adplus-dvertising
Connect with us

Economy

North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA)

Published

 on

What Is the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA)?

The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) was implemented to promote trade between the U.S., Canada, and Mexico. The agreement, which eliminated most tariffs on trade between the three countries, went into effect on Jan. 1, 1994. Numerous tariffs—particularly those related to agricultural products, textiles, and automobiles—were gradually phased out between Jan. 1, 1994, and Jan. 1, 2008.

Understanding NAFTA

NAFTA’s purpose was to encourage economic activity among North America’s three major economic powers: Canada, the U. S., and Mexico. Proponents of the agreement believed that it would benefit the three nations involved by promoting freer trade and lower tariffs among Canada, Mexico, and the United States.

On Aug. 27, 2018, President Donald Trump announced a new trade deal with Mexico to replace NAFTA. The U.S.-Mexico Trade Agreement, as it was called, would maintain duty-free access for agricultural goods on both sides of the border and eliminate non-tariff barriers while also encouraging more agricultural trade between Mexico and the United States.

On Sept. 30, 2018, this agreement was modified to include Canada. The United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) took effect on July 1, 2020, completely replacing NAFTA. If not renewed, the USMCA will expire in 16 years.

300x250x1

A Sept. 30, 2018, joint press release from the U.S. and Canada Trade Offices stated:

“USMCA will give our workers, farmers, ranchers, and businesses a high-standard trade agreement that will result in freer markets, fairer trade, and robust economic growth in our region. It will strengthen the middle class and create good, well-paying jobs and new opportunities for the nearly half billion people who call North America home.”

History of NAFTA

About one-fourth of all U.S. imports, such as crude oil, machinery, gold, vehicles, fresh produce, livestock, and processed foods, originate from Mexico and Canada, which are, respectively, the United States’ second- and third-largest suppliers of imported goods, as of 2019.23 In addition, approximately one-third of U.S. exports, particularly machinery, vehicle parts, mineral fuel/oil, and plastics are destined for Canada and Mexico.4

NAFTA legislation was developed during George H. W. Bush’s presidency as the first phase of his Enterprise for the Americas Initiative. The Clinton administration, which signed NAFTA into law in 1993, believed it would create 200,000 U.S. jobs within two years and 1 million within five years because exports play a major role in U.S. economic growth. The administration anticipated a dramatic increase in U.S. imports from Mexico as a result of the lower tariffs.

The next scheduled review of NAICS will take place in 2022.

This classification system allows for more flexibility than the SIC’s four-digit structure by implementing a hierarchical six-digit coding system and classifying all economic activity into 20 industry sectors. Five of these sectors are primarily those that produce goods, and the remaining 15 sectors provide some type of service. Every company receives a primary NAICS code that indicates its main line of business. A company receives its primary code based on the code definition that generates the largest portion of the company’s revenue at a specified location in the past year.

The first two digits of a NAICS code indicate the company’s economic sector. The third digit designates the company’s subsector. The fourth digit indicates the company’s industry group. The fifth digit reflects the company’s NAICS industry, and the sixth designates the company’s specific national industry.

Advantages and Disadvantages of NAFTA

NAFTA’s immediate aim was to increase cross-border commerce in North America, and it did indeed spur trade and investment among its three member countries by limiting or eliminating tariffs. It was especially advantageous to small or mid-size businesses, because it lowered costs and did away with the requirement of a company to have a physical presence in a foreign country to do business there.

Most of the increase came from trade between the U.S and Mexico or between the U.S. and Canada., though Mexico-Canada trade grew as well. Overall, there was $1.0 trillion in trilateral trade from 1993 to 2015, a 258.5% increase in nominal terms (125.2%, when adjusted for inflation). Real per-capita gross domestic product (GDP) also grew slightly in all three countries, primarily Canada and the U.S.

NAFTA protected non-tangible assets like intellectual property, established dispute- resolution mechanisms, and, through the NAAEC NAALC) side agreements implemented labor and environmental safeguards. It increased U.S. competitiveness abroad and “exported” higher U.S. workplace safety and health standards to other nations.

From the beginning, NAFTA critics were concerned that the agreement would result in U.S. jobs relocating to Mexico, despite the supplementary NAALC. In fact, many companies did subsequently move their manufacturing operations to Mexico and other countries with lower labor costs—in particular, thousands of U.S. auto workers and garment-industry workers were affected in this way. However, NAFTA may not have been the reason for all those moves.

During the NAFTA years, U.S. trade deficits (importing more from a nation than you export) did increase, especially with Mexico. So did inflation.

Some critics also cite the rising wave of Mexican immigrants to the U.S. as a result of NAFTA—partly because the expected convergence of U.S. and Mexican wages didn’t happen, thus making the U.S. more attractive to Mexican workers.

