World Trade Organization sanctions, implementation, and retaliation

Liebman, Benjamin H.; Tomlin, Kasaundra

doi:10.1007/s00181-013-0794-2

Cited by 10 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Further, comparing R-squareds between these results and those in the baseline, we find that adding this variable has little effect on our estimates. 29 Therefore, it does not seem to be the case that our results are driven by "noisy" firms. In Tables 9 and 10 we repeat the process of Table 6 for those firms that had a positive return on 24 June and those that did not (comparable to columns 2 and 3 of Table 5).…”

Section: Size Of Carmentioning

confidence: 77%

“…In addition to the outcome of the referendum, we consider five subsequent Brexit related "events": 5 October 2016 (Brexit speech by Prime Minister May outlining her plan for negotiations), 3 November 2016 (referral of case challenging the legality of Brexit to the High Court), 17 January 2017 (the "Hard Brexit" speech by Prime Minister May), 24 January 2017 (the High Court ruling that Parliament must be permitted to vote on Brexit), and 29 March 2017 (triggering of Article 50, commencing the two year negotiation period before Brexit). Unlike aftermath of the referendum's outcome, the market reaction to these events was slight.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The heterogeneous impact of Brexit: Early indications from the FTSE

Davies

Studnicka

2018

European Economic Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The UK's decision to leave the EU is surrounded by several studies simulating its potential effects. Alternatively, we examine expectations embodied in stock returns using a two-part estimation process. While most firms' prices fell, there was considerable heterogeneity in their relative changes. We show that this heterogeneity can be explained by the firm's global value chain, with heavily European firms doing relatively worse. For firms with few imported intermediates, this was partially offset by a greater Sterling depreciation. These changes were primarily in the first two days and highly persistent. Understanding these movements gives a better understanding Brexit's potential effects.1 Norway has a free trade agreement with the EU but is not a member of the EU's customs union, so it faces the non-tariff barriers that apply to non-EU countries.2 Other studies in this vein, which cover various simulation exercises, include Head and Mayer (2015), PWC (2016), Fraser of Allander (2016) (who focus on Scotland), HM Treasury (2016),and OECD (2016). All of these find negative effects of various magnitudes whereas Minford, et al. (2016) finds the potential for positive impacts on the UK. It should be noted that Sampson, et al. (2016) argue that Minford, et al.'s optimism is based on implausible assumptions on trade barrier changes and import elasticities.3 Head and Mayer (2015) describe three possible disadvantages of Brexit for FDI. First, an increase in trade barriers makes production in the UK less attractive because it becomes more costly to ship to the rest of Europe. Second, supplying inputs and staff from brands headquarters becomes more difficult (higher co-ordination costs). Third, UK products become less attractive to EU consumer after Brexit.4 Strictly speaking, this is a return that is 14.4% worse than expectations; since in the long run a firm's return should equal the market, results in our comparison. See below for a detailed discussion of how to 11 Timmer, et al. (2014b) provide a recent overview of this literature. 12 Davies, et al. (forthcoming) find that tariff pass-through within a multinational is roughly half that of an arm's length transaction.13 See London Stock Exchange (2010) for details.

show abstract

Section: Size Of Carmentioning

confidence: 77%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The heterogeneous impact of Brexit: Early indications from the FTSE

Davies

Studnicka

2018

European Economic Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Event study methodology involves estimating the normal return for a security and calculating the direction and size of the excess return attributable to unanticipated information. Econometric techniques used in event studies are provided by Warner (1980, 1985), Dyckman et al (1984), Jain (1986), Ball and Taurus (1988), Corrado (1989), Corrado and Zivney (1992), Kritzman (1994), McWilliams and Siegel (1997), Bartholdy et al (2007), Díaz and Jareno (2013), Liebman and Tomlin (2015) and Kenjegaliev et al (2016). The theory is still growing, and the number of economists researching in this area is increasing, along with the sophistication of studies.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The effect of oil price changes on the price of Russian and Chinese oil shares

Hall

Kenjegaliev

2016

Empir Econ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Do changes in oil prices have an effect on stocks of oil companies in emerging markets? Do the shares of oil companies in emerging markets react to the price news in a similar way as those of the Western companies? This paper aims to answer these questions utilizing event study techniques. As expected, the results of both parametric and nonparametric tests suggest that the fluctuations in oil prices have an effect on the stock prices. However, an interesting result is that the responses of stocks of Chinese and Russian oil companies are considerably different from the shares of their Western counterparts.

show abstract

“…https://doi.org/10.15405/epsbs.2020.03.186 Corresponding Author: O. A. Sapozhnikova Selection and peer-review under Ideally, part of the costs of the green basket, despite the restrictive nature of this basket by WTO standards, should be directed towards applying the achievements of scientific and technical progress by the agricultural producer and contribute to holding differential annuity of the second form (Liebman & Tomlin, 2015). The dynamics of two types of annuity depends on changes in levels and the ratio of prices for agricultural products on world commodity markets.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%