TTIP Affects upon the USA and the EU
The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership(TTIP) is a multinational economic agreement that is being negotiated between the European Union and the United States. TTIP is expected to increase free trade, harmonize regulations, and create a more competitive, inclusive global market. If TTIP becomes a reality, then it will be the largest trade agreement ever, since the countries within T TIP represent 12% of the world population and 30% of global trade. By cutting tariffs and getting rid of non-tariff trade barriers (NTB), TTIP will permanently increase the level of GDP per capita for the EU and the US. Politically, this deal would be advantageous since it would pull the United States and Europe
…show more content…
The standardization of licensing/approvals and an open market means that professionals will be more mobile and competitive. TTIP also aims to preserve national rights to regulate services and impose work quality and safety standards into place. (European Union 2015)
Rules and Regulations
TTIP aims to increase regulatory cooperation in order to create a fair, free market. By removing the technical barriers to trade and increasing regulatory cooperation, a fair market can be made wherein the quality of products does not decrease. As of 2015, TTIP covers the regulation of the following: chemicals, cosmetics, engineering products, information and communication technologies, medical devices, pesticides, pharmaceuticals, textiles, and vehicles. TTIP also covers the regulation of food safety and animal and plant health. There has been much concern about the food safety regulations. The EU and the US have different regulations, with the EU being stricter in some areas while the US is stricter in others. However, food safety regulations are generally looser in the US. It is difficult to make sanitary and phytosanitary regulations the same since Americans and Europeans have different concerns. The Europeans, for example, are generally against GMO’s and the use of pesticides while the Americans just regulate them. Europeans and Americans have different sets of concerns and regulations for every
In 1994, the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) was enacted between two industrial countries and a yet still developing nation. This was an agreement that was the first of its kind due to the relationship that the countries had and the investment opportunities that it presented. The United States, Canada, and developing Mexico decided to work towards eliminating most tariffs and non-tariff barriers between the three in order to increase the flow of trade in goods and services. Since its enactment NAFTA has led to the providing of over 40 million more jobs throughout the countries, and it has also tripled merchandise trade between the three participants to an astounding $946 billion USD in 2008 (NAFTA Now). However even then it is still not very clear whether enacting NAFTA was worth the time and effort and in fact the United States may have been better off not having joined NAFTA.
The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) is a grand, 21st century regional free-trade treaty which was commenced on 2003. It initiated as a trade contract involving Singapore, New Zealand and Chile. Presently, the TPP consists of 12 countries as their members that includes US, Malaysia, Mexico, Canada, Japan, Brunei, China, Korea, Australia, Peru and Vietnam. Other countries like Bangladesh, Philippines, Indonesia, India etc. have also revealed their concern in merging with the TPP trade agreement. In 2011 the Trans-Pacific Partnership countries declared that the TPP is expected to “develop trade and investment accompanied by the TPP partner countries, to uphold innovation, economic expansion and advancement, and to support the formation and preservation of jobs. TPP will undo prospects for American employees, families, businesses, farmers, and ranchers by offering increased permission to some of the greatest growing markets in the world.
After a lengthy negotiation of over 3 years, Canada, the United States, and Mexico reached an agreement on trilateral trade ― the North American Free Trade Agreement. Commonly referred to as NAFTA, it came into effect on the first day of 1994. Covering 450 million of population and reaching $17 trillion in combined GDP, NAFTA proudly ranks the first among the world’s free trade agreements (USTR). It is usually seen as a remarkable success for the countless benefits it brings to its members. Some of NAFTA’s main advantages are promoting closer relationships, eliminating trade barriers, and increasing market opportunities. However, as the first proposer of NAFTA, the United States has indeed benefited the most from it in several different
The North American Free Trade Agreement, commonly known as the NAFTA, is a trade agreement between the United States, Canada and Mexico launched to enable North America to become more competitive in the global marketplace (Amadeo, 2011). The NAFTA is regarded as “one of the most successful trade agreements in history” for its impact on increases in agricultural trade and investment among the three contracting nations (North American Free Trade Agreement, 2011). Supporters and opponents of the NAFTA have argued the effects of the agreement on participating nations since its inception; yet, close examination proves that NAFTA has had a relatively positive impact on the economies of the United States, Canada, and Mexico.
