DIGITAL TRADE AND REGULATION IN AN AGE OF DISRUPTION

The Trump Administration stated that its trade policy would focus on trade in goods, prioritizing U.S. production over the overall competiveness of U.S. multinational firms. It objects to regulation and instead will concentrate on unfair behavior by U.S. trading partners, especially currency manipulation, tax system manipulation, and rigging markets by hidden protectionism. But, as goods markets become more information and communication technology (ICT) intensive, higher value added and higher wages will rely on the technology for sustainable advantages. American negotiators and their international counterparts will face a series of challenges. U.S. leadership will continue to rest on America's "soft power" advantage: U.S. leadership in ICT architecture. We suggest ways in which a policy platform for quasiconvergence of national policies, facilitated by trade agreements, in conjunction with more detailed decisions, facilitated by trade agreements and multi-stakeholder organizations (MSOs), respectively, could help create a trusted digital environment in which the United States and others could thrive. The 2016 presidential election featured heated attacks on existing trade policy. Both Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump rejected the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade agreement. Trump went beyond rejecting the TPP with his calls to dismantle the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and even to reconsider the merits of the World Trade Organization (WTO). Although President Trump's Administration ("Administration") remains strong on rhetorical flourishes to overhaul trade policy, few details over programmatic strategy and choices have surfaced. Nonetheless, there seem to be four guiding premises. First, the Administration is focused on the trade in goods and perhaps commodities (blue collar strongholds). In particular, it is intent on increasing U.S. production of goods and jobs tied to steel, coal, and other heavy industry sectors. It is quite willing to use presidential jawboning to push for added investment in American manufacturing plants and claims that it may alter tariffs and taxes to provide big financial incentives for U.S. production. The corollary to this premise is that the Administration has paid scant attention to trade in services, even though said trade is approaching 40 percent of all U.S. trade and generates most American employment. Second, the White House seems particularly focused on three claims about unfair trade conduct—currenc