由 caicai8478 The following is an exploratory article framework on the protective effect of anti-dumping duties on local companies, taking the Sino-US trade war as an example for your reference:
Can anti-dumping duties really protect local companies? ——Take the Sino-US trade war as an example
Introduction
Since the outbreak of the Sino-US trade war in 2018, the United States has imposed high anti-dumping duties on Chinese goods, and China has also taken reciprocal measures. As a trade protection tool, the core goal of anti-dumping duties is to curb the impact of low-priced imported goods on local industries. However, has this policy really achieved the original intention of protecting local companies? This article will analyze the actual effects and long-term impacts.
- The short-term protective effect of anti-dumping duties
Temporary recovery of market share
Case: After the United States imposed anti-dumping duties on Chinese photovoltaic products, local companies such as First Solar saw short-term orders increase, and their market share rose from 9% in 2017 to 13% in 2019.
Data support: After the US steel industry imposed a 25% tariff on Chinese steel in 2018, its capacity utilization rate once rebounded to more than 80% (WTO, 2019).
Artificial support for price advantage
By raising the prices of imported goods, local companies gain pricing space, but rely on policy dividends rather than efficiency improvements.
- Structural contradictions from a long-term perspective
The backlash of rising industrial chain costs
China’s retaliatory tariffs hit US agricultural products (such as soybeans), causing US farmers to lose market share, and soybean exports to China fell by 75% in 2018 (USDA data).
US manufacturing companies have weakened their competitiveness due to rising costs of imported intermediate products (such as Chinese electronic components). General Electric once protested that tariffs increased the cost of its wind power projects by 30%.
Technology substitution and avoidance strategies
Chinese companies bypass anti-dumping duties by building factories overseas (such as Vietnam and Malaysia), and Vietnam’s exports to the United States surged by 25% in 2020 (World Bank data).
Local enterprises may delay transformation and upgrading due to protectionist policies. For example, the US solar industry still relies on government subsidies and has failed to form technical barriers.
III. Enlightenment of the Sino-US trade war
The limitations of zero-sum game
Although the US tariffs on Chinese steel have saved 146,000 jobs, downstream industries (automobiles, machinery) have lost about 500,000 jobs due to increased costs (Peterson Institute, 2021).
More effective alternatives
The EU’s anti-dumping investigation on Chinese electric vehicles is also accompanied by subsidies for the local battery industry chain, forming a “defense + innovation” combination punch.
After the Japan-US Semiconductor Agreement (1986), Japanese companies maintained their advantages through technological upgrades rather than price competition.
Conclusion
Anti-dumping duties are a double-edged sword: in the short term, they can buy adjustment time for local companies, but in the long term, they may distort market signals and aggravate the fragmentation of the global supply chain. Real industrial protection needs to be combined with technological innovation investment and value chain upgrades, rather than relying solely on tariff barriers. The Sino-US trade war shows that unilateral protectionism may ultimately lead to a “lose-lose” situation, and international cooperation and fair competition rules are the sustainable path.
Key data sources
WTO Trade Monitoring Report (2019-2023)
USITC Case Library
Peterson Institute for International Economics (PIIE) Model Analysis
If you need to expand a part of the content or add specific case details, you can further adjust and improve it.