Op-Eds and Speeches Archives

Fighting for American Business: USCIB in the News in 2017

Published on January 16, 2018

Throughout 2017, USCIB President and CEO Peter M. Robinson, alongside other USCIB leaders and staff, garnered important coverage from the news media on issues critical to USCIB members. Policy issues ranged from NAFTA and the need to enshrine investor protections to the need for reform at the United Nations.

USCIB members and committee leaders, particularly Jerry Cook of Hanesbrands and Tam Nguyen of Bechtel, also made headlines on issues such as customs and trade facilitation and the evolution of corporate sustainability standards, respectively.

“USCIB won important news coverage in a wide variety of areas,” said Jonathan Huneke, USCIB’s vice president for communications and public affairs. “Thanks to outstanding thought leadership from USCIB President Robinson, as well as committee leaders and our staff experts, we were able to consistently punch above our weight, holding our own in a crowded media environment.”

Read the full 2017 media review here. To request an interview with a USCIB expert, contact USCIB Communications.

USCIB Op-ed: It’s Time to Save NAFTA

Published on October 27, 2017

USCIB President and CEO Peter M. Robinson has joined ICC Mexico Chair Maria Fernanda Garza and Canadian Chamber of Commerce CEO Perrin Beatty in publishing an op-ed, “A trade deal in distress: It’s time to save NAFTA,” in The Hill.

The op-ed has also been published in Spanish in the Mexican newspaper El Economista.

The op-ed comes as negotiators from the United States, Canada and Mexico take stock following the most recent round of talks, which exposed divisions between the U.S. and its two neighbors on a variety of issues.

The three business leaders express their support of efforts to improve and modernize NAFTA. They also state their concern over proposals that they believe are inconsistent with the principles of free trade and free enterprise, calling them “a dramatic reversal of long-held U.S. trade policy objectives” that “would greatly restrict, rather than enhance, cross-border commerce.”

Please click here to read the op-ed in its entirety on The Hill’s website.

USCIB Op-ed: NAFTA 2.0 Needs to Protect Investment

Published on August 1, 2017

USCIB’s Vice President for Investment and Financial Services Shaun Donnelly along with its Director for Investment, Trade and Financial Services Eva Hampl recently contributed an op-ed in The Hill titled, “NAFTA 2.0 needs to enshrine investor protections.”

As the Trump administration gears up to update the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) later this month, Hampl and Donnelly evaluate the Trump administration’s negotiating objectives, which were released last month.

“Overall, the administration’s “NAFTA 2.0” wish-list is solid. Some commentators have noted the irony of including so many goals that were essentially attained in the Trans-Pacific Partnership, an agreement President Trump withdrew from on his third day in office,” they write. However, one of the more crucial objectives, mainly investor protection under the agreement’s Chapter 11 are not included.

“These provisions, which allow U.S. investors both small and large to seek compensation for unfair, discriminatory or inequitable treatment at the hands of foreign governments, are based on bedrock principles embedded in our own Constitution prohibiting abusive government treatment and the taking of private property without just compensation. Without this provision, domestic courts become the only legal recourse for a wronged investor. While Mexico has made great strides in many respects, its court system is still far from impartial. Indeed, miscarriages of justice can happen in any country, including advanced democracies like the United States and Canada,” they noted.

Please visit The Hill for the whole op-ed.

Robinson’s Op-ed in The Hill on Modernizing NAFTA

Published on June 21, 2017

USCIB President and CEO Peter M. Robinson wrote an Op-ed in The Hill, “How to Modernize NAFTA: First, do no Harm.”

Robinson cites a recent study by the Peterson Institute for International Economics, since the agreement’s implementation, U.S. trade with Canada and Mexico has more than tripled, with a positive impact on U.S. GDP of 0.5 percent, or several billion dollars of added growth per year.

However, he also writes that NAFTA needs to be updated in a way that solidifies the gains Americans have reaped from these transformations, while further enhancing our competitiveness.

The Op-ed is available here.

ICC’s Danilovich Writes in FT on Importance of Services to American Economy

Published on February 21, 2017

The Financial Times has published a letter to the editor from ICC Secretary General John Danilovich on the importance of services to the American economy. Danilovich, who has served as U.S. ambassador to Brazil and Costa Rica, writes that “tit-for-tat trade responses sparked by new border taxes could come at a considerable cost for the U.S. services sector– and the growing number of Americans whose livelihoods depend on it. When it comes to trade policy, nostalgia is no substitute for the realities of today’s global economy.”

