下面为大家整理一篇优秀的essay代写范文- Us "fair trade" policy，供大家参考学习，这篇论文讨论了美国“公平贸易”政策。美国近来以“公平贸易”政策为由，频繁对他国所谓“不公平贸易行为”实施单边贸易保护措施，与多个经济体产生贸易摩擦。其中，中美贸易关系最为紧张，双边就知识产权保护等关键议题分歧巨大，未达成任何制度性协定，同时两国在高端制造业和贸易新领域竞争日益激烈。
"Fair trade" is a controversial abstraction. In the context of American trade law and practice, "fair trade" has a specific meaning. After World War II, the United States recognized that the great depression was often associated with competing tariff increases and beggar-thy-neighbour policies. At that time, the United States had an obvious comparative advantage in the field of trade, so it led the establishment of a free trade system to create conditions for opening up foreign markets and expanding its own economy. At the same time, the United States is committed to capital and technology intensive industries, and gradually shifted to traditional manufacturing, resulting in the total demand for consumer goods in the United States than the total supply. In addition, in order to make up for the shortage of domestic production, the United States used the unique international "hard currency" status of the dollar to expand imports, which led to the rising trade deficit of the United States. On the other hand, the United States views the trade deficit as the result of other countries' "unfair trade measures". The United States now has a trade deficit with 101 economies, which it blames on other countries' "unfair trade practices". Rather than free trade, "fair trade" policies are better suited to campaigns or rallies to shore up the base of the vote. When the pressure on the us to compete increases, it tries to deflect the pressure by accusing other countries of "unfair trade practices". In this case, the United States will continue to use the "fair trade" as an excuse to improve trade protection measures and try to reduce the trade deficit. Here, the "fair trade" policy is the dynamic balance between free trade and trade protection, which shows that "fair trade" is actually the weapon used by the United States to implement trade protection.
In the us discourse system, free trade is considered "unfair" if other countries are less open than the us. In other words, "fair trade" here means demanding parity in the level of openness. Of course, the requirement for "fair trade" is laudable in terms of reducing trade barriers; But it is against the principle of free trade to close us markets to other countries because they do not give in to us demands. In theory, even without reciprocity, the us would still benefit from unilateral openness; If America opens its own markets as well as those of others, it will generally get a double dividend. So it is only right for the us to continue to show the benefits of free trade to countries that were initially reluctant to do so, or to lobby them to do so, if their requests for opening up their markets are denied.
Mr Trump's "fair trade" thesis assumes that foreign producers competing with the us should bear the same Labour costs; It is not "fair trade" if labor costs in different countries in the same industry are different from those in the United States, but the labor costs in the United States are higher. This goes against the classical theory of comparative advantage in economics, and should be based on local conditions. Therefore, when the United States restricts its exports to the United States or even closes its market because other countries do not yield to the United States' demand for equal openness, when the United States asks other countries to conform to American labor standards, the United States is adopting import protectionism.
At the legal and institutional level, the anti-dumping and countervailing investigation and article 337 of the us tax act of 1930 also give the us the right to take protective measures against other countries' unfair trade practices. The United States trade act of 1974 further gives the President authority over trade policy.
It can be seen that, first, the United States has its own discourse system on "fair trade" and a complete trade protection system under the pretext of "fair trade", which has a long-term impact on the world economy. Second, measures taken by the us based on the so-called "fair trade" principle are not only protectionist, but often take the form of unilateral trade measures. In the name of "fair trade" or a "level playing field," the United States seeks to protect the domestic industries of strong trading nations or gain market access for weak ones by pressuring them, often in the form of unilateral trade measures.
The "fair trade" policy violates the laws of the market and erodes the free trade system. Free trade enables countries around the world to cut tariff and non-tariff barriers, open their markets, integrate into the global economic system quickly and promote their own economic development. It can also produce "spillover effect", which is conducive to exchanges and cooperation between different countries and indirectly promotes world peace. The wto brings together trade liberalization efforts to exert market power in a way that benefits all members and eliminates discriminatory treatment. Unlike this approach, one country's pursuit of sectoral or intra-sectoral reciprocity makes it politically difficult for other countries to accept, leading to trade antagonism degenerating into punitive tariffs and retaliatory tariffs. In short, "fair trade" is not conducive to the global trading system and does not form the basis for the design, negotiation and implementation of its complex economic policies.
