Many United States companies have， unfortunately，made the search for legal protection from importcompetition intoa major line of work. Since 1980 theUnited States International Trade Commission （ITC）（5） has received about 280complaints alleging damagefrom imports that benefit from subsidies by foreigngovernments. Another 340 charge that foreigncompa-nies “dumped” their products in the United States at“less than fair value.” Even when no unfair practices（10） arealleged， the simple claim that an industry has beeninjured by imports is sufficient grounds to seek relief.
Contrary to the general impression， this quest forimport relief has hurt more companies than it hashelped. As
corporations begin to function globally， they（15） develop an intricate web of marketing， production， andresearchrelationships， The complexity of these relation-ships makes it unlikely that a system of import relieflaws will meet thestrategic needs of all the units underthe same parent company.
（20）Internationalization increases the danger that foreigncompanies will use import relief laws against the
verycompanies the laws were designed to protect. Suppose aUnited States-owned company establishes an overseasplant tomanufacture a product while its competitor（25） makes the same product in the United States. If thecompetitor can proveinjury from the imports——andthat the United States company received a subsidy froma foreign government to build its plantabroad-theUnited States company‘s products will be uncompeti-（30） tive in the United States， since they would besubject toduties.
Perhaps the most brazen case occurred when the ITCinvestigated allegations that Canadian companies wereinjuringthe United States salt industry by dumping（35） rock salt， used to de-ice roads. The bizarre aspect of thecomplaint wasthat a foreign conglomerate with UnitedStates operations was crying for help against a UnitedStates company with foreignoperations. The “UnitedStates” company claiming injury was a subsidiary of a（40） Dutch conglomerate， while the“Canadian” companiesincluded a subsidiary of a Chicago firm that was thesecond-largest domestic producer of rock salt. 1. The passage is chiefly concerned with
（A） arguing against the increased internationalization of United States corporations
（B） warning that the application of laws affecting trade frequently has unintended consequences
（C） demonstrating that foreign-based firms receive more subsidies from their governments than United States firmsreceive from the United States government
（D） advocating the use of trade restrictions for “dumped” products but not for other imports （E） recommending a uniform method for handling claims of unfair trade practices
2. It can be inferred from the passage that the minimal basis for a complaint to the International Trade Commission iswhich of the following？
（A） A foreign competitor has received a subsidy from a foreign government.
（B） A foreign competitor has substantially increased the volume of products shipped to the United States. （C） A foreign competitor is selling products in the United States at less than fair market value.
（D） The company requesting import relief has been injured by the sale of imports in the United States.
（E） The company requesting import relief has been barred from exporting products to the country of its foreigncompetitor.
3. The last paragraph performs which of the following functions in the passage？
（A） It summarizes the discussion thus far and suggests additional areas of research. （B） It presents a recommendation based on the evidence presented earlier.
（C） It discusses an exceptional case in which the results expected by the author of the passage were not obtained. （D） It introduces an additional area of concern not mentioned earlier.
（E） It cites a specific case that illustrates a problem presented more generally in the previous paragraph. 4. The passage warns of which of the following dangers？
（A） Companies in the United States may receive no protection from imports unless they actively seek protectionfrom import competition.
（B） Companies that seek legal protection from import competition may incur legal costs that far exceed anypossible gain.
（C） Companies that are United States-owned but operate internationally may not be eligible for protection fromimport competition under the laws of the countries in which their plants operate.
（D） Companies that are not United States-owned may seek legal protection from import competition under UnitedStates import relief laws.
（E） Companies in the United States that import raw materials may have to pay duties on those materials.
5. The passage suggests that which of the following is most likely to be true of United States trade laws？ （A） They will eliminate the practice of “dumping” products in the United States.
（B） They will enable manufacturers in the United States to compete more profitably outside the United States. （C） They will affect United States trade with Canada more negatively than trade with other nations.
（D） Those that help one unit within a parent company will not necessarily help other units in the company. （E） Those that are applied to international companies will accomplish their intended result.
6. It can be inferred from the passage that the author believes which of the following about the complaint mentionedin the last paragraph？
（A） The ITC acted unfairly toward the complainant in its investigation. （B） The complaint violated the intent of import relief laws.
（C） The response of the ITC to the complaint provided suitable relief from unfair trade practices to the complainant. （D） The ITC did not have access to appropriate information concerning the case. （E） Each of the companies involved in the complaint acted in its own best interest.
7. According to the passage， companies have the general impression that International Trade Commission import relief practices have
（A） caused unpredictable fluctuations in volumes of imports and exports （B） achieved their desired effect only under unusual circumstances （C） actually helped companies that have requested import relief （D） been opposed by the business community
（E） had less impact on international companies than the business community expected
8. According to the passage， the International Trade Commission is involved in which of the following？ （A） Investigating allegations of unfair import competition
（B） Granting subsidies to companies in the United States that have been injured by import competition （C） Recommending legislation to ensure fair
（D） Identifying international corporations that wish to build plants in the United States （E） Assisting corporations in the United States that wish to compete globally
因篇幅问题不能全部显示，请点此查看更多更全内容