IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/mie/wpaper/557.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Economic Effects of a Korea-U.S. Free Trade Agreement

Author

Listed:
  • Kozo Kiyota
  • Robert M. Stern

    (Research Seminar in International Economics, University of Michigan)

Abstract

This study presents an analysis of the bilateral free trade agreement (FTA) that is being negotiated between Korea and the United States. The bilateral FTA negotiations were notified to the U.S. Congress by the United States Trade Representative in February 2006, and formal negotiations began in May 2006.1 It is anticipated that the negotiations may be completed and the agreement signed before mid-2007, which is when the current U.S. presidential negotiating authority expires. Once signed, the implementing legislation can be introduced in the U.S. Congress at any time. In Chapter 1, we set out what appear to be the primary objectives of the United States and Korea in their pursuit of an FTA. In Chapter 2, we review the existing studies of a Korea-U.S. FTA that have been done to date. Chapter 3 is devoted to comparative static and dynamic analyses of the FTA. We first provide an overview of the features and benchmark data of the Michigan Model of World Production and Trade, which is the computational general equilibrium (CGE) modeling framework that we use to analyze the economic effects of a Korea-U.S. FTA. Thereafter, we present the comparative static modeling results for the bilateral removal of tariffs and other trade barriers for agricultural products, manufactures, services, and all of these combined. This is followed by presentation of results of some dynamic computational scenarios that are specially constructed to take into account possible changes in capital formation that may be generated by the Korea-U.S. FTA. We then draw together the main conclusions from the review of previous studies and our own computational work. In Chapter 4, we provide a broader perspective on a Korea-U.S. FTA that takes into account alternative negotiating options for the two nations. These options include computational analyses of the other FTAs that each nation has concluded in recent years and that are currently in process. We also calculate the potential effects of the unilateral removal of trade barriers by the United States and Korea and the effects of global free trade in which all countries or regions covered in the model are assumed to remove their existing trade barriers on a multilateral basis. In Chapter 5, we present conclusions and implications for further research and policy.

