adplus-dvertising
Connect with us

Economy

FACT SHEET: In Asia, President Biden and a Dozen Indo-Pacific Partners Launch the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework for Prosperity – The White House

Published

 on


IPEF will strengthen our ties in this critical region to define the coming decades for technological innovation and the global economy
 
Framework will create a stronger, fairer, more resilient economy for families, workers, and businesses in the United States and in the Indo-Pacific region

Today in Tokyo, Japan, President Biden launched the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework for Prosperity (IPEF) with a dozen initial partners: Australia, Brunei, India, Indonesia, Japan, Republic of Korea, Malaysia, New Zealand, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, and Vietnam. Together, we represent 40% of world GDP.  

The United States is an Indo-Pacific economic power, and expanding U.S. economic leadership in the region is good for American workers and businesses — as well as for the people of the region. IPEF will enable the United States and our allies to decide on rules of the road that ensure American workers, small businesses, and ranchers can compete in the Indo-Pacific. As the President has said, tackling inflation is a top economic priority, and this framework will help lower costs by making our supply chains more resilient in the long term, protecting us against costly disruptions that lead to higher prices for consumers.

300x250x1

U.S. foreign direct investment in the region totaled more than $969 billion in 2020 and has nearly doubled in the last decade, and we are the leading exporter of services to the region, helping fuel regional growth. Trade with the Indo-Pacific supports more than three million American jobs and is the source of nearly $900 billion in foreign direct investment in the United States. With 60 percent of the world’s population, the Indo‑Pacific is projected to be the largest contributor to global growth over the next 30 years.  

The United States and our partners in the region believe that much of our success in the coming decades will depend on how well governments harness innovation — especially the transformations afoot in the clean energy, digital, and technology sectors — while fortifying our economies against a range of threats, from fragile supply chains to corruption to tax havens. The past models of economic engagement did not address these challenges, leaving our workers, businesses, and consumers vulnerable. The framework will focus on four key pillars to establish high-standard commitments that will deepen our economic engagement in the region:

  • Connected Economy: On trade, we will engage comprehensively with our partners on a wide range of issues. We will pursue high-standard rules of the road in the digital economy, including standards on cross-border data flows and data localization. We will work with our partners to seize opportunities and address concerns in the digital economy, in order to ensure small and medium sized enterprises can benefit from the region’s rapidly growing e-commerce sector, while addressing issues is such as online privacy and discriminatory and unethical use of Artificial Intelligence. We will also seek strong labor and environment standards and corporate accountability provisions that promote a race to the top for workers through trade. 
  • Resilient Economy: We will seek first-of-their-kind supply chain commitments that better anticipate and prevent disruptions in supply chains to create a more resilient economy and guard against price spikes that increase costs for American families. We intend to do this by establishing an early warning system, mapping critical mineral supply chains, improving traceability in key sectors, and coordinating on diversification efforts.
  • Clean Economy: We will seek first-of-their-kind commitments on clean energy, decarbonization, and infrastructure that promote good-paying jobs. We will pursue concrete, high-ambition targets that will accelerate efforts to tackle the climate crisis, including in the areas of renewable energy, carbon removal, energy efficiency standards, and new measures to combat methane emissions. 
  • Fair Economy: We will seek commitments to enact and enforce effective tax, anti-money laundering, and anti-bribery regimes that are in line with our existing multilateral obligations to promote a fair economy. These will include provisions on the exchange of tax information, criminalization of bribery in accordance with UN standards, and effective implementation of beneficial ownership recommendations to strengthen our efforts to crack down on corruption.

###

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Economy

Opinion: The future economy will suffer if Canada axes the carbon tax – The Globe and Mail

Published

 on


Open this photo in gallery:

Poilievre holds a press conference regarding his “Axe the Tax” message from the roof a parking garage in St. John’s on Oct.27, 2023.Paul Daly/The Canadian Press

Kevin Yin is a contributing columnist for The Globe and Mail and an economics doctoral student at the University of California, Berkeley.

The carbon tax is the single most effective climate policy that Canada has. But the tax is also an important industrial strategy, one that bets correctly on the growing need for greener energy globally and the fact that upstart Canadian companies must rise to meet these needs.

That is why it is such a shame our leaders are sacrificing it for political gains.

300x250x1

The fact that carbon taxes address a key market failure in the energy industry – polluters are not incentivized to consider the broader societal costs of their pollution – is so well understood by economists that an undergraduate could explain its merits. Experts agree on the effectiveness of the policy for reducing emissions almost as much as they agree on climate change itself.

