American Trade Policy Research Articles

Differential Economic Impacts of Chinese and American Trade Policies on Developed Versus Developing Nations

The trade conflict between the United States and China, the two largest economies in the world, has considerable implications for global economic stability and growth. This topic has been selected due to the necessity of understanding how these trade disputes impact other countries, particularly those heavily dependent on exporting goods to these major economies. The analysis aims to investigate the varied effects of the trade war on both industrialized and developing nations. An analysis is conducted to examine the differential effects of the trade war on industrialized and developing nations by studying the changes in GDP growth rates, unemployment rates, and balance of trade trends. This study examines the distinct economic effects of the China-US trade war on Germany, Canada, and Mexico, which serve as representative examples of developed and developing nations. The results emphasize the significance of customized policy measures to tackle the distinct difficulties and prospects encountered by various economies. Developed countries should prioritize efforts to reduce sluggish economic development and address unemployment in specific sectors. On the other hand, developing nations should take advantage of trade diversion benefits and strengthen their economic resilience. This study enhances the awareness of global trade dynamics and offers vital perspectives for policymakers seeking to negotiate the intricacies of international trade wars.

Trade agreements and participation in global value chains: Empirical evidence from Latin America

AbstractThe rise of global sourcing implies a heterogeneous relationship between buyers and suppliers regarding the liberalisation scenarios in emerging countries. This paper analyses the effect of regional trade agreements (RTAs) on participation in the Global Value Chains of Latin American countries between 1995 and 2015. We combine the framework of gravity equations with the trade in value‐added, applying a Pseudo Poisson Maximum Likelihood (PPML) estimator with panel data and fixed effects to deal with endogeneity and heteroscedasticity. Heterogeneous estimations show that the deepest RTAs reinforce the position of lower technology‐industry suppliers, driven by an extra‐regional strategy of Latin American trade policy. The geography of value chains has little effect on industrial upgrading in the region, reducing the development potential. The study concludes that the region's trade policy could reduce the dependent relationship between distant partners and pay more attention to creating shorter value chains as a strategy to generate local capacities to gain competitiveness in value chains.

Trade, the American System, and Globalism

American trade policy in the modern era has been rooted in a globalist ideology which has resulted in the loss of millions of jobs, the weakening of the fundamental strength of the economy, and has endangered national security. American became a great economic power due to the American System of Washington and Hamilton which was a policy of domestic Free Enterprise and trade policy based on the national interest. The United States needs to return to an American System adapted to the realities of the 21st century.

American trade policy between protectionism and economic dumping for the period of 2009-2021: implications for China and Iraq

The main aim of the study is to investigate the American trade policy between protectionism and economic dumping for the period 2011-2021. The trade war between the United States of America and China is a serious issue in terms of international economic relations, which has negative effects on the global economy, especially those related to the low rates of international trade. Accordingly, the return of economic and trade relations between the two countries to their previous state will have positive effects on the developing oil economies, including the increase in oil prices in global markets. The increase in oil prices will lead to an increase in the trade exchange of Iraq with the countries worldwide, given that its economy is among the developing oil-dependent economies that depend on oil as the main source of its revenues. Likewise, it is in the economic interest of Iraq that China becomes the first trading partner after the value of trade exchange between the two countries reached 30 billion dollars in 2020, and the same is true for the United States of America, the second trading partner, as the value of trade exchange between the two countries amounted to 13.1 billion dollars in 2020.

A Study on the Effects and Prospects of the USMCA Following Transformation in American Trade Policy

A Study on the Effects and Prospects of the USMCA Following Transformation in American Trade Policy

Hewers of wood and drawers of water 2.0: how American and Chinese economic nationalism influence Canadian trade policy in the twenty-first century

ABSTRACT While specific events and personalities have disrupted bilateral relations between Canada and its two largest trade partners of the United States and China, long-term challenges remain at the core of Canada's future trade relations with each. Under Presidents Trump and Xi, the United States and China respectively are pursuing nationalist economic agendas that seek to privilege domestic production while reducing reliance on imports. This paper analyzes the likely impacts of America First and Made in China 2025 strategies on Canada's own Supercluster plan for economic growth and export success. Significant overlaps in sectoral focus between all three strategies suggest that Canada faces stiff competition. The paper then considers whether changing geopolitical conditions create an impetus for Canada to revisit its shift away from prioritizing growth in natural resource sectors, exploring the example of rare earths and their importance for supply chains in the new economy.

