Presidential Tariff Authority

2017 ◽  
Vol 111 (4) ◽  
pp. 957-969 ◽  
Author(s):  
John K. Veroneau ◽  
Catherine H. Gibson

As part of the “America First” agenda discussed in his inaugural address, President Donald J. Trump promised that “[e]very decision” on trade, among other areas, would be “made to benefit American workers and American families.” During its first months, the Trump Administration made a number of trade moves apparently in connection with this “America First” trade agenda, including initiating national security investigations into steel and aluminum imports under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 and preparing an “omnibus” report on trade deficits. The Trump Administration also took steps to alter U.S. treaty relationships, by withdrawing from the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement, announcing the renegotiation of the North American Free Trade Agreement, and requesting a special session of a joint committee created under the United States-Korea Free Trade Agreement. In August 2017, President Trump continued this course—and indicated a willingness to take unilateral action against U.S. trading partners—by signing a presidential memorandum directing the United States Trade Representative to determine whether China's treatment of U.S. intellectual property warranted investigation under Section 301 et seq. of the Trade Act of 1974.

1990 ◽  
Vol 84 (2) ◽  
pp. 394-443 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jean Raby

This is a good deal, a good deal for Canada and a deal that is good for all Canadians. It is also a fair deal, which means that it brings benefits and progress to our partner, the United States of America. When both countries prosper, our democracies are strengthened and leadership has been provided to our trading partners around the world. I think this initiative represents enlightened leadership to the trading partners about what can be accomplished when we determine that we are going to strike down protectionism, move toward liberalized trade, and generate new prosperity for all our people.On January 2, 1988, President Ronald Reagan of the United States and Prime Minister Brian Mulroney of Canada signed the landmark comprehensive Free Trade Agreement (FTA) between the two countries that already enjoyed the largest bilateral trade relationship in the world. The FTA was subsequently ratified by the legislatures of both countries, if only after a bitterly fought election on the subject in Canada. On January 1, 1989, the FTA formally came into effect.


2018 ◽  
Vol 112 (3) ◽  
pp. 510-513 ◽  

Consistent with his approach on the campaign trail, President Trump has demonstrated a continued interest in revamping U.S. trade agreements. By the late spring of 2018, the Trump administration had negotiated modest changes to the United States-Republic of Korea Free Trade Agreement (KORUS) in favor of U.S. interests. It had yet to reach any final agreement with regard to the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), despite the expiration of an initial deadline that was designed to ensure adequate time for a vote on the negotiated agreement by the present Congress. To ease the passage of future trade deals, Trump has triggered the three-year extension of a process that provides expedited congressional consideration of negotiated trade agreements.


Author(s):  
Richard D. Mahoney

How did the U.S.-Colombia free trade agreement come about? The officially named “U.S.-Colombia Trade Promotion Agreement” was the stepchild of a rancorous hemispheric divorce between the United States and five Latin American governments over the proposal to extend the North American Free Trade Agreement...


1994 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 53-71 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edward B. DeBellevue ◽  
Eric Hitzel ◽  
Kenneth Cline ◽  
Jorge A. Benitez ◽  
Julia Ramos-Miranda ◽  
...  

Subject Prospects for Mexico and Central America to end-2017. Significance The economies of Mexico and Central America will maintain a ‘business as usual’ stance until renegotiation of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) formally starts later in the year. Growth momentum in the region is therefore likely to be maintained for the rest of 2017. Nonetheless, threats to trade and migration links with the United States, and to remittance income, will drive uncertainty.


Significance Separately, five Republican senators, led by Florida's Marco Rubio, wrote to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on February 7, requesting she invite Taiwan's President Tsai Ing-wen to address a joint Congress session. Impacts The proposed US-Taiwan free trade agreement is presently unlikely to advance. The Trump administration might be more willing than others to defend Taiwan, but relations with China will take priorty. Taiwan is exporting its political divisions to the United States; the main opposition Kuomintang will open a Washington office this year.


Elements ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew Hamilton

Longstanding incentives for migration have encouraged individuals to travel from Mexico to the United States in search of higher wages and economic survival. These incentives exist despite the stated goal of various officials to curb immigration to the United States. in fact, the migration of workers is a key facet in the historical relationship between the United States and Mexico. Several policies have contributed to the continued migration and have further entrenched a growing dependency between the two nations. This paper serves as an in-depth examination of the causes of this economic dependence and investigates what effect the latest of these policies, the North American Free Trade Agreement, has on the issue.


Author(s):  
John P. McCray

The dramatic growth in trade between the United States and Mexico from $12.39 billion to $56.8 billion of U.S. exports and $17.56 billion to $73 billion of U.S. imports between 1977 and 1996 and the implementation of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) have focused attention on the impact that the truck-transported portion of this trade has on U.S. highways. State and federal highway administrators are concerned with the planning implications this additional unexpected traffic may have on the transportation infrastructure. Public advocacy groups want additional highway funds to promote one NAFTA highway corridor over others in an effort to stimulate additional economic development. Most of these groups advocate a north-south route through the United States between Canada and Mexico that follows the alignment of an existing federal highway number. Research conducted by the U.S. government under the 1991 Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act has failed to define NAFTA highway corridors adequately, leaving policy makers with little concrete information with which to combat the rhetoric of the trade highway corridor advocacy groups. A report is provided on research critical to the needs of both highway administrators and corridor advocacy groups, namely, the location of U.S.-Mexican trade highway corridors and the trade truck density along these corridors.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document