Japan-US Economic Relations in the Post-Trans-Pacific Partnership Era

2017 ◽  
Vol 09 (03) ◽  
pp. 38-49
Author(s):  
Min-Hua CHIANG

Japan and the United States have agreed to discuss a post-Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) bilateral trade framework during the Abe-Trump meeting in February 2017. The bilateral trade talks will be a significant step for Japan to remain economically connected to America. To reward Japan’s support of Trump’s economic agenda, the United States has promised to defend Japan, including the disputed Senkaku islands.

At the present stage of development of international economic relations special attention is paid to the study of the relations between the countries that are the world leaders in terms of GDP and foreign trade – the USA and China. This is due to the fact that in recent years the US have introduced a number of measures to counteract the growth of Chinese exports, which has led to backlash from China. The subject of the study is the foreign trade relations of the USA and China. The goal is to analyze the influence of protectionist measures applied by the US and China on the development of their foreign economic relations. The following objectives are set: to determine the level of economic interdependence of the USA and the PRC, to investigate their impact on mutual trade flows and to analyze the dynamics of bilateral trade of countries under restrictive measures. The following methods are: comparative analysis, systematization and generalization, construction of regression models. The results of the analysis revealed that the US and PRC current accounts show reverse dynamics: the United States demonstrates stable deficit, while China has had surplus for many years. Moreover, the structures of the current accounts do differ a lot as well: the US is totally services-oriented country, whereas China is a major exporter of goods. It can be observed that both countries have experienced a recession of foreign economic activity since 2018, as far as their current account balances decreased substantially, which is likely to be the consequence of tariff barriers imposed by the US and PRC. Furthermore, due to trade confrontation, bilateral trade between these countries declines significantly as well, so that now China and the United States are forced to look for new export markets. The results of the regression models allow concluding that import from China is indeed having a negative impact on US exports, which has led to the US restrictions on imports from China. However, the introduction of mutual restrictions did not lead to an improvement of the US foreign trade.


Author(s):  
Roberto Zepeda

Canada is Mexico’s third largest trading partner in terms of the overall bilateral trade, and both countries have become strategic allies during the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) era, between 1994 and 2020. Canada, Mexico, and the United States have been members of the NAFTA since 1994. For both Canada and Mexico, the United States is their first trading partner, in terms of exports, imports, and foreign direct investment. NAFTA has paved the way for economic integration between Canada and Mexico during the period of this agreement. It is significant to highlight the notable expansion of Mexico’s exports to Canada, but also of Canada’s investment in Mexico. From a subnational perspective, the provinces of Ontario, Quebec, British Columbia, and Alberta are among Mexico’s most important trading partners. Economic relations between Mexico and Canada has also facilitated international cooperation from subnational governments and important interchanges in education, science, culture, and environment. Quebec is the only Canadian province with a general delegation in Mexico and representations in several subnational states. The Canadian province of Saskatchewan has established important agreements in education with government agencies and universities in Mexico. Relations between Mexico and Canada have strengthened during the NAFTA era. Not only central governments but also subnational governments define the characteristics and dynamics of this relation.


2020 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 92-109
Author(s):  
Prema-chandra Athukorala

This paper examines the implications of the Trump Administration's U.S. trade policy on U.S.–India relations and the Indian economy against the backdrop of strengthening political and strategic ties between the two countries, which have been strong since the beginning of this century. Trump's strategy of using tariffs as the bargaining chip in bilateral economic relations with India, while ignoring mutual geopolitical interests, has coincided with new protectionist tendencies in India under the Make in India strategy of the Modi government, setting the stage for a protracted bilateral trade dispute. U.S. safeguard duties on steel and aluminium have taken a toll on India's exports of these products to the United States, but these products account for a tiny share of India's total exports to the United States. The hard hit was Trump's termination of India's designation as a beneficiary developing nation under the Generalized System of Preferences (GSP). The GSP abolition is likely to have a much more significant effect on the Indian economy as exports under the program are heavily concentrated in the traditional labor-intensive industries. However,  given the handsome mandate received by the Modi government at the May 2019 election and that the next election is four years away (2024), GSP abolition is unlikely to receive much weight in determining India's position in trade negotiations compared with the new protectionist policy stance stemming from the Make in India strategy. The WTO verdict on the U.S. complaint on India's manufacturing export subsidies, if upheld by the WTO Appellate body, would strengthen the U.S. position in negotiating a trade deal with India.


1994 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 349-366
Author(s):  
James Riedel ◽  
Maria Luisa Cicognani

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 74 (4) ◽  
pp. 402-419
Author(s):  
Krishnakumar S.

With Donald Trump as President of United States, multilateralism in the world economy is facing an unprecedented challenge. The international economic institutions that have evolved since the fifties are increasingly under the risk of being undermined. With the growing assertion of the emerging and developing economies in the international fora, United States is increasingly sceptical of its ability to maneuvre such institutions to suit its own purpose. This is particularly true with respect to WTO, based on “one country one vote” system. The tariff rate hikes initiated by the leader country in the recent past pose a serious challenge to the multilateral trading system. The paper tries to undertake a critical overview of the US pre-occupation of targeting economies on the basis of the bilateral merchandise trade surpluses of countries, through the trade legislations like Omnibus Act and Trade Facilitation Act. These legislations not only ignore the growing share of the United States in the growing invisibles trade in the world economy, but also read too much into the bilateral trade surpluses of economies with United States and the intervention done by them in the foreign exchange market.


2010 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 256-281 ◽  
Author(s):  
Guy Michaels ◽  
Xiaojia Zhi

Do firms always choose the cheapest suitable inputs, or can group attitudes affect their choices? To investigate this question, we examine the deterioration of relations between the United States and France from 2002–2003, when France's favorability rating in the US fell by 48 percentage points. We estimate that the worsening attitudes reduced bilateral trade by about 9 percent and that trade in inputs probably declined similarly, by about 8 percent. We use these estimates to calculate the average decrease in firms' willingness to pay for French (or US) commodities when attitudes worsened. (JEL D24, F13, F14, L14, L21)


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document