In this file:
· America Doesn’t Need Trade Like Other Nations Do
Donald Trump may have an upper hand in trade talks because America needs its partners less than any other advanced economy…
· Editorial: Trump's trade phobia hurts the Midwest
… he’ll return to the White House with the United States in weaker economic and diplomatic positions in the Pacific because of his blind spot on trade…
· Trump's Trade Swagger Leaves Markets Unimpressed
The problem with his push for bilateralism is that it has no other takers.
· New TPP Deal Agreed
Japan's Economic Revitalization Minister has announced that the 11 countries of the Trans-Pacific Partnership reached an agreement to push ahead with a pact without the US. The new agreement will be called the "Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for the TPP" or the CPTTP...
· While Trump's Trade Rhetoric May Just be a Negotiation Tactic, We Can't Afford to Take a Chance
… “We still have a lot of worries, especially in regards to (Trump’s) continued thoughts or comments about pulling out of NAFTA and also KORUS,” Woodall said. “Both of those have brought a tremendous amount of value to the US cattle industry”…
America Doesn’t Need Trade Like Other Nations Do
These ties don’t bind
By Greg Quinn, Bloomberg
November 13, 2017
Donald Trump may have an upper hand in trade talks because America needs its partners less than any other advanced economy.
The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development says the U.S. has the most limited ties to foreign commerce of any country in the group, using new measures that look at both trade and investment flows.
One such broader measure showed the “international orientation’’ of the U.S. was equal to 13 percent of gross domestic product in 2014, according to OECD figures tallied up last month. It's the first time the Paris-based group has calculated such a measure to track national income that is tied to both exports and profits made by the foreign affiliates of domestic companies.
And when it comes to Trump's threat to take on Mexico, such figures may strengthen his hand even further. Another wider trade measurement pushes Mexico further down the rankings of U.S. partners, leaving it behind Japan, the U.K. and Germany in sixth place. That’s worse than Mexico’s 2014 positions of second place for exports and third place for imports.
One complication is the U.S. is negotiating with Canada as well as Mexico under the North American Free Trade agreement, which Trump has threatened to rip up...
more, including charts
Editorial: Trump's trade phobia hurts the Midwest
Editorial Board, Chicago Tribune
Nov 13, 2017
President Donald Trump went to Asia for nearly two weeks, an unusually long time away from Washington for an American leader. Was it worth the effort and aviation fuel? No, especially for us in the Midwest. He’ll return to the White House with the United States in weaker economic and diplomatic positions in the Pacific because of his blind spot on trade.
One of Trump’s first actions as president was to quit TPP, the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a broad trade agreement with 11 other nations. Trump is a trade skeptic. Actually, he’s phobic, believing the United States usually gets the bad end of these major deals, which is quantifiably not true.
In the case of TPP, his hang-up did nothing to dissuade America’s economic partners from continuing to pursue the agreement without the U.S. So during his visit to Vietnam for the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum, Trump hung loose while the rest of the TPP gang made progress on their negotiations. The pact will create an integrated marketplace among Japan, Canada, Australia, Mexico, Malaysia, Singapore, Chile, Peru, New Zealand, Vietnam and Brunei. The U.S. would have been the 12th member.
Being left out is bad news for agricultural and industrial states such as Illinois — heavy exporters that sell corn, soybeans, pork, machinery and plenty of other products around the world. The point of TPP is the same as other agreements, such as NAFTA: to break down trade barriers and encourage interdependence in ways that help all sides, buyers and sellers.TPP would have slashed high taxes on U.S. exports to member countries and helped small and midsized American businesses by reducing paperwork burdens. With the U.S. on the outside looking in, those other countries are more likely to trade among themselves.
Beyond the specifics of who sells corn, pork or industrial refrigerators to whom, there is a crucial geopolitical component to TPP and other trade deals: Either countries bind themselves together for mutual benefit or they drift about, looking for friends. TPP would have been a key point of U.S. collaboration with a group of countries on both sides of the Pacific at a time when China is sharpening its elbows in the region.
China, noticeably, isn’t part of TPP. What happens now? The U.S. misses an easy chance to strengthen its ties to Japan, an important defense ally, and Vietnam, a growing economy, among other benefits. Meanwhile, China gets an extra opportunity to ingratiate itself with Pacific neighbors through its own arrangements. That’s fine as far as trade goes (every country has the right to do as it sees fit), but corn and machinery exports are only part of the picture.
The bigger issue is Chinese political influence and power projection in the Pacific, where the U.S. role is to maintain peace and security. China looks for every opportunity to expand its orbit. When Trump walked away from TPP, he made China’s task easier. The U.S. withdrawal from TPP creates “a large vacuum in its economic diplomacy,” one expert in Singapore told CNNMoney.com.
Trump says he will replace TPP with individual trade agreements with other countries because he believes such pacts are fairer to U.S. interests and protect more jobs. It’s not clear other countries will prioritize more negotiations solely with the U.S...
