According to Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade pact is necessary to demonstrate US’ commitment  to engage with the Asia-Pacific region.   Furthermore,  the TPP involves the US and 11 other countries including Japan and Australia, when combined results in 40% of the world’s GDP.  “The TPP is a key part of the US’ rebalancing towards Asia and an instrument to deepen this relationship”. So why the hesitation? Read more in the article below.

US to lose a great deal if TPP pact isn’t ratified: PM (PUBLISHED: JUNE 28, 2014)

NEW YORK — The United States would stand to lose a great deal if ratification of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade pact became a problem, said Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong as he wrapped up a six-day working visit to Washington DC and New York.

In an interview with Singapore media, Mr Lee said failing to ratify the trade pact would be very damaging and call into question the US’ commitment to and engagement with the Asia-Pacific region.

Negotiations for the TPP — which involves the US and 11 other countries including Japan and Australia, which combined make up about 40 per cent of the world’s gross domestic product — could conclude by November. US’ ratification of the trade pact requires the support of its Congress.

Mr Lee, who met Congressmen and other key officials during his trip, said he made the TPP pitch to everyone he met and received a range of reactions.

“I think many understood the imperative, but there are some political considerations, of course. You’ve got the elections coming and even beyond the elections, you want to have something which is saleable to the voters,” he said. “And while a good number said yes … there were also a few who listened to me and reserved their positions. So I don’t know how they will decide, but I hope I have left them something to think about.”

Mr Lee has pitched strongly for the TPP in recent days, such as during a dialogue held at a think tank in Washington DC. He also called on business leaders to lend their support at such events as a reception to commemorate the 10th anniversary of Singapore’s free trade agreement with the US.

The TPP is a key part of the US’ rebalancing towards Asia and an instrument to deepen this relationship, he said. The region is moving, such as through the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership involving the Association of South-east Asian Nations, China, Japan, South Korea, Australia, New Zealand and India. “So if America is not moving, you may be part of the game, but you’re not in play.”

Asked about the receptiveness of US Vice-President Joe Biden and National Security Adviser Susan Rice during meetings with them, Mr Lee said they are completely convinced of the TPP. It was foremost on US President Barack Obama’s mind when he joined the meeting with Ms Rice for a few minutes, Mr Lee added.

“So I’m convinced that the Administration wants it; what we need to be able to know is that between the Administration and Congress, and the American people, they can work together to deliver the ratification.”

Mr Obama was reported last week saying he hoped for a document to present to the public and stakeholders by the time he travels to Asia in November. The meeting of the Group of Twenty leaders will take place in Australia and the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) leaders meet in Beijing that month.

On how the South China Sea disputes between China and four Southeast Asian countries affect the US’ rebalancing towards Asia, Mr Lee said the Americans’ strategic move is happening regardless of specific issues, such as the territorial rows in the South and East China Seas.

The US has a legitimate interest in the South China Sea issue because of freedom of navigation and international law, but stable US-China relations are important, he said. “I told them, it depends on what you say, it depends on how you act, also it depends on how you interact with China and with the other participants in the region.”

Marisol R.

It feels good to know that EMBA students are not alone in doing HW.  However, we know to do extensive research before presenting facts or writing a report.  It’s disappointing to read that tariffs were being reported to be at a record low, which contradicts information from the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). Although tariff restrictions on agricultural imports are about 2.2%, the non-tariff barriers jumps to 17.0%, and Japan’s all-in tariff equivalent on agricultural imports is 38.3%. South Korea’s is 48.9%, and Australia’s is 29.5%.” I too cannot conclude that tariffs are “universally low”. Read the article below for more interesting facts. 

More homework, please  (Feb 28th 2014 by R.A. | LONDON)

BACK in December, Paul Krugman promised to provide his opinion of the Trans-Pacific Partnership, writing to readers, “I’ll do some homework and get back to you.” Today, his column provides his opinion of the TPP. It doesn’t provide much evidence that he did his homework. Mr Krugman writes:

The first thing you need to know about trade deals in general is that they aren’t what they used to be. The glory days of trade negotiations — the days of deals like the Kennedy Round of the 1960s, which sharply reduced tariffs around the world — are long behind us.Why? Basically, old-fashioned trade deals are a victim of their own success: there just isn’t much more protectionism to eliminate. Average U.S. tariff rates have fallen by two-thirds since 1960. The most recent report on American import restraints by the International Trade Commission puts their total cost at less than 0.01 percent of G.D.P.Implicit protection of services — rules and regulations that have the effect of, say, blocking foreign competition in insurance — surely impose additional costs. But the fact remains that, these days, “trade agreements” are mainly about other things. What they’re really about, in particular, is property rights — things like the ability to enforce patents on drugs and copyrights on movies. And so it is with T.P.P.

t’s just not clear to me how anyone who had looked at available information on the TPP could have arrived at this conclusion.

