NAFTA came into force on January 1, 1994, changing the relative tariff situation in the region and sparking a debate on parity issues related to the treatment of U.S. imports through competing trade agreements and agreements. Imports from Mexico have benefited from severely reduced tariffs or duty-free treatment under NAFTA, which have been increasingly phased in for more than 14 years by Mexico, both in absolute and absolute terms compared to the CBI countries. Preferential access to textile and clothing products would apply not only to the value of American content, but above all to the added value in Mexican production. Imports were subject to detailed rules of origin, which generally limited the content of products traded to materials manufactured in NAFTA countries, so that the CBI countries were no longer sufficient. It is difficult to reconcile broader regional integration with the needs of very small developing countries, which are highly vulnerable to the vicissitudes of global economic trends and require new and creative solutions, especially when US policy, in addition to trade liberalization, remains motivated by the historical emphasis on regional development and security issues. With regard to the continuation of trade preferences in a similar or modified form or the choice of a free trade agreement, the solution is not immediately clear. Following the January 12, 2010 earthquake in Haiti, Congress passed the Haitian Economic Recovery Program (HELP) Act 2010 (P.L. 111-171), which amended the HOPE Act to give Haiti even more flexible and generous tariff preferences. It extended trade preferences until September 30, 2020 and improved those that appeared to be most effective in expanding exports to the United States. Preferences do not work as in other U.S.
trade agreements with the region. Unlike CBTPA, of which Haiti is a beneficiary, and CAFTA-DR, which does not include Haiti, the HOPE Act authorizes duty-free treatment for limited quantities of clothing imports processed in Haiti with inputs from third countries or outside the region that do not participate in a preferential trade agreement or a free trade agreement with the United States. The competitive advantage stems from the fact that Haitian companies can use cheaper inputs from virtually anywhere in the world, while being treated duty-free. To the extent that this benefit is in effect over a long period of time, it aims to encourage increased investment in garment assembly activities in Haiti, with the hope of contributing to the growth of production, exports and employment. When a product is entirely the «growth, product or manufacture» of a recipient country and is imported directly from a recipient country, it can enter the United States duty-free or at a reduced rate. However, there were significant exceptions for items that were defined by Congress as «import sensitive.» These included textiles and clothing subject to textile agreements under the multi-fibre arrangement (AMF), 12 petroleum products, shoes, handbags, luggage, flat goods, work gloves, leather clothing, tuna preserves, watches and watch parts. According to the rules of origin, 35% of the value of the article for work and the parties were to come from a recipient country, 13 Other preferential geographical trade programmes would be created by the Andean Trade Preferences Act (ATPA -P.L. 102-182) and the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA- P.L. 106-200).
The rest of Table 1 is divided into three parts, with imports subject to either a tariff or a separate preferential regime.https://wikifama.com/us-haiti-free-trade-agreement/