Rola szczebla federalnego i stanowego w kształtowaniu amerykańskiej polityki handlowej po przyjęciu Narodowej Inicjatywy Eksportowej

The purpose of the article is to analyze the role of the federal and state level institutions in shaping and implementing American trade policy, as well as to verify the assumptions of the National Export Initiative implemented in 2010 by the Barack Obama administration which intended to activate state level institutions in the area of trade. The goal of the article is to answer two basic research questions: What is the role of the federal and state level institutions in shaping and implementing trade policy in the United States? Has the role of the state level increased in the decision-making process and the implementation of trade policy after the adoption of the National Export Initiative in 2010? Answers to the above questions will allow verification of the adopted hypothesis, which indicates that, despite its assumptions, the National Export Initiative has not increased the role of the state level institutions in shaping and implementing trade policy. To conduct a reliable analysis, the following article structure was adopted. The first part presents the general methodological and analytical assumption. The second discusses the institutional and legal framework that shapes the distribution of competences in the US system, paying particular attention to trade policy issues. Part three analyzes the state level activities in a practical dimension after the adoption of the National Export Initiative. The summary of the article will contain conclusions in the form of answers to the questions posed, which will allow to verify the hypothesis.

China’s Accession to Government Procurement Agreement under the Trump Administration’s Trade Policy

China committed to initiate the accession to Government Procurement Agreement when it entered the WTO as a compromise to the requirements made by GPA parties, mostly the developed western countries such as the United States. China started its official attempt to join the GPA on December 28, 2007 by submitting the first offer to the GPA Commission. Six revised offer were then submitted during the past years. The position of the United States and China in international trade changed dramatically since then. This article finds that Trump Administration’s attitude toward China’s accession to GPA is mixed and the US government might impede China’s accession with the analysis on the current American foreign trade policy and the latest development in government procurement in the US’s related international agreements and domestic laws. However, this accession process can only be delayed but not terminated even if the standpoint of the US is proved to be negative due to the theoretical and technical analysis on GPA. Effective and significant measures will be taken by Chinese government since the president Xi Jinping made the statement to accelerate the accession to GPA in Boao Forum in early 2018.

The Redefinition of Foreign Policy of the United States since Trump’s Election: The Case of Trade War with China

The main aim of this text is to present economic relations between China and the US today. The election of Donald Trump in 2016, significantly redefined American trade policy toward China. Despite the first months of his presidency, which promised an efficient, long-term cooperation between Beijing and Washington, incumbent president decided to implement severe restriction on the trade with China at the beginning of 2018. However, the announced imposition of tariffs on almost all goods coming from this country could interfere with the growth of the single states and the economy of the whole country in the future. Therefore the text is aimed to investigate the ependency of selected states on the inflows of Chinese investments since 2010. Finally, it is necessary to examine the phenomenon of the trade war, which has begun in July 2018, and assess its impact on the growth of both countries.

The Trade Policy of the United States Under the Trump Administration

The evolution of American trade policy is best understood over the long run as a function of the international distribution of power and wealth, but in the short run policy it is dominated by the exigencies of domestic politics. The decline in that country’s position has long raised doubts regarding its readiness to lead, and those doubts have been greatly amplified by the Trump administration. The arc of the administration’s policy thus far appears as a series of year-long phases by which almost inchoate sentiments have been progressively transformed into ever more concrete policy, culminating in the resuscitation of trade laws that were nearly forgotten but not gone. Chief among them were a “reciprocity” statute that gives the president broad powers to define and enforce U.S. rights; a global safeguards law that had been quiescent since the Bush administration used it to protect steel in 2002; and especially a national security law that the president invoked to restrict steel and aluminum imports. In 2019 the Trump administration has supplemented its trade war with new negotiations, including talks with the European Union, the United Kingdom, and Japan. While these talks do not directly engage China, the U.S. strategy is driven largely by a desire to isolate that rival. The world may well be headed towards a system where most commercially significant countries are pressed to align with one or another of these giants. No matter who occupies the White House, trade policymaking will remain perennially challenging for a system of government that is always divided by branch and frequently by party. Donald Trump was able to act in 2017-2018 with little restraint from Congress, but some of the things he aims to do now will require the acquiescence of Congress. Securing that cooperation will be more challenging as a result of the 2018 elections, in which Democrats recaptured control of the House of Representatives. Over the long term, Trumpism may well survive Trump, unless pro-trade forces manage to retake control of one of the two major parties.

