What if - and hear me out - we stopped trying to invent tech that let us write emails and, instead, we worked out how to make Star Trek food replicators so not a single person ever went hungry.

Rather than dubbing these economic security agreements, I quite like @alanbeattie.bsky.social 's description of the Malaysia and Cambodia agreements: "neocolonial gunboat trade diplomacy as though it were analogous to the pursuit of co-operative alliance-based economic security."

Is Section 122 of the 1974 Trade Act a Fall-Back Option for Trump to Impose #Tariffs? In this post @worldtradelaw.bsky.social I raise questions about whether the scope and meaning of Section 122 align with the Trump administration’s intended objectives. ielp.worldtradelaw.net/2025/11/is-s...

Is Section 122 of the 1974 Trade Act a Fall-Back Option for Trump to Impose Tariffs?

Is Section 122 of the 1974 Trade Act a Fall-Back Option for Trump to Impose #Tariffs? In this post @worldtradelaw.bsky.social I raise questions about whether the scope and meaning of Section 122 align with the Trump administration’s intended objectives. ielp.worldtradelaw.net/2025/11/is-s...

I wrote about some of my scepticism with the arguments that Sec. 122 of the 1974 Trade Act is a viable pathway for the current administration's regulatory, reciprocal, retaliatory tariff strategy. Can make it a blog, let me know. www.linkedin.com/posts/mppaul...

Hi, I'm going to wait to offer an analysis until I can study the USSC decisions carefully, but I reflected on what I saw as interesting excerpts (mainly Gorsuch) Here: linkedin.com/feed/update/... Here: linkedin.com/feed/update/... And here: www.linkedin.com/posts/mppaul...

I don't know what to say. I said all the cleverer things on Linkedin.

Ya’ll when I tell you that a child’s stomach flu and the Supreme Court plus some bad copy editing is making me stress dance, I mean it.

Fascinating - a sliver of why it's insufficient to argue that China simply "cheats" WTO subsidies disciplines. Rather, Chinese lenders operate in a far more complex way. No amount of navigating control of SOEs will account for this integrated, layered support. www.aiddata.org/publications...

In The Big Bang Theory, Sheldon speaks to Amy about his favourite movie, Raiders of the Lost Ark. Amy disappoints Sheldon by observing that Indiana Jones has no bearing on the outcome. Regardless of whatever Indiana Jones did, the Nazis would have stolen the ark, opened it, and all died.

From Chemerinsky, Dean of Berkeley Law www.scotusblog.com/2025/11/the-... Most debate centres on POTUS authority under the IEEPA to impose tariffs, or the government’s interpretation of the law would be an unconstitutional excessive delegation of legislative power.👇🏻 reviewability Q vital too.

Looking forward to reading this new work by Abe and Elana. In recent work, I likewise concluded that States could improve their assessment of supply and influence, and build out crisper norms for tools directed to the detriment of other states versus improving domestic/club objectives.

Distortion is not the right word. Presuming markets run free and have no state intervention, distortion implies a deviation from the normal. But if state-owned is a deviation, what value does that term add to the assessment? Good state-owned from bad state-owned?

Least developed countries face new US tariffs amid global uncertainty. Expanding trade, especially across the Global South, could help mitigate the impact and promote diversification. Learn more: ▶️ ow.ly/OQsW50XkQQw

Far from being incoherent, the United States' recent moves against trading partners suggest a unique restructuring of its economic structure, with executive-dominated *foreign* investments planned to drive much of its future economic growth.

Considering there has been no evidence of an increase in tariffs, I wonder if it’s because of the apology. Or everyone told Trump they’d be clearly illegal. But I suppose Carney wants to keep his head in the negotiating game.

Far from being incoherent, the United States' recent moves against trading partners suggest a unique restructuring of its economic structure, with executive-dominated *foreign* investments planned to drive much of its future economic growth.

Trick or treat for Cambodia? Trick or treat for all developing economies? I argue that the United States has locked Cambodia into its broader economic security strategy in exchange for a new status quo. New from me @worldtradelaw.bsky.social ielp.worldtradelaw.net/2025/10/boun...

My latest for @worldtradelaw.bsky.social focuses on Cambodia's commitments in its Agreement with the United States. I argue that the United States has locked Cambodia into its broader economic security strategy in exchange for a new status quo. Please have a read. Thanks.

Apparently London is done with Halloween and decided to just lock it down with a thunderclap and enough rain to stop any straggler or teenage trick or treaters.

The US has locked Cambodia into its broader economic security strategy in exchange for a new status quo says Prof @monapaulsen.bsky.social @lselaw.bsky.social. It is in my view the opposite of a mutually beneficial FTA and violates the US' int'l obligations. ielp.worldtradelaw.net/2025/10/boun...

