the tra ns—pacific partnership the two big partnerships, the trans—pacific partnership and the transatlantic trade and investmenteated two blocks of free—trade areas that china would have had to adjust trade practices that it wanted to be part of, orface being isolated, yet he stepped back from both of them. he stepped back from both of them. he stepped back from both of them. he stepped back because when he looked at the detail over those deals, from his perspective they were not good deals for the states and why not? he wa nts to deals for the states and why not? he wants to grow the local economy in the us, and thejobs he promised to the us, and thejobs he promised to the americans. and he couldn't see those deals sitting alongside those promises, so he has to move the deals around and hence open up this conversation around tariffs. plenty to talk about in terms of international trade and plenty of questions around how britain's all important services sector will continue, or try to continue, accessing eu markets after brexit. the plans that are being put up seem to be rejected by brussels. yes. i just said i

we're back where we were a couple of years ago which is towards tea to apply to transatlantic trade and investment partnership let's recall let's rename it now let's call it trying to please the president with it well this is just the beginning as well because negotiations have to start we're talking about and there are tariff subsidies and non-tariff barriers what can get in the way of those negotiations. during the obama administration in the negotiations took years to do this the this is sausage making this is very complicated stuff. subsidies means that the u.s. would have to get rid of its. farm bill its farm subsidies same is true for the european union this is tough stuff so a lot of things could it could get in the way and it is completely possible that this president reverses course yet again and. as a guest on last night and that is the trump factor if i may you know how many people here in germany also in brussels are worried that we could see the u.s. president change his mind that's always a possibility as as we have seen but we've we've also seen and that's another message that we i think this r

became president that his fight was not to reduce tariffs, he pulled out of the transatlantic trade and investment partnershipthe eu, he was going to fight by raising taxes. the issue with cars is that europe has higher tariffs, 10% on american ca rs has higher tariffs, 10% on american cars coming into europe, that america does on european cars coming into america, 2.5%. but there are huge tariffs for european products in other areas, other manufacturing areas. rather than lower the rates, he is saying he is going to fight on each point. but economists argue that doing that risks jobs, risks prices for consumers, the very people who voted for donald trump in the first place. it is a difficult political argument to make the economics are against what he is doing. one of the biggest car manufacturers in the states is bmw and it has a huge south carolina factory and it is pumping out more ca rs factory and it is pumping out more cars than anywhere else in america and that is a european company. cars than anywhere else in america and that is a european companym is, but donald trump ‘s supporters will say that wha

trade. what about that? how would that work? canning? >> it would be aspirational and as blake said we did-- went a long way towards trying to get there with our transatlantic's trade and investment partnershipi spent countless hours and days in brussels working on that which had been limited in most of the tariffs, but unfortunately with this administration took place it pushed that off, so i think it would be a lot to do in the context of everything we are doing with china and nafta. i'm not optimistic they will get there anytime soon. liz: would've president trump and for that matter treasury secretary stephen nugent known what cecilia had already talked about, which was that she did not believe they were serious simple because this issue had arisen once before, but they couldn't drop tariffs entirely because of us laws that have been put in place that protect us industry. >> exactly what right. liz: what are those laws. >> there are a whole bunch of them and we have high levels of tariffs on light trucks that protect us to metric-- thomistic industry so it's not clear at all. liz: suvs, by the way. >> huge percentage of the profits for general motors which you just mentioned in your intr

trading partners. he stated that he prefers bilateral arrangements over multilateral arrangements. by indicating that he did not want to pursue the trans-pacific partnership or the transatlantic trade and investment partnership, one with asia partners and one with the e.u. and while it's true that bilateral treaties are easier to negotiate and acquire, select multilateral arrangements can achieve broad geopolitical and geoeconomic strategic objectives. in the case of t.p.p., potentially significantly leverage the economic clout of china in southeast asia, and obviously link longstanding free trade partners with trans-- across the transatlantic region with the ttip. president trump has also initiated the effort to improve the north american free trade agreement, 1/2 tarks among the united states, mexico and canada. -- nafta, among the united states, mexico and canada. he's called this agreement one of the worst ever but has offered concrete ways to imfrove and modernize it for current conditions -- to improve it and modernize it for current conditions. and no doubt these are in fact significantly different than back in 1992 when the nafta agreement was arranged. this work continues in earnest and

dialogue, et cetera, that sort of thing looks much like reinvigoration of the old transatlantic trade investment partnership and agreement negotiations that was suspended much earlier on. i think we see this as revile of transatlantic dialogue that had failed. so i think trump is achieved his goal of using the threat that he has made to bring the eu to the negotiating table. he is interesting that it is non-industrial goods. trump made a big deal about the reduction of tariffs subsidies and other barriers in that sector. the reality, there are a lot of other barriers in that sector. most of the barriers are regulatory. those will be taken care of in the standards dialogue which will be a very, very difficult one. this is one where it is very good news that this process has started. it is very good news that we are moving forward, reviving the transatlantic trade agenda which had been essentially dead for a couple of years. but the devil is in the detail and the standards dialogue will be very tough. melissa: i think all the dialogues are going to be tough, nile. that is how we got to this place, that all of the

trade. and so his comment that he wants a u.s., u.k. free trade deal, i like to call that tea tip for two, because it's a mini version of the transatlantic trade investment partnership's a lot of low hanging fruit that president trump could pick. u.s., u.k. free trade deal would be a good start. the longer these trade wars continue, the less goodwill we'll have on the part of the european allies to negotiate deals that look like that. elizabeth: is this how you do go about negotiating on the global scale, on a global scale, especially because right now the u.s. economy has an advantage, it's stronger and you could argue that china needs us more than we need china. >> we need a lot of countries to do a lot of good things in the coming years. we have a lot of populism around the world. economic openness is not in vogue. this is a problem for everyone. the reality ills we need to negotiate and it would be useful if president trump would tell the chinese and the europeans what he's looking for in terms of the content of a deal, not just trying to get a negotiating upper hand on many of our allies, we should be looking for a multi-lateral effort right now, not trying to