To read Danilovich’s letter in the FT, please visit this link (subscriber log-in is required).

TTIP: Now More Than Ever, We Need a Common Vision for the Future

Published on January 5, 2017
USCIB President and CEO Peter M. Robinson
USCIB President and CEO Peter M. Robinson

By Peter M. Robinson, President and CEO, United States Council for International Business (USCIB)

This column was originally published in Echanges Internationaux, the magazine of ICC France, the French national committee of the International Chamber of Commerce.

The past year has been a disappointing one for transatlantic trade policy. More than ever, we must stand up for trade and investment, two keys for economic growth and job creation. Peter M. Robinson, President and CEO of the United States Council for International Business (ICC USA), puts forward some ideas for a common transatlantic business agenda.

Efforts by the United States and the European Union to negotiate a comprehensive, high-standard Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership have progressed at a disappointingly slow pace. As we near the end of the Obama administration (and look ahead to a Trump administration that promises a decidedly different approach to trade policy), TTIP has gotten mired in squabbling over a range of challenging issues and is now effectively sidelined.

These are challenging times for global companies and for major business organizations, including the International Chamber of Commerce and its national committees – such as ICC France and USCIB.

Strong, credible voices from business are more important than ever. The U.S., France and Europe more broadly all need more economic growth, more prosperity, more and better jobs. And as we in the ICC family know, one of the best ways to drive that growth is through increased international trade and investment. With that said, I would put forward the following as a common transatlantic business agenda that we can all agree on.

Keep pushing on trade liberalization

The U.S. and EU must keep pressing ahead on the important and challenging issues in TTIP. We cannot let the change of administration in the U.S., internal divisions within the EU, or other distractions deter us or our political leaders from achieving a comprehensive, ambitious, and balanced Transatlantic economic framework. TTIP was, and remains, our preferred option but that pathway seems blocked at least for the time being. It won’t be easy, and it won’t get done as fast as we’d like. But whether TTIP or some other comparable U.S.-EU agreement, it is more important to get a great agreement than to get a quick or easy agreement.

At the same time as we work to cement transatlantic ties, the U.S. and EU also need to keep providing strong leadership for the multilateral trading system, principally through support for and leadership of the World Trade Organization, which desperately needs a strong shot in the arm. The U.S. and Europe must work together to push forward an ambitious multilateral trade agenda for as we approach the WTO ministerial in Argentina in late 2017.

Work together on development

One key element of any WTO agenda needs to be a strong development pillar, designing and implementing creative ways the WTO trade regime can more effectively promote economic growth in the least developed countries, especially in Africa.

Through our “Business for 2030” initiative, USCIB had spearheaded efforts within the ICC network to provide proactive, constructive business participation in the UN Sustainable Development Goals and the 2030 Agenda. We would love to work more closely with ICC France and other leading ICC national committees in Europe on this effort, as we did successfully on the Paris Agreement on Climate Change. Our website www.businessfor2030.org provides additional information on this important effort.

Join forces on global taxation

Business needs clear, predictable, and fair tax regimes in order to plan and execute its operations. Both European and American business need to be more active, and more closely coordinated, in our participation in the G-20 and OECD efforts to reform global taxation. ICC France and USCIB actively engaged in the OECD’s Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS). We cannot allow the BEPS effort to get hijacked by those with an anti-business agenda.

Keep global organizations “open for business”

Unfortunately, some international organizations in the UN family are becoming hostile to the private sector, seeking to exclude business representatives from key meetings and to impose an anti-business agenda. Leading U.S. and European business groups, and the global ICC network, need to confront that discrimination, while actively supporting and growing the mutually beneficial relationships that do exist after over 70 years of consultative status with various UN agencies.

I have laid out a long and challenging agenda. I very much look forward to working with François Georges and his dynamic team at ICC France in all of these important areas. We have a lot to do, and a lot more that we can do together. Let’s get to work.

The U.S. and Mexico Must Work Together as Neighbors

Published on October 31, 2016

Flag Badges of America and Mexico in PileUSCIB Chairman Terry McGraw has joined with ICC Mexico Chair Maria Fernanda Garza in a joint appeal for the United States and Mexico to work together to address common challenges of trade, immigration and security.

In a joint op-ed in the Mexican newspaper El Financiero, the two business leaders urged their compatriots to reject the antagonism emanating from the U.S. campaign trail, reminding readers of the direct and measurable benefits the North American Free Trade Agreement has brought to both Mexicans and Americans alike.

