Campaign briefing Trading with Trump What we can expect from a US-UK trade deal April 2017

A free trade deal between the US and the UK is the world to tear up international rules around trade likely to include all the elements that made the for its own self-interest and threaten trade wars. earlier trade negotiations between the EU and the Not only does the US hold all the cards, the current US on TTIP so controversial, but in a more extreme Trump administration is taking an aggressive form – TTIP on steroids: approach to trade. The UK will be walking into a •• ‘Corporate courts’ that allow foreign corporations negotiating room that is on a war footing, with a to sue governments outside of the national legal weak hand. system to challenge things like environmental protection or public health policy. Brexit has revealed a huge democratic deficit in •• Locking in privatisation of public services, trade policy in the UK – deals are already being including of the NHS. made behind closed doors and even our MPs •• Undermining our climate commitments. are excluded. If trade is to work for people and not solely for big business, we have to ensure The Trump administration’s ‘America first’ economic that the way deals are struck is open, honest and nationalism is leading the most powerful country in democratic. Photo: Gage Skidmore Gage Photo:

The lure of a free trade deal between the US What would be in a US-UK trade and the UK is one of the selling points that UK deal? government ministers have held up for our post- Brexit future. However it poses huge risks. This kind Donald Trump has spoken of putting us somewhere of trade deal with the US would affect our public vaguely toward the front of the queue for a services, our ability to fight climate change and trade deal – although it is clear that that means even how our laws are made. somewhere after dealing with China and NAFTA (the trade agreement between the US, Canada and Mexico). Nonetheless, while formal negotiations Governments can never win from an ISDS case – cannot begin until the UK leaves the EU, a ‘high level even if the judgement is in their favour they have dialogue’ has been set up to start discussing a US-UK legal costs which on average are just under £5 trade deal. So what would be in it? million for each case. If the state loses, it can be forced to pay much more in compensation. A deal with the US would be about far more than Under ISDS cases in NAFTA, the trade agreement tariffs on buying and selling goods – tariffs between between the US, Canada and Mexico, the the US and the UK are already low and trade levels Canadian government has paid US companies are high. The deal would be all about making sure more than US$200 million, and is facing claims of laws and regulations don’t obstruct the free flow of over US$2.6 billion in new cases.1 The system can trade and investment (capital). only be used by companies suing governments, This was exactly what made earlier attempts to not vice versa. The winners from ISDS have negotiate an EU-US trade deal, the Transatlantic been the richest – over 95% of all compensation Trade and Investment Partnership, or TTIP, so awarded in ISDS cases has gone to companies controversial. Within the EU, the UK has always with over US$1 billion in annual revenue and super- been one of the strongest supporters of TTIP, and rich individuals with over US$100 million in wealth.2 a deal between the US and UK alone is likely to be Because the amounts are so large, both in legal similar to TTIP but more extreme – TTIP on steroids. costs and compensation, even the threat of being Like other trade deals, the rules will be written taken to arbitration can be enough to persuade with the assumption that increasing levels of governments to abandon plans to introduce new privatisation and reliance on the market is good, rules – creating a regulatory chill. and that any step back from that will count as The current US secretary of state, Rex Tillerson, was breaking the rules. Privatisation thus becomes formerly CEO of ExxonMobil. Under his watch, locked in and the hands of future governments ExxonMobil brought several ISDS cases against are tied. There will be pressure to agree to a lowest countries that the US has trade and investment common denominator in standards. It is likely that agreements with. For instance, the Canadian state the deal would include a ‘necessity test’ so that of Newfoundland and Labrador had experience laws and regulations will have