• International Commerce and Information Review
• /
• v.6 no.3
• /
• pp.373-384
• /
• 2004

While the bilateral trade volume between China and U.S. has been growing rapidly, the trade deficits of U.S. to China has also been expanding. This growing trade deficit of U.S. to China has several reasons: the increase of foreign direct investment to China, the transfer of trade deficit origins, the intervention of U.S. domestic politics to China-U.S. trade relations, and U.S. direct control on export to China. However, the increased U.S. trade deficit to China does not mean that U.S. is in a disadvantaged position in its economic relations with China, or its international competitiveness is deteriorating. When U.S. surplus in service trade to China is included, the picture would be very different. Also, as internationalization progresses and China's industrial structure adjusts, the trade deficit of U.S. to China would narrow.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.59
• /
• pp.181-205
• /
• 2013

This study has analyzed the international trade flow of medical devices in Korea, China, and U.S. more theoretically and systematically through a mutual connection of the medical device export structure of Korea and the import structure of China and U.S. organically, with an intensity approach on the bilateral international trade flow. Also, it is meaningful to find a solution to boost exports of Korea to China and U.S.. Therefore in this study, we recognize the importance of the medical device market in China and U.S., which is the main competition for Korea and its market, and look into the trade situation of these three countries. We also look into the relative market stream and the trade intensity of the main medical devices in Korea, China and U.S., and seek measures for the steady growth of the medical device market in these three countries.

• Asia-Pacific Journal of Business
• /
• v.13 no.2
• /
• pp.183-195
• /
• 2022

Purpose - The study attempted to analyze how the U.S.-China trade dispute affects a highly trade-dependent South Korea. Currently, major domestic and international institutions have issued a number of conflicting predictions that the trade dispute between China and the United States will have a positive and negative impact on South Korea. Accordingly, the present study attempted to analyze using actual data. Design/methodology/approach - The analysis was conducted using actual import and export data from the United States and China and actual import and export data from the United States and China from South Korea. The analysis measured the number and amount of imports and exports by year and month, and the rate of increase and decrease. We also looked at trade dispute days, import and export outcomes and what the impact was. In addition, as a result of the US-China trade dispute, the amount of change in Korea's imports and exports was analyzed. Findings - Empirical analysis shows that South Korea's exports to the United States and China have increased. The analysis results are as follows. First, exports to the United States increased by 5.65% in 2018 and 6.45% in 2019 compared to 2017. Second, exports to China surged 12.34% in 2018 compared to 2017. This increase in South Korea's exports to the United States and its mass exports to the United States shows that South Korea has benefited from the trade dispute between the United States and China. Research implications or Originality - South Korea, which is highly trade-dependent, has been heavily affected by the U.S.-China trade dispute. Various predictions are made about this. The analysis showed that South Korea's export volume has increased. In the end, the effect of the trade transition to the 3rd country did not occur. Rather, the U.S.-China trade dispute appears to have helped South Korea.

• The Journal of the Convergence on Culture Technology
• /
• v.9 no.2
• /
• pp.285-294
• /
• 2023

The trade dispute between China and the U.S. began before Corona and is easing at this time by bringing new changes to the pendemic, and the development of the Chinese manufacturing industry has increased interdependence between the U.S. and China. However, the overall global trade should be less than before pendemic, and Korea's response strategy should be made serious at this time.However, new changes are taking place again these days. With the recent outbreak of COVID-19 in Shanghai, China, new changes are expected to occur in China's industrial chain. As the Chinese government strictly creates quarantine figures for COVID-19, many factories and companies among industries are forced to close for a while. As economic globalization and division of labor continue to deepen, multinationals choose suppliers and industrial chains within the world to form a global supply chain structure to pursue cost minimization and profit maximization. China is an indispensable part. Whether it is China, the U.S. or Korea, it can be a risk and an opportunity now.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.69
• /
• pp.567-588
• /
• 2016

Korea-China FTA and Korea-U.S. FTA are the most significant FTA in volume and economic effect for Korea's perspective. Developed countries have dealt with environmental issues one of the main issues in FTA negotiation, while developing countries have been reluctant to it. Both Korea-China FTA and Korea-U.S. FTA have separate environment chapter respectively. A separate environment chapter was firstly introduced in Korea-U.S. for Korea's perspective. Both environment chapters provide high level of environment protection, recognition of multilateral environmental agreements, enforcement of environmental laws, and environmental cooperation. Both environment chapters require that each party make effort to improve environmental laws and measures. Korea-China FTA provides establishment a "Committee on Environment and Trade", and Korea-U.S. FTA provides establishment a "Environment Council" to oversee the implementation of environment clauses. Korea-China FTA and Korea-U.S. FTA have very similar provisions on environment and trade, and are expected to contribute to enhancing environment protection. However, a lot of provisions are somewhat declaratory rather than mandatory. Therefore, further environmental cooperation is encouraged to achieve the goals and objectives of the environment clauses and FTA.

