CTA Hails ‘New NAFTA’ Pact, but Public Knowledge Blasts It as Lacking 'Transparency'
CTA joined other tech groups in hailing the trilateral trade agreement the U.S., Canada and Mexico reached over the weekend (see 1810010014), mainly saying it modernizes the North American Free Trade Agreement for the digital era. The Software and Information Industry Association and National Electrical Manufacturers Association also weighed in with their support of the agreement, but Public Knowledge criticized the deal’s intellectual property “chapter” as reflecting “the priorities of major corporate rightsholders while neglecting consumer and public interests.”
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Export Compliance Daily combines U.S. export control news, foreign border import regulation and policy developments into a single daily information service that reliably informs its trade professional readers about important current issues affecting their operations.
The “new NAFTA,” as CTA President Gary Shapiro called the deal Tuesday, “supports America's innovation by reducing barriers to digital trade,” and prevents “discrimination” against U.S. “payment platforms,” said Shapiro. CTA wants the Trump administration to “add guidelines on a balanced approach to copyright” to the agreement so Congress “may vote quickly on this pro-tech trade deal,” he said.
Shapiro urged the administration to use the trade deal with Canada and Mexico as the basis to lift its Trade Act Section 232 tariffs on steel and aluminum imports and negotiate an agreement with China that would end Section 301 tariffs on Chinese imports and China’s retaliatory duties on U.S. goods. “The global marketplace can't thrive with high tariffs," he said.
CTA likes several specific provisions of the deal because it will help the North American tech industry “flourish” in digital trade, it said. The agreement bars duties and “other discriminatory measures” on products distributed electronically, and “ensures cross-border data transfer,” it said.
The deal also lifts “technical barriers to trade,” by recognizing “more international bodies that can set technology standards,” said CTA. Additional terms in the agreement would avoid the need for “duplicative product testing,” and would set “strong provisions for regulatory transparency,” including an “organized approach” that boosts “regulatory alignment and North American cooperation,” it said.
SIIA is “particularly pleased” with the agreement’s “cross-border data flow obligations” and the protections for “source code/algorithms,” among other terms, said Vice President-Public Policy Mark MacCarthy Monday. “With $1.2 trillion in trade at stake, this deal is extremely important. It demonstrates the importance of working with friends and allies and also strengthens America’s hand as it seeks to change Chinese trade and investment practices,” he said.
NEMA “welcomes” the trilateral trade deal because it includes “commitments of material importance to U.S. electroindustry manufacturers, including in the areas of market access, standards and conformity assessment, and regulatory cooperation,” said CEO Kevin Cosgriff Tuesday. NEMA will review terms of the deal with member companies and “industry counterpart organizations,” he said. That assessment will “inform further consultations” with the administration, Congress and other trade groups “in preparation for legislative action to implement the commitments and bring them into force," he said.
But Public Knowledge thinks the trilateral agreement’s IP chapter “would have benefited from a modicum of transparency and public deliberation,” it said Monday. “Instead, the text was written entirely in secret, and only revealed after negotiations concluded, with no apparent room for revisions.” Even some of the administration’s “official advisory committees have been shut out of the process,” it said. It said Congress should revise the Trade Promotion Authority “to guarantee that future trade negotiations are conducted in consultation with all relevant stakeholders, and with a minimum of democratic transparency.” It called the agreement a “missed opportunity to truly adapt NAFTA to the 21st century.”