,
10 tweets,
5 min read
Read on Twitter
Let‘s take a moment and look at one of the examples of the benefits of a US-UK FTA that @ShankerASingham mentions: government procurement. (Thread)
@ShankerASingham There is the WTO level of government procurement commitments - the GPA and the revised GPA. Not every WTO Member is a party to these, but the US is and the UK will be in its own right. That would be the non-FTA baseline. If you want.
@ShankerASingham But the statement is correct that this leaves much to be desired. The US has its protective Buy America programmes. And worse: It‘s federal structure means that much of the procurement happens on state level. And how do you get access to that?
@ShankerASingham So there‘s much to be gained. What are the chances? USTR has published the negotiating objectives for a UK FTA. These are far more concrete than the US government statements on it. They are available here. ustr.gov/sites/default/…
@ShankerASingham What do they say on government procurement? Well... this: 
@ShankerASingham And then... this
@ShankerASingham So: no access to state procurement, keep Buy America, keep broad exceptions as, e.g., national security (which under the Trump Administration seems to include e.g. protecting US car production).
@ShankerASingham Or in other words: don‘t hold your breath for enormous gains on government procurement.
@ShankerASingham Clarification: as @OliverCooper rightly points out the US HAS made commitments as to states in the WTO. The commitments are here: wto.org/english/tratop…
@ShankerASingham @OliverCooper However, the US has rarely been willing to do similar things on a bilateral level (see the negotiation objectives) - for constitutional reasons. International law obligations and US states are a difficult topic...
