EXCLUSIVE — SULLIVAN PLANS MAJOR ECONOMIC ADDRESS: National security adviser Jake Sullivan on Thursday will deliver what the White House is billing as a major address on international economics — reviewing the Biden administration’s policies, efforts with allies, and potentially previewing new action on the Chinese economy. The speech at the Brookings Institution will highlight Biden’s new industrial policies — embodied in the CHIPS Act and Inflation Reduction Act — and argue those policies are “not just a domestic imperative but necessary for America’s national security and global leadership,” according to a senior administration official. Sullivan will also discuss what Biden’s team has done to bring allies along with a “vision of bold public investment and secure and resilient supply chains,” said the official, granted anonymity to discuss the speech. That means references to the critical minerals deal with Japan, the similar pact being discussed with the European Union, and efforts to get those nations to pass clean energy subsidies of their own. Sullivan will also discuss Biden’s plans to “build a fairer, more durable global economic order,” the official said, including its new economic “partnerships” in the Indo-Pacific and Americas and plans to reform the World Bank and International Monetary Fund. Split screen: Sullivan’s speech will come a week after — and right across the street from — Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen’s major address on China last Thursday. At the time, she sought to assure the world that Washington is not trying to undermine China’s economic development, despite new trade restrictions on Chinese tech industries — like the Commerce Department’s chips rule last year and an upcoming executive order on American investments in China. That speech raised eyebrows for potentially contradicting Sullivan’s tech doctrine outlined last September, when he said the U.S. would try to slow or stop Chinese tech development in a number of sectors — from chips to artificial intelligence, clean energy and biotech. The White House insists everyone is on the same page and stresses that Sullivan’s speech will be broader than China — hitting all aspects of international economics with a focus on U.S. efforts with allies. But still, any daylight between their approaches will be taken by China watchers on the Hill and on K Street as an indication that debate continues in the administration between national security and economic officials over how hard to hit China’s economy. Lately, Treasury seems to have the momentum. In recent months, pushback from the economic officials has succeeded in scaling back the so-called outbound investments order into a temporary pilot program that will cover fewer sectors than Sullivan outlined last year. The timing of that order is still in flux. We reported earlier this month that industry was preparing for it to drop in April. Bloomberg said last week it was expected in May, but other sources tell your host that it could get pushed into June. The White House message out of the policymaking fog has been that doing new things is hard and they want to get it right. All the more reason to tune in Thursday we guess. DEMS URGE TOUGH-ON-TECH STANCE IN TRADE TALKS: Trade talks in the Indo-Pacific have become the latest front in the battle over the power and business practices of the world’s largest technology companies, and a group of Democratic lawmakers wants guarantees from the Biden administration that industry lobbyists are not unduly shaping the negotiations in their favor. On Friday, the lawmakers warned U.S. trade negotiators to reject efforts by the likes of Google, Meta, Apple, Amazon and Microsoft to influence provisions in the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework related to data privacy, artificial intelligence and antitrust. Corporations are “advocating that the U.S. government include rules in IPEF that would tie Congress’s and regulators’ hands and conflict with President Biden’s whole-of-government effort to promote competition,” the lawmakers wrote in a letter. The “inclusion of such provisions could undermine efforts by U.S. policymakers to pass new legislation and antitrust enforcers to crack down on anti-competitive conduct, including price fixing and self-dealing, by the largest tech companies,” the lawmakers fear. It could also hamstring foreign trade partners, such as the European Union or Canada, from moving ahead with digital regulations that the lawmakers describe as “common sense” and that the pact “should in no way inhibit.” In the letter, lawmakers also criticized the fast pace of the trade talks, and the fact that much of the text has only been available to a close circle of administration advisers and Capitol Hill staff. “An artificial deadline must not come before ensuring that the deal fulfills the Biden Administration’s commitments to promote competition in the economy, to protect digital privacy, and to advance a worker-centered trade policy,” they write. Democratic Sens. Elizabeth Warren (Mass.), Amy Klobuchar (Minn.), Sherrod Brown (Ohio) and Richard Blumenthal (Conn.) signed onto the letter, along with Democratic Reps. Jan Schakowsky (Ill.), David Cicilline (R.I.) and Rosa DeLauro (Conn.). It was sent Friday to U.S. Trade Representative Katherine Tai and Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo, whose agencies are spearheading the IPEF negotiations. DOJ antitrust head Jonathan Kanter and FTC Chair Lina Khan were copied. Concerns are spreading: It’s not just Congress expressing worry. Officials from the Justice Department’s antitrust division and Federal Trade Commission wrote to Tai on March 22, urging the trade ambassador to fight for language in line with Biden’s 2021 competition policy executive order, as well as a modern definition of the digital economy, according to people with knowledge of the letter. Warren also raised similar issues at a Senate Finance Committee hearing in March. And she was among several progressive Democrats to raise alarm last month that the tech industry is angling to use the negotiations to undercut efforts in Congress to regulate, a fear that has been amplified by anti-monopoly advocates including Rethink Trade, a division of the American Economic Liberties Project. Spokespeople for the DOJ and FTC declined to comment. Commerce spokesperson Charlie Andrews said the letter was received and the agency will “respond through appropriate channels.” Meanwhile, UTSR spokesperson Sam Michel said the agency is “committed to building trust and promoting confidence in the digital economy” with provisions that “avoid unfair trade practices” while “recognizing the need to be able to address legitimate public policy objectives.” Spokespeople for the companies did not respond for comment. Companies dig in: The letters come as a wave of tech regulation in Congress, including both antitrust and privacy bills, ultimately fizzled out at the end of last year, in part due to a massive lobbying effort by the companies. Tai told lawmakers last month that trade negotiators are limited in how far they can advance global rules for digital trade because Congress has failed to enact its own legislation. The business lobby has criticized U.S. antitrust regulators for what it perceives as undermining the interests of U.S. tech companies abroad. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce sent a letter last week to National Economic Council director Lael Brainard and national security adviser Jake Sullivan, criticizing the European Union's Digital Markets Act, as well as what it argues are efforts by the DOJ and FTC to improperly intervene in the IPEF talks. What’s next: IPEF negotiations are expected to wrap up by the end of the year. The lawmakers are demanding that more information on the talks be more widely shared with Congress, and are asking Tai and Raimondo to respond to a series of questions by May 8 about how their proposals may conflict with administration tech policy priorities. ICYMI: NEW TRADE & TAX STAFF GROUP: Earlier this month, a bipartisan group of staff members on the Ways and Means committee launched a new Trade and Tax Staff Association to bring trade and tax staffers of both parties together for networking and professional development events. Founded by Jordan Dickinson, deputy chief of staff for Congressman Dan Kildee of Michigan, and Elle Collins, tax counsel on the Ways and Means majority staff, the group is framed as an “opportunity for Congressional staff to build bipartisan relationships and to work together on the many complex issues in these policy areas.” According to House rules, the group is only open to current Congressional employees. If you want to join or are someone downtown looking for more information, reach out to Jordan and Elle.
| 
Comments
Post a Comment