Trade and Investment Archives

USCIB Hails Trade Promotion Authority Legislation

Published on April 16, 2015

capitol_scaffolding_loresNew York, N.Y., April 16, 2015 – The United States Council for International Business (USCIB) applauded the introduction of bipartisan legislation in Congress to re-establish Trade Promotion Authority (TPA), trade legislation that facilitates the negotiation and implementation of U.S. trade agreements.

“The United States needs TPA to secure international trade deals that create jobs and increase economic prosperity for all,” said USCIB President and CEO Peter Robinson. “We won’t be able to complete important agreements with Asia, the European Union and other trading partners without TPA. The business community is urging Congress to swiftly pass this legislation.”

USCIB and its member companies have been outspoken advocates for TPA and for an ambitious trade U.S. trade agenda, organizing two high-level policy conferences about the benefits of increased trade and investment: “Exploring New Approaches to Trade, Investment and Jobs” last October with a keynote by USTR Michael Froman, and the Customs & Trade Facilitation Symposium in February with Customs and Border Protection Commissioner Gil Kerlikowske.

As a founding member of the Trade Benefits America Coalition, USCIB also joined with other leading business groups to advocate for passage of TPA and educate the public about how U.S. trade agreements lead to prosperity for all. The coalition has worked with Congress and the Obama administration to build public support for the U.S. trade agenda. In addition, last month Robinson co-authored an Op-Ed in The Hill with former Rep. James Bacchus about the pressing need to pass TPA.

Robinson cited important recent progress on several trade pacts – including the Trans-Pacific Partnership, the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, and the implementation of the World Trade Organization’s Trade Facilitation Agreement – as adding urgency to the need to re-establish TPA, which every president since FDR has enjoyed.

“Current trade negotiations could make our country the preferred location for global innovation and jobs,” Robinson said. “But first Congress must provide President Obama the necessary trade negotiating authority.”

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. With a unique global network, USCIB provides business views to policy makers and regulatory authorities worldwide, and works to facilitate international trade and investment. More at www.uscib.org.

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

 

Global Business Calls on G20 to Ensure That Actions Match Words on Trade Protectionism

Published on April 15, 2015

FourthEd_Scorecard_Banner_150x50Washington, D.C., April 15, 2015 – On the eve of the 2015 World Bank and IMF Spring Meetings, the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) has called on G20 governments to do more to address the growing impact of protectionism on the global economy, according to ICC’s American chapter, the United States Council for International Business (USCIB).

The fourth installment of the ICC G20 Business Scorecard – which assesses the response of the G20 to recommendations put forward by the international business community – highlights that G20 governments have done a “poor” job in implementing their commitment to roll back trade restrictive measures introduced since the financial crisis.

Commenting on the launch of the Scorecard, ICC Chairman and co-chair of the B20 Trade Task Force Terry McGraw said: “There is a paradox right now at the heart of trade policymaking. On the one hand, we’ve got possibly the most robust negotiating agenda in two decades—with a range of deals on the table that, with the right political leadership, could provide a major stimulus to the global economy.

“But at the same time, we are seeing governments subtly employing regulatory measures – or non-tariff barriers – to restrict international trade. While the G20 deserves great credit for holding the worst protectionist excesses in check, action is needed now to curb the steady drip feed of measures which we have seen since the financial crisis.”

Research suggests that, despite G20 commitments, the global stock of protectionist measures has continued to increase over the past year. One recent study indicated that since 2008, over 70% of the changes to trade rules around the world have curbed trade, rather than spurring it.

ICC Secretary General John Danilovich added: “Protectionism is not just bad for business: it also has a significantly negative effect on job creation and consumer welfare. The G20 now needs to lead by example, as it has done in many other areas, and take action on its longstanding commitment to roll-back protectionist policies.”

“The IMF has just lowered its growth forecast for this year to 3.5 percent. What’s more, 200 million people remain unemployed across the globe. Trade policy needs to be viewed as the next economic stimulus. Implementing the B20’s four trade recommendations from 2014 could add some $3.4 trillion to global GDP.”

The release of the Scorecard also comes ahead of the anticipated introduction of so-called “fast-track” legislation in the United States – which would give President Barack Obama authority to negotiate free-trade deals with other countries under special rules.

USCIB President and CEO Peter Robinson said: “It is critically important for individual G20 member countries to keep moving forward on trade. We are delighted that the U.S. and many of its G20 partners are involved in ambitious, market-opening negotiations such as the Trans-Pacific Partnership and the Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership.”

“We also applaud the imminent introduction of Trade Promotion Authority legislation in the U.S. Congress, which will be a very welcome sign of new wind in the sails of global trade liberalization.”

