Tariff-Based Disputes Continue to Characterize Trump Administration Trade Policies

2018 ◽  
Vol 112 (4) ◽  
pp. 751-759 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
European Union ◽  
Free Trade Agreement ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
The United States ◽  
Trade Policies ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Trade Relations ◽  
Trading Partners ◽  
Trump Administration

Over the summer of 2018, trade relations between the United States and many of its trading partners continued to be marked by tensions. The United States and China ratcheted up their use of tariffs against each other. The United States both received and initiated requests for consultation with various countries at the World Trade Organization (WTO) related to its earlier steel and aluminum tariffs and to tariffs imposed in response by other countries. President Trump has continued to pursue the possibility of further tariffs, including with respect to automobile and uranium imports. The United States also escalated trade tensions with Turkey through various measures, explicitly linking some of these measures to Turkey's detainment of an American pastor. Despite the broader theme of tensions, negotiations have proved productive between the United States and two of its major trading partners—the European Union and Mexico—paving a way for future settlements. With the European Union, the Trump administration has reached a tentative understanding and agreed not to impose new tariffs while the parties negotiate toward finalizing this understanding. As to Mexico, in late August 2018 the Trump administration announced that the two countries had reached agreement with respect to many issues underlying their ongoing North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) negotiations.

scholarly journals Overview of the Trade Relations Between the European Community/Union and the United States at the Threshold of Globalization and Post-globalization Era

2020 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 27-42
Author(s):  
Rett R. Ludwikowski ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
European Union ◽  
Free Trade Agreement ◽  
Main Part ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
The United States ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Trade Relations ◽  
Strategic Trade ◽  
The Us

The main goal of this article is to present to the European reader the implications of the unstable relationships between the United States and an integrated Europe. The article focuses on the trade relations between the US and Europe in the globalization era. It explains the meaning of some basic terms used by trade experts, such as globalization, regionalization, glocalization, and strategic trade. The author also tries to explore the reasons for the recent crisis of global trade. The main part of the paper reviews the major disputes between these two regions which resulted in postponing of the negotiations of the Trans-Atlantic Free Trade Agreement. As we have observed in the introduction of the article, the relationships between the European Union and the United States have always been complicated and the article presents the main reasons for these disagreements. In a time of renewed Trans-Atlantic negotiations, pro-American sentiments in Europe grew stronger, and European experts on trade and politics emphasized that the US significantly increased support for the European Deterrence Initiative (EDI). Still, with comments repeated by President Trump many times that “Europe needs its own army”, the European media began warning the readers that the crisis in US-EU relations may soon return.

Presidential Tariff Authority

2017 ◽  
Vol 111 (4) ◽  
pp. 957-969 ◽  
Author(s):  
John K. Veroneau ◽  
Catherine H. Gibson
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
Free Trade Agreement ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
The United States ◽  
Trade Expansion ◽  
The North ◽  
Trading Partners ◽  
Partnership Agreement ◽  
Trump Administration

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.

The Investment Provisions of the Canada—United States Free Trade Agreement: A Canadian Perspective

1990 ◽  
Vol 84 (2) ◽  
pp. 394-443 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jean Raby
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
Free Trade Agreement ◽  
Bilateral Trade ◽  
Good Deal ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
Ronald Reagan ◽  
The United States ◽  
The World ◽  
Trading Partners

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.

Growing US Republican Taiwan focus may provoke Beijing

2019 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
Free Trade Agreement ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
The United States ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Trump Administration

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.

scholarly journals Trump Administration Continues Trade Negotiations with Major Trade Partners

2020 ◽  
Vol 114 (1) ◽  
pp. 137-142
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Executive Branch ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Trade Disputes ◽  
Trade Relations ◽  
United States Mexico ◽  
Other Regarding ◽  
Trade Partners ◽  
Trump Administration

