Initial KORUS Session Reportedly Ends Without Consensus on Path Forward
U.S. and South Korean officials failed to reach agreement on how to move forward with the countries’ free trade agreement during a meeting Aug. 22, Reuters reported, after U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer in July said the U.S. wants to resolve several market access issues facing U.S. exports (see 1708180017). Discussions during the meeting revealed “different views on the free trade agreement” and lack of concurrence on a path forward between the two countries, according to Reuters. South Korea also asserted the U.S. trade deficit with the country, which totaled $27.6 billion in goods in 2016, hasn’t been the result of the trade deal, and South Korean Trade Minister Kim Hyun-chong proposed a joint study on the “effects” of the Korea-U.S. Free Trade Agreement, according to the Reuters story.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
If your job depends on informed compliance, you need International Trade Today. Delivered every business day and available any time online, only International Trade Today helps you stay current on the increasingly complex international trade regulatory environment.
The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative and the South Korean Embassy in Washington didn’t directly respond to the report, but Lighthizer in a statement expressed resolve in continuing to address the “trade imbalance” through the deal, as the agency said it will continue to raise issues covered during the meeting in the weeks ahead. Lighthizer cited a U.S. bilateral trade deficit that has tripled since KORUS entered into force in 2012, as well as decreasing U.S. goods exports to the country. “The United States and Korea have an important economic relationship,” Lighthizer said in a statement. “Unfortunately, too many American workers have not benefited from the agreement. USTR has long pressed the Korean government to address burdensome regulations which often exclude U.S. firms or artificially set prices for American intellectual property. This negotiation offers us an opportunity to resolve these and other barriers.”