Introduction
Arguments for government intervention in international trade take two paths: political and economic (Hill 2011, p205). Political intervention is concerned with protection of certain groups within the nation. These groups are usually the producers who have a lot to gain at the expense of consumers. On the other hand, economic arguments for intervention are concerned with increasing the wealth of the nation to the benefit of all i.e. producers and consumers. This paper discusses the arguments for the protectionist measures and the instruments governments apply in controlling trade and foreign direct investments. Firstly the instruments for trade policy available to governments are defined. The arguments for intervention are then looked at. Following this, the challenges and opportunities faced by international companies wishing to expand into these controlled markets are then analysed and discussed with examples. Finally conclusions are drawn from the analysis and recommendations made on multi-national strategies to adopt in harnessing opportunities availing.
Trade policy instruments
Governments have at their disposal various instruments to use in trade policing. The most common are briefly explained below;
Tariffs – Hill (2011, p199) defines this as a tax levied on imports or exports. The tax may be fixed (specific) or as a percentage of the value of the goods (ad valorem). Import tariffs help governments to increase revenue, protect local producers who gain and affect consumers who lose through higher priced goods. Import tariffs promote inefficiencies in local industries as goods are produced that could be more efficiently produced abroad. Export tariffs are less common. They are used to raise revenue on exports an...
... middle of paper ...
...d Beghin, J. C. (2012) Protectionism Indices for Non-Tariff Measures: An Application to Maximum Residue Levels. Food Policy 45 pp.57-68.
10. Mayda, A. M. and Rodrik, D. (2005) Why are some people (and countries) more protectionist than others?. European Economic Review, 49 (6), pp. 1393--1430.
11. Ng, F., Yeats, A. and Er. (1997) Open economies work better! did Africa's protectionist policies cause its marginalization in world trade?. World Development, 25 (6), pp. 889--904.
12. Tharakan, P., Greenaway, D. and Kerstens, B. (2006) Anti-dumping and excess injury margins in the European Union: A counterfactual analysis. European Journal of Political Economy, 22 (3), pp. 653--674.
13. Wang, Y. (2013). Fiscal Decentralization, Endogenous Policies, and Foreign Direct Investment: Theory and Evidence From China and India. Journal of Development Economics. 103 pp.107-123.
The light of the global recession, assess the likely economics effects of an increase in protectionism on the world economy. (15 marks)
Office of Industries, U.S. International Trade Commission.(2009).Export controls: an overview of their use, economic effects, and treatment in the global trading system. Retrieved from United States International Trade Commission http://www.usitc.gov/publications/332/working_papers/ID-23.pdf
With Europe in control, “the policies of the governing powers redirected all African trade to the international export market. Thus today, there is little in the way of inter-African trade, and the pattern of economic dependence continues.” Europeans exported most of the resources in Africa cheaply and sold them costly, which benefited them, but many Africans worked overtime and were not treated with care.
The United States has for over two centuries been involved in the growing world economy. While the U.S. post revolutionary war sought to protect itself from outside influences has since the great depression and world war two looked to break trade restrictions. The United States role in the global economy has grown throughout the 20th century and as a result of several historical events has adopted positions of both benefactor and dependent. The United States trade policy has over time shifted from isolationist protectionism to a commitment to establishing world-wide free trade. Free trade enterprise has developed and grown through organizations such as the WTO and NAFTA. The U.S. in order to obtain its free trade desires has implemented a number of policies that can be examined for both their benefits and flaws. Several trade policies exist as options to the United States, among these fair trade and free trade policies dominate the world economic market. In order to achieve economic growth the United States has a duty to maintain a global trade policy that benefits both domestic workers and industry. While free trade gives opportunities to large industries and wealthy corporate investors the American worker suffers job instability and lower wages. However fair trade policies that protect America’s workers do not help foster wide economic growth. The United States must then engage in economic trade policies that both protect the United States founding principles and secure for tomorrow greater economic stability.
