|
Issue 1, January/February 2003
Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas
Beyond the Border
Chilean Accord Extends U.S. Free Trade Universe by One
After years of fits and starts on a
free trade agreement between the United States and Chile-the
low point of which was the U.S. Congress' rejection of fast-track
authority for the Clinton administration's efforts-the two
nations finally reached an accord Dec. 11. The agreement is
expected to be signed early this year.
Since implementation of the North American
Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) in 1994, the United States has
been slow to enact similar agreements. U.S. recalcitrance
at trade liberalization with Chile over the last decade has
been particularly striking because Chile's relatively small
population of 15 million and status as only the world's 43rd
largest economy make it a poor candidate for U.S. protectionism.
All of this masks the more general question
of political opposition to freer U.S. trade, inasmuch as the
United States does not trade much to begin with, at least
as a share of gross domestic product (GDP). Of the 171 nations
for which the World Bank collects international trade data,
only five (Sudan, Brazil, Argentina, Japan and Myanmar) trade
less than the United States as a percentage of GDP.
While the current trade agreement with
Chile is a positive event, it temporarily allows continuing
U.S. protectionism in some areas. On the plus side for U.S.
consumers, more than 85 percent of Chilean exports to the
United States will enter duty-free as soon as the treaty goes
into effect. By the fourth year, 94.8 percent of Chilean exports
overall will be duty-free; however, only about three-fourths
of Chilean agricultural exports will enter the United States
duty-free by that time.
The distinction between the overall
opening of trade and the opening of agricultural trade has
been typical of trade agreements not only between the United
States and its trading partners but also between other industrial
countries and their trading partners. For example, while U.S.
trade openings for Chilean consumer and industrial products
occur rather rapidly under the agreement, a 3,500-ton quota
remains for now on Chilean dairy exports to the United States.
The agreement will also allow tariffs
on some Chilean fruits, which are among Chile's most visible
products in the United States, to persist 12 years after the
agreement takes effect. Similarly, the new accord specifies
free trade in wine, but not until 2014. All of this will allow,
some say, plenty of time for U.S. protectionists to devise
new anticompetitive stratagems. Innovative U.S. protectionists
quickly devised political pressures to impede several NAFTA
trade openings-including those on Mexican tomatoes and trucking
services. A dozen years is ample time to conceive of additional
protectionist measures.
On the Chilean side, protectionists
also scored some victories against the lower prices immediate
free trade would bring. A spokesman for the Chilean Ministry
of Agriculture said, "We can categorically affirm that
our nation's production of wheat and beets will remain protected...."
Nevertheless, Chile has long been perceived
as an attractive place for U.S. citizens to do business. Even
though Chile is only the United States' 36th most significant
trading partner, just 22 countries receive more U.S. foreign
direct investment.
These days the rule of law is operative
in Chile. The intellectual property and other legal accords
that are part of the new trade agreement will clearly have
positive effects on some aspects not only of foreign direct
investment but also of portfolio investment, including equities
and debt instruments. According to Transparency International's
Corruption Perceptions Index, Chile is less corrupt than Germany,
Japan or France-to say nothing of a host of other countries.
In any case, it is not a moment too
soon for the United States to finally reach such an accord.
Both Canada and Mexico-the other two partners in NAFTA-signed
free trade agreements with Chile in the 1990s and compete
handily against the United States there as a result. Indeed,
while total merchandise trade between the United States and
Chile between 1995 (the year before the Canada–Chile
free trade agreement was signed) and 2001 rose about 2 percent,
merchandise trade between Chile and Canada surged 66 percent.
Since the beginning of the last decade,
Chile has also signed trade agreements with the European Union,
Central America and South Korea. Since NAFTA, the European
Union has signed more than 30 trade accords. In contrast,
the agreement with Chile is only the second such accord the
United States has reached since signing on to NAFTA. But at
least it's a start.
—William C. Gruben and Sherry
L. Kiser
| About the Authors
Gruben is a vice president
and Kiser is director of international relations
in the Research Department of the Federal Reserve
Bank of Dallas.
About Southwest
Economy
Southwest Economy
is published six times annually by the Federal
Reserve Bank of Dallas. The views expressed are
those of the authors and should not be attributed
to the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas or the Federal
Reserve System.
Articles may be reprinted
on the condition that the source is credited and
a copy is provided to the Research Department
of the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas.
Southwest Economy
is available free of charge by writing the Public
Affairs Department, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas,
P.O. Box 655906, Dallas, TX 75265-5906, or by
telephoning (214) 922-5254. |
|
|