to ultimately be of massive natural resource extraction projects judged not on whether they serve a socially useful that brought little benefit to the local economy, purpose, but on whether they are ‘minimally trade and sought to change this with the introduction distorting’. of guidelines requiring that investors in such Corporate courts projects must also contribute some investment in local research and development. ExxonMobil A deal between the US and the UK would likely challenged this and has so far won US$17 million.3 include ‘investor state dispute settlement’ (ISDS), also known as ‘corporate courts’. This allows foreign corporations to sue governments for What would this mean in passing regulations that could affect corporate practice for … profits, through an international arbitration process that completely bypasses our own national justice NHS and public services system. In practice, this means corporations will be A US-UK trade deal could be disastrous for public able to sue Britain for doing almost anything they services, including the NHS. The impact on don’t like – environmental protection, regulating healthcare was one of the most controversial parts finance, renationalising public services, anti- of the earlier US-EU trade deal, TTIP, and it is likely smoking policies – you name it. to be so again. Those negotiations used a ‘list it or • Public health: Cargill sued Mexico over a tax on lose it’ approach to public services where unless a sugary drinks; Ethyl sued Canada over a ban on sector is specifically excluded, it will be opened up MMT, which is a suspected neurotoxin, in petrol to private companies. Although on paper the deal might pay lip service to the right of governments • Energy: Vattenfall sued Germany for deciding to run public services, in practice this is defined to phase out nuclear power; Lone Pine sued extremely narrowly, applying only when there is Quebec over a fracking moratorium no competition – the NHS competes both with • Employment: Veolia sued Egypt over the private healthcare and through the introduction introduction of a minimum wage of an internal market. The UK government did not explicitly protect the NHS in TTIP and so might well want to use a trade agreement to lock in financial not do so in a US-UK deal. deregulation – making proposals to break up big banks or impose a financial transactions tax This is one of the key things that US business would extremely difficult. US Democratic senator Elizabeth like to get out of a deal with the UK. Its massive Warren highlights the risks: private healthcare industry would love to get its hands on more of the NHS. During the TTIP “We did this kind of [de]regulation before and negotiations the powerful business organisation, it resulted in the worst financial crisis since the the Alliance for Healthcare Competitiveness, Great Depression. We cannot afford to go down lobbied US negotiators to make sure that this road again.”11 healthcare was included.4 US senators have already said they hope a future US-UK deal could Food and farming open up the NHS – asked about a potential US-UK The US government has always been clear that our deal, Republican senator Todd Young said he was: food and farming regulations, which prevent the “always looking for opportunities to open up sort of high-intensity, high-chemical, low-animal foreign markets.”5 welfare farming common in the US, are a ’trade barrier‘. Any deal will likely look at stripping away Risks from a trade deal include: regulations on pesticide, antibiotic and hormone •• ‘Standstill’ clauses which prevent public services use in farming. that have already been privatised or opened In turn, this will open up our small farmers to up to private finance initiatives from ever being devastating competition with US agribusiness. brought back into public hands. The US farming lobby group, the American Farm •• ‘Ratchet’ clauses which specify that if any Bureau Federation is already seeing a US-UK deal further services are privatised, they also cannot as an opportunity to open up the UK market afterward be returned to public ownership. to food produced with technologies currently banned in the EU such as genetic engineering •• Requirements for cheaper generic medicines and chlorine washes for meat, saying: “We’re to be used when possible could be challenged asking for our chance to compete”.12 And the UK under market access rules. is open to making concessions in agriculture in Climate hope of gains elsewhere – on banking for instance. While agriculture was a controversial issue in Trump is already rolling back even the modest the earlier EU-US trade negotiations on TTIP, the improvements the US had made toward UK ambassador to the US, Kim Darroch, has said combatting climate change. He has given the agriculture: green light to the previously-blocked Keystone “would simply not be anything like that big a XL and Dakota Access oil pipelines,6 rolled back problem for us”.13 Obama’s climate and water rules,7 and has packed his cabinet with climate change deniers.8