It is true that tariff rates on goods have come down enormously over the past half century. In macroeconomic terms, there is very little left to be gained from further reductions (though little is not nothing, of course). But tariff rates are not universally low. On some categories of goods they remain quite high, and while those categories might be too small to make liberalization macro economically important, tariff-reduction might nonetheless be micro economically desirable. Slashing tariffs on equipment used in wind-power installations or solar-energy facilities will not make a dent in GDP growth. But it would still be a really good thing to do. And trade in environmental goods and services is part of the TPP agenda.

Second, one of the stated ambitions of both TPP and the Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership is reduction in non-tariff barriers, which in most cases add substantially more to goods costs than tariff barriers. According to estimates by the World Bank, for instance, American tariff restrictions on agricultural imports are relatively low on the whole, at just 2.2%. But the tariff equivalent of an all-in measure of restrictiveness, which takes into account non-tariff barriers, jumps to 17.0%. The all-in rates for many of the partners in TPP negotiations are substantially higher; Japan’s all-in tariff equivalent on agricultural imports is 38.3%. South Korea’s is 48.9%. Australia’s is 29.5%.

Third, “implicit protection of services” does indeed impose additional costs. For instance, the cost to foreign providers of some crucial transport and shipping services within the American market is basically infinite. Services account for four times as much economic output as goods production in America but only around one-fifth of American trade. Many services aren’t tradable, of course; haircut tariffs will not be on the TPP agenda. But a growing array are. And rules on service trade have barely changed at all in two decades. TTIP and TPP (as well as the Trade in Services Agreement) are aimed at updating rules on services trade to make it easier to sell insurance, or financial and consulting services, or IT and environmental services, and so on, across borders. Now maybe these deals are “really about” intellectual property, and all-powerful Hollywood has convinced the government to expend a lot of time and effort setting standards for services trade, the better to provide a smokescreen for its own nefarious activities. But I doubt it.

Investment is another key item on the agenda. At present rules on cross-border investment can be pretty ad hoc; a firm interested in buying shares in a business in another country often needs to be careful not to buy too much or not to invest in politically sensitive industries, lest the investment invite political scrutiny. TPP is working to reduce the scope for ad-hoc interference in investment, which I think we would generally consider to be a good thing. TTIP is as well (that’s what the “I” is all about).

The list goes on. Both TTIP and TPP are taking steps toward regulatory harmonization. It’s a huge problem for firms when they need to get products separately approved by multiple governments. If the governments can all agree to a similar set of standards and then to honor each others’ approvals, then costs to firms and consumers for everything from food products to light bulbs to medical equipment could fall substantially. It’s also important to recognize that a lot of this stuff simply hasn’t been done at scale before, and TPP and TTIP aren’t intended to sweep away whole categories of barriers at a stroke, anymore than goods tariffs were slashed to almost nothing in one round of talks.

They are meant to start a new and important phase of liberalization, however. It would honestly be very difficult to read much at all on the deals and miss that point.

http://www.economist.com/multimedia

http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2014/02/trade?zid=293&ah=e50f636873b42369614615ba3c16df4a

Wow, it’s amazing how the core curriculum for EMBA all makes sense.  As I searched through the internet to read on global expansion, I came across an article which discussed how Modality systems are expanding into Australia.  The very same SaaS services we discussed in our IT class and mentioned in the Zuora case study.  These modality systems offer “a range of end-to-end services from strategic consultancy and design, to deployment, end-user adoption and customized applications on behalf of Microsoft”. This article definitely hit home for me as I was part of the group assigned to present on Zuora.

Modality Systems Announces Expansion of Global Operations to Australia

Seattle, WA (PRWEB) May 22, 2014

The global expansion for Modality Systems is part of the continued growth of its global operations and part of a strategic plan to strengthen its activities in the APAC region. Justin Morris who is currently a Senior Consultant within the EMEA operations will return to his native homeland to head up the expansion as Managing Consultant of Modality Systems Pty Ltd.

Justin, who is a Microsoft Most Valuable Professional (MVP) for Lync as well as a well-respected and recognized figure within the UC market, has a wealth of technical and customer experience and has been instrumental in the growth of the Modality business over the last 5 years. He deployed the largest Lync voice project in the UK in 2012/2013 and has since been involved in a number of high profile consulting projects. He is also a regular speaker at industry events such as TechEd North America and Lync Conference, as well as the Co-Founder of Microsoft Unified Communication User Group London (MUCUGL) and a contributor to the UC Architects Podcast.

John Lamb, Co-founder and President of Modality Systems stated, The growth of our global business has been staggering over the last few years and the demand for our consulting and support expertise continues to grow. Expanding our activities into APAC is the next logical step with the goal of further developing the operations in the region to mirror the established activities in North America and EMEA.

John continues, Justin has been with us for nearly 5 years. His depth of knowledge in the UC space and approach to helping organizations realize the value of extending their UC investments, makes him the ideal candidate to head up our Australian office which will play a pivotal part in the continued global success.

About Modality Systems 
Modality Systems is a specialist provider of Unified Communications (UC) services, associated products and custom development software for Microsoft Lync. Combining in depth technical expertise with a professional consulting approach, we have an enviable track record in delivering successful projects globally, working with clients to optimize their investment and the value of UC.

