Comments for Peter Gallagher

Comment on Nothing to see here by pwg

pwg — Wed, 29 Feb 2012 04:47:34 +0000

Hi Alan,

Internet trade in goods does not affect the trading system; all goods, however invoiced, cross the customs barrier and don’t necessarily escape any regulation; there or beyond.

As for services trade… well, it escapes in myriad ways, not just because of digital intermediation (probably 50% of services trade as currently defined takes place through foreign affiliates established abroad; but it’s never adequately counted).

I intended this article to be part of a pair — the second still in gestation — about the conditions under which broader collaboration might emerge (again) and what must change and not change in future institutions to make collaboration more valuable than the WTO has been in the past sixteen years.

Best,

Peter

Comment on Nothing to see here by Alan Moran

Alan Moran — Wed, 29 Feb 2012 03:36:46 +0000

Peter,
Excellent piece. I just wonder though to what degree the cross border trade over the internet might start undermining controls more widely than is already happening with consumer goods

Comment on Multilateral misalignment by Nothing to see here – Peter Gallagher

Nothing to see here – Peter Gallagher — Thu, 16 Feb 2012 03:27:31 +0000

[…] muttered about the misaligned incentives that lie at the heart of WTO’s problem (not U.S. treachery as Bhagwati claims, […]

Comment on “Critical Mass” on US business agenda by pwg

pwg — Thu, 16 Feb 2012 02:36:07 +0000

Hi John,

Yes… as I understand the Emerson proposal (I have never seen specifics) it is for negotiations on a CM, or “plurilateral” for services. I’m not sure how the proposal deals with the problem of consistency with the universal obligation in the GATS to comply with MFN in any scheduled services sector (except in the context of an Article V agreement).

I’ll see if I can find out.

Peter

Comment on “Critical Mass” on US business agenda by John Hannoush

John Hannoush — Sun, 12 Feb 2012 08:15:15 +0000

Thanks for that concise critique of the proposal to have agreements without all in. The FTC proposal is essentially the same as the one that Craig Emerson has been advocating?

Comment on A great big (banana) tax by john wratt

john wratt — Mon, 26 Dec 2011 22:39:32 +0000

Dodgy graft & corruption in the industry & politics amazing that it has been going on for so long ? — who benefits? — do the unaffected growers share the profits across the industry? — why don’t they sort out disease resistant crops? and as most industries open up the trade to world trade competition — unbelievable how politicians stick to the baloney about importing diseases — someone needs to get to the bottom of the story!!

Comment on Strategic stupidity in Afghanistan by chris

chris — Sun, 02 Oct 2011 00:32:12 +0000

I agree completely with pwg. Unfortunately, the people who really ‘call the shots’ in the US are not so much the visible politicos but rather, the invisible Generals and CEO’s of the military industrial complex. They have little interest in leaving Afghanistan any time soon (for obvious reasons). A few more years, I’m afraid, and the US will suffer the consequences — actually, that’s already apparent!

Comment on Standard and Poor’s reasons by j fay

j fay — Sun, 07 Aug 2011 21:35:48 +0000

So, it really appears that the S&P rating is based on their lack of confidence in our “management” group. If that same “group” can’t reach an agreement, why is it one sides fault? I keep hearing that it is to be laid at the feet of either party, depending on who is speaking. We are being led by incompetents.

Comment on EU tax on airline CO2 emissions by pwg

pwg — Mon, 11 Jul 2011 04:19:29 +0000

Excellent question, John, to which I don’t know the answer.

It is not clear to me whether the EU will consider a tax on the production of fuels used by Qantas as equivalent to the tax that the EU imposes on airlines’ own production of emissions (by burning fuel). The two are not commensurate taxes so the “equivalence” calculation would, I guess, be a political botch.

The only sure way that I know Qantas can avoid the EU tax (assuming it survives challenges from China, the USA etc) is to purchase EU Emission Permits. Now would be a really good time to do that, since the market in the EU has collapsed: http://www.petergallagher.com.au/index.php/site/article/dzikujemy-polska

Best,

Peter

Comment on EU tax on airline CO2 emissions by John Hannoush

John Hannoush — Mon, 11 Jul 2011 04:09:35 +0000

Hi Peter

Does the PM’s announcement of a carbon tax mean the Brussels bunker will get off Qantas’s back now?

Regards

John