Pros

  • A spurred surge in cross-border trade and investment
  • Increased competitiveness of U.S. industry
  • Opened up opportunities for small businesses
  • Implemented universal, higher health, safety, and environmental standards
Cons

  • Caused loss of manufacturing jobs, especially in certain industries
  • Increased inflation in the U.S.
  • Increased U.S. trade deficits
  • May have spurred Mexican immigration

NAFTA vs. USMCA

The U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) entered into force on July 1, 2020. Basically, it builds on NAFTA, using the older legislation as a basis for a new agreement. But it does have some differences.

Some are simple updates, expanding the tariff ban on new technologies and industries. Most notably, the USMCA prohibits tariffs on digital music, e-books, and other digital products. The agreement also establishes copyright safe harbor for internet companies, meaning they can’t be held liable for copyright infringements by users.6

Another change moves the labor and environmental protections of the original side agreements into the main agreement, meaning issues like the right to organize are now subject to the pact’s normal procedures for settling disputes.7

In particular, it revised and toughened labor laws relating to Mexico, establishing an independent investigatory panel that can investigate companies accused of violating workers’ rights, and stop shipments from those found to be in violation of labor laws. It also compelled Mexico to enact a wide array of labor reforms, to improve working conditions and increase wages.7

Here are some other distinctions between the two agreements, indicating qualifications for tariff-free status and other rules.

Comparing NAFTA and USMCA
Provision NAFTA USMCA
autos 62.5% of vehicle components must be made in North America 75% of components be North American in origin; 40%-45% of parts be from a factory paying $16/hour
 pharmaceuticals protections for certain drug classes from cheaper alternatives protections eliminated
 dairy protected market in Canada, limiting access allows U.S. farmers access to up to 3.6% of the Canadian market and vice versa
investor-state dispute settlement mechanism allows companies to sue governments for unfair treatment eliminated, except for certain Mexican industries
intellectual-property protections 50 years 70 years
treaty sunset provision  none treaty to be reviewed after 6 years; expires after 16 years unless extended

NAFTA FAQs

What Was the Main Goal of NAFTA?

NAFTA aimed to create a free trade zone between the U.S., Canada, and Mexico. The goal was to make doing business in Mexico and Canada less expensive for U.S. companies (and vice versa), reducing the red tape needed to import or export goods.

How Did NAFTA Work?

Among its three member nations, NAFTA eliminated tariffs and other trade barriers to agricultural and manufactured goods, along with services. It also removed investment restrictions and protected intellectual property rights. Finally, its provisions addressed environmental and labor concerns, attempting to establish a common high standard in each country.

Is NAFTA Still in Effect?

No, NAFTA was effectively replaced by the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA). Signed on Nov. 30, 2018, it went into full effect on July 1, 2020.

Did NAFTA Help the U.S. Economy?

Whether NAFTA helped the U.S. economy is a matter of some debate. Certainly, trade between the United States and its North American neighbors more than tripled, from roughly $290 billion in 1993 to more than $1.1 trillion in 2016. Cross-border investments also surged, and U.S. GDP overall rose slightly.

But economists find it’s been tough to target the deal’s direct effects from other factors, including rapid technological change and expanded trade with countries such as China. Meanwhile, debate persists regarding NAFTA’s effect on employment (which was badly hit in certain industries) and wages (which largely remained stagnant).8

How Did Canada Benefit From NAFTA?

“NAFTA has had an overwhelmingly positive effect on the Canadian economy. It has opened up new export opportunities, acted as a stimulus to build internationally competitive businesses, and helped attract significant foreign investment,” states the Canadian government’s website.9

More specifically, since NAFTA went into full effect, U.S. and Mexican investments in Canada have tripled. U.S. investment alone grew from $70 billion in 1993 to more than $368 billion in 2013.8 Total merchandise trade between Canada and the United States more than doubled since 1993 and grew nine-fold between Canada and Mexico.

Volume 75%

1:10

What is NAFTA?

Additions to NAFTA

NAFTA’s provisions were supplemented by two other regulations: the North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation (NAAEC) and the North American Agreement on Labor Cooperation (NAALC). These tangential agreements were intended to prevent businesses from relocating to other countries to exploit lower wages, more lenient worker health and safety regulations, and looser environmental regulations.

NAFTA did not eliminate regulatory requirements on companies wishing to trade internationally, such as rule-of-origin regulations and documentation requirements that determine whether certain goods can be traded under NAFTA. The free-trade agreement also contained administrative, civil, and criminal penalties for businesses that violate any of the three countries’ laws or customs procedures.

North American Industry Classification System

The three NAFTA signatory countries developed a new collaborative business-classification system that facilitates comparison of business activity statistics across North America. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) organizes and separates industries according to their production processes.

The NAICS replaced the U.S. Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) system, allowing businesses to be classified systematically in an ever-changing economy. The new system enables easier comparability between all countries in North America. To ensure that the NAICS remains relevant, the system is reviewed every five years.

