Trade agreements are discussed as though they were about tariffs. Tariffs are now a small part of what they contain, and the rest is where the arguments actually are.
What tariffs still do
Average tariff rates on manufactured goods between developed economies are low by historical standards, following decades of multilateral reduction.
Which means removing them entirely produces modest gains for most sectors.
Exceptions remain substantial — agriculture in particular retains high protection in most economies, and specific sectors like vehicles and textiles carry meaningful rates.
Those exceptions are where tariff negotiation still matters, and they are politically the hardest.
Rules of origin
The provision that determines whether preferential rates apply and is enormously consequential.
A product qualifies for preferential treatment only if it originates in a party to the agreement, which requires defining origin.
Rules specify how much value must be added locally, or which processing steps must occur.
Which means a manufacturer sourcing components globally may not qualify despite assembling domestically.
Compliance requires documentation through the supply chain, and the administrative burden is significant enough that some firms pay the tariff rather than claim the preference.
Non-tariff measures
Where most modern negotiation happens.
Product standards, testing and certification requirements, labelling rules, sanitary and phytosanitary measures for food and agriculture.
Each can restrict trade as effectively as a tariff, and each generally exists for a legitimate domestic purpose.
Which is why negotiating them is difficult — the question is whether a requirement is genuine regulation or disguised protection, and both parties have honest disagreements about that.
Mutual recognition and harmonisation
Two approaches to the same problem.
Mutual recognition means each party accepts the other's standards as equivalent.
Harmonisation means agreeing common standards.
The first preserves regulatory autonomy and requires trust in the other party's system. The second removes duplication and involves ceding some control.
Public concern about trade agreements has focused heavily on the second, since it can constrain future domestic regulation.
Services
A growing share of trade and considerably harder to liberalise than goods.
Barriers are regulatory rather than at the border — licensing requirements, professional qualification recognition, restrictions on foreign ownership, data localisation rules.
Which means services provisions are about domestic regulation almost entirely, and progress has been slower.
Investment protection
The most contested element.
Provisions allowing investors to bring claims against states before arbitration tribunals were included in many agreements to protect against expropriation.
Criticism has centred on cases challenging environmental, health and public policy measures, on the composition and transparency of tribunals, and on the asymmetry that only investors can bring claims.
Several agreements have reformed or removed these provisions, and a permanent investment court has been proposed as an alternative.
What the economic evidence shows
Trade liberalisation generally increases aggregate output and generally produces distributional effects within countries.
Which is the standard finding, and the distributional part has received far more attention since evidence accumulated that adjustment costs in affected regions were larger and more persistent than earlier models assumed.
Compensation and adjustment support has been consistently under-delivered relative to what those models assumed would accompany liberalisation.
Which is arguably the central political fact about trade policy over the past three decades.
Dispute settlement between states
Separate from investor claims and structurally different.
Agreements generally provide a mechanism for one party to challenge another's compliance, with panels issuing findings.
Enforcement rests on authorised retaliation rather than on direct penalties, which means the remedy is proportionate counter-measures.
The multilateral system's appellate function has been non-operational for some years due to blocked appointments, which has weakened enforcement considerably and pushed disputes toward bilateral arrangements.
The negotiation process
Negotiations are conducted confidentially, with texts published at varying stages.
Which has been a persistent source of criticism, since the content becomes public late in the process when changes are difficult.
Some jurisdictions have moved toward publishing negotiating mandates and periodic text releases, which is a partial response.
Ratification requirements differ — some agreements require legislative approval in each party, others take effect provisionally pending it.
Labour and environment chapters
Now standard inclusions with varying enforceability.
Some are subject to the same dispute settlement as commercial provisions, others only to consultation.
Which determines whether they are commitments or statements, and the distinction is stated in the text.
Government procurement
A significant chapter in most modern agreements and rarely discussed.
It opens public contracts above thresholds to bidders from the other party, subject to procedures.
Which is economically substantial given the size of public purchasing, and politically sensitive since it constrains preferences for domestic suppliers.
Exclusions for defence, health and certain services are typically negotiated and are where the detail matters.
Intellectual property chapters
Modern agreements include provisions on patents, copyright terms, trade marks and enforcement.
These have been among the most contested elements, particularly provisions affecting pharmaceutical patents and the availability of generic medicines.
Which is a genuine tension between innovation incentives and access, and it is negotiated rather than resolved.