Showing posts with label trade agreements. Show all posts
Showing posts with label trade agreements. Show all posts

Friday, July 02, 2021

China did not comply with the WTO agreement – Harry Broadman

 

Harry Broadman

China did not comply with the conditions it signed up for when it entered the World Trade Organization (WTO), says former White House advisor Harry Broadman at the NACD Northern California Chapter in a discussion about American business in China. And while US president Joe Biden has taken on China bilaterally, it needs collective action to change the country’s attitude to trade, he adds.

Harry Broadman is a speaker at the China Speakers Bureau. Do you need him at your (online) meeting or conference? Do get in touch or fill in our speakers’ request form.

Are you looking for more political experts at the China Speakers Bureau? Do check out this list.

Friday, March 01, 2019

Why a currency deal might be bad for China - Arthur Kroeber

Arthur Kroeber
China is pondering to throw in a currency deal in its trade negotiations with the US, maintaining the value of the Renminbi, to pacify the doves in the White House. But that might be a wrong idea, say analysts like economist Arthur Kroeber, who point at Japan. Japan agreed to a currency deal in 1985 as has paid for it dearly, writes the South China Morning Post.

The South China Morning Post:
Amid reports that the United States will demand that China stop devaluing its currency as part of any trade agreement, Beijing has been urged to learn from the cautionary tale of Japan, which in 1985 agreed to a currency deal which has shouldered a good portion of the blame for its economy’s disastrous “lost decade”. 
The US demands that China limit the yuan’s depreciation have been compared with the Plaza Accord, under which Japan, France, Germany, the United Kingdom and the US agreed to push the value of the US dollar down against the Japanese yen and German Deutsche mark. 
The five countries began selling large amounts of US dollars, leading to a significant loss in dollar value. 
The intervention resulted in the Japanese yen doubling in value against the US dollar in under two and a half years... 
The clause demands that currencies are market-determined and that signatories avoid competitive devaluation, as a means of gaining a competitive advantage in trade. 
It is the first time such a clause had been included in a major trade agreement. 
China has previously signed up to to commitments at the G20 and International Monetary Fund that bar it from competitive devaluation. 
However, critics claim that China has not upheld these commitments. In an interview with the Financial Times last year, US Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin noted that the yuan had fallen significantly over the course of 2018. 
“As we look at trade issues there is no question that we want to make sure China is not doing competitive devaluations,” he said. 
Arthur Kroeber, co-founder and research head at Gavekal Dragonomics, said that a currency agreement would be aimed at satisfying the demands of Mnuchin, a more dovish presence in the US administration, compared to hardliners such as US trade representative Robert Lighthizer. 
“An exchange rate agreement is just a way for Beijing to collude with Trump administration doves like Stephen Mnuchin to trumpet a non-event as a big US victory,” Kroeber wrote. 
Former US Federal Reserve chair Janet Yellen last week that it is “difficult and treacherous” to define when a country is manipulating its currency, warning US trade negotiators to think twice about asking China to maintain a stable yuan exchange rate.
More at the South China Morning Post.

Arthur Kroeber is a speaker at the China Speakers Bureau. Do you need him at your meeting or conference? Do get in touch or fill in our speakers' request form.

Are you looking for more strategic experts at the China Speakers Bureau? Do check out this list.  

Tuesday, March 13, 2018

The madness of Trump's Tariff Scheme - Harry Broadman

Harry Broadman
The US announcement of tariffs on steel and aluminum was supposed to be a fit shot in the US-China trade war but left many US allies behind in disarray. Former US official Harry Broadman tries to make sense out of the mess Donald Trump has created, for Forbes.

