- Does the US prevent European tech companies from doing business in America?
- Does the US prevent European people from finding work, moving to, and purchasing property in America?
- Does the US prevent European people from finding work, moving to, and purchasing property in America?
European and foreign businesses get much higher fines compares to local businesses (e.g. Volkswagen, Deutsche Bank, Bayer (e.g. just after buying Massato), Toyota, etc...)
On the other hand Europe allows american businesses to access the european market without following the local laws. No user data can be transfered to the USA where protection clearly is not adequate, still they do.
EDIT: You can downvote me, but it's all true:
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/29/business/dealbook/volkswa...
"Criminal fines in the United States from 2001-12 were on average more than seven times the size for overseas entities than for American companies"
You fail to mention that the law requires 51% ownership by a Chinese company and forced IP transfer.
You also fail to mention that there are many industries in which foreign company are completely prohibited.
And the Chinese version of “following the law” includes whatever the party arbitrarily decides you should do. Including things like forcing companies to remove any mention of Taiwan from material completely outside of China.
Yes, regularly, via extensive caps and quotas on visas. That has to be a trick question. As of last year if a European wanted to work in America they had to pony up $6K+ for a 1 in 3 chance in April of landing an H1B for a job that couldn’t start until September.
I'm not European, but here in Canada, I have seen how the US treats its trade partners. Trump forced Canada to renegotiate NAFTA and got many concessions from us. Less than 2 months after his new trade deal came into force, he is imposing a 10% tariff on aluminum imports [1]. Before aluminum, it was softwood lumber. In the middle, there was Bombardier passenger airplanes.
The funny thing is, in order to force Canada to renegotiate NAFTA, the US imposed tariff's on Canadian steel and aluminum under the guise of "national security" [2]. That is why I don't buy any claims on national security excuses for putting tariffs or expelling companies. It's mercantilism, plain and simple. But because it is frowned upon to talk about mercantilism in this day and age, the US administration always covers its mercantilism with a thin veneer of market fairness and national security.
Either that, or Canada is actually a national security threat to the US.
[1] https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/trump-aluminum-tariff-1.567...
[2] https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/19/us/politics/trump-nationa...
Historically, the US has mostly been a free market to both Europe and Canada, and hasn't enacted protectionist measures overall. The US allows European car companies to sell here despite having domestic production. Nestle, HSBC, Astra-Zeneca, Siemens, SAP, Ericsson...these are all companies that are titans in their respective industries and also have a large mostly dominant US presence.
The level of US protectionism pales in comparison to what China engages in and it's hardly fair to compare the two. Obviously there are well sourced grievances but to compare China's protectionism to US protectionism isn't correct.
To say the US is banning Canadian giants like shopify because they reached critical mass is very wrong and not based on reality. Using it to compare to China's relationship with western countries at best confused two different things.
Airbus is a great example of this, the US repeatedly cockblocks Airbus from making major US military sales, puts tariffs on them, etc.
Which way do you think the trend points?