Which Of The Following Statements Correctly Describe The North American Free Trade Agreement (Nafta)

What is clear is that NAFTA is still a flash in the air for political views on globalization and free trade in general. Opposition to NAFTA has grown and made it much more politically difficult to implement other similar free trade agreements. This was clearly demonstrated in the summer of 2005, when the Central American Free Trade Agreement (CEFTA) stagnated in Congress due to a lack of support. Two journalists, Dawn Gilbertson and Jonathan J. Higuera, who wrote in the Republic of Arizona to mark the tenth anniversary of NAFTA, summed it up this way: „The reality of 10-year-old NAFTA is this: an ever-changing story of winners and losers, largely separated by where you work and what you do.“ The same goes for the impact of NAFTA on small businesses. For some, it was an opportunity to grow and for others a challenge to overcome. Under only the current U.S. free trade agreements, NAFTA includes a binational dispute settlement mechanism (Chapter 19) to review anti-dumping and countervailing decisions by a national administrative authority. This mechanism was created as a compromise with Canada under the CFTA, which had attempted to eliminate ACM/CVM between the two countries. Mexico also supported the inclusion of this provision in the NAFTA negotiations. However, some U.S. industry groups that have been negatively affected by the Chapter 19 decisions have called for the repeal of the provisions of the NAFTA Binational Review Body. NAFTA has not eliminated regulatory requirements for businesses that wish to trade internationally, such as rules of origin.

B and documentation requirements that determine whether certain goods may be traded under NAFTA. The free trade agreement also includes administrative, civil and criminal penalties for companies that violate the laws or customs procedures of the three countries. A study published in the August 2008 issue of the American Journal of Agricultural Economics found that NAFTA increased U.S. agricultural exports to Mexico and Canada, even though most of the increase occurred a decade after its ratification. The study focused on the impact that progressive periods of „phased implementation“ of regional trade agreements, including NAFTA, have on trade flows. Most of the increase in Members` agricultural trade, which was only recently transferred to the World Trade Organization, was due to very high trade barriers prior to NAFTA or other regional trade agreements. [91] Source: Compiled by CRS using U.S. trade data. Census Bureau, www.census.gov/foreign-trade/balance/country.xlsx (data accessed February 8, 2017). Some of the most significant changes have taken place in the textile, apparel, automotive and agricultural industries.

The removal of barriers to trade in these key industries is summarized below. Fourth, NAFTA has established procedures to resolve trade disputes. The parties would begin with a formal discussion, followed by a discussion at a meeting of the Free Trade Commission, if necessary. If the disagreement was not resolved, a committee reviewed the dispute. The process allowed all parties to avoid costly lawsuits in local courts and helped them interpret the complex rules and procedures of NAFTA. This protection against trade disputes also applied to investors. The objective of NAFTA was to remove barriers to trade and investment between the United States, Canada and Mexico. The introduction of NAFTA on January 1, 1994 resulted in the immediate elimination of tariffs on more than half of Mexico`s exports to the United States.

. . .