Economic policies that violate market principles often have undesirable consequences. The "fair trade" policy provides legal support for the us to take trade remedy measures. Trade remedies are essentially a form of government intervention in the economy and a means to address market failures, but the description and characteristics of the concept of "fairness" were vague from the outset, so the United States could apply restrictive and unfavorable interpretations to foreign suppliers. The offensive to open foreign markets open policy is based on the requirements of equivalence assumption that often leads to weak trade party is likely to shift trade with other economies, to the United States to reduce imported from more efficient suppliers to meet the demand for exports in the United States, it destroys the free and open market, which would influence the efficiency of the market.
The essence of the "fair trade" policy is "America first", that is, American interests come first. "Agenda" proposed "America first" policy, emphasize the experiences in other countries' unfair trade practices "threat, so U.S. trade policy to adapt to the requirement of national interests and security strategy, under the existing trade agreements, the implementation of the United States trade law and the rights in the United States, as a" fair trade "basis.
In this regard, the "America first" trade policy is embodied in a series of successive protectionist measures. The us department of commerce initiated "232 investigations" against steel and aluminum imports respectively in April 2017 in accordance with section 232 of the trade extension act 1962. The United States commission on international trade law initiated a safeguard investigation of photovoltaic cells and modules worldwide in May pursuant to section 201 of the 1974 act. Under section 301 of the 1974 trade act, the ustr initiated a section 301 investigation into the Chinese government's policies and measures relating to technology transfer, intellectual property rights and innovation in August. In May 2018, the United States launched the "232 investigation" against imported automobiles and spare parts on the grounds of national security. As the largest trading partner and source of trade deficit of the United States, China is regarded by the United States as a "challenger eroding the security and prosperity of the United States" and has become the main target of the United States' trade protection measures.
In the national security strategy report released by the us in December 2017, the trump administration pointed out the need to shape and reform the WTO to ensure that it is more efficient and capable of adjudicating "unfair trade practices". The agenda also gives priority to reform of the existing multilateral trading system.
Because of the world trade organization on the so-called "unfair trade practices" powerless and dissatisfaction with the reform of the world trade organization, the United States is trying to shape and reform the existing multilateral trade mechanism, will include "fair trade" policies, which can be "market economy status", "national security" and other factors as the basis of trade protection measures. Lighthizer, the current U.S. trade representative, even publicly praised the effectiveness of the non-binding dispute settlement mechanism under the gatt framework, saying that the mandatory dispute settlement mechanism under the WTO goes beyond the scope of member states' mandates and needs to be reformed. Is also based on this, in the current dispute settlement body appellate body three judges term is full, don't immediately appoint judges dispute settlement body is unable to effective implementation of WTO rules, which affect the stability of the multilateral trading system and the predictability of the background, the United States remains in the world trade organization, the appellate body transparency extended verdict, the appellate body members after he continue to hear by blocking the selection of the judge, to stress the world trade organization member world trade organization to accept the United States, the reform plan.
In his state of the union address on January 30, 2018, trump said the trade relationship the United States seeks will be "fair and reciprocal" and that he will work to resolve "bad trade agreements" and negotiate "good" and "fair" new ones. In the case of dissatisfaction with the multilateral trading mechanism of WTO, the us under trump turned to "bilateral negotiation" mode, making full use of its strong position, giving full play to its advantages, formulating more self-interested rules and maximizing the interests of the us. In the agenda, trump stressed that in order to better negotiate "fair and balanced" trade agreements, it is necessary to renegotiate the north American free trade agreement, the korea-us free trade agreement, establish the us-uk trade and investment working group, and open up the potential for signing bilateral trade agreements with the Indian Ocean and Pacific region and Africa.
