The agreement reduces tariffs by more than 18,000.  Tariffs on all U.S. industrial products and virtually all U.S. agricultural products would be eliminated altogether, with most eliminations being immediate.  According to the Congressional Research Service, the TPP would be “the largest free trade agreement in the United States after trade flows ($905 billion in exports of goods and services to the United States and $980 billion in imports in 2014).”  Including the United States, signatories account for about 40% of global GDP and one-third of world trade.  We know this now: President Obama informed Congress on November 5 that he was signing the TPP. This triggered a 90-day review of the treaty text, meaning the president will sign the TPP in February 2016. If and if the House of Representatives and the Senate submit legislation after the President is signed, the voting period begins at 45 days after the introduction of the law. The House of Representatives Ways and Means Committee will vote on or before the 45th day, and the entire House of Representatives has 15 days to vote on the bill. The bill then goes to the Senate, where the Finance Committee has 15 days to vote on the bill, followed by a new 15-day deadline for a full Senate vote.
Robert Z. Lawrence, a Harvard economist, argues that the model used by Tufts researchers “is simply not able to credibly predict the effects of the TPP” and argues that the model used by Petri and Plummer is superior.  Lawrence argues that the model used by Tufts researchers “does not have the granularity that allows it to assess variables such as exports, imports, foreign direct investment and changes in the industrial structure. As a result, his predictions ignore the benefits to TPP economies resulting from increased specialization, economies of scale and better consumer selection.  Lawrence also notes that the model used by tufts researchers indicates that the TPP will fall by 5.24% in non-TPP developing countries such as China, India and Indonesia, which is very skeptical of Lawrence: “It is not credible that a trade agreement of this magnitude could lead the rest of the world into recession.  Harvard economist Dani Rodrik, a well-known skeptic of globalization, says that Tufts researchers “do a bad job of explaining how their model works, and the details of their simulation are a little dark… lack of sectoral and country-by-country details under Capaldo; his attitudes remain opaque; and its extreme Keynesian assumptions are agitated with its medium-term perspective.  Japan`s main competition in the region is China, both of which have polar views on how the economy close to the Southeast Asian economy should develop. [Citation required] Before the TPP, Japan sought supremacy by creating the Asian Monetary Fund (MFA), which the United States blocked.