The three parties responsible for the formation and continued maintenance of the NAICS are the Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Geografía in Mexico, Statistics Canada, and the United States Office of Management and Budget through its Economic Classification Policy Committee, which also includes the Bureau of Economic Analysis, Bureau of Labor Statistics, and the Bureau of Census. The first version of the classification system was released in 1997. A revision in 2002 reflected the substantial changes occurring in the information sector. The most recent revision, in 2017, created 21 new industries by reclassifying, splitting, or combining 29 existing industries.

Economy

Biden's Hot Economy Stokes Currency Fears for the Rest of World – Bloomberg

Published

 on


As Joe Biden this week hailed America’s booming economy as the strongest in the world during a reelection campaign tour of battleground-state Pennsylvania, global finance chiefs convening in Washington had a different message: cool it.

The push-back from central bank governors and finance ministers gathering for the International Monetary Fund-World Bank spring meetings highlight how the sting from a surging US economy — manifested through high interest rates and a strong dollar — is ricocheting around the world by forcing other currencies lower and complicating plans to bring down borrowing costs.

Adblock test (Why?)

300x250x1

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Economy

Opinion: Higher capital gains taxes won't work as claimed, but will harm the economy – The Globe and Mail

Published

 on


Open this photo in gallery:

Canada’s Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland hold the 2024-25 budget, on Parliament Hill in Ottawa, on April 16.Patrick Doyle/Reuters

Alex Whalen and Jake Fuss are analysts at the Fraser Institute.

Amid a federal budget riddled with red ink and tax hikes, the Trudeau government has increased capital gains taxes. The move will be disastrous for Canada’s growth prospects and its already-lagging investment climate, and to make matters worse, research suggests it won’t work as planned.

Currently, individuals and businesses who sell a capital asset in Canada incur capital gains taxes at a 50-per-cent inclusion rate, which means that 50 per cent of the gain in the asset’s value is subject to taxation at the individual or business’s marginal tax rate. The Trudeau government is raising this inclusion rate to 66.6 per cent for all businesses, trusts and individuals with capital gains over $250,000.

300x250x1

The problems with hiking capital gains taxes are numerous.

First, capital gains are taxed on a “realization” basis, which means the investor does not incur capital gains taxes until the asset is sold. According to empirical evidence, this creates a “lock-in” effect where investors have an incentive to keep their capital invested in a particular asset when they might otherwise sell.

For example, investors may delay selling capital assets because they anticipate a change in government and a reversal back to the previous inclusion rate. This means the Trudeau government is likely overestimating the potential revenue gains from its capital gains tax hike, given that individual investors will adjust the timing of their asset sales in response to the tax hike.

Second, the lock-in effect creates a drag on economic growth as it incentivizes investors to hold off selling their assets when they otherwise might, preventing capital from being deployed to its most productive use and therefore reducing growth.

Budget’s capital gains tax changes divide the small business community

And Canada’s growth prospects and investment climate have both been in decline. Canada currently faces the lowest growth prospects among all OECD countries in terms of GDP per person. Further, between 2014 and 2021, business investment (adjusted for inflation) in Canada declined by $43.7-billion. Hiking taxes on capital will make both pressing issues worse.

Contrary to the government’s framing – that this move only affects the wealthy – lagging business investment and slow growth affect all Canadians through lower incomes and living standards. Capital taxes are among the most economically damaging forms of taxation precisely because they reduce the incentive to innovate and invest. And while taxes on capital gains do raise revenue, the economic costs exceed the amount of tax collected.

Previous governments in Canada understood these facts. In the 2000 federal budget, then-finance minister Paul Martin said a “key factor contributing to the difficulty of raising capital by new startups is the fact that individuals who sell existing investments and reinvest in others must pay tax on any realized capital gains,” an explicit acknowledgment of the lock-in effect and costs of capital gains taxes. Further, that Liberal government reduced the capital gains inclusion rate, acknowledging the importance of a strong investment climate.

At a time when Canada badly needs to improve the incentives to invest, the Trudeau government’s 2024 budget has introduced a damaging tax hike. In delivering the budget, Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland said “Canada, a growing country, needs to make investments in our country and in Canadians right now.” Individuals and businesses across the country likely agree on the importance of investment. Hiking capital gains taxes will achieve the exact opposite effect.

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Economy

Nigeria's Economy, Once Africa's Biggest, Slips to Fourth Place – Bloomberg

Published

 on


Nigeria’s economy, which ranked as Africa’s largest in 2022, is set to slip to fourth place this year and Egypt, which held the top position in 2023, is projected to fall to second behind South Africa after a series of currency devaluations, International Monetary Fund forecasts show.

The IMF’s World Economic Outlook estimates Nigeria’s gross domestic product at $253 billion based on current prices this year, lagging energy-rich Algeria at $267 billion, Egypt at $348 billion and South Africa at $373 billion.

Adblock test (Why?)

300x250x1

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Trending