USTR has just published the Trump administration's NAFTA negotiating objectives here. Many of them will look familiar, as they are a standard part of U.S. trade negotiations. Here are some examples:
Investment - "Secure for U.S. investors in the NAFTA countries important rights consistent with U.S. legal principles and practice, while ensuring that NAFTA country investors in the United States are not accorded greater substantive rights than domestic investors."
E-commerce - "Establish rules to ensure that NAFTA countries do not impose measures that restrict cross-border data flows and do not require the use or installation of local computing facilities."
State owned enterprises - "Ensure that SOEs accord non-discriminatory treatment with respect to purchase and sale of goods and services."
Intellectual property - "Ensure provisions governing intellectual property rights reflect a standard of protection similar to that found in U.S. law."
These and many other objectives set out in the document are things we've heard before. On these issues, the new NAFTA may look very similar to the old TPP, although there could be some tweaks here and there.
On the other hand, a couple issues seem new, and reflect Trump's more skeptical approach to trade. Here are two examples from the trade remedies section:
- "Eliminate the NAFTA global safeguard exclusion so that it does not restrict the ability of the United States to apply measures in future investigations."
- "Eliminate the Chapter 19 dispute settlement mechanism."
Obviously, Canada and Mexico will push back on these U.S. objectives.
There is also the obligatory trade deficit concern:
"Trade in Goods: - Improve the U.S. trade balance and reduce the trade deficit with the NAFTA countries"
And some vague language on currency:
"Currency: - Through an appropriate mechanism, ensure that the NAFTA countries avoid manipulating exchange rates in order to prevent effective balance of payments adjustment or to gain an unfair competitive advantage."
Overall, my quick read suggests there is a lot of boilerplate language, which could have been drafted by any U.S. administration, and also plenty of discretion for the Trump administration to take the NAFTA renegotiation in any direction it wants (subject to the views of Congress and U.S. trading partners, of course).