Which of the following Characteristics Relates to the North American Free Trade Agreement (Nafta)
The legislation was drafted under President George H. W. Bush as the first phase of his Enterprise for the Americas initiative. The Clinton administration, which signed NAFTA in 1993, believed it would create 200,000 jobs in the United States within two years and 1 million within five years, as exports play an important role in U.S. economic growth. The government expected a dramatic increase in U.S. imports from Mexico due to lower tariffs. The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) was implemented to promote trade between the United States, Canada and Mexico. The agreement, which eliminated most tariffs on trade between the three countries, entered into force on 1 January 1994.
Many tariffs, notably on agriculture, textiles and automobiles, were phased out between 1 January 1994 and 1 January 2008. NAFTA has not eliminated regulatory requirements for companies wishing to trade internationally, such as . B rules of origin and documentation requirements that determine whether certain goods may be traded under NAFTA. The free trade agreement also includes administrative, civil and criminal penalties for companies that violate the laws or customs procedures of the three countries. The debate on the impact of NAFTA on signatory countries continues. While the U.S., Canada, and Mexico have all experienced economic growth, higher wages, and increased trade since nafta`s introduction, experts disagree on the extent to which the agreement has actually contributed to these gains, if any, in U.S. manufacturing jobs, immigration, and consumer goods prices. The results are difficult to isolate, and over the past quarter century, other important developments have taken place on the continent and around the world.
President Donald Trump promised during the election campaign to repeal NAFTA and other trade agreements that he considered unfair to the United States. On August 27, 2018, he announced a new trade agreement with Mexico to replace him. The U.S.-Mexico trade agreement, as it was called, would maintain duty-free access for agricultural products on both sides of the border and remove non-tariff barriers to trade, while further promoting agricultural trade between Mexico and the United States and effectively replacing NAFTA. NAFTA had three major advantages. U.S. food prices declined due to duty-free imports from Mexico. Oil imported from Canada and Mexico prevented gasoline prices from rising. NAFTA has also boosted trade and economic growth in all three countries. About one-quarter of all U.S. imports, such as crude oil, machinery, gold, vehicles, fresh produce, livestock and processed foods, come from Canada and Mexico.
which are the second and third largest suppliers of imported goods to the United States. In addition, about one-third of U.S. exports, particularly machinery, vehicle parts, mineral fuels and plastics, go to Canada and Mexico. What is clear is that NAFTA remains a lightning rod for political views on globalization and free trade in general. Opposition to NAFTA has grown and made it much more politically difficult to adopt other similar free trade agreements. This was clearly demonstrated in the summer of 2005, when the Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA) stagnated in Congress due to a lack of support. Two journalists, Dawn Gilbertson and Jonathan J. Higuera, who wrote on the occasion of the tenth anniversary of NAFTA in the Republic of Arizona, summed it up as follows: “The reality of NAFTA at 10 years is this: a story of winners and losers that depends largely on where you work and what you do.” The same goes for the impact of NAFTA on small businesses. For some, it was an opportunity to grow and for others a challenge. Additional ancillary arrangements have been made to address concerns about the potential impact of the Treaty on the labour market and the environment.
Critics feared that low wages in Mexico would attract U.S. and Canadian companies, leading to a relocation of production to Mexico and a rapid decline in manufacturing jobs in the U.S. and Canada. Environmentalists, meanwhile, have worried about the potentially catastrophic effects of Mexico`s rapid industrialization, as the country has no experience in implementing and enforcing environmental regulations. Potential environmental issues were addressed in the North American Convention on Environmental Cooperation (NAAEC), which established the Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC) in 1994. Fourth, NAFTA has established procedures to resolve trade disputes. The parties would begin with a formal discussion, followed by a discussion at a meeting of the Free Trade Commission, if necessary. If the disagreement was not resolved, a committee reviewed the dispute. The process allowed all parties to avoid costly lawsuits in local courts and helped them interpret the complex rules and procedures of NAFTA. This protection against trade disputes also applied to investors.
Sixth, the agreement allowed business travelers easy access to all three countries. U.S. Department of Commerce. Census Bureau, foreign trade statistics. “New updates to 2005 data.” Available from www.census.gov/foreign-trade/statistics/. Retrieved 17 April 2006. One of the most important provisions of NAFTA provided for the status of “domestic goods” for products imported from other NAFTA countries. No state, provincial or local government could impose taxes or duties on these goods. In addition, tariffs were eliminated at the time of the agreement or should be phased out in 5 or 10 equal steps.
The only exception to expiration was the specified sensitive points, for which the expiration period would be 15 years. The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) was inspired by the success of the European Economic Community (1957-93) in eliminating tariffs to boost trade among its members. Proponents argued that establishing a free trade area in North America would bring prosperity through more trade and production, resulting in the creation of millions of well-paying jobs in all participating countries. Controversy over the treaty`s environmental protection provisions remained strong in the late 1990s. In fact, North American trade interests have sought to weaken an important NAFTA side agreement on environmental protection and enforcement. The agreement – one of the few provisions welcomed by environmental groups – allows groups and ordinary citizens to accuse member states of not enforcing their own environmental legislation. .