In the fall of 2019, the Trump administration reached several trade arrangements, some of them tentative, with important U.S. trade partners. On October 11, 2019, China and the United States announced a preliminary trade deal subject to finalization—one that came after more than a year of escalating tariffs. Just a week earlier, the United States had signed two trade agreements with Japan, one regarding tariff reductions and the other regarding digital trade. None of these deals appear to require subsequent congressional approval in the eyes of the executive branch, unlike the earlier United States-Mexico-Canada-Agreement (USMCA), which was signed in November 2018 and whose fate in Congress appears promising as of mid-December of 2019. In addition to these trade arrangements, the fall of 2019 saw several developments in trade relations between the United States and the European Union tied to the long-running trade disputes.

scholarly journals The China-Australia Free Trade Agreement (ChAFTA): its implications for Australia-United States relations

2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 41-53
Author(s):  
Johni Robert Verianto Korwa
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
Free Trade Agreement ◽  
Strategic Alliance ◽  
International System ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
The United States ◽  
National Interests ◽  
Trade Relations ◽  
The Us

Australia is currently faced with a strategic and economic dilemma regarding its interactions with China and the United States (US). On the one hand, it should maintain and strengthen its strategic relations with the US as an ally in order to contain a rising China. On the other hand, Australia should ensure its economic growth by strengthening trade relations with China. This paper aims to examine the implications of the new China-Australia Free Trade Agreement (ChAFTA) for the ANZUS strategic alliance. Through Qualitative Approach, this article analyzes the issues with the use of realist and liberal perspectives in international relations. By assessing two previous events involving the triangular Australia-US-China relationship (the case of the Taiwan conflict, and the US development of a National Missile Defense system), this paper concludes that ChAFTA may tend to undermine the ANZUS alliance. Three reasons for this conclusion are identified: a fundamental shift in the way Australia perceives China; ChAFTA offers more benefits to Australia than the Australia-US Free Trade Agreement (AUSFTA); and finally Australia may consider ChAFTA as being more in its national interests in the international system than the ANZUS alliance.

scholarly journals The Effects of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership on the European Union and Turkey

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pınar Bal
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
European Union ◽  
The United States ◽  
Customs Union ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Trade Relations ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
Transatlantic Trade ◽  
Policy Alternatives ◽  
Trade And Investment

The goal of this paper is to analyze the possible effects of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) Agreement aimed to be signed between the European Union and the United States by the end of 2015. The TTIP is expected to have important social, economic and political benefits for the European Union and the United States. In this respect, following a short description of the TTIP, the possible effects of this agreement on the European Union, the United States as well as on world trade will be described. The effects of such an agreement on Turkey will also be examined both with respect to Turkey’s already existing relations with the European Union and the United States. In parallel with these, the advantages and disadvantages of the existing Customs Union Agreement between Turkey and the European Union will be evaluated with respect to the TTIP. Based on this analysis, some policy alternatives for Turkey will be proposed that might help Turkey to overcome the current disadvantages that will result from the TTIP and that might strengthen its trade relations with both the European Union and the United States by transforming those disadvantages into advantages.

Global Risks for Eurasia in 2019

2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (1-3) ◽  
pp. 52-59
Author(s):  
Yerzhan Saltybayev
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
European Union ◽  
South China Sea ◽  
Common Ground ◽  
The United States ◽  
The European Union ◽  
International Meeting ◽  
Trading Partners ◽  
International Experts ◽  
Trade Conflicts

The Rating of Global Risks for Eurasia in 2019 is the first analytical project to assess global risks for the Eurasian macroregion. The risk rating was released as part of the Astana Club international meeting and is based on a survey of over 1,000 professional respondents from 60 countries and detailed opinions of 30 prominent international experts. The world’s vulnerability to global risks will grow – the overwhelming majority of experts who participated in the project are sure of this. Pessimism seems to be associated with a new round of tension in the Middle East, crises around Iran and Ukraine, rising tensions in the South China Sea, and sanctions against Russia. Another trend that will continue in the coming year is the rise of protectionism. 56 percent of polled experts are inclined to this opinion. Pessimism is added by the aggravation of trade conflicts between the United States and its key trading partners: China, the European Union, as well as the NAFTA members such as Canada and Mexico. Although part of the conflict has been resolved, the confrontation between the United States and China will not lose its relevance in 2019. The global geopolitical and geo-economic confrontation has been spilling over onto the new area: the cyber environment. World tensions have also kept the countries from finding common ground on solving environmental problems and challenges.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document