Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement Reached, Let's All Buy Subaru Sambars

Aaron Cole
by Aaron Cole

Twelve countries, including the United States, reached an agreement Monday on an historic trade agreement that could economically tie together more than 400 million people in Asian Pacific and American countries. The pact would cover trade for wide ranging products, from rice to pharmaceutical drugs to cars.

The Trans-Pacific Partnership, which negotiators have been working on for eight years, would thaw trade relations among countries included in the regional zone, including Japan and the United States. For automakers in both countries, the tentative deal includes provisions for Japanese automakers to (eventually) bring light-duty trucks to the U.S. For American automakers, part of the proposed agreement included a side deal between America and Japan to allow access for U.S. automakers to traditionally closed Japanese markets.

The agreement faces an uphill battle to get congressional approval; House Republicans and presidential candidates already have roundly dismissed the deal.

The full text of the accord won’t be available for another month, according to the New York Times.

According to reports, the deal won’t include any sort of currency devaluation agreement to keep countries from artificially driving down costs on their own exports. Separate agreements between individual countries would need to be made.

The trade agreement could include provisions for cars produced in partner countries that could be exported duty-free. For cars and trucks produced in the North American Free Trade Agreement zone, those vehicles would need to include 62.5 percent of its parts sourced within the region to be sold without high tariffs.

Opponents on both sides say the deal could compromise jobs in the U.S. and that the agreement ignores human rights violations in some countries.

Join the conversation
4 of 43 comments
  • Big Al from Oz Big Al from Oz on Oct 06, 2015

    I'm an advocate of trade pacts between nations. The people who consider it a right to protect in effective or uncompetitive industry aren't looking at the reality of what can be offered with these trade pacts. A business/country must develop what it is good at, when I speak of good, good just doesn't imply that the country can manufacture an item. It must be able to manufacture competitively. The scaremongering in some of these comments are from the Luddites. The US can profit from any trade pact. The manufacturing sector is morphing, across all industries. Even the services industry is morphing. In twenty years the way our economies function and the employment offered will change. If anyone has ever gone to a country fair you will see the "artisans" like blacksmiths, candlestick makers, tapestry, etc. These were all once middle class jobs of their era. Times have changed. We must change with the times or be left behind. The Europeans didn't grasp during the onset of the manufacture of consumer goods. The US did. The US went ahead in leap and bounds. Many of the Luddite, comments in this article are the same as those Europeans who were scared of change, just like some you sorry people. If you can't cook very well, you don't open a restaurant, the same as a country, if you can't manufacturer competitively then become innovative and search for work arounds. This is called progress, but Luddites aren't reknown as progressives.

    • DenverMike DenverMike on Oct 06, 2015

      Even before this pact, the US was already the most open and friendly, meaningful market to import automakers. This goes one step beyond. You and Bertel Schmitt share the same attitude.

