scholarly journals INDONESIA'S POSITION BASED ON THE AUSTRALIAN ASEAN NEW ZEALAND FREE TRADE AGREEMENT AND ITS IMPACT FROM A BUSINESS LAW PERSPECTIVE

2010 ◽  
Vol 40 (1) ◽  
pp. 142
Author(s):  
Ariawan Gunadi
Keyword(s):  
New Zealand ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
Free Trade Agreement ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
South East Asia ◽  
Business Law ◽  
Business Partner ◽  
The West ◽  
Brunei Darussalam ◽  
The World

AbstractIndonesia as one of the major countries in South East Asia acts as aprominent business center between the East and the West. Business activitiessoon attract the attention of other countries in similar geography to share thewealth such as Malaysia, Filipina, Myanmar, Cambodia, Singapore,Vietnam, Thai/and, Laos, Myanmar and Brunei Darussalam. However, theinternational society would have to face the import taxes that impedesf oreign goods from flowing into state member' market. Australia and NewZealand as a fellow business partner then proposes the Australian AseanNew Zealand Free Trade Agreement (AANZFTA) to the Association of SouthEast Asian Nations (ASEAN) that allows members to conduct free tradeamong them in almost every sector, including goods, services, investment,intellectual property and new issues (Singapore Issues). However theagreement is suspected by some parties to condone a subtle form of liberaleconomy that may allow Australia and New Zealand to influence the nationaleconomy of the weaker state, not mentioning endangering ASEAN'bargaining position in the World Trade Organization. This article attemptsto explain the position of Indonesia 's economic sovereignty by signing theAANZFTA which imposes several clauses affecting the economic activity andhow will the agreement bring impact to Indonesia 's national economy offrom a business law perspective.

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.

scholarly journals The China-NZ FTA and Waxing Juridical

2011 ◽  
Vol 42 (2) ◽  
pp. 353
Author(s):  
Ruiping Ye ◽  
Ricarda Kesebohm
Keyword(s):  
New Zealand ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
Free Trade Agreement ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
Legal Personality

This article considers the translation of legal personality and the use of the word juridical in the China-New Zealand Free Trade Agreement.

Modelling welfare effects under Pakistan–China free trade agreement

2018 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 202-218 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lubna Uzair ◽  
Ahmad Nawaz
Keyword(s):  
Trade Policy ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
Free Trade Agreement ◽  
Academic Research ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
Policy Formulation ◽  
Trade Creation ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The World ◽  
The Impact

PurposeThis paper aims to empirically examine the trade creation and diversion impacts on merchandise imports of Pakistan under the Pakistan–China Free Trade Agreement (FTA). The analysis of Pakistan’s preferential treatment with its largest trade partner as well as the most substantial exporter of the world will help to shape trade policy, open windows for academic research and also gives an immense contribution in literature.Design/methodology/approachA disaggregated panel data on the imports of Pakistan from China and other WTO member countries and tariff concessions at Harmonized System (HS) two-digit level used for the agreement period of 2006-2012. The empirical analysis takes care of bias through robust and panel-corrected standard errors with time, industry-specific effects and controlling for multilateral trade resistance.FindingsEvidence found in support of trade creation under the Pakistan–China FTA. It means overall this agreement increased the welfare of Pakistani consumers.Practical implicationsFindings are in favour of negotiations and signing for the next round of this agreement and with other major trade partners like the US and Saudi Arabia.Originality/valueIt is worth investigating empirically the impact of preferential trade liberalization between Pakistan – a developing country – and China – the largest importer of the world – explicitly, in the form of trade creation or diversion. The empirical assessment of this FTA signed with the world’s largest exporter will not only contribute immensely to the literature but also help in trade policy formulation and open windows for academic research. Another unique aspect of this study is the use of disaggregated data consisting of all goods imports along with tariff concessions at two-digit Harmonized System (HS) code.

