Blog Post

India must push forward with RCEP trade deal

Negotiations on a trade agreement between the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and their free trade partners could have major implications for the world economy.

By: Date: June 1, 2016 Topic: Global Economics & Governance

India could benefit from concluding the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), a trade deal that would group 16 nations and account for 40% of world trade, but is procrastinating due to political difficulties.

The RCEP initiative would link the ten member states of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and the group’s free-trade agreement partners, Australia, China, India, Japan, South Korea and New Zealand. In total, the grouping of 16 countries includes more than 3 billion people and has a combined GDP of about $17 trillion. RCEP is the largest free-trade agreement (FTA) negotiation in Asia, and also the biggest FTA negotiation that India has ever participated in.

If it is negotiated successfully, RCEP would create the world’s largest trading bloc, with major implications for Asian countries and the world economy. Negotiations among the 16 parties began in early 2013 and are scheduled to conclude by the end of 2016. So far 12 rounds of negotiations have been completed, with the 13th round scheduled to take place during June 12-18, 2016 in Auckland, New Zealand.

The RCEP is expected to act as a counter-balance to the US-led Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP), which was announced on the 5th of October of 2015 (though it is yet to be ratified by the parliaments of the respective member countries). However, four members of the ASEAN, namely Brunei, Singapore, Vietnam and Malaysia, are members of both trade deals.

ASEAN is expected to benefit from both the TPP and the RCEP, but there could be differences between its members’ abilities to adapt to the higher standards of the TPP compared to RCEP.

The RCEP seeks to achieve a modern and comprehensive trade agreement among members. The core of the negotiating agenda covers trade in goods and services, investment, economic and technical cooperation and dispute settlement. The partnership would support the spread of global production networks, and reduce the inefficiencies of the multiple Asian trade agreements that currently exist.

India is a major player in the RCEP negotiations, and is under pressure to reduce its tariffs sharply. In fact, industry leaders in India see a steep tariff reduction for goods from China as the biggest threat, fearing a rush of cheap goods from across the border.

In addition, countries such as Singapore, which has near zero tariffs on most goods, and Malaysia, where 90 percent of trade is carries a negligible customs duty, are pressuring India to lower barriers. According to an internal estimate from the Indian ministry of commerce, the signing of the 16 country RCEP trade agreement will result in a revenue loss of as much as 1.6% of GDP. This has forced the negotiators to tread carefully.

According to recent reports, the serious adverse effects of joining the agreement have made India more aggressive in the ongoing negotiations. It is said that India is seeking greater market access in services to be able to justify the closing of the deal at home. However, the industry chambers in India remain sceptical and view the deal as equivalent to signing a free trade agreement with China.

India has faced this problem since it started negotiating regional trade agreements, and RCEP is no exception. Like in all such agreements, one of the objectives of RCEP is to eliminate nearly 95 percent of tariffs. This might be easy for most ASEAN member states, whose tariffs are less than 5 percent. But for a country like India with average tariffs at around 15 per cent, drastically reducing them to zero or 2-3 per cent is difficult.  This would also entail giving up much greater market access than what it would get in return.

Given the importance of the deal, India has offered several concessions to its member countries in the RCEP – especially since TPP has already been signed, and is likely to hurt Indian exports. For instance, with those countries with which India has already signed FTAs such as ASEAN, India has proposed to eliminate tariffs on 80 percent of items.

Similarly, India has offered to open up 65 per cent of its product space to Japan and South Korea. For Australia, New Zealand and China, Delhi has offered to eliminate duties on only 42.5 per cent of products. As India does not have any kind of free-trade agreement with these three countries, its offer is less. But the expectations from India are high and the members are demanding much more. This means that going ahead with RCEP and other pending free-trade agreements is a politically difficult prospect for India.

India’s interests lie mostly in services, the removal of technical barriers to trade such as those taken under sanitary and phyto-sanitary measures, and trade in goods such as pharmaceuticals and textiles. India has been negotiating hard to liberalise the free movement of professionals aspect of the services agreement (mode 4), in order to offset the revenue loss from goods liberalisation.

