Kenyataan Media – Malaysia Rugi Jika Sertai TPPA

Oct 22, 2014 Publish by MTEM

Kenyataan media dari sidang akhbar anjuran MTEM bersama Bantah TPPA. Terima kasih kepada rakan-rakan media yang hadir.

Versi BM selepas versi Inggeris. Sebarang pertanyaan boleh hubungi kami. Terima kasih.

UN STUDY SHOWS NET LOSS FOR MALAYSIA IN TPPA

A new paper by a United Nations senior economist working has shown damning evidence that Malaysia joining the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPPA) will not be overtly beneficial for domestic value added trade, and may in fact prove detrimental to certain industries.

In her report, Rashmi Banga of the Unit of Economic Cooperation and Integration among Developing Countries (ECIDC) says that Malaysia will have an unfavourable balance of trade (BOT, defined as exports minus imports) of US$300 million per annum, roughly RM900 million per annum specifically to the United States.

This is slightly lower than we are currently experiencing now.

This means that while our government insists that the TPPA is an agreement where the “benefits outweigh costs” and is quoted telling the media such, it is a half-truth.

According to the paper, if  Malaysia joins the TPPA, its exports will increase to the other TPPA countries, but its imports from them will increase by even more, and thus the country will have a net loss in its trade balance.  The trade balance (or BOT) is the difference between the value of export and import of goods.

In 2013, Malaysia exported US$93.7 billion of goods to the other 11 TPPA countries, and imported US$73.9 billion of goods.  Malaysia thus enjoyed a surplus in its trade balance with the 11 countries of US$19.8 billion.

The new paper shows that once the TPPA is implemented, Malaysia’s exports to the 11 countries will increase by US$1.5 billion (from US$93.7 billion to US$95.2 billion).  But its imports will rise by more than that, i.e. by US$2.9 billion (from US$73.9 billion to US $76.8 billion).

Therefore, the BOT for Malaysia with its 11 TPPA partner countries will worsen by US$1.465 billion (or RM4.79 billion).  Its trade surplus will fall from US$19.84 billion to US$18.37 billion.

This means that Malaysia will not have no net gains from the increased trade resulting from the TPPA.   As imports will rise faster than exports, Malaysia will suffer a net loss in its trade balance.  The loss is significant, i.e. US$1.465 billion or RM4.79 billion per annum (at the exchange rate at 17 October of US1 = RM3.27).

This worsening of Malaysia’s balance of trade may even be more than the paper’s conclusion because the paper assumes that Malaysia will be able to export more textiles and clothing to the United States, at zero tariffs and without any other impediment.

In actual fact, the US is insisting on a “yarn forward rule”, where TPPA countries like Malaysia can only use yarn from other TPPA countries when producing textiles and apparel items. Thus, the cost of production of some of Malaysia’s textiles and clothing will be more costly as it will not be able to continue to use yarn from lower cost countries like China or even Indonesia.

Thus the estimated increase in Malaysian exports of textiles and apparel items to the United States by about RM 454 million (US$139 million)  may exaggerate the gains for Malaysia.  If the increase of textiles exports is less than this RM454 million, then the loss in trade balance for Malaysia will be more than RM4.79 billion per annum.

The loss could be even more than RM5 billion per annum.

While it is true that this amount may be small, but it has a higher impact on Malaysians as a whole in terms of employment.

In addition to this, Rashmi adds that if the TPPA is signed, Malaysia will be seeing an increase in imports from the United States and Japan.

In the electrical machinery sector, 61% of electrical machinery imported by Malaysia will be sourced from the United States. As much as 97% in the import of vehicles and 90% in iron and steel will be sourced from Japan.

All these industries are existent in Malaysia and would face direct competition – our steel industry, electrical machinery and the automotive sector.

We all know that these sectors employ tens of thousands of local Malaysians, are ailing, very dependent on government funds and policies and now have to compete on a global level.

