America, Europe, and the New Trade Order

2009 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 1-22 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey J. Schott

Over the last 60 years, the multilateral management of trade through the GATT and subsequently through the WTO has been led by the United States and Europe. Since the turn of the new millennium, however, developing countries have increasingly used their leverage to insist that talks on agriculture receive priority attention, deny the inclusion of investment and competition policy on the negotiating agenda, and block agreement on negotiating modalities for agriculture and non-agricultural market access (NAMA). Cooperation between the United States and the European Union is still essential, but no longer sufficient, for successful multilateral negotiations. Specifically, the “BRICKs” (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and Korea) are likely to be pivotal in directing the course and contributing to the success or failure of the WTO.

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Silvia Velarde Aramayo ◽  

The OECD is leading global efforts to reach an international consensus around the BEPS Project with the G20 support. Action 1 works on the tax challenges of the digital economy and its proposals have been made with the «inclusive framework» participation that brings together more than 137 countries. The article focuses on the legitimacy, operation, and consequences of all this work for developing countries that, according to estimates of the UNCTAD, lost annually U$100 billion due to tax avoidance schemes by MNEs. The OECD/G20 inclusive framework is designing a new global tax structure and its proposals attempt to introduce new rules on taxing rights allocation and distribution. At the same time, some countries have adopted unilateral measures in order to tax some digital businesses. Finally, the European Union Countries continue to delay the adoption of the CCCTB and DST Directive proposals, and the United States has introduced the GILTI legislation that seeks to tax the global intangible income. Everything seems to indicate that in the next years the international tax architecture will be changed in deep.


Author(s):  
Jean-Christophe Bureau ◽  
Luca Salvatici

Abstract This paper provides a summary measure of the possible new commitments in the area of agricultural market access undertaken by the European Union and the United States, using the Trade Restrictiveness Index (TRI) as the tariff aggregator. We take the 2001 bound tariffs as the starting point and attempt to assess how much liberalization in agriculture could be achieved in the European Union and the United States as a result of the present negotiations. We compute the index for 20 agricultural commodity aggregates under the actual commitments assuming a specific functional form for import demand. We compare the present levels of the TRI with three hypothetical cases: a repetition of the same set of tariff cuts commitments of the Uruguay Round according to a EU proposal prior to the 2003 WTO ministerial meeting, a uniform 36% reduction of each tariff, an harmonization ( "Swiss" ) formula based on the initial US proposal.


Author(s):  
Igor Balyuk

The article contains an analysis of the dynamics and structure of the external debt of various countries and groups of countries in the context of the coronavirus pandemic. The authors conclude that at the beginning of 2021, the ratio of external debt to GDP almost reached the level that was noted on the eve of the global financial and economic crisis of 2008-2009. A trigger for a new global crisis may be the exacerbation of problems in one or more segments of the economy of the European Union, Great Britain, the United States, or a number of large developing countries.


2013 ◽  
Vol 781-784 ◽  
pp. 1341-1346
Author(s):  
Ren Yuan Li

The European Union and the United States have imposed different legal management on the genetically modified food. There are some disadvantages in the legal regime of China concerning the management of GMF which make the regal reform on the issue of GMF become necessary. To ensure food safety, China should take the legal regime of EU as reference and raise its standards for the market access of the GMF. The requirements of traceability and labeling for GMF should also be included in law. A centralized governmental department responsible for the issues of GMF should also be established.


2018 ◽  
Vol 21 ◽  
pp. S162
Author(s):  
K. Kloc ◽  
S. Lach ◽  
M. Dusza ◽  
C. Rémuzat ◽  
Y. Sediri ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document