Latest news with #non-tariffbarriers
CNA
a day ago
- Business
- CNA
EU push to protect digital rules holds up trade statement with US, FT reports
The European Union is trying to prevent the United States from targeting the bloc's digital rules as both sides work through the final details of a delayed statement to formalise a trade deal reached last month, the Financial Times reported on Sunday. EU officials said disagreements over language relating to "non-tariff barriers", which the U.S. said include the digital rules, are among the reasons for the hold-up of the statement, the newspaper said.
Reuters
a day ago
- Business
- Reuters
EU push to protect digital rules holds up trade statement with US, FT reports
Aug 17 (Reuters) - The European Union is trying to prevent the United States from targeting the bloc's digital rules as both sides work through the final details of a delayed statement to formalise a trade deal reached last month, the Financial Times reported on Sunday. EU officials said disagreements over language relating to "non-tariff barriers", which the U.S. said include the digital rules, are among the reasons for the hold-up of the statement, the newspaper said. Reuters could not immediately verify the report.
Zawya
30-06-2025
- Business
- Zawya
Uganda's export revenues dip on high informal trade
Uganda's exports to East African Community (EAC) markets have declined by Ush820.5 billion ($228.19 million), blamed on a host of challenges confronting business owners in the past one year. These challenges, including non-tariff barriers, are pushing traders into informal channels as they seek to dodge red tape. The Bank of Uganda's (BoU) latest trade data shows Uganda's exports to South Sudan, Tanzania, Kenya, and Rwanda took big hits, due to a combination of domestic protectionist tendencies, geopolitical tensions, and other non-tariff barriers. Combined, Uganda exports through both formal and informal transactions to the four markets dropped from $1.88 billion in May 2023-April 2024 to $1.66 billion in April 2024-May 2025. While reading the 2025/2026 EAC budget, Beatrice Askul Moe, chairperson of the EAC Council of Ministers and Kenya's Cabinet Secretary for East African Community, Arid and Semi-Arid Lands, said that at least 47 non-tariff barriers were reported in different member states in the previous fiscal year. Only 16 NTBs were resolved, and 31 remain. This means, despite the EAC's efforts to promote free trade, some of these NTBs are pushing many East Africans into informal cross-border trade, which creates an uneven playing field for formal businesses. Some of the goods, which dominated informal trade in Uganda are maize, beans, fish, fruits, bananas, eggs, onions, cattle and tomatoes. Uganda Bureau of Statistics also names footwear and parts, clothes, maize flour, alcohol/spirits, mattresses, bags, soda, bed sheets, sacks, cement, and synthetic hair as some of the industrial goods traded in the EAC informal market. Democrativc Republic of Congo remains Uganda's biggest informal export market, which surged from $318.84 million in May 2023-April 2024 to $359.70 million in May 2024-April 2025. The huge informal market flourishes even after Uganda Revenue Authority closed operations at Uganda's borders with eastern DRC on March 3, 2025. This means there is growing smuggling of goods from Uganda to other East African markets after the taxman closed Cyanika in Kisoro district and Katuna in Kabale district, as well as the Uganda-DR Congo border of Kyeshero and Ishasha in Kanungu district. In South Sudan, Uganda's exports also suffered steep fall, from $661 million to $556.12 million, after Juba ran into financing difficulties when revenues from oil exports were cut because of the war in Sudan. A World Bank report, A Pathway to Overcome the Crisis, confirmed the gravity of the situation when it reported that South Sudan suffered a 30 percent GDP contraction, a $7 million-per-day revenue loss, and sky-high poverty levels. Uganda's formal exports to Kenya also took a hit from Kenya's continued use of tariffs and quotas to protect its domestic market from competition. For instance, Brookside Uganda, which used to export over 90 percent of its milk to Kenya, has been blocked for about three years now. Rwanda's imports from Uganda also registered a slight decline, from $311 million to $292.75 million. Formal exports slowed from $291.44 million to $251.61 million. Over the past four years, Kigali has been building its industrial production capacity, cutting some supplies from Uganda. For instance, before 2019, Rwanda was importing over 59 percent of cement and most building materials from its northern neighbour. But Narendra Raval, executive chairman of Devki Group, which owns Cimerwa Cement, earlier told The EastAfrican that Kigali was racing against time to be 100 percent import-free, a move that would save $160 million in foreign exchange Rwanda has been spending on cement imports. Cimerwa increased production from 600,000 tonnes to 1.2 million tonnes annually. Uganda's exports to Tanzania also declined from $202.33 million to $171.8 million. Uganda also suffers from low production capacity and, as such, the country is struggling to satisfy the domestic market. Shadow Finance minister Ibrahim Nganda Ssemujju said that most of his country's 2,263 agro-processing facilities (APFs) established nationwide, including zonal industrial hubs, industrial parks, and urban markets, are struggling.'Forty percent of the APFs are non-functional, and more than 50 percent are performing below capacity,' Ssemujju said in an alternative budget he presented in Parliament. © Copyright 2022 Nation Media Group. All Rights Reserved. Provided by SyndiGate Media Inc. (
Malay Mail
16-05-2025
- Business
- Malay Mail
Non-tariff barriers more damaging than tariffs — Ahmad Ibrahim
