of price collusion. Often domestic pnces have stabilized after a decrease and foreign ones have increased. So clearly there are tradeoffs. Obviously, the elimination of anti-dumping measures could induce a more competitive domestic market, at the risk, however small, of the potentia **l** ong term consequences of predation.

When a country applies anti-dumping duties on a particular product originating from a particular country, it may lead to 'country hopping' and 'product shifting' in an attempt to avoid the duties. The offending country may move production to the jurisdiction which imposed the anti-dumping duty or to a third country. They may also produce a slightly differentiated product to escape the duty.

Different countries have different approaches and interpretations of GATI articles, such as the definition of "liket products discussed above. There are also different levels of discretion allowed in different countries. The US system is considered most mechanical. Duties are automatically imposed equal to the calculated dumping margin, whereas other systems may confidentially indicate minimum prices under which duties would be imposed.

# Issues in Countervailg Measures

Similar to anti-dumping duties, countervailing measures are undertaken to offset adverse effects of a foreign country's trade policies on domestic industry, and deter foreign governments from intervening with targeted subsidy policies in the first place (reverse foreign aid). As stated in GAIT Article VI:3, 'these duties are for the purpose of offsetting any. bounty or subsidy bestowed, directly or indirectly, upon the manufacture, production, or export of any merchandise' on the part of the foreign government. GAT differ subsidies in research and development between applied and basic research. However, it is often difficult to differentiate between these two types. Since subsidies that increase exports tend to shift profits away from rival unsubsidized firms, other producing nations consider this unfair behavior. The countervailing duty provisions in GAUT were developed to address 17