Trade deal between South Korea and the US takes effect

[alp227]

Source: BBC

The long-delayed free trade agreement between South Korea and the US has come into effect, amid protests in Seoul.

The deal, signed five years ago, is the biggest such agreement for the US in 16 years and comes as Seoul is trying to open its markets to other trading partners.

US President Barack Obama spoke with South Korean President Lee Myung-bak on the phone to mark the launch.

But many South Koreans expressed scepticism about who will benefit.

Read more: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-17377444

[vaberella]

1. Wait this was signed 5 years ago...

But I kept reading that Obama brokered this deal? What's going on?

[Lasher]

3. It was signed 5 years ago by GWB but that version was never ratified.

A renegotiated version of the KORUS FTA was signed by Obama in late 2010 and ratified by the US Congress a year later.

[vaberella]

4. Thanks. A question...

Do you know if there is a site that lists the positives and negatives of this contract between the two nations?

[Lasher]

6. Such assessments are often distorted by bias.

For a relatively objective account, I recommend this Wikipedia article as a starting point. The Effects section might be of particular interest to you.

You should also check back on this DU thread, as I expect there will be more of us weighing in on the subject today.

FWIW, I don't like NAFTA and I expect this new FTA to be pretty much the same. Congress ratified FTAs with Colombia and Panama on the same day they passed the KORUS FTA.

[fasttense]

2. Many South Koreans expressed scepticism

They are right to be skeptical. These free trade deals are horrible for both countries. Only the uber rich international corporations make out in the end. The rest of us merely suffer the consequences.

[Kolesar]

5. Korea's arcane regulations were designed to keep American electronic companies from selling there

The country had safety requirements that were actually a market barrier to companies like my employer. Their agencies also wanted big filing fees, so they can extort money from us if we tried to sell there.

[fasttense]

7. I doubt Korea's minor purchases will make a dent in the $115 Billion US Trade deficit.

It will probobly only make it worse.

[Lasher]

9. New FTAs with Colombia and South Korea are likely to increase our trade deficit by $16.8 billion.

This is according to a 2010 study by the Economic Policy Institute. Their analysis then shows that the increased trade deficit per se will correspond to the loss of 214,000 jobs in the U.S. by 2015.

http://www.epi.org/publication/trade_policy_and_job_loss/

[Lasher]

8. Obama Does a "Lose-Lose" by South Korea Free Trade Agreement

Sat, 12/04/2010

Obama has announced a new trade agreement with South Korea. There is just one new tweak that is better than before, the tariff schedule on autos.

The new agreement calls for South Korea to reduce its tariff on U.S. auto imports from 8% to 4%, and fully eliminate it in five years.

Meanwhile, the 2.5% U.S. tariff on auto imports will remain in place until the fifth year, instead of being immediately eliminated as specified in the 2007 agreement.

Here's what Public Citizen said about the auto tweaks:

Merely tweaking the “cars and cows” market access provisions of Bush’s NAFTA-style Korea trade pact but leaving in place the offshoring-promoting foreign investor protections is a slap in the face to the majority of Americans who, according to repeated polls, oppose the same old trade policy that has cost millions of American jobs.

http://www.economicpopulist.org/content/obama-does-lose-lose-south-korea-free-trade-agreement

For the next 5 years South Korea will have a net 1.5% tariff on US auto imports. That's better than the exasperating 5.5% difference that would have continued under GWB's 2007 agreement, had it been ratified. But US automakers did not get a level playing field out of this.

South Korea has pledged to stop the outright rejection of US beef shipments, and to reduce their current 40% tariff on US beef over the next 15 years.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/03/news/03iht-oxan.0403.5124955.html?_r=1