MAY 16 — Global trade has been rattled by the sudden jacking up and shifting down of tariff rates by the US. No country has been spared from the impact. Some more than others. Not all trade barriers are tariff-based because countries have a range of strategic, political, and economic motivations for regulating trade beyond simply collecting revenue. In recent decades, non-tariff barriers (NTBs) have become increasingly popular as tools for protecting domestic economies in more subtle ways. Our own palm biodiesel export to the EU is one which has been subjected to such measures, under the guise of climate concerns. There are reasons why this is happening. Tariffs are more visible and politically sensitive. They are easy to spot and often spark immediate retaliation. When a country imposes a tariff, affected trading partners usually respond with their own tariffs, escalating tensions. Trade agreements and WTO rules have gradually reduced tariffs globally, making them less available as tools for protection. Non-tariff barriers on the other hand offer flexibility and subtlety. Countries now use a variety of non-tariff measures that can serve the same protective functions without openly violating international trade agreements. These include import quotas limiting the quantity of certain goods entering the country. Another is licensing requirements which require special import permits. Cases of technical barriers to trade impose standards related to safety, quality, or labelling that make it harder for foreign products to compete. The other tactic is to deploy customs procedures and bureaucratic delays, slowing down imports through complex paperwork or inspections. Subsidies for local industries are also non-tariff. This involves giving domestic producers a competitive edge without directly taxing imports. Many NTBs are designed to appear legitimate and in line with WTO rules, especially those related to health, safety, or environmental standards. This allows countries to protect local industries while avoiding direct conflict with international trade laws. Such NTBs are driven by economic nationalism. Countries are increasingly motivated by concerns about National security (banning certain foreign tech products), Supply chain resilience (especially after Covid-19), protecting infant industries that need time to develop competitiveness and climate and sustainability goals (e.g., carbon border taxes, eco-labelling). NTBs to trade are often considered more damaging than traditional tariff barriers. — Reuters pic NTBs can be tailored to support these broader policy objectives in ways that tariffs cannot. There are some real-world examples. EU's food safety standards involving ban on hormone-treated beef act as barriers for US meat exports is one. India's import licensing on electronic goods is aimed at reducing reliance on Chinese tech. Whilst US restrictions on Chinese telecom companies like Huawei are framed as national security concerns. Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) by the EU will impose a carbon cost on imports from countries with weaker climate policies. The global trade landscape has evolved. As countries navigate economic uncertainty, geopolitical shifts, and sustainability concerns, NTBs are likely to continue growing in importance. NTBs to trade are often considered more damaging than traditional tariff barriers. Unlike tariffs, which are clear and quantifiable (10 per cent tax on imports), NTBs are often ambiguous and unpredictable. Examples include complex regulatory standards, arbitrary licensing rules, and sudden import bans or quotas. This lack of transparency makes it difficult for exporters to plan long-term business strategies, increasing trade risks. NTBs often impose significant administrative and financial burdens, such as, conforming to different product standards (EU's REACH regulations on chemicals), customs delays due to excessive paperwork, and testing and certification costs Small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) are disproportionately affected, as they lack the resources to meet these requirements. Many NTBs are designed to appear neutral but effectively block foreign competition, a form of disguised protectionism. Examples include sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) measures (strict food safety rules that may not be scientifically justified), local content requirements (forcing firms to use domestically sourced materials), and discriminatory government procurement policies. Unlike tariffs, which are negotiated and bound under WTO rules, NTBs are harder to challenge legally. NTBs can create artificial monopolies by restricting foreign competitors. They also increase consumer prices by limiting supply. And reduce innovation by shielding domestic industries from global competition. Because NTBs are less transparent, they often provoke retaliatory actions, leading to escalating trade conflicts (China's non-tariff restrictions on Australian wine and coal in response to political disputes). WTO rules are less effective against NTBs. While the WTO regulates tariffs, many NTBs fall into 'grey areas' where enforcement is weak. Dispute resolution is slow, and proving discrimination is difficult. NTBs are often more harmful than tariffs because they are less visible, more complex, and more distortive to trade. While tariffs generate revenue for governments, NTBs primarily create inefficiencies, raise costs, and reduce market access, ultimately harming both businesses and consumers. * Professor Datuk Dr Ahmad Ibrahim is an associate fellow at the Ungku Aziz Centre for Development Studies, Universiti Malaya. ** This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of Malay Mail.
Bloomberg
09-05-2025
- Business
- Bloomberg
The Best Part of the US-UK Trade Deal Isn't Tariffs
President Donald Trump claimed his first victory in his trade war on Thursday: a deal with the UK under which it will reduce many non-tariff barriers in exchange for a 10% US tariff on British goods and possibly lower tariffs on steel and aluminum. While a 10% tariff isn't much of a win — it's about three times the average for developed countries — a reduction of non-tariff barriers is something worth bragging about. Non-tariff barriers, called NTBs, are regulations that restrict trade and make it harder or more expensive for foreign firms to sell goods and services in a given country. By bringing attention to them, Trump is doing the world a service, since they are costly for all involved — especially the country that enacts them. In that sense, the real winner in this deal will be the UK.