In a trade deal therefore, we are likely to see Photo: Rick Danielson rules, already proposed in other deals, that make discriminating between different sorts of fuels impossible. In other words, supporting renewable technologies when fossil fuels could do the job could become the basis for a trade dispute. Similarly earlier trade negotiations between the US and the EU proposed a requirement to get rid of existing restrictions on the trade of natural gas between the US and EU, entrenching fossil fuel use.9

Banking Traditionally the US has been less lax on financial regulation than the UK, but Trump has already started the process of sweeping away Barack Obama’s post-crash financial laws.10 That will Standing Rock protest camp against the Dakota Access be welcomed by the City of London, which will pipeline which has restarted under Trump. Who’s who in Trump’s trade and settled.28 He made millions during the team? financial crisis, both from mortgage foreclosures29 and from bank bailouts – including £172 million In the past, US trade policy was centralised in from buying the bailed out remains of Northern the Office of the US Trade Representative (USTR), Rock from the UK government and selling it on. but Trump has changed this in order to draw a line between himself and previous trade policy. Peter Navarro, director of the National While the USTR will still exist, Trump has created a Trade Council new National Trade Council reporting directly to Navarro is an economist who the White House and has also decided that the has for many years dogmatically commerce secretary will now take the leading made alarmist warnings of role on trade policy. the threat that China poses to the US.30 His books and Wilbur Ross, commerce secretary documentaries have titles like Ross is a billionaire investor. He The coming China wars, Death originally worked for Rothschild by China and Crouching tiger: what China’s Inc, but then became known for militarism means for the world. He considers the asset-stripping failing companies US’s support for China’s entry into the WTO as and selling them on without “the worst political and economic mistake in regard for jobs, pensions or safety American history in the last 100 years”31 and talks standards – from which he gets of competition with China in terms of both cold the nickname ‘the bankruptcy and hot war.32 king’. He is a longstanding friend of Trump’s, Navarro also focusses on reducing the US’s trade having in the 1980s helped him strike a deal over deficit, and along with China has specifically problems with his casinos. singled out Germany for attack on this point.33 As an investor he expertly used trade rules to his advantage. For instance, he bought bankrupt US Robert Lighthizer, US trade representative steel companies in 2002 just as the US introduced nominee 30% tariffs on steel imports, which led to a 25% Lighthizer is a trade lawyer increase in the price of American steel. When who previously worked as the tariffs were done away with at the end of deputy USTR under President 2003, he sold the companies to foreign investors Reagan in the 1980s, where he for US$4.5 billion.24 Although Trump’s rhetoric is was known for an aggressive highly critical of sending jobs offshore, Ross was approach to negotiations.34 As fully part of such globalised trade practices and a private lawyer he has often responsible for offshoring thousands of jobs.25 represented US steel companies in trade disputes, seeking to get the US He was fined US$2.3 million in 2016 for breaking government to raise tariffs against steel imports, financial regulations.26 In 2006, 12 people died particularly from China. He is another ‘trade in an explosion in a mine ultimately owned by hawk’ who has said that China presents a threat Ross’s company, which had a long history of to the US economy and the US government must safety violations.27 He was sued for negligence take a more aggressive attitude.35