It is not just that pollution is bad for us. That a patchwork of policies supporting clean industries is proliferating across the United States, China and the European Union means that Canada needs its own hospitable ecosystem for clean-energy companies to set up shop and eventually compete abroad. The earlier we nurture such industries, the more benefits our energy and adjacent sectors can reap down the line.

But with high fixed costs of entry and non-negligible technological hurdles, domestic clean energy is still at a significant disadvantage relative to fossil fuels.

A nuclear energy company considering a reactor project in Canada, for example, must contend with the fact that the upfront investments are enormous, and they may not pay off for years, while incumbent oil and gas firms benefit from low fixed costs, faster economies of scale and established technology.

The carbon tax cannot address these problems on its own, but it does help level the playing field by encouraging demand and capital to flow toward where we need it most. Comparable policies like green subsidies are also useful, but second-best; they weaken the government’s balance sheet and in certain cases can even make emissions worse.

Unfortunately, these arguments hold little sway for Pierre Poilievre’s Conservatives, who called for a vote of no-confidence on the dubious basis that the carbon tax is driving the cost-of-living crisis. Nor is it of much consequence to provincial leaders, who have fought the federal government hard on implementing the tax.

Not only is this attack a misleading characterization of the tax’s impact, it is also a deeply political gambit. Most expected the vote to fail. Yet by centering the next election on the carbon tax debate, Mr. Poilievre is hedging against the possibility of a new Liberal candidate, one who lacks the Trudeau baggage but still holds the line on the tax.

With the reality of inflation, a housing crisis and a general atmosphere of Trudeau-exhaustion, Mr. Poilievre has plenty of ammunition for an election campaign that does not leave our climate and our clean industries at risk. The temptation to do what is popular is ever-present in politics. Leadership is knowing when not to.

Nor are the Liberals innocent on this front. The Trudeau government deserves credit for pushing the tax through in the first place, and for structuring it as revenue-neutral. But the government’s attempt to woo Atlantic voters with the heating oil exemption has eroded its credibility and opened a vulnerable flank for Conservative attacks.

Thus, Canadian businesses are faced with the possibility of a Conservative government which has promised to eliminate the tax altogether. This kind of uncertainty is a treacherous environment for nascent companies and existing companies on the precipice of investing billions of dollars in clean tech and processes, under the expectation that demand for their fossil fuel counterparts are being kept at bay.

The tax alone is not enough; the government and opposition need to show the private sector that it can be consistent about this new policy regime long enough for these green investments to pay off. Otherwise, innovation in these much-needed technologies will remain stagnant in Canada, and markets for clean energy will be dominated by our more forward-thinking competitors.

A carbon tax is not a panacea for our climate woes, but it is central to any attempt to protect a rapidly warming planet and to develop the right businesses for that future. We can only hope that the next generation of Canadian leaders will have a little more vision.

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Economy

Business leaders say housing biggest risk to economy: KPMG survey – BNN Bloomberg

Published

 on


Business leaders see the housing crisis as the biggest risk to the economy, a new survey from KPMG Canada shows.

It found 94 per cent of respondents agreed that high housing costs and a lack of supply are the top risk, and that housing should be a main focus in the upcoming federal budget. The survey questioned 534 businesses.

Housing issues are forcing businesses to boost pay to better attract talent and budget for higher labour costs, agreed 87 per cent of respondents. 

300x250x1

“What we’re seeing in the survey is that the businesses are needing to pay more to enable their workers to absorb these higher costs of living,” said Caroline Charest, an economist and Montreal-based partner at KPMG.

The need to pay more not only directly affects business finances, but is also making it harder to tamp down the inflation that is keeping interest rates high, said Charest.

High housing costs and interest rates are straining households that are already struggling under high debt, she said.

“It leaves household balance sheets more vulnerable, in particular, in a period of economic slowdown. So it creates areas of vulnerability in the economy.”

Higher housing costs are themselves a big contributor to inflation, also making it harder to get the measure down to allow for lower rates ahead, she said. 

Businesses have been raising the alarm for some time. 

A report out last year from the Ontario Chamber of Commerce also emphasized how much the housing crisis is affecting how well businesses can attract talent. 

Almost 90 per cent of businesses want to see more public-private collaboration to help solve the crisis, the KPMG survey found.

“How can we work bringing all stakeholders, that being governments, not-for-profit organizations and the community and the private sector together, to find solutions to develop new models to deliver housing,” said Charest.

“That came out pretty strong from our survey of businesses.”

