Changdong Shin


Antidumping laws were designed to protect domestic industries from unfair predatory price discrimination from foreign companies, yet these laws are often alleged to be used to protect domestic industries from competition. The U.S. has not been a stranger to these accusations since the 1980s as the U.S.’s trade deficit grew. The Uruguay Round negotiations were aimed at ending this protectionist use of antidumping laws, but many issues were left unsettled by the Uruguay Round antidumping agreement. In particular, interpretation of the agreement is deferred to each country primarily. Thus, the Dispute Settlement Body of the WTO can only determine a violation of the agreement in cases of obvious arbitrary interpretation. This thesis analyzes the enacted U.S. implementing legislation following the Uruguay Round, concentrating on provisions which may be inconsistent with the Uruguay Round agreement. The thesis also focuses on bilateral trade between the U.S. and Korea, both before and after the Uruguay Round.