Naming Names

It is slightly unusual for two major newspapers to quote a "U.S business group" without naming it, but when I looked, almost all of the stories about a recommendation to "use all the arrows in the quiver" to get China to grant more access to their internal markets say something similar.  I wondered who this business group might be.

It appears that the source of it is the American Chamber of Commerce in China, in a 2017 White Paper which has some recommendations for the Chinese government that are worth looking further into:

• Continue progress in providing 30-day notice and comment periods for all draft laws and regulations across the board, as specified in multiple commitments.
• End the use of “window guidance” and release public directives instead.
• Improve comprehensiveness in the online publishing of all court cases within seven working days of a ruling as required by 2016 regulations.
• Improve transparency by releasing formal findings and case histories of anti-monopoly related investigations.
• Clarify customs and tax regulations so that foreign companies can fully comply and make more informed investment decisions.
• Provide written explanations whenever administrative agencies deny or provide conditional approvals for license applications or other approval applications, and adhere to decision deadlines specified in laws and regulations.

I had to look up "window guidance" but found it interesting since it appears regulations are unpublished but appear, and are implemented immediately.  FT carries an interesting story about how this worked on currency controls.  Chinese regulators called in representatives of 20 banks last December and told them about new controls on currency export, even blocking some exports right away.  You can imagine what a "business disruption" this caused the banks involved.  It would not be seen as a good way to regulate anything, let alone the financial systems of large banks.  

Yes, we need to use every arrow in the quiver because China regulates on the spot by bureaucrats who have no idea what kind of penalties they impose on business operations by their arbitrary actions.  I have advocated reciprocity with China on almost every element of trade because we have no level playing field to play on.  This is the only exception to reciprocity I can think of at the moment, because nobody wants to use the whim of beureaucrats to govern institutions that have international standards across multiple countries.  We would fail as quickly as the Chinese have.