IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/sus/susewp/1217.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Deep and Not Comprehensive? What the WTO rules permit for a UK-EU Trade Agreement

Author

Listed:
  • Emily Lydgate

    (UK Trade Policy Observatory, University of Sussex)

  • L Alan Winters

    (UK Trade Policy Observatory, University of Sussex)

Abstract

WTO rules prohibit Free Trade Areas (FTAs) that provide tariff-free access or services liberalisation in only one or a few sectors. In this sense, a narrow, sectoral approach to concluding an FTA between the EU and the UK would contravene WTO law. However, assuming the EU and the UK were able to agree a substantially broad tariff-free FTA, WTO rules would not prevent them from moving further to maintain the bulk of the benefits of the Customs Union and the Single Market in a few key sectors. They could establish customs union-like conditions by coordinating external tariffs in some sectors and agreeing on relaxed Rules of Origin (RoOs) administered lightly and Single Market-like access could be approximated through sectoral Mutual Recognition Agreements. Such an approach would enable continued deep integration, whose desirability has been signalled on both sides. It would fall short of current market access levels even in the selected sectors and, in the case of tariff coordination, re-create some of the limits to an independent trade policy that Brexit aimed to remove. If the trade-off were deemed desirable, however, the approach could be reconciled with WTO rules including the ‘Most Favoured Nation’ requirement that equal treatment be awarded to all WTO Member States.

Suggested Citation

  • Emily Lydgate & L Alan Winters, 2017. "Deep and Not Comprehensive? What the WTO rules permit for a UK-EU Trade Agreement," Working Paper Series 1217, Department of Economics, University of Sussex Business School.
  • Handle: RePEc:sus:susewp:1217
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sussex.ac.uk/economics/documents/wps-12-2017.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Adlung, Rudolf, 2015. "The Trade in Services Agreement (TISA) and Its Compatibility with GATS: An Assessment Based on Current Evidence," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 14(4), pages 617-641, October.
    2. Anne O. Krueger, 1999. "Are Preferential Trading Arrangements Trade-Liberalizing or Protectionist?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 13(4), pages 105-124, Fall.
    3. L Alan Winters, 2015. "The WTO and Regional Trading Agreements: Is it all over for Multilateralism?," RSCAS Working Papers 2015/94, European University Institute.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Kevin J. Fox & Ulrich Kohli & Alice Shiu, 2010. "Trade Agreements and Trade Opportunities: A Flexible Approach for Modeling Australian Export and Import Elasticities," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(3), pages 513-530, August.
    2. Austria, Myrna S., 2003. "East Asian Regional Cooperation: Approaches and Processes," Discussion Papers DP 2003-02, Philippine Institute for Development Studies.
    3. Richard Pomfret & Uwe Kaufmann & Christopher Findlay, 2010. "Are Preferential Tariffs Utilized? Evidence from Australian Imports, 2000-9," School of Economics and Public Policy Working Papers 2010-13, University of Adelaide, School of Economics and Public Policy.
    4. Austria, Myrna S., 2001. "Liberalization and Regional Integration: The Philippines' Strategy to Global Competitiveness," Discussion Papers DP 2001-09, Philippine Institute for Development Studies.
    5. Claudio Candia Campano & Medardo Aguirre González & Lilliam Antón López & Javier Beltrán Valdebenito, 2018. "A gravity model of trade for Nicaraguan agricultural exports," Revista Cuadernos de Economia, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, FCE, CID, vol. 37(74), pages 391-428, July.
    6. Jagdambe, Subhash & Kannan, Elumalai, 2020. "Effects of ASEAN-India Free Trade Agreement on agricultural trade: The gravity model approach," World Development Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 19(C).
    7. Langhammer, Rolf J. & Wößmann, Ludger, . "Erscheinungsformen regionaler Integrationsabkommen im weltwirtschaftlichen Ordnungsrahmen: Defizite und Dynamik," Chapters in Economics,, University of Munich, Department of Economics.
    8. Mr. Tubagus Feridhanusetyawan, 2005. "Preferential Trade Agreements in the Asia-Pacific Region," IMF Working Papers 2005/149, International Monetary Fund.
    9. Salazar-Xirinachs, Jose M., 2002. "Proliferation of sub-Regional Trade Agreements in the Americas: an assessment of key analytical and policy issues," Journal of Asian Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(2), pages 181-212.
    10. Hiro Lee & Dominique van der Mensbrugghe, 2007. "Regional Integration, Sectoral Adjustments and Natural Groupings in East Asia," OSIPP Discussion Paper 07E008, Osaka School of International Public Policy, Osaka University.
    11. Michael Daly & Eugenia Lizano & Angelo Silvy, 2000. "Recent trends in tariff and nontariff barriers to trade in the United States," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 136(4), pages 724-752, December.
    12. Barbara Dluhosch & Stefanie Krause, 2013. "Diversity and the disinterest in trade liberalization: on the prospects of self-enforcing cooperation," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 455-475, April.
    13. Egger, Hartmut & Egger, Peter & Greenaway, David, 2008. "The trade structure effects of endogenous regional trade agreements," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(2), pages 278-298, March.
    14. Anna Maria Mayda & Chad Steinberg, 2009. "Do South-South trade agreements increase trade? Commodity-level evidence from COMESA," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 42(4), pages 1361-1389, November.
    15. Tokarick, Stephen, 2011. "Should Countries Worry About Immiserizing Growth?," Conference papers 332133, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    16. Chadha Rajesh, 2005. "Commentary: FTAS and the WTO Doha Development Round--Asian Response to EEU and FTAA," Global Economy Journal, De Gruyter, vol. 5(4), pages 1-7, December.
    17. Costas Hadjiyiannis, 2004. "Common markets and trade liberalization," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(2), pages 484-508, May.
    18. repec:phd:pjdevt:pjd_2001_vol__xxviii_no__1-c is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Anna Maria Mayda & Chad Steinberg, 2009. "Do South‐South trade agreements increase trade? Commodity‐level evidence from COMESA," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 42(4), pages 1361-1389, November.
    20. Suder, Gabriele & Liesch, Peter W. & Inomata, Satoshi & Mihailova, Irina & Meng, Bo, 2015. "The evolving geography of production hubs and regional value chains across East Asia: Trade in value-added," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 50(3), pages 404-416.
    21. Lee, Jong-Wha & Shin, Kwanho, 2006. "Does regionalism lead to more global trade integration in East Asia?," The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 17(3), pages 283-301, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Free Trade Agreements; WTO; Brexit; European Union;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • F15 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Economic Integration
    • 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:sus:susewp:1217. 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: University of Sussex Business School Communications Team (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ecsusuk.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.