International Economics

David Chan Smith argues that tariff regimes during the eighteenth century encouraged modern history’s first offshore markets to reroute goods through jurisdictions that faced lower tariff rates. This historical “entrepôt trade” could outstrip the legal trade of some goods and carries lessons for contemporary revisions to international trade.

The following is an excerpt from Michael Posner’s recent book, Conscience Incorporated: Pursue Profits While Protecting Human Rights, reprinted here with permission from NYU Press.

New research from Veljko Fotak, Hye Seung Grace Lee, William Megginson, and Jesus Salas shows that the United States tariff exemption process during the...

Karthik Ramanna writes that if the United States adopts a trade policy based on a dynamic emissions accounting method, it can achieve President Donald Trump’s goal of leveling the manufacturing playing field for American companies by penalizing foreign “dirty” producers, while also mitigating inflation and the risk of a trade war.

The 2024 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences was awarded to Daron Acemoglu, Simon Johnson, and James Robinson for “studies of how institutions are...

A new study by Utpal Bhattacharya, Tse-Chun Lin, and Janghoon Shon finds that Hong Kong's 2020 National Security Law led local financial analysts to...

Utsav Gandhi relates recent developments in the American government’s ban on TikTok and shows how the case maps over broader debates about conflicts between...

The ongoing debates about the EU’s competition policy have predominantly focused on Western Europe, overlooking the dynamic growth and unique challenges of Central and Eastern Europe, writes Maciej Bernatt and Kati Cseres. This oversight risks deepening economic disparities and undermining the EU’s goals of unity, democracy, and innovation-driven growth.

Despite fundamental changes in the real economy, and strides in the regulation of privacy, data, and digital markets, antitrust practice and discourse in Europe are still conducted in “safe spaces” where the antitrust community resists change and remains attached to neoliberal approaches and efficiency goals. But the Trump Administration will not just signify a wholesale return to pre-NeoBrandeisian times (as many in Europe hope): indeed Europeans hiding in their “safe spaces” may well be surprised, writes Cristina Caffarra.

In Europe, many regulatory authorities are debating whether to loosen regulations on tech companies so that they can catch up with their counterparts in the United States and close Europe’s innovation gap. Based on her recent article, Anu Bradford shows that this choice is a false one. She argues that rather than stringent regulation, the gap in tech innovation between the U.S. and EU can be explained by differences in their scaling opportunities, capital markets, bankruptcy laws, immigration policy, and flexibility of their labor markets.