Are duty drawbacks on exports worth the hassle?

Abstract.  Many countries use duty drawbacks on exports, yet there is no consensus whether countries should embrace or abandon them. The answer depends on countries' development priorities and economic conditions. An increase in the drawback has a positive impact on export competitiveness, but the welfare effect is ambiguous. A welfare increase is more likely if the economy is small with high input tariffs, low initial drawback, low administrative costs and tariff leakages. In China duty drawback removal after meeting its WTO commitments improves welfare, but hurts economic efficiency, export competitiveness, and real incomes. Further liberalization can mitigate these negative effects.     

Export,FDI and the welfare gains from trade liberalization

This paper extends Melitz and Redding (2015) to analyze the welfare gains from trade liberalization by adding foreign direct investment(FDI). Our model predicts that with FDI activities, welfare gains from trade liberalization will be strictly lower than those in a model without FDI, but only takes exports into account. In addition, the calibrated model indicates that with FDI activities, aggregate welfare reaches its maximum when the fixed export costs are positive rather than 0. Furthermore, we decompose the welfare gains induced by trade liberalization from continuing exporters, and switchers. The results show that in any case, with or without FDI, continuing exporters contribute a larger share to welfare gains than status switching firms.     

Trade in goods and services: Two sides of the same coin?

This study analyzes the interrelationship between goods and services in production and trade using the most recent input–output tables for all OECD countries. It first describes the role of services in production and trade in goods. Next, it proposes two models for analyzing the impact of services trade liberalization on industrial structure. The first captures the role of trade in tasks when countries have different technology i) in production of services; and ii) in organizing production. The latter has to the author's knowledge not been analyzed in the trade literature before. Countries with superior organizational technology (e.g. Japan) will strengthen their comparative advantage in manufacturing following trade liberalization in services. The second model explores the interrelationship between intermediate goods and services i) when they are substitutes; and ii) when they are complements. In both models the gains from trade liberalization is non-linear in trade costs. Going the last mile of liberalization has a much larger impact than taking the first steps.     

Additive versus multiplicative trade costs and the gains from trade liberalizations

This paper addresses welfare effects from trade liberalization in a Melitz ( 2003 ) heterogeneous‐firms trade model including the empirically important per‐unit (i.e., additive) trade costs in addition to the conventional iceberg (i.e., multiplicative) and fixed trade costs. The novel contribution of the paper is the result that the welfare gain for a given increase in trade openness is higher for reductions in per‐unit (additive) trade costs than for reductions in iceberg (multiplicative) trade costs. The ranking derives from differences in intra‐industry reallocations and, in particular, from dissimilar impacts on the number of exporters (i.e., the extensive margin of trade).     

On the welfare effects of trade and investment liberalization

Using a three-factor knowledge- and physical capital model of trade and multinational activity, we consider a set of policy experiments to assess the welfare effects of trade and investment liberalization in general equilibrium. Specifically, we address the question of whether and under which circumstances a single versus a combined trade/investment liberalization strategy or a unilateral versus a bilateral policy change is preferable from a single country's and the world's point of view. The focus of this paper is to look at three relevant questions. First, when is investment liberalization beneficial and when is it harmful for a single economy or the whole world? Second, is pure investment liberalization a welfare maximizing strategy? Third, when is either kind of liberalization (trade, investment, or both) welfare improving and when neither of them?     

PRIVATIZATION AND LIBERALIZATION: COSTS AND BENEFITS IN THE PRESENCE OF WAGE-BARGAINING

ABSTRACT ** :  The most important economic motive for privatization and liberalization is to reduce costs, which are believed to be higher in a public monopoly for several reasons, including internal rent capture. We assume that there is wage-bargaining both before and after privatization and liberalization. Wages are then in most cases reduced by liberalization but not by privatization as such. Social welfare may increase after liberalization with decentralized wage-bargaining if many firms enter, if the employees' bargaining strength is high and if there is no need of vertical separation. However, the social costs of privatization and liberalization are more likely to dominate despite free entry if sunk costs are high, and will always dominate under central wage-bargaining or vertical separation.     