Suggested Citation

  • Kozo Kiyota & Robert M. Stern, 2007. "Economic Effects of a Korea-U.S. Free Trade Agreement," Working Papers 557, Research Seminar in International Economics, University of Michigan.
  • Handle: RePEc:mie:wpaper:557
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.fordschool.umich.edu/rsie/workingpapers/Papers551-575/r557.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Brown, Drusilla K. & Kiyota, Kozo & Stern, Robert M., 2005. "Computational analysis of the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA)," The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 16(2), pages 153-185, August.
    2. Harrison, W Jill & Pearson, K R, 1996. "Computing Solutions for Large General Equilibrium Models Using GEMPACK," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 9(2), pages 83-127, May.
    3. Kala Krishna, 2005. "Understanding Rules of Origin," NBER Working Papers 11150, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Olivier Cadot & Antoni Estevadeordal & Akiko Suwa-Eisenmann & Thierry Verdier, 2006. "The Origin of Goods: Rules of Origin in Regional Trade Agreements," Post-Print halshs-00754856, HAL.
    5. Wolfgang F. Stolper & Paul A. Samuelson, 1941. "Protection and Real Wages," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 9(1), pages 58-73.
    6. Drusilla K. Brown & Robert M. Stern, 2009. "Computable General Equilibrium Estimates of the Gains from US-Canadian Trade Liberalization," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Globalization And International Trade Policies, chapter 13, pages 425-481, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    7. Drusilla K. Brown & Alan V. Deardorff & Robert M. Stern, 2000. "Computational Analysis of the Accession of Chile to the NAFTA and Western Hemisphere Integration," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(2), pages 145-174, February.
    8. Warwick McKibbin & Jong-Wha Lee & Inkyo Cheong, 2004. "A dynamic analysis of the Korea-Japan free trade area: simulations with the G-cubed Asia-Pacific model," International Economic Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(1), pages 3-32.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. durongkaveroj, wannaphong, 2014. "CGE analysis of trade liberalization in Thailand," MPRA Paper 55191, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Kim Ruhl & Jack Rossbach & Timothy Kehoe, 2013. "Using the New Products Margin to Predict the Sectoral Impact of Trade Reform," 2013 Meeting Papers 1227, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    3. Kehoe, Timothy J. & Rossbach, Jack & Ruhl, Kim J., 2015. "Using the new products margin to predict the industry-level impact of trade reform," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(2), pages 289-297.
    4. Ozlem Yaylaci & Serge Shikher, 2014. "What Would Korea-US Free Trade Agreement Bring?," International Economic Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(1), pages 161-182, March.
    5. Wei, Dan & Chen, Zhenhua & Rose, Adam, 2018. "Estimating Economic Impacts of the U.S.-South Korea Free Trade Agreement," Conference papers 333011, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Drusilla K. Brown & Kozo Kiyota & Robert M. Stern, 2006. "Computational Analysis of the Menu of US‐Japan Trade Policies," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(6), pages 805-855, June.
    2. Drusilla K. Brown & Alan V. Deardorff & Robert M. Stern, 2003. "Multilateral, Regional and Bilateral Trade‐Policy Options for the United States and Japan," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(6), pages 803-828, June.
    3. Brown, Drusilla K. & Kiyota, Kozo & Stern, Robert M., 2005. "Computational analysis of the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA)," The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 16(2), pages 153-185, August.
    4. Drusilla K. Brown & Alan V. Deardorff & Robert M. Stern, 2003. "Developing Countries' Stake in the Doha Round," Working Papers 495, Research Seminar in International Economics, University of Michigan.
    5. Drusilla K. Brown & Alan V. Deardorff & Robert M Stern, 2001. "CGE Modeling and Analysis of Multilateral and Regional Negotiating Options," Working Papers 468, Research Seminar in International Economics, University of Michigan.
    6. Marco Fugazza & Frédéric Robert-Nicoud, 2014. "The “Emulator Effect” of the Uruguay Round on US Regionalism," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(5), pages 1049-1078, November.
    7. Drusilla K. Brown & Alan V. Deardorff & Robert M Stern, 2002. "Computational Analysis of Multilateral Trade Liberalization in the Uruguay Round and Doha Development Round," Working Papers 489, Research Seminar in International Economics, University of Michigan.
    8. Krishna, Kala, 2009. "Background Paper on the IMF's Trade Restrictiveness Index," MPRA Paper 21316, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Fugazza, Marco & Nicita, Alessandro, 2011. "Measuring preferential market access," MPRA Paper 38565, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Patrick Georges, 2010. "Dispensing with NAFTA Rules of Origin? Some Policy Options," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(11), pages 1606-1637, November.
    11. Azmeh, Shamel, 2015. "Transient global value chains and preferential trade agreements: rules of origin in US trade agreements with Jordan and Egypt," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 64601, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    12. Drusilla K. Brown & Kozo Kiyota & Robert M. Stern, 2004. "Computational Analysis of the U.S FTA with the Southern African Customs Union (SACU)," Working Papers 514, Research Seminar in International Economics, University of Michigan.
    13. Georges, Patrick & Mérette, Marcel, 2011. "Trade Diversification Away from the U.S. or North American Customs Union? A Review of Canada’s Trade Policy Options," Conference papers 332084, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    14. Patrick Georges, 2017. "Canada’s Trade Policy Options under Donald Trump: NAFTA’s rules of origin, Canada-U.S. security perimeter, and Canada’s geographical trade diversification opportunities," Working Papers 1707E, University of Ottawa, Department of Economics.
    15. Drusilla K. Brown & Alan V. Deardorff & Robert M Stern, 2001. "Impacts on NAFTA Members of Multilateral and Regional Trading Arrangements and Initiatives and Harmonization of NAFTA's External Tariffs," Working Papers 471, Research Seminar in International Economics, University of Michigan.
    16. Drusilla Brown & Kozo Kiyota & Robert Stern, 2006. "An Analysis of the U.S.-SACU FTA Negotiations," Working Papers 545, Research Seminar in International Economics, University of Michigan.
    17. Patrick Georges, 2009. "Dispensing with NAFTA Rules of Origin? Some Policy Options for Canada," Working Papers 0904E, University of Ottawa, Department of Economics.
    18. Ianchovichina, Elena, 2004. "Trade policy analysis in the presence of duty drawbacks," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 353-371, April.
    19. Dani Rodrik, 2018. "Populism and the economics of globalization," Journal of International Business Policy, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 1(1), pages 12-33, June.
    20. M. Magnani, 2009. "Labor share dynamics: a survey of the theory," Economics Department Working Papers 2009-EP07, Department of Economics, Parma University (Italy).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Free trade; Korea (South); Commercial treaties;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • F13 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade Policy; International Trade Organizations

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:mie:wpaper:557. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: FSPP Webmaster (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/riumius.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.