CENTER FOR TRANSATLANTIC RELATIONS JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY | PAUL H.

NITZE SCHOOL OF ADVANCED INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
DANIEL S. HAMILTON
AND

JOSEPH P. QUINLAN
Annual Survey of Jobs, Trade and Investment
between the United States and Europe
THE

TRANSATLANTIC
ECONOMY 2014
EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
Center for Transatlantic Relations
American Consortium on EU Studies
EU Center of Excellence Washington, DC
The Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced
International Studies
The Johns Hopkins University
1717 Massachusetts Ave., NW, Suite 525
Washington, DC 20036
Tel: (202) 663-5880
Fax: (202) 663-5879
Email: transatlantic@jhu.edu
http://transatlantic.sais-jhu.edu
American Chamber of Commerce
to the European Union (AmCham EU)
www.amchameu.eu
Avenue des Arts 53
1000 Brussels, Belgium
Tel: +32 (0)2 513 68 92
Fax: +32 (0)2 513 79 28
Email: amchameu@amchameu.eu
Trans-Atlantic Business Council
www.transatlanticbusiness.org
Washington Office
919 18th Street, NW
Washington, DC 20006
Tel: +1 (202) 828-9104
Email: dnunnery@transatlanticbusiness.org
Brussels Office
Avenue de Cortenbergh 168
B-1000 Brussels
Tel: +32 2 514 05 01
Email: fm@transatlanticbusiness.org
1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
» Despite economic turbulence, the US and Europe remain
each other’s most important markets. No other commercial
artery in the world is as integrated.
» The transatlantic economy generates $5 trillion in total
commercial sales a year and employs up to 15 million
workers in “onshored” jobs on both sides of the Atlantic.
» The transatlantic economy is the largest and wealthiest
market in the world: over 50% of world GDP in terms of
value and 40% of GDP in terms of purchasing power.
» As globalization proceeds and emerging markets rise,
however, transatlantic markets are shifting from a position
of preeminence to one of predominance—still considerable,
but less overwhelming than in the past.
The Importance of TTIP
» Transatlantic zero-tariffs could boost US and EU exports
each by 17%—about five times more than under the US-
Korea free trade agreement.
» Eliminating/harmonizing half of non-tariff barriers
would add 0.7% to the EU economy and 0.3% to America’s
economy by 2018, 3 times more beneficial to US and EU than
current Doha Round offers. A 25% reduction in non-tariff
barriers could boost increase in combined EU and US GDP
by $106 billion.
2
» Eliminating services barriers to services would have
a substantial impact on jobs and growth, since most
American and European jobs are in the services economy,
and protected services sectors on both sides of the Atlantic
account for about 20% of combined US-EU GDP. Removing
services barriers would be equivalent to 50 years’ worth of
GATT and WTO liberalization of trade in goods.
» TTIP’s global impact could be even more important than
opening transatlantic commerce. Transatlantic alignment
on basic standards and norms is likely to set the tone for
high, WTO-plus global standards; failure will mean lowest-
common-denominator standards set by others.

