Digital trade is boosting trade in services and reshaping economic blocs. Globalisation is increasingly dominated by trade in services.
04.07.2025 06:00
👍 1
🔁 0
💬 0
📌 0
Digital trade is boosting trade in services and reshaping economic blocs. Globalisation is increasingly dominated by trade in services.
ODI: Think change:The impact of Chinese preferences on Africa odi.org/en/insights/...
Available data for this year, same source used by #WIR, suggest that greenfield investment to the US is almost as high as the total received in 2024.
From the #WIR The #US, for the first time since 1990, in 2024 was a net investment receiver (on greenfield investment). @unctad.bsky.social Chips and Science Act? IRA?
The average value of low-value consignment in the EU is Euros 10.50 (Copehagen Economics, 2023); so this fee is equivalent to a duty of around 20% (average); well above the average tariff not applied under de minimis provisions.
www.ft.com/content/102e...
It is based on the impact assessments made opportunetily by DIT & DBT. For UK-Australia is £2.1bn, CPTPP is £2bn and UK-India is £4.8bn. The one for the EU is £9bn.
By own accounts of HMG, the addition of the impacts in the #UK GDP by 2040 of the UK-Australia, accession to the CPTPP and UK-India will still be lower than the impact of the new agreement with the #EU.
I doubt Trump will extend a concession on a MFN basis without further negotiation.
Retaliate is a terrible option. Better to increase integration and trade across the world without the US that will be detached fromthe rest of the world for a while.
#Asian economies such as #srilanka #Bangladesh #Cambodia must work in increase further the regional integration particularly with #India and other partners.
#Kenya, #Ethiopia and other African countries could benefit if they accelerate the implementation of the #AfCFTA and finalise the rules of origin on textiles and garments, facilitating backward linkages across the continent.
The impact is not even across the world. So, some #African countries that currently export to the US might benefit as the differential tariffs with respect to the #Asian countries will increase.
The US has large deficits with these countries because it has specialised on other products. Therefore, there is a mutually beneficial exchange to make. Unfortunately, neither Trump nor his advisors understand it. Higher prices and likely trade diversion for the US consumers.
Unsurprinsingly for everyone that has read Ricardo, the impact of the #Trump tariffs falls primarily on those countries with abundant manual labour (Asian countries) that has specialised in the production of garments, footwear and other light manufactures.
ODI: Think change:US implements sweeping reciprocal tariffs, igniting global economic challenges @odi.global @odi-trade.bsky.social odi.org/en/insights/...
Is this Trump's Liz Truss moment?
Live Updates: Tariffs Send Wall Street Tumbling Toward Worst Day Since 2022 www.nytimes.com/live/2025/04...
Yes, that’s right. I just pointed that it is an instance of EU support to strategic technology. In reality, I only support my beloved Racing Club in Argentina; but as an adopted Brightonian, I had to defend the honour of the BHA
You have another example with the EU development of Galileo to compete with the GPS.
As I Brightonian, I can say that at this very precise moment, there are other substantially less glamourous teams.
Services trade data is somewhat imprecise if available.
It is part of the package. Less exports, more available at home to drink and forget. Cunning plan.
The US could tight rules of origin in the USMCA, and US-Vietnam FTA and its GSP. It could, on these grounds, let AGOA expire at the end of this year. These appear as easier and more likely options with probably similar impact on China.
And it will create in most local industries including textiles, garments, light manufactures, etc. A very complex political picture in each country.
Assuming countries want to continue playing by the rules, rising their MFN tariffs to restrict imports from China may put them at risk of being hit by the US reciprocal tariffs (although, we need to see what they mean)
I heard that thanks to climate change, the South of England has now a better climate than Chapagne, France to produce sparkling wines.
Most likely is that Trump aims to just bring back industries. The other objectives are through into the argument just to reinforce it, they could happen in isolation but not altogether.
And, if tariffs are succesful in bringing industries back, then imports will fall. Then, it is very likely that revenue will fall as the taxable base is eroded.
Tariffs cannot be applied once the ultimate objective (e.g. "stop flow of fentanyl") is achieved. Otherwise the other part will never acceed to anything if the tariffs is not mantained at the original level. Therefore, tariff revenue does not raise and industries are not coming back.
Tariffs as leverage, to raise revenue and to re-industrialise are mutually inconsistent policy objectives.
Also worth mentioning that the US economy is in full employment and labour participation, although not at its highest, it is not low. So, pressures on wages may mount. So, higher prices are more likely due cost increases rather than the direct effect from tariffs.
Thinking on the Prisonners Dilemma, as it is and in the current context, the current rule-based system seems that it not preventing the world from landing in the non-cooperative equilibrium. Maybe reform is necessary to restore the cooperative scenario.