The Illusionary Conflict between Antidumping and Antitrust: A Rejoinder by Barbara Epstein* to a Comment by Robert P. Rogers
Date | 01 June 1974 |
Published date | 01 June 1974 |
DOI | 10.1177/0003603X7401900213 |
Subject Matter | Article |
THE
ILLUSIOiNARY
CONFLICT
BETWEEN
ANTIDUMPING
AN:D
ANTITRUST:
A
REJO,INDER
IY
BARBARA
EPSTEIN*
TO A
COMMENT
BY
ROBERT
P.
ROGERS
Mr. Rogers' conclusion
that
"price discrimination can lead
to a more optimal result" is based on entirely different and,
in my opinion, less realistic assumptions than were set
forth
in my article.
ASSUMPTION
I-ANTITRUST
POWER
Rogers: "
...
antitrust
authorities cannot control mo-
nopolies in foreign countries."
Epstein:
"The United States
antitrust
laws
...
can be
applied to restraints of
trade
in foreign coun-
tries 'even upon persons not within its [United
States] allegiance, for conduct outside
its
bor-
ders
that
has consequences within its borders
which the
State
reprehends.'"
Assuming other-
wise is unrealistic.
ASSUMPTION
2-RULES
OF
COMPETITION
Rogers: "
...
its
[United States
antitrust
authority]
best policy is to tolerate behavior resulting
from these monopolies when
it
improves com-
petition in the U.S. market."
Epstein:
"If
imported products can make a desirable
contribution to United
States
markets, then sup-
plies of imported products should be subject
to the same laws and regulations to which
American producers
are."
• Vice President, Horace J. De Podwin Associates, Inc., New
York.
377
To continue reading
Request your trial