US Worker Centered Trade Policy Meets Global Competition

The United States has a new chief trade official. Katherine Tai was unanimously confirmed as the next US Trade Representative (basically trade minister). As USTR, Tai is expected to develop and execute US trade policies. The extent to which American policies on trade are adjusting remain to be seen. Thus far, Tai has been relatively quiet on her objectives, speaking only during her confirmation hearing. She has to hire her three deputies and a chief agriculture negotiator who will help flesh out and deliver policies. The early signs, however, suggest that potentially important changes are on the horizon. The key buzz word is that from now on, the US will pursue “worker centered” policies. It remains unclear what “worker centered” actually means. In practice, the phrase is likely to mean different things to different people. It will take cues from long-standing Democratic party objectives to support organized labor and environmental protection. These concerns have been embedded into a series of trade agreements for the United States, including the renegotiated NAFTA or USMCA. Tai took the lead role of shepherding the final USMCA document through Congress and building support from within Capitol Hill for the agreement. Her personal ability to forge bipartisan consensus on renewal helped with her smooth passage into her new role at USTR. US President Biden has suggested that trade agreements are not going to be part of American trade objectives in the near term. This suggests that worker centered policies will need to be anchored in something other than trade deals. Where might they be found? In large measure, it appears through enforcement. The US is likely to be giving extra scrutiny to US trade partners under various free trade agreements (FTAs) and other preference programs. It will also be looking hard at obligations and commitments made at the World Trade Organization (WTO) which have not been pursued with sufficient vigor by members. The US is also likely to change its position on a number of domestic policies. This includes an increasing use of “Buy American” policies and a probable review of US commitments under the WTO’s government procurement agreement and other similar chapters in existing FTAs.

In Asia, especially, many people are also puzzled about how dumping is determined. After all, costs in this region are much lower than costs in North America. If you are just comparing costs of production, Asia could be found “guilty” all the time of dumping. Ah—this gets to an interesting problem with trade remedies. The methods used for determining “guilt” are, indeed, a major issue. When the US argues that it will engage in tougher enforcement, part of what it means is that it will more aggressively pursue trade remedies. Officials will crack down on firms assumed to be dumping stuff into the American market. Expect to hear a lot more about AD and CVD in the coming weeks and months, including more new and novel ways to interpret trade remedies with potentially serious implications for firms.