原文地址：
http://econblog.aplia.com/2008/05/hanger-hang-up.html
by Brandon Fuller
According to a recent
NPR story, dry-cleaning costs increased substantially after the U.S. imposed import tariffs on wire hangers from China—so much so that many dry cleaners are now soliciting customers for unused hangers. The U.S. imposed the tariffs after several American producers made dumping accusations against Chinese producers.
Dumping occurs if a Chinese firm sells hangers in the U.S. for significantly less than it sells the same hangers for in China, or for significantly less than it costs to produce the hangers in China. The U.S. International Trade Commission found that Chinese manufacturers were, in fact, dumping hangers in the U.S. market.
Economists tend to be skeptical of trade restrictions based on the anti-dumping argument. In markets for standardized goods (like wire hangers) with relatively free entry and exit, there's no long-term benefit from selling a product at below cost. While legitimate cases of dumping certainly come up, some cases may simply involve domestic firms that want to protect their market position from lower-cost foreign manufacturers. In the case of hangers, the tariffs benefit U.S. manufacturers at the cost of the dry cleaners and consumers who would otherwise benefit from lower-priced Chinese imports.
Milton Magnus III, owner of one of the U.S. manufacturers that filed for the anti-dumping duties, argues that the costs to consumers are negligible—amounting to a penny or two per hanger. "If I pay $12.95 to have my suit cleaned and that hanger cost him a cent and a half more, that's $12.96 and a half. It's not a factor." Magnus's point partly explains why import-competing industries often succeed in their efforts to lobby government for the imposition of trade restrictions: the tariff offers concentrated benefits to a few domestic firms, while the costs of the tariff are spread out among millions of consumers—none of whom see a sharp increase in price. Of course, over millions of hangers, a penny or two per hanger can add up.
上面大意：美国去年从中国进口了铁丝衣架27亿个，由于美国国内衣架生产商的反倾销控诉，说中国的在美国销售的衣架的价格比在中国内地售价还便宜，甚至还低于成本。美国国家贸易委员会调查后，认为情况属实，今年3月美国开始对从中国进口的这种铁丝衣架征收关税。由于美国干洗店大都要使用这种衣架，而且是直接岁洗好的衣服一起让客户带走，征税使每个干洗店每年成本增加4000美元。
Advocates of trade restrictions often argue that protection will save jobs. Since we can observe price and cost increases associated with trade restrictions, we can estimate how much it costs to save each job in a protected industry. According to the NPR story, there are roughly 30,000 dry cleaners in the U.S., and on average, each pays an additional $4,000 per year due to the hanger tariff. This indicates an average annual cost of 30,000 firms x $4,000 per firm = $120 million. According to the U.S. International Trade Commission's
report, U.S. employment in wire hanger manufacturing was 564 workers in 2004 and fell to 236 workers by 2006. Let's assume that employment in this sector would have fallen to zero in the absence of the tariff, and that with the tariff, employment will recover to 2004 levels. In other words, assume the tariff "saves" 564 jobs. Dividing the cost of the tariff to U.S. dry cleaners ($120 million year) by the number of jobs saved (564 jobs) indicates that each job saved costs about $212,765 per year. Keep in mind that the typical full-time worker in this sector earns about $30,000 per year. Even if we assume that industry employment doubles, the cost of the tariff is still roughly $120,000 per job.
大意：根据新闻里提到的数据，美国大概有3万家干洗店，征关税后每家干洗店每年将多付出4000美元，为此所有干洗店每年所付出的总成本就是4000*3万=1亿2000万美元。在2004年美国国衣架厂有工人564名，2006年降为236人。假设没有关税工人数最终会降为0。而有关税将使工人数恢复到04年的水平即564人。也就是衣架关税挽救了564个工作岗位。而为此美国干洗店付出的成本是1亿2000万，即相当于挽救每一个工作岗位的成本是212765美元。然而每一个这样岗位的工人一年的平均收入大概是3万美元。就算假设挽救的工作岗位再增加一倍，公众为其付出的成本任然超过10万。
Discussion Questions
问题讨论
1. Our cost estimates ignore possible job losses in the dry-cleaning industry. How would this impact the overall cost of the trade restrictions? Will dry cleaners organize to oppose the tariff on wire hangers from China?
上面的成本计算忽略了成本增加干洗店工作机会也可能出现减少的情况。这将如何影响征税的造成的总成本？干洗店会组织起来反对征税吗？
2. According to the Trade Commission report, China provides tax rebates to firms that export items that use steel (such as wire hangers). As of July 2007, the tax rebate amounted to 5% of the value of exports. How do you think export subsidies or tax rebates should factor into government analysis of trade policies?
根据贸易委员会的报告，中国从事对如铁衣架等钢铁制品出口的企业进行出口退税的鼓励。2007年7月，出口退税额占到总出口额的5%。你认为出口补贴或出口退税会如何影响政府的贸易政策？
3. The story mentions dry cleaners' attempts to reclaim and reuse wire hangers. Are there inadvertent environmental benefits from the tariff? Could the U.S. government encourage dry cleaners and their customers to reuse wire hangers without resorting to tariffs on Chinese manufacturers?
新闻里提到干洗店在尝试回收再利用这些铁丝衣架。这是是否征关税带来的一个对环境的益处呢(即一项收益)？美国政府可以通过其它途径（非征关税）做到这点（鼓励干洗店及其顾客回收再利用铁丝衣架）吗？