Clashing Over Commerce: A History of U.S. Trade Policy by Douglas A. Irwin

Reviewed by: Clashing Over Commerce: A History of U.S. Trade Policy by Douglas A. Irwin William Bolt (bio) Clashing Over Commerce: A History of U.S. Trade Policy. By Douglas A. Irwin. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2017. Pp. x, 860. $35.00 cloth; $27.50 paper; $27.50 ebook) [End Page 650] In Clashing over Commerce: A History of U.S. Trade Policy, Douglas A. Irwin offers the first comprehensive study of American tariffs and trade policies in over a century. Irwin's text examines commercial restrictions from the Navigation Acts of the 1640s up to President Donald Trump's inaugural address of 2017. He focuses on the three principal goals of tariffs, which he dubs the three "R's." According to Irwin, revenue, restriction, and reciprocity have been the goals of American trade policy. The book is divided into three parts. During the first part, which covers the colonial period through the Civil War, the national government used tariffs to fill its coffers. Irwin examines the Navigation Acts, the Tariff of 1789, Alexander Hamilton's economic vision, the Embargo Act, the Tariff of 1816, the Tariff of 1824, the tariff of Abominations, the Nullification Crisis, the Walker Tariff of 1846, the Tariff of 1857, and the Morrill Tariff of 1861 in this section. Irwin reminds readers that the tariff, in spite of what some might say, did not cause the Civil War. "The South did not secede because of the Morrill tariff; the Morrill tariff was enacted because the South seceded. In addition, the bill was signed by Democrat James Buchanan, not Republican Abraham Lincoln," Irwin writes (p. 209). From Reconstruction until the Smoot-Hawley Tariff of 1930, the second era that Irwin discusses, the government imposed tariffs to restrict foreign imports as a way to protect American manufacturers. Here Irwin analyzes the Gilded Age and Progressive era tariffs including the Mongrel Tariff of 1883, the McKinley Tariff of 1890, the Dingley Tariff of 1897, the Payne-Aldrich Tariff of 1909, the Underwood Simmons Tariff of 1913, the Fordney-McCumber Tariff of 1922, and the Smoot-Hawley Tariff of 1930, which he refers to as the Hawley-Smoot Tariff since the bill first appeared in the House after Willis Hawley, chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, drafted it and introduced it in that chamber. In the third and final era, which ranged from the New Deal to the present, Irwin maintains that American trade policy shifted towards achieving reciprocity with trade partners. Irwin covers the Reciprocal Trade Agreements Act, the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade [End Page 651] (GATT), the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, the Smithsonian Agreement, the Trade Act of 1974, and the Trade Agreements Act of 1979. Irwin recognizes a slight return to protectionism under Ronald Reagan. Irwin notes, "Reagan himself was often conflicted between his strong belief in free trade and limited government and his desire to help out American industries and their workers" (p. 573). Irwin concludes that Reagan increased tariffs marginally in order to prevent Congress from increasing them even higher. After Reagan, Irwin ends this section by discussing the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) as well as trade relations with China before postulating (correctly) that a new era might emerge under President Donald Trump. Throughout this thoroughly researched text, Irwin informs readers that the enactment of tariffs never occurred in a vacuum. Outside events as well as political and economic factors typically influenced the implementation of tariffs. Budget surpluses prompted the lowering of tariffs at various times. The need for revenue or agitation from industries led to increases in tariffs. Divided government created stalemates in Washington that left tariff policies in place even though neither side supported the current rates. Clashing over Commerce will be required reading for business and economic historians. It will serve as an excellent reference for any tariff debated throughout American history. One only has to go to the index to find information on any tariff enacted in American history. Simply put, Clashing over Commerce is now the standard work on tariffs in American history. William Bolt william bolt is an associate professor of history at Francis Marion University. He is the author...

