The Illusionary Conflict between Antidumping and Antitrust: A Rejoinder by Barbara Epstein* to a Comment by Robert P. Rogers

• DOI: 10.1177/0003603X7401900213
• Published date: 01 June 1974
• Date: 01 June 1974

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 moreoptimal result" is basedon entirely different and,

in my opinion, lessrealistic 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 shouldbe subject

to the same lawsandregulations to which

American producers

are."

•Vice President, Horace J. De PodwinAssociates, Inc., New

York.

377