• Korea Trade Review
• /
• v.44 no.1
• /
• pp.177-191
• /
• 2019

Global trade protectionism has increased further and U.S. priorities and protectionism have strengthened since Trump took office in 2017. Trump administration is actively implementing tariff measures based on U.S. domestic trade laws rather than the WTO rules and regulations. In particular, the American government has recently been imposing high tariffs due to national security and imposing economic sanctions on other countries' imports. According to the U.S. Trade Expansion Act Section 232, the American government imposed additional tariffs on steel and aluminum imports to WTO member countries such as China, India, and EU etc. on march 15, 2018. Thus, this study aims to investigate whether the U.S. Trade Expansion Act Section 232 is consistent with GATT/WTO rules by comparing the legal basis of US / China / WTO regulations related to Section 232 of the U.S. Trade Expansion Act, and gives some suggestions for responding to the Section 232 measure. As the Section 232 measure exceeded the scope of GATT's Security Exceptions regulation and is very likely to be understood as a safeguard measure. If so, the American government is deemed to be in breach of WTO's regulations, such as the most-favored-nation treatment obligations and the duty reduction obligations. In addition, American government is deemed to be failed to meet the conditions of initiation of safeguard measure and violated the procedural requirements such as notification and consultation. In order to respond to these U.S. protection trade measures, all affected countries should actively use the WTO multilateral system to prevent unfair measures. Also, it is necessary to revise the standard jurisdiction of the dispute settlement body and to explore the balance of the WTO Exception clause so that it can be applied strictly. Finally, it would be necessary for Chinese exporters to take a counter-strategy under such trade pressure.

• Asia-Pacific Journal of Business
• /
• v.7 no.2
• /
• pp.49-59
• /
• 2016

The study attempts to investigate the causes of Sino-U.S. trade friction in recent years and provides countermeasures accordingly. The import and export volume of two countries, the product structure of China's export, the 337th Act lawsuits related to China, the industries involved in trade friction, and the G-L Index of Sino-U.S. Products are analyzed in detail. The causes of Sino-US trade frictions are discussed from the aspect of mercantilism and trade protectionism, interest groups and governments' trade policies, Chinese product structure, intellectual property protection in China, and performance of Chinese enterprises in litigation. Based on these, countermeasures are put forward. China needs to implement industrial upgrading, increasing the added value of products, and improving intellectual property protection. A trade friction warning system also needs to be constructed. The Chinese government needs to carry out strategic dialogue and international negotiation.

• International Journal of Advanced Culture Technology
• /
• v.8 no.4
• /
• pp.207-211
• /
• 2020

In the global economy, trade is not confined in geological boundaries, enhancing the international relation among countries. However, the trade tension between the largest economy and the second-largest economy raise concerns among the world economies, enhancing the uncertainties around world. In particular, the trade tension between the two countries is highly related with South Korea's trade balance, because the country is highly dependent on the trade with the two countries. Given this, we analyzed the news editorials published in Korean quality newsaper, with related to U.S. and China Trade War by looking at the ideological perspectives of news outlets or journalists to the issue within the framework of critical discourse analysis. In particular we gave a special attention to the attitude to each country in order to investigate their ideological stance to the country, following van Dijk (1998)' ideological square. The results are as follows: first, the Chosun Ilbo emphasized 'their' bad properties directly and aggresively, while the Hankyoreh designated the U.S. as a member of an out-group, thus mitigating 'our' bad quatilies; Second, the two strategies of emphasis and mitigation enabled both newspapers to reinforce in-group homogeneity and out-group exclusion. Thus, we could conclude that the editorial is a clear indicator to show the news outlet's ideological stance to each country in regard to the trade issue.

• East Asian Economic Review
• /
• v.19 no.2
• /
• pp.117-142
• /
• 2015

This paper uses a 53-country 15-industry computable general equilibrium model of trade to analyze the effects of the Korea-China free trade agreement on the Korean economy, the manufacturing sector in particular. The model is based on Yaylaci and Shikher (2014) which uses the Eaton-Kortum methodology to explain intra-industry trade. The model predicts that the Korea-China FTA will increase Korea-China manufacturing trade by 56%, manufacturing employment in Korea by 5.7% and China by 0.55%. The model also predicts significant reallocation of employment across industries with the Food industry in Korea losing jobs and other industries there gaining jobs, with the Medical equipment industry gaining the most. There will be some trade diversion from the ASEAN countries, as well as Japan and the United States.

• Korea Trade Review
• /
• v.43 no.5
• /
• pp.47-66
• /
• 2018

This study analyzes the potential economic effects of a trade war between the U.S. and China. The CGE model is used to estimate the macroeconomic variables of each country and the change in imports/exports by industry by considering three different scenarios: (i) the US imposes a 25% of tariff on China; (ii) the US and China impose a 25% tariff bilaterally; (iii) the United States expands protection in vehicles and metals to Korea, Japan, and the EU. According to the results of the study, when the US and China initiate a trade war, GDP and welfare of both countries decline. China's decline in GDP and welfare are larger than those of the United States, which implies a trade war is more favorable to the U.S. than to China. In the long run, China's GDP and welfare decline widens further. While the trade volumes of the US and China are greatly reduced, the trade volumes of other countries does not significantly fluctuate. Finally, if the US extends protection policy to Korea, Japan and the EU, it creates undesirable effects on the US. In particular, damage to the US jeopardizes its advantageous position in a trade war with China. In order to emphasize the unfairness of protectionist policy and the damage to Korean industry, Korea needs to establish a strategy to counter US protectionist policy.