Bound Rates and the Stakes of the Cambodian Trade Deal

My latest for @worldtradelaw.bsky.social focuses on Cambodia's commitments in its Agreement with the United States. I argue that the United States has locked Cambodia into its broader economic security strategy in exchange for a new status quo. Please have a read. Thanks.

Marc Trachtenberg has laid out his critique of the so-called rules-based liberal international order. It's a rich article, requiring time to digest. I recommend it if you wish to test your preconceptions about the interface of trade and security. direct.mit.edu/isec/article...

One year? China and the US are locked in a stalemate. Each buys time. But it’s hardly a stable solution. What matters is what that time buys

If anything, Trump-Xi talks have emphasised the tight spot the EU is in going into tomorrow's talks on export controls with China. In order to lift rare earth restrictions for a year, Trump lowered tariffs, seems to have opened the door to Chinese investments, and paused probes

Excellent piece from @douglasirwin.bsky.social Reagan: "We should beware of the demagogues who are ready to declare a trade war against our friends — weakening our economy, our national security and the entire free world — all while cynically waving the American flag www.nytimes.com/2025/10/29/o...

Trump's pick for USTR chief ag negotiator, Julie Callahan: "My intention in the negotiation with Argentina is this will not be a one-way conversation about beef. We would like to see beef access into Argentina as well."

Someone may wish to correct, but it is unclear how the July 31, 2025 Order concerning Cambodia, which, among other issues, set out that if U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) determined an article “transhipped”, it would set an additional duty rate of forty per cent.

The choice to bypass the enforcement mechanism (international review) for domestic investigation should signal to all governments how this admin will address any potential noncompliance with the frameworks. Unpredictable notification, political, and subject to US standards of review.

More on Reagan v Trump on tariffs www.wsj.com/opinion/reag...

Brutal reality that these political agreements seem to lack any enforcement beyond the threat of arbitrary tariffs.

The U.S. and South Korea remain stuck on "all” the major details of a $350 billion investment pledge, South Korea's president said, signaling they may not finalize a trade deal before a summit meeting with Donald Trump.

The irony is that many governments have viewed the push to bargain away US tariffs, imposed in contravention of WTO commitments, as acts of economic coercion.

Negotiators have reached a framework of a trade deal to avert additional 100 percent tariffs that President Trump had threatened to impose on imports from China.

Here’s me pointing out the incredible asymmetrical Cambodia agreement that would likely fail to meet WTO commitments and sets a dangerous precedent for LDCs: www.linkedin.com/posts/mppaul...

How can a country that gave us this scene still get it wrong?

Boeing is doing very well. US-Vietnam joint statement on trade confirms: “Vietnam Airlines has agreed to purchase 50 aircraft from Boeing which is worth over $8 billion.” www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-st...

Good thing the US still knows how VAT works.

TL:DR first impressions? An entrenchment of US authority to regulate trade through exceptional authorities focused on US growth, and does little to help Cambodia. Entrenches US power over Cambodia. www.linkedin.com/posts/mppaul...

Unclear statutory authority for the punitive tariffs, most likely performative. 232 makes more sense in terms of “hostile acts” but would require investigation. Unlikely legal under IEEPA no POTUS authority wrt personal communications that do not involve a transfer of value.

‘No matter what you think the law forbids, you can always find a Yoo to give a legal sign-off,” said Rosa Brooks, a constitutional law professor at Georgetown Law School. “We call this the ‘lawful but awful’ category.”’ Thought-provoking @edwardluce.bsky.social www.ft.com/content/1377...

A country’s trade policies personalised to the goals of a single, albeit powerful leader, within a shell of a system designed to prohibit this kind of strategy from happening. The legal structuring of the globalised economy facilitates counter responses but cannot resolve what is a domestic problem.

Unjustified, arbitrary, WTO-inconsistent tariffs.

President Donald Trump said he expected to meet with Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva during his trip to Asia and that he was open to reducing tariffs on Brazil

How did I miss this all day? Whether this direction actually stops negotiations between the negotiators, I can’t say. But I can say an ad would not influence the interpretation and application of law to the facts of the dispute. It could shape the public discourse on what is at stake.

New from me, upon reading the US-AUS framework concerning the financing of rare earth mining. While there is very little to go on, I wanted to connect it to what we know about international investment law and existing institutional development. ielp.worldtradelaw.net/2025/10/inte...

Trade chair in EP @bernd-lange.bsky.social says MEPs won't remove tariffs on US as long as Washington hasn't made a move on opening quotas or reducing tariffs on steel, aluminium and derivatives. #TurnberryDeal #EUUS #Section232s 🇺🇸🇪🇺 @robfranciseu.bsky.social borderlex.net/2025/10/23/e...

A reminder to advocates of using the EU ACI. Its scope is narrower than what might first appear. Certain concerns with respect to China may not be resolvable through the use of ACI. I acknowledge there is enough vagueness to make a good argument, but it is a responsive tool of last resort.