“It is the maxim of every prudent master of a family, never to attempt to make at home what it will cost him more to make than to buy . . . . If a foreign country can supply us with a commodity cheaper than we ourselves can make it, better buy it of them with some part of the produce of our own industry, employed in a way in which we have some advantage.”
-Adam Smith, An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, 1776
IPI believes the United States should aggressively pursue trade liberalization, which includes a willingness to lower our own trade barriers even when other countries do not respond reciprocally. Ideally, those efforts include multilateral agreements, such as the Trans-Pacific Partnership, but bilateral agreements can also promote freer trade.
American consumers bear the brunt of the protectionist impulse through higher prices on consumer goods, and American workers are best served when liberalized trade policies facilitate the export of American products throughout the world. At a time when protectionist sentiments are growing, it is important to assert that the U.S. and its workers have nothing to fear from trade, and everything to gain.
Public Knowledge Pans Post-NAFTA Mexico Trade Agreement
The Institute for Policy Innovation has said it is "critical" that "any revision of NAFTA includes strong, updated protections for IP goods and services."
NAFTA Without IP Consideration is 'Not a Better Deal' Warns IPI President
If the new North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) doesn’t improve intellectual property protections, then it’s not a better deal, according to the Institute for Policy Innovation (IPI).
A New NAFTA Must Enhance IP Protections
If a new NAFTA doesn’t improve intellectual property protections, it’s not a better deal, says a new publication released today by the Institute for Policy Innovation.
Why NAFTA 2.0 Must Enhance IP Protection
Policies that support innovation and creativity should be priorities for the U.S. government, especially in trade agreements.
SoCalGas Helps Put More Ultra-Low Emission NGV Trucks on Road
In more recent years federal environmental authorities have worked to keep the proportion of ethanol to gasoline in U.S. supplies at 10%. Generally, the auto and boating industries alike have resisted the use of ethanol, but the Trump administration may be poised to reverse that, according to a commentary on the Institute for Policy Innovation blog by Merrill Mathews, who equates the administration's interest to providing pork barrel offsets to Iowa farmers.
CTA: New Tariffs Would Do Billion-Dollar Number on U.S. Economy
"The primary purpose of the Trump tariffs isn’t necessarily to raise tax revenue, as in centuries past, but to make something more expensive to U.S. consumers so that they will buy less of that item and buy more from domestic manufacturers, who, incidentally, typically raise their domestic prices," says IPI.
Trump Pushes the Ethanol Blend Wall
Increasing the blend wall to E15 means more demand for corn, which means higher prices and more money in farmers’ pockets — or maybe it just offsets some of their tariff-related losses.
Who Pays Tariffs?
Who pays the Trump tariffs? Americans, that’s who—as importers of tariffed products, businesses that buy those imported items, and, ultimately, consumers.
Trump Accomplished American Energy Dominance - Then Gambled It On A Trade War
If the U.S. and China don’t defuse this conflict, China’s retaliatory tariffs could hammer America’s booming energy industry, wiping out thousands of current or future oil and gas jobs.
Time for Congress to Take Back Its Tariff-Imposing Authority
The U.S. Constitution empowers Congress, not the president, to impose tariffs. It's time to return that power to its rightful legislative branch.
Total Records: 169