Investment Drives the Transatlantic Economy
» The US and Europe are each other’s primary source and
destination for foreign direct investment.
The US in Europe
» Europe has attracted 56% of US global foreign direct
investment (FDI) since 2000.
» US FDI to Europe rose 6% in 2013 to $200 billion.
» The UK, the Netherlands and Ireland account for just over
79% of US investment to the EU since 2000.
» Within Europe, America’s top overseas market has shifted
from the UK to the Netherlands; US FDI is shifting to
Ireland and eastern Europe from much of western Europe.
3
» US FDI flows to Poland soared 103% in the first nine months
of 2013 from a year before. US investment stock in Poland
rose from $1 billion in 1995 to over $14 billion in 2012, larger
than US investment in Indonesia.
» US investment stock in the Czech Republic, $6.4 billion in
2012, exceeded US investment in the Philippines.
» Ireland is the number one export platform in the world for
Corporate America. US affiliate exports from Ireland are 5
times larger than US affiliate exports from China and 3.5
times larger than from Mexico.
» China has accounted for just 1.2% of total global US
investment since the start of this century. US investment
in the Netherlands was more than 14 times larger; US
investment in the UK was more than 10 times larger; and
US investment in Ireland more than 6 times larger than US
investment in China.
» Since 2000, US firms have invested more in the Netherlands
($513 billion) alone and in the UK ($383 billion) alone than
in South and Central America, the Middle East, and Africa
combined ($341 billion).
» US cumulative investment in Brazil since 2000 ($52.6
billion) is one-fourth of U.S. investment in Ireland.
» US FDI in Russia since 2000 ($9 billion) has been less than
in such smaller European markets as Norway ($22.9 billion)
and Denmark ($14.7 billion).
4
» Since 2000 Corporate America has invested less in India
($27.7 billion) than in Italy ($34.5 billion)
» On a historic cost basis, the US investment position in
Europe was 14 times larger than the BRICs and nearly 4
times larger than in all of Asia at the end of 2012.
» US investment in the Netherlands alone is about 4 times
greater, and US investment in the UK 3 times greater, than
US investment in all the BRICs.
» America’s investment stakes in Ireland ($204 billion) were
much greater than in South America ($171 billion).
» There is more US investment in Germany ($121 billion) than
in all of Central America, including Mexico ($113 billion).
» US investment in Switzerland ($130 billion) is more than
double US FDI investment in Africa ($61 billion).
» Of Corporate America’s total foreign assets globally, roughly
60%—$13.2 trillion—was in Europe in 2012. Largest shares:
the UK (22.5%, $5.1 trillion) and the Netherlands (nearly
9%, $2.0 trillion).
» America’s asset base in Germany ($721 billion) in 2012 was
over 50% larger than in all of South America.
» America’s combined asset base in Poland, Hungary, and the
Czech Republic (roughly $136 billion, up from $85 billion in
2008) was much larger than the size of corporate America’s
assets in India (est. $100 billion).
» US assets in Ireland topped $1 trillion in 2012, more than in
either Switzerland or France. Ireland accounted for 8.1% of
total US assets in Europe in 2012.
5
» US affiliate output in Europe rose 6% in 2012 to total
$760 billion, surpassing the pre-crisis high of $660 billion
in 2008.
» Global output of US affiliates reached nearly $1.6 trillion in
2011; Europe accounted for 48% of the total.
» The UK accounted for 22% of total US affiliate output in
Europe; Ireland 13.7% and Germany 13.3%.
» These 3 countries accounted for half of total US affiliate
output in Europe in 2012.
» By sector, output is tilting toward services (53%) from
manufacturing (47%).
» US affiliates accounted for over 25% of Ireland’s total
output in 2011; 6% of UK output; 5.8% of Norway; 5% of
Switzerland; and 4.9% of Belgium.
» US foreign affiliate output in Belgium in 2012 (roughly
$25.5 billion) was more than 40% larger than US foreign
affiliate output in India (est. $18 billion).
» US affiliate output in Poland totaled an estimated $12.6
billion in 2012. Affiliate output in Poland rose six-fold
between 2000 and 2012.
» US affiliate sales in Europe topped $3 trillion for the first
time in 2012 and accounted for 48% of worldwide US
affiliate sales.
» Sales of US affiliates in Europe in 2012 were roughly double
comparable sales in the entire Asia/Pacific.
» Affiliate sales in the UK ($655 billion) were almost double
sales in South America.
6
» While US affiliate sales in China have soared over the past
decade, they do so from a low base, and still remain well
below comparable sales in Europe.
» US affiliate sales of $206 billion in China in 2011 were below
those in Ireland ($320 billion), Switzerland ($304 billion)
the Netherlands ($228 billion) or France ($220 billion).
» Europe remains the most profitable region of the world
for US companies. US foreign affiliate income earned
in Europe rose modestly in 2013 to an estimated $230
billion—a record high.
» Since 2000, Europe has accounted for over 57% of total US
foreign affiliate income.
» US affiliate income from China and India together in 2012
($10.4 billion) was only 15% of U.S. affiliate earnings in
the Netherlands ($73 billion) and a fraction of US affiliate
earnings in the UK ($36 billion) or Ireland ($30 billion).
» In the first nine months of 2013, US affiliate income from
Europe—$172 billion—was more than combined US affiliate
income from Latin America ($64 billion) and Asia ($56
billion).
» US affiliate income in China ($7 billion) or Brazil ($5.7
billion), however, was well above affiliate income in
Germany ($1.1 billion) or France ($2.2 billion).
Europe in the US
» Europe’s FDI investment in the US in 2013 totaled roughly
$80 billion, one of the weakest levels in years. This follows
investment inflows of $105 billion in 2012 and $128 billion
in 2011.
7
» European financial firms have scaled back their presence in
the US because Europe’s sovereign debt crisis forced banks
to raise capital at home.
» Nonetheless, even in bad year 2012 Europe’s investment
flows to the US were 4 times larger than to China.
» In 2012 total assets of European affiliates in the US were an
estimated $8.7 trillion. UK firms held $2.2 trillion, followed
by German firms ($1.5 trillion), Swiss (roughly $1.4 trillion),
French ($1.2 trillion) and Dutch firms ($1 trillion).
» The US is the most important market for earnings of many
European multinationals. European affiliate income in the
US rose in 2013 to $119 billion—sizable, but down 4.8% from
2012 record levels.
» European affiliate output in the U.S. rose by nearly 6.5% in
2012, totaling over $500 billion, a record high.
» The 2012 output of UK firms in the US of nearly $128 billion
was more than a quarter of the European total.
» German affiliate output totaled $87 billion, 18% of the total.
French affiliate output ($64 billion) accounted for 13% of
the total.
» Beyond European affiliates, only Japan and Canada have
any real economic presence in the U.S.—Japanese affiliate
