More debates on the memo

Some analysis coming in on the America First Trade Policy memo from various sources within the United States:

Brownstein touches upon the various aspects of the memo.

American Action Forum analysis reveals that the present reviews could result in action and increase in revenues over time.

Can tariff be a source of adequate revenue or is it a drop in the ocean? Two infographs for that debate:

Inforgraph #1

(https://www.statista.com/chart/33464/us-government-receipts-in-fy-2023-by-source/)

Infograph #2:

Tariffs are going to be a really important part of the tax-cut discussion.” A 10% tariff is “about $350 to $400 billion in revenue. So you see the beauty of that in the negotiations,” Trump aide Peter Navarro told CNBC on Tuesday.

(https://www.americanactionforum.org/shipment/post-inauguration-edition-presidential-actions-and-trade-reaction/)

Mohawk Global has this piece stresses on the implications for US-China relations.

Richards Jurusik Immigration Law signals it as a decisive step in US policy to protect US interests with a possibility of retaliation, global supply chain disruptions and enforcement challenges.

The memo also re-introduces the much debated "currency manipulation" issue which I have blogged here and here and also written a fairly detailed piece on here.

Project Syndicate has this scathing piece by Stephen S Roach - an interesting point on how much revenue would tariffs give. The point that federal customs revenue (through tariffs) is less than 2 % of overall federal revenue may be relevant to the discussion or not a determining factor depending on which side of the debate you are on.

All in all, a lot to look forward to in trade policy and its impact in global economic interactions! The memo touches on issue ranging from tariffs, currency manipulation, unfair trade practices, revenues, trade deficits - each a subject matter of a book!

On trade policy and more

For those following international trade policy, how to balance the right to regulate and a globalized world and the intersection of domestic policy and international trade rules, this memo titled "America First Trade Policy" gives us a glimpse into priorities issues and approaches on trade policy.

A lot to discuss on tariffs, national security, international trade agreements and their impact assessment and how one approaches bilateral trade partners.

The IELP blog, as usual, has a much more detailed analysis here.

The right to regulate - a weapon or a shield?

The power of the State vis a vis foreign investors in the context of international investment agreements is a constant source of debate. 

What does this right to regulate entail? Is it unfettered? Does it impact investment? What kind of policy space is given to States? Where is the balance? How much of the right to regulate is necessary and howmuch is excessive? Is there a standard model?

This piece in the Kluwer Arbitration Blog on the first day of the new year explores the right to regulate in the context of the EU-Angola Investment Agreement.

Take a look here.

Lessons: The landscape for rule making is constantly changing and there is a fertile ground for experimentation. Is it a weapon for exploitation or a shield against unfair aggrandisement? Frankly, a lot of that depends on how a provision is utilised. However, there is no doubt that the debate over the mutual interests of States to preserve policy space for public interest vis a vis investor's rights for fair treatment is an eternal one. Which set of provisions provide the right balance is debatable. Where is the middle path, is once again, a matter of conjecture!