Hinrich Foundation

The Final ATC Talking Trade

The Final ATC Talking Trade

It was an exciting time to be in the region.  Governments were enthusiastically signing up to a wide variety of trade agreements.  For example, Laos completed accession procedures to become the 158th member of the World Trade Organization (WTO).  We were in Bhutan for two workshops to support a renewed consideration of joining the WTO.  We also had several training activities in Timor Leste with members of Parliament and across the government to support accession to the WTO in conjunction with plans to become part of ASEAN.  Mongolia, the last WTO member to not have a free trade agreement (FTA), asked for training to complete an FTA with Japan. ASEAN itself was rapidly pursuing greater internal integration, with plans for the ASEAN Economic Community (AEC) pushed forward from 2020 to 2015.  It was also working on a range of agreements called ASEAN+1s with major powers in the region including Australia, China, India, Japan, New Zealand, and South Korea.  There was also a lot of activity to integrate Asia more closely to the rest of the world.  The first meeting in what would become the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) took place in Singapore on the sidelines of APEC.  The TPP, as regular Talking Trade readers will recall, rapidly expanded and finally concluded in 2014.  The European Union was actively involved in working with members of ASEAN to create an eventual bloc-to-bloc agreement, starting with a bilateral FTA with Singapore.

Digital Trade Supports Economic Development

Digital Trade Supports Economic Development

Perceiving the digital sphere as winner-takes-all leads to an incorrect assessment of the market forces shaping the digital economy and suboptimal policy responses. In particular, the suggestion that developing countries should enact technology transfer, data localization, and internet filtering requirements, or force the breakup of large e-commerce firms, ignores both the benefits of these platforms to development and the potential consequences of pushing platforms out of small markets. Instead, governments should focus on creating an enabling environment for MSMEs to pursue digitalization, enacting regulation that encourages firms to leverage digital tools for growth and development. For MSMEs, there are several key reasons participating in digital platforms can beneficial. Firstly, digital platforms increase visibility for participating MSMEs, as large platforms are accessed by large numbers of customers. Participation in digital platforms contributes to lowering operational costs, as economies of scale and their marketing abilities reduce the burden of logistics, payment methods, and marketing on individual firms participating in the platform. For example, a small firm may struggle to navigate customs rules when engaging in cross-border trade, adding risk and increasing costs. E-commerce platforms with sufficient scale and expertise can easily navigate the complexities of cross-border trade, reducing costs for participating MSMEs. This has enabled the emergence a growing number of ‘micro-multinationals’ in the Asia-Pacific region, wherein small business engages in cross-border e-commerce. A further benefit in participating in platforms for MSMEs is access to their analytics capabilities and optimization programs. Using data analytics to collect information about customer preferences, MSMEs can leverage the platform’s data to optimize offerings to customers. Digital platforms, like any other business, are profit-seeking. But this does not mean that this profit-seeking behavior functions to stifle MSME growth or development. Instead, the opposite is true. Platforms tend to push capacity-building efforts to enable MSMEs to participate in their platforms, unlocking new growth opportunities. For example, Meta, Amazon, Gojek, and Flipkart offer training, advisory services, and more to MSMEs to boost capacities to participate in their platforms. From this arrangement, the companies benefit from an increased number of suppliers, and MSMEs unlock new growth opportunities, increasing access customer pools and addressing key barriers to growth.

