Explore BrainMass
Share

Explore BrainMass

    Imposing Tariffs on steel imports in 2002; Does WTO represent a loss of US national sovereignty; if tariffs were removed, who would benefit

    This content was COPIED from BrainMass.com - View the original, and get the already-completed solution here!

    A) Do you believe the Bush administration was correct in imposing tariffs in March 2002 on a wide range of steel imports?

    b) Why are the main beneficiaries of protective tariffs such as those imposed on steel imports? Who are the losers?

    c) Does the WTO represent a loss of US national sovereignty? Why do you think the WTO aided with the European Union?

    d) If all tariffs on international trade in steel were removed, and subsidies to steel exporters around the workd were banned, who would this benefit? Who would lose from such action?

    © BrainMass Inc. brainmass.com October 9, 2019, 6:46 pm ad1c9bdddf
    https://brainmass.com/business/wto-and-gatt/97266

    Solution Preview

    a) Do you believe the Bush administration was correct in imposing tariffs in March 2002 on a wide range of steel imports?

    I don't believe that Bush administration is correct in imposing tariffs as it will hurt consumers of steel.

    b) Why are the main beneficiaries of protective tariffs such as those imposed on steel imports? Who are the losers?
    This type of measure is known as protectionist measure by the country to protect the domestic Industry from the foreign competition. As in this case, the imported steel was cheaper than the US producers which was hurting the US steel producers but was a gain to US steel consumers. ...

    Solution Summary

    The 408 word cited solution provides good explanations of the issues in the problem.

    $2.19