clean environment, environment, environmental regulations, essential services, expected future profits, food safety, health, jobs, labor law, Lack of Transparency, NAFTA, private tribunal, Safety, secrecy, secret tribunals, TPP, Trans-Pacific Partnership, US exposure to investor-state attacks
The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) would grant foreign corporations extraordinary new powers to attack the laws we rely on for a clean environment, essential services, and healthy communities. Foreign corporations would be empowered to bypass domestic courts and directly “sue” the U.S. government before a tribunal of private lawyers that sits outside of any domestic legal system. These lawyers would be authorized to order the U.S. government to hand millions of our tax dollars to the corporations for laws that they find inconvenient.
How could foreign corporations attack domestic health, environmental and financial protections that local companies have to follow? The TPP would give foreign firms special privileges, including the ability to challenge new policies – from Wall Street regulations to climate change protections – because they frustrated the corporations’ “expectations.”
The TPP would also grant these privileges to U.S. firms that offshore American jobs. The deal’s special protections for foreign corporations would eliminate many of the usual risks that make firms think twice about moving to low-wage countries, incentivizing a new wave of offshoring. hide
The TPP’s privileges for foreign firms would also spur a new wave of corporate cases against U.S. laws, to be decided by tribunals of three private lawyers unaccountable to any electorate. In cases already launched under this “investor-state” system, such lawyers have rotated between serving as “judges” and bringing cases for corporations against governments. They are not bound by precedent or the opinions of governments, and there is no outside appeal to their rulings.
If a tribunal rules against a challenged policy, there is no limit to the amount of taxpayer money it can order the government to pay the foreign corporation. The amount is based on the “expected future profits” the tribunal surmises that the corporation would have earned in the absence of the public policy it is attacking. Under existing U.S. pacts, tribunals have ordered more than $3.6 billion in taxpayer compensation to foreign firms, and more than $38 billion is pending.
While this shadow legal system for foreign corporations has been around since the 1960s, just 50 known cases were launched in the regime’s first three decades combined. In contrast, corporations have launched more than 50 claims in each of the last three years.
Instead of decreasing our exposure to this surge of corporate attacks, the TPP would roughly double U.S. exposure to investor-state attacks against U.S. policies. The TPP would newly empower more than 1,000 additional corporations in TPP countries, which own more than 9,200 additional subsidiaries in the United States, to launch investor-state cases against the U.S. government. No other U.S. pact has subjected the United States to such an increase in investor-state liability.
Copyright © 2015 Public Citizen.
Many informative embedded and non-embedded links at original, such as: http://www.citizen.org/documents/fact-sheet-tpp-and-environment.pdf