Harry Broadman:
When President Trump signed an Executive Order on March 11, 2018 that set forth a plan to impose prospectively import tariffs on steel of 25% and on aluminum of 10% for countries exporting those products to the U.S., most of us trade negotiation veterans were startled. Literally. You should be too. 
We were taken aback for two reasons. First, the legal basis on which the Executive Order appealed is arcane and rarely invoked. Second, the mechanics of how the tariffs would be applied—under a dangled threat, where countries would have to belly up to the table one-by-one and seek exclusions from Mr. Trump until the Executive Order becomes effective on March 23, 2018—are unprecedented, set in motion a dynamic that threatens to unravel the multilaterally agreed rules-based world trading system for which the U.S. has been the primary champion for more than 70 years, and plunges an extraordinarily wide swath of industries lying at the core of world economic growth into uncertainty. 
Only Canada and Mexico were provisionally excluded in Trump’s Executive Order—since they are in the midst of a U.S.-forced re-negotiation of the North America Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). But if the NAFTA renegotiations do not go Mr. Trump’s way, the only two neighboring countries of the U.S. and our 2nd and 3rd largest trading partners, respectively, would also fall under the Trumpian Sword of Damocles. 
Some of the smartest trade policy observers in Washington, Brussels, Tokyo, Beijing, New Delhi, Mexico City, Ottawa and Canberra, among others, are scratching their heads as to why Trump proceeded in this fashion. Actually, the answer can be found in the way the President has conducted his business dealings in the private sector for years. Regrettably, these practices are fundamentally at odds with the rules governing global trade negotiations, which, after all are among sovereign not commercial entities.
More at Forbes and this pdf file.

Harry Broadman is a speaker at the China Speakers Bureau. Do you need him at your meeting or conference? Do get in touch or fill in our speakers' request form.

Are you looking for more strategy experts at the China Speakers Bureau? Do check out this list.

Monday, February 05, 2018

Why Trump's approach to trade deals fails - Harry Broadman

Harry Broadman
The world had one year to get used to Donald Trump's approach to trade deals: bilateral trade deals rather than plurilateral regional trade deals. Former World Bank official Harry Broadman explains for Forbes why Trump's approach for international deals is going to fail.

Harry Broadman:
In the year that he’s occupied the Oval Office, President Trump has left many eye-catching imprints on the way he has positioned the U.S. to act unilaterally with the rest of the world’s economies. Perhaps nothing is more notable in this context than the Negotiator-in-Chief’s penchant for championing the negotiation of bilateral trade deals. The May 2017 China-U.S. agreement was his first foray into this practice, which received far more press attention than it merited, and to date has borne little tangible fruit. And, overhanging the current renegotiation of NAFTA—a plurilateral regional trade agreement—is Trump’s threat, which I think of as "Threatenomics", to simply dissolve the treaty in whole and instead work out two separate bilateral agreements, one with Mexico and one with Canada. 
Trump has asserted he could potentially envision pursuit of broader multilateral trade deals based on the World Trade Organization’s (WTO) bedrock ‘Most Favored Nation’ (MFN) principle—where all 164 WTO signatories automatically are afforded uniform, non-discriminatory treatment. Such agreements, of course, stand in contrast to bilateral deals, where, by definition, the included parties treat each other on more favorable terms than either extends to all excluded countries. Hence why they are officially referred to as ‘preferential trade agreements’ (PTAs). 
But in his heart, Trump sees international trade negotiations as ‘Bilateral Man’—hardly surprising for someone who cut his teeth conducting real estate transactions in New York. Indeed, he’s noted on several occasions recently that he can get a far better bargain taking up trade agreements with other heads of state on a bilateral basis. 
Yet in the complex, nuanced world of international trade agreements, it really is not the “either or choice” Trump makes it out to be. The WTO specifically allows for preferential agreements—whether structured on a bilateral or a plurilateral, regional basis-- as long as they meet certain criteria specified within the WTO agreement. In fact, with the 2016 bilateral trade agreement between Japan and Myanmar now in place, allWTO members are party to PTA's in one form or another.
More in Forbes, full text republished with the kind approval of Harry Broadman TRUMP BILATERAL JAN 2018

Harry Broadman is a speaker at the China Speakers Bureau. Do you need him at your meeting or conference? Do get in touch or fill in our speakers' request form.

 Are you looking for more strategic experts at the China Speakers Bureau? Do check out this list.