The 15 countries in the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) held an elegant virtual signing ceremony on November 15, 2020. The Asian Trade Centre will be delving more deeply into the specific details and producing a series of materials to help companies get ready to use the agreement. For now, here are our first quick technical assessments of the agreement. Note that this early look should not be taken as the definitive guide, as an agreement with 20 chapters and thousands of pages of associated schedules will take some time to unravel. To get a sense of the task ahead, the Korean tariff schedules alone run to 2743 pages. Compounding the difficulties of making a quick assessment: governments can be quite creative in burying important details inside of different provisions. Flexibilities and exceptions are going to be tough to note, understand and unravel. RCEP will, of course, have important implications for trade in the region, for economic integration and for the future of trade policy. This post, however, will focus on the details of the agreement itself. The basic structure includes 20 chapters, making RCEP a comprehensive trade agreement that includes commitments in areas like goods, services, investment, intellectual property rights, competition, trade remedies, standards, e-commerce and dispute settlement. Many of these chapters were not included in the underlying ASEAN+1 agreements that formed the original core of RCEP. Getting these negotiated took significant time, which is partly why RCEP has taken 8 years to reach conclusion. Overall, RCEP represents a significant achievement. The 15 countries involved (Australia, Brunei, Cambodia, China, Indonesia, Japan, Lao PDR, Malaysia, Myanmar, New Zealand, Philippines, Singapore, South Korea, Thailand, and Vietnam) are very diverse in nearly every imaginable dimension. Getting an agreement that could successfully navigate the domestic constraints and starting points in all 15 countries is an important accomplishment. RCEP also represents the first time that many members have engaged in this sort of trade arrangements: especially between China, Japan and South Korea. As expected, this created additional friction as officials grappled with managing outcomes.

US President Joseph Biden: Time for a “Reset” on Trade?

If this disruption at the top were not impediment enough to pushing for new policies, it remains unclear exactly what both parties will want to accomplish, particularly on trade issues. Traditionally, Democrats have been more skeptical of trade. This stance has changed in line with American public opinion to be more receptive to trade as a potential force for good. But it remains unclear how the Democratic party will respond to specific trade initiatives. It is also uncertain how Republicans will approach trade. In the past, free trade was a key plank in the party platform. Donald Trump scrambled this approach and it is not obvious how the Republican party will choose to address trade in the coming few years. Getting clarity inside both parties will take time. Trade, in general, is not going to be the key priority. Instead, expect Biden and the incoming Congress to focus significant time and attention on a host of domestic policy items including handling the escalating pandemic and economic fallout from disruption. There are two specific trade issues that will likely come up first: China and the CPTPP.