The agreement opened the door to open trade by ending tariffs on various goods and services and implementing equality between Canada, America and Mexico. NAFTA has allowed tariff exemption for agricultural products such as eggs, maize and meat. This has allowed companies to act freely and import and export different products at the North American level. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce attributed to nafta that U.S. trade in goods and services with Canada and Mexico increased from $337 billion in 1993 to $1.2 trillion in 2011, while the AFL-CIO held the agreement responsible for sending 700,000 U.S. manufacturing jobs to Mexico at that time.  In a 60-minute interview in September 2015, presidential candidate Donald Trump called NAFTA “the worst trade deal ever approved in [the United States] and said that if elected, “he would either renegotiate or we would break it.”   Juan Pablo Castaen [es], chairman of the trade group Consejo Coordinador Empresarial, expressed concern about the renegotiations and the desire to focus on the automotive industry.  A number of trade experts have stated that abandoning NAFTA would have a number of unintended consequences for the United States, including limited access to its key export markets, lower economic growth and higher prices for gasoline, cars, fruits and vegetables.  Members of the Mexican private initiative noted that many laws needed to be adapted by the U.S.
Congress to eliminate NAFTA. Finally, this would give rise to complaints from the World Trade Organization.  The Washington Post found that a review of academic literature by the Congress Research Service concluded that “the overall net effect of NAFTA on the U.S. economy appears to be relatively modest, mainly because trade with Canada and Mexico accounts for a small percentage of U.S. GDP.”  A fourth round of talks included a U.S. request for a sunset clause that would terminate the agreement in five years unless the three countries agreed to maintain it, a provision that would allow U.S. Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross to terminate the agreement if it did not work. Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau met with the House Ways and Means Committee because Congress would have to pass legislation that re-releases the treaty provisions if Trump tries to pull out of the pact.  So far, you have seen international organizations such as the WTO, the IMF and the World Bank support world trade, but that is only part of the story. Where world trade really has a boost, there are trade agreements (also known as trade blocs).
This is where the term “global economic integration” takes its feet – the process of changing barriers between nations and between nations to create a fully integrated global economy. Trade agreements differ from the level of free trade they allow between members and non-members; everyone has a unique level of economic integration. We will examine four: the Regional Trade Agreement (RTA) (also known as the “free trade area”), a customs union, common markets and economic unions. Deep trade agreements are an important institutional infrastructure for regional integration. They reduce business costs and set many rules in which economies are active. If designed effectively, they can improve political cooperation between countries and thus promote international trade and international investment, economic growth and social well-being. World Bank Group Surveys: Maliszewska M, Z. Olekseyuk and I. Osorio-Rodarte, March 2018, economic and distributive impacts of a comprehensive and progressive agreement for the Trans-Pacific Partnership: the case of Vietnam. Washington, D.C.: World Bank Group.
A 2007 study showed that nafta had “a significant impact on the volume of international trade, but a modest impact on prices and prosperity.”  Nafta has transformed the political landscape in North America by providing a solid foundation