US leaves TPP-dashed hopes for industry growth in Asia?

经济注解

  • 澳大利亚,
  • 中国,
  • 日本,
  • 马来西亚,
  • 新西兰,
  • 新加坡,
  • 美国,
  • 越南
  • 自动化/交通,
  • 建筑,
  • 电子/计算机技术,
  • 食品,
  • 一般经济,
  • 服务,
  • 纺织

2017年02月08日

The US decision to leave the TPP agreement could foretell profound economic and strategic implications for certain Asia Pacific economies and industries.

 

On January 23rd, President Trump formally withdrew the US from the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP); a trade agreement between 12 Pacific Rim countries. Some members, like Australia and Singapore, are trying to push for a TPP ratification despite the US withdrawal. The future of this trade agreement however is now in limbo at best, given that the US alone accounts for more than 60% of the signatories’ total GDP.

The US decision to pull out could foretell profound economic and strategic implications for certain Asia Pacific economies and industries.  

Australia and New Zealand: Mainly food producers and exporters and service providers would have benefited from increased market access to TPP markets.

Japan: Auto manufacturers are facing a setback in respect to improvement in long-term growth opportunities. Under the TPP agreement they would have gained better access to the US market, including manufacturing US-bound cars with more parts provided by (cheaper) Asian sources.

Malaysia: TPP envisaged improved access for palm oil exports to the US and other TPP markets due to decreased import tariffs. This would have provided Malaysian businesses with a competitive edge against Indonesian palm exporters. At the same time the Malaysian manufacturing and textile sectors expected significant increases in exports as a result of the access to a large duty free market, while more foreign companies would have increased investment in Malaysia to set up branches for regional operations.

Singapore: As the city state is largely export-oriented, many businesses exporting to the large US market would have benefited from the removal of duties on more types of goods than previous trade agreements provided for. Port facilities, shipping and trade financing are sectors that would have widely benefited from rising intra-TPP trade flows. TPP would have enabled Singapore companies in the IT, construction and consultancy sectors to bid for government procurement projects in markets such as Malaysia, Mexico and Vietnam, which were previously closed to foreign bidders.

Vietnam: The country was supposed to be a major beneficiary of a US-led TPP, which would have led to a significant increase in its medium-term growth prospects. However, it has shelved ratification immediately after the outcome of the US presidential elections, expecting the US to exit TPP. It is estimated that Vietnam’s GDP would have grown an additional 10% over the coming 10 years. Reduced and discontinued tariffs would have boosted growth in its export-oriented food, textiles, furniture and consumer electronics industries. For textile/footwear manufacturers alone better market access to Japan and the US was expected to boost export growth by about 50% over the next 10 years. The failure of TPP would leave Vietnam more economically isolated and dependent on China.

China: While not being a member of TPP, the US exit gives China a greater opportunity to shape trade and the economic order in the Asia Pacific region by launching its own trade agreements. Beijing is already actively promoting its own trade agreement known as the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), which would include several key TPP members, such as Japan and Australia.

While the US exit from TPP does not squash the growth prospects of TPP members, in the short term, it reduces some opportunities for more rapid growth given that the agreement was already in the ratification process.

免责声明

Each publication available on or from our websites, such as, but not limited to webpages, reports, articles, publications, tips and helpful content, trading briefs, infographics, videos (each a “Publication”) is provided for information purposes only and is not intended as a recommendation or advice as to particular transactions, investments or strategies in any way to any reader. Readers must make their own independent decisions, commercial or otherwise, regarding the information provided. While we have made every attempt to ensure that the information contained in any Publication has been obtained from reliable sources, Atradius is not responsible for any errors or omissions, or for the results obtained from the use of this information. All information in any Publication is provided ’as is’, with no guarantee of completeness, accuracy, timeliness or of the results obtained from its use, and without warranty of any kind, express or implied. In no event will Atradius, its related partnerships or corporations, or the partners, agents or employees thereof, be liable to you or anyone else for any decision made or action taken in reliance on the information in any Publication, or for any loss of opportunity, loss of profit, loss of production, loss of business or indirect losses, special or similar damages of any kind, even if advised of the possibility of such losses or damages.