A Dynamic Macroeconomic Analysis of NAFTA

作者: Michael A. Kouparitsas

DOI:

关键词: BusinessFree tradeRules of originProtectionismForeign direct investmentInternational tradeInternational free trade agreementTariffInvestment (macroeconomics)Trade barrier

摘要: On December 8, 1993, President Clinton signed into law the North American Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act. The United States' action was soon followed by Canada and Mexico (NAFTA) came force on January 1, 1994. NAFTA represents first far-reaching free trade agreement between major industrial countries a developing country. Throughout development of NAFTA, there intense domestic debate about desirability pursuing expanded ties within America. From U.S. perspective, one foremost objectives to ensure that would lock in economic political reforms it has instituted since 1985. These have created more predictable business environment for exporters investors. negotiators believed also benefit economy accelerating Mexico's liberalization process give investors increased access growing marketplace. hopes will improve its Mexican market. avoids separate agreements with Mexico. Canadian realized (along lines U.S.-Canada [CFTA] 1989) affect Canada's share market whether participated or not. officials joining be better positioned keep what achieved through CFTA take advantage closer For Mexico, offered an opportunity extensive market-oriented policy late 1980s. hoped gain credibility reform encourage foreign investment industry trade. At same time, viewed as means reducing threat protectionism further enhancing export opportunities markets. anticipated greater technology capital. In most basic form, trilateral eliminate all tariffs significantly reduce nontariff barriers (NTBs), such quotas import licenses, U.S., Canada, Tariff duties phased out stages over period 15 years, majority tariff reductions taking place ten years. addition reform, are three broad NTBs. First, prohibitions quantitative restrictions applied at border, licenses. Second, agreed not impose new user fees phase existing June 1999. Third, permit eligible businesspeople bring tools their trade, professional samples other goods, duty basis. includes provisions capital flows parties. One costs limited-participation area is like must develop rules origin define which goods entitled preferential treatment. As such, wholly produced qualify Most containing nonagricultural components qualify, if those sufficiently transformed region ultimate article undergoes specified change classification. some cases, establishes set percentages content classification requirement. adds worldwide trend toward regional agreements, no doubt related General Tariffs (GATT). Over long history, GATT fostered lowering across countries/regions. …

参考文章(22)
Timothy J. Kehoe, Toward a Dynamic General Equilibrium Model of North American Trade Cambridge University Press. pp. 328- 348 ,(1994) , 10.1017/CBO9780511664472.012
Robert Z. Lawrence, Nora Lustig, William Diebold, Barry B. Bosworth, North American Free Trade: Assessing the Impact ,(1992)
Michael A. Kouparitsas, North-South business cycles Research Papers in Economics. ,(1996)
Robert G. King, Charles I. Plosser, Sergio T. Rebelo, Production, growth and business cycles: I. The basic neoclassical model Journal of Monetary Economics. ,vol. 21, pp. 195- 232 ,(1988) , 10.1016/0304-3932(88)90030-X
Valerie A Ramey, Inventories as Factors of Production and Economic Fluctuations The American Economic Review. ,vol. 79, pp. 338- 354 ,(1989)
Patrick J. Kehoe, Timothy J. Kehoe, Capturing NAFTA’s Impact with Applied General Equilibrium Models The Quarterly review. ,vol. 18, pp. 33- 57 ,(1994) , 10.1007/978-94-009-0123-0_2
Mario J. Crucini, Marianne Baxter, Explaining saving-investment correlations The American Economic Review. ,vol. 83, pp. 416- 436 ,(1993)
John Whalley, The North-South Debate and the Terms of Trade: An Applied General Equilibrium Approach The Review of Economics and Statistics. ,vol. 66, pp. 1- ,(1984) , 10.2307/1925823
Marianne Baxter, Fiscal Policy, Specialization, and Trade in the Two-Sector Model: The Return of Ricardo? Journal of Political Economy. ,vol. 100, pp. 713- 744 ,(1992) , 10.1086/261837