output totaled $92 billion in 2011, well below UK output
and roughly similar to German affiliate output; Canadian
affiliate output totaled $65 billion, on a par with French
affiliate output.
8
» Overall, foreign affiliates contributed nearly $775 billion to
US aggregate production in 2012, with European affiliates
accounting for roughly two-thirds of the total.
» Affiliate sales, not trade, are the primary means by
which European firms deliver goods and services to US
consumers. In 2012 European affiliate sales in the US ($2.2
trillion) were more than triple US imports from Europe
($655 billion), and rose roughly 6%.
» Sales by British affiliates in the U.S. totaled an estimated
$521 billion in 2012, followed by German ($411 billion) and
Dutch ($374 billion) affiliate sales.
» Total portfolio inflows from the EU15 to the U.S. amounted
to roughly $115 billion in 2013, one of the lowest levels since
the early 1990s.
» China, Japan and Europe hold roughly equal shares of US
Treasuries. China held $1.3 trillion in U.S. Treasuries, or
23%; Japan and Europe each close to $1.2 trillion, or 21%.
OPEC’s share 4%.
Transatlantic Trade
» US-EU merchandise trade totaled an estimated $787 billion
in 2013, double the level of 2000.
» The US 2013 merchandise trade deficit with the EU surged
to $125 billion, 8% larger than in 2012 and more than double
the deficit in 2009. Germany accounted for nearly half the
deficit.
» In contrast, the US consistently records services trade
surpluses with Europe—nearly $67 billion in 2012 and $51
billion in the first nine months of 2013.
9
» 45 of 50 US states export more to Europe than to China, and
by a wide margin in many cases.
» In the first nine months of 2013 Florida, New Jersey and
Rhode Island each exported roughly 8 times more to Europe
than to China; Connecticut 7 times more; Indiana and West
Virginia 6 times more; New York, Maryland, Delaware,
Nevada and Wyoming 5 times more; and Iowa, Kentucky,
Massachusetts, New Hampshire over 4 times more.
» Texas, the leading US state exporter to Europe, sent more
than 3 times as many goods to Europe than to China as did
7 other states, including Arizona and New Mexico, Ohio,
Pennsylvania and Virginia.
» The Pacific coast state of California exported twice as
much to Europe as to China, as did 14 other states ranging
from Illinois, Michigan and Colorado to North Carolina,
Wisconsin and Tennessee.
» Germany was the top European export market for 18 US
states in 2012. The UK was the top European export market
for 11 states. The Netherlands and Belgium were each the
top European destination for 7 states.
» Under WTO/OECD ‘’value-added’’ calculations, the US in
2009 was the major customer and supplier for Germany, the
UK, France and Italy. Germany followed only Canada as the
most important export market for the US, ahead of Mexico
and China.
Transatlantic Services: The Sleeping Giant
» The US and Europe are the two leading services economies
in the world. The US is the largest single country trader in
10
services; the EU is the largest trader in services among all
world regions.
» The EU ranks number one in each major category of global
services trade in 2012, but exports of services from Europe
declined by 2.3% due to depressed economic conditions.
» Services exports plunged 5.7% from France; 3.3% from
the UK; and 1.1% from Germany. U.S. services exports, in
contrast, rose 5.5% in 2012.
» Five of the top ten export markets for U.S. services are in
Europe.
» Europe accounted for 38.1% of total US services exports and
for 41.6% of total U.S. services imports in 2012.
» US services exports to the EU more than doubled between
2001 and 2012, from $102 to $240 billion.
» US services exports to Europe grew 3.8% to total $239
billion in 2012 and grew 5.3% to total $187 billion in first
nine months of 2013.
» The US posted a $66.8 billion trade surplus in services with
Europe in 2012, compared with its $126 billion trade deficit
in goods with Europe.
» Transatlantic services trade figures are impressive, but the
more important services linkages are actually in mutual
flows of foreign direct investment.
» Sales of services by US foreign affiliates in Europe—$645
billion in 2011—were more than 2.5 times US services
exports to Europe.
11
» The UK alone accounted for around 30% of all US affiliate
sales in Europe in 2011—$191 billion, more than combined
U.S. affiliate sales of services in South and Central America
($111 billion), Africa ($13 billion) and the Middle East ($29
billion).
» Europe accounted for half of U.S. global services sales.
» Sales of services by US affiliates of European firms of $467
billion in 2011 were more than 2.5 times US services imports
from Europe.
Transatlantic Jobs
» Most foreigners working for US companies outside the US
are Europeans, and most foreigners working for European
companies outside the EU are American.
» European companies in the US employ millions of American
workers and are the largest source of onshored jobs in
America.
» Similarly, US companies in Europe employ millions of
European workers and are the largest source of onshored
jobs in Europe.
» U.S. affiliates directly employ about 4.2 million workers in
Europe. Roughly half work in the UK, Germany and France.
» US affiliates employed many more manufacturing workers
in Europe (1.8 million) in 2011 than they did in 1990 (1.6
million). Yet they have shifted towards lower cost locations
like Ireland and Poland.
12
» US affiliates employ more Europeans in services than in
manufacturing. Manufacturing accounted for just 42.5% of
total employment by U.S. affiliates in Europe in 2011.
» US affiliates in Germany employed 360,000 workers in
2011, above those employed in Brazil (316,000) and India
(149,000) yet below China (574,000).
» European majority-owned foreign affiliates employed
roughly 3.8 million US workers in 2011, some 500,000 less
than US affiliates employed in Europe.
» The top five European employers in the US in 2012 were
firms from the UK (986,000, up from 910,000 in 2011),
Germany (600,000, up from 589,000 in 2011), France
(531,000, up from 489,000 in 2011), Switzerland (457,000,
up from 416,000 in 2011) and the Netherlands (405,000, up
from 350,000 in 2011).
» European firms employed 2/3 of all U.S. workers on the
payrolls of majority-owned foreign affiliates in 2012.
13
The Transatlantic Innovation Economy
» In 2011 US affiliates invested $27.7 billion in R&D in Europe,
roughly 61% of total global R&D expenditures by US foreign
affiliates. R&D expenditures were greatest in Germany, the
UK, Switzerland, France, the Netherlands, Belgium and
Ireland. These 7 countries accounted for nearly 86% of US
global spending on R&D in Europe in 2011.
» R&D spending by European affiliates in the US totaled $33.4
billion, $2.1 billion more than in 2010, and representing
three-fourths of all R&D performed by majority-owned
foreign affiliates in the United States.
» Swiss-owned R&D in the US totaled $8.9 billion in 2011,
nearly one-fifth of total affiliate R&D in the United States.
British, German and French affiliates accounted for 14.2%,
12.2% and 11.1% shares respectively.
14
T
H
E

