US put on the restrictions. The WTO has yet to rule in that case either. Overall, it seems as if the WTO antidumping agreements need some refinement. There is still much confusion as to whether countries are actually using its standards or not in their dumping investigations. There are many theoretical problems with some antidumping procedures. Allegations of unfair investigations abound. The WTO's Antidumping Agreement was made to be very complex to help to deal with these problems, it may be too opaque to be able to determine the validity of some antidumping measures. As the main part of this paper explores, the consequences of unnecessary or mistaken antidumping measures can be grave for both the exporting and importing countries. Tariffs and countervailing duties can hurt the domestic countries consumers and can have large negative effects on the small trading partners. This is especially problematic for developing countries that need access to industrialized markets to ensure they can obtain a basis for long-term economic stability and growth and clime out of poverty. The industrialized nations should want this to occur so they don't have to perpetually give handouts to these developing nations. Of course, in order give a lengthy description of one aspect that is not necessarily popular in the United States of antidumping , this paper restricted its examination to only half of the antidumping story; there are many arguments for the antidumping laws that are currently on the books. No one is suggesting that the US or any other industrialized nation let its industries be unfairly put out of business, if that is truly the case at hand. Still, as the Seattle Round demonstrates, the WTO's antidumping laws seem to have satisfied to few countries. Given the spirit of its trade barrier reduction goals, the WTO should make sure it gets its antidumping rules right....