India thinks its best bet is in exporting services, through which it can supply its burgeoning skilled professionals to other countries, thus partially meeting the demand for jobs from a million people joining the labour market every month. But at the same time there are serious limitations to this. Many complain that India’s service trade with ASEAN is insignificant, and moreover India faces stiff competition on services from countries like the Philippines.

It is high time India decides whether it wants to go ahead with RCEP and conclude it. Procrastinating and delaying the process – for which India has earned the ire of many member countries – is not good for India. India needs to have a clear vision and strategy with respect to its free-trade agreements and move forward quickly. This would benefit India’s external sector, as India’s exports have been falling for more than a year now. The export slump is a matter of serious concern to the Indian economy.

It is time for serious action. The government needs to be tough, and realise that RCEP’s future as a major trade bloc will remain uncertain until there is enough political will to go through the arduous negotiation rounds and conclude them quickly. Most importantly, India needs to hold more moderate and flexible positions. It must reverse its image as a tough negotiator obstructing talks, and show that it is serious about making progress.

The RCEP will also lay the foundation for India and other members of ASEAN to join TPP, because of the overlapping membership between the TPP and RCEP. The RCEP will no doubt face stiff opposition from various interest groups within the participating countries. But now that India has decided to join, it must balance economic and strategic calculations, and prepare to lead in the “Indo-Pacific century”.

 


Republishing and referencing

Bruegel considers itself a public good and takes no institutional standpoint. Anyone is free to republish and/or quote this post without prior consent. Please provide a full reference, clearly stating Bruegel and the relevant author as the source, and include a prominent hyperlink to the original post.

View comments
Read article More on this topic

Blog Post

Brexit, phase two (and beyond): The future of the EU-UK relationship

Whether it looks more like ‘CETA-plus’ or ‘EEA-minus’, the trade deal that emerges from phase two of the Brexit negotiations should not be the limit of ambition for future partnership between the EU and the UK

By: Maria Demertzis and André Sapir Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: December 13, 2017
Read article More on this topic

Blog Post

Promoting intra-regional trade in the south of the Mediterranean

Regional integration is still a sure way for economies in development to achieve economic growth on the global market. The south of the Mediterranean has still a low level of intra-regional trade integration, dominated by some overlapping trade agreements and political instability. The EU has the opportunity to play a decisive role, promoting and coordinating the process.

By: Filippo Biondi and Maria Demertzis Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: December 6, 2017
Read article More by this author

Blog Post

The European Union with the Community of Latin America and the Caribbean: where do we stand?

Latin American and Caribbean countries have deep historical, political, cultural, and economic ties with Europe, and cooperation between the two regions has been intensifying recently. Here we report some of the main trends in trade, foreign direct investment, and agreements between the European Union and The Community of Latin American and Caribbean States, the European Union’s official counterpart in the bi-regional strategic partnership that commenced in 1999.

By: Francesco Chiacchio Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance, Global Economics & Governance Date: December 5, 2017
Read article Download PDF More on this topic

External Publication

Central Asia—twenty-five years after the breakup of the USSR

Central Asia consists of five culturally and ethnically diverse countries that have followed different paths to political and economic transformation in the past 25 years. The main policy challenge for the five Central Asian economies is to move away from commodity-based growth strategies to market-oriented diversification and adoption of a broad spectrum of economic, institutional and political reforms

By: Marek Dabrowski and Uuriintuya Batsaikhan Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: November 14, 2017
Read about event More on this topic

Past Event

Past Event

A conversation on USA economic policy with Kevin Hassett

This is an invitation-only event for Bruegel's member and for a selected number of experts.

Speakers: Kevin Hassett Topic: Global Economics & Governance Location: Bruegel, Rue de la Charité 33, 1210 Brussels Date: November 9, 2017
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

Falling Pound might not bring UK trade balance boost

The Pound Sterling depreciated by 14% against a basket of world currencies in the four months after the referendum vote to leave the EU. A number of pundits claimed that this would improve the UK trade balance and boost the economy. But the data do not show any visible improvement in the trade balance to date. Could it be that currency depreciations have less impact on trade balances than before?

By: Nicholas Branigan Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: October 31, 2017
Read about event More on this topic

Past Event

Past Event

EU - CELAC Economic Forum - Channels for a joint future

On 11 October Bruegel together with GIGA and Real Instituto Elcano will organise a conference on relations between the EU and the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States.

