Monday, September 12, 2011

Import Restraints and Their Economic Impact

Today the U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC) released its Publication #4253 entitled, “The Economic Effects of Significant U.S. Import Restraints.”

The USITC is self-described as “an independent, quasi-judicial Federal agency with broad investigative responsibilities on matters of trade. The agency investigates the effects of dumped and subsidized imports on domestic industries and conducts global safeguard investigations. The Commission also adjudicates cases involving imports that allegedly infringe intellectual property rights. Through such proceedings, the agency facilitates a rules-based international trading system. The Commission also serves as a Federal resource where trade data and other trade policy-related information are gathered and analyzed. The information and analysis are provided to the President, the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR), and Congress to facilitate the development of sound and informed U.S. trade policy.”

In this publication, USITC shares its findings regarding the economic effect on sectors subject to weighty restraints, such as, not surprisingly, that of textiles and apparel, canned tuna, and, to my surprise (call me naïve), ethanol.

Here are some of its findings:

Textiles and apparel
The Commission estimates that liberalizing import restraints in textiles and apparel would increase welfare by $514 million. Liberalization would reduce output and employment in this sector by 9–10 percent, which would magnify the already substantial declines projected to occur without liberalization. Import liberalization would also eliminate exports of U.S. goods that are stimulated by preferential rules of origin. This change would lead to large declines in exports of U.S. products such as thread, yarn, fabric, and cut pieces of fabric to be sewn into clothing.

Canned tuna
Ending import restraints in canned tuna would increase welfare by $16 million. Imports of canned tuna would increase by 20 percent, and output would decline by 8 percent. Employment in the broader canned fish industry would fall by 7 percent.

Ethanol (ethyl alcohol)
Because of rapidly increasing quantities of ethanol mandated by the U.S. Renewable Fuel Standard, both U.S. ethanol production and U.S. imports of ethanol are projected to rise markedly by 2015. The projected higher import quantities and the continued moderate restrictiveness of ethanol restraints combine to make these restraints the most costly (in welfare terms) among all sectors considered. The Commission estimates that liberalizing ethanol import restraints would increase welfare by $1.5 billion and increase imports by 45 percent in 2015. Although liberalization would reduce the domestic industry’s output and employment from their projected 2015 levels by 4–5 percent, these changes are minor considering that the ethanol industry employment and output are both projected to more than double between 2005 and 2015, with or without liberalization.

The USITC report goes on to discuss U.S. and global supply chains, and more specifically about how the global restructuring of production has led to faster growth in trade, new benefits from trade, and new patterns of trade.

It further gives an in-depth analysis of the key elements of global supply chains, together with the major economic forces driving their development, which include improved international logistics, lower trade and transport costs, technological change, and international cost differences.

For a copy of the publication, click here.

Questions/comments? Post below or email me at clark.deanna@gmail.com

No comments:

Post a Comment