What does Trump want from Both would be hugely damaging for people and trade? planet. Neoliberals now in Trump’s cabinet, such as Gary On the campaign trail Trump exploited anger Cohn, the ex-Goldman Sachs executive who is over the damage that trade deals have done, director of the National Economic Council, want denouncing the neoliberal approach of previous business as usual in trade – opening up more US governments. Now he is in office, though, we and more of our lives to the market, locking in are seeing a battle within the White House over privatisation, deregulating and entrenching the trade policy between the economic nationalists of power of globalised corporations. his campaign and neoliberals staging a fight back. Trump’s ‘America first’ approach sums up the While there are fundamental problems with the economic nationalists, such as Peter Navarro, the WTO, which Global Justice Now has campaigned director of the National Trade Council. Trump’s on for many years, multilateral rules in and of problem with trade is not about injustice or the themselves need not necessarily be bad. There damage it can cause to the planet, but simply that could be benefits from a set of international rules he felt the US was not absolutely always the winner. that were human rights-based, were compliant He also has no concerns about corporate power with commitments on climate, workers rights and is offering US corporations a bargain tying and other policy priorities, and which provided a them in to his policies: deregulation and corporate framework within which governments could make tax cuts in exchange for support for ‘America first’. pragmatic choices about trade policy suited to their needs. None of this however is an issue for This leads to a beggar-my-neighbour approach Trump. to trade. While Trump has repudiated the Trans- Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade deal that Obama Trump’s trade team is concerned simply that the had negotiated with eleven other countries, his WTO dispute settlement system has sometimes problem with it was not the trade deal as such not found in favour of the US and does not but the view that the US was at a disadvantage always move fast enough or allow strong enough negotiating with several other countries at once. penalties to be imposed for its liking.19 For the most powerful country in the world to tear up the rules Wilbur Ross, the US commerce secretary, who will for its own self interest is incredibly dangerous. lead trade policy for Trump, has said Trump’s trade team wants to only negotiate bilateral deals, with The US is now willing to start trade wars. Hostility one country at a time, so that it will always have to China is longstanding in US trade policy – the the advantage. There is no sense of trade as being US has brought 21 dispute cases against China at for mutual benefit. Ross has spoken of a need for the WTO. However Trump’s trade team is now also a take-it-or-leave-it approach to negotiations speaking of trade wars more broadly and openly. because he considers that the US has made too Speaking about the NAFTA trade deal between many concessions compared to other countries 14 the US, Canada and Mexico, Ross has said: (not necessarily a belief shared outside of the US). “We’re in a trade war, we’ve been in a trade war for decades, that’s why we have a deficit. The Instead he thinks the US: difference is our troops are now coming to the “should treat ourselves as the world’s biggest ramparts.”20 customer and treat nations that are selling to us as suppliers to us.”15 Ross boasts that threats like this are now an overt part of US trade policy: Sanctions and trade wars “The Mexicans know, the Canadians know, “There’s not a lot of point making trade deals if everybody knows: times are different … they you don’t enforce them.”16 will have to make concessions. The only Wilbur Ross, US commerce secretary question is the magnitude and the form of the concessions. I have told the president The highest profile focus of Trump’s trade team repeatedly: he has made my job a lot easier by is enforcing trade rules in the US interest. This softening up the adverse parties. What could includes a disregard for international rules and be better than going into a negotiation [when] the determination to be able to impose unilateral the fellow on the other side knows he has to trade sanctions regardless of the risk of trade wars. make concessions?”21 Trump’s Trade Policy Agenda17 