Jump to content

New NAFTA Gives USA Leverage Over Future Canada-China Trade


alpha
 Share

Recommended Posts

Astonishing' clause in new deal suggests Trump wants leverage over Canada-China trade talks: experts

 

The USMCA includes language that requires signatories to give notice if they plan to negotiate a free trade deal with a 'non-market country'

 

https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/astonishing-clause-in-new-deal-suggests-trump-wants-leverage-over-canada-china-trade-talks-experts

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Astonishing' clause in new deal suggests Trump wants leverage over Canada-China trade talks: experts

 

The USMCA includes language that requires signatories to give notice if they plan to negotiate a free trade deal with a 'non-market country'

 

https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/astonishing-clause-in-new-deal-suggests-trump-wants-leverage-over-canada-china-trade-talks-experts

 

The clause works both ways...if the U.S. negotiates with China, Canada and Mexico have the same rights to examine any potential agreements and withdraw from the USMCA.  Cheers!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Schwab711

Thanks. I was hoping something a little more readable from a news outlet or something.  ;D

 

It's more or less the same deal. Here are the cleanest USMCA v. NAFTA I've seen. I'm sure white papers with more detail will be out soon but not a whole lot changed on paper.

 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2018/10/01/comparison-nafta-and-usmca-trade-agreements/1487163002/

https://www.ft.com/content/92e9ce0a-c55f-11e8-bc21-54264d1c4647

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Astonishing' clause in new deal suggests Trump wants leverage over Canada-China trade talks: experts

 

The USMCA includes language that requires signatories to give notice if they plan to negotiate a free trade deal with a 'non-market country'

 

https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/astonishing-clause-in-new-deal-suggests-trump-wants-leverage-over-canada-china-trade-talks-experts

 

Does anyone know if there is bipartisan support for this section?   

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Schwab. Here's a NYTimes article:

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/01/business/trump-nafta-usmca-differences.html

 

Which tries to summarize the major changes as well. I agree though, doesn't seem like much has materially changed. A lot of huffing and puffing over nothing. Unsurprising.

 

Trump wanted to abolish NAFTA, so he changed the name. Right do think that going forward some provisions to prevent backdoor import of Chinese parts into US/NAFTA produced cars are important, but I think it would be easy to add them to the exist agreement. Neither Mexico, Canada or the HS are interested on allowing Chinese parts in US cars, I think some multinational car suppliers would want to do that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share



×
×
  • Create New...