Egypt’s Anti-Dumping Law Reforms
At a pivotal moment in the life of the Egyptian economy, the legislative system stands incapable of keeping pace with market transformations, amidst a highly volatile global environment and extremely sensitive internal balances. Despite the density of laws regulating trade, competition protection, and consumer protection, many of these laws now operate outside the modern practical context and lack an overarching vision that connects economic protection on the one hand, and market justice on the other.
This article is not merely a review of legal texts; it is a call for a balanced legislative revolution — one that redraws the relationship between the state, the investor, the consumer, and the overall economy. Policies are not measured by intentions, but by their ability to create a true balance that neither oppresses one party nor shields another from criticism.
Anti-Dumping Law: When Protection Is Used Against the Public Interest
Law No. 161 of 1998, known as the Law on Combating Harmful Practices in International Trade, was established at a time when the main challenges lay in protecting national industry from dumping and unlawful subsidies. However, today, under global supply chains, it is sometimes used against the very consumer it was meant to protect.
The absence of a provision requiring public interest evaluation as a mandatory condition before imposing anti-dumping duties has led to economic decisions that favor the complainant, without measuring the impact on production chains, employment, or consumer goods prices. As a result, the law becomes a pressure tool used by a few producers to save themselves from losses while plunging the economy into a cycle of inflation and growth disruption.
Competition Protection: Silence in the Face of Economic Immunity
Law No. 3 of 2005 on the Protection of Competition and Prevention of Monopolistic Practices, despite its relative development, operates in isolation from trade protection laws. When large protective tariffs are imposed without assessing their market impact, a new monopolistic environment is created, closing the door to free competition.
Legislation should not only combat monopolies in a free market but also within a protected market. The lack of a mandate for the Competition Protection Authority to intervene in anti-dumping decisions empties its role of meaning and turns the economy into a closed field governed by narrow sectoral interests.
Customs and Investment: Fees Without an Integrated Vision
The new Customs Law No. 207 of 2020 and the Investment Law No. 72 of 2017 both aim to facilitate the business environment and attract investment. However, in reality, safeguard and anti-dumping duties are sometimes imposed without coordination with investment authorities, affecting the operational efficiency of factories, especially those reliant on imported raw materials.
Duties that do not consider their impact on investors may spoil the business climate and weaken Egypt’s competitive advantage as a regional industrial hub. Thus, exports are severely undermined under the pretext of protecting production that is unable to grow independently.
Consumer Protection: The Absent Voice in the Legislative Scene
The Consumer Protection Law No. 181 of 2018 is considered one of the boldest in its drafting, yet it is entirely absent from the circles of real influence in economic policy. The authority lacks significant power over decisions that directly affect prices, such as anti-dumping measures, even though the consumer is the primary victim.
The current framework marginalizes the consumer’s voice in the decision-making process, placing them in a passive recipient role, while market mechanisms operate above their heads.
Conclusion: Outdated Law, New Reality
What we need is not isolated amendments to legal articles, but a new legislative philosophy based on the “integration of economic functions” among institutions. Anti-dumping, competition, customs, investment, and consumer protection laws must all speak one language: the language of public interest.
Only then can we move from reactionary policies to an economic strategy capable of balance, sustainability, and justice.
Frequently Asked Questions
How can Egypt’s current anti-dumping laws be reformed to better balance protection for local industries with the interests of consumers?
+
Reforms should require mandatory public interest evaluations before imposing anti-dumping duties. Decisions must consider not only producers’ complaints but also impacts on consumers, supply chains, employment, and prices.
In what ways does the lack of coordination between trade, investment, and competition laws hinder Egypt’s economic development?
+
Without coordination, measures like tariffs or duties can harm investors relying on imported materials, reducing efficiency. This weakens Egypt’s competitiveness and undermines exports, slowing economic growth.
What legislative steps are needed to ensure that the public interest is a central factor in economic decision-making?
+
Laws should integrate the roles of competition, trade, investment, customs, and consumer authorities. Decisions must assess overall economic impacts, ensuring fair pricing, employment, and sustainable growth are prioritized.
How can the voice of consumers be strengthened in the legislative and policy-making processes affecting market prices and competition?
+
Empowering the Consumer Protection Authority to have a formal role in price-related decisions and increasing transparency in how policies affect consumers will give the public a stronger voice.
What are the risks of maintaining outdated economic laws in a rapidly changing global and local market environment?
+
Outdated laws can create inefficiencies, foster monopolies, and discourage investment. They inflate prices, stifle innovation, and risk trapping the economy in cycles of inflation and stagnation, making Egypt less competitive globally.
To find out more, please fill out the form or email us at: info@eg.Andersen.com
Contact Us