As for the North American free trade agreement revisions, the United States sought an advisory, rather than mandatory, dispute settlement mechanism and called for a "sunset clause" that would automatically expire after five years unless the three countries agreed to renew the agreement. If it cannot renegotiate, the us will withdraw from nafta under article 2205. Faced with a huge trade deficit with South Korea that has been growing year by year, trump expressed concern that South Korea has not strictly complied with its commitments on labor, competition, tariffs, medical equipment and other aspects of the agreement, and called for a renegotiation of the U.S. -south Korea free trade agreement to reach a more "fair" trade agreement.
From the above specific manifestations of the "fair trade" policy of the United States, trump's "fair trade" policy has three characteristics. Second, strengthen the implementation of domestic trade law and further open the foreign market with our own advantages; Third, weaken the multilateral trading system and seek American interests through bilateral negotiations. It can be seen that trump's "fair trade" policy is based on the premise of America first, unilateralism as the means and protectionism as the purpose.
Trump's trade policy team argues that when imports exceed exports, trade reduces the economy, and reducing the trade deficit increases the economy. Under the current free trade system, facing the us trade deficit with China rising, America's economic advantage is relatively reduced, thus the trump in "fair trade" policies established the "America first" premise, and by 301, 201, terms such as "fair trade" policy tools to improve America's trade protection measures, save the comparative advantages of the United States. But whether or not Mr Trump is re-elected as President, us protectionism is here to stay. The passage of the 1974 trade act illustrates the blurring of partisan divisions over trade policy in the United States. In general, the us Democratic Party is too tied to Labour groups to support open trade policies; Republicans remain wary of lowering tariff barriers and ensuring reciprocal market access. The huge trade deficit has become a difficult problem for the us government to face, and trade policy tools have once again become the preferred means of driving competitors to submission.
As a tool of "fair trade" policy, section 301 imposes tough sanctions on countries with balance-of-payments surpluses, based on their own legal system rather than international trade rules. Although the legal functions of article 232, 201 and 301 are different, they have the same purpose. In terms of function, section 301 can expand the market of other countries and guarantee the access of American products, while section 232 and section 201 fully protect the domestic industry and domestic market of the United States from strong competition from foreign imports. The common purpose of these trade policy tools is to reduce the us trade deficit, protect specific domestic industries and discriminate against specific trading partners, so as to safeguard the priority economic and security interests of the us. The preferential "fair trade" policy of the United States shows that the United States circumvented its obligations under the WTO with national security and other reasons, and protected the domestic market by imposing tariffs, which is in essence trade protectionism.
The us's use of trade protection measures such as anti-dumping and countervailing duties against competitors is clear. The improper use of trade protection measures reflects the bias of the United States in evaluating the "fairness" of trade between foreign enterprises. The United States seeks to engage successful competitors in costly defense actions by engaging them in a national judicial process that is not a model of justice and fairness. Anti-dumping and countervailing duties are obviously used as tactical tools to bring foreign competitors to their knees. Legal low-level mechanisms are deliberately abused to pave the way for illegal trade protection to use administrative high-level mechanisms of protection. In the United States, an industry is usually successful in securing protection from the U.S. government through the classification of unfair trade complaints.
The United States is the world's largest economy and its escalating trade protectionism raises the risk of a global trade war. This action of the United States directly affects the free trade of China, the European Union, Japan and Canada, and also causes these countries to take corresponding tariff measures as countermeasures. The international community has a general consensus on the harm of trade protectionism. Economists at the European central bank said the change in global tariffs could lead to a contraction in global trade of up to 3 per cent and a decline in global growth of up to 1 per cent. Ms lagarde attacked the trump administration's focus on the us bilateral trade deficit with China, saying: "the trump administration should look more closely at the us domestic economy to improve its overall trade deficit and governments must steer clear of protectionism of any kind. History shows that imposing import restrictions hurts everyone, especially poorer consumers."
