{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02321724709784411, 'fraction_numerical': 0.001658374792703151, 'mean_word_length': 5.386243386243386, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Empirical Evidence on Surrogate Country Method for Non‐Market Economy: US Anti‐Dumping Policy Towards China

Whether the non‐market economy (NME) treatment on China can be maintained even after the expiry date under Section 15 of China's World Trade Organization (WTO) Accession Protocol is one of the most controversial issues in the WTO. In fact, the key issue of the NME status in the anti‐dumping (AD) proceedings turns out to be how surrogate countries are selected in relation to dumping margin calculation. This paper reviews the US practices concerning the application of the surrogate country method. Despite the general perception of capricious and random selection of surrogate countries, the Department of Commerce has maintained a consistent pattern for applying the criteria. This seemingly consistent practice, however, raised systematic problems—but not at a significant scale—in dumping margin calculation concerning Chinese products. This result sheds an interesting light on the current WTO disputes concerning the China's NME status. At least in terms of the US AD practices, the result of the WTO dispute settlement process may not have a significant impact on the China's exportation.