UK considers joining existing US-Mexico-Canada trade deal as hopes of standalone US agreement fade
Ministers are considering efforts to join an existing free trade agreement between the US, Mexico and Canada – or to strike a series of mini-deals with America – after Boris Johnson appeared to admit a standalone UK-US free trade deal was not an imminent prospect.
On his visit to New York and Washington DC this week, the prime minister has failed to commit to securing a free trade agreement between Britain and America by the time of the next general election in 2024.
He has also acknowledged that US President Joe Biden has “a lot of fish to fry” as he played down the chances of an agreement being struck soon between the two countries.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Biden reveals concern over NI Protocol
A senior government figure has suggested that an alternative route to boosting trans-Atlantic trade could be the UK joining the existing free trade agreement between the US, Mexico and Canada, known as USMCA.
Another option could be pursuing a series of smaller UK-US deals on separate issues, they added.
“There are different ways to do this, the ball in their court and it takes two to tango,” the source said.
Asked about the prospects of a US-UK trade deal, as he sat next to Mr Johnson ahead of a White House meeting on Tuesday night, Mr Biden said: “We’re going to talk a little bit about trade today and we’re going to have to work that through.”
And he did not reject the past suggestion, made by former US president Barack Obama, that the UK would be “back of the queue” for a post-Brexit trade agreement.
Mr Biden also issued a warning that post-Brexit arrangements between the UK and EU must not end in a “closed border” on the island of Ireland.
“On the (Northern Ireland) protocols I feel very strongly on those. We spent an enormous amount of time and effort, the United States, it was a major bipartisan effort made,” he added.
“And I would not at all like to see, nor I might add would many of my Republican colleagues like to see, a change in the Irish accords, the end result having a closed border in Ireland.”
The USMCA agreement came into effect in July last year and replaced the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), which former president Donald Trump had vowed to replace on taking office.
New Foreign Secretary Liz Truss is said to have raised the status of stalled UK-US trade negotiations during her meeting with US Secretary of State Antony Blinken in New York on Monday.
Back in 2017, when Mr Trump was US president, Mr Johnson had said the UK would be “first in line” for a post-Brexit trade agreement with America.
But the prime minister has now appeared to publicly acknowledge that Mr Biden’s administration is less keen on a deal being struck quickly.
“On the FTA [free trade agreement], the reality is that Joe has a lot of fish to fry,” Mr Johnson told reporters travelling with him to New York.
“He’s got a huge infrastructure package, he’s got a build back better package. We want to do it, but what we want is a good FTA, a great FTA.”
Subscribe to the All Out Politics podcast on Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, Spotify, Spreaker
Asked in an interview with Sky News on Tuesday whether he would get a UK-US free trade deal by the time of the next general election, Mr Johnson said: “We will keep going with free trade deals around the world, including in the United States.
“I have plenty of reason to be optimistic about that. But the Americans do negotiate very hard.”
Since leaving the EU, the UK government has struck agreements to rollover those trade deals it previously enjoyed with Mexico and Canada as part of its membership of the bloc.
Ministers also announced their intention to begin talks on upgraded trade deals with the two countries this year, in order for the agreements to be “better tailored to the UK economy”.
The EU does not have a free trade agreement with the US after talks on a proposed agreement were halted under Mr Trump, before later being abandoned.
As part of the post-Brexit ability to pursue an independent trade policy, the UK government is also bidding to join the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) – a free trade agreement between Canada, Mexico, Peru, Chile, New Zealand, Australia, Brunei, Singapore, Malaysia, Vietnam and Japan.
After nearly a year of legal proceedings, a South Korean court acquitted former Wemade CEO Jang Hyun-guk of market manipulation charges.
Are Rachel Reeves’s fiscal rules quite as iron clad as she insists?
How tough is her armour really? And is there actually scope for some change, some loosening to avoid big tax hikes in the autumn?
We’ve had a bit of clarity early this morning – and that’s a question we discuss on the Politics at Sam and Anne’s podcast today.
Politics Live: Reeves to reform financial regulations
And tens of billions of pounds of borrowing depends on the answer – which still feels intriguingly opaque.
You might think you know what the fiscal rules are. And you might think you know they’re not negotiable.
For instance, the main fiscal rule says that from 2029-30, the government’s day-to-day spending needs to be in surplus – i.e. rely on taxation alone, not borrowing.
And Rachel Reeves has been clear – that’s not going to change, and there’s no disputing this.
But when the government announced its fiscal rules in October, it actually published a 19-page document – a “charter” – alongside this.
And this contains all sorts of notes and caveats. And it’s slightly unclear which are subject to the “iron clad” promise – and which aren’t.
There’s one part of that document coming into focus – with sources telling me that it could get changed.
And it’s this – a little-known buffer built into the rules.
It’s outlined in paragraph 3.6 on page four of the Charter for Budget Responsibility.
This says that from spring 2027, if the OBR forecasts that she still actually has a deficit of up to 0.5% of GDP in three years, she will still be judged to be within the rules.
In other words, if in spring 2027 she’s judged to have missed her fiscal rules by perhaps as much as £15bn, that’s fine.
A change could save the chancellor some headaches. Pic: PA
Now there’s a caveat – this exemption only applies, providing at the following budget the chancellor reduces that deficit back to zero.
But still, it’s potentially helpful wiggle room.
This help – this buffer – for Reeves doesn’t apply today, or for the next couple of years – it only kicks in from the spring of 2027.
But I’m being told by a source that some of this might change and the ability to use this wiggle room could be brought forward to this year. Could she give herself a get out of jail card?
The chancellor could gamble that few people would notice this technical change, and it might avoid politically catastrophic tax hikes – but only if the markets accept it will mean higher borrowing than planned.
But the question is – has Rachel Reeves ruled this out by saying her fiscal rules are iron clad or not?
Or to put it another way… is the whole of the 19-page Charter for Budget Responsibility “iron clad” and untouchable, or just the rules themselves?
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Is Labour plotting a ‘wealth tax’?
And what counts as “rules” and are therefore untouchable, and what could fall outside and could still be changed?
I’ve been pressing the Treasury for a statement.
And this morning, they issued one.
A spokesman said: “The fiscal rules as set out in the Charter for Budget Responsibility are iron clad, and non-negotiable, as are the definition of the rules set out in the document itself.”
So that sounds clear – but what is a definition of the rule? Does it include this 0.5% of GDP buffer zone?
Read more:
Reeves hints at tax rises in autumn
Tough decisions ahead for chancellor
The Treasury does concede that not everything in the charter is untouchable – including the role and remit of the OBR, and the requirements for it to publish a specific list of fiscal metrics.
But does that include that key bit? Which bits can Reeves still tinker with?
I’m still unsure that change has been ruled out.
The Justice Department says two LA Sheriff deputies admitted to helping extort victims, including for a local crypto mogul, while working their private security side hustles.
-
Sports3 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports1 year agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports2 years agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Sports2 years agoButton battles heat exhaustion in NASCAR debut
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment2 years agoGame-changing Lectric XPedition launched as affordable electric cargo bike