51due留学教育原创版权郑重声明：原创essay代写范文源自编辑创作，未经官方许可，网站谢绝转载。对于侵权行为，未经同意的情况下，51Due有权追究法律责任。主要业务有essay代写、assignment代写、paper代写、作业代写服务。
51due为留学生提供最好的essay代写服务，亲们可以进入主页了解和获取更多essay代写范文 提供代写服务，详情可以咨询我们的客服QQ：800020041。
"Fair trade" is a controversial abstraction. In the context of American trade law and practice, "fair trade" has a specific meaning. After World War II, the United States recognized that the great depression was often associated with competing tariff increases and beggar-thy-neighbour policies. At that time, the United States had an obvious comparative advantage in the field of trade, so it led the establishment of a free trade system to create conditions for opening up foreign markets and expanding its own economy. At the same time, the United States is committed to capital and technology intensive industries, and gradually shifted to traditional manufacturing, resulting in the total demand for consumer goods in the United States than the total supply. In addition, in order to make up for the shortage of domestic production, the United States used the unique international "hard currency" status of the dollar to expand imports, which led to the rising trade deficit of the United States. On the other hand, the United States views the trade deficit as the result of other countries' "unfair trade measures". The United States now has a trade deficit with 101 economies, which it blames on other countries' "unfair trade practices". Rather than free trade, "fair trade" policies are better suited to campaigns or rallies to shore up the base of the vote. When the pressure on the us to compete increases, it tries to deflect the pressure by accusing other countries of "unfair trade practices". In this case, the United States will continue to use the "fair trade" as an excuse to improve trade protection measures and try to reduce the trade deficit. Here, the "fair trade" policy is the dynamic balance between free trade and trade protection, which shows that "fair trade" is actually the weapon used by the United States to implement trade protection.
In the us discourse system, free trade is considered "unfair" if other countries are less open than the us. In other words, "fair trade" here means demanding parity in the level of openness. Of course, the requirement for "fair trade" is laudable in terms of reducing trade barriers; But it is against the principle of free trade to close us markets to other countries because they do not give in to us demands. In theory, even without reciprocity, the us would still benefit from unilateral openness; If America opens its own markets as well as those of others, it will generally get a double dividend. So it is only right for the us to continue to show the benefits of free trade to countries that were initially reluctant to do so, or to lobby them to do so, if their requests for opening up their markets are denied.
Mr Trump's "fair trade" thesis assumes that foreign producers competing with the us should bear the same Labour costs; It is not "fair trade" if labor costs in different countries in the same industry are different from those in the United States, but the labor costs in the United States are higher. This goes against the classical theory of comparative advantage in economics, and should be based on local conditions. Therefore, when the United States restricts its exports to the United States or even closes its market because other countries do not yield to the United States' demand for equal openness, when the United States asks other countries to conform to American labor standards, the United States is adopting import protectionism.
At the legal and institutional level, the anti-dumping and countervailing investigation and article 337 of the us tax act of 1930 also give the us the right to take protective measures against other countries' unfair trade practices. The United States trade act of 1974 further gives the President authority over trade policy.
It can be seen that, first, the United States has its own discourse system on "fair trade" and a complete trade protection system under the pretext of "fair trade", which has a long-term impact on the world economy. Second, measures taken by the us based on the so-called "fair trade" principle are not only protectionist, but often take the form of unilateral trade measures. In the name of "fair trade" or a "level playing field," the United States seeks to protect the domestic industries of strong trading nations or gain market access for weak ones by pressuring them, often in the form of unilateral trade measures.
The "fair trade" policy violates the laws of the market and erodes the free trade system. Free trade enables countries around the world to cut tariff and non-tariff barriers, open their markets, integrate into the global economic system quickly and promote their own economic development. It can also produce "spillover effect", which is conducive to exchanges and cooperation between different countries and indirectly promotes world peace. The wto brings together trade liberalization efforts to exert market power in a way that benefits all members and eliminates discriminatory treatment. Unlike this approach, one country's pursuit of sectoral or intra-sectoral reciprocity makes it politically difficult for other countries to accept, leading to trade antagonism degenerating into punitive tariffs and retaliatory tariffs. In short, "fair trade" is not conducive to the global trading system and does not form the basis for the design, negotiation and implementation of its complex economic policies.