In addition to this, Malaysia currently is a large importer vehicles such as trains and carriages from China.

Malaysia is also a producer of automotive parts which is part of our recently announced National Automotive Plan.

The economist says that our business services gross exports – which Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak said was getting support for further growth in Bajet 2015 – only contributes a domestic value added (DVA) export by only 3.8%.

In addition to this negative balance of domestic value added trade which is tangible, there are also intangible negatives in terms of intellectual property rights which will affect the price of medicines and also the investor state dispute settlements, proving that this agreement is not beneficial to Malaysia from any perspective whatsoever.

So, yet again, our Prime Minister is painting us a rosy picture that is factually untrue. Bantah TPPA calls on the Minister of International Trade and Industry, Datuk Seri Mustapa Mohamed, and also Najib to clarify their stance.

Where are these facts that talk about “benefits outweigh costs” on the TPPA? Where is the cost benefit analysis report that was pending since May 2014?

Until all these questions are answered and facts, figures and direct engagement to debate this agreement is made available to civil society and stakeholders, Bantah TPPA will continue to call on everyone to protest against this deal.

It is not beneficial to us and we have economists from the United Nations such as Rashmi, Nobel Peace Prize winners like Joseph Stiglitz and even local economists here who say that the agreement is a bad idea.

In fact, we even had Jean Pierre Lehmann from the International Institute of Management Studies based in Switzerland (which offers the world’s best MBA programme) tell the Global Economic Symposium (GES), that it was a “stupid idea”.

So we ask our government to clarify who are these brilliant people who say otherwise.

NIZAM MAHSHAR

Chairman

Bantah TPPA

 

Rashmi Banga is Senior Economist in UNCTAD (Unit of Economic Cooperation and Integration among Developing countries), Geneva. She is former Professor of Economics in School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University India, and has taught in University of Delhi for fifteen years. She was Senior Economist in DFID funded UNCTAD-India Project for assisting Ministry of Commerce & Industry of India in trade negotiations. She received her doctorate from Delhi School of Economics, specializing in development economics, international economics and econometrics.  She has published extensively in international journals on trade and FDI related issues and authored several books, including with, inter alia, Routledge and Oxford University Press. Her current area of research is global and regional value chains. She is the project coordinator and lead researcher in UNCTAD’s projects on regional value chains. She was awarded International Economic Development Research Award (IEDRA) of 2005 by EXIM Bank of India and has been a recipient of two Gold Medals for her research on globalization and development from Global Development Network (World Bank).

Her paper can be downloaded from this website link:

http://wtocentre.iift.ac.in/workingpaper/TPP%20PAPER.pdf

 

VERSI BM

KAJIAN PBB MENUNJUKKAN MALAYSIA RUGI DALAM TPPA

Satu kertas kajian baru oleh seorang pakar ekonomi kanan PBB telah membuktikan Malaysia secara terang tidak akan mendapat manfaat besar dari segi nilai tambah perdagangan domestik sekiranya menyertai Perjanjian Perkongsian Trans Pasifik (TPPA) dan mungkin merugikan buat beberapa industri tertentu.

Dalam laporannya, Rashmi Banga dari Unit Kerjasama Ekonomi dan Integrasi di kalangan Negara-negara Membangun (ECIDC) mengatakan Malaysia akan mempunyai kelemahan imbangan dagangan (BOT, didefinisikan sebagai eksport tolak import) dari AS$300 juta setahun, kira-kira RM900 juta setahun ke Amerika Syarikat.

Ini adalah rendah berbanding dengan apa yang sedia ada sekarang.

Ini bermakna walaupun kerajaan menegaskan TPPA sebuah perjanjian di mana “keuntungan melebihi kos” dan sering menguar-uarkan ini kepada media, ia sebenarnya adalah separuh benar.