actually has a fair Usually, deciding if trade rules have been broken is amount of continuity with earlier US trade policy, a long and technical process, however the Trump but it notably no longer even pays lip service to trade team is simply referring to the existence of the need for a multilateral rules-based trading a trade deficit as sufficient proof of fault. This has system. Specifically the US is looking at bypassing been mainly discussed so far in the context of the World Trade Organisation’s (WTO) system of China, NAFTA and Germany, but Ross has also settling disputes between countries, and instead said this type of enforcement would apply to considering imposing its own trade sanctions ‘everybody’.22 Trump’s trade team is concerned according to its own discretion.18 with any competitor which could threaten ‘America first’, and that includes Europe – over the past two decades, the only WTO member that the The lack of democratic accountability is shocking. US has brought a similar number of cases against MPs in Westminster: compared to China, is the EU. In this context, the •• Are not able to set any objectives, framework or UK is vulnerable to such threats from the US, while limits for negotiations on a deal (a mandate) at the same time the plans for a US-UK trade deal are a tool the US can use as part of its attempts to •• Will not be consulted on its progress and they weaken the EU.23 cannot make any amendments if they think it is going in the wrong direction. Who will be in control? •• May not even get to have any debate on the deal Since the EU referendum the talk has been of ‘taking back control’ and the ability to make trade In addition: deals much more easily outside of the EU. But it •• Only when a deal is finalised and signed will it be won’t be that simple. brought to parliament for ratification Even at this US or UK? point, MPs cannot actually reject a deal outright – they can only at most delay it. A potential US-UK trade deal is far more important to Theresa May’s government than it is to Trump’s. It The devolved administrations in Scotland, Wales would be at any time, because the US is a far more and Northern Ireland do not have any input on powerful economy and the US is a much more trade deals, even though they will affect vital issues important trading partner for the UK than the UK is over which they have devolved powers such as for the US.36 But all of this is massively exaggerated health, environment and farming. by the Brexit context, when May’s government In contrast, big business usually has a direct line desperately needs the political credibility of this to the trade negotiators through their lobbyists. US deal. Meanwhile US businesses have highlighted companies have already formed a US-UK Business that the UK can no longer offer entry to the Council that they say “will be a powerful conduit 37 European market. The UK will be in a weak for inputs into complex trade negotiations”.39 position to secure its demands. There is also often a revolving door between big Not only does the US hold all the cards, the current business and trade negotiators. In Trump’s trade Trump administration is taking an incredibly team Ross is a billionaire investor with ongoing aggressive approach to trade, openly speaking commercial ties to foreign companies who may be of trade wars. The UK will be walking into a affected by the trade rules he is setting.40 Navarro negotiating room that is on a war footing, with a was previously a government trade negotiator, weak hand. then worked as a lawyer representing big business People or corporations? in trade disputes and is now returning to be a government trade negotiator. People have a right to know about the plans for something with such a broad scope, and be part We need real accountability in trade deals, of shaping it. This should not be a concession - otherwise they will just end up handing more trade policy would actually be improved by robust control to corporations. This must include: debate and contributions from a broad range of •• The right of parliament to set a detailed knowledge and expertise. Yet everything is being mandate to govern each trade negotiation, with done behind closed doors, in secrecy. a remit for the devolved administrations It’s not even just the public who are excluded, •• The right of citizens to be consulted as part of parliament is too. There is a huge democratic setting that mandate deficit in the UK around trade policy, which means •• Full transparency in negotiations we actually have even less chance of raising concerns through our democratically elected •• The right of parliament to amend and to reject representatives than in the EU. Already MPs have trade deals, with full debates guaranteed with a asked to be updated on initial plans for similar remit for the devolved administrations trade deals and been told the government has no intention of sharing information.38 Notes

