[CTC] Chamber Policy Panel Recommends TPP Support, But Hints At Need For Changes

[Arthur Stamoulis]

Begin forwarded message:

From: "Dolan, Mike" 
Subject: Chamber Policy Panel Recommends TPP Support, But Hints At Need For Changes
Date: December 2, 2015 at 7:18:54 AM EST
Reply-To: "Dolan, Mike" 

"... Tobacco companies, brand-name pharmaceutical manufacturers, financial services firms and the Ford Motor Company made clear during the meeting that they are unable to support the TPP deal in its current form, while other companies such as Cargill conveyed their enthusiastic support, according to industry sources. Still other Chamber members fall in between those two extremes ..."

Chamber Policy Panel Recommends TPP Support, But Hints At Need For Changes
Posted: December 01, 2015 
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce on Monday (Nov. 30) moved one step closer to coming out in support of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) agreement when its international policy committee agreed in principle to send a policy recommendation to the board of directors that will generally endorse the deal but include language hinting at the need for changes, according to industry sources.

These sources provided differing characterizations of this additional language, which is still being drafted by Chamber staff. One source described it as laying forth “qualifications” to the Chamber's support for TPP, while another signaled it would not go that far.

This source said the language would likely state that the Chamber will continue to work with the Obama administration, Congress and other TPP governments to get the most commercially meaningful deal possible.

The international policy committee agreed in principle on its recommendation despite divisions within the Chamber's membership on the TPP deal reached on Oct. 5.     

Tobacco companies, brand-name pharmaceutical manufacturers, financial services firms and the Ford Motor Company made clear during the meeting that they are unable to support the TPP deal in its current form, while other companies such as Cargill conveyed their enthusiastic support, according to industry sources. Still other Chamber members fall in between those two extremes.

Chamber Executive Vice President and Head of International Affairs Myron Brilliant made reference to these divisions during the meeting, saying he did not remember the Chamber's members ever having been this divided over a free trade agreement, sources said. 

Some members who do not support the agreement as negotiated believe that if the Chamber comes out in support of the TPP too early, it would give up its leverage with the administration to secure changes to the provisions of the agreement that they oppose, according to industry sources.

But other Chamber members are pressing for an early statement of support because they believe coming out in favor of the deal may buy the business group more leverage to push for changes, as the administration may be more likely to listen to an ally than an adversary, one industry source said. 

Even some of the biggest business cheerleaders for the TPP agreement say that the deal in its current form would be unlikely to garner sufficient votes to secure congressional passage, given the objections voiced by Senate Finance Committee Chairman Orrin Hatch (R-UT) and other lawmakers historically supportive of trade deals.

Sources differed on whether the final language of the Chamber's policy recommendation would need to be approved by the international policy committee before being presented to the board. It is also unclear when the Chamber's board might consider the recommendation and make a decision on it, although that is considered to be a pro-forma step.

The administration has already begun engaging with U.S. financial services firms about their objections to two aspects of the TPP. 

The first is that fact that language in the TPP prohibiting governments from requiring data be stored on local servers does not apply to the financial services sector. The second is a provision that allows Malaysia to maintain a screening mechanism under which it can block foreign investments in financial services on the broad grounds that they are not in the best interest of Malaysia.

Officials from the Treasury Department and the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative met with financial services industry representatives on Nov. 20 for a discussion that focused on the server localization ban, but did not provide any indication whether the administration was willing to change its opposition to the ban in TPP or future trade agreements, sources said.

Treasury has opposed the inclusion of language in trade agreements that would ban server localization requirements for the financial services sector, under the argument that it wanted to preserve space to impose such requirements in the future. 

The meeting consisted largely of industry representatives rehashing their objections to the U.S. approach, and U.S. officials offering an explanation of why they believed they had been addressed, according to these sources.

Industry representatives offered a mixed reaction to the meeting, with some expressing frustration that the case of the industry had already been laid out multiple times, while others viewing it as a positive development that the administration is engaging on the issue, sources said.

USTR has historically been more sympathetic to the industry's position than Treasury, although sources said the administration officials delivered a common position at the Nov. 20 meeting, sources said.

Related News |  FTA Central <http://insidetrade.com/topic/FTA-Central> |  Trans-Pacific Partnership <http://insidetrade.com/topic/Trans-Pacific-Partnership> |

Dolan
Teamsters
USA



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.citizenstrade.org/pipermail/ctcfield-citizenstrade.org/attachments/20151202/0ed216b5/attachment.htm>