The full G20 Business Scorecard is available at: http://www.iccwbo.org/Global-influence/G20/Reports-and-Products/ICC-G20-Scorecard/

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. With a unique global network, USCIB provides business views to policy makers and regulatory authorities worldwide, and works to facilitate international trade and investment. More at www.uscib.org.

Media contact:

Jonathan Huneke, USCIB

+1 917.420.0039, jhuneke@uscib.org

 

USCIB Defends Investor Dispute System at World Economic Forum

Published on March 25, 2015
Shaun Donnelly (left) in Geneva.
Shaun Donnelly (left) in Geneva.

As debate continues over whether Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) ought to be included in U.S. trade agreements such as the Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), USCIB represented American business interests at the Investment Policy Group meeting of the World Economic Forum (WEF) and the International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD) in Geneva on March 23 and 24.

Shaun Donnelly, USCB’s vice president for investment and financial services, attended the meeting as one of just three business representatives among the group’s 25 investment experts convened by WEF and ICTSD.

This Investment Policy Group ‎is one of 18 parallel expert groups under the E15 initiative, jointly implemented by WEF and ICTSD, to develop policy recommendations to governments and international organizations across a broad range of trade and investment issues by late 2015. At the investment group meeting, academics, lawyers, international organization officials and business representatives debated a range of investment issues and options. Herbert Oberhaensli of USCIB member Nestle and Nicolle Graugnard from the International Chamber of Commerce secretariat in Paris joined Donnelly at as business representatives at this session.

Much of the discussion centered on ISDS, which grants an investor the right to use dispute settlement proceedings against a foreign government. USCIB argued that ISDS is a necessary legal instrument to truly incentivize and protect international investment flows that are vital for economic growth, development and job creation.

The E15 initiative’s Investment Policy Group will meet again in June to finalize its recommendations.

B20 Sets Priorities for World Trade Agenda

Published on March 14, 2015

4977_image002The Business-20 (B20) Trade Task Force has committed to work toward ratification of the World Trade Organization’s (WTO) Trade Facilitation Agreement (TFA) by year’s end and to work with WTO and its members to ensure quick and effective implementation. The Task Force agreed to the strategy as it met to set business priorities for G20 governments, which also includes a call on the G20 to roll back protectionist measures implemented since the 2008 financial crisis.

B20 is the premier dialogue platform for engaging global business leaders with G20 governments and leaders. B20 Turkey is chaired by Rifat Hisarciklioglu, the president of the Union of Chambers of Commerce of Turkey.

The Turkey B20 Trade Task Force held its second meeting in Istanbul on March 10. The Task Force consists of 76 company senior representatives from around the globe and is co-chaired by ICC and USCIB Chairman Terry McGraw and Guler Sabancı, chairman of Turkey’s Sabancı Holding.

The B20 group of companies unanimously agreed that the first priority is to call on all WTO countries to ratify the Trade Facilitation Agreement, which over time could contribute an additional US$1 trillion to world GDP and 21 million jobs, 18 million of which will be in developing countries. The task force outlined plans to work at the country level to convey the economic and job growth benefits of the agreement and to press for ratification and implementation.

“Governments, particularly those in the G20, must now ensure that the TFA is ratified by their national legislatures by mid-December,” McGraw said. “So far, the US is the only G20 country to ratify; and the remaining 19 must fulfill the commitments they made in Brisbane and demonstrate the leadership that comes with being part of the G20.”

The B20 Trade Task Force also agreed that the second key priority is to stop protectionism and is calling on governments to move forward to remove trade restrictive measures.

The 2015 G20 Leaders’ Summit will be held in Antalya on November 15 and 16.

USCIB Fights for Investment Agreements and Protections at the OECD and UNCTAD

Published on March 3, 2015
USCIB’s Shaun Donnelly represents American business at UNCTAD on February 25, 2015.
USCIB’s Shaun Donnelly represents American business at UNCTAD on February 25, 2015.

As the contentious global dialogue concerning investment protection and international investment agreements (IIAs) continues, USCIB remains on the front lines fighting for adequate protections for investors in a world increasingly reliant on Foreign Direct Investment (FDI).  USCIB Vice President, Investment and Financial Services Shaun Donnelly spent the week of February 22-27, 2015 in Brussels, Belgium leading a delegation of business experts at the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) stakeholder consultation on the review of the Policy Framework for Investment (PFI); and in Geneva, Switzerland, leading a small but vocal business contingent at the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) Experts Group on International Investment Agreements.

