Trade
Navigate forward to interact with the calendar and select a date. Press the question mark key to get the keyboard shortcuts for changing dates.
Navigate backward to interact with the calendar and select a date. Press the question mark key to get the keyboard shortcuts for changing dates.
Growing the innovation economy requires tight and deep integration of global markets—but with the critical caveat that this integration must come with strong commitments to openness and robust, market-oriented national competitiveness policies, not protectionist market distortions. ITIF's research focuses on how to promote robust trade, especially in innovation-based industries, and curb the spread of innovation mercantilism in all its forms.
Vice President, Global Innovation Policy, and Director, Center for Life Sciences Innovation
Information Technology and Innovation Foundation
Read BioFeatured
Testimony to the House Ways and Means Trade Subcommittee Regarding Advancing America’s Interest at the WTO’s 14th Ministerial Conference
The United States should use MC14 to push for a WTO that actively promotes fair market competition—not one that passively accepts non-market policies, overcapacity, and coercive distortions that are undermining the global trading system.
Letter to the Trump Administration Regarding Non-Tariff Attacks on US Tech Firms and Industries
Foreign governments are systematically deploying policies that constitute non-tariff attacks (NTAs) on America’s leading technology companies. ITIF and other think tank scholars and policy experts urge the administration to put these unfair NTAs on the U.S. trade agenda and insist that America’s trading partners address them.
Toward Globalization 2.0: A New Trade Policy Framework for Advanced-Industry Leadership and National Power
Globalization 1.0 has failed, but protectionist autarky cannot be its replacement. Instead, it is past time to craft a new kind of globalization that advances U.S. interests in key industries and prevents China from becoming the dominant techno-economic power.
Testimony to the US House Ways and Means Trade Subcommittee: Protecting American Innovation by Establishing and Enforcing Strong Digital Trade Rules
Congress needs to make clear that it expects other nations to cease and desist, while at the same time holding whoever is in the White House to high standards of more strongly incorporating digital issues into a robust trade defense strategy.
How Expanding the Information Technology Agreement to an “ITA-3” Would Bolster Nations’ Economic Growth
Completing a second expansion of the Information Technology Agreement (an “ITA-3”) could bring more than 400 unique ICT products under the ITA’s tariff-eliminating framework, which would add more than $750 billion to the global economy over 10 years.
More Publications and Events
March 30, 2026|Reports & Briefings
Mobilizing for Techno-Economic War, Part 2: Slowing China’s Advance
Boosting U.S. competitiveness in national power industries is necessary, but not sufficient to avoid losing to China. America also must take measures to slow the PRC’s progress toward global dominance. This report provides more than 100 actionable recommendations for the administration and Congress. Western allies should take many of the same steps.
March 30, 2026|Blogs
WTO’s MC14 Let the E-Commerce Moratorium Expire, Showing Why the United States Needs Strategic Trade
MC14 exposed the WTO’s deepening dysfunction on digital trade and reform, underscoring why the United States needs a more strategic approach to global trade.
March 26, 2026|Blogs
The Administration Is Using Section 301 to Fight Unfair Trade Practices in Manufacturing: It Should Do the Same for Digital Protectionism
The Trump administration has launched sweeping Section 301 investigations into foreign manufacturing overcapacity, but discriminatory digital regulations pose an equally serious threat to U.S. commerce and warrant the same enforcement response.
March 18, 2026|Testimonies & Filings
Comments to the US Treasury Department Regarding the CFIUS Known Investor Program and Foreign Investment Review Process
CFIUS’ procedures need to be strengthened to ensure that Chinese entities, particularly those influenced or backed by Chinese government influence or funding, cannot acquire U.S. companies or technology that could harm America’s economic or national security.
March 5, 2026|Blogs
Europe and the United States Should Stay Together for the Kids
Together, the transatlantic alliance can shape the rules of the digital age. Divided, neither side stands a chance.
March 2, 2026|Reports & Briefings
The Alarming Performance of US Advanced Technology Product Trade
Over the last decade, U.S. trade performance has deteriorated significantly in advanced industries. That is a major problem because these industries have high fixed costs and require substantial investments in R&D, so they depend on large customer bases to achieve scale economies and remain globally competitive.
February 27, 2026|Testimonies & Filings
Comments to the Digital Trade and Telecommunications Chapter on a Possible Canada-Mercosur Free Trade Agreement
The Information Technology and Innovation Foundation’s Centre for Canadian Innovation and Competitiveness (CCIC) appreciates the opportunity to contribute to Global Affairs Canada’s consultation on a potential Canada-Mercosur Free Trade Agreement.
February 23, 2026|Blogs
Fact of the Week: Through November 2025, U.S. Consumers and Businesses Bore 86 Percent of the Economic Burden From Tariffs
Throughout 2025, U.S. businesses and consumers have borne the largest share of the tariff incidence, or burden, while tariffs had relatively minimal impacts on foreign exporters.
February 17, 2026|Op-Eds & Contributed Articles
US Trade Representative Should Shine a Spotlight on Chinese Counterfeits
If the USTR is serious about protecting U.S. consumers and businesses from copyright piracy and trademark counterfeiting, it should designate Chinese online platforms Temu, AliExpress, and SHEIN as notorious markets.
February 11, 2026|Blogs
Op-Art: The High Toll of Europe’s Payment Sovereignty
European calls for “payment sovereignty” misdiagnose the problem: Visa and Mastercard lead through competition, not coercion, and a state-backed alternative would entrench protectionism instead of enabling regulatory reforms that would let European firms scale and compete globally.
