Tomatoes, Furniture, and Shrimp: Is Extortion the Main Purpose of the Antidumping Law? | Daniel J. Ikenson | Cato Institute

Tomatoes, Furniture, and Shrimp: Is Extortion the Main Purpose of the Antidumping Law? | Daniel J. Ikenson | Cato Institute: "Imagine your local supermarket operating on the same principles. Imagine ringing up your basket-full of groceries, paying $122.45, and then waiting a year to find out whether you get a rebate or have to issue a supplemental check. Gamblers might enjoy the thrill, but this kind of uncertainty is anathema to business. Most grocery shoppers would buy their groceries somewhere else, where the prices are final. "

"Every other major country that has an antidumping law has a “prospective” system, where under the duties assessed upon importation are final."

"U.S. producers of wooden bedroom furniture have been extorting cash from their Chinese competition in exchange for dropping pursuit of even higher antidumping duty rates at the Commerce Department.

The Journal reported that about $13 million was paid to a group of 20 U.S. furniture makers between 2006 through 2009, and that a much larger, but unspecified, amount of money went to pay the U.S. firms’ lawyers."