Trade Deficits and U.S. Trade Policy okumak kayıt olmadan

ZIP 9.8 Mb
RAR 7.1 Mb
EXE 6.7 Mb
APK 10.6 Mb
IOS 6.7 Mb
Trade Deficits and U.S. Trade Policy

The economic effects of the U.S. trade deficit have been a topic of long-standing congressional interest. The U.S. Constitution grants authority to Congress to regulate commerce with foreign nations and to lay and collect duties, and Congress exercises this authority in numerous ways. These include oversight of trade policy and consideration of legislation to implement trade agreements and to authorize trade programs. In some cases, Congress has delegated certain authorities over trade policy to the Executive Branch: for example, to facilitate trade negotiations. As part of efforts to examine U.S. trade policy and key trading relationships, Congress and previous Administrations have focused on the trade deficit at times, but generally have not implemented specific measures to lower the trade deficit. Nor has reducing bilateral trade deficits been a major objective in evaluating or negotiating U.S. free trade agreements (FTAs) and implementing trade laws. Previous Administrations rarely linked trade deficits and import tariffs with U.S. national security. The Trump Administration, however, is using the U.S. trade deficit as a barometer for evaluating the success or failure of the global trading system, U.S. trade policy, and bilateral trade relations with various countries. It also characterizes the trade deficit as harming the performance and national security of the U.S. economy. The Trump Administration’s approach contrasts with the views of most economists, who argue that the overall U.S. trade deficit stems from U.S. macroeconomic policies that create a savings and investment imbalance in which domestic sources of capital are not sufficient to meet domestic capital demands. As such, attempting to alter the trade deficit without addressing the underlying macroeconomic issues will likely be counterproductive and create distortions in the economy. Some analysts argue that trade agreements play an important role in the U.S. trade deficit; they contend the agreements have failed to provide U.S. exporters with reciprocal treatment or have exposed U.S. producers to increased competition. Most economists, however, question both the role that trade agreements play in determining the trade deficit and the position that the trade deficit is substantially the product of unfair treatment. The Trump Administration’s approach does not rule out the possibility that some countries may not be fully abiding by international trade agreements and rules, or may be maintaining certain trade barriers. Such actions may distort market performance and erode public support for the international trade system. As a result, addressing these issues and continuing to negotiate new agreements to remove trade barriers are likely to have benefits by improving efficiency and creating a level playing field in the global trading system. Nevertheless, given the macroeconomic origins of the trade deficit, as is generally accepted, addressing such distortions may alter the composition of U.S. trade among trading partners and commodities, but would be unlikely to affect the overall U.S. trade deficit. Most economists also question the role the trade deficit plays in affecting jobs, wages, and the distribution of income in the U.S. economy. One concern expressed by economists and others is the debt accumulation associated with sustained trade deficits. . Most economists contend that as a whole, both consumers and producers benefit from liberalized trade and that the gains for the economy as a whole outweigh the costs, irrespective of the bilateral trade deficit or surplus. Most economists argue that the economy operates more efficiently as a result of competition through international trade. They also contend that trade may have a long-term positive dynamic effect on an economy that enhances both production and employment.


Biçim seçin
pdf kindle epub doc
yazar
Boyutlar ve boyutlar
Tarafından yayınlandı

15,2 x 0,6 x 22,9 cm 31 Ağustos 2012 21,6 x 0,6 x 27,9 cm NAN RIEWALDT Icon Group International 1 Ocak 2013 25 Mayıs 2010 20,3 x 0,4 x 26 cm Aeryn Cartwright 3 Haziran 2009 21,6 x 0,2 x 27,9 cm 29 Ağustos 2009 20,3 x 0,2 x 26 cm N&S Collection Gerardus Blokdyk Kolektif 20,3 x 0,3 x 26 cm 28 Şubat 2018
okumak okumak kayıt olmadan
Sürüm ayrıntıları
yazar Congressional Research Service
isbn 10 1722359269
isbn 13 978-1722359263
Yayımcı CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform; CRS Report R45243. baskı
Dilim İngilizce
Boyutlar ve boyutlar 21,6 x 0,2 x 27,9 cm
Tarafından yayınlandı Trade Deficits and U.S. Trade Policy 5 Temmuz 2018

En son kitaplar

benzer kitaplar

Brazil: Political and Economic Situation and U.S. Relations (CRS Reports)


okumak kayıt olmadan
U.S.-UK Free Trade Agreement: Prospects and Issues for Congress


okumak kayıt olmadan
Jordan: Background and U.S. Relations


okumak kayıt olmadan
Argentina: Background and U.S. Relations


okumak kayıt olmadan
Ukraine: Background and U.S. Policy


okumak kayıt olmadan
Guam: U.S. Defense Deployments (CRS Reports)


okumak kayıt olmadan