Future Implications of the Trans-Pacific Partnership Pact 

The U.S., Japan and 10 other Pacific nations have just recently come up with the largest trade pact in two decades, which is thought to be a huge political and strategic victory for both U.S. and Japanese leaders. The pact lowers trade barriers among the various countries, along with helping countries specialize in producing and exporting goods and services they can specialize in. This will attempt to lower consumer prices. The pact will have affects on all industries. For example, U.S. dairy farmers will be more able to sell milk to Canada, which opens up a whole new market. The pact also implements a 5 year minimum period of market exclusivity on each country before pharmaceutical companies have a cheaper competition (known as biosimilars). Originally, the want was to make the period last for 12 years, which went in accordance with the Affordable Care Act. However, other countries did not agree to adopt this, which left the U.S. as the only one utilizing the time period. The 12 years is actually better for data protection of biologic medication because it allows the stimulation of research and development, while simultaneously giving access to biosimilars in the appropriate manner. 

Although the pact has been much celebrated by the Obama Administration along with other countries involved with the new trade deal, there are a number of negative repercussions that could result from it. First off, people opposed to the deal think that it will continue to leave underdeveloped counties without access to necessary goods and ability to export/import. New patents and market exclusivity have ben imposed, possibly making it harder for countries with less leverage to be as flexible. This concept, may lead back to the idea of certain countries and companies monopolizing the market. Another thing to consider is that the lowering of import tariffs could potentially create a "backdoor" for Chinese goods to be snuck into the U.S. It may also be potentially easier for contaminated food to make its way into the United States, with big exporters having more lenient inspection rules. Also, there could be job loss in the U.S. due to companies that are vulnerable to import competition. Lastly, while Congress believes that there should be currency provisions in the deal, other counties such as Singapore and Japan are strongly opposed to the currency provision. 

As the trade deal is still extremely new, it is evident that the details need to be worked out. After details are established, clarity will perhaps shut down certain concerns and critiques of the detail. However, it is still important to think about any future changes the deal could promote. Are there other potential positive or negative implications of the deal? Is the opposition right to be so critical?

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/06/business/international/what-changes-lie-ahead-from-the-trans-pacific-partnership-pact.html?ref=business