Posted on 04/02/2025 5:22:04 AM PDT by Cronos
The negotiations will not be easy, but India and the EU seem determined to sign a major trade agreement by the end of the year.
...A free trade agreement between the EU and India would be the largest deal of this kind anywhere in the world,” president of the Commission Ursula von der Leyen said on Friday in New Dehli, adding: “This is why we have agreed with Prime Minister Modi to push to get it done during this year.”
That timetable is ambitious, given that the last two decades have produced little in the way of results between the two sides, who began negotiations over a trade deal in 2007, but subsequently saw these frozen over a decade between 2013 and 2022.
The EU is making India a priority in an increasingly uncertain geopolitical context, where existing alliances appear fragile. “I am well aware it will not be easy” von der Leyen said, “but I also know that timing and determination counts, and that this partnership comes at the right moment for both of us.”
The EU hopes to get access to the India market for its cars and spirits, despite high India tariffs, as reported. It also hopes to conclude an agreement on investment and Geographical Indications quickly.
The EU is expecting difficult negotiations on agriculture, since farmers fear unfair competition from non-European importers. The issue is also thorny for India, which relies mainly on small scale farms for production.
(Excerpt) Read more at euronews.com ...
And they can do this because the probability that they have significant overlaps in products and capabilities is low. Tariffs are designed to shield local industries from being wiped out by those in another country that benefit from a special advantage. That advantage could be lower cost of production due to cheaper power or available infrastructure. It could be because the wage structure of the competition is significantly lower. The tariff is, or rather should be, designed to compensate for the advantage. A blanket tariff meaning protection for the sake of protection itself often hurts the country imposing it because their industries have no incentive to innovate. Products locally made but protected by high tariffs often cost more in their own country than they should because the manufacturer, due to tariff protection, can charge whatever he wants.
Domestic producers compete with each other, innovate etc. So you premise is flawed.
You assume monopoly status and no domestic competition. Again, your premise is flawed.
“Domestic producers compete with each other, innovate etc. So you premise is flawed.”
I am thinking specifically of Japan, where the local producers have a consortium and do not compete with one another. A similar thing happens in South Korea.
Their products do actually improve. That improvement is driven by cutthroat competition in the rest of the world. But the local prices remain higher than real competition would allow.
Cool . Can we send all the Indians in America to Europe now too? They are worse ethnic group currently invading America
Amusing. Because, of course, it is from India that the EU gets its Russian oil.
Sherman anti trust law:
The Sherman Act broadly prohibits 1) anticompetitive agreements and 2) unilateral conduct that monopolizes or attempts to monopolize the relevant market. The Act authorizes the Department of Justice to bring suits to enjoin (i.e. prohibit) conduct violating the Act, and additionally authorizes private parties injured by conduct violating the Act to bring suits for treble damages (i.e. three times as much money in damages as the violation cost them). Over time, the federal courts have developed a body of law under the Sherman Act making certain types of anticompetitive conduct per se illegal, and subjecting other types of conduct to case-by-case analysis regarding whether the conduct unreasonably restrains trade.
Yup. German car companies need somewhere not sanctioned to sell. And German cars and the whole EU booze business as well as cars is the focus of finding a place "not President Trump" and "not tariffed" to play their games. India, bigger than the EU in populace, calls as a market. But probably not for expensive cars and fine wines....
Korea and Japan, the two examples I studied while getting my MBA operate on their own laws and to an alien business culture. In Korea a small group of families own all the big companies. In Japan, the government helped organized monopolies and made Japan a protected market to help those companies succeed.
Their culture and religion is abhorrent to Western civilization and don’t belong here.
I think they would have overlaps in
1. Agriculture - I would guess rice v/s Italian rice farmers plus also whiskey: irish v/s indian.
2. Software services - though this might be complementary.
Overall you are correct
“We should set domestic economic policy based on foreign economies.”
Here are a couple of thoughts. I’m not advocating a position, just exploring the subject. The local Japanese rules keeping their domestic prices high are favoring significantly lower prices for the American consumer. I’ve spoken to lots of foreign students, and they are astonished at how cheap things are here. That includes everything across the board, cars, energy, food, and consumer products. This is because their local governments rape and pillage because they can.
The major reasons American manufacturers left are because the union labor costs were significantly higher than anywhere else. The federal, state and local laws often added even more “benefits” like unemployment insurance which is simply and addition tax. Because they can.
Federal, state and local laws and ordinances greatly and I mean hugely increase the cost of anything a company wants to do. Because they can.
To redress this, we’d need labor to be reasonable. We’d need the governments to limit the insane taxes, fees and interference. We’d need to cut down the number of approvals needed for anything. As an example, General Dynamics decided to save money and build only the amount of the approved, paved parking lot that they needed at the moment. A year later when they went to pave the rest, they were required to submit another $30,000 environmental report, which was a copy of the last one plus an additional $30,000 fee. Because the government can do this.
When Elon went to China to build a factory, all the paperwork was handled by the government, and he was building in the first week. We could do that too. But the purpose of the paperwork is to create government jobs and produce revenue.
We should NOT set domestic economic policy based on foreign economies.
Fixed it.
In retaliation for President Trump seeking free (and fair) trade, our former allies will engage in... (drum roll)... free trade.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.