[AU/CA/CO/CR/JP/KR/MX/NZ/PE/US propose; PK considering; CH oppose: No Party
may require a service supplier of another Party [MU oppose: to establish or maintain a
commercial presence, or] to be resident [AU/JP propose: or domiciled], in its territory as a
condition for the supply of a service as described in Article I-1.2(a), (b), and (d).]
Interesting that China opposes that one. I wonder how they proceed on that basis? Would the other members included it but only allow China access if they opened offices?
Reading some of it, it sounds a lot like a global services "FTA" for those signed up. It certainly means when it comes into effect the UK will be able to trade freely with most of the industrialised world in services (if those countries allow access which I suspect the Anglosphere / EU will certainly.
Interesting that China opposes that one. I wonder how they proceed on that basis? Would the other members included it but only allow China access if they opened offices?
Reading some of it, it sounds a lot like a global services "FTA" for those signed up. It certainly means when it comes into effect the UK will be able to trade freely with most of the industrialised world in services (if those countries allow access which I suspect the Anglosphere / EU will certainly.
CH = Switzerland. China is not part of the negotiations.
Does every state in the USA have to agree or is it only every state in the EU?
In a way more so. If for example California, Texas and New York are not happy then it is very unlikely to pass both the House and Senate. That's why Obama tried to push through fast track authority which would have meant that Congress would not be able to vote on amendments of trade agreements but only vote yes or no.
I hate to break it to you but TISA only works between countries that have agreed to it... and as much as you can't stomach the fact that the EU with its 27 is part of it, it just is.
Of course there is nothing to prevent the UK, once it has left the EU and is a full member of the WTO, to try to negotiate with the US, but considering that the UK is a tiny market for the US it's very unlikely that UK will get very far, especially bearing in mind how extremely protective any US government has been, is and will be of their own financial services.
The U.K. is not a tiny market for the US. We are each other's biggest inwards investors for a start. Yes it's smaller than the combined EU market but as a country we are a big market for them. It's really annoying when you remoaners try and run this country and it's significance down. We are small geographically but we're the 5th richest country on the world.
Civitas said that 3.2 percent of all German jobs are linked to exports to the U.K, whereas only 2.4 percent of British jobs are reliant on Germany. Almost one in 10 jobs in Ireland, Malta, Cyprus, and Belgium are connected to trade with the U.K.
Close all those tabs. Open this email.
Get Bloomberg's daily newsletter.
“It will be the pressure of their citizens on national governments that will force continental politicians to recognize that what is good for Britain and British workers is also good for their own populations,” Christopher Mills, business spokesman for the U.K. Independence Party, which campaigned for Brexit, said in a statement. “A fair deal that allows freedom to trade without unrestricted freedom of movement is the clear best solution, for us, and for them.”
A bit of an odd comparison as when we leave the EU, we aren't just making it harder to trade with Germany, but with all 27 EU countries. So % of jobs linked to all EU trade would have been the correct comparison.
Comments
Reading the TiSA doc from here https://ttip-leaks.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/09.-Localization-provisions.pdf
I noticed this one from June 2016
Interesting that China opposes that one. I wonder how they proceed on that basis? Would the other members included it but only allow China access if they opened offices?
Reading some of it, it sounds a lot like a global services "FTA" for those signed up. It certainly means when it comes into effect the UK will be able to trade freely with most of the industrialised world in services (if those countries allow access which I suspect the Anglosphere / EU will certainly.
CH = Switzerland. China is not part of the negotiations.
Have a look at https://ttip-leaks.org/favez/05-financial-services/?pdf=https://ttip-leaks.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/05.-Financial-services.pdf to get a better view as to how little agreement there is. Even where the EU and the US agree on points you have at least the Swiss or another big player opposing any proposal.
The agreement can't be signed until all parties involved are happy unless a country voluntarily drops out and thus removes their demands.
Does every state in the USA have to agree or is it only every state in the EU?
In a way more so. If for example California, Texas and New York are not happy then it is very unlikely to pass both the House and Senate. That's why Obama tried to push through fast track authority which would have meant that Congress would not be able to vote on amendments of trade agreements but only vote yes or no.
The U.K. is not a tiny market for the US. We are each other's biggest inwards investors for a start. Yes it's smaller than the combined EU market but as a country we are a big market for them. It's really annoying when you remoaners try and run this country and it's significance down. We are small geographically but we're the 5th richest country on the world.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-09-22/eu-has-more-to-lose-than-u-k-if-brexit-leads-to-trade-curbs
The European Union would be hit harder than the U.K. if Britain faced trade barriers following its decision to leave the bloc, according to a study published Friday.
A bit of an odd comparison as when we leave the EU, we aren't just making it harder to trade with Germany, but with all 27 EU countries. So % of jobs linked to all EU trade would have been the correct comparison.