Competition in the Digital Sphere

Competition in the Digital Sphere

In the tech industry, first-movers often come to occupy large market shares, potentially leading to a natural monopoly in the given market. Firms might also vertically and horizontally integrate, acquiring other businesses in pursuit of efficiency gains or a competitive edge. Though maybe a red flag for competition regulators, whether such efforts by digital platforms cause measureable harms to consumers is not always easy to determine. At its heart, competition regulation seeks to limit the harms of monopoly – limited choice, high prices, and lack of innovation. This is done with the aim of maximizing consumer welfare. Regulators, in pursuing digital platforms, believe that they are doing just that. But platforms, even those that are very large, rarely fit neatly into the monopoly box. Platforms might offer unpriced services to users, and competitors are just a click away. Further, the pace of innovation is often break-neck. Firms that do not change with the times quickly lose market share – evidenced by the fact that the tech landscape of today is vastly different from even five years ago. Despite the unique nature of tech markets, competition regulation is generally pursued with traditional regulatory tools. But this leads to insufficiently dissuasive enforcement actions, with litigation processes that move slowly compared to the pace of change in the digital economy. Whether these efforts to rein in digital platforms actually boost consumer welfare – which should be a guiding question for regulators – is unclear. This is especially true where digital platforms ‘disrupt’ traditional markets with low prices, efficiency gains, and innovation.

Trade and Tax in a Digital World

Trade and Tax in a Digital World

Neither trade nor tax are new issues. What is new are the types of challenges that digital trade poses to revenue collection. As the digital economy has grown significantly, governments have watched with increasing dismay as taxes have not been collected from a steeply growing volume of transactions. Fiscal pressures in the wake of pandemic spending have accelerated the quest to appropriately tax companies and purchases made in the digital or online environment. The rise of the digital economy has complicated the traditional tax environment. Firms can be located anywhere and provide goods and services online to suppliers, vendors and customers in places without any need for a physical presence. The digital economy allows firms to scale up substantially at often minimal direct costs, creating a small set of super firms generating outsized profits. Such technology or digital firms present tempting targets for cash-strapped governments looking for revenue. However, it is not just large firms that can take advantage of new ways to find customers. A vital aspect of the digital economy is how it enables even the smallest companies to engage in cross-border trade. Firms that might never have been tempted to trade outside their own villages are increasingly finding key markets halfway around the globe. In short, there are at least four important ways that the digital economy has affected traditional tax systems: by allowing firms to compete in markets without a physical presence; by the proliferation of approaches, mostly used by large firms, to more carefully manage tax; companies that can operate with no or minimal presence; and by the participation in cross-border trade by companies previously not engaged in such transactions. Our latest paper, published this week with the Hinrich Foundation as part of the ongoing series on digital trade issues in Asia, highlights some of the current and upcoming issues of digital tax under both direct and indirect tax collection schemes.

Digital Trade in the Asia-Pacific: 8 Issues for 2021 and Beyond

Digital Trade in the Asia-Pacific: 8 Issues for 2021 and Beyond

In the earliest days, the digital economy flourished with extremely limited regulatory oversight. While this might sound like an ideal environment for companies, most prefer to operate within a set of clearly defined basic rules. The alternative can be sudden and unanticipated regulatory and legal changes that can upend business models overnight. As the portions of the economy driven by digital technology have continued to expand and as digital connectivity has increased, governments have increasingly been grappling with the appropriate ways to allow digital trade to grow while restraining harms that might flow to consumers and businesses. Effective management of the regulatory and policy environment to facilitate digital trade will become one of the most important aspects of trade policy in 2021 and beyond. The Covid-19 pandemic and associated lockdowns and trade disruption have up-ended many longstanding business models. Firms are rapidly shifting to develop or expand digital capabilities to manage highly altered supply and demand pressures. The adjustment to digital tools applies to both large and small firms and has increasingly filtered to include citizens around the globe. An online presence can make the difference for companies between survival and extinction. Despite the growing importance of digital trade, the ability of governments to tackle a range of issues of relevance to managing the online environment still lags behind the speed of innovation for firms. Domestic-level regulatory and legal adjustments to better accommodate digital trade can be complicated. Negotiations between governments to ensure greater consistency in policy frameworks are often time-consuming to complete. By the time policy settings adjust, the commercial environment could appear quite different. Headed into 2021 and beyond, there are at least eight topics that are likely to be on the radar for government officials working on digital trade. The Asian Trade Centre, with generous support from the Hinrich Foundation, has launched a series of papers, Asia in the Digital Economy, to more carefully examine new and emerging issues in digital trade in 2021.