Property prices are on the rise. Bank interest rates are on the rise. Raw materials are on the rise. Even the price of a bowl of rice is on the rise. Next, we heard that local tile manufacturers are again up in arms to petition our government to investigate and initiate an anti-dumping policy to protect the local manufacturers against the influx of tile imports. Determining whether government policies on anti-dumping to the ceramic tiles industry would do more harm or good requires a comprehensive analysis of various factors, such as the specific market conditions, the effectiveness of the policy, and the long-term implications. Whatever the outcome will be, here are some advantages and disadvantages to comprehend:

Potential benefits of anti-dumping policies on the ceramic tiles industry:

Potential drawbacks of anti-dumping policies on the ceramic tiles industry:

1. Higher prices for consumers:Anti-dumping measures can lead to increased prices for ceramic tiles, making them less affordable for major consumers and potentially limiting their choices. Finally, consumers will have to foot more while surviving on the reduced real value of our wages due to inflation unless the country’s economy and productivity rise in tandem with wage increments. Otherwise, there is no way the consumers will be able to live in such an unwarranted environment.

2. Reduced product variety:Restrictions on imports may limit the availability of certain ceramic tile styles or designs, reducing consumers’ options and potentially hindering their ability to find products that suit their preferences. There would be a possibility that specific sizes or shapes not produced locally will also be impacted by the ruling, thus inflating the prices further.

3. Slowed innovation:Limiting competition from foreign manufacturers through anti-dumping measures might reduce incentives for local manufacturers to innovate or invest in new technologies, which slow down technological advancements within the industry. This “comfort zone” has always been the Achilles’ heel for umpteen years without seeing the ability of the local factories to compete on the global stage. The Malaysian tiles industry has been around since the 1960s without seeing much improvement in terms of revolution or creation during those years except for the gradual reduction of the import duty to embrace competition. Due to selective protectionism, such precious time was being wasted. The eventual prelude to this will only hasten the industry’s natural demise, where new technology and cleaner energy will take center stage as we need the urgent adoption of an innovative method in producing tiles of the future and not compete merely on prices.

4. Trade retaliation:Imposing anti-dumping measures can provoke retaliatory actions from other countries, possibly harming other industries or sectors of the economy through the disruption of bilateral trade relationships.

5. Decreased product competition:Worst, anti-dumping measures can reduce competition from foreign manufacturers, which may result in less innovation, reduced product quality, and slower technological advancements in the ceramic industry. It would not be a good idea to protect the few at the expense of the majority of consumers where, in the end, the majority will have to pay a higher rate.

6. Reduced access to unique products:Some ceramics may have unique characteristics or be produced using specialized techniques that are only available from foreign manufacturers. Imposing anti-dumping measures may restrict access to these products for end users and may reduce the creativity of intellectual or artistic professionals like architects, designers, or artists.

7. Negative impact on small businesses: Importing ceramic products at lower costs can be crucial for small businesses that cannot afford to manufacture their own goods. Anti-dumping rulings might make it more difficult for these businesses to access affordable ceramics, hindering their growth and competitiveness.

8. Slowed market response:Restrictions on imports can slow down the market’s ability to respond to changing consumer demands and preferences. This results in delays in accessing new and innovative ceramic products. Hence, the nation will move backward instead of forward in our nation-building initiatives.

9. Risk of monopolies or oligopolies:If anti-dumping measures eliminate or reduce competition from foreign manufacturers, it could lead to the emergence of monopolies or oligopolies in the domestic ceramic industry. This limits consumer choices and potentially leads to higher prices and reduced quality.

10. Increased reliance on limited local supply:With less competition from foreign manufacturers, end users may become more reliant on a limited number of local suppliers. Inadvertently, this leads to supply chain disruptions, higher prices due to increased demand, and limited availability during peak periods or factory downtime.

11. Inefficient allocation of resources:Anti-dumping rulings may result in the allocation of resources towards less efficient domestic manufacturers, potentially leading to wasted resources and inefficiencies in the ceramic industry. When an industry is protected against competition, complacency will creep in, causing many things to be taken for granted as there would not be any real competition to keep these in check. Eventually, the efficiency and effectiveness dropped, and the industry continued to see further deterioration since inception, as these resources should instead be allocated to newer technology like Artificial intelligence (AI), Renewable Energy (RE), Robotics, advanced software, satellite communications, or future mode of transportation which are now high in demand globally.

It is equally important to assess the specific circumstances and impacts of anti-dumping policies on the ceramic tiles industry to determine whether the overall effect does more harm or good. Additionally, policymakers often need to strike a balance between protecting domestic industry and ensuring consumer welfare and market efficiency.

From the above suggestion, the consumers seem to have the last say that dictates how the market will respond to the impending issue while weighing the advantages and disadvantages of this policy, with a ratio of 1 against 2.