  • Big Al from Oz Big Al from Oz on Oct 06, 2015

    DenverMike, Read and learn a little. Canada even has a more liberal economy than the US. The US has only 51 vehicle brands available. That is for over 300 million people. Australia has 64, not counting the grey imports. Something lacking in the US. Imagine if someone really wanted a 3.2 diesel Mazda BT50 could buy one. But this ain't so in the US, you can buy it, but you are not able to drive it on a public road. So much for freedom of choice. One thing though, you do have a million times the choice of junk and trash food outlets. That's real freedom! Yes, Australia is one of the most competitive car markets in the world. For a relatively small market that comprises only 1.5 per cent of global automotive production, Australia has 67 vehicle brands and over 350 make/models of light vehicles. This is more brands than overseas markets such as the UK (53 brands), the US (51 brands) or Canada (49 brands). Study: the United States has a less open economy than Romania 13 June 2013, Washington Post As for the rest of the leading G7 and G20 economies, Canada ranks 24th, Australian 27th, the UK 30th, Saudi Arabia 36th, France 37th, Republic of Korea 41st and the US 42nd. The two lowest scoring countries are the United States and Japan. rank country overall change Free Markets 1 Hong Kong 89.6 -0.5 4 Australia 81.4 -0.6 2 Singapore 89.4 0.0 5 Switzerland 80.5 -1.1 Mostly Free 6 Canada 79.1 -1.1 21 Luxembourg 73.2 -1.0 7 Chile 78.5 -0.2 22 Georgia 73.0 +0.4 8 Estonia 76.8 +0.9 23 Sweden 72.7 -0.4 9 Ireland 76.6 +0.4 24 Czech Republic 72.5 +0.3 10 Mauritius 76.4 -0.1 25 United Arab Emirates 72.4 +1.0 11 Denmark 76.3 +0.2 26 Iceland 72.0 -0.4 12 United States 76.2 +0.7 27 Norway 71.8 +0.9 13 United Kingdom 75.8 +0.9 28 Colombia 71.7 +1.0 14 Taiwan 75.1 +1.2 29 South Korea 71.5 +0.3 15 Lithuania 74.7 +1.7 30 Austria 71.2 -1.2 16 Germany 73.8 +0.4 31 Malaysia 70.8 +1.2 17 The Netherlands 73.7 -0.5 32 Qatar 70.8 -0.4 18 Bahrain 73.4 -1.7 33 Israel 70.5 +2.1 19 Finland 73.4 0.0 34 Macau 70.3 -1.0 20 Japan 73.3 +0.9 35 Saint Lucia 70.2 -0.5 3 New Zealand 82.1 +0.9 I do think you really need to leave the US, haven't you been to Spain 36 times?? How's your F Series car dealership. They need quite a few SuperDutys to drive around the quaint Spanish villages;) Leave the US and look at the world and stop living in the 50s and 60s. The US is the greatest country in the world.......but this doesn't necessarily translate into the best. There are quite a few countries that can teach the US a thing or two about liberalising your economy so less government interference is used and the US will become more competitive. If the consumer wins, the nation wins. I do expect some lame ass comment that is not credible or verifiable from you, as usual. Open the links and actually read and digest the material within, you might learn something and you can move out of that little, tiny Winnepeg apartment with all of those pickup trucks blocking the road outside.

    • DenverMike DenverMike on Oct 06, 2015

      Key words you missed: 1 Automakers 2 Meaningful markets Or were we talking chickens to/from Hong Kong?

  • Skippity “Things To Watch Out For When Buying a 1979 Mercury Cougar XR-7.” A 1979 Mercury Cougar XR-7.
  • Mike Beranek Would you cross this man? No way!
  • Skippity I kinda like styling. There’s plenty of lookalike boxes on the road. Nice to see something unique.
  • Make_light I drive a 2015 A4 and had one of these as a loaner once. It was a huge disappointment (and I would have considered purchasing one as my next car--I'm something of a small crossover apologist). The engine sounded insanely coarse and unrefined (to the point that I wasn't sure if it was poor insulation or there was something wrong with my loaner). The seats, interior materials, and NVH were a huge downgrade compared to my dated A4. I get that they are a completely different class of car, but the contrast struck me. The Q3 just didn't feel like a luxury vehicle at all. Friends of mine drive a Tiguan and I can't think of one way in which the Q3 feels worth the extra cost. My mom's CX-5 is better than either in every conceivable way.
  • Arthur Dailey Personally I prefer a 1970s velour interior to the leather interior. And also prefer the instrument panel and steering wheel introduced later in the Mark series to the ones in the photograph. I have never seen a Mark III or IV with a 'centre console'. Was that even an option for the Mark IV? Rather than bucket seats they had the exceptional and sorely missed 60/40 front seating. The most comfortable seats of all for a man of a 'certain size'. In retrospect this may mark the point when Cadillac lost it mojo. Through the early to mid/late 70's Lincoln surpassed Cadillac in 'prestige/pride of place'. Then the 'imports' took over in the 1980s with the rise of the 'yuppies'.