Jacob Kopnick

Outside the most complicated issues to be implemented as part of the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement, such as rules of origin, CBP also sees new “opportunities that are touched on in the agreement,” said Brenda Smith, executive assistant commissioner of CBP’s Office of Trade, during a Jan. 29 interview. “For example, there's some guidance around establishing single windows, there are opportunities for us to validate through site visits compliance with all customs laws and that's a much broader scope than it was before,” she said. President Donald Trump signed the implementing bill into law the same day, though Canada still must give its final approval, and implementing actions must be completed by all countries before USMCA can take effect.

The tariffs on billions of dollars worth of European goods because the World Trade Organization found the EU illegally subsidized Airbus puts Europe in a position where it will need to take similar action, assuming the WTO rules that state tax credits for Boeing also distorted trade. “This is where I don't want to be,” European Union Commissioner Phil Hogan said during a press roundtable with reporters late Jan. 16.

The joint statement on how to confront Chinese abuses through the World Trade Organization (see 2001140044) has been the highlight of the first visit to Washington by Phil Hogan, the new European Union Trade Commissioner. Hogan, who spoke to the Center for Strategic and International Studies Jan. 16, acknowledged that the WTO doesn't have the capacity to act on these ideas “quickly enough.”

Senate Finance Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, said he's been told it's going to take three or four days for six other Senate committees to clear the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement so that it can go to the floor for a vote. Whether it can come up the week of Jan. 21 will depend on whether the articles of impeachment have arrived by then, he noted.

It will be easier to bring a labor case under the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement than it was in previous trade deals, but several particulars remain undisclosed. There will be expedited labor enforcement that “provides for facility-based enforcement,” and if independent labor experts find that collective bargaining rights weren't honored at particular factories, it will “lead to penalties,” a summary of the changes to USMCA says. But what those penalties are is not mentioned, and members of the House Ways and Means Committee and Senate Finance Committee said they don't know what they are, as no other details beyond the memo have been shared. A Ways and Means spokeswoman and trade staffer did not answer questions.

Democrats in the House insisted that their ideas about how to verify compliance with Mexico's labor laws is a balanced one that respects their sovereignty. Chief Mexican negotiator on USMCA, Jesus Seade, wrote a column published Dec. 4 that said, in Spanish, that there will be no “transnational inspectors,” even though the U.S. has pushed so much for that approach. "If the U.S. stops insisting on the pair of unacceptable ideas that the [Mexican trade group CCE] statement yesterday speaks of, we can soon have a treaty, and a very good treaty," he wrote (see 1912030033). He said that the state-to-state dispute settlement system, broken in NAFTA, "will now be 100% repaired, for all topics and sectors under the treaty."

Trade observers don't think that the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative will announce new tariffs on French products on Dec. 2, when it is scheduled to release a report on France's Digital Services Tax (see 1911270047), but there may be a list of potential targets for the future. Although the tax passed the French legislature in July, it has not been levied while U.S. and French authorities negotiate, and while the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development works on a global approach to taxing companies like Google, Facebook and others.

Although the U.S. trade representative found a way to avoid a congressional vote on a U.S.-Japan trade deal by limiting the size of the initial U.S. tariff reductions, Democrats on the Ways and Means Committee are questioning whether the deal is allowed under the fast-track law. A letter sent Nov. 26, led by Rep. Bill Pascrell, D-N.J., and signed by every Democrat on the committee except the chairman and Rep. John Lewis, D-Ga., did not explicitly say that Democrats believe the law is not being followed, but repeatedly asked under what authority the agreement was reached. Among the specific issues raised were rules of origin or marking rules and whether there would be changes. The letter also asked if there is such a provision, why wasn't it mentioned in the notification to Congress.

House Democrats and the administration have gotten close enough on what the edits to the new NAFTA should be that they have narrowed differences to three, “maybe two and a half," the Ways and Means Committee chairman said Nov. 21. Chairman Richard Neal, D-Mass., had just exited a meeting with U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and Neal said that at the beginning of the meeting, there were five issues separating them.

When the Ways and Means Trade Subcommittee held a hearing on the U.S.-Japan mini-deal, the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative declined to send anyone to testify. Rep. Ron Kind, D-Wis., one of the biggest boosters of free trade in the Democratic caucus, said that absence represents “the disdain the current administration has" for Congress, and its role in setting trade policy. He predicted that "this will have serious ramifications for the next time" Congress has a vote on fast-track authority.