Modality offers a range of end-to-end services from strategic consultancy and design, to deployment, end-user adoption and customized applications. Our consultants are some of the highest qualified in the Lync world, authoring leading Lync publications and carrying out Lync consultancy projects on behalf of Microsoft.

Modality was founded in 2007 and has offices in several locations in the UK and US to support the deployment and support of its global customer base. We are a Microsoft Gold competency partner for Communications and one of a limited number of Microsoft Lync Certified Support Partners.

Modality is consistently among the top Microsoft Lync partners in terms of number of seats delivered and have twice been awarded the Microsoft UK Unified Communications Partner of the Year Award.

Our reputation for successful deployments and delivering the highest level of support means we have a very satisfied client base of local and global customers and can boast the largest UK Enterprise Voice deployment, as well as the largest global Microsoft Certified Lync Support contract.

For the original version on PRWeb visit: http://www.prweb.com/releases/2014/05/prweb11870182.htm

Marisol R.

This article is a great example of cutting the “red tape” with importing and/or exporting of cargo. Businesses will now be able to electronically import and/or export cargo.   A process which often took days, can now be executed in minutes. Go Obama!

Obama’s order aimed at streamlining export import process: By Daniel Enoch

WASHINGTON, D.C., Feb. 19, 2014 – President Obama today will sign an executive order aimed at streamlining the export and import process for U.S. businesses, the White House said.

Through a new International Trade Data System (ITDS), businesses will be able to electronically transmit, through a “single-window,” government-required data to import or export cargo. Currently, information must be submitted to dozens of government agencies, often on paper, a process that can take days. The new system will allow processing in minutes, the White House said.

“This Executive Order is especially important to small and medium companies that depend on global trade,” the White House said in a news release. “Once fully implemented, the ITDS will dramatically reduce the time and expense for businesses to move the more than 50 million containers and $3.8 trillion worth of goods that cross our borders each year.”

Though the development of the ITDS has been underway for some time, Obama’s order sets a December 2016 deadline for completion and requires relevant agencies to transition from paper-based to electronic data collection, according to the White House.

Additionally, a newly expanded Border Interagency Executive Council (BIEC) will be responsible for improving coordination among the dozens of agencies with import and export requirements and with outside stakeholders.  The BIEC is charged with cutting red tape and reducing supply chain inefficiencies, while managing the risks presented by goods flowing in and out of the U.S., the White House said.

The executive order is one way in which Obama is making good on his State of the Union promise to make 2014 a year of action, by using his pen and his phone to take steps that expand opportunity for America’s middle class, the White House said. The president planned to sign the order today as he traveled on Air Force One to Mexico.

For more news, go to: www.agri-pulse.com

© Copyright Agri-Pulse Communications, Inc.

Marisol R.

[contact-form][contact-field label=’Marisol Ramos’ type=’name’ required=’1’/][contact-field label=’[email protected]’ type=’email’ required=’1’/][contact-field label=’Website’ type=’url’/][contact-field label=’Comment’ type=’textarea’ required=’1’/][/contact-form

(Side note)  Baruch’s International Business class and curriculum has been extremely informative.  I became interested in learning more about the Global Market, trade, tariffs, export, and import implications around the world while participating in this particular class of International Business Fundamentals (IBS 9600).  This class has increased my awareness and interest in learning more about other countries and the global economy.

In a recent search on the internet, I came across an impressive Management Plan designed specifically for Trade that I thought may be of interest to others.  I was surprised to find out that a strategic plan has been designed and published to foster trade and growth in the global economy.

1. MISSION STATEMENT

The European Commission’s Directorate-General for Trade implements the EU’s trade policy in order to help secure prosperity, solidarity and security in Europe and around the globe.

DG Trade contributes to shaping a trade environment that is good for European citizens and European business.

2. THIS YEAR’S CHALLENGES: PERSONAL MESSAGE BY JEAN-LUC DEMARTY, DIRECTOR GENERAL, DG TRADE

DG Trade seeks to implement  two general objectives — driving growth by improving trade conditions for European companies and fostering sustainable development around the world. Read the full article, link is provided below.

http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2013/january/tradoc_150230.pdf

Marisol R.

[contact-form][contact-field label=’Marisol Ramos’ type=’name’ required=’1’/][contact-field label=’[email protected]’ type=’email’ required=’1’/][contact-field label=’Website’ type=’url’/][contact-field label=’Comment’ type=’textarea’ required=’1’/][/contact-form] From Ted Talk:

James Glattfelder studies complexity: how an interconnected system — say, a swarm of birds — is more than the sum of its parts. And complexity theory, it turns out, can reveal a lot about how the economy works. Glattfelder shares a groundbreaking study of how control flows through the global economy, and how concentration of power in the hands of a shockingly small number leaves us all vulnerable. (Filmed at TEDxZurich.)

Check out this amazing TED Talk:

James B. Glattfelder: Who controls the world?

Sent from TED app for iOS
http://itunes.com/apps/tedconferences/ted

Marisol R.