Winchester, N. (2009), “Is there a dirty little secret? Non-tariff barriers and the gains from trade,” Journal of Policy Modeling, b. 31, no. 6, pp. 819-834. Duong, N.B. (2016), “Vietnam-EU free trade agreement: impact and policy implications for Vietnam”, SECO Working Paper No. 07/2016, World Trade Institute, IL. Numerous policy studies and reports have highlighted the inevitable trend towards the elimination or reduction of tariffs in free trade agreements as soon as countries engage their partners to promote global and regional trade liberalization (Ahmed and O`Donoghue, 2010); Cirera et al., 2014). Mr. Fukase and Martin (2016) pointed out that a free trade agreement would bring additional welfare benefits to both countries and that they had a positive impact on both economies by examining the case of the India-US Free Trade Agreement. 1, pp. 140-162.
Shaