Trade and Investment Archives

USCIB Sponsors National Governors Association North American Summit

Published on May 8, 2018
From left to right: CEO of Rassini Eugenio Madero; USCIB VP for Trade and Financial Services Shaun Donnelly; Woodrow Wilson Institute and former US Ambassador to Mexico Tony Wayne; National Restaurant Association Senior VP Steve Danon

USCIB was an organizational sponsor for the National Governor Association (NGA) North American Summit in Scottsdale, Arizona, which was held May 4-6. USCIB Vice President for Investment Policy and Financial Services Shaun Donnelly represented USCIB at the weekend event. The NGA welcomed Mexican Governors and Canadian provincial premiers to the North American Summit, which focused on strengthening North American economic integration and competitiveness in today’s and tomorrow’s global economy.

“The good news is that governors, across the three nations of North America, get it!” said Donnelly. “Open trade and investment gets broad bipartisan support across the political spectrum of governors and premiers. They welcome trade and investment and they welcome business comments and recommendations at these sessions. Obviously, NAFTA, and the on-going negotiations to update that key agreement, were key areas of discussion.”

Business speakers from the three countries were united in urging governors across all three countries, particularly in the U.S., to be strong advocates for a strong updated NAFTA with their national governments at this key moment in the negotiations.

USCIB member company representatives were also present and active at the NGA Summit with UPS, Walmart, and Squire Patton Boggs executives among the formal speakers/panelists to the Governors; CenturyLink was another active participant in the corridors. Former Canadian Foreign Minister Perrin Beatty, CEO of USCIB’s Canadian counterpart organization the Canadian Chamber was another clear pro-NAFTA, pro-business panelist in his presentation to the assembled governors.

Donnelly commented, “I come away from this NGA weekend with some key governors from across North America very encouraged that they really understand and support NAFTA and importance of an integrated, competitive North American economy/marketplace going forward. At this trilateral Summit, I saw none of the partisanship and anti-trade grand-standing we see so much of in Washington these days. The coming weeks will be critical for the fate of NAFTA and America’s governors, of wither party, can be important allies in convincing the Administration and, then down the road, the Congress to do the right thing…….and not to do the wrong thing on NAFTA.”

World Trade Week NYC Celebrates Gotham’s Export Champs

Published on May 8, 2018
Cheryl Moore of the New York Genome Center

USCIB is a longtime partner in the annual World Trade Week festivities in New York City. World Trade Week, a celebration of international commerce in cities across the United States, was launched by President Franklin Delano Roosevelt and brings together trade champions and companies of all sizes to mark the critical importance of cross-border commerce in promoting American competitiveness and global leadership.

World Trade Week NYC 2018 – despite the name, actually a full month of events and activities – kicked off this week with a high-level awards breakfast hosted by the Weissman Center for International Business at Baruch College, part of the City University of New York. Among the award honorees was the New York Genome Center, whose president and COO Cheryl Moore also served as the breakfast keynote speaker, providing an overview of New York’s efforts to foster growth in the life sciences industries.

Other businesses recognized for export success included Magnetic Analysis Corp., Innodata, Inc. and Classic Rug Collection, Inc. Empire State Development’s Global NY initiative was also honored, as was Irving A. Williamson, a member of the U.S. International Trade Commission, who was presented with a lifetime achievement award.

USCIB Vice President Jonathan Huneke served on the steering committee for World Trade Week NYC 2018. For a full list of World Trade Week events in and around New York City, click here.

Mulligan Joins BIAC to Push for Business Priorities at OECD

Published on May 4, 2018

USCIB Senior Vice President for Policy and Government Affairs Rob Mulligan was in Paris the last week of April attending Business at OECD (BIAC) and OECD Trade Committee meetings, which included dialogues with several OECD officials, including Director of the OECD Trade Directorate Ken Ash, OECD Deputy Secretary General Mari Kiviniemi, Head of the OECD Investment Division Ana Novik, and Head of the OECD Services Trade Division John Drummond, among others.

“BIAC’s meetings were integral in getting the business community on the same page regarding several issues, including possible accession to the OECD by Argentina, Brazil, Peru, Croatia, Romania and Bulgaria, BIAC’s upcoming work with B20 Argentina on joint meetings later this month in Paris, as well as the OECD release of a Trade Facilitation publication this summer,” noted Mulligan.

According to Mulligan, BIAC members also discussed BIAC talking points on the OECD’s draft Program of Work and Budget for 2019-20 (PWB), providing suggestions for inclusion of services trade, de-minimis, overcapacity, digital trade, cybersecurity, customs simplification for SMEs, trade distortions, international regulatory cooperation, and government procurement.  These were in addition to the points based on the BIAC Trade as a Priority for All paper approved by the Committee last year. At a subsequent OECD Trade Committee Meeting later that week, member countries provided feedback to the secretariat about the draft PWB and BIAC, represented by its Chair Cliff Sosnow, noting the areas it would like to see the committee focus on during this cycle, which aligned with many of the areas BIAC had suggested.  However, BIAC noted that the PWB did not seem to include further work on localization requirements and state-owned enterprises that continue to be key areas of concern for its members and encouraged the OECD to include this in their work plans going forward.

Mulligan also had the opportunity to attend the BIAC Roundtable on Data Localization, Digital Trade and Market Openness which enabled a dialogue among the 25 people around the table. Ash, who recently met with the Japanese business group Keidanren, emphasized his desire to understand the realities of business and digital trade issues and noted Keidanren’s plans to make digital trade a focus when they host G20/B20 in 2019.

Mulligan then joined Pat Ivory of the Irish Business Federation Ibec, in their capacities as vice chairs of the BIAC Trade Committee to provide overviews on the BIAC digital trade priorities.

“Members are increasingly voicing concerns about data localization requirements related to the impact on cybersecurity and the conflicts they can cause for highly regulated industries,” stressed Mulligan. “The impact of rapidly changing technology and the need for regulators to take approaches to digital trade that do not end up restricting trade, stifling innovation, and undercutting economic growth.”

BIAC members noted challenges they deal with when assessing where to do business and suggested that localization requirements that can increase security risks in some developing countries and can make it less likely for them to do business there.

Donnelly Speaks Up for Business at UN Trade Meetings

Published on May 1, 2018
Shaun Donnelly

USCIB Vice President for Investment Policy Shaun Donnelly single-handedly represented the views of the business community at last week’s meetings of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) Working Group III on Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS).  The week-long meetings at UN Headquarters in New York were, according to Donnelly, “a painstaking death march through a draft UNCITRAL document on real or perceived problems with the existing ISDS system.” Eighty UN member governments (sixty of whom serve terms as full UNCITRAL members, plus 20 observer governments) were generally critical of the current systems and numerous NGO observers were always happy to chime in to attack ISDS investment arbitration and businesses which use those protections, reported Donnelly.

It fell to a relative handful of government delegations plus Donnelly and one European business representative, as well as fellow observer representatives from leading law and arbitration bodies such as the American Bar Association,  the American Society of International Law, and the American Arbitration Association to defend the well-established ISDS arbitration system.

“Clearly ISDS is under assault from NGOs and many developing countries,” said Donnelly. “The European Union and its member states are pushing hard for early negotiations on a new permanent multilateral investment court to replace the whole ISDS system.” Donnelly and other observers continued to emphasize in formal interventions and in corridor conversations with key delegations the proven strengths of the current ISDS system and, by implication, serious problems with some of the more state-dominated “reform” proposals.

“Frankly, it’s frustrating, “ Donnelly said, “to see UNCITRAL and many of its member governments so intent on rushing hell-bent to replace a proven system of independent, expert arbitrators to resolve complex investment disputes. Ideas from the EU and others to replace ISDS with some sort of state-dominated permanent court seem explicitly designed to be hostile to investors and are not helpful.”

UNCITRAL is scheduled to continue semi-annual WG meetings, alternating between Vienna and New York, and will be turning to debating specific alternative systems. These issues will need more attention from US and international business going forward, both at the sessions and intersessionally with national governments.

The Hill: Trump Aiming to Make NAFTA Like a Football Game Without Referees

Published on April 26, 2018

Op-Ed by USCIB President and CEO Peter Robinson as appeared on TheHill.com

The business community is broadly supportive of efforts to update and strengthen the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). NAFTA has been a major success for the United States, as well as our Canadian and Mexican partners.

But it’s now a quarter-century old and lacks rules in important new areas like digital trade, data flows and treatment of state-owned enterprises. A modernization that will bring NAFTA into the 21st century would be a welcome development, provided that it keeps what is already working in the agreement.

Since we are living in an age where the benefits of global economic integration are not well understood or appreciated, it’s worth backing up a bit to ask: What is a free trade agreement (FTA) anyway? Also, why would countries want to enter into an FTA?

The United States currently has FTAs with 20 countries, but other countries around the world have entered into several hundred bilateral and regional FTAs since the end of World War II.

They have done so not to cede sovereignty or export jobs overseas — two of the widely held misconceptions about trade agreements. Rather, they enter into FTAs in order to grow their economies through mutually beneficial cross-border trade and investment.

FTAs historically have provided preferences to the negotiating parties primarily centered around tariff-free trade. More recent trade agreements, including NAFTA, also include provisions on customs and trade facilitation, investment protection, regulatory standards, environment and labor and many other issues.

The key to reaping the benefits of an FTA and ensuring that it benefits U.S. companies, workers and consumers is to enforce the rules of the agreement in the event of a breach. In short, a new NAFTA must be fully enforceable.

Unfortunately, it seems that the Trump administration may want to weaken NAFTA’s core enforcement provisions. Such a change would spell disaster, akin to playing football or any other sport without a referee.

NAFTA currently has three strong chapters that provide for enforcement and redress: Chapter 11, which covers disputes between investors and states; Chapter 19, which covers anti-dumping measures and countervailing duties; and Chapter 20, which covers state-to-state disputes.

The United States has put forth proposals on each of these chapters, ranging from weakening the provision to entirely eliminating the chapter. If all of these proposals were to be included in NAFTA 2.0, there would be no provision available to provide legal recourse to an injured party against the party in breach of any of the substantive provisions.

Simply put, an agreement without enforceability would be bad for business. The Trump administration’s proposal for an “opt-in” approach to NAFTA’s existing dispute resolution mechanisms is no substitute for real, recognized, agreed and enforceable rules in this area.

Without substantive provisions protecting investment, including investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS), it’s very unlikely that the United States would gain the very tangible benefits it gets from open investment among the three NAFTA partners.

ISDS depoliticizes the enforcement of important investment rules by putting the dispute in the realm of neutral and legal arbitration.

U.S. investors, including the many smaller and medium-sized companies that have expanded sales and operations north and south of the border under NAFTA, would be far less willing to do business in Canada or Mexico if those governments couldn’t be held responsible for poor treatment or abuse of power.

The same goes for Canadian or Mexican investors in the United States, who have created many thousands of jobs here at home since NAFTA came into effect.

More broadly, you have to ask yourself: What good is a free trade agreement without enforcement provisions? The law of the Wild West is not the sort of formula needed to govern international trade and investment in today’s complex globalized international economy.

To extend the sports metaphor, the Trump administration seems to be more focused on playing defense than offense, preoccupied with eliminating tried-and-true principles because they impinge on our unilateral ability to block imports, discriminate against foreign products or projects and simply ignore inconvenient rules and regulations.

Historically, under both Republican and Democratic administrations, the United States has played offense. Indeed, we have been the star quarterback of the pro-growth team, leading international efforts to open markets, fight protectionism, promote greater international competition and uphold the rule of law.

A key part of this has been our insistence on strong enforcement provisions, i.e., referees with real whistles and real authority. For the U.S. now to focus on defense while also throwing away the rulebook is truly troubling.

Peter M. Robinson is president and CEO of the United States Council for International Business a business advocacy group that was founded in 1945 to promote free trade and help represent U.S. business in the then-new United Nations.

Donnelly Defends Strong Investment Protections at UNCITRAL Meeting in New York

Published on April 24, 2018

USCIB Vice President for Investment Policy Shaun Donnelly is on the front lines this week defending international investment protections, and Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) specifically, at the United Nations in New York City.  Donnelly is the only U.S. business representative with formal observer status at the April 23-27 meeting of the UN Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) Working Group III on “Investor-State Dispute Settlement Reform.”

“Yesterday’s opening session showed that we on the business side are facing real challenges on ISDS with developing countries and NGO activists pushing to overturn 60 years precedent of legal protections for foreign investors with access to expert neutral arbitration to resolve disputes,” said Donnelly. “The European Union’s defection from strong ISDS provisions in their broad networks of investment agreements has given ISDS critics an unfortunate boost. The EU is aggressively and unhelpfully pushing its ‘multilateral investment court system’ in the UNCITRAL meetings this week. And the shift in recent months in the U.S. Administration’s  views on ISDS, also reflected in the on-going NAFTA update negotiations, is a further complication.”

Throughout the week, Donnelly will be reminding government delegates and other participants that investment, including Foreign Direct Investment (FDI), is the driver of economic growth, competitiveness, exports and jobs. And strong investment agreements with effective enforcement provisions can play a critical role in facilitating private investment flows.

“ISDS has worked well; governments like the U.S. with open investment regimes and strong rule-of- law culture do not lose ISDS cases,” Donnelly added. “But governments which discriminate or abuse foreign investors, tilt or rewrite the rules, need to be disciplined; ISDS offers investors those vital protections.”

Donnelly, a retired U.S. diplomat and trade negotiator before joining USCIB, made similar points in his presentation in a public “Open Form” session at the Grand Hyatt on April 23 hosted by Columbia University’s Center for Sustainable Investment for UNCITRAL participants, invited guests and the media.

Donnelly noted, “Now is the time for business representatives to speak up on the importance of strong international investment agreements.  Foreign investment, and especially ISDS, are under orchestrated attacks including a lot of disinformation. USCIB will be taking the lead in getting the facts our about foreign investment issues and ISDS. The best, strongest trade and investment agreements only deliver results when they include strong enforcement provisions to ensure compliance by all parties. ISDS is a proven formula to deliver effective, apolitical, fair enforcement.”

Over 100 Business Representatives Lobby Senate on NAFTA

Published on April 17, 2018

Following previous successful NAFTA Senate Lobby Days, USCIB once again participated last week, joining more than 100 representatives from the agriculture and business community to talk about private sector concerns and perspectives regarding the ongoing negotiations to modernize NAFTA. The Senate Lobby Day, as in the past, was coordinated as a larger Coalition effort by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

“The purpose of this day was to increase support in light of the high-level talks among the NAFTA countries currently taking place in DC,” noted Eva Hampl, USCIB director for investment, trade and financial services. “There is concern in the business community about the Administration’s alleged push to conclude an agreement on an accelerated timeline.”

Hampl led one of the groups that went up to the Hill last week, where she met with several Republican and Democratic Senate offices throughout the day.

“While the various offices are certainly focused on NAFTA, they do not appear to have a definite action plan on what to do in the event of the potential negative scenarios that may take place, such as withdrawal from NAFTA 1.0 or an inadequate NAFTA 2.0.,” said Hampl.  “Also, while the Committee appears to get briefings from the Administration when they request it, the remainder of the Senators are not being briefed in a way that should be expected under TPA, given that the agreement is allegedly near conclusion.”

Time to De-Escalate U.S.-China Trade Conflict, Says USCIB

Published on April 6, 2018
President Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping at last year’s G20 Summit in Germany (White House photo)

Washington, D.C., April 6, 2018 – The United States Council for International Business (USCIB), which represents America’s top global companies, is urging the U.S. and China to take steps to de-escalate their trade conflict. Responding to statements by President Trump and China’s commerce ministry over the past 24 hours, USCIB said both parties should seek to resolve their differences via established bilateral and multilateral mechanisms.

“China’s unfair trade practices and its mistreatment of U.S. and other foreign companies are serious problems,” said USCIB President and CEO Peter M. Robinson. “But an escalating, tit-for-tat trade war is not the way to solve them, and risks doing serious harm to the American and global economies.”

Robinson said both sides should seek to work constructively, tone down their rhetoric, and step back from threats to impose new trade barriers, which he said could rattle international markets, imperil future growth prospects and damage the global trading system. He urged the U.S. to use the multilateral mechanisms it has helped build over the years to defuse a looming crisis.

“We should be working with our allies, with other major trading nations, and via the World Trade Organization to apply pressure on China in a way that does not boomerang back to hurt U.S. farmers, workers, consumers and companies.”

About USCIB:

USCIB promotes open markets, competitiveness and innovation, sustainable development and corporate responsibility, supported by international engagement and regulatory coherence. Its members include U.S.-based global companies and professional services firms from every sector of our economy, with operations in every region of the world, generating $5 trillion in annual revenues and employing over 11 million people worldwide. As the U.S. affiliate of several leading international business organizations, USCIB provides business views to policy makers and regulatory authorities worldwide, and works to facilitate international trade and investment. More information is available at www.uscib.org.

Contact:
Jonathan Huneke, USCIB
jhuneke@uscib.org, +1 212.703.5043

Hampl Advocates on SOE Issues at OECD Meetings

Published on April 2, 2018

USCIB Director for Investment, Trade and Financial Services Eva Hampl was in Paris the week of March 26 participating in various meetings surrounding the work of the OECD Working Party on State Ownership and Privatization Practices. The consultation with the SOE working party took place on March 27. Business at OECD (BIAC) used this platform to present comments on global reporting standards for internationally active SOEs, integrity and anti-corruption in state-owned enterprises, as well as the OECD working party’s program of work for 2019-2020.

“Addressing stakeholder and, particularly, business involvement is crucial,” said Hampl in her remarks. “The importance of the adherence to the OECD Anti-Bribery Convention to ensure government backing, the benefits of privatization, as well as the importance of a horizontal OECD work program cannot be overstated,” she said.

The SOE issue has been addressed in turn by various Committees of the OECD. During the consultation, BIAC learned that such horizontal activity is being pursued by the OECD. On March 28, BIAC participated in a discussion with members of the Working Party on the follow up to the special roundtable on SOEs and Integrity in October, and on the “building blocks” of future OECD Anti-Corruption and Integrity Guidelines for the state as owner of SOEs. Hampl reiterated the point about the importance of stakeholder input, highlighting that business is at the frontlines of these issues and should be regarded as a specifically relevant stakeholder. Following the discussion, Hampl attended a joint session with the Integrity Forum entitled Towards Anti-Corruption and Integrity Guidelines for State-Owned Enterprises.

Hampl Moderates Panel on Trade and Corruption in Paris

Published on April 2, 2018

USCIB Director for Investment, Trade and Financial Services Eva Hampl was in Paris the week of March 26, participating in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development’s (OECD) Global Anti-Corruption and Integrity Forum, during which she moderated a panel on “Integrity & Trade: No Need to Grease the Wheels,” which focused on the relationship between trade facilitation and opportunities for corruption at the border.

Other speakers included Senior Trade Policy Analyst at the OECD Evdokia Moise, Policy Director of Trade Negotiations at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Norway Benedicte Fleischer, Capacity Building Director at the World Customs Organization (WCO) Ernani Checcucci, and Director, ABAC Governance and External Engagement at GlaxoSmithKline Gonzalo Guzman. Hampl noted the importance of trade running smoothly for USCIB member companies.

“Corruption is a cost to business and companies invest in compliance systems, however there are limitations to what business can effect internally,” said Hampl. “The customs border presents many opportunities for corruption. One vehicle to address these issues, of course, is the WTO Trade Facilitation Agreement. USCIB has been very active in promoting the ratification of the agreement with U.S. FTA partners, as well as within the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC). As always, implementation is the key, and robust implementation is required to achieve the full benefits of the agreement.”

Moise presented preliminary work by the OECD that is being conducted in this space, addressing issues like automation and the relationship to corruption. Following the presentation, panelists and audience participated in a debate to address the various issues surrounding the topic, including transparency, the TFA and other global efforts.

“The general consensus after the panel was that while much is already being done, still more must be achieved, particularly when it comes to collaboration between governments, business, and civil society,” noted Hampl.