Economic policies that violate market principles often have undesirable consequences. The "fair trade" policy provides legal support for the us to take trade remedy measures. Trade remedies are essentially a form of government intervention in the economy and a means to address market failures, but the description and characteristics of the concept of "fairness" were vague from the outset, so the United States could apply restrictive and unfavorable interpretations to foreign suppliers. The offensive to open foreign markets open policy is based on the requirements of equivalence assumption that often leads to weak trade party is likely to shift trade with other economies, to the United States to reduce imported from more efficient suppliers to meet the demand for exports in the United States, it destroys the free and open market, which would influence the efficiency of the market.
The essence of the "fair trade" policy is "America first", that is, American interests come first. "Agenda" proposed "America first" policy, emphasize the experiences in other countries' unfair trade practices "threat, so U.S. trade policy to adapt to the requirement of national interests and security strategy, under the existing trade agreements, the implementation of the United States trade law and the rights in the United States, as a" fair trade "basis.
In this regard, the "America first" trade policy is embodied in a series of successive protectionist measures. The us department of commerce initiated "232 investigations" against steel and aluminum imports respectively in April 2017 in accordance with section 232 of the trade extension act 1962. The United States commission on international trade law initiated a safeguard investigation of photovoltaic cells and modules worldwide in May pursuant to section 201 of the 1974 act. Under section 301 of the 1974 trade act, the ustr initiated a section 301 investigation into the Chinese government's policies and measures relating to technology transfer, intellectual property rights and innovation in August. In May 2018, the United States launched the "232 investigation" against imported automobiles and spare parts on the grounds of national security. As the largest trading partner and source of trade deficit of the United States, China is regarded by the United States as a "challenger eroding the security and prosperity of the United States" and has become the main target of the United States' trade protection measures.
In the national security strategy report released by the us in December 2017, the trump administration pointed out the need to shape and reform the WTO to ensure that it is more efficient and capable of adjudicating "unfair trade practices". The agenda also gives priority to reform of the existing multilateral trading system.
Because of the world trade organization on the so-called "unfair trade practices" powerless and dissatisfaction with the reform of the world trade organization, the United States is trying to shape and reform the existing multilateral trade mechanism, will include "fair trade" policies, which can be "market economy status", "national security" and other factors as the basis of trade protection measures. Lighthizer, the current U.S. trade representative, even publicly praised the effectiveness of the non-binding dispute settlement mechanism under the gatt framework, saying that the mandatory dispute settlement mechanism under the WTO goes beyond the scope of member states' mandates and needs to be reformed. Is also based on this, in the current dispute settlement body appellate body three judges term is full, don't immediately appoint judges dispute settlement body is unable to effective implementation of WTO rules, which affect the stability of the multilateral trading system and the predictability of the background, the United States remains in the world trade organization, the appellate body transparency extended verdict, the appellate body members after he continue to hear by blocking the selection of the judge, to stress the world trade organization member world trade organization to accept the United States, the reform plan.
In his state of the union address on January 30, 2018, trump said the trade relationship the United States seeks will be "fair and reciprocal" and that he will work to resolve "bad trade agreements" and negotiate "good" and "fair" new ones. In the case of dissatisfaction with the multilateral trading mechanism of WTO, the us under trump turned to "bilateral negotiation" mode, making full use of its strong position, giving full play to its advantages, formulating more self-interested rules and maximizing the interests of the us. In the agenda, trump stressed that in order to better negotiate "fair and balanced" trade agreements, it is necessary to renegotiate the north American free trade agreement, the korea-us free trade agreement, establish the us-uk trade and investment working group, and open up the potential for signing bilateral trade agreements with the Indian Ocean and Pacific region and Africa.
As for the North American free trade agreement revisions, the United States sought an advisory, rather than mandatory, dispute settlement mechanism and called for a "sunset clause" that would automatically expire after five years unless the three countries agreed to renew the agreement. If it cannot renegotiate, the us will withdraw from nafta under article 2205. Faced with a huge trade deficit with South Korea that has been growing year by year, trump expressed concern that South Korea has not strictly complied with its commitments on labor, competition, tariffs, medical equipment and other aspects of the agreement, and called for a renegotiation of the U.S. -south Korea free trade agreement to reach a more "fair" trade agreement.
