The U.S. Chamber of Commerce attributed to nafta that U.S. trade in goods and services with Canada and Mexico increased from $337 billion in 1993 to $1.2 trillion in 2011, while the AFL-CIO held the agreement responsible for sending 700,000 U.S. manufacturing jobs to Mexico at that time. [86] But from an economic point of view, NAFTA is a success and without it, the effects of competition from the expanding economies of the European Union or China would be worse. This is crucial now that both trade zones are above the United States as the world`s largest economies. According to Chad Bown of the Peterson Institute for International Economics, the Trump administration`s list is „very consistent with the president`s attitude of loving trade barriers and protectionism. This makes NAFTA less of a free trade agreement in many ways. [131] The considerations expressed by the U.S. representative regarding subsidized state-owned enterprises and currency manipulation are not likely to apply in Canada and Mexico, but are intended to send a message to countries outside North America. [131] Jeffrey Schott of the Peterson Institute for International Economics stated that it was not possible to conclude renegotiations quickly, while alleviating all concerns on the list.

[133] He also said that it would be difficult to do something about trade deficits. [133] But other economists, including Gary Clyde Hufbauer and Cathleen Cimino-Isaacs of the Peterson Institute for International Economics (PIIE), have pointed out that increased trade brings overall benefits to the U.S. economy. Some jobs are lost because of imports, others are created and consumers benefit greatly from lower prices and often improved product quality. Your 2014 PIIE study on the impact of NAFTA revealed a net loss of about 15,000 jobs per year as a result of the pact – but gains of about $450,000 for each job lost, in the form of higher productivity and lower consumer prices. The overall effect of the agricultural agreement between Mexico and the United States is controversial. Mexico has not invested in the infrastructure needed for competition, such as efficient railways and highways. This has led to more difficult living conditions for the country`s poor. Mexico`s agricultural exports increased by 9.4% per year between 1994 and 2001, while imports increased by only 6.9% per year over the same period.

[69] The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) was a three-country agreement negotiated by the governments of Canada, Mexico and the United States that came into force in January 1994. NAFTA eliminated most tariffs on goods traded between the three countries, with a focus on trade liberalization in agriculture, textiles and automobiles. The agreement also aimed to protect intellectual property, establish dispute resolution mechanisms and implement labour and environmental protection measures through ancillary agreements. The free trade agreement was concluded in 1988 and NAFTA extended most of the provisions of the free trade agreement to Mexico. NAFTA was negotiated by the governments of U.S. President George H.W. Bush, Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney and Mexican Prime Minister Carlos Salinas de Gortari. An interim agreement on the pact was reached in August 1992 and signed by the three heads of state and government on 17 December. NAFTA was ratified by the national parliaments of the three countries in 1993 and came into force on January 1, 1994. Many economists argue that the current level of TaA funding is largely insufficient to meet the increase in trade-related job losses.