T
R
A
N
S
A
T
L
A
N
T
I
C

E
C
O
N
O
M
Y

V
S
.

T
H
E

W
O
R
L
D

-

S
H
A
R
E

O
F

W
O
R
L
D

T
O
T
A
L
S
o
u
r
c
e
s
:

U
N
,

I
M
F
,


g
u
r
e
s

f
o
r

2
0
1
2
.

1
.

B
a
s
e
d

o
n

P
P
P

e
s
t
i
m
a
t
e
s
.
2
.

E
x
c
l
u
d
i
n
g

i
n
t
r
a
-
E
U
,

N
o
r
w
a
y
,

S
w
i
t
z
e
r
l
a
n
d

a
n
d

I
c
e
l
a
n
d

t
r
a
d
e
.
8
0
%
7
0
%
6
0
%
5
0
%
4
0
%
3
0
%
2
0
%
1
0
%
0
%
3
9
.
6
%
W
o
r
l
d

G
D
P
1
2
4
.
7
%
W
o
r
l
d

E
x
p
o
r
t
s
2
W
o
r
l
d

I
m
p
o
r
t
s
2
5
5
.
4
%
W
o
r
l
d

F
D
I
I
n
w
a
r
d

S
t
o
c
k
W
o
r
l
d

F
D
I
O
u
t
w
a
r
d

S
t
o
c
k
6
5
.
8
%
W
o
r
l
d

M
&
A
S
a
l
e
s
3
1
.
0
%
W
o
r
l
d

M
&
A
P
u
r
c
h
a
s
e
s
3
0
.
2
%
6
9
.
5
%
15
A
M
E
R
I
C
A

S

M
A
J
O
R

C
O
M
M
E
R
C
I
A
L

A
R
T
E
R
I
E
S
F
o
r
e
i
g
n

A
f

l
i
a
t
e

S
a
l
e
s
:

E
s
t
i
m
a
t
e
s

f
o
r

2
0
1
2
.

T
o
t
a
l

T
r
a
d
e
:

D
a
t
a

f
o
r

g
o
o
d
s

&

s
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
,

2
0
1
2
.
S
o
u
r
c
e
:

B
u
r
e
a
u

o
f

E
c
o
n
o
m
i
c

A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
.
$
5
.
0

T
r
i
l
l
i
o
n
T
r
a
n
s
a
t
l
a
n
t
i
c
T
o
t
a
l

F
o
r
e
i
g
n
A
f

l
i
a
t
e

S
a
l
e
s
$
2
.
5

T
r
i
l
l
i
o
n
A
s
i
a
/
P
a
c
i

c
T
o
t
a
l

F
o
r
e
i
g
n

A
f

l
i
a
t
e

S
a
l
e
s
$
1
.
6

T
r
i
l
l
i
o
n
A
s
i
a
/
P
a
c
i

c
T
o
t
a
l

T
r
a
d
e
$
1
.
3

T
r
i
l
l
i
o
n
N
A
F
T
A
T
o
t
a
l

T
r
a
d
e
$
1
.
2

T
r
i
l
l
i
o
n
T
r
a
n
s
a
t
l
a
n
t
i
c
T
o
t
a
l

T
r
a
d
e
$
1
.
2

T
r
i
l
l
i
o
n
N
A
F
T
A
T
o
t
a
l

F
o
r
e
i
g
n

A
f

l
i
a
t
e

S
a
l
e
s
$
1
.
1

T
r
i
l
l
i
o
n
L
a
t
i
n

A
m
e
r
i
c
a
T
o
t
a
l

T
r
a
d
e
$
1
.
0

T
r
i
l
l
i
o
n
L
a
t
i
n

A
m
e
r
i
c
a
T
o
t
a
l

F
o
r
e
i
g
n

A
f

l
i
a
t
e

S
a
l
e
s
U . S . $ T r i l l i o n s
16
U
.
S
.

P
R
O
F
I
T
S
1

I
N

E
U
R
O
P
E

U
P
;

E
U
R
O
P
E
A
N

P
R
O
F
I
T
S

I
N

A
M
E
R
I
C
A

D
O
W
N

1
I
n
c
o
m
e

o
f

a
f

l
i
a
t
e
s
*
D
a
t
a

t
h
r
o
u
g
h

3
Q
2
0
1
3
.

2
0
1
3

d
a
t
a

i
s

a
n
n
u
a
l
i
z
e
d

f
o
r

f
u
l
l

y
e
a
r

e
s
t
i
m
a
t
e
S
o
u
r
c
e
:

B
u
r
e
a
u

o
f

E
c
o
n
o
m
i
c

A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
2
4
0
2
2
0
2
0
0
1
8
0
1
6
0
1
4
0
1
2
0
1
0
0
8
0
6
0
4
0
2
00
9
0
9
1
9
2
9
3
9
4
9
5
9
6
9
7
9
8
9
9
0
0
0
1
0
2
0
3
0
4
0
5
0
6
0
7
0
8
0
9
1
0
1
2
1
3
*
1
1
U
.
S
.

A
f

l
i
a
t
e

P
r
o

t
s


i
n

E
u
r
o
p
e
E
u
r
o
p
e
a
n

A
f

l
i
a
t
e

P
r
o

t
s

i
n

t
h
e

U
.
S
.
U . S . $ B i l l i o n s
1
2
3
1
2
5
1
1
9
1
0
9
8
3
1
0
6
8
0
9
8
8
1
6
1
4
9
2
7
1
4
3
9
3
7
2
5
3
0
2
4
2
2
1
6
8
5
2
4
2
2
3
2
2
6
2
3
0
2
1
7
1
7
9
1
9
7
1
7
6
1
5
4
1
3
6
1
1
4
8
6
6
5
5
4
6
6
5
8
5
1
4
8
4
4
4
1
3
1
2
7
2
2
2
8
3
3
17
U
.
S
.

F
O
R
E
I
G
N

D
I
R
E
C
T

I
N
V
E
S
T
M
E
N
T

F
L
O
W
S

T
O

C
H
I
N
A

V
S
.

E
U
R
O
P
E

-

B
I
L
L
I
O
N
S

O
F

$
S
o
u
r
c
e
:

B
u
r
e
a
u

o
f

E
c
o
n
o
m
i
c

A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
.
*
D
a
t
a

t
h
r
o
u
g
h

3
Q
2
0
1
3
.

D
a
t
a

a
n
n
u
a
l
i
z
e
d

f
o
r

f
u
l
l

y
e
a
r

e
s
t
i
m
a
t
e
.
2
5
0
2
0
0
1
5
0
1
0
0
5
00
-
5
0
9
0
9
1
9
2
9
3
9
4
9
5
9
6
9
7
9
8
9
9
0
0
0
1
0
2
0
3
0
4
0
5
0
6
0
7
0
8
0
9
1
0
1
1
1
2
*
E
u
r
o
p
e
C
h
i
n
a
1
3
*
1 0
0
2 0
0
1 9
0
4 6
1
3 4
1
5 2
0
4 0
1
4 8
1
8 6
1
1 0 9
2
7 8
2
6 6
2
7 9
1
8 8
1
1 3 7
4
- 2 9 ,
2
1 4 8
4
5
2 4 0
5
1 7 8
1 6
1 6 5
- 8 ,
1 7 6
1 8 8
- 1
1 9 8
- 3
8
18
U
.
S
.

F
O
R
E
I
G
N

D
I
R
E
C
T

I
N
V
E
S
T
M
E
N
T

O
U
T
F
L
O
W
S

T
O

T
H
E

B
R
I
C
S

V
S
.

E
U
R
O
P
E
1

-

(
B
I
L
L
I
O
N
S

O
F

$
)
2
5
5
2
4
0
2
2
5
2
1
0
1
9
5
1
8
0
1
6
5
1
5
0
1
3
5
1
2
0
1
0
5
9
0
7
5
6
0
4
5
3
0
1
50
-
1
5
-
3
0
-
4
5
S
o
u
r
c
e
:

B
u
r
e
a
u

o
f

E
c
o
n
o
m
i
c

A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
1

E
u
r
o
p
e

d
o
e
s

n
o
t

i
n
c
l
u
d
e


o
w
s

t
o

R
u
s
s
i
a
*

D
a
t
a

t
h
r
o
u
g
h

3
Q
2
0
1
3
.

D
a
t
a

a
n
n
u
a
l
i
z
e
d

f
o
r

f
u
l
l

y
e
a
r

e
s
t
i
m
a
t
e
.
5 . 1
7 8 . 1
1 . 8
6 6 . 0
1 . 3
7 9 . 8
1 . 8
8 7 . 0
1 0 . 0
1 3 5 . 6
8 . 1
1 4 5 . 9
1 7 . 4
2 3 7 . 2
2 6 . 8
1 7 5 . 7
1 4 . 4
1 7 9 . 7
1 2 . 4
2 2 6 . 0
1 0 . 2
1 8 6 . 9
1 5 . 7
1 9 9 . 9
2
0
0
0
2
0
0
1
2
0
0
2
2
0
0
3
2
0
0
4
2
0
0
5
2
0
0
6
2
0
0
7
2
0
0
8
2
0
0
9
2
0
1
0
2
0
1
1
2
0
1
3
*
2
0
1
2
B
R
I
C
s
E
u
r
o
p
e
6 . 4
- 3 1 . 4
1 6 4 . 6
- 1 . 1
19
C
O
M
P
A
R
I
N
G

F
R
E
E

T
R
A
D
E

A
G
R
E
E
M
E
N
T
S

(
B
I
L
L
I
O
N
S

O
F

$

U
N
L
E
S
S

O
T
H
E
R
W
I
S
E

S
P
E
C
I
F
I
E
D
)
T
r
a
n
s
a
t
l
a
n
t
i
c

T
r
a
d
e

a
n
d

I
n
v
e
s
t
m
e
n
t

P
a
r
t
n
e
r
s
h
i
p
T
r
a
n
s
-
P
a
c
i

c

P
a
r
t
n
e
r
s
h
i
p

N
A
F
T
A
G
D
P

(
P
u
r
c
h
a
s
i
n
g

P
o
w
e
r

P
a
r
i
t
y
)


%

o
f

W
o
r
l
d

T
o
t
a
l
1
5
,
9
9
3
1
9
.
2
%
1
0
,
7
5
5
1
2
.
9
%
3
,
2
7
2
3
.
9
%
P
o
p
u
l
a
t
i
o
n

(
t
h
o
u
s
a
n
d
s
)


%

o
f

W
o
r
l
d

T
o
t
a
l
5
0
8
,
3
8
1
7
.
2
%
4
8
3
,
6
4
9
6
.
8
%
1
5
5
,
6
8
5
2
.
2
%
P
e
r

C
a
p
i
t
a

I
n
c
o
m
e

(
$
)
3
2
,
7
9
7
2
4
,
5
8
7
1
9
,
2
6
2
P
e
r
s
o
n
a
l

C
o
n
s
u
m
p
t
i
o
n

E
x
p
e
n
d
i
t
u
r
e
s


%

o
f

W
o
r
l
d

T
o
t
a
l
9
,
7
2
0
2
3
.
2
%
7
,
0
6
6
1
6
.
9
%
1
,
8
1
5
4
.
3
%
E
x
p
o
r
t
s


%

o
f

W
o
r
l
d

T
o
t
a
l
5
,
5
8
3
3
1
.
3
%
2
,
8
0
1
1
5
.
7
%
8
2
4
4
.
6
%
I
m
p
o
r
t
s


%

o
f

W
o
r
l
d

T
o
t
a
l
5
,
7
3
4
3
1
.
1
%
2
,
9
3
4
1
5
.
9
%
9
1
7
5
.
0
%
U
.
S
.

O
u
t
w
a
r
d

F
D
I

S
t
o
c
k

t
o



%

o
f

U
.
S
.

T
o
t
a
l
2
,
2
3
8
5
0
.
3
%
9
3
4
2
1
.
0
%
4
5
2
1
0
.
2
%
U
.
S
.

I
n
w
a
r
d

F
D
I

S
t
o
c
k

f
r
o
m



%

o
f

U
.
S
.

T
o
t
a
l
1
,
6
4
2
6
1
.
9
%
6
2
0
2
3
.
4
%
2
4
0
9
.
1
%
U
.
S
.

F
D
I

I
n
c
o
m
e

E
a
r
n
e
d

A
b
r
o
a
d


%

o
f

U
.
S
.

T
o
t
a
l
1
9
6
4
3
.
6
%
9
6
2
1
.
4
%
4
4
9
.
8
%
F
o
r
e
i
g
n

F
D
I

I
n
c
o
m
e

E
a
r
n
i
n
g

i
n

t
h
e

U
.
S
.


%

o
f

U
.
S
.

T
o
t
a
l
1
0
7
7
0
.
9
%
3
7
2
4
.
6
%
1
6
1
0
.
3
%
F
o
r
e
i
g
n

A
f

l
i
a
t
e

S
a
l
e
s

o
f

U
.
S
.

M
N
C

s

i
n

*


%

o
f

U
.
S
.

T
o
t
a
l
2
,
3
7
5
3
9
.
8
%
1
,
8
5
2
3
1
.
0
%
8
7
1
1
4
.
6
%


S
o
u
r
c
e
s
:

I
M
F
;

U
N
;

B
E
A
.


D
a
t
a

f
o
r

2
0
1
2


*
D
a
t
a

f
o
r

2
0
1
1




20
S
A
L
E
S

O
F

U
.
S
.

A
F
F
I
L
I
A
T
E
S

I
N

E
U
R
O
P
E

V
S
.

U
.
S
.

E
X
P
O
R
T
S

T
O

E
U
R
O
P
E
*
E
s
t
i
m
a
t
e

f
o
r

s
a
l
e
s
.
S
o
u
r
c
e
:

B
u
r
e
a
u

o
f

E
c
o
n
o
m
i
c

A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
.
M
a
j
o
r
i
t
y
-
o
w
n
e
d

n
o
n
-
b
a
n
k

a
f

l
i
a
t
e
s

d
a
t
a
:

1
9
8
7

-

2
0
0
8
.

M
a
j
o
r
i
t
y
-
o
w
n
e
d

b
a
n
k

a
n
d

n
o
n
-
b
a
n
k

a
f

l
i
a
t
e
s
:

2
0
0
9

-

2
0
1
2
.
3
,
4
0
0
3
,
2
0
0
3
,
0
0
0
2
,
8
0
0
2
,
6
0
0
2
,
4
0
0
2
,
2
0
0
2
,
0
0
0
1
,
8
0
0
1
,
6
0
0
1
,
4
0
0
1
,
2
0
0
1
,
0
0
0
8
0
0
6
0
0
4
0
0
2
0
00
8
7
8
8
8
9
9
0
9
1
9
2
9
3
9
4
9
5
9
6
9
7
9
8
9
9
0
0
0
1
0
2
0
3
0
4
0
5
0
6
0
7
0
8
0
9
1
0
1
1
1
2
*
U . S . $ B i l l i o n s
U
.
S
.

F
o
r
e
i
g
n

A
f

l
i
a
t
e

S
a
l
e
s

i
n

E
u
r
o
p
e
T
o
t
a
l

U
.
S
.

E
x
p
o
r
t
s

t
o

E
u
r
o
p
e
21
S
A
L
E
S

O
F

E
U
R
O
P
E
A
N

A
F
F
I
L
I
A
T
E
S

I
N

T
H
E

U
.
S
.

V
S
.

U
.
S
.

I
M
P
O
R
T
S

T
O

E
U
R
O
P
E
*
E
s
t
i
m
a
t
e

f
o
r

s
a
l
e
s
S
o
u
r
c
e
:

B
u
r
e
a
u

o
f

E
c
o
n
o
m
i
c

A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
M
a
j
o
r
i
t
y
-
o
w
n
e
d

n
o
n
-
b
a
n
k

a
f

l
i
a
t
e
s
:

1
9
8
7

-

2
0
0
6
.

M
a
j
o
r
i
t
y
-
o
w
n
e
d

b
a
n
k

a
n
d

n
o
n
-
b
a
n
k

a
f

l
i
a
t
e
s
:

2
0
0
7

-

2
0
1
2
.
2
,
4
0
0
2
,
2
0
0
2
,
0
0
0
1
,
8
0
0
1
,
6
0
0
1
,
4
0
0
1
,
2
0
0
1
,
0
0
0
8
0
0
6
0
0
4
0
0
2
0
00
8
7
8
8
8
9
9
0
9
1
9
2
9
3
9
4
9
5
9
6
9
7
9
8
9
9
0
0
0
1
0
2
0
3
0
4
0
5
0
6
0
7
0
8
0
9
1
0
1
1
1
2
*
U . S . $ B i l l i o n s
E
u
r
o
p
e
a
n

F
o
r
e
i
g
n

A
f

l
i
a
t
e

S
a
l
e
s

i
n

t
h
e

U
.
S
.
T
o
t
a
l

U
.
S
.

I
m
p
o
r
t
s

f
r
o
m

E
u
r
o
p
e
22
2
2
5
2
0
0
1
7
5
1
5
0
1
2
5
1
0
0
7
5
5
0
2
50
E
U
R
O
P
E
A
N

U
N
I
O
N

F
O
R
E
I
G
N

D
I
R
E
C
T

I
N
V
E
S
T
M
E
N
T

O
U
T
F
L
O
W
S
,

U
.
S
.

V
S
.

C
H
I
N
A

-

(
B
I
L
L
I
O
N
S

O
F

E
U
R
O
S
)
S
o
u
r
c
e
:

E
u
r
o
s
t
a
t
.
D
a
t
a

a
s

o
f

J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
4
.
9
2
9
3
9
4
9
5
9
6
9
7
9
8
9
9
0
0
0
1
0
2
0
3
0
4
0
5
0
6
0
7
0
8
0
9
1
0
1
2
1
1
O
u
t

o
w
s

t
o

t
h
e

U
.
S
.
O
u
t

o
w
s

t
o

C
h
i
n
a
23
T
H
E

U
.
S
.

-

E
U
R
O
P
E
A
N

E
M
P
L
O
Y
M
E
N
T

B
A
L
A
N
C
E


T
H
O
U
S
A
N
D
S

O
F

E
M
P
L
O
Y
E
E
S
,

2
0
1
2
1
C
o
u
n
t
r
y
E
u
r
o
p
e
a
n

A
f

l
i
a
t
e
s

o
f

U
.
S
.

C
o
m
p
a
n
i
e
s
U
.
S
.

A
f

l
i
a
t
e
s

o
f

E
u
r
o
p
e
a
n

C
o
m
p
a
n
i
e
s
E
m
p
l
o
y
m
e
n
t
B
a
l
a
n
c
e
A
u
s
t
r
i
a
4
3
.
9
1
4
.
1
-
2
9
.
8
B
e
l
g
i
u
m
1
3
5
.
9
1
6
5
.
9
3
0
.
1
D
e
n
m
a
r
k
3
2
.
7
3
0
.
1
-
2
.
7
F
i
n
l
a
n
d
2
1
.
4
2
7
.
3
5
.
9
F
r
a
n
c
e
4
7
0
.
0
5
3
1
.
2
6
1
.
2
G
e
r
m
a
n
y
6
4
4
.
8
6
0
0
.
5
-
4
4
.
4
I
r
e
l
a
n
d
1
0
3
.
3
1
7
5
.
0
7
1
.
7
I
t
a
l
y
2
0
7
.
8
1
2
6
.
9
-
8
0
.
9
L
u
x
e
m
b
o
u
r
g
1
4
.
0
3
8
.
0
2
4
.
0
N
e
t
h
e
r
l
a
n
d
s
2
2
8
.
9
4
0
5
.
0
1
7
6
.
1
N
o
r
w
a
y
4
2
.
1
8
.
0
-
3
4
.
1
S
p
a
i
n
1
7
7
.
5
8
5
.
0
-
9
2
.
5
S
w
i
t
z
e
r
l
a
n
d
9
4
.
6
4
5
7
.
0
3
6
2
.
5
U
n
i
t
e
d

K
i
n
g
d
o
m
1
,
3
1
5
.
3
9
8
6
.
0
-
3
2
9
.
4
E
u
r
o
p
e
4
,
2
7
5
.
2
3
,
8
8
0
.
2
-
3
9
5
.
0

N
o
t
e
:

E
m
p
l
o
y
m
e
n
t

b
a
l
a
n
c
e


+


f
a
v
o
r
s

t
h
e

U
n
i
t
e
d

S
t
a
t
e
s


S
o
u
r
c
e
:

B
u
r
e
a
u

o
f

E
c
o
n
o
m
i
c

A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s

1
.

E
s
t
i
m
a
t
e
s

M
a
j
o
r
i
t
y
-
o
w
n
e
d

b
a
n
k

a
n
d

n
o
n
-
b
a
n
k

a
f

l
i
a
t
e
s
24
T
H
E

P
O
W
E
R

B
R
O
K
E
R
S

O
F

T
H
E

G
L
O
B
A
L

E
C
O
N
O
M
Y

C
O
M
P
A
R
E
D
E
u
r
m
e
r
i
c
a
A
s
i
a
C
h
i
n
d
i
a
C
h
i
n
m
e
r
i
c
a
G
D
P
,

P
P
P
3
9
.
6
%
3
5
.
7
%
2
0
.
4
%
3
4
.
3
%
G
D
P
,

N
o
m
i
n
a
l
4
7
.
2
%
3
0
.
7
%
1
3
.
9
%
3
3
.
9
%
M
a
r
k
e
t

c
a
p
.

(
a
s

o
f

2
/
1
1
/
2
0
1
4
)
$
3
5
.
9

t
r
i
l
l
i
o
n
$
1
7
.
8

t
r
i
l
l
i
o
n
$
4
.
6

t
r
i
l
l
i
o
n
$
2
5
.
2

t
r
i
l
l
i
o
n
P
e
r
s
o
n
a
l

c
o
n
s
u
m
p
t
i
o
n

e
x
p
.
4
9
.
9
%
2
9
.
3
%
9
.
7
%
3
3
.
8
%
M
+
A

S
a
l
e
s
6
5
.
8
%
1
7
.
7
%
4
.
0
%
2
4
.
7
%
M
+
A

P
u
r
c
h
a
s
e
s
3
1
.
0
%
3
5
.
9
%
1
2
.
9
%
3
8
.
0
%
I
n
w
a
r
d

F
D
I

s
t
o
c
k
5
5
.
4
%
2
4
.
9
%
4
.
6
%
2
0
.
9
%
O
u
t
w
a
r
d

F
D
I

s
t
o
c
k
6
9
.
5
%
1
9
.
7
%
2
.
7
%
2
4
.
2
%
I
n

o
w
s

(
2
0
0
0
-
2
0
1
2
)
5
3
.
1
%
2
4
.
9
%
8
.
0
%
2
1
.
0
%
O
u
t

o
w
s

(
2
0
0
0
-
2
0
1
2
)
6
8
.
8
%
1
9
.
2
%
3
.
3
%
2
1
.
3
%
E
x
p
o
r
t
s
*

(
G
o
o
d
s
)
2
4
.
7
%
4
2
.
0
%
1
7
.
1
%
2
6
.
2
%
I
m
p
o
r
t
s
*

(
G
o
o
d
s
)
3
0
.
2
%
4
0
.
8
%
1
6
.
0
%
2
8
.
8
%
M
i
l
i
t
a
r
y

S
p
e
n
d
i
n
g

$
9
8
7
.
2

$
3
8
5
.
8

$
2
0
5
.
9
$
8
2
6
.
4
(
U
.
S
.

$

b
i
l
l
i
o
n
s

a
t

c
o
n
s
t
a
n
t

2
0
1
2

p
r
i
c
e
s
)
5
7
.
0
%
2
2
.
3
%
1
1
.
9
%
4
7
.
7
%


*

T
o
t
a
l

d
o
e
s

n
o
t

i
n
c
l
u
.

I
n
t
r
a
-
E
U
2
8

+

N
o
r
w
a
y
,

S
w
i
t
z
e
r
l
a
n
d
,

&

I
c
e
l
a
n
d

t
r
a
d
e
.


S
o
u
r
c
e
s
:

I
M
F
;

B
l
o
o
m
b
e
r
g
;

U
N
;

S
I
P
R
I
.


A
l
l

d
a
t
a

f
o
r

2
0
1
1

o
t
h
e
r
w
i
s
e

n
o
t
e
d

DANIEL S. HAMILTON
AND
JOSEPH P. QUINLAN
Annual Survey of Jobs, Trade and Investment
between the United States and Europe
THE

TRANSATLANTIC
ECONOMY 2014
Center for Transatlantic Relations
American Consortium on EU Studies
EU Center of Excellence Washington, DC
The Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies
The Johns Hopkins University
1717 Massachusetts Ave., NW, Suite 525
Washington, DC 20036
Tel: (202) 663-5880
Fax: (202) 663-5879
Email: transatlantic@jhu.edu
http://transatlantic.sais-jhu.edu