Trade Liberalization and Welfare Inequality: A Demand‐Based Approach*

There is strong evidence suggesting that different income groups consume different bundles of goods. Hence, trade liberalization can affect welfare inequality via changes in the relative prices of goods consumed by different income groups (the price effect). In this paper, I develop a framework that enables us to explore the role of the price effect in determining welfare inequality. I find that trade liberalization does benefit some income classes more than others. In particular, I show that the relative welfare of the rich with respect to that of the poor has a hump shape as a function of trade costs.     

Policy commitment and the welfare gains from capital market liberalization

This paper evaluates the quantitative impact of capital liberalization on the taxation structure and welfare of the liberalizing countries when governments conduct fiscal policy optimally but without commitment (time-consistent policies). The transition from a regime of capital autarky to a regime of free mobility leads to a decrease in the long-term tax rate on capital of 13 percent and an increase in the tax rate on labor of 2 percent. As a consequence of this taxation shift, welfare increases by about 1 percent. The reduction in capital taxation induced by capital market liberalization is welfare improving because, in the absence of capital mobility, the time-consistent policies over-tax capital.     

Heterogeneous firms,trade liberalization and agglomeration

Abstract In this study, we develop an economic model to examine agglomeration of heterogeneous firms following trade liberalization. In a closed economy, we show that high‐productivity firms are more likely to agglomerate because they benefit more from agglomeration than their low‐productivity counterparts. However, trade liberalization, especially with a high‐productivity partner, favours partial agglomeration; that is, low‐productivity firms relocate away from the region where high‐productivity firms agglomerate. Consequently, the welfare gap between the domestic regions of an economy narrows following trade liberalization. The latter result suggests that trade liberalization promotes regional economic development.     

Trade liberalization and economic growth: a case study of Iran

We estimate the impact of trade liberalization and physical and human capital accumulation on Iran’s economic growth during the period 1959?2007. Using co-integration techniques and a vector error correction model, we find a unique long-run relationship between economic growth and its major determinants. These determinants include the physical and human capital stock, the labor force, real non-oil exports, and import tariffs. In addition, the short-term error correction dynamics analysis suggests that trade liberalization has a significant long run positive role in dynamic of growth. Our results support the view that the integration of the Iranian economy with the world economy is undoubtedly welfare improving.     

Welfare change and the elimination of the shortage economy in Russia: some representative-household results1

The welfare consequences of eliminating the shortage economy for the representative Russian household are quantitatively assessed. Before price liberalization, households either bought goods and services at state prices and paid searching and queuing costs, or they bought on parallel markets at higher monetary prices. An equation is derived that permits empirical evaluation of the extent to which welfare gains from eliminating searching and queuing costs offset welfare losses from falling real consumption. Available data suggest that when regime change was initiated in Russia in 1992, welfare gains from eliminating shortage were substantial and may have completely offset welfare losses from falling real consumption.     

Countries, regions and trade: On the welfare impacts of economic integration

We study the impact of falling international trade costs and falling national transport costs on the economic geography of countries involved in an integration process. Each country is formed by two regions between which labor is mobile, whereas there is no international mobility. Goods can be traded both nationally and internationally at positive, but different, costs. A decrease in trade costs and/or in transport costs has a direct impact on prices and wages, which allows us to account for the impact of changes in these parameters on the economic geography and welfare of each country. We show that, as trade barriers fall, the benefits of integration come after its costs. We also show that national transport policies are of the beggar-thy-neighbor type. On both counts, policy coordination is required in the process of economic integration.     

Trade liberalization,forward‐looking firms,and welfare

We set up an oligopolistic model with two exporting firms selling to a third market to investigate the welfare implications of trade liberalization when the exporting firms are forward‐looking. The results show that with cost asymmetry trade liberalization encourages the exporting firms to engage in tacit collusion, which may not only be detrimental to the domestic welfare, but also to the consumer surplus of the importing country. Moreover, we find that tacit collusion is less sustainable if the government of the importing country imposes a lower (higher) tariff on the more (less) efficient exporting firm. If a nonforward‐looking or a forward‐looking cost‐efficient domestic firm exists in the importing country, then trade liberalization also encourages tacit collusion.     

