Spurred on by China’s export prowess and President Trump’s tariff-centered trade agenda, the European Union and India announced in late January that they had concluded negotiations on a comprehensive free trade agreement. Less than a week later, President Trump revealed the United States had also reached a trade deal—later described as a “framework for an Interim Agreement”—with the world’s fourth-largest economy.

The near-simultaneous announcements invite an obvious question: who got the better deal—the American self-styled “Dealmaker-in-Chief” or Brussels’ much-maligned Eurocrats? Although neither agreement’s full text has been published, the available details strongly suggest that the EU emerged with a more liberalizing, durable, and economically sound agreement. By contrast, the US-India arrangement appears narrower in scope, less certain in effect, and more deeply rooted in a mercantilist mindset that treats imports as a problem rather than a benefit.

To understand why, consider several key dimensions of the two deals.

Tariff LiberalizationTariff Liberalization

Scope Beyond TariffsScope Beyond Tariffs

Durability and Legal CertaintyDurability and Legal Certainty

Side agreements and managed tradeSide agreements and managed trade

The verdictThe verdict

...read more at cato.org