Senate Finance Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, as he talked about attending the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement signing ceremony, acknowledged that there are a number of steps before the NAFTA replacement can come into force. He said on a Jan. 28 phone call with reporters that he thinks Canada will ratify “probably within the next 30 days,” but then all parties will have to show how they “will be able to carry out their USMCA obligations so that this can enter into force.” Here at home, uniform regulations for the new rules of origin have to be promulgated before the U.S. can certify it's ready for USMCA. Still, Grassley said, Trump will be running his re-election campaign on replacing NAFTA. “I'm glad he can say that, and I'm willing to say it for him, too,” he said. “He likes to brag, and this is legitimately something to brag about.”
International Trade Today is providing readers with some of the top stories for Jan. 13-17 in case they were missed.
An expert panel evaluating the changes associated with the labor chapter under the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement say that there are a lot of unknown details on the rapid response mechanism to enforce complaints about collective bargaining in Mexico. The panel spoke at the Washington International Trade Association on Jan. 16.
The Senate overwhelmingly passed the new NAFTA, though it wasn't by quite as wide a margin as in the House, where more than 95 percent of votes were for the trade pact. The vote, which happened just before the reading of the impeachment articles against President Donald Trump on Jan. 16, was 89-10, with only one Republican voting no. Most of the Democrats who voted no did so because the U.S.-Canada-Mexico Agreement doesn't address climate change.
The Senate Environmental and Public Works Committee sent the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement out of committee on a 16-4 vote, and the Budget Committee moved the implementing bill with a voice vote, though several senators voted no there, as well.
International Trade Today is providing readers with some of the top stories for Jan. 6-10 in case they were missed.
Majority Leader Mitch McConnell told reporters Jan. 14 that the Senate will hold a ratification vote on the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement this week.
Daimler CEO Ola Kallenius told reporters that Mercedes-Benz's transition plan for auto rules of origin under the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement will take three or four years. Kallenius, who was responding to a question from International Trade Today after a Q&A at the Washington Economic Club Jan. 10, did not say explicitly that the carmaker would be applying for the extension, which would require the company to show how Alabama production -- not just Mexican production at its joint venture with Nissan -- will meet the tougher standards. If it will take Mercedes four years to meet the standard, they would need an extension.
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce laid out its priorities for trade in 2020, and most of them were well-known in 2019: getting USMCA passed; ending steel and aluminum tariffs; negotiating comprehensive trade agreements with Japan, the European Union and the United Kingdom. But lesser-known priorities are: ensuring that new regulations on foreign ownership of American firms are focused on national security issues, and arguing for a balanced approach in the regulations from the Export Control Reform Act of 2018 that protect “national security without unduly hindering legitimate commerce.” The Chamber also said Jan. 9 that it wants Congress to approve “permanent normal trade relations with Kazakhstan and its graduation from the Jackson-Vanik amendment to the Trade Act of 1974.”
After the Senate Parliamentarian ruled that six other committees besides Finance need to consider the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement, five of those committees have scheduled hearings or meetings to deal with the implementing bill next week. The Budget and the Environment committees will take it up Jan. 14; the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions and the Commerce committees will take it up Jan. 15; and the Foreign Relations Committee will take it up Jan. 16. If the Appropriations Committee were to also have a hearing next week, a vote could come the following week, but Appropriations has not scheduled a hearing.