None of the cases I could read about discussed monopoly profits (so I guess, no - although it was not my argument). Rather they focused on the destruction of wh

None of the cases I could read about discussed monopoly profits (so I guess, no - although it was not my argument). Rather they focused on the destruction of what were otherwise perfectly good industrial bases. So I suppose the point I'd like to refute is that "dumping is always a losing game for the dumper". The following article: http://www.nap.edu/read/5902/chapter/28 http://www.nap.edu/read/5902/chapter/28 Discusses the case of the British steel industry between about 1880 to 1914. It's not 100% clear that dumping was the proximate cause of their industrial decline (these things are very hard to be sure about!), but a strong case is made that it was a major factor. It's actually a pretty interesting read. Britain had a free market for steel, while the U.S. and German industries enjoyed substantial protection in their home markets. It's better to run a steel plant at 100% capacity, so it actually makes sense to sell extra production overseas even at a loss. Quote: "The U.S. Consul General in Berlin reported in 1916 that "the Steel Verband believes in dumping. They justify their position as follows: Large steel plants must work at a certain maximum capacity without interruption if they are to remain efficient and produce at a minimum cost. It is impossible for the home market of any plant in any country to absorb a large output without interruption in the flow of orders due to periods of depression, from economic causes outside the influence of the steel industry. Also, the increased complication of the coal, iron, and steel industries, the increased use of furnace gases for industrial purposes (gas engines), for running lighting plants for neighboring towns, also the concentration of all stages of production in a few large mills, have made it increasingly difficult to reduce production in any one line of all the allied processes, without causing grave losses and disorganization in other lines. The Steel Verband therefore maintains that it is better for the entire economic life of the country in slack years at home to dispose of surplus products abroad at prices which may even cause a loss, inasmuch as the loss incurred by dumping abroad is in no comparison to the losses which would be incurred if production were reduced at home. " Of course in an ideal world everyone in Britain was now "free to do other things than make steel" but of course that ignores the fact that when the steel industry goes, so does a lot of related industry, manufacturing investment, industrial expertise and research and development. This means that a country which falls behind due to dumping will tend to fall further behind. Interestingly enough if you look through US anti-dumping / countervailing duties messages here: http://adcvd.cbp.dhs.gov/adcvdweb/ http://adcvd.cbp.dhs.gov/adcvdweb/ it seems like steel is still pretty relevant today.