In its May 24, 2017 report, the Congressional Research Service (CRS) wrote that the economic impact of NAFTA on the U.S. economy was modest. In a 2015 report, the Congressional Research Service summarized several studies as follows: “In reality, NAFTA did not cause the huge job losses that critics feared, nor the significant economic benefits predicted by supporters. The overall net effect of NAFTA on the U.S. economy appears to have been relatively small, not least because trade with Canada and Mexico accounts for a small percentage of U.S. GDP. However, there have been adjustment costs for workers and businesses as the three countries have prepared for more open trade and investment between their economies. [93]: The United States had a trade surplus of $28.3 billion in 2009 with NAFTA countries for services and a trade deficit of $94.6 billion (36.4% per year) in 2010. This trade deficit represented 26.8% of the total U.S. trade deficit. [89] A 2018 study on international trade published by the Center for International Relations identified irregularities in NAFTA trade patterns using network theory analysis techniques.

The study showed that the U.S. trade balance was influenced by the potential for tax evasion in Ireland. [90] From the outset, critics of NAFTA feared that the agreement would result in a move of U.S. jobs to Mexico, despite the additional NAALC. NAFTA, for example, has affected thousands of U.S. auto workers in this way. Many companies have relocated their production to Mexico and other countries where labour costs are lower. However, NAFTA may not be the source of these measures.

President Donald Trump`s USMCA should allay those concerns. The White House estimates that the USMCA will create 600,000 jobs and increase the economy by $235 billion. Maquiladoras (Mexican assembly plants that absorb imported components and produce goods for export) have become the emblem of trade in Mexico. They left the United States for Mexico, hence the debate about the loss of American jobs. Revenues in the maquiladora sector had increased by 15.5% since nafta in 1994. [68] Other sectors have also benefited from the free trade agreement and the share of non-cross-border exports to the United States has increased over the past five years [when?], while the share of exports from border states has declined. This has led to rapid growth in non-cross-border metropolitan areas such as Toluca, Leén and Puebla, all more populated than Tijuana, Ciudad Juérez and Reynosa. In July 2017, the Trump administration presented a detailed list of changes it wants to make to NAFTA. [131] The top priority was to reduce the U.S.

trade deficit. [131] [132] The government has also called for the abolition of provisions allowing Canada and Mexico to challenge U.S. tariffs and impose import restrictions on the United States, Canada and Mexico. [131] The list also highlighted subsidized state-owned enterprises and monetary manipulation. [131] [133] In June 1990, Mexican President Carlos Salinas de Gortari called for a free trade agreement with the United States. In September 1990, Reagan succeeded President George H.W.