AIIB shows increased US-China institutional rivalry

2015 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
Free Trade Agreement ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
The United States ◽  
South East Asia ◽  
Content Type ◽  
White House ◽  
Regional Institutions ◽  
Institutional Competition

Significance London's actions drew a harsh, if unofficial, reaction from the White House. It underscores the growing rivalry between the United States and China over the changing architecture of global and regional institutions. Impacts Institutional competition will not spill over much into the security field, where China's neighbours seek to balance it. Increased European involvement in South-east Asia will accelerate movement towards an EU-ASEAN free trade agreement. Increased international prestige could help Chinese President Xi Jinping's domestic clout.

scholarly journals Do U.S. agriculture suppliers benefit from South Korea- U.S. Free Trade Agreement – the case of orange juice

2018 ◽  
Vol 21 (7) ◽  
pp. 883-894
Author(s):  
Yan Heng ◽  
Lisa A. House
Keyword(s):  
South Korea ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
Orange Juice ◽  
Free Trade Agreement ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
The United States ◽  
Import Demand ◽  
Trade Data ◽  
The World ◽  
Korus Fta

This paper investigates the effect of the South Korea-U.S. Free Trade Agreement (KORUS-FTA) on U.S. competition with other suppliers for the import/export of orange juice. We use monthly trade data for 2007- 2015 to estimate the import demand from the United States, Brazil, Israel, and the rest of the world. Our results suggest that U.S. suppliers have surpassed Brazil and dominate the market. Moreover, we show that thanks to the KORUS-FTA, U.S. suppliers have gained significant welfare and trade value, which is particularly important for industries suffering from a shrinking domestic market.

scholarly journals Bilateral Agreements and Fair Trade Practices: A Policy Analysis of the Colombia-U.S. Free Trade Agreement (2006)

Con-texto ◽  
2015 ◽  
pp. 77
Author(s):  
Kevin J. Fandl
Keyword(s):  
Developing Countries ◽  
Economic Development ◽  
Policy Analysis ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
Fair Trade ◽  
World Trade ◽  
Free Trade Agreement ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
The World ◽  
Bilateral Approach

<p>This article brings to the attention of those public servants involved in the design and negotiation of free trade agreements between the United States and developing countries, such as Colombia, the potential benefits and drawbacks of negotiating in a bilateral forum. Rather than critiquing the free trade agreement for its particular provisions, this article examines the U.S. policy of negotiating bilaterally with developing countries as opposed to multilaterally in the world trade system and what effects such an approach might have on the economic development of the latter. Using an incremental policy analysis, the article critiques the bilateral approach in terms of economic development and fair trade negotiations using the recent Colombia-U.S. trade agreement as a case study. The article concludes that a bilateral approach that is disconnected from a broader multilateral context may be detrimental to developing countries and recommends increased oversight of such agreements by the World Trade Organization to ensure a higher degree of fairness.</p>

scholarly journals The Development of the Free Trade Area of the Americas: A Guide For Legal Research

2005 ◽  
Vol 33 (1) ◽  
pp. 11-64 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michelle S. Viegas
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
Free Trade Agreement ◽  
Free Trade Area ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
Trade Agreements ◽  
The United States ◽  
Common Market ◽  
Trade Area ◽  
The World

At the 1994 Summit of the Americas, leaders of democratic nations in the Western Hemisphere committed to establishing a Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) by January 2005. The Declaration of Principles resulting from that Summit called for building on “existing sub-regional and bilateral arrangements in order to broaden and deepen hemispheric economic integration and to bring the agreements together.” Although ambitious, this endeavor was undertaken during a decade marked by an unprecedented proliferation of trade agreements. In 1991, Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay agreed to initiate the formation of a common market now known as the MERCOSUR. Then in 1994, Canada, Mexico and the United States signed the North American Free Trade Agreement which replaced the United States-Canada Free Trade Agreement. Later that year, nations around the world formalized the existing General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, creating the World Trade Organization. In 1997, the Andean Community of Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador, Peru and Venezuela formalized its plans to establish a common market. Members of the Caribbean Community and Common Market also agreed in several protocols to further their economic and social integration. During the 1990's, numerous other trade agreements were negotiated, and their development continues at the same rapid pace today.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document