McGraw and Fernanda Garza finished by reiterating that the business communities of both the United States and Mexico are united in their support for the Trans-Pacific Partnership, which they urged their respective legislatures to ratify without delay.

Please see below for the English translation of the op-ed. To read it in Spanish on El Financiero’s website, click here.

USCIB and ICC Mexico each serve as their country’s national committees of the International Chamber of Commerce.

 

The U.S. and Mexico Must Work Together as Neighbors

By Harold McGraw III and María Fernanda Garza

If the U.S. presidential campaign has reminded us of anything, it is the importance of neighborliness. Just as your own neighborhood deteriorates if you and your neighbors don’t communicate or work together well, so it is in business and international affairs.

Right now, on both sides of the U.S.-Mexico border, we face a stark choice: build walls, foster mistrust and disengage our economies – or work together to continue building shared prosperity. As representatives of the business communities from both nations, we strongly urge our fellow countrymen and our leaders to choose the latter course.

Since the North American Free Trade Agreement was negotiated more than 20 years ago, Mexico and the United States have enjoyed an increasingly close and mutually beneficial relationship that builds on our respective strengths and abilities, our vibrant economies and vast resources, our unique position as neighbors and, most importantly, our peoples. Mexico, the U.S. and Canada have turned North America into one of the most important and most dynamic free trade areas in the world. It has taken foresight and resolve.

Bilateral trade between Mexico and the U.S. has multiplied by six since NAFTA’s entry into force, reaching nearly $500 billion in 2015. Mexico is now the second-largest export market for U.S. goods and its second-largest supplier. It is estimated that U.S. trade with Mexico supports some six million American jobs.

With a growing, $1 trillion economy and a developing middle class that eagerly consumes U.S. and other foreign products, Mexico is the world’s 9th-largest world importer, and it buys 16 percent of everything the U.S. sells to the world. It is the largest export market for California, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas, and one of the three most important export markets for 29 other U.S. states.

This burgeoning trade relationship is built upon regional economic integration, cooperation and capitalizing on both nations’ competitiveness. Bilateral trade often occurs in the context of shared production, where manufacturers on each side of the border work together to produce goods. The development of robust supply chains as a result of NAFTA has translated into highly integrated trade in such key industries as automobiles, aerospace and electronics.

For instance, Mexican exports to the U.S. contain 40 percent of U.S. value-added, which is much higher than those from South Korea or China which are at five percent and four percent, respectively.

The U.S. and Mexico have a shared interest in fostering economic integration in North America, which is becoming, once again, the most competitive region in the world. Among other things, both countries need to ensure an efficient and secure border, the development of human capital for innovation and the growth of the services sector.

Businesses on both sides of the border firmly believe that the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) will further strengthen Mexico-U.S. relations, North American competitiveness and our shared prosperity by encouraging competition and setting new and modern disciplines in the Asia-Pacific Region. With TPP, North America will become an even more important export platform to the world, with the consequent creation of jobs. We therefore are urging our respective legislatures to quickly ratify the TPP.

Especially in the face of growing protectionist and isolationist sentiment, we cannot stress strongly enough the critical importance of closer cooperation between our two governments in fostering a strong U.S.-Mexico relationship – one that contributes to shared economic growth, competitiveness and prosperity throughout North America. As neighbors, we have a shared responsibility to keep the neighborhood safe and prosperous.

Harold McGraw III is chairman of the United States Council for International Business. Maria Fernanda Garza chairs the Mexican chapter of the International Chamber of Commerce.

Talking Responsibly About Trade and Investment

Published on October 14, 2016

container_ship

The recently launched OECD interim Economic Outlook reveals global GDP growth is projected to slow marginally to 2.9 percent in 2016, and acknowledges trade as an important driver of productivity growth — enhancing competitiveness, enabling greater specialization and facilitating knowledge transfer. Against this background, Bernhard Welschke, secretary general of Business at OECD, called on the OECD and member governments to communicate the benefits of trade more responsibly.

Read Welschke’s posting in the OECD Insights blog.

Transatlantic Trade Talks Lack European Leadership

Published on September 21, 2016

Originally published in the Wall Street Journal on September 20

Many details of TTIP still need to be negotiated. But what’s missing is a sign of seriousness from the EU.

By PETER ROBINSON and THOMAS NILES
Sept. 20, 2016 3:05 p.m. ET

us_eu_flags_3Readers following the progress of negotiations over the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership would be forgiven for thinking that a deal is now impossible. Between the Brexit vote, antitrade rhetoric on the U.S. presidential campaign trail and stern opposition by assorted European political leaders, TTIP appears to lack the kind of serious support needed to succeed.