Menurut akhbar, sekiranya Malaysia menyertai TPPA, eksport negara akan berkembang ke negara-negara TPPA yang lain, tetapi import dari negara-negara TPPA ini akan meningkat lebih banyak, menyebabkan negara-negara ini menanggung kerugian bersih dalam imbangan perdagangan. Imbangan perdagangan ialah perbezaan antara nilai barangan eksport dan import.

Pada tahun 2013, eksport Malaysia ke 11 negara TPPA bernilai AS$93.7 bilion dan import barangan AS$73.9 bilion. Malaysia dengan itu menikmati lebihan dalam imbangan perdagangan dengan 11 negara sebanyak AS$19.8 bilion.

Kajian terbaru dalam kertas ini menunjukkan sebaik sahaja TPPA dilaksanakan, eksport Malaysia ke 11 negara akan meningkat sebanyak AS$1.5 bilion (daripada AS$93.7 bilion kepada AS$95.2 bilion). Tetapi nilai import akan meningkat lebih banyak daripada itu, dengan sebanyak AS$2.9 bilion (daripada AS$73.9 bilion kepada AS$76.8 bilion).

Oleh itu, BOT untuk Malaysia dengan 11 negara-negara rakan TPPA akan merundum sebanyak AS$1.465 bilion (atau RM4.79 bilion). Lebihan dagangan akan jatuh daripada AS$19.84 bilion kepada AS$18.37 bilion.

Ini bermakna Malaysia tidak akan mempunyai keuntungan bersih daripada peningkatan perdagangan yang terhasil dari TPPA. Oleh kerana import akan meningkat lebih pantas daripada eksport, Malaysia akan mengalami kerugian bersih dalam imbangan perdagangan. Kerugian ini nyata, iaitu AS$1.465 bilion atau RM4.79 bilion setahun (kadar pertukaran pada 17 Oktober AS$1 = RM3.27).

Krisis keseimbangan perdagangan negara mungkin akan menjadi lebih goyah daripada apa yang dibayangkan kertas kerja ini kerana Malaysia akan berupaya mengeksport lebih banyak tekstil dan pakaian ke Amerika Syarikat pada kadar tarif sifar tanpa halangan lain.

Amerika Syarikat sebenarnya menggesa satu peraturan “Yarn-Forward”, di mana negara-negara TPPA seperti Malaysia hanya boleh menggunakan benang dari negara-negara TPPA sahaja untuk menghasilkan tekstil dan pakaian. Ini membuatkan kos pengeluaran beberapa tekstil dan pakaian dari Malaysia melonjak menjadi lebih mahal kerana tidak mendapat kebenaran menggunakan benang dari negara-negara kos rendah seperti China atau Indonesia.

Oleh itu anggaran peningkatan eksport tekstil dan pakaian Malaysia ke Amerika Syarikat dengan sebanyak kira-kira RM 454 juta (AS$139 juta) boleh dianggap sebagai sensasi penambahan keuntungan negara. Jika peningkatan eksport tekstil adalah kurang dari RM454 juta ini, maka kerugian dalam imbangan perdagangan Malaysia akan menjadi lebih dari RM4.79 bilion setahun.

Kerugian boleh mencecah lebih daripada RM5 bilion setahun.

Walaupun benar jumlah ini dianggap kecil, tetapi secara keseluruhan ia mempunyai kesan yang lebih besar ke atas rakyat Malaysia dari segi pekerjaan.

Di samping itu, Rashmi menambah sekiranya TPPA ditandatangani, Malaysia akan melihat lonjakan dalam dari Amerika Syarikat dan Jepun.

Di dalam sektor jentera elektrik, 61% import negara akan didapati dari Amerika Syarikat. Dan sebanyak 97% import kenderaan serta 90% dalam besi dan keluli akan didapati dari Jepun.

Semua industri-industri ini ada di Malaysia dan mereka bakal hadapi persaingan secara langsung – industri besi kita, mesin elektrik dan sektor automotif.

