Guest Post: Deep sea salvage – raising TPP?

by | Mar 10, 2017 | Trade Working Blog | 0 comments

Remove

Guest post from Tracey Epps, Trade Law Consultant, Chapman Tripp.

A meeting of Asia Pacific economies in picturesque Viña del Mar, Chile, 14-15 March, will consider the path forward for trade liberalisation in the Asia-Pacific region.   New Zealand along with the original signatories of the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) will be in attendance, along with China, South Korea and Colombia.

The US will be represented by their Ambassador to Chile.  The summit will provide an opportunity, among other things, for the TPP signatories to consider the Agreement’s future.

One option which has already been mooted is the idea of a TPP minus the US (potentially with the addition of other countries). I have previously suggested that the 11 TPP partners consider re-signing the Agreement as it stands, but agree not to enforce some of the more controversial provisions until agreed otherwise.

This could preserve TPP’s attractiveness to the US for future accession, while helping to address concerns about concessions made in return for access to the US market.

But let’s for a moment consider what a renegotiation would involve. For starters, the entry into force clause would require amending. A critical mass would most likely be desired, and this could be achieved in various ways, such as a revised GDP threshold, an explicit requirement for certain countries (e.g. Japan) to ratify, or a simple numerical threshold (e.g. ratification of five signatories).

But what of the substance of the Agreement?

There are some fairly obvious national interests reflected in the text and a renegotiation would likely involve removing or revising those provisions that most strongly reflect US interests. A starting list might include various provisions found in the Intellectual Property chapter (such as copyright, biologics, patent linkage, patent term extension and technological protection measures), the Health Care Transparency annex and the State-Owned Enterprises chapter. The list might also include the application of dispute settlement to the Labour and Environment chapters, the application of “investor state dispute settlement’ (ISDS) to investment authorisations and investment agreements, the design of the temporary safeguard measures provision and the provision for textiles and apparel emergency actions.

In addition, there would be the possibility of some signatories wanting to renegotiate provisions that appear mundane on the face of it but that have particular significance to them.

Then there is the question of market access. Is there any realistic chance that the more reticent signatories would agree to liberalise further or faster in the US’ absence, (and in doing so, put pressure on the US in any future accession negotiations), or is there a risk that the US’ absence would have the opposite effect?

In short, there would be many complexities to a renegotiation – in some cases countries may readily agree to remove or revise a provision, but it would not be so simple if a provision reflected more than US interests. This is not to suggest that a renegotiation ought not to occur, but it does speak to the importance of carefully defining any renegotiation agenda to ensure that we are not dragged into a quagmire from which we might only emerge in time to find that President Trump has been succeeded and the US is back in the game.

Raising TPP from its submerged state is no simple matter. All the better to get this work underway in a Chilean sea-side resort.

0 Comments

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

REGISTER WITH TRADE WORKS

Register to stay up to date with latest news, as well as saving and discussing articles you’re interested in.

 

Remove

 

Latest News

LAMENTATION DAY

When President Trump spoke in the White House Rose Garden to launch his wrecking-ball “fair and reciprocal tariffs”, there were some in the audience wearing hard hats.  While this was doubtless to show support for the move amongst hard-working Americans, maybe...

BUSINESS FORUM WELCOMES INDIA FTA NEGOTIATIONS

Media release, 17 March 2025 The NZ International Business Forum (NZIBF) welcomes the launch of free trade negotiations with India, announced in Delhi, and is particularly pleased that these will proceed on a comprehensive basis. “There is enormous value to be gained...

Playing the long trade game with India

Prime Minister Luxon is at last making his visit to India with a large business and community delegation.  We wish them well in expanding and deepening the relationship with India.  The reasons for doing so we have explained previously. Our Government’s...

SUBMISSION TO THE MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS AND TRADE

PROPOSED GREEN ECONOMY JOINT WORKING GROUP WITH CHILE AND SINGAPORE MARCH 2025 Introduction This submission is made on behalf of the New Zealand International Business Forum (NZIBF), whose members are listed at Annex A[1]. NZIBF is a forum of senior business leaders...

SOUTHERN LINK REVISITED SEMINAR, SEPT 2024

On 24 September 2024 a stakeholders seminar was held in Auckland to reassess the Southern Link concept, five years after a large conference kickstarted focused discussion of the idea (before Covid intervened).   This report of the seminar discussions...

T Day has come

STOP PRESS – NOT SO FAST.  This post deals with the tariffs President Trump announced on 1 February he would impose on Canada, Mexico and China.  By 4 February he announced imposition of tariffs on Canada and Mexico would be suspended for 30 days (until 5 March). ...