Snap Insight: Trump’s reciprocal tariffs put Asia’s history of trade openness at risk

By:
On:
In: Asia

Chance AND IMPORTANCE OF Buying WITH US

However, the letter from Mr. Trump goes even further to combine five different groups into a final “tariff”: current levels of tariffs on US products, unfair taxes ( such as value-added and goods and services taxes ), costs for US businesses and consumers from other government’s policies, subsidies and transfer rates, and any other practices the US business representative’s company deems unfair.

A comprehensive report released on April 1 will address all of these issues, opening the door for the introduction of new bilateral taxes as soon as April 2.

It is almost impossible to determine the effects of this new plan beyond superficiality. The US has modified the latest trading method that has been in place since the 1940s. The rest of the world must decide whether to reject financial integration or observe America’s example, it is obvious that the US is only interested in punitive trade policies.

Reciprocious tariffs have given deal with the United States the most uncertainty. There is simply no way to anticipate the ultimate price that any item from any business partner might encounter at the borders.

It may be that specific countries, industries or firms rarely have a mutual tariff applied. Or it might be that diligent conversations won’t be enough to halt fresh accusations.

Asia has a rich history of openness and trade, which has helped to fuel regional economic development. This is probably at hazard in the midst of Mr Trump’s latest activities. A fresh roulette wheel of tax applications will be very difficult to use.

Deborah Elms, the leader of the Asian Trade Center, is the mind of business plan at the Hinrich Foundation.

Continue Reading

Commentary: Why low inflation in China is no cause for applause

By:
On:
In: Asia

PBOC Governor Yi Gang didn’t seem too troubled during a recent speech to the Peterson Institute for International Economics in Washington. He observed that for the past decade, inflation in China has averaged 2 per cent, a level targeted in some way by most monetary authorities. “Two per cent is the central banker’s dream,” Yi quipped.

PBOC HAS TO ACT NOW 

In a note this week, Bank of America assessed the prospects of deflation in China. While a sustained decline in prices is unlikely, inflation will remain very muted. The firm’s economists note Japan’s inflation is higher than its Asian neighbour, with all the attendant risks that brings:

“It almost appears that when major central banks find it hard to tame the inflation beast, the PBOC would have ranked high on the scorecard for inflation control … However, a central bank’s mandate is not likely supposed to push inflation down as much as possible.

“When inflation is too low, the lack of confidence in consumer spending and business expenditure could lead to further growth slowdown, making deflationary expectation permanent and incapacitating monetary policy intervention. Relative to the 3 per cent target set by the National People’s Congress, sub-1 per cent CPI inflation is perhaps too low.”

Haruhiko Kuroda, who retired last month after 10 years leading the Bank of Japan, might agree. Kuroda often sounded like he wasn’t trying to reflate an economy as much as change psychology. He often complained about a “deflationary mindset”. If Yi isn’t thinking about this, he should be.

Unlike his counterparts, the PBOC chief isn’t remotely master of his own destiny. The agency isn’t independent and key decisions need to be walked upstairs. It may not be enough to just signal a commitment to maintaining the recovery. Some action may be needed.

It would be too bad if China let this recovery drift. The stakes are too high.

Continue Reading

Commentary: With Trump topping presidential polls, deja vu hangs over US-led trade talks in Singapore

By:
On:
In: Asia

Business community support, even for an agreement that contains more understandings than binding agreements, will result in IPEF partners becoming more inclined to implement an agreement. While the business community can invest regardless of IPEF surviving the next election, a sustainable IPEF brings needed scale and intensity of investment.

SINGAPORE WEEK CRITICAL FOR IPEF

The IPEF negotiators have a tougher task than usual. They must reach an agreement that provides not just a win-win, but a win 14 times. And they must do it such that a change in US administration after the framework has been agreed upon will not cause the “new” government to abandon any outcomes.  

As an agreement like IPEF has little chance of getting concluded during next year’s US presidential campaign, the four pillars need to be closed this year. This will be a heavy lift under the best of circumstances.

No one wants a TPP repeat. While a formal mechanism may not be easily available, the IPEF negotiators need to think about implementation, enforceability and follow-through.

For the agreement to straddle a change in governments, it must be clear on what the implementation obligations are, for instance, what should be incorporated into domestic law such that it’s difficult for new governments to make changes.

The negotiators have a critical question to grapple with this week: What sort of vehicle should IPEF be such that it has a higher chance of survival?

Not only will the negotiators be dealing with each other in answering this question, they need to do so with the proverbial 800-pound orange gorilla in the room as well.

Steven R Okun is CEO of Singapore-headquartered APAC Advisors, Senior Adviser for global strategic consultancy McLarty Associates and Chair of the AmChams of Asia Pacific. He served in the Clinton administration as Deputy General Counsel at the US Department of Transportation.

Continue Reading