On January 29, 2020, President Donald Trump signed the agreement between the United States, Mexico-Canada. Canada has not yet adopted it in its parliamentary body until January 2020. Mexico was the first country to ratify the agreement in 2019. Little has happened in the labour market, which has significantly changed the outcome in each country participating in the treaty. Because of the immigration restrictions, the wage gap between Mexico, on the one hand, and the United States and Canada, on the other, has not decreased. The lack of infrastructure in Mexico has led many U.S. and Canadian firms to choose not to invest directly in Mexico. As a result, there were no significant job losses in the United States and Canada and there were no environmental disasters due to industrialization in Mexico. The immediate objective of NAFTA was to increase cross-border trade in North America, and in this regard it has undoubtedly been a success. Reducing or removing tariffs and removing certain non-tariff barriers, such as.
B local content requirements in Mexico, NAFTA has encouraged increased trade and investment. Most of the increase came from U.S.-Mexico trade, which totaled $481.5 billion in 2015, and U.S.-Canada trade of $518.2 billion. Trade between Mexico and Canada, although by far the fastest growing canal between 1993 and 2015, reached only $34.3 billion. Nevertheless, NAFTA has been a recurring objective in the broader free trade debate. President Donald J. Trump says it undermines U.S. jobs and manufacturing, and in December 2019, his administration finalized an updated version of the pact with Canada and Mexico, now known as the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA). The USMCA received broad support from all parties on Capitol Hill and came into force on July 1, 2020. Many analysts explain these differences in results by the fact that the Mexican economy is « two-speed », where NAFTA has led the growth of foreign investment, high-tech production and wage growth in the industrial north, while the south, largely agricultural, has remained disconnected from this new economy. University of Pennsylvania economist Mauro Guillen argued that Mexico`s growing inequality is due to NAFTA workers receiving much higher wages from trade-related activities in the north.
NAFTA was the largest free trade agreement in the world when it was established on January 1, 1994. NAFTA was the first time that two industrialized countries had signed a trade agreement with an emerging country. Chapter 19 of NAFTA was a trade litigation mechanism that subjects anti-dumping and compensatory tariff (AD/CVD) rules to binational panel review or conventional judicial review.  In the United States, for example, review of decisions by authorities imposing anti-dumping and countervailing duties is generally referred to the U.S. International Court of Commerce, a Section III court. However, the NAFTA parties were given the opportunity to appeal decisions against binational bodies made up of five citizens of the two NAFTA countries.  Participants were generally lawyers with experience in international commercial law. Since NAFTA did not contain physical provisions for AD/CVD, the panel was tasked with determining whether the final decisions of the agencies to which AD/CVD were parties were consistent with domestic national law. Chapter 19 was an anomaly in international dispute resolution because it did not apply international law, but required a body made up of individuals from many countries to review the application of a country`s domestic law.
[Citation required] When Bill Clinton signed the nafta law in 1993, he said the trade agreement signed « jobs. » U.S. jobs and well-paying American jobs. His independent opponent in the 1992 elections, Ross Perot, warned that the leak of jobs by the