At the OECD session, which was co-hosted by the European Commission, USCIB argued for pro-investment, pro-business policies and dispelled concerns about the adverse impacts of investment and the need for greater government involvement. USCIB is working closely with the Business and Industry Advisory Committee (BIAC) to the OECD to provide comprehensive and detailed comments on the PFI revision; a final version of the PFI is expected from the OECD following the March 16-20, 2015 meeting of the Investment Committee in Paris.

During the Experts Group on International Investment Agreements at UNCTAD, Donnelly lead a small team of USCIB’s international partners (BDI, VNO of Netherlands, MEDEF of France, and Business Europe) in defending the current system and model for IIAs, as well as specific measures included in investment protections, particularly investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) protections.

“We in business are the real users of International Investment Agreements; we invest,” Donnelly said in his remarks to the Experts Group. “IIAs mitigate and reduce risk, which is, of course, the real challenge to investment and specifically to foreign direct investment, and we believe that IIAs work well to do just that.”

USCIB will represent members at the March 15-20, 2015 meeting of the OECD Investment Committee and the corresponding meeting of the BIAC Investment Committee.

 

 

Investment Protection In TTIP: One Step Forward, Two Steps Back

Published on February 19, 2015

By Eva Hampl

The EU Commission finally released its report on the online public consultation on investment protection and investor-state dispute settlement in the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, but it is disappointing that negotiations on an investment chapter in TTIP have yet to resume, writes Eva Hampl in Investment Policy Central.

Read the full post: http://www.investmentpolicycentral.com/content/investment-protection-ttip-one-step-forward-two-steps-back

Global Business Stands Up for Strong Investor-State Dispute Settlement Rules

Published on February 9, 2015

Tablet computer, smartphone and newspapersThe Financial Times has published a letter from the head of the International Chamber of Commerce forcefully rebutting some of the more widespread canards, circulating in Europe and elsewhere, concerning investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS). (See below for the full text of the letter.)

ISDS provisions provide for the referral of disputes between foreign investors and host governments to neutral tribunals, rather than local courts, in cases of expropriation or other government actions that impact a company’s investment. Strong ISDS rules have been developed over the years via numerous European, U.S. and other trade and investment agreements as a way to promote cross-border investment, by providing a measure of certainty in investment decisions that might otherwise be lacking.

ISDS has emerged as a major lightning rod for opponents of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), which seeks to remove many remaining barriers to cross-border commerce between the United States and the European Union.

In his letter, ICC Secretary General John Danilovich said that “too much of the recent European debate on investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) has been driven by hearsay, superstition and myth,” and that anti-ISDS fervor has been largely motivated by misplaced anti-Americanism. Sixty percent of recent ISDS cases worldwide, he noted, were launched by European investors.

“A gold-standard agreement in TTIP,” Danilovich wrote, “could play a central role in fostering improved conditions for a much-needed expansion of global investment flows.”

Text of the ICC letter to the Financial Times on investor-state dispute settlement:

Financial Times

February 9, 2015

Letters

Ditching investor-state dispute settlement may come at quite a cost

Sir, John Kay is no doubt correct to conclude that excluding investment protection standards from the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership would make it “much easier” to sell the proposed deal to a sceptical European public (“Free trade should not put democracy in the dock”, February 4). But would this be the right thing to do?

While greater public engagement in trade policy making is welcome, too much of the recent European debate on investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) has been driven by hearsay, superstition and myth. Professor Kay shows that even the most reasoned commentators can fall into this trap, casually depicting big — “predominantly American” — businesses as rapacious users of ISDS.

The facts tell a different story: ISDS cases remain relatively rare and almost 60 per cent of claims filed over the past five years have been made by European investors. The importance of fact-based policy making is emphasised by the global dimension to the TTIP talks. Estimates may vary about the economic value of a transatlantic investment pact, but it would be short-sighted to ignore the negative precedent that a weak or non-deal would set for future negotiations.

By contrast, a gold-standard agreement in TTIP could play a central role in fostering improved conditions for a much-needed expansion of global investment flows. Prof Kay would be well advised not to lose sight of this broader perspective: ditching ISDS from TTIP might be the easy thing to do, but it may come at quite a cost in the long run.

John Danilovich
Secretary General,
International Chamber of Commerce,
Paris, France

View this letter on the Financial Times website (paid login may be required)

 

 

BIAC Highlights the Importance of Effective Investor-State Dispute Settlement

Published on February 3, 2015

In order to stimulate inward investment, investors must be treated fairly and protected against the arbitrary behavior of host states. Open, transparent and non-discriminatory investment policies and agreements are a must. In this context, Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) is an indispensable part of a fair, efficient investment protection system. It provides for a neutral and high-quality legal dispute resolution mechanism in cases of investment treaty breaches by host states.