The federal government has been working to roll out more funding supports for other levels of government, and introduced measures like a GST rebate for rental housing construction, but it only has limited direct control on the file. 

Part of the federal funding has been to link funding to measures provinces and municipalities adopt that could help boost supply. 

The vast majority of respondents to the KPMG survey supported tax measures to make housing payments more affordable, such as making mortgage interest tax deductible, but also want to maintain the capital gains tax exemption for a primary residence.

The survey of companies was conducted in February using Sago’s Methodify online research platform. Respondents were business owners or executive-level decision makers.

About a third of the leaders are at companies with revenue over $500 million, about half have revenue between $100 million and $500 million, with the rest below. 

This report by The Canadian Press was first published March 27, 2024.

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Economy

China’s Xi meets foreign business leaders amid jitters over economy

Published

 on

Taipei, Taiwan – Chinese President Xi Jinping met with American business leaders and academics at Beijing’s Great Hall of the People, state media has reported, as he tries to woo foreign investment back to China after a challenging few years for the world’s second-largest economy.

The meeting on Wednesday included Evan Greenberg, the chief executive of the US insurance company Chubb, as well as Stephen Orlins, the president of the National Committee on US-China Relations, and Craig Allen, the president of the US-China Business Council.

Like many Chinese state functions, the event was highly choreographed, with footage showing attendees arranged in a square formation offset by elaborate floral installations.

Xi last met with US executives in San Francisco following the APEC summit there in November.

300x250x1

The meeting offers an opportunity for Beijing to shore up ties with US companies amid tensions with Washington and signal that their investment is welcome.

Many of the world’s top executives are already in Beijing this week for the China Development Forum, which took place on Sunday and Monday.

The forum’s guest list includes World Bank President Ajay Banga, International Monetary Fund (IMF) Managing Director Kristalina Georgieva  and representatives of more than 100 multinational firms.

While business leaders have been able to meet with many senior Chinese leaders in recent days, the invitation to meet Xi signals a concerted effort by Beijing to address negative perceptions about the current business environment.

“It’s possible that investors and executives will air some grievances at the meeting and it’s possible that lobbying might make some impact, but I don’t think that’s what this meeting is really about,” Chris Beddor, the deputy China research director at Gavekal Dragonomics, told Al Jazeera.

“This is primarily about Xi sending a message. The message is that the Chinese government is attuned to the concerns of global companies and investors, and still wants their presence in the country, at a time when global businesses are very wary of China.”

Last year, foreign direct investment in China fell by 8 percent as companies scaled back operations and sought to “de-risk” their businesses amid continuing geopolitical tensions and a tougher regulatory environment.

Tightened espionage and state secret laws have also made some firms question whether they are truly welcome, while the COVID-19 pandemic drew attention to their over-reliance on Chinese supply chains.

Still, some foreign companies have stressed their eagerness to double down on their investment.

Cook on Sunday told Chinese media that he hoped to increase Apple’s investment in China, where the company’s flagship iPhone has lost ground to local Huawei models like the Mate 60 Pro Plus.

“I think China is really opening up, and I’m so happy to be here,” Cook was quoted as saying on the sidelines of the China Development Forum.

Others, including the IMF’s Georgieva, are more jittery over China’s future.

During a speech at the China Development Forum, Georgieva told policymakers that more pro-market reforms are needed to help China’s economy rebound from the pandemic.

Despite growing 5 percent last year, China’s economy is struggling with deflation and a protracted real-estate crisis.

“China is poised to face a fork in the road – rely on the policies that have worked in the past, or update its policies for a new era of high-quality growth,” Georgieva said, suggesting that reforms could add $3.5 trillion to the economy over the next 15 years.

Shifting to consumption-focused growth, however, may be easier said than done in an economy marked by weakened domestic demand and sagging business confidence.

Chinese officials have long relied on mega infrastructure projects to boost gross domestic product (GDP), necessitating a mind shift among policymakers to move towards consumption-led growth.

Despite these concerns, China has set this year’s GDP target at 5 percent and pledged to continue its support for strategic sectors, among other goals outlined to attendees of the China Development Forum.

This year’s China Development Forum got off to a less rocky start than last year’s event, which was overshadowed by the aftermath of Beijing’s tough pandemic curbs and controversy over a Chinese spy balloon in US airspace.

“US-China tensions are a bit more stable this year, so the political pressure on American attendees has lessened somewhat,” Beddor said.

“There simply weren’t that many foreign visitors in China in March 2023. So it’s not surprising that attendance is up this year, because foreign travel of all sorts to the country is a bit more normal compared to last year,” he said.

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Trending