Such benefits of trade often escape attention, because although the costs are highly concentrated in certain sectors such as auto manufacturing, the benefits of an agreement such as NAFTA are widely distributed across society. PROPONENTS of NAFTA estimate that about fourteen million U.S. jobs depend on trade with Canada or Mexico and that the nearly two hundred thousand export-related jobs created each year by the pact pay an average of 15 to 20 percent more than the jobs lost. Many workers and business leaders blame trade deals such as NAFTA for declining employment in U.S. manufacturing. The U.S. auto sector has lost about 350,000 jobs since 1994 – a third of the sector – while employment in Mexico`s auto sector has risen from 120,000 to 550,000 workers. The Parties agreed to put in place important procedural safeguards for the recognition of new geographical indications, including strong standards of protection against the grant of geographical indications that would prevent producers in the United States from using common names, as well as a mechanism for consultation between the Parties on future geographical indications, in accordance with international agreements. To view the full text of the agreement between the United States, Mexico and Canada, click here.

In addition, there is a provision stating that the agreement itself must be reviewed every six years by the three nations, with a sunset clause of 16 years. The agreement can be extended by 16 years during the six years of revision. [51] The introduction of the sunset clause puts more control in the organization of the future of the USMCA in the hands of national governments. However, there is concern that this could lead to greater uncertainty. Sectors such as automotive manufacturing require significant investments in cross-border supply chains. [52] Given the predominance of the consumer market in the United States, it is likely that this will put pressure on companies to install more production in the United States, with a greater likelihood of increasing the costs of producing these vehicles. [53] Milk legislation gives the U.S. duty-free access at 3.6%, compared to 3.25% under the trans-Pacific partnership that has never been ratified, the Canadian dairy market of $15.2 billion (as of 2016). [39] [40] Canada has agreed to abolish Class 7 pricing rules for certain dairy products, while Canada`s supply management system remains in place.

[41] Canada has agreed to increase the duty-free limit for purchases from the United States. to 150$US from the previous level of 20$US, allowing Canadian consumers to have better duty-free access to the U.S. market. [42] But other economists, including Gary Clyde Hufbauer and Cathleen Cimino-Isaacs of the Peterson Institute for International Economics (PIIE), have pointed out that stronger trade represents overall benefits for 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. Their 2014 PIIE study on the impact of NAFTA found a net loss of about fifteen thousand jobs a year due to the pact — but gains of about $450,000 for every job lost in the form of increased productivity and lower consumer prices. Since the adoption of NAFTA, U.S. trade interests have often expressed great satisfaction with the agreement.

Trade between the three NAFTA countries has increased sharply, but this increase in trade activity has led to an increase in trade deficits for the United States. Along with Canada and Mexico, the United States imports more from Mexico and Canada than it exports to these trading partners. Critics of the deal argue that NAFTA is responsible, at least in part, for these trade deficits and the striking loss of manufacturing jobs in the United States.