Kita semua tahu bahawa sektor-sektor ini mengambil kerja berpuluh-puluh ribu rakyat Malaysia, sedang tenat, amat bergantung kepada dana dan dasar-dasar kerajaan dan kini perlu bersaing di peringkat global pula.

Di samping itu, Malaysia kini merupakan pengimport kenderaan skala besar seperti kereta api dan trak pengangkut dari China.

Malaysia juga pengeluar alat ganti automotif yang merupakan sebahagian daripada Dasar Automotif Nasional yang diumumkan baru-baru ini.

Pakar ekonomi mengatakan eksport kasar perkhidmatan perniagaan kita – yang mana Perdana Menteri Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak berkata mendapat sokongan untuk pertumbuhan dalam Bajet 2015 – hanya menyumbang eksport tambah nilai domestik (DVA) sebanyak 3.8% sahaja.

Selain dari keseimbangan negatif dari nilai tambah perdagangan yang ketara ini, terdapat juga unsur negatif tersembunyi dari segi hak harta intelek yang akan mempengaruhi harga ubat-ubatan dan juga penyelesaian pertikaian pelabur (ISDS), lantas membuktikan perjanjian ini tidak memberi manfaat kepada Malaysia dari apa-apa jua perspektif.

Jadi, sekali lagi, Perdana Menteri kita telah memberi gambaran fakta yang tidak benar. Bantah TPPA menyeru Menteri Perdagangan Antarabangsa dan Industri, Datuk Seri Mustapa Mohamed, dan juga Perdana Menteri Najib Razak untuk menjelaskan pendirian mereka.

Di manakah fakta-fakta yang berbicara tentang “keuntungan melebihi kos” dalam TPPA? Di manakah janji terbitan laporan analisis kos faedah yang tertunggak sejak Mei 2014?

Kami di Bantah TPPA akan terus menyeru orang ramai untuk memprotes perjanjian ini sehinggalah semua soalan-soalan kami dijawab dan segala fakta, angka dan penglibatan secara langsung untuk berdebat mengenai perjanjian ini disediakan kepada masyarakat awam dan pihak-pihak berkepentingan.

Pakar-pakar ekonomi dari PBB seperti Rashmi, pemenang Hadiah Keamanan Nobel seperti Joseph Stiglitz dan juga ahli-ahli ekonomi tempatan juga telah sebulat suara mengatakan perjanjian perkongsian ini satu idea yang buruk.

Malah, Jean Pierre Lehmann dari Institut Pengajian Pengurusan yang berpusat di Switzerland (yang menawarkan program MBA terbaik di dunia) telah pun memberitahu Simposium Ekonomi Global (GES), bahawa ia (TPPA) satu “idea bodoh”. Jadi kami minta kerajaan kita untuk menjelaskan siapakah orang-orang bijak yang mengatakan sebaliknya.

NIZAM MAHSHAR

Pengerusi

Bantah TPPA

Rashmi Banga is Senior Economist in UNCTAD (Unit of Economic Cooperation and Integration among Developing countries), Geneva. She is former Professor of Economics in School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University India, and has taught in University of Delhi for fifteen years. She was Senior Economist in DFID funded UNCTAD-India Project for assisting Ministry of Commerce & Industry of India in trade negotiations. She received her doctorate from Delhi School of Economics, specializing in development economics, international economics and econometrics. She has published extensively in international journals on trade and FDI related issues and authored several books, including with, inter alia, Routledge and Oxford University Press. Her current area of research is global and regional value chains. She is the project coordinator and lead researcher in UNCTAD’s projects on regional value chains. She was awarded International Economic Development Research Award (IEDRA) of 2005 by EXIM Bank of India and has been a recipient of two Gold Medals for her research on globalization and development from Global Development Network (World Bank).

Her paper can be downloaded from this website link:

http://wtocentre.iift.ac.in/workingpaper/TPP%20PAPER.pdf

 

Tags: , ,

Comments