The commercial and diplomatic logic behind TTIP remain as compelling as ever. An agreement would further open each side’s market to mutual trade, which currently amounts to more than $1 trillion annually. It would strengthen rules-based investment in what is already the world’s largest relationship for foreign direct investment. And it would improve market access for trade in services while tackling costly nontariff barriers, including regulatory obstacles.

Done right, the effort to roll back the impediments to trade and investment between the U.S. and the European Union could be a huge boost to both economies. Business leaders on both sides of the Atlantic are united in support of an ambitious agreement.

But progress in the 4-year-old talks has come more slowly than the governments or the business communities had hoped. TTIP certainly faces headwinds in the U.S., where the two major candidates in this presidential election have turned their backs on a half century of bipartisan trade policy and American global engagement. Instead, they pander to antitrade, isolationist, protectionist forces.

But the greatest challenge to TTIP right now comes from Europe, in the form of naked antitrade and anti-American prejudices from some European leaders.

Over the past couple of years, the European Parliament has consistently belittled American policies and positions, issuing unhelpful “red-line” declarations, for example, that no single EU policy or regulation could possibly be modified under a TTIP agreement, or that the U.S. would have to adopt wholesale the EU’s regulatory regime.

Particularly disappointing have been a series of high-level political statements in recent weeks from senior Austrian, French and German officials calling for a stop to TTIP negotiations because of American intransigence. These complaints are unfounded. In fact, the U.S. has been quite forthcoming about eliminating tariffs on industrial goods and agriculture, as well as removing barriers to trade in services and in government procurement. The EU has declared far more areas of negotiation to be off limits.

While Cecilia Malmström, the EU’s trade commissioner, has, to her credit, defended TTIP, the overall response from the European political leadership has been disappointing. Many prominent EU leaders have remained silent. And while Germany’s Chancellor Angela Merkel has shown consistency and courage with a strong defense of TTIP, too many other European leaders haven’t matched her commitment or clarity.

Like all real-world negotiations, getting to agreement on TTIP will require tough decisions and compromise. American business groups are joining with other stakeholders in pushing their government to achieve an ambitious,
comprehensive, high-standard TTIP agreement. They have consistently opposed, for instance, the U.S. government’s insistence that the regulation of financial services be excluded from TTIP.

But the real question isn’t what detailed provisions will be included in a TTIP agreement. Rather, it’s whether the EU is serious about the negotiations at all. Will European leaders simply use TTIP to mollify their own critics at home? If the EU is serious about cementing its member economies more closely to each other, then European leaders need to stand up in support of a deal, and they need to do so now. Meanwhile, the European Commission should move quickly to schedule multiple negotiating rounds with the U.S. before the end of the year.

The two sides have agreed to continue talking, with the next round of TTIP negotiations set for early October. Hopefully this will result in actual progress and not additional excuses for delay. Both the U.S. and EU need to show the courage, vision and commitment to the transatlantic relationship and to push forward for the kind of balanced, ambitious, high-standard TTIP that both economies need.

Mr. Robinson is president and CEO of the United States Council for International Business. Mr. Niles, the council’s past president, is a retired U.S. diplomat who served as ambassador to the European Union.

Investment Facilitation – UNCTAD’s Useful Agenda For Pragmatism Over Politics

Published on August 11, 2016

By Peter Robinson, President and CEO, United States Council for International Business

investment_buildingsWe in the international business community are, frankly, not in the habit of finding inspiration in policy papers on the sometimes politically-charged topic of international investment from the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), often seen as an organization more aligned with developing country governments. But a recent UNCTAD document, UNCTAD’s Global Action Menu for Investment Facilitation, discussed at last month’s UNCTAD’s Fourteenth Ministerial Conference and, in more detail, at its parallel World Investment Forum, is a valuable contribution to ongoing policy debates on international investment in developing countries, in the U.S., European Union and around the world.

Building off of the important model of the Trade Facilitation Agreement adopted at the World Trade Organization’s ministerial meeting in Bali in December 2013 and currently in the final stages of an extended ratification process among the WTO member countries, the UNCTAD proposal for an Investment Facilitation Action Agenda eschews broad and controversial policy issues related to international investment and, instead, focuses on concrete implementation and facilitation steps which governments, developed or developing, who chose to welcome Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) can take to improve their competitiveness as an FDI destination. Out with politicized policy debates on Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) and in with practical recommendations to help governments attract more and better foreign investments and to do it more quickly and efficiently.

Read the full column at Investment Policy Central.