“Let’s Not be Laughed at Anymore: Donald Trump and Japan from the 1980s to the Present”

This article explores the central role of Japan’s rise to global economic prominence in the evolution of Donald J. Trump’s worldview. It traces how the transformation of the relationship between the United States and Japan during the 1980s informed Trump’s ideas about trade and protectionism, globalization, the international economy, and executive power. Trump, it argues, was a product of U.S.-Japanese relationship; while he began his public career as a prominent critic of Japan, claiming that the country exploited American trade and defense policy, his career in real estate heavily relied on Japanese finance. This contradictory approach continues to shape his understanding of Japan. As president, Trump repeatedly condemns Japan as predatory and protectionist, but also seeks expanded Japanese investment in the United States to revitalize the U.S. economy. Equally important, Trump has expanded criticisms originating with Japan to countries like China and Mexico, international agreements such as the Trans-Pacific Partnership and the North American Free Trade Agreement, and the World Trade Organization. By tracing Trump’s rhetorical, financial, and diplomatic encounters with Japan over the past thirty years, this article uncovers the sources of Trump’s contradictory attitudes towards trade, globalization, and cross-border investment and his understandings of strong leadership and executive power.

‘The apostle of free trade:’ Adam Smith and the nineteenth-century American trade debates

ABSTRACTThis paper examines the diversity of uses of Adam Smith’s ideas in nineteenth-century American debates about the tariff. Legislative debates about American trade policy ran almost uninterrupted from the 1820s to the end of the century; as a result, they provide an abundance of examples of the ways in which legislators marshaled economic ideas to shape political discourse and influence policy. Smith’s causal ideas about free trade and its effects were referenced in policymaking, and Smith’s intellectual authority was often invoked as a legitimating device for partisan ideology. These uses, I argue, contributed to the sloganizing of Smith as the ‘apostle of free trade’ and his enduring popularity as a political icon in American politics.

Donald Trump’s Protectionist Trade Policy from the Perspective of Economic Nationalism

This article aims to analyze American trade policy under Donald Trump’s administration. President Trump has imposed a se t of tariffs and quotas for such imported agriculture and manufactured products. Such trade policies triggered many American trading partners, most notably China and NAFTA members, to take any retaliatory measures, starting trade war. Preliminary observation on this issue starts with two problematization. First, Trump’s trade policies failed to push his trade partners for their trade compliances despite of their higher relative export dependency on American market rather than on the contrary. Second, most of Trump’s “trade belligerents” are democratic countries; it is another anomaly for established assumption about democratic peace theory which has stated that structures and norms held by democratic countries prevent them to engage conflictual relations in both political-security and economy. Further research has found that competitive trade structure US Government faced at some traded commodities put American trade interests at stake against other conflicting countries. In order to protect such interest, President Trump must deliver restrictive measures—tariffs and quotas—in favor of domestic industries and market. Such behavior is justified by both President Trump’s view and tenet about the construction of American nation and his political mobilization of popular far-right mass which also contribute to the discourse of contemporary American nationalism. The result is American economic nationalism which drives domestic political configuration to support President Trump’s political economic initiatives.

The Transatlantic Partnership Agreement: an American perspective

AbstractThis paper discusses the internal dynamics of American trade policy making in the context of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) negotiations. The author describes the active role interest groups, the U.S. business community, and representatives on both sides of the political spectrum have played in the passing of Transatlantic Partnership Agreement (TPA), the TPP negotiations, and currently the TTIP debate. Lastly, the author lays out the challenges TTIP will continue to face in light of opposition to specific TPP provisions, trans-atlantic disagreement over ISDS and data flows, and the recent presidential elections.

“And we would have the field”: U.S. Steel and American trade policy, 1908–1912

AbstractRecent surveys revealed few producers in an export sector participate in trade. Economists explained this result by relaxing their assumption about firms’ operations, to produce a novel observation: Trade liberalization disproportionately benefits the most efficient producers in the sector, while potentially harming the least efficient. Political scientists have begun exploring the consequences of this variation, especially in lobbying. This article explores whether the impact of this finer-grained description of interests can be observed in the later stages of our demand-driven models of the politics of trade. I focus on one case with characteristics favorable to observing intra-industry differences: the American steel industry in Taft's presidency. A trade-based cleavage inside the sector determined firms’ interests. Demands shaped policy, as observed in three pieces of legislation: the Payne-Aldrich Act, reciprocity with Canada, and the 1912 tariff. The first liberalized trade in steel, intensifying competition in the industry. The second promised to do the same, with a similar impact. The third had no effect, however, because Taft vetoed the bill. This case illustrates intra-industry firm heterogeneity can provide additional accuracy, revealing a previously undiscovered cleavage. Nonetheless, preferences alone did not determine policy.