In light of the current anti-trade sentiment criticizing the ISDS system, USCIB and its global network including the Business and Industry Advisory Council to the OECD believe that it is crucial that the discussion is put back in the right perspective and that common misrepresentations are effectively addressed. The OECD, as an internationally recognized forum for fact-based and objective analysis, and with a long track record of fostering open, transparent and non-discriminatory investment policies, should play an important role in providing objective analysis, thus helping to shape further understanding about the issues that are at stake. The BIAC paper on ISDS contains concrete proposals for future OECD analysis in this area.

USCIB has been a strong advocate for ISDS, and Shaun Donnelly, vice president for investment, trade and financial services, has been travelling around Europe making the case for a strong Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership and explaining the importance of ISDS provisions in that and other international trade agreements.

USCIB Gives Feedback on OECD New Approach to Economic Challenges Project

Published on January 22, 2015
L-R: Rick Johnston (Citi), David Mallet (Wells Fargo), Tom Molitor (Wells Fargo), Mathilde Mesnard (OECD), Peter Robinson (USCIB) and William Hynes (OECD).
L-R: Rick Johnston (Citi), David Mallet (Wells Fargo), Tom Molitor (Wells Fargo), Mathilde Mesnard (OECD), Peter Robinson (USCIB) and William Hynes (OECD).

USCIB and member representatives met with officials from the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) on January 22 at USCIB’s New York office to give feedback on the OECD’s New Approach to Economic Challenges (NAEC), aimed at updating the organization’s instruments and policy analyses.

USCIB President and CEO Peter Robinson met with the main authors of the NAEC report, Mathilde Mesnard and William Hynes, along with member representatives from Citigroup, Wells Fargo and JPMorgan Chase.

The informal meeting gave USCIB an opportunity to provide member feedback and concerns at this stage of the NAEC project.

USCIB is the American affiliate of the Business and Industry Advisory Committee to the OECD (BIAC), which acts as the voice of business in the OECD and has provided structured input to the NAEC project.

The OECD’s final synthesis report on its NAEC work will be delivered to OECD ministers in June 2015.

 

EU Reports on Investor Consultation Results in U.S.-EU Trade Agreement

Published on January 22, 2015

4937_image001On Tuesday, January 13, the EU Commission released its final report on the online public consultation on investment protection and investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) in the Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP). In response, USCIB issued a press release noting the importance of a strong investment chapter including ISDS in the agreement. USCIB also played a leading role in pulling together a group of 15 major business groups on both sides of the Atlantic to issue a joint statement that same day.

The commission launched the consultation in response to public concerns about whether the EU’s proposed approach for TTIP would achieve the right balance between protecting investors and safeguarding the EU’s ability to regulate in the public interest.

The commission – which issued a consultation questionnaire about 12 issues concerning investment protection and ISDS in TTIP – had received a total of nearly 150,000 replies by the July 13 deadline, with the vast majority (around 145,000, or 97%) submitted through various online platforms with pre-defined answers. Most replies were skeptical of investor protections and ISDS.  In addition to these mass-produced responses, there were also submissions from more than 3,000 individual citizens, and about 450 organizations, including USCIB.

According to the report, the commission received responses in three broad categories: statements indicating opposition or concerns to TTIP in general, concerns or opposition with regard to investment protection and ISDS in TTIP, and specific views in relation to the various aspects presented under each question, often accompanied by concrete suggestions for the way forward.

“The commission has not made a clear recommendation on how to move ahead with the negotiations,” said Eva Hampl, USCIB’s Director for Investment, Trade and Financial Services. “That suggests the volume of responses opposing investor protections in TTIP has not gone unnoticed.”

Instead of prescribing a concrete way forward, the commission merely noted four areas where they urge further improvements to be explored:

  • the protection of the right to regulate
  • the establishment and functioning of arbitral tribunals
  • the relationship between domestic judicial systems and ISDS
  • the review of ISDS decisions through an appellate mechanism

“Though not unexpected, the Commission report confirms that TTIP, particularly for investment and ISDS, will continue to be an uphill battle,” said Hampl.

USCIB submitted comments in support of an ambitious investment chapter including strong investor protection and ISDS representing the views of the U.S. business community.  USCIB also signed a joint statement with other U.S. and EU business associations upon the release of the report.

A high standard investment chapter including ISDS is crucial to a successful TTIP, and both the EU and the U.S. stand to gain significantly from a concluded agreement.