Less developed nations sometimes argue that the industrialized nations’ tariff structures discourage the less-developed nations from undergoing industrialization. How?
While free trade has certainly changed with advances in technology and the ability to create external economies, the concept seems to be the most benign way for countries to trade with one another. Factoring in that imperfect competition and increasing returns challenge the concept of comparative advantage in modern international trade markets, the resulting introduction of government policies to regulate trade seems to result in increased tensions between countries as individual nations seek to gain advantages at the cost of others. While classical trade optimism may be somewhat naïve, the alternatives are risky and potentially harmful.
Angola is one of those countries that is full of such examples. It is also full of contradictions and inefficiencies that dictate that more than often these interventions are only temporary on not fully abided by.
In realising that foreign investments are the key source of the nation’s economic rise, the Chinese government has given special preferences to foreign investors (Financial Express, 2006). This is mostly done through reduction of most favoured nation (MFN) tariff rate. In India, on the other hand, fair competition exists between domestic and foreign investors. Although the Indian government states that it aims to reduce its MFN tariff rate, which currently doubles the rate in China, to other ASEAN country levels, it is in reality a big challenge because a large portion of the nation’s tax revenue comes from customs tariffs (Henley, 2004).
With so much focus on the positive elements of free trade, the negative aspects of an open system are often overlooked. However, they do exist, and protectionism is needed. Consequently, safeguards are built into the system. States look out for their own good, whether that is through the use of escape clauses or the choice of the optimal forum for dispute settlement based on the precedent they do or do not want set. This paper argues that protectionism is valuable and inherent in the current system; however, not enough. Powerful states exploit weaker states, and “free trade” exacerbates the problem. I will first discuss why free trade does not work. Then, I will explain how the current system enables the inherent protectionist attitude of states. Finally, I will analyze the fairness of the system.
level. The sand is Both developed and developing countries benefit from tariff reduction. The consumer will have more choices with more products and a wider price range.... ... middle of paper ... ... Retrieved from http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/docserver/download/0109121e.pdf?expires=1394821453&id=id&accname=guest&checksum=148EDDDFD930AFCF166F34498B8601B6.
...tervene despite evidence showing that most interventions are counter-productive is the ambiguity presented by various economists making arguments for or against trade. Ambiguous arguments and nationalist pride will continue to influence more government interventions in free trade.
Reflected in its policies and attitudes toward business are a government's idea of how best to promote the national interest, considering its own resources and political philosophy. A government controls and restricts a company's activities by encouraging and offering support or by discouraging and banning or restricting its activities depending on the government. Here are steps in international law. International law recognizes the right of nations to grant or withhold permission to do business within its political boundaries and control its citizens when it comes to conducting business. Thus, political environment of countries is a critical concern for the international marketer and he should examine the salient political features of global markets they plan to enter.
Powell, J.(1990) . Policy Analyis: Why trade retaliaton closes markets and impoverishes people, Cato Policy Analysis No. 143 . [Online], Available at: http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-143.html , Accessed 5.12.2013.
Economic risks faced by companies that want to expand their business globally are exchange controls, local content laws, import restrictions, tax controls, price controls, and labor problems (Cateora, Gilly & Graham, 2011). These risks can be just as harmful, in some cases, as the political risks faced. As implied by its title, import restrictions are limitations placed on certain goods being shipped in from another country. “There are especially tight import restrictions on goods with a potential to be hazardous” (Dugger, 2016). Many restrictions are placed on imports in order to protect and promote the domestic market within the host country. Tax controls are put into place primarily to generate revenue and operating funds. Unfortunately, many companies that attempt to expand their business overseas experience unreasonably high taxes. Elevated tax rates can also be seen as a form of protectionism in efforts to deter threatening foreign companies from entering their market, thus allowing domestic companies to
H4: Countries with a stronger protectionist stance indicated by higher tariffs tend to be more active in anti-dumping regulation.