North American Trade Policy for Agriculture and Forestry: Can Economics Trump Politics?

Despite overwhelming evidence of benefits overall from lower barriers to trade in goods and services, the number of trade restrictions continues to grow. In some nations, nationalistic politicians who threaten to build walls between nations and reject both new and established trade treaties have gained considerable public support by fanning the resentment and anger of those left behind in a globalizing world. Trade and immigration have incorrectly been blamed. Instead, it should be recognized that economic growth has been fueled by technological and institutional changes that have been accelerated by trade and investment. While these changes improve standards of living overall and create new job opportunities, they also displace workers in high cost regions and industries. Perceptions of the fairness of distribution of gains from trade are likely to be improved where public policy effectively assists labor adjustment and mandates socially acceptable employment standards and safety nets. Possible ways to encourage improvements in communication of the benefits of growth that arise from trade and globalization are suggested.Malgré des preuves accablantes démontrant les avantages généraux provenant de la réduction des barrières au commerce de biens et services, le nombre de ces restrictions continue d'augmenter. Certaines nations oú des politiciens nationalistes menacent la construction de murs frontaliers et rejettent les accords de commerce, autant nouveaux que déjà en vigueur, reçoivent un soutien public considérable en encourageant l'animosité et la colère de ceux qui se sentent exclus de la mondialisation. Le commerce et l'immigration portent sans raison le blâme. Il faut plutôt reconnaître la croissance économique nourrie par les changements technologiques et institutionnels, ces derniers accélérés par le commerce et l'investissement. Alors que ces changements améliorent, en général, les niveaux de vie et créent de nouvelles possibilités d'emplois, ils délogent aussi les travailleurs au sein d'industries à coût élevé. La perception de justice dans la répartition des gains de commerce pourrait s'améliorer là où les politiques publiques appuient efficacement les ajustements à la main‐d'œuvre et mandatent des normes de travail et des dispositions de soutien acceptables pour la société. L'article propose des moyens pour encourager des améliorations à la communication des avantages de la croissance provoquée par le commerce et la mondialisation.

Public Opinion Distribution and Party Competition in US Trade Policy

AbstractMass public opinion has generally been presumed to have little or no impact on American trade policy. I argue against this presumption. I assert that mass public opinion significantly affects US trade policy by shaping the way the two parties compete over that trade policy. When public opinion is unbalanced, the competition between the parties is likely to resemble a bidding war. When public opinion is balanced but split in a partisan manner the competition is likely to descend into Manichean conflict. When public opinion is balanced but split in a non‐partisan manner, the competition is likely to be characterised by political actors seeking to maintain the support of their core constituencies. To examine this relationship, I investigate three cases: the push to punish China over Tiananmen Square in 1989–90, the ratification of NAFTA in 1992–93 and the process through which President Bush was granted trade promotion authority in 2001–02.

Tangle of Interest Groups and Institutions in American Trade Policy: Battle over Trade Promotion Authority

Tangle of Interest Groups and Institutions in American Trade Policy: Battle over Trade Promotion Authority

North American trade and US monetary policy

This paper investigates how an increase in the United States Federal Fund rate affects the United States economy and how the effects are transmitted to the Canadian economy using the factor-augmented VAR (FAVAR) approach of Stock and Watson (2005) and Bernanke et al. (2005). A distinguishing feature of our model is the disaggregation of the traded goods sector where imports and exports are disaggregated into 12 and 13 industries, respectively. Extra information is provided on the domestic and international transmission mechanisms between the two countries. The factor-augmented VAR method allows impulse response functions to be generated for all the variables in the data set and so is able to provide a comprehensive description of the domestic and international transmission mechanisms between the United States and Canada.