Top Industries with the Most Challenging Business Approval Processes in the USA

Since the 1980s, states all over the world have used bilateral and regional free trade agreements (FTAs) to lower barriers, expand markets, and establish new and better standards in sectors such as investment, intellectual property, and now digital trade. The US approach to trade agreements is based on the premise that as global markets become more important and emerging markets expand, so do trade and investment opportunities. The fall of communism, the entry of China and India into the global economy, and accelerated growth in Asia and other countries have all resulted in billions of new consumers joining the global market economy. This includes hundreds of millions of consumers who have joined the middle class and gained purchasing power. Leaders from multiple administrations have assumed that by lowering trade and investment barriers, markets overseas will expand, not only because of the lower barriers, but also because of increased trade volume. US businesses cannot afford to pass up these chances, as 95 percent of the world's population and 75 percent of global purchasing power currently live outside the United States.

Multiple studies have found that free trade agreements offer significant benefits for the United States.

According to US International Trade Commission economic research models, in addition to positively benefiting real GDP, employment, and wages, current FTAs boosted or decreased US trade surpluses or deficits with partner nations by 59.2 percent ($87.5 billion) in 2015. They also generated tariff savings of up to $13.4 billion in 2014, which benefited consumers, particularly those with low or moderate incomes, by lowering expenses. Of the 267 bilateral and regional free trade agreements negotiated around the world, only 14 involve the US. The elements included in the proposed Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), an agreement between the United States and 11 trading partners, were positioned as the cornerstone of US plan to open markets while also cementing US economic leadership in Asia-Pacific. This global trend will continue notwithstanding the United States' exit from the Trans-Pacific Partnership. Canada and the European Union recently approved a free trade agreement, while Japan and Europe are currently negotiating one. In Asia, China's proposed 16-nation trade pact, the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership, is positioned to fill the hole created by the US exit. Asia-Pacific Trade: Why the TPP Still Matters The US could have anticipated similar benefits from the Trans-Pacific Partnership. While the United States has officially withdrew from that deal, it may still benefit from future agreements with comparable terms.Agriculture would also profit, since previously closed markets, such as Japan's, would become open to US goods. In other areas of importance, the TPP's provisions included enforceable labor and environmental regulations, which set the highest standards of any previous international trade pact.

Effects on Manufacturing

Combined, free trade agreement countries buy roughly half of all US-manufactured exports, although accounting for only 6% of global consumers and less than 10% of global GDP. In 2015, the United States had a $6.4 billion goods and services surplus with its 20 free trade partners, but a $489.8 billion deficit with non-FTA countries. Currently, the United States' largest trade imbalance is with China, which has no trade agreement with the United States and is not a member of the proposed Trans-Pacific Partnership. Contrary to detractors' allegations, trade agreements are not the primary reason of the US manufacturing sector's decline or job loss. Manufacturing production is increasing, with US manufacturing companies generating a record $2.2 trillion in value in 2015. Manufacturing production differs from employment, which has been dropping for decades. Only around 13% of the drop is related to commerce. The true reason we have fewer manufacturing employment is that technology makes production more efficient and requires fewer workers. An illuminating analogy is agriculture, where US production has increased by 13% since 2010, while employment in the industry has decreased by 15%, both due to technological advances. These are irreversible processes that will continue. Free trade agreements have had a favorable impact on manufacturing. In 2015, US manufacturers supplied $12.7 billion more produced goods to FTA partners than US businesses purchased from them. At the same time, the United States had a $639.6 billion manufacturing trade deficit with nations that do not have free trade agreements.

The vast majority of these employment are for middle-class Americans who manufacture, move, and generate goods and services.

The US International Trade Commission predicted that with the TPP, exports to TPP partners would have increased faster than exports to other countries. Imports from TPP nations would have increased, but not as quickly as exports. In terms of employment, the Peterson Institute for International Economics projected that the deal would have increased real US salaries while having no substantial impact on overall employment levels. The Peterson Institute model estimated that "job churn," or the movement of jobs across businesses, sectors, and industries, would be 53,700 per year, including both job losses in less productive import-competing firms and job gains in firms that expand. Experience shows that the resulting jobs, in both manufacturing and services, are higher-paying than those in companies that do not compete globally. While manufacturing is a major focus in trade debates, services are also important: tradable business services (including legal services, consulting, financial services, accounting, architecture, engineering, healthcare, and education) account for 25% of US employment, more than doubling that of manufacturing. The service economy is rapidly expanding, with the Peterson Institute projecting that 90 percent of US workers will be employed in the service industry by 2030. In contrast to trading in products, the United States has a significant trade surplus in services. The TPP's concepts and provisions assist both large and small businesses across a variety of industries. Technology companies and their employees would profit from the opening of service markets, the strengthening of intellectual property protection, the protection of cross-border data transfer, and the protection of source code from foreign government expropriation.