Liberalizing Services Trade In APEC: A General Equilibrium Analysis with Imperfect Competition

The paper studies services-sector trade liberalization in the Asia–Pacific Economic Co-operation (APEC) Forum using a global, multicountry, multisector applied general equilibrium model with an imperfectly competitive service sector. Reducing the service sector's nontariff barriers is modeled by eliminating the possibility for oligopolistic firms to price-discriminate between client countries within APEC and lowering the fixed costs of the firms doing service exporting business. The results suggest that services trade liberalization reinforces existing sectoral trade balances. Increase in demand for intermediate services tends to reinforce rather than counteract the role of primary factors in determining sectoral comparative advantage. The western APEC members received the greatest welfare gains from services trade liberalization, while the developing economies gained more if only tariffs were eliminated.     

A welfare analysis of unilateral trade and FDI liberalization

This paper uses a heterogeneous‐firms model to examine the pro‐competitive channel through which FDI affects national welfare. The model shows that the country from which FDI originates experiences a welfare gain following liberalization. However, a counterintuitive finding is that the welfare of the host country deteriorates. This is explained by the production relocation process that leads to an increase in the mass of domestic firms in the source country and a decrease in the host country. The model also confirms that unilateral trade liberalization brings a similar result even in the presence of bilateral FDI flows.     

Trade liberalization and the Labor Market Revisited

This paper provides new insights in understanding the adjustments of the labor market to trade liberalization policies in an economy producing tradeables and nontradeables. The results of the paper indicate that the short-run effects of trade liberalization on wages, labor allocation and worker welfare is contingent on certain explicit production and demand conditions that exist in an economy. The production condition is related to the slope of the labor demand curve in a given economy and the demand condition is related to the difference in the cross-price elasticity of demand of nontradeables to the price of importables and exportables. The necessary combination of these conditions needed for trade liberalization to be welfare improving in the short run is explored.     

Costly pollution abatement, competitiveness and plant location decisions

The NAFTA debate included assertions that were used as arguments against trade and investment liberalization. (1) Trade liberalization increases production sensitivity to environmental restrictions (‘environmental dumping’?). (2) Investment liberalization, leading to multinational firms, similarly increases the production and welfare response to costly environmental restrictions. I find that: (1) Trade liberalization increases production sensitivity to costly environmental restrictions, but arguments against liberal trade on welfare grounds do not follow. (2) Multinationals do not increase the production-reallocation effect caused by environmental restrictions or regulations. In addition, I find a great difference between restrictions that fall on fixed costs and restrictions that fall on marginal costs.     

Adjustment in the process of trade liberalization: The U.S. and Mexico

Although many of the issues in North-American trade liberalization are reminiscent of those faced earlier by Europeans and by the United States and Canada, there are also some non-trivial differences. Divergences in economic structure are more pronounced. They affect the interplay of various sources of welfare gains and costs and are likely to make inter-industry and vertically integrated intra-industry trade more important Non-tariff barriers play a greater role in the present context and the welfare effects of preferntial elimination of quantitative restraints differ in important respect from those of tariffs. A free trade area, for example, which is clearly trade-diverting under tariff liberalization may be trade-creating under quantitative restrictions.     

Trade between symmetric countries,heterogeneous firms,and the skill premium

Abstract This paper examines the effects of trade liberalization between symmetric countries on the skill premium. I introduce skilled and unskilled labour in a model of trade with heterogeneous firms à la Melitz (2003) and assume a production technology such that more productive firms are more skill intensive. I show that the effects of trade liberalization on wage inequality crucially depend on the type of trade costs considered and on their initial size. While fixed costs of trade have a potentially non‐monotonic effect on the skill premium, a drop in variable trade costs unambiguously and substantially raises wage inequality.     

The Economic Efficiency of Policy Reform and Partial Market Liberalization under Transaction Costs

The article presents an integrated analysis of the effects of domestic and trade policy reform on resource allocation and welfare under transaction costs. It develops a general multiagent, multicommodity model, where transaction costs are the costs of resources used in the exchange process. The influence of domestic and trade policy (including both price and quantity instruments) on distorted market equilibrium is analysed. Alternative concepts of distorted equilibrium are presented and investigated. They provide a basis for evaluating the effects of multilateral partial market liberalization on resource allocation and welfare under transaction costs. New conditions are derived under which multilateral policy reforms generate Pareto improvements.