1 Maude Barlow, Fighting TTIP, CETA and ISDS: lessons 2016, www.ft.com/content/bb739d58-b25e-11e6-9c37- from Canada. Council of Canadians, 2015, https:// 5787335499a0 canadians.org/sites/default/files/publications/report- 16 David Tweed & Kevin Cirilli, “Ross pledges to fix ceta-ttip-isds-1015.pdf NAFTA, get tough with China on trade”, Bloomberg, 2 Gus Van Harten & Pavel Malysheuski, “Who has 1 Mar 2071, www.bloomberg.com/politics/ benefited financially from investment treaty articles/2017-03-01/ross-pledges-to-fix-nafta-get- arbitration? an evaluation of the size and wealth of tough-with-china-on-trade-rules claimants” Osgoode Legal Studies Research Paper 17 Office of the US Trade Representative, 2017 Trade No. 14/2016, https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers2. policy agenda and 2016annual report. Washington cfm?abstract_id=2713876 DC, USTR, 2017. https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/files/ 3 Mobil Investments v Canada I & II reports/2017/AnnualReport/AnnualReport2017.pdf 4 Alliance for Healthcare Competitiveness, Transatlantic 18 Shawn Donnan & Demetri Sevastopoulo, “Trump Trade and Investment Partnership. AHC, 2013, http:// team looks to bypass WTO dispute system”, Financial healthcare-competitiveness.com/media/AHC_ Times, 27 Feb 2017, www.ft.com/content/7bb991e4- Submission_on_TTIP_to_the_US_Trade_Representative_ fc38-11e6-96f8-3700c5664d30 Office.pdf 19 Office of the US Trade Representative, 2017 Trade 5 Jim Waterson, “Republican Senators hope trade policy agenda and 2016annual report. Washington deal will open up the NHS To American companies”, DC, USTR, 2017 §IIB1&2. ustr.gov/sites/default/files/files/ Buzzfeed, 27 Jan 2017, www.buzzfeed.com/ reports/2017/AnnualReport/AnnualReport2017.pdf jimwaterson/republican-senators-hope-trade-deal- 20 Bloomburg, “Sec. Ross on NAFTA, China, and border will-open-up-the-nhs-to adjustment tax”, Bloomburg, 8 Mar 2017, www. 6 Conservative Party. (2010). One world Conservatism: A bloomberg.com/politics/videos/2017-03-08/sec-ross- Conservative agenda for international development. on-nafta-china-and-border-adjustment-tax 7 Athena Jones et al, “Trump advances controversial 21 Bloomburg, “Sec. Ross on NAFTA, China, and border oil pipelines with executive action”, CNN, 24 Jan 2017, adjustment tax”, Bloomburg, 8 Mar 2017, www. http://edition.cnn.com/2017/01/24/politics/trump- bloomberg.com/politics/videos/2017-03-08/sec-ross- keystone-xl-dakota-access-pipelines-executive- on-nafta-china-and-border-adjustment-tax actions/ 22 David Tweed & Kevin Cirilli, “Ross pledges to fix 8 Mazin Sidahmed, “Climate change denial in the NAFTA, get tough with China on trade”, Bloomberg, Trump cabinet: where do his nominees stand?”, 1 Mar 2071, www.bloomberg.com/politics/ Guardian, 15 Dec 2016, www.theguardian.com/ articles/2017-03-01/ross-pledges-to-fix-nafta-get- environment/2016/dec/15/trump-cabinet-climate- tough-with-china-on-trade-rules change-deniers 23 Samuel Osborne, “Donald Trump’s likely EU 9 EC, EU textual proposal: energy and raw materials. ambassador Ted Malloch wants to tame the bloc ‘like 2016, http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2016/july/ he brought down Soviet Union’” Independent, 27 Jan tradoc_154801.pdf 2017, www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/ 10 Ben Protess and Julie Hirschfeld Davis, “Trump moves donald-trump-eu-ambassador-ted-malloch-tame- to roll back Obama-era financial regulations”, New european-union-like-brought-down-soviet-union- York Times, 3 Feb 2017, www.nytimes.com/2017/02/03/ russia-a7549696.html ; Linette Lopez, “Trump repeated business/dealbook/trump-congress-financial- a delusion about Germany that’s been floating regulations.html around the White House” Business Insider UK, 18 Mar 2017, http://uk.businessinsider.com/trump-repeats- 11 Bloomberg, “Sen. Warren says facts prove Trump claim-that-germany-can-negotiate-trade-outside-of- wrong on Dodd-Frank” Bloomberg, 14 Feb 2017, eu-2017-3 https://www.bloomberg.com/news/videos/2017-02-14/ sen-warren-says-facts-prove-trump-wrong-on-dodd- 24 Michela Tindera, “How Wilbur Ross made a fortune frank in blue-collar industries”, Forbes, 18 Jan 2017, www. forbes.com/sites/michelatindera/2017/01/18/how- 12 Venessa Wong, “American chlorine-dipped chicken wilbur-ross-made-a-fortune-in-blue-collar-industries/ could make it to the UK”, Buzzfeed News, 1 Feb 2017, www.buzzfeed.com/venessawong/brexit-trade-deal- 25 Andy Sullivan, “Wilbur Ross, Trump’s Commerce could-bring-chlorine-dipped-chicken pick, offshored 2,700 jobs since 2004”, Reuters, 17 Jan 2017, www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-jobs- 13 “Fears agriculture could be sacrificed in US-UK trade idUSKBN1510FM deal” Farmers Weekly, 26 January 2017, http://www.fwi. co.uk/business/fears-agriculture-could-be-sacrificed- 26 CNN Library, “Wilbur Ross fast facts”, CNN, 2 Mar 2017, us-uk-trade-deal.htm http://edition.cnn.com/2013/05/30/us/wilbur-ross-fast- facts/ 14 Inside US Trade, “Ross pledges to design ‘model trade agreement,’ calls for systematic re-examination of 27 Roddy Boyd, “N.Y. exec knew of problems: ex- deals”, IUST, 18 Jan 2017, honchos”, New York Post, 5 Jan 2006, http://nypost. com/2006/01/05/n-y-exec-knew-of-problems-ex- 15 Geoff Dyer, “Donald Trump expected to pick Wilbur honchos/ Ross as commerce secretary”, Financial Times 24 Nov 28 CNN Library, “Wilbur Ross fast facts”, CNN, 2 Mar 35 Keith Bradsher, “What Trump’s nominee for trade 2017, http://edition.cnn.wwwwwwcom/2013/05/30/us/ representative has said about China and the W.T.O.”, wilbur-ross-fast-facts/ New York Times, 13 Jan 2017, www.nytimes.com/ 29 David Dayan, “Wilbur Ross and Steve Mnuchin— interactive/2017/01/13/business/document-lighthizer- profiteers of the great foreclosure machine—go to 2010-china-two-trade-testimony.html Washington”, Nation, 30 Nov 2016, www.thenation. 36 US GDP is £13.3 trillion; UK GDP is £2.2 trillion. The US is com/article/wilbur-ross-and-steve-mnuchin-profiteers- the long term main export destination for the UK and of-the-great-foreclosure-machine-go-to-washington/ one of its top three trading partners (HM Revenue 30 Jacob Heilbrunn, “The most dangerous man in Trump & Customs Overseas Trade Statistics), whereas the world?”, Politico, 12 Feb 2017, www.politico.com/ UK is seventh in the list for the US (US Census Bureau, magazine/story/2017/02/peter-navarro-trump-trade- Foreign Trade). china-214772 37 Daniel Boffey, “US businesses warn the UK over loss 31 Paul Solman, “What is the Trump trade doctrine? His of access to EU single market”, Guardian, 8 Mar economic adviser explains”, PBS Newshour, 25 Aug 2017, www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/mar/08/ 2016, www.pbs.org/newshour/making-sense/trump- us-businesses-warn-uk-loss-access-eu-single-market- trade-doctrine-economic-adviser-explains/ american-chamber-commerce 32 Shawn Donnan, “Trump’s trade team yearns for 38 Trade Agreements:Written question – 60938. the battling 1980s”, Financial Times, 8 Mar 2017, Asked 19 Jan 2017, answered 26 Jan 2017, www. www.ft.com/content/53c23e04-0316-11e7-aa5b- parliament.uk/business/publications/written- 6bb07f5c8e12 questions-answers-statements/written-question/ Commons/2017-01-19/60938/ 33 Shawn Donnan, “Trump’s top trade adviser accuses Germany of currency exploitation”, Financial Times, 39 Inside US Trade, “U.S. companies, eyeing trade, form 31 Jan 2017, www.ft.com/content/57f104d2-e742-11e6- ‘U.S.-UK Business Council’” IUST, 26 January 2017 893c-082c54a7f539 40 Jean Eaglesham & Lisa Schwartz, “Commerce 34 Matthew Korade, Adam Behsudi & Louis Nelson, nominee Wilbur Ross will keep his stake in Chinese- “Trump picks Lighthizer to serve as U.S. trade government-backed company”, Wall Street Journal, representative”, Politico, 3 Jan 2017, www.politico. 13 Feb 2017, www.wsj.com/articles/commerce- com/blogs/donald-trump-administration/2017/01/ nominee-wilbur-ross-will-keep-his-stake-in-chinese- robert-lighthizer-us-trade-representative-trump-233116 government-backed-company-1486990800

To find out how you can help tackle corporate power and become part of a Take action movement for real change visit globaljustice.org.uk or call 020 7820 4900.

Global Justice Now campaigns for a world where resources are controlled by the many, not the few. With thousands of members around the UK, we work in solidarity with global social movements to fight inequality and injustice. Global Justice Now, 66 Offley Road, London SW9 0LS t: 020 7820 4900 e: [email protected] w: globaljustice.org.uk