Buy American: Bad for Jobs, Worse for Reputation
AbstractOn January 28, 2009, the US House of Representatives passed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. Out of the bill's 700 text pages, a small half-page section attracted enormous media attention: the section requiring that all public projects funded by the stimulus plan must use only iron and steel produced in the United States. The US Senate draft includes a broad Buy American provision that goes further than the House bill, expanding the requirement to all manufacturing products. Based on economic and legal analysis, the authors conclude that the Buy American provisions would violate US trade obligations and damage the United States' reputation, with very little impact on US jobs. They estimate that the additional US steel production fostered by the Buy American provisions will amount to around 0.5 million metric tons. This in turn translates into a gain in steel industry employment equal to roughly 1,000 jobs. The job impact is small because steel is very capital intensive. In the giant US economy, with a labor force of roughly 140 million people, 1,000 jobs more or less is a rounding error. On balance the Buy American provisions could well cost jobs if other countries emulate US policies or retaliate against them. Most importantly, the Buy American provisions contradict the G-20 commitment not to implement new protectionist measures--a commitment that was designed to forestall a rush of "beggar-thy-neighbor" policies. Gary Clyde Hufbauer in a BBC interview, February 3, 2009. © BBC. Posted with permission of the BBC. What should be done? The best result would be to simply delete the Buy American provision in the House-Senate conference. Next best would be to keep the House version, applying the Buy American restriction only to iron and steel, but stating explicitly--in either the statutory text or in the legislative history--that the public interest waiver is intended to be used to avoid violations of US trade obligations. The third option is a presidential statement--preferably before legislation is finalized--that the United States will respect its international obligations when it applies the Buy American provisions.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by Peterson Institute for International Economics in its series Policy Briefs with number PB09-2.
Date of creation: Feb 2009
Date of revision:
You can help add them by filling out this form.
CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
- Naude, Wim, 2009. "The Global Economic Crisis after One Year: Is a New Paradigm for Recovery in Developing Countries Emerging?," Working Paper Series, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER) UNU-WIDER UNU Policy Brie, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
- Antoine BOUET & David LABORDE, 2009.
"The potential cost of a Failed Doha Round,"
2, CATT - UPPA - Université de Pau et des Pays de l'Adour, revised Jul 2009.
- Bouet, Antoine & Laborde, David, 2008. "The potential cost of a failed Doha Round:," Issue briefs, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) 56, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
- Bouet, Antoine & Debucquet, David Laborde, 2009. "The potential cost of a failed doha round:," IFPRI discussion papers, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) 886, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
- Mario Larch & Wolfgang Lechthaler, 2009.
"Why "Buy American'' is a Bad Idea but Politicians Still Like it,"
Kiel Working Papers
1570, Kiel Institute for the World Economy.
- Mario Larch & Wolfgang Lechthaler, 2011. "Why `Buy American' is a bad idea but politicians still like it," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 44(3), pages 838-858, August.
- Mario Larch & Wolfgang Lechthaler, 2010. "Why "Buy American" is a Bad Idea but Politicians still Like it," CESifo Working Paper Series 3207, CESifo Group Munich.
- BOUET, ANTOINE & Laborde, David, 2010.
"Assessing the potential cost of a failed Doha Round,"
World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge University Press, vol. 9(02), pages 319-351, April.
- Antoine Bouet, 2010. "Assessing the potential cost of a failed Doha round," Working Papers hal-00637583, HAL.
- repec:laf:wpaper:201001 is not listed on IDEAS
- Jeffrey J. Schott & Cathleen Cimino, 2013. "Crafting a Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership: What Can Be Done," Policy Briefs PB13-8, Peterson Institute for International Economics.
- Wim Naudé, 2011. "The Global Financial Crisis and Development: Implications for the Entrepreneurial Economy," Working Papers, Maastricht School of Management 2011/01, Maastricht School of Management.
- Wim Naudé, 2009. "Fallacies about the Global Financial Crisis Harms Recovery in the Poorest Countries," CESifo Forum, Ifo Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, Ifo Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 10(4), pages 3-12, 01.
- Claire Brunel & Gary Clyde Hufbauer, 2009. "Money for the Auto Industry: Consistent with WTO Rules?," Policy Briefs PB09-4, Peterson Institute for International Economics.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Peterson Institute webmaster).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.