For those suddenly looking for info on Section 122:
@monapaulsen.bsky.social: "Is Section 122 of the 1974 Trade Act a Fall-Back Option for Trump to Impose Tariffs?"
@freetradebryan.bsky.social: "President Trump Cannot Legally Impose Tariffs Using Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974"
My 2c on the US-India ‘deal’ in the FT:
“It seems highly doubtful that India has agreed to reduce tariffs to zero, particularly on agricultural goods, given India’s long-standing approach to trade negotiations going right back to the Doha Round"
www.ft.com/content/72f1...
India signed a trade agreement with the European Union just last week. (That deal eventually provides EU companies preferential access to the Indian market.)
The Economics Show with @soumayakeynes.ft.com has an excellent episode explaining the EU-India deal, with @nks.bsky.social & Ajay Srivastava.
🗨️ #EU is caught between #TrumpTariffs and #China's #overcapacities.
👉Institut Jacques Delors's @nks.bsky.social
➡️Full show: f24.my/B4CD.x
@en.france24.com #Trump #tariffs
1/15 🚗 How can the European automotive industry navigate the trilemma of decarbonisation, competitiveness & economic security? @vonderleyen.ec.europa.eu
📣 a thread on our report out today presenting trade & industrial Policy Options” shorturl.at/QWFtx
European 🚗 industry: options ahead for the 🇪🇺 automotive sector as it navigates the trilemma of decarbonation, competitiveness and security
By @delorsinstitute.bsky.social & PSIA Sciences Po
@elvirefabry.bsky.social @nks.bsky.social
👇
institutdelors.eu/en/publicati...
🚗 Our report explores the challenges & opportunities facing the EU #automotive_industry as it navigates the trilemma of #decarbonization, #competitiveness, and #economic_security
By V. do Prado @elvirefabry.bsky.social @aranchagonzalez.bsky.social @nks.bsky.social P. Lamy & S. Praetorius
[Trade] The lack of effective European governance structures for economic security is an institutional weakness that hinders the development of long-term thinking
Analysis of EU, China, United States & Japan by Elvire Fabry, @nks.bsky.social, Marco Sibona & Pascal Lamy
We are saddened by the passing of our founder, #JacquesDelors.
His visionary leadership and tireless commitment to European unity will be forever remembered.
We send our deepest condolences to his family and loved ones. May he rest in peace.
Read our PR: www.europejacquesdelors.eu/news/an-arch...
China bans the export of rare earth processing technologies for national security reasons
www.reuters.com/markets/comm...
Go Trade Team Status Quo!
But we need to think about the limits of de-risking: With less economic integration, we may have less risk for welfare losses in the case of a hard decoupling scenario, but we may also make that scenario more likely by loosening the brakes for risky political bets.
So yes, let's de-risk to the extent necessary, but let's also not shoot ourselves in the foot with overblown calls for decoupling. (I am looking at you, House Select Committee on the CCP.)
This aligns with the findings of our recent @delorsinstitute.bsky.social report on EU-China interdependence, which show a significantly greater reliance of China on exports to the EU than vice-versa: lnkd.in/eYkJtNVu
Quote: "The cost of a decoupling are always costlier for China and Russia than for any Western country, in the short‐run, in the long‐run, and for both a cold turkey decoupling or a gradual de‐risking."
An excellent new report that illustrates that much has been overblown in the debate about decoupling and de-risking. Yes, there are significant costs associated with a hard-decoupling scenario, but overall, economic interdependence is a source of Western strength, not weakness. 👇
Will the little engagement of Xi at the 🇪🇺🇨🇳 summit press the EU towards more de-risking? Our scenarios by 2035 may be even more useful to identify key drivers of change and to protect European interest.
👉 urlz.fr/oQzL