From the above specific manifestations of the "fair trade" policy of the United States, trump's "fair trade" policy has three characteristics. Second, strengthen the implementation of domestic trade law and further open the foreign market with our own advantages; Third, weaken the multilateral trading system and seek American interests through bilateral negotiations. It can be seen that trump's "fair trade" policy is based on the premise of America first, unilateralism as the means and protectionism as the purpose.
Trump's trade policy team argues that when imports exceed exports, trade reduces the economy, and reducing the trade deficit increases the economy. Under the current free trade system, facing the us trade deficit with China rising, America's economic advantage is relatively reduced, thus the trump in "fair trade" policies established the "America first" premise, and by 301, 201, terms such as "fair trade" policy tools to improve America's trade protection measures, save the comparative advantages of the United States. But whether or not Mr Trump is re-elected as President, us protectionism is here to stay. The passage of the 1974 trade act illustrates the blurring of partisan divisions over trade policy in the United States. In general, the us Democratic Party is too tied to Labour groups to support open trade policies; Republicans remain wary of lowering tariff barriers and ensuring reciprocal market access. The huge trade deficit has become a difficult problem for the us government to face, and trade policy tools have once again become the preferred means of driving competitors to submission.
As a tool of "fair trade" policy, section 301 imposes tough sanctions on countries with balance-of-payments surpluses, based on their own legal system rather than international trade rules. Although the legal functions of article 232, 201 and 301 are different, they have the same purpose. In terms of function, section 301 can expand the market of other countries and guarantee the access of American products, while section 232 and section 201 fully protect the domestic industry and domestic market of the United States from strong competition from foreign imports. The common purpose of these trade policy tools is to reduce the us trade deficit, protect specific domestic industries and discriminate against specific trading partners, so as to safeguard the priority economic and security interests of the us. The preferential "fair trade" policy of the United States shows that the United States circumvented its obligations under the WTO with national security and other reasons, and protected the domestic market by imposing tariffs, which is in essence trade protectionism.
The us's use of trade protection measures such as anti-dumping and countervailing duties against competitors is clear. The improper use of trade protection measures reflects the bias of the United States in evaluating the "fairness" of trade between foreign enterprises. The United States seeks to engage successful competitors in costly defense actions by engaging them in a national judicial process that is not a model of justice and fairness. Anti-dumping and countervailing duties are obviously used as tactical tools to bring foreign competitors to their knees. Legal low-level mechanisms are deliberately abused to pave the way for illegal trade protection to use administrative high-level mechanisms of protection. In the United States, an industry is usually successful in securing protection from the U.S. government through the classification of unfair trade complaints.
The United States is the world's largest economy and its escalating trade protectionism raises the risk of a global trade war. This action of the United States directly affects the free trade of China, the European Union, Japan and Canada, and also causes these countries to take corresponding tariff measures as countermeasures. The international community has a general consensus on the harm of trade protectionism. Economists at the European central bank said the change in global tariffs could lead to a contraction in global trade of up to 3 per cent and a decline in global growth of up to 1 per cent. Ms lagarde attacked the trump administration's focus on the us bilateral trade deficit with China, saying: "the trump administration should look more closely at the us domestic economy to improve its overall trade deficit and governments must steer clear of protectionism of any kind. History shows that imposing import restrictions hurts everyone, especially poorer consumers."
51due留学教育原创版权郑重声明：原创essay代写范文源自编辑创作，未经官方许可，网站谢绝转载。对于侵权行为，未经同意的情况下，51Due有权追究法律责任。主要业务有essay代写、assignment代写、paper代写、作业代写服务。
51due为留学生提供最好的essay代写服务，亲们可以进入主页了解和获取更多essay代写范文 提供代写服务，详情可以咨询我们的客服QQ：800020041。
※コメント投稿者のブログIDはブログ作成者のみに通知されます