The legislation was developed under President George H. W. Bush as the first phase of his Enterprise for the Americas initiative. The Clinton administration, which signed NAFTA in 1993, believed it would create 200,000 U.S. jobs in two years and one million in five years, as exports would play an important role in U.S. economic growth. The government expected a dramatic increase in U.S. imports from Mexico due to lower tariffs. In 1984, Congress passed the Trade and Customs Act, which gave the president quick power to negotiate free trade agreements.
He only allowed Congress to approve or disapprove of Congress, and he could not change the negotiating points. NAFTA has not eliminated regulatory requirements for companies wishing to act internationally, such as rules of origin and documentation obligations, that determine whether certain products can be traded under NAFTA. The free trade agreement also provides for administrative, civil and criminal sanctions for companies that violate the laws or customs procedures of the three countries. About a quarter of all U.S. imports, such as crude oil, machinery, gold, vehicles, fresh produce, livestock and processed food products, come from Canada and Mexico, the second and third largest suppliers of imported products to the United States. In addition, about one-third of U.S. exports, including machinery, spare parts, mineral oils and plastics, go to Canada and Mexico. The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) was implemented to promote trade between the United States, Canada and Mexico.
The agreement, which removed most tariffs on trade between the three countries, came into force on 1 January 1994. Between 1 January 1994 and 1 January 2008, many tariffs – notably for agriculture, textiles and automobiles – were phased out. On September 30, 2018, the United States and Canada agreed on an agreement to replace NAFTA, which will now be called the USMCA – the agreement between the United States and Mexico. In a joint press release from the U.S. and Canadian trade offices, officials stated that, fourth, NAFTA had established procedures for resolving trade disputes. The parties would begin a formal discussion, followed by a discussion at a meeting of the Free Trade Committee, if necessary. If the disagreement has not been resolved, a panel has considered the dispute. The trial helped all parties avoid costly prosecutions in local courts and helped them interpret THE complex NAFTA rules and procedures. These commercial disputes also applied to investors. From the beginning, critics of NAFTA feared that the agreement would result in a move of U.S. jobs to Mexico, despite additional NAALCs.