Trump's Trade Swagger Leaves Markets Unimpressed
The problem with his push for bilateralism is that it has no other takers.
by Komal Sri-Kumar, Opinion, Bloomberg
November 13, 2017,
There was much goodwill during President Donald Trump's Asian tour. He was greeted warmly by Prime Minister Shinzo Abe of Japan and became the first U.S. president to be the guest of honor at a state dinner in Beijing's Forbidden City. Markets were less impressed, however, and noted that Trump received no trade concession from either Asian power.
Trump said repeatedly during the presidential campaign that the large trade deficit was proof the U.S. was being unfairly treated, and he vowed to correct the situation. The specific path the administration adopts to improve the trade balance --- whether through mutually beneficial trade accords, or by imposing new restrictions on imports --- will have vastly different outcomes for U.S. multinationals and investors.
The urgency of Trump’s task is heightened by the increase of the U.S. trade deficit with China since 2009. The shortfall was $347 billion in 2016 and could rise to a record $370 billion this year. Although the $250 billion in contracts involving U.S. companies that were signed during his Beijing stay would provide future dividend earnings and capital gains, the amount includes transactions that had already been concluded, and others that have escape clauses allowing the parties to exit deals. In short, the major campaign promise shows no sign of being fulfilled based on the Trump trip.
Trump has said repeatedly that he dislikes multilateral treaties such as the proposed Trans-Pacific Partnership and the North American Free Trade Agreement that the U.S. would like to radically revise, or even cancel. The president would prefer to negotiate bilateral treaties, which, he believes, would give the U.S. greater negotiating advantage. One-on-one, the U.S. could “punish” nations that take unfair advantage of American munificence.
The problem with seeking bilateralism is that it has no other takers. Canada, Mexico, China and Japan all want multilateral agreements. Similarly, the U.S. will have to reach trade agreements with the European Union rather than negotiate individually with the 28 member nations. An accord involving several countries would increase their collective competitive advantage in global trade because they wouldn't have to negotiate individually with each of the countries with which they have commercial relations.
The discord between the two positions was most evident in recent speeches by Trump and President Xi Jinping in which the latter firmly rejected making specific deals with the U.S. on limiting Chinese exports. Instead, Xi championed globalization and, in the absence of the U.S., China is likely to become the leading trading nation and major export destination.
Already, the marginalization of the U.S. in global trade was evident at the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation Forum in Da Nang, Vietnam, on Nov. 10 and 11, where the other 20 countries endorsed a free-trade regime. There is a move to initiate TPP even without U.S. membership...
New TPP Deal Agreed
NHK Newsline from Tokyo
November 13, 2017
Japan's Economic Revitalization Minister has announced that the 11 countries of the Trans-Pacific Partnership reached an agreement to push ahead with a pact without the US. The new agreement will be called the "Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for the TPP" or the CPTTP.
Ministers have been talking in Da Nang, Vietnam on the sidelines of the APEC meeting. Toshimitsu Motegi, who co-chaired the ministerial talks told reporters that "the most important thing is that all 11 member countries were able to reach a new agreement." It maintains the high standard of the previous TPP document, and is well-drafted and well-balanced. It sends a strong message to the US and other countries in the Asia-Pacific region,” he said.
The new agreement will take effect 60 days after 6 of the 11 member countries ratify the deal. Core elements of the original TPP are included, but a shortlist of rules spanning 20 categories was suspended. The 11 member countries agreed to reincorporate those items if the US returns to the deal in the future.
Japanese officials said on November 9th that an agreement-in-principle had been reached. But Canada disputed the claim and its international trade minister tweeted that "despite reports, there was no agreement-in-principle on the TPP." But the nations were able to agree on the terms and an official announcement followed.
The original TPP was signed in early 2016 with 12 members, including the US. Its future was thrown into question after the US withdrew from the pact in January.
What is TPP11? ...
NHK WORLD's Ramin Mellegard discussed the issue in the studio with NHK's senior economic correspondent Reiko Sakurai ...
Waseda University’s Professor Shujiro Urata, an international trade expert, also joined Mellegard in the studio to share his view ...
While Trump's Trade Rhetoric May Just be a Negotiation Tactic, We Can't Afford to Take a Chance
Oklahoma Farm Report
13 Nov 2017
Each week, it seems there is something new coming from the ongoing negotiations to reauthorize the North American Free Trade Agreement, that could change the direction of discussion, either for better or worse. The same is true about the US free trade agreement with South Korea, or KORUS. This of course injects uncertainty into the markets and adds to the agricultural industry’s apprehension regarding trade. Radio Oklahoma Ag Network Associate Farm Director Carson Horn spoke with Colin Woodall of the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association’s Washington, DC office about his organization’s concerns surrounding the President and his administration’s trade agenda and how it may impact beef producers.
“We still have a lot of worries, especially in regards to (Trump’s) continued thoughts or comments about pulling out of NAFTA and also KORUS,” Woodall said. “Both of those have brought a tremendous amount of value to the US cattle industry.”
Woodall says $47 in value can be attributed to each marketed animal from our access to Korea alone. He contends that a pullout from either of these agreements would have a major, negative impact on the bottom line of the US cattle industry...
more, including audio report