Stop the Big Tech
“Digital Trade” Sneak Attack!

Revealing Big Tech's "Digital Trade" Ploy to Lock In Online Abuses of Workers, Consumers and Small Businesses

digital trade trojen horseBig Tech is attempting to use trade negotiations and policies to lock in binding international rules to limit governments from regulating online platforms in the public interest and from fighting corporate concentration and monopoly power. The Big Tech giants that dominate global retail, advertising, transportation, hotel and other businesses seek to evade regulation and oversight by quickly establishing international agreements that handcuff Congress and U.S. agencies now working to counter these Big Tech abuses. To obscure this, they have misbranded their attack against the very notion of government regulation of their abuses as new  “e-commerce” or “digital trade” policy initiatives. 

The agenda that Big Tech has misbranded as “digital trade” is not focused on fixing the real problems related to the online sale of imported goods. For example, today more than two million packages of online-purchased goods enter the U.S. mainly from China daily without inspection and dodging taxes thanks to what is called the de minimis or Amazon loophole.That is a real problem.

Instead, Big Tech interests are trying to undermine worker protections, policies that constrain entities’ size or market power and promote fair competition, and civil rights, privacy and liability policies being promoted by the Biden administration and many in Congress from both parties — and by other governments worldwide.

Big Tech interests are pushing this effort simultaneously on many fronts. That includes Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF) negotiations, U.S.-EU Trade and Technology Council talks and what is formally called the World Trade Organization (WTO) “Joint Statement Initiative on E-Commerce” (JSI-EComm) negotiations now underway in Geneva among 80-plus countries. 

At a time when the United States and the world are grappling with how to best regulate Big Tech in areas as disparate as gig economy worker protections, discrimination and algorithm transparency, competition policy and anti-trust, corporate liability, and consumer privacy, we must not establish “trade” rules that restrict or dissuade countries from regulating digital entities and breaking up monopolies or that impose or lock in retrograde domestic digital governance policies.

Harmful “digital trade” proposals include those that serve to:

No trade or other international commercial agreement should limit countries’ policies that condition permission for an entity to operate on compliance with labor, health and safety, civil rights, competition, consumer and other policies that apply across an economy or to a sector. Requiring large ride-sharing companies, for instance, to meet driver hours-of-service-rules or to contribute to social security for drivers or requiring buildings of short stay guest units booked online to meet worker and consumer safety rules, must never be characterized as a “trade barrier” nor as “censorship” if failure to comply means an end to operating permissions. Trade and commercial agreements must not be allowed to become Trojan Horse tools for attacking, weakening, preventing or dismantling labor or other public interest policies. Instead, all trade agreements should be structured to raise the floor to help ensure that all workers’ rights are protected, regardless of country.

Governments increasingly are turning to private corporations for aid with “predictive policing” and other surveillance, law enforcement and security functions. And, every-day decisions made by artificial intelligence components of online platforms increasingly affect which individuals and communities are offered access to public and private services ranging from home loans to job postings to medical treatments. International commercial agreements cannot repurpose “trade secrets” protection rules or establish other “digital trade” rules that limit the ability of regulators, academics, civil society and the public to access and review the underlying technology for discriminatory practices deserving of scrutiny, criticism and correction. Similarly, “digital trade” rules cannot establish rights and protections for online entities that allow them to evade liability for discriminatory conduct and civil rights violations.

Peoples’ every move on the internet and via cell phones is increasingly tracked, stored, bought and sold — as are interactions with the growing “internet of things,” that many people may not even be aware are tracking them nor from which they have a feasible way to opt out. Trade pacts must not restrict governments from acting on the public’s behalf in establishing rules regarding under what conditions individuals’ personal data may be collected, where it can be processed or transmitted, and how or where it is stored.

How to address the ways in which certain online business practices, algorithms and moderation stoke racial and ethnic violence and contribute to other anti-social behavior is a hotly debated topic. While there is no consensus on policy solutions, what is absolutely true is that this rapidly evolving area of public policy must not be restrained via trade agreements. Using trade pacts to prevent signatory countries from determining the best ways to protect the public interest online is unacceptable.

As corporations and conglomerates exert increasing control over important social functions, governments must be able to combat anti-competitive business practices, place limits on corporate mergers and break up monopolies where warranted. Digital trade rules must not include terms that forbid countries from establishing or maintaining policies that limit the size or range of services offered by companies, limit the legal structures under which they may be required to operate, nor otherwise restrict the regulation or break-up of Big Tech monopolies.

