The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) is a prospective EU-US economic cooperation, still in ongoing negotiations. Similar to our former TTIP projects, this review is meant to provide all interested citizens with diverse information about the benefits, challenges, myths and facts surrounding the proposed partnership. The project is supported financially by the US Embassy in Berlin. Please see our TTIP Governance Rules regarding our editorial independence.

If you are looking for issue-specific information about TTIP, have a look at our TTIP Bibliography, which provides a categorized list of insightful articles about various topics within the TTIP debate. You can also browse through articles published on our website, categorized by the same TTIP topics: TTIP Analyses, Official Statements, Economic Projections, Geo-Strategic Arguments, Democracy and Transparency, Investor State Dispute Settlement (ISDS), Standards and Regulatory Cooperation, Effects on Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises, and Miscellaneous information about TTIP.

Additional TTIP Review content in German is available here.

We further invite you to join the atlantic-community.org to receive our newsletter, which features TTIP articles, as well as other information regarding transatlantic relations.

Our last TTIP project concluded with the report How to Save TTIP and the Atlantic Memo 48.

Unbiased Safety Through Procedural Safeguards in TTIP

Regulatory divergences between the US and EU present costly non-tariff barriers to trade, and meaningful change to the status quo requires long-term commitment to making structural changes. There are many currently existing legal instruments that can serve as models in order preserve a predictable and evidence-based regulatory science process that is both safe and transparent. View
 

Trade Agreements Should Allow Countries to Set High Standards

Modern-day trade agreements, such as TTIP, have little to do with the historical role of trade agreements that dealt almost exclusively with quotas and tariffs. Instead, today's trade pacts focus on "non-tariff" trade issues, or trade "barriers". However, what multinational corporations and most trade officials refer to as non-tariff barriers are actually domestic, democratically constructed social, health, environmental, and food safety standards intended to safeguard citizens. View
 

Is the European Union More Precautionary than the US?

Perceived differences in regulatory principles in the EU and US have led many to be concerned that TTIP will damage the EUs ability to regulate in a way that relies fundamentally on caution. However, research on regulation has provided evidence that the idea of the EU as being more cautious is largely the result of stereotypes. When examined in the aggregate, regulations in the EU and US both apply precaution with similar frequency, but in different areas. View
 

TTIP and CETA Jeopardize EU Agriculture and Environmental, Animal Welfare and Consumer Protection Standards

According to official communications from both sides, TTIP focuses on the harmonization of standards and mutual acceptance of control systems. EU officials state that sensitive issues such as growth hormones or GMO admissions will not be watered down. Nobody, however, can explain how this can be guaranteed in practice. View
 

Why Regulatory Harmonization Will not Equal Regulatory Erosion

While free trade can serve as a stimulus to our struggling economies that does not involve fiscal sacrifices, many critics of TTIP point to a feature of the proposed agreement that they believe is a price too steep to pay: regulatory harmonization. However, public assurances, official negotiating positions, as well as past and present practice seem to contradict most of the concerns associated with harmonizing sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) regulations. View
 

Theme Week: What Does TTIP Mean for Food and Environment?

A main goal of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) is the reduction of non-tariff barriers to trade. Among these barriers are differing food safety and environmental standards. Critics argue that harmonizing regulations would inevitably lead to the degradation of these standards, while proponents see TTIP as a chance to set global standards and eliminate unnecessary divergence. View
 

Conveying Projections is Difficult, but Critically Important

TTIP involves huge economies that are already deeply intertwined. It is no surprise, then, that predicting the results of an agreement requires the use of sophisticated macroeconomic models. Difficulty in communicating these results has created some mistrust, since ordinary citizens generally rely on others to make the findings from technical papers available in a comprehensible way, and there is an incentive for proponents to overstate and critics to understate the results. View
 

TTIP and the Economy: It's all About the Non-Tariff Barriers

Economic projections clearly show that the potential gains to be had from TTIP are heavily dependent upon the extent to which non-tariff barriers to trade (NTBs) are eliminated. However, eliminating NTBs also introduces a lot of uncertainty. Socially, it can sometimes impose costs by allowing economic cost reduction and power over global regulatory schemes to trump common a soceity's concerns. Economically, the effects of regulatory coordination are exceedingly difficult to estimate. View
 

Twitter Highlights for the Second TTIP Theme Week

Experts from the Wilson Center, the European Trade Union Institute, the University of Bayreuth, and other institutions have joined us to discuss and offer their views about the economic implications of TTIP negotiations and the potential agreement that might come out of them. Here we've collected some of our favorite and most shared tweets from over the course of the week. The discussion doesn't just happen on Twitter though, join us and the experts in the comments! View
 

Rebuttal: Criticism of TTIP's Economic Projections

Last week on atlantic-community.org, Dr. Martin Myant wrote that the Bertelsmann version of an ifo Institute study misrepresented economic projections about TTIP. This argument misinterprets the relationship between the two studies, which are based on different models rather than being technical and summary versions of the same analysis. Additionally, the difference that he notes between GDP and average real income is, in fact, not a contradiction. View
 
TTIP Events in Germany


Februar 2016

TTIP Strategie- und Aktionskonferenz", TTIP Unfairhandelbar, 26.-27. Februar 2016. Kassel

Chancen und Potenziale des Freihandelsabkommens mit den USA", Vereinigung der Bayerischen Wirtschaft, 29. Februar 2016. Passau
 

März 2016

TTIP und EPAS: Auswirkungen des Freihandels für Subsahara-Afrika", Colloquium Dritte Welt, Volkshochschule, 1. März. Osnabrück

TTIP - Gefahr oder Chance für Deutschland", CDU Lichtenrade, 10. März. Berlin


April 2016

Faktencheck TTIP – Berlin", Handelsblatt Konferenz, 3.-6. April. Berlin

Hannover Messe - USA Partnerland", Besuch von US Präsident Obama, 25.-29. April 2016. Hannover

 

More events on our German website „Deutschlands Agenda"

Latest Articles