Start your weekend right and have a look at our new podcast episodes, webinars and more!
✉️ https://t.co/I4O8mlTIfzhttps://t.co/OGnB3mMG8CRT IIEA @iiea: 7 years on from the #Brexit vote we're continuing to analyse the impact of the UK's withdrawal from the #EU.
Join… https://t.co/cYlxTquavgThe EU is taking charge in regulating data and the digital economy, launching new regulations like the #DMA, #DSA,… https://t.co/jfOuY6kaPNLet's talk about #AI regulations in the #EU!
It is important to understand and enhance the benefits, but also min… https://t.co/OU6PEWlg6j🎧 New global economy podcast episode!
We talk about the US trade policy and America's role in the world economic o… https://t.co/DHHvBdKZ4M
In contrast to existing published literature that assumed the EPAs tariff cuts, this paper uses the tariff cuts actually agreed by some African countries to quantify fiscal revenue losses from the EPAs. It finds that the profile in the tariff cuts vary significantly across countries. Revenue losses are limited and spread over long transition periods. Using taxable imports instead of total imports (a standard method of the literature), in order to take into account tax breaks and preferences granted to other partners in regional groups, increases the estimated revenue losses but they remain limited. Trade diversion, a source of additional indirect revenue loss, could be significant.