Speakers: Paola Amadei, Angel Badillo, Paulo Carreño King, Linda Corugedo Steneberg, Gonzalo de Castro, Gonzalo Gutiérrez, Bert Hoffmann, Edita Hrdá, Ramón Jáuregui, Emilio Lamo de Espinosa, Eduardo Levy Yeyati, Gabriel Lopez, Enrique Medina Malo, Maryleana Méndez Jiménez, Luicy Pedroza, Mario Pezzini, Mario Soares, Everton Vargas, Dylan Vernon and Guntram B. Wolff Topic: Global Economics & Governance Location: Bruegel, Rue de la Charité 33, 1210 Brussels Date: October 11, 2017
Read article

Blog Post

India’s trade ties with the UK and EU

As EU and Indian leaders meet in Delhi, we look at the figures on trade. The UK’s place in the relationship warrants special attention. EU-India trade has more than tripled since 2000, but UK-India trade is largely static. The shift is especially noticeable for EU exports to India, where the UK share has dropped from 29% to 10%.

By: Maria Demertzis and Alexander Roth Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance, Global Economics & Governance Date: October 6, 2017
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

Long-term growth potential, or dead in the long run?

By linking growth with both employment and the imperative for India to hold its own with China for strategic autonomy, Prime Minister Modi has brought sustainable, high quality, inclusive economic growth to the centre of political discussion, which is where it rightfully belongs.

By: Suman Bery Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: October 5, 2017
Read article More by this author

Podcast

Podcast

Surprising priorities for Europe and China

Bruegel’s Alicia García-Herrero and Robin Niblett of Chatham House discuss a new joint report on EU-China relations. How easy was it to find common ground with Chinese partners? And what should be the priorities for economic cooperation between Europe and China?

By: The Sound of Economics Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: September 13, 2017
Read about event More on this topic

Past Event

Past Event

EU-China economic relations: looking to 2025

This event will see the launch of a report on EU-China relations and discuss issues such as trade and investment, industrial cooperation and innovation and global governance

Speakers: Victor Chu, Ian Davis, Alicia García-Herrero, Dame Clara Furse, Tony Graziano, Anatole Kaletsky, K.C. Kwok, Lawrence J. Lau, Ina Lepel, Hanna Müller, André Sapir, Robin Niblett, György Szapáry, Jean-Claude Trichet, Zhang Yansheng, H.E. Ambassador Yang Yanyi, Liu Xiangdong, Gunnar Wiegand, Guntram B. Wolff, Huang Ping and Elena Flores Topic: Global Economics & Governance Location: Bruegel, Rue de la Charité 33, 1210 Brussels Date: September 13, 2017
Read about event

Past Event

Past Event

Bruegel Annual Meetings 2017

The Annual Meetings are Bruegel’s flagship event. They offer a mixture of large public debates and small private sessions about key issues in European and global economics. In a series of high-level discussions, Bruegel’s scholars, members and stakeholders will address the economic policy challenges facing Europe.

Speakers: Carlos Sallé Alonso, José Antonio Álvarez Álvarez, Agnès Bénassy-Quéré, Pervenche Béres, Matthias Buck, Grégory Claeys, Zsolt Darvas, Jean Luc Demarty, Maria Demertzis, Anna Ekström, Lowri Evans, Ferdinando Giugliano, Sandro Gozi, Peter Grünenfelder, Reiner Hoffmann, Levin Holle, Kate Kalutkiewicz, Steffen Kampeter, Peter Kažimír, Emmanuel Lagarrigue, Matti Maasikas, Steven Maijoor, Reza Moghadam, Nathalie Moll, James Murray, Johan Van Overtveldt, Julia Reinaud, André Sapir, Dirk Schoenmaker, Mateusz Szczurek, Marianne Thyssen, Jean-Claude Trichet, Reinhilde Veugelers, Nicolas Véron, Ida Wolden Bache, Liviu Voinea, Guntram B. Wolff and Georg Zachmann Topic: Energy & Climate, European Macroeconomics & Governance, Finance & Financial Regulation, Global Economics & Governance, Innovation & Competition Policy Location: Square - Brussels Meeting Centre Date: September 7, 2017
Load more posts