These export trade agreements, in the next two decades, will create thousands of available jobs, and also boost the GDP by approximately $25 billion, which benefits consumers, households and economic growth. There are several strategies under the new trade agreement that targets partnership and bring benefits:
Two of the well-known theories are absolute advantage and comparative advantage theory. Absolute advantage trade theory is when the producer is able to input a small amount to produce a good or service. It is also recognized to attain better through the acts of low-cost production. By this I mean, an example of absolute advantage is when a small country like China manufacture or produce a good and participate in the ability to have low labor cost on that item. Meanwhile, comparative advantage is the action of a country being able to produce or manufacture a good/service at a lower cost than another country. When having the theory of comparative advantage country that produces an item has an advantage over the company that has a desire for that specific item. Their ability to produce the item locally gives them a cheaper source of the ingredient causing them to offer their product cheaper than other companies. The Trans-Pacific Pacific Partnership is an agreement that has threatened to extend restrictive intellectual property laws across the world and rewrite international rules on its enforcement. Countries involved in the TPP are Australia, Peru, Japan, Canada, Vietnam, Brunei, Chile, New Zealand, Singapore, Malaysia, and Mexico. Basically, all the countries along the Pacific Ocean signed the agreement on February 4, 2016. The trade agreement is said to makes trading easier, adds intellectual property protection, and raises labor environmental standards in all countries involved, but there is no set person to write the rules and regulations to the agreement along with no one to make sure they are enforced. If the U.S doesn’t ratify the agreement, China can step in and continue to dominate and control the market. I believe if done right TPP can bring world domination for all countries to work together in creating one huge market to live by. Regional trading groups are
The greatest achievement that I have been able to accomplish in terms of securing the material national interest of the United States has been the agreement of the Trans-Pacific Partnership. This trade agreement amongst twelve member states (United States, Canada, Chile, Peru, Zealand, Australia, Brunei, Singapore, Vietnam, Malaysia, and Japan) was adopted to strengthen the economic ties for a more interconnected global economy. For the average working American it shows great promise to increase their income and for the nation as a whole. It also possesses the potential to allow for the growth of the nation’s GDP and annual exports, thereby increasing the living standard.
After the controversial TPP fast track legislation was passed by Congress, the world woke up to the devastating effects of other "trade agreements."
The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) was designed to create trade that was mutually beneficial for all North American countries. Yet a recent change in the U.S. administration has threatened continued trade between the three major players – the U.S, Canada and Mexico. New President Donald J. Trump’s promises to renegotiate NAFTA have both Canada and Mexico on edge, and without stability, can possibly force Mexico to opt out of the agreement altogether. While NAFTA has holes in its implementation, this agreement has aided in economic growth, tripled foreign investment, and lowered prices within the US.
The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) was introduce as vehicle spark growth between the United State and the European Union. The US and EU represent the most developed, modern and committed to the highest consumer protection in the world. It is the T-TIP goal to capitalize on the relationship by providing economic growth and more jobs to US and EU to 13 million jobs already supported by transatlantic trade and investment. It is the T-TIP goal and desire to cut the edge and tariff agreements to allow for greater compatibility and transparency, in trade and investment regulations, while maintaining high level of health, safety and environmental protection.
Free trade agreements are in force all over the world today. A free trade agreement is an “agreement between two or more countries where the countries agree on certain obligations that affect trade in goods and services, and protections for investors and intellectual property rights, among other topics” (www.naftanow.org, 2013). These agreements are essential for the countries if they want to trade goods and services with each other without having to be bothered with each other’s laws and regulations.
Government protectionism plays a specific role in trade, especially in the beef and pork industry, before the Trans-Pacific Partnership. Protectionism is a self-protecting mechanism used by many countries to protect their own economies from competing international businesses. The Trans-Pacific Partnership will unite twelve countries, and allow access into large markets such as Japan with lots of opportunity. Consumers are affected daily by protectionism. At the grocery store, consumers are faced with the task of choosing nearly identical products with the sole differentiating factor being the price. Protected products see a major price difference favoured towards consumers. Protectionism, such as tariffs or subsidies, is critical for Canadian companies as it gives them an upper hand against rival international competitors.
According to Library of Congress (n.d) compared to other countries, regulation of GMOs in the US is relatively favourable to their development. GMOs are an economically important component of the biotechnology industry, which now plays a significant role in the US economy. For example, the US is the world’s leading producer of genetically modified crops. This explains, why Monsanto Company makes more emphasis on improving their biotechnology and teach it to future generations, while EU establishes a strict monitoring of GM products for marketing in regard to the requirement of mandatory labelling rules. On the other hand, in the United States the issue of GMOs are promoted as a benefit for the population and the environment, while in the European Union, biotechnology has been viewed as a new process that requires large regulators by the European Food Safety Authority. It would be the reason because Syngenta's report is focusing on issues related to make crops more efficient and to help farmers meet new emissions requirements, to produce more food while reducing their environmental footprint.
The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and Michael Froman (United States Trade Representative) need to decide whether it is necessary to reduce tariffs to benefit Americans and the economy or keep the tariffs in order to keep certain manufacturing jobs in the United States.
As mentioned earlier, the TPP is a major potential free trade agreement between twelve of the Pacific Rim countries. The countries are Australia, Canada, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, Peru, The United States, Vietnam, Brunei, Chile, New Zealand, and Singapore (Freil, Sharon, Gleeson, Thow, Labonte, Stuckler, Kay, and Snowdon 1). Interestingly enough, this agreement is the technical successor to the P4 agreement that was initialised in 2006 (Elms 29). This agreement was held between Chile, Brunei, New Zealand, and Singapore. In 2008 the U.S. showed large interest in joining this agreement giving spark to a new agreement that has enticed other Pacific Rim countries (Elms 29). Taking charge of this new agreement the U.S. has laid down most of the TPP 's foundation to create an agreement that should allow for a