TPP too big to fail, says visiting US trade deal specialist Petri

Brandeis University professor international finance Peter Petri

0:00 0:10

Too much political capital has been invested in the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal for it to fail at the final hurdle, says Peter Petri, a professor of international finance at Brandeis University and co-author of a study on the economic benefits of the TPP.

Negotiations are about to accelerate this month after US legislators granted US president Barack Obama's administration fast-track approval, which means he can take a trade deal to Congress for a so-called "up or down" vote that can only accept or reject the deal, not alter it.

Petri said the US president, along with other political leaders, now has a lot at stake to get an agreement after nearly a decade of negotiations.

"In that process much political capital has been invested. What I see coming out of this is not something that has been thrown together at the last minute to get something signed but something that has been considered and has had the sharp edges sanded off," Prof Petri said.

In his view, getting fast-track approval for the trade agreement spanning the Pacific Rim and involving 12 countries, was a bigger hurdle than gaining final Congress approval.

"I think the drama is now thankfully mostly over and, once we get a TPP, which will hopefully happen soon, I think first of all that the terms of the agreement will surprise people positively, that they are much less extreme than has been represented in much of the popular discussion, and the benefits will become clearer."

Prof Petri, who's currently in New Zealand, said a TPP deal would give New Zealand agreements with a number of countries it would have found impossible to negotiate with on a bilateral basis.

"New Zealand is a specialised economy and it would want a lot of concessions in some of the agricultural areas and countries wouldn't give it to you because they wouldn't see the reciprocal access. So in the TPP, all of that is possible because you can get something from Canada, it can get something from Japan, Japan can get something from the US, so you can get a lot more in these multilateral deals."

His economic modelling, which has been criticised for including only the benefits and not also the costs of a potential TPP deal, estimates New Zealand could enjoy a 2% economic boost from increased investment and market access. About a quarter of that would come in agriculture.

Dairy remains a sticking point in the negotiations though, particularly because Canada is heading into a general election in October and political factors were working against what most Canadian policymakers knew had to be done, he said. "I don't know what will happen there."

Trade Minister Tim Groser has said New Zealand will back away from signing a deal unless more concessions are made on dairy.

The Petri study showed a TPP deal would probably boost the US economy by about 0.4% but the long-term benefits, which had not been well-explained, were bigger than they looked at the beginning, he said.

Where the deal differs from other free-trade agreements is that it includes alignment of regulatory settings across borders rather than simply removing quotas and tariffs. It has faced staunch opposition from those who claim it undermines national sovereignty through investor-state dispute settlement provisions and through its treatment of intellectual property and medical procurement.

Prof Petri said the TPP was intended to get a like-minded group of countries developing a set of rules for the next generation of trade issues which have not been dealt with in the World Trade Organisation for more than two decades and the world economy has changed tremendously in that period.

The idea is to get a set of rules that can be expanded to a much wider group of countries such as Europe and also hopefully China in the long-run and the benefits then are much larger if it works, he said.

"The TPP is really a strategy for rebuilding a rules-based trading system when our 'Plan A' has begun to fail in the WTO," he said.

A draft of part of the TPP trade deal leaked today to the Politico website suggests the US is demanding increased protections for pharmaceutical companies, restricting access to the lower-cost generic versions of drugs that agencies such as New Zealand's Pharmac buy.

The draft copy of the intellectual property chapter of the trade agreement as it stood on May 11, before the Guam negotiating round, includes what is known as 'patent-linkage' provisions that would prevent regulators in TPP countries approving generic versions of drugs whenever there were unresolved patent issues, the Washington-based Politico website reported.

The draft would make linkage mandatory, as it is in the US, allowing drug companies to fend off generics by claiming patent infringements, the website reported.

Politico also cited US trade officials saying the draft may not survive in the final form of the agreement because of the degree of compromise required to get all the signatories on board.

That's also Prof Petri's view. He says the US will pull back slightly on its expectations on the IP front. But he said mainly American and European consumers are paying prices that fund the research and development costs of new drugs and that had to be rebalanced to other countries.


6 · Got a question about this story? Leave it in Comments & Questions below.

This article is tagged with the following keywords. Find out more about MyNBR Tags

Post Comment

6 Comments & Questions

Commenter icon key: Subscriber Verified

So some more vague claims of benefits, but no actual data with the ability to measure the benefit once signed. Smoke and mirrors. There is no benefit if dairy is not included. Theres little care from Fonterra for it. Whats the overall cost to the public of the compromises, vs potential vague claims of value gains? But then the voters will not get an option to provide input, as htey are irrelevant.

  • 0
  • 0

Too much political capital invested, is not a good enough reason for the TPP 'not to fail'. If it's a bad deal, then it should fail irrespective of how much time has been spent negotiating. If ten years has been wasted, that is better than being stuck with a flawed agreement forever!

If Professor Petri's analysis, which as this article points out, only considers benefits and not costs, show NZ benefitting by only 2%, I would say that the potential downsides outweigh the upsides. Especially since the US stance on pharmaceuticals still appears likely to force more cost on Pharmac by allowing patent owners to extend these and delay (possibly indefinitely) the potential for generics.

Working in M&A, I often see companies spend so much time, effort and money negotiating and going through due diligence that they feel obliged to complete the transaction, when what they should do is recognise the sunk cost and walk away if the deal doesn't stack up. But that takes balls, and unfortunately I don't think that Grosser or Key have any!

  • 0
  • 0

The article says "In [Professor Petri's] view, getting fast-track approval for the trade agreement spanning the Pacific Rim and involving 12 countries, was a bigger hurdle than gaining final Congress approval." Well Duh. It took 60 senators to get TPA (fast track) approval. It will only take 50 to get final approval (because TPA precludes a filibuster), so it's a done deal, no matter how horrific the terms. I expect it will be awful, given the secretive, undemocratic process whereby it was negotated. Hopefully I'll be pleasantly surprised, but I doubt it.

  • 0
  • 0

This is not a “fait accompli”

This is not over…regardless of the constant defeatist spin…

The final TPP vote is in the fall – 60 days after the American people and the world are finally allowed to see the agreement.

If the actual details of the TPP are finally revealed to be as shockingly onerous as we expect then it may finally awake the sleeping masses. The resulting pressure and outrage may cause even the most “bought off” and “control filed” of our representatives to have a sudden change of heart when the actual final TPP vote comes up in the fall. If we stand up…this may also serve to further embolden those in the other 11 nations who are also desperately attempting to stop the agreement.

The often repeated fact that every trade deal with Fast –Track has passed over the last 41 years has nothing to do with this… There has never been anything like the TPP, TTIP or TiSA….there may be nothing like the reaction the people have once they finally see what is in them.

“Together” We can still win and they know it.

  • 0
  • 0

What do you think the new flag should be?

  • 0
  • 0

good article

  • 0
  • 0

Post New comment or question

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

NZ Market Snapshot


Sym Price Change


Commodity Price Change Time


Symbol Open High Last %