Related Resources

Reports & Fact Sheets

Big Tech’s “Digital Trade” Trojan Horse Strategy

Articles
Washington Post: Big Tech rivals enter fight over U.S. digital trade
External Voices
Business Leaders’ Letter Criticizing IPEF “Digital Trade” Rules
Articles
Bloomberg: Republican Lawmakers Call for Tech Lobby Be Blocked From Indo-Pacific Trade Input
Articles
Bloomberg: Google, Amazon Lobbyists Helped US Shape New Indo-Pacific Trade Framework
External Voices
Senator Warren Report: Big Tech’s Big Con: Rigging Digital Trade Rules to Block Antitrust Regulation
Articles
Washington Post: Big Tech trying to ‘weaponize’ U.S. trade talks, Democrats warn
External Voices
Senator Warren and Congressional Big Tech Accountability Leaders Letter on IPEF “Digital Trade” Rules
Reports & Fact Sheets
What Industry Identified as “Digital Trade Barriers” in the Indo-Pacific Region as Part of the National Trade Estimate Report Process
External Voices
AI Now report: International “Digital Trade” Agreements: The Next Frontier
Reports & Fact Sheets
LOADED: Corporate Interests Dominate the Official U.S. Government Trade Advisory System​
Articles
The American Prospect: Corporations Dominate Trade Advisory Panels
Press Releases
Business Interests Dominate U.S. Trade Advisory System, Gain Access to Trade- Pact Texts Kept Secret from Public, New Economic Liberties Research Shows
Videos & Podcasts
Webinar: Big Tech’s Ploy to Undermine AI Accountability, Privacy and Anti-Monopoly Policies with Sen. Warren, Rep. Schakowsky, and Rep. Takano
Press Releases
Study Reveals Big Tech Ploy to Internationally Preempt Privacy, Anti-Monopoly and Algorithmic Transparency Initiatives with “Digital Trade” Deals
Reports & Fact Sheets
International Preemption by “Trade” Agreement: Big Tech’s Ploy to Undermine Privacy, AI Accountability, and Anti-Monopoly Policies
Letters & Filings
Letter to President Biden: Don’t Replicate Big-Tech-Favored Terms in IPEF!
External Voices
Trans Atlantic Consumer Dialogue: The Consumer Perspective on the Joint EU-US Roadmap on Artificial Intelligence
External Voices
A Worker-Centered Digital Trade Agenda: AFL-CIO Policy Agenda
Press Releases
The Biden Administration Can Only Achieve Its Laudable “Worker-Centered” Trade Policy for the Americas by Fixing the Existing U.S. Trade Deals with Most Prospective APEP Partners and Building On Solid New Foundations
Reports & Fact Sheets
Analysis of U.S. “Digital Trade” Rules that Undermine Congressional and Administration Privacy, AI Civil Rights, and Anti-Monopoly Initiatives: Side by Sides
Letters & Filings
Business Coalition for App Fairness Letter: “Digital Trade” Threat to Anti-Monopoly Policy
Videos & Podcasts
U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren and Patrick Woodall, AFL-CIO: Digital Trade Senate Finance Committee Hearing
Reports & Fact Sheets
“Digital Trade” Doublespeak: Big Tech’s Hijack of Trade Lingo to Attack Anti-Monopoly and Competition Policies
Press Releases
Economic Liberties Investigation Reveals: Big Tech Interests Hijacking Trade Lingo, Enorcement Tools to Attack Anti-Monopoly Initiatives Worldwide
Letters & Filings
Rethink Trade Comments on “Trade Pillar of an Indo-Pacific Economic Framework” for the Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade
Videos & Podcasts
WATCH: Big Tech’s “Digital Trade” Attack on Working People & Labor Rights US Rep. Ro Khanna & Teamsters President Sean O’Brien
Reports & Fact Sheets
Big Tech’s “Digital Trade” Attack on Working People and Labor Rights
Reports & Fact Sheets
Big Tech’s “Digital Trade” Sneak Attack Lessons from Big Tech’s Effort to Hijack the U.S. “Special 301” Trade Enforcement Tool to Protect Their Monopoly Power & Evade Regulation
Blog
WTF Is IPEF? Yes, It Matters…
External Voices
Big Tech Influence at Commerce Department Taints “Digital Trade” Talks: Sen. Warren, Rep. Jayapal Question Commerce Sec. Raimondo
External Voices
WaPo Tech 202: Pelosi Fears Tech Giants Will Exploit Wrinkle in China Competition Bill
External Voices
TACD Letter on Special 301 for Big tech
External Voices
Stan Greenberg oped: To survive in this economic climate, Democrats must fight monopolies, not flirt with them
Letters & Filings
AFL-CIO Factsheet on USICA Including Special 301 for Big Tech
Press Releases
Fix Big Tech Scams in USICA Urge Union, Consumer, Small Business and Digital Rights Groups
Letters & Filings
Letter: Fix Big Tech Scams in China Competitiveness Legislation
Articles
American Prospect: The Trade Fight That Could Doom Biden’s Industrial Policy
Letters & Filings
Rethink Trade Comments to USTR on IPEF
External Voices
AFL-CIO lndo-Pacific Economic Framework {IPEF) Comments of the Labor Advisory Committee for Trade Negotiations and Trade Policy {LAC)
External Voices
Trade Justice Education Fund Comments on the Digital and Emerging Technologies-Related Issues in an Indo-Pacific Economic Framework
Videos & Podcasts
WEBINAR: Billions in Chinese Imports Dodge Inspection & Taxes, Close the Amazon Loophole
Reports & Fact Sheets
USICA Special 301 for Big Tech: Memo Unpacking Stealthy Terms in CHIPS Bill
Letters & Filings
Letter to Secretary Raimondo: Criticism of the European Digital Services Act and the Digital Markets Act
External Voices
Really, a “Bipartisan Trade Consensus” that is GOOD for WORKERS! Oped by XTX