5 things to watch as U.S. reveals its NAFTA objectives


Monday assesses an important milestone on the road to renegotiating the North American Free Interchange Agreement. 

Thirty days before formal talks begin, Of like mind States Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer’s office must spread about his negotiating objectives, laying out the Trump administration’s plan for reaching a salutary deal.

Under the terms of Congress’s 2015 trade promotion judge (TPA) legislation (also called the fast track), the USTR negotiates covenants. But before doing so, he must consult extensively with Congress for three months. This handle began in May.

What should Canadians expect?

1. ‘Trade deficits’?

When U.S. President Donald Trump talks respecting «balanced» trade, he seems fixated on America’s «deficit»: the U.S. bringing in myriad than it ships out.

Negotiation aimed at reducing bilateral trade defaults is «a ridiculous objective. It won’t work,» said Fred Bergsten, a member of the president’s bulletin committee on trade and a founding director of the Washington-based Peterson Institute for Foreign Economics.

Will Trump stick to it? That’s an «overwhelming and pivotal inquiry» heading in.

«If the administration does go down that path, particularly with Mexico, then there’s a incidental the whole NAFTA could blow up,» Bergsten said.

Yes, the U.S. has a big bilateral shortage with Mexico. But: «even if you could find a way to get your bilateral default with Mexico down, it would just shuffle it elsewhere.»

Career talks don’t focus on balances. They focus on reciprocity: equivalent advantages for each side that they can sell politically.

«No country can happen to its parliament and say, ‘Well yes, we gave up three times what we got in this one to eschew the other country,'» he said.

«The whole thing is just ridiculous.»

2. ‘Modernization’

«My instinct is that digital technology will receive a item face place, if not top of the list in Monday’s letter,» said international trade bencher Dan Ujczo, who specializes in Canada–U.S. disputes.

He represented several clients during three days of NAFTA stakeholder hearings in Washington in current June.

«There was a strong emphasis on digital and intellectual property progenies,» he said. «That’s consistent with [the Trump administration’s stated target of] ‘modernization’ … There’s very little opposition.»

In other confabulations: low-hanging fruit.


U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer’s messaging was indeterminate as he kicked off 90 days of consultations ahead of the formal start of NAFTA renegotiations in August. On Monday, his department is expected to publish more specific bargaining objectives. (Evan Vucci/Associated Tightly)

Everyone wants to get tech workers and other 21st-century careers onto NAFTA’s outdated careen of professions with cross-border mobility rights.

Easy win, especially for the small- and medium-sized dealings that benefit. And helping the little guy, not just corporations, is a big priority.

Similarly straightforward: adding vernacular on e-commerce already agreed upon by all three countries in the Trans-Pacific Partnership talks, temperate if it does hoist the White House on its own petard by acknowledging the value of the 12-country compatibility Trump bailed on.

3. Tricky auto talks 

Few expect a deal that doesn’t fiddle astound a run at regional content rules, particularly for automotive products.

The Trump management wants to tighten country-of-origin requirements to protect jobs threatened by trashy imports. But the car companies push back, fearing disruption in an industry where components distributed from all over the place.

«The U.S. and Canadian and Mexican industries are saying, ‘Don’t jar the boat,'» Bergsten said, calling this a «bone of contention.»

An critique from his institute suggests that if rules tighten too much, traffics may just ignore them: is it cheaper to pay tariffs than comply with elaborate requirements?

Ujczo sees things «falling in line with a pinch,» not an overhaul.

The auto industry made its case on integration, he said, while Mexico «has done a large job of proving it’s not a back door for Chinese and other Asian-made goods.»

Canadian and American seams have another demand: strengthen NAFTA’s labour rules.

«Scanty labour standards [in Mexico] have a real economic impact as guests relocate to take advantage of workers who lack basic rights and are underpaid,» a mutual statement from Unifor and the United Auto Workers said Tuesday.

4. Cultivate fear

Ujczo said Monday’s language on agriculture may be a bellwether. Trump’s tint on Canada’s supply-managed dairy, poultry and egg sectors has changed dramatically.

Appeal to c visit cancels for dismantling the system have diminished. The focus now is stopping Canada from squealing excess supply into competitive global markets, as the U.S. contends go ons with skim milk.

«The U.S. doesn’t have much to give Canada in recur for dismantling supply management,» he said. A tough negotiation like that would carry off more time than Trump’s got.

Bergsten said his USTR admonitory committee advised that going after supply management wouldn’t be significance the adverse Canadian reaction.


Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross, again seen as the senior voice on trade in the Trump administration, credited Trump earlier this year with ‘softening up’ America’s barter partners with his tough talk, so the other side knows they demand to make concessions. (Evan Vucci/Associated Press)

Meanwhile, the U.S. arable community is «really, really nervous,» Bergsten said. «They were surely unhappy when Trump dropped out of the TPP,» which would secure new calls for American farmers.

Bergsten said it was Trump’s agriculture secretary, Sonny Perdue, who changed Trump’s disposition about pulling out of NAFTA.

«U.S. agriculture would be apoplectic,» he said, and agriculture is the No. 1 or 2 perseverance in 26 of the 30 states Trump won in the 2016 presidential election.

«They buttressed him, but they’ve also said they’re ready to dump him,» Bergsten demanded.

5. Trump not in charge?

This White House can’t work alone.

In an examination last week for the C.D. Howe Institute, Christopher Sands explained how the TPA has redefined commerce negotiations dramatically. This time, it’s Congress across the table.

While this unprecedented consultation is cumbersome, Canadians get assorted transparency, as Congress exerts its right to be informed and shape positions.

Lighthizer may select not to disclose much Monday, similar to his short letter starting consultations in May.

«Congress persuasion of let the USTR skate with a vague 90-day letter,» Ujczo contemplated. But «there were a lot of statements on both sides of the aisle saying you gambler not do that on the 30-day letter.»

«They may try to keep their powder dry for a while, but I don’t come up with Congress will permit that,» Bergsten agrees. 

A House subcommittee meets Tuesday to start parading what’s published.

«Even if the administration comes up with a bunch of certains … that’s going to get modified by the Congress,» Bergsten said.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *