USMCA AGREEMENT:- The United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) is the most

comprehensive and high-standard trade agreement ever negotiated. It fully updates, modernizes,
and rebalances the NAFTA to meet the challenges of the 21st century economy and to ensure that
American workers, farmers, ranchers, and businesses, including small- and medium-sized
enterprises, share in the benefits of the agreement. It will help drive economic prosperity,
promote fairer and more balanced trade, and help ensure that North America remains the world’s
most competitive region.

USMCA is a broad agreement that covers trade in goods and services, rules of origin, customs
facilitation, SPS measures, technical barriers to trade, foreign investment, intellectual property,
government procurement, competition policy, and labor and environmental standards, among
other areas. The agreement consists of 34 chapters, 4 annexes, and 14 side letters that address
bilateral trade issues between the United States, Mexico, and Canada.

USMCA is a broad trade and investment agreement. Because NAFTA eliminated tariffs in most
sectors, USMCA largely involves rule changes that impact a number of industries. Some rule
changes are industry specific, such as the increase in tariff-rate quotas (TRQs) above levels
currently established by NAFTA for dairy, poultry, eggs, and egg-containing products. It is
estimated that this rule change would offer the United States additional market access into
Canada.

The agreement would establish commitments to open flows of data, which would positively
impact a wide range of industries that rely on international data transfers. USMCA would reduce
the scope of the investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) mechanism, a change that, based on
modeling results, would reduce U.S. investment in Mexico and would lead to a small increase in
U.S. domestic investment and output in the manufacturing and mining sectors. The agreement, if
enforced, would strengthen labor standards and rights, including those related to collective
bargaining in Mexico, which would promote higher wages and better labor conditions in that
country. New intellectual property rights provisions would increase protections for U.S. firms
that rely on intellectual property. These changes are estimated to increase U.S. trade in certain
industries.

STEEL :-Steel accounted for the largest share (54 percent) of the “curb weight” of the average
North American light vehicle in 2018, while aluminum accounted for 12 percent. Although the
automotive market does not consume as much aluminum as it does steel, the use of aluminum in
motor vehicles has grown in recent years. Compared to steel, aluminum saves up to 50 percent of
the weight in automotive body structures, but tends not to be as strong. In its post hearing
submission, the American Automotive Policy Council estimates that for a vehicle built in the
United States, the average cost of the steel parts was $1,100, and the average cost of the
aluminum parts was $430. Canada’s steel and aluminum industries are key contributors to the
Canadian economy, providing well-paying jobs and key inputs for other major industries, including
energy, advanced manufacturing, construction, and auto-making.
In 2019, the Canadian steel industry employed over 25,000 workers and contributed $3.8 billion
to Canada’s gross domestic product (GDP). For the same year, the Canadian aluminum industry
employed approximately 10,000 workers and contributed $3.1 billion to our GDP.

The Canadian and United States (U.S.) steel and aluminum industries are deeply integrated, and
underpin continental supply chains that strengthen the global competitiveness of the North
American economy. Canada is a longstanding safe and secure supplier of steel and aluminum to
the U.S. defence industry.

Canada imports more steel from the U.S. than any other country in the world, accounting for
roughly 40% of U.S. exports. In 2019, $11.5 billion of steel was traded between Canada and the
United States.

ALUMINIUM;- On aluminum, Canada and the U.S. share a highly integrated market with
combined trade of $12.9 billion in 2019. About 81% of Canada’s primary aluminum production
is exported to the United States, where it is used as an important input for further processing into
products for U.S. domestic and export markets.

USMCA includes new specific provisions that will have a positive impact on the Canadian
aluminum and steel sectors. NAFTA did not include any provisions to incentivize the use of
North American steel or aluminum. In order to qualify for duty-free treatment, the current
NAFTA requires that light vehicles (i.e. passenger automobiles and light trucks) have 62.5%
originating content. When USMCA enters into force, automakers will be required to comply with
a requirement that 70% of the aluminum and steel purchased for use in the production of light
vehicles qualify as originating under the USMCA product-specific rules of origin.

This requirement will apply to aluminum and steel purchased by automakers for their own parts
production, as well as to purchases that are directed to parts makers for fabrication into parts.
Vehicles produced by automakers that are unable to satisfy this requirement will not be eligible
for duty-free treatment under the new Agreement. Many automakers have stamping and casting
operations to produce parts such as body panels and engine blocks, and purchase aluminum and
steel sheet materials, bars or ingots for use in these operations. For these operations, only
aluminum and steel produced in Canada, the United States or Mexico will be counted toward
meeting the 70% target. Aluminum and steel imported from outside of North America and
purchased by an automaker will not count toward the 70% requirement.

Notably, seven years after the Agreement enters into force, for purposes of the originating steel
requirement applicable to passenger cars, light trucks and heavy trucks, the criteria for
determining if steel is originating will be strengthened. As such, to qualify as originating in
North America seven years after entry into force, all steel manufacturing processes must occur in
one or more of the parties, except for metallurgical processes involving the refinement of steel
additives. With respect to aluminum, the parties have committed to reviewing— 10 years after
CUSMA enters into force—the rules of origin applicable to the 70% originating aluminum
requirement with a view to strengthening it.

This commitment does not prevent the parties from reviewing the ROO applicable to aluminum
at any time. 26 In addition to the aluminum and steel-specific ROO requirement, CUSMA
includes other provisions that are expected to have a positive impact on the Canadian aluminum
and steel sectors. Specifically, the Agreement includes strengthened regional content
requirements for core parts (engines, transmissions, bodies, axles, steering and suspension
systems) and principal parts (including aluminum and steel intensive parts such as brakes,
bearings, radiators, bumpers and wheels). CUSMA requires 75% regional content for core parts
and 70% for principal parts, compared to 60% to 62.5% in NAFTA. Higher regional content
requirements will incentivize both automakers and parts producers to use originating North
American aluminum and steel in the production of these parts to ensure they qualify for duty-free
treatment under the new Agreement. Separately from CUSMA, on May 17, 2019, Canada
successfully negotiated with the United States the elimination of the Section 232 steel and
aluminum tariffs of 10% and 25% imposed on Canadian aluminum and steel respectively. As part
of the agreement on U.S. Section 232 tariffs, Canada and the United States agreed to implement
effective measures to prevent the importation of aluminum and steel that is unfairly subsidized
and/or sold at dumped prices and to prevent the trans-shipment of aluminum and steel made
outside of Canada or the United States to the other country. As part of a similar outcome, Mexico
undertook to implement the same measures.

AUTOMOTIVE:- USMCA would strengthen and add complexity to the rules of origin
requirements in the automotive sector by increasing regional value content (RVC) requirements
and adding other requirements. USMCA’s requirements are estimated to increase U.S. production
of automotive parts and employment in the sector, but also to lead to a small increase in the
prices and small decrease in the consumption on vehicles in the United States. There are three
types of vehicle passenger vehicles, light trucks, and heavy trucks. Passenger vehicles include
cars (e.g., Chevrolet Camaro, Ford Mustang), sport-utility vehicles (Chevrolet Equinox, Jeep
Wrangler), and minivans (Dodge Caravan, Honda Odyssey), while the light-truck category
includes pickup trucks (Chevrolet Silverado, Ford F-150) and workvans (Ram ProMaster, Ford
Transit). Heavy trucks are medium- and heavy-duty trucks of either the tractor-trailer or the cab
and chassis varieties. Passenger vehicles and light trucks are often grouped as “light vehicles”
because they tend to be manufactured by the same companies, to be sold in the same dealerships,
and to use similar supply chains. Heavy trucks tend to be sold in separate dealerships, are sold
more to commercial fleets than to individual consumers, have limited supply chain overlap with
light vehicles, and are updated less frequently. Light vehicle manufacturing made up 92 percent
of the total value of shipments and services Two-thirds to threefourths of auto parts production in
North America contributes toward original equipment production, with the remaining parts
produced for the automotive aftermarket. As a result, demand for new vehicles is the largest
driver of demand for automotive parts. In USMCA, automotive parts are grouped into three
categories for the ROOs requirements: core parts, principal parts, and complementary parts. Core
parts account for about 40 percent of the cost of the vehicle and include engines, transmissions,
body and chassis, axle, suspension systems, steering systems, and advanced batteries. Principal
parts include items such as tires, rear view mirrors, fluid pumps, air-conditioning parts, bearings,
bodies and bumpers, seats and seatbelts, and radiators and mufflers. 89 percent Complementary
parts include items such as certain pipes, locks, certain batteries, lighting and signaling
equipment, certain valves, and defrosters. 85 percent of U.S. employment in motor vehicle
manufacturing.

To qualify for preferential tariff treatment under NAFTA, light vehicles must meet a single
requirement: a 62.5% RVC. Under CUSMA, light vehicles will have to meet five requirements:
· a 75% RVC for the vehicle; · all core parts in the vehicle must qualify as originating (i.e. meet
a 75% RVC); · 70% of the steel purchased by an assembler for use in vehicle production must
originate in the FTA territory · 70% of the aluminum purchased by an assembler for use in
vehicle production must originate in the FTA territory; · a labour value content (LVC)
requirement whereby a proportion of a vehicle assembler’s production activities must be
undertaken by workers earning at least US$16/hour: o 40% LVC for passenger cars (phased in
over three years); and o 45% LVC for light trucks (no phase-in period). Heavy trucks will be
subject to the following requirements: a 70% RVC threshold (phased in over seven years), 70%
steel and aluminum requirements, and a 45% LVC requirement.

IMPORTANCE AND OVERALL GLOBAL TRADE VALUE:- For decades, labour unions, and
others across progressive civil society had rightly criticized the decidedly one-sided, corporate-
focused trade rules enshrined in the NAFTA. Expanded tariff-free access to the North American
market, coupled with less-restrictive investment laws, resulted in a painful restructuring of the
economy – causing hardship for workers from factories to farm-fields. Promises of shared
prosperity resulting from “freer trade” were broken, as real wages stagnated or, as in Mexico’s
case, declined. NAFTA rules designed to protect workers’ rights and the environment, proved
unenforceable and ineffective. With fewer trade and investment restrictions (and NAFTA tools to
challenge laws that upset profits), many global corporations responded to worker demands for
higher wages, greater benefits and retirement security with threats of investment relocation and
job loss. For decades, labour unions have called for NAFTA’s renegotiation. Successive
governments throughout North America acknowledged the problem, but failed to act. In an
attempt to win favour and secure votes from hard-hit industrial (and Democratleaning) states,
Donald Trump identified trade reform as a key plank in his Presidential election campaign – and
won. In May 2017, less than five months from taking office, U.S. Trade Representative Robert
Lighthizer notified Congress of the President’s intent to renegotiate NAFTA. Shortly thereafter,
the U.S. laid out a series of hard-line proposals designed to secure economic gains for the United
States, at the expense of both Canada and Mexico.

GLOBAL TRADE:-

MFN STATUS:- NAFTA preferential tariff treatment would cease. Trade between Canada and
the United States would be governed by WTO rules and MFN tariffs would be applied according
to each country’s current applied MFN tariffs. Based on the average tariff by product, the trade-
weighted MFN tariff is estimated at 1.7% for Canadian shipments to the United States and 2.5%
for U.S. shipments to Canada. b) Section 232 tariffs on steel (25%) and aluminum (10%) that
started in May 2018 would remain in place. c) Duty-free treatment currently provided for under
WTO rules would continue, and the current original equipment manufacturer (OEM) tariff
waiver for auto parts imported into Canada would remain in place. Higher tariffs would be
applied only to a small proportion of products, such as trucks, footwear and apparel, for the
United States. In 2018, about 40.5% of Canadian exports to the United States and 66.7% of U.S.
exports to Canada were MFN duty-free. The share of dutyfree trade between Canada and Mexico
was even higher: about 75.1% of Canadian exports to Mexico and 57% of Mexican exports to
Canada were dutyfree in 2016 (see Figures 10 and 11). 14

Overall, if combining assembled vehicles and parts together, currently about 19.1% of Canadian
automotive exports to the United States and 9.6% of Canadian automotive exports to Mexico
would fail to meet the new CUSMA automotive ROOs, and would therefore be subject to MFN
tariffs. In this analysis, we assume that the vehicle manufacturers would adjust their sourcing of
parts to comply with the new ROOs up to the point that the cost of doing so would be equivalent
to MFN tariffs of 2.5% for products shipped to the United States and 6.1% for products exported
to Canada. This would likely incentivize North American production and benefit Canadian
automotive parts producers as well as Canada’s steel and aluminum sectors. However, if the
costs of sourcing adjustments were higher than the MFN tariffs, we have assumed that the
manufacturers would simply choose to pay the non-preferential MFN duties on engines,
transmissions, other parts and vehicles that are noncompliant. This assumption implies the
application of MFN auto tariffs between CUSMA parties on all assembled vehicles that fail to
meet the new rules of origin requirements. The application of MFN tariffs or adjustments to meet
the new ROO could result in higher prices for consumers and overall higher costs of production
due to increased sourcing of more expensive parts from within the region. This would likely
affect competitiveness and, as a result, other automotive producing countries outside North
America—such as Japan, South Korea, Germany and China—could benefit from

OVERALL NATIONAL ECONOMIC CONTRIBUTION- DIRECT AND INDIRECT:-

Canada’s investment environment for both banking and insurance would improve. This
improvement can be assessed through use of the OECD’s Services Trade Restrictiveness Index
(STRI). As part of the study, Canada’s STRI scores for banking and insurance have been updated
to account for the changes under USMCA. For future investment in insurance services, Canada’s
STRI score improves from 0.2084 before USMCA to 0.2018 after USMCA. Similarly, the STRI
score for investment in banking services improves from 0.1783 to 0.1663.
EMPLOYMENT-SKILLED/UNSKILLED AND OVERALL NATIONAL SHARE :- The
estimated impacts of USMCA on workers are generally positive, but vary in magnitude
depending on their level of education. Differences across labor types are based on several
factors. The first factor is that the labor composition of each industry is different, meaning that
each industry tends to employ a different share of each type of worker. As a result, when demand
for a certain industry’s output increases, the labor demand for some types of workers grows more
than others. The second factor is that each worker type responds differently in terms of a
worker’s decision to enter or exit the labor market in response to wage changes. In general, more
highly educated workers are less responsive to changes in wages because their jobs are more
specialized and they are less likely to enter or exit the job market. By comparison, less educated
workers respond to wage changes more readily, reflecting the less stable labor market these
workers face compared to more-educated workers. Across sectors, the largest wage increases are
estimated to be in the manufacturing and mining sector, due primarily to the automotive rules of
origin changes. The other sectors would see smaller wage changes, with services showing a
smaller increase than agriculture. Employment would grow the most for workers with 10–12
years of education (0.15 percent or about 75,000 jobs) and 13–15 years of education (0.14
percent or about 63,000 jobs). Together, these two groups of workers represent nearly 78 percent
of the estimated total employment gains.. Workers with 0–9 years of education would see smaller
growth in the number of jobs they hold (about 13,000 jobs) because they make up a small share
of the workforce. However, they would experience a higher rate of employment growth (0.20
percent) than the other groups, due to their high responsiveness to wage changes. Workers with
bachelor’s and graduate degrees would experience the smallest employment growth, in terms of
both jobs and percentages, for two reasons: their responsiveness to wage changes is lower than
average, and they make up relatively small shares of the labor force. Employment of workers
with bachelor’s degrees would grow by about 19,000 jobs (0.06 percent), and employment of
workers with graduate degrees would grow by about 6,000 jobs (0.04 percent).

LAWS GOVERNING THE AGREEMENT:- A key Canadian objective in the renegotiations was to
avoid the threatened future use by the U.S. of section 232 of the U.S. Trade Expansion Act  to impose
tariffs against Canada's auto sector on alleged national security grounds. Section 232 is the same
provision used by the Trump Administration in early 2018 to impose tariffs on imports of steel (at 25%)
and aluminum (at 10%) from almost all countries (the tariffs were extended to apply against Canada and
Mexico in June 2018) on the basis that imports of these products threatened U.S. national security. In
May 2018, the U.S. initiated a similar investigation under section 232 into auto imports. Canada's
objective was achieved by way of side letter. The U.S. has agreed that, in the event it imposes section
232 measures against auto imports, the measures shall exclude imports from Canada for up to 2.6
million passenger vehicles on an annual basis, US$32.4 billion worth of auto parts from Canada in any
calendar year, with all light trucks being exempt entirely. Mexico was given the same deal, but with a
higher value for auto parts (US$108 billion).

These figures are comfortably above Canada's 2017 sales into the U.S. Put in perspective, according to
U.S. Department of Commerce trade data, Canadian firms sold just over 1.8 million new passenger
vehicles into the U.S. in 2017, and have not sold more than 2.1 million vehicles annually in the past five
years. Likewise, the ceiling on Canadian auto parts is well above current trading volumes – the total
value of U.S. imports of automotive parts from Canada was approximately US$16.4 billion in 2017.

While the USMCA does not address section 232 U.S. tariffs on aluminum and steel, Canada and Mexico
each obtained a second side letter that addresses future section 232 measures. The side letters contain
little by way of real protection, amounting to essentially a notice requirement. The U.S. agreed that if it
imposes future section 232 measures, such measures shall not apply against Canada or Mexico until 60
days after they are imposed. During the notice period, the U.S. and Canada (or Mexico) shall "seek to
negotiate an appropriate outcome". Once the 60-day time limit runs out, the exemption expires and the
tariffs would apply to Canadian and/or Mexican goods if no agreement is reached. The side letters
expressly permit Canada and Mexico to take retaliatory measures of "equivalent commercial effect" if
the U.S. section 232 action is "inconsistent" with the USMCA or the WTO (or the NAFTA, if applicable).
Canada and Mexico also retain the ability to challenge a section 232 measure at the WTO.
Notwithstanding, the USMCA does nothing to delegitimize the application of section 232 measures
against the close trading partners of the U.S., and does not answer the question of how a free-trading
partner may represent an access risk relating to needed materials to defend the security of the U.S.

Canada's objective was achieved by way of side letter. The U.S. has agreed that, in the event it
imposes section 232 measures against auto imports, the measures shall exclude imports from
Canada for up to 2.6 million passenger vehicles on an annual basis, US$32.4 billion worth of
auto parts from Canada in any calendar year, with all light trucks being exempt entirely. Mexico
was given the same deal, but with a higher value for auto parts (US$108 billion).

These figures are comfortably above Canada's 2017 sales into the U.S. Put in perspective,
according to U.S. Department of Commerce trade data, Canadian firms sold just over 1.8 million
new passenger vehicles into the U.S. in 2017, and have not sold more than 2.1 million vehicles
annually in the past five years. Likewise, the ceiling on Canadian auto parts is well above current
trading volumes – the total value of U.S. imports of automotive parts from Canada was
approximately US$16.4 billion in 2017.

In addition to the rules of origin requirements, a passenger vehicle, light truck, or heavy truck is
originating only if, during the time-period specified (Section 17(7) of the Appendix to 19 CFR
182), at least seventy percent of a vehicle producer’s purchases of steel and aluminum, by value,
in the territories of the USMCA countries are originating. Producers are required to certify their
corporate purchases of steel and aluminum. Furthermore, a passenger vehicle, light truck, or
heavy truck is originating only if the vehicle producer certifies and can demonstrate that its
production meets the applicable labor value content requirement. In addition to the certification
of origin, producers of passenger vehicles, light trucks, and heavy trucks are required to submit
three new certifications to receive preferential tariff treatment under the USMCA for these goods
– Labor Value Content (LVC) certification (Annex B), Steel certification, (Annex C) and
Aluminum certification (Annex D). See Annex B -D of this document for the certifications’
minimum data element requirements.

U.S. FTAs, including NAFTA and bilateral investment treaties (BITs), maintain core investor
protections reflecting U.S. law, such as obligations for governments to provide investors with
nondiscriminatory treatment, a minimum standard of treatment, and protections against
uncompensated expropriation, among other provisions.

On May 17, 2019, and as a condition for moving towards ratification, Canada secured the
removal of U.S. Section 232 tariffs on approximately $17.2 billion worth of Canadian exports of
steel and aluminum products to the United States. The removal of U.S. Section 232 tariffs on
Canadian steel and aluminum products was a key element in clearing the path towards
implementation and ratification of the Agreement. These unilateral tariffs threatened the high
level of integration among Canadian and U.S. steel and aluminum producers and long-
established cross-border value chains, and were contradictory to the long-standing Canada-U.S.
security partnership. Similarly, the imposition of Section 232 tariffs as high as 25% on Canadian
automobiles and auto-part exports to the United States would have had a significant negative
impact on Canada’s auto industry and would have undermined decades of Canada-U.S.
commercial cooperation. For this reason, it was imperative that Canada secure an exemption
from any Section 232 measures on automobiles and auto parts as part of the CUSMA outcome.
In a bilateral exchange of letters on November 30, 2018, Canada secured an exemption from any
potential U.S. Section 232 tariffs on automobiles and auto parts for up to 2.6 million automobiles
and US$32.4 billion in Canadian auto parts imported into the United States annually. Light
trucks (e.g., pickup trucks) are fully exempt from any potential Section 232 tariffs. These levels
are sufficiently high to provide both stability and room for growth for Canada’s automotive
industry in a scenario where Section 232 tariffs were imposed.

TRADE DISPUTE RESOLUTION:- USMCA maintains the NAFTA state-to-state mechanism

for most disputes arising under the agreement. It also retains the binational dispute settlement
mechanism to review trade remedy disputes. However, USMCA: eliminates investor-state
dispute settlement (ISDS) for Canada after the termination of NAFTA; maintains ISDS only
between the United States and Mexico for claimants regarding government contracts in the oil,
natural gas, power generation, infrastructure, and telecommunications sectors; and maintains
U.S.-Mexico ISDS in other sectors provided the claimant exhausts national remedies first.
USMCA removes procedures allowing a party to block the formation of a dispute settlement
panel. The USMCA preserves the binational panel "dispute settlement mechanism" presently
found in NAFTA Chapter 19, and confers on all parties the right to challenge each other’s anti-
dumping and countervailing duty decisions before an independent, expert panel. Chapter 19
became a red line issue for Canada during the negotiations and was hotly contested by U.S.
negotiators.

With respect to global safeguards, the USMCA is almost identical to the existing global
safeguards exclusion under Chapter 8 of the NAFTA, and continues to provide preferential
treatment to imports from the other parties. Similar to the NAFTA provisions, the USMCA states
that when a safeguard measure is applied, the country applying it will provide the trading partner
against whose exports the measure has been applied “trade compensation” in the form of
concessions, meant to re-balance the trade equation between the parties. Another interesting
observation is that the safeguards agreed upon in the US-Mexico bilateral talks are markedly
different from the USMCA safeguard provisions insofar as they eliminate some compensation
requirements and immunity for Mexico from future safeguard actions, according to U.S. trade
advisory committee reports.

The CUSMA outcome improves upon NAFTA by ensuring that arbitral panels are created
automatically upon request in order to address disputes with respect to the interpretation of and
compliance with the Agreement. Specifically, the Free Trade Commission (of ministers) will no
longer be involved in the dispute settlement process, meaning that a panel will be automatically
established upon request. In addition, the parties made changes to ensure that a roster of potential
panelists is created and updated. CUSMA also includes new requirements to provide for
additional clarity and transparency on procedures regarding the operation of panel hearings. If an
arbitral panel finds that a party has failed to implement its obligations under the Agreement, that
party must remove the violation. If the violation is not remedied, the winning party is
automatically entitled to suspend benefits of equivalent effect (such as increased import duties).
Almost all of the obligations in the Agreement, including those related to labour and the
environment, are subject to this dispute settlement system.

ADR- ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION:- Under CUSMA, and in addition to

continued access to the NAFTA chapter 19 mechanism for trade remedies, Canadian stakeholders
will benefit from Canada’s enhanced ability to enforce the Agreement. In particular, the state-to-
state dispute settlement mechanism has been improved to ensure that panels will be established
automatically upon request and that a roster of potential panelists is created and maintained.

PAST AND CURRENT SCENARIOS:- current :- The Commission's model gauges that
USMCA would raise U.S. genuine GDP by $68.2 billion (0.35%) and U.S. work by 176,000
occupations (0.12%). The model gauges that USMCA would almost certainly positively affect
U.S. exchange, both with USMCA accomplices and with the remainder of the world. U.S. fares
to Canada and Mexico would increment by $19.1 billion (5.9%) and $14.2 billion (6.7%),
separately. U.S. imports from Canada and Mexico would increment by $19.1 billion (4.8%) and
$12.4 billion (3.8%), individually. The model gauges that the understanding would probably
positively affect all expansive industry areas inside the U.S. economy. Assembling would
encounter the biggest rate gains in yield, fares, wages, and business, while in outright terms,
administrations would encounter the biggest increases in yield and work.

RESPECTIVE GOVERMENT'S CURRENT STANCE:-

PERSONAL TRADE PERSPECTIVE:- The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR)
projected a significant boost for U.S. automakers and parts producers in an economic analysis of
the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Trade Agreement (USCMA) published Thursday. The White House
trade office projected the USMCA to spur $34 billion in investments in U.S. auto plants, $23
billion in American auto parts sales and create 76,000 new industry jobs over the course of five
years. The employment gains would include roughly 22,800 automotive assembly jobs, 8,000
additional advanced battery supplier jobs, and 45,600 additional automotive supplier jobs,
according to USTR estimates. he Commission estimates that USMCA would boost U.S. GDP by
$68.2 billion and would add roughly 176,000 jobs. Additionally, ‘U.S. exports to Canada and
Mexico would increase by $19.1 billion (5.9 percent) and $14.2 billion (6.7 percent),
respectively. U.S. imports from Canada and Mexico would increase by $19.1 billion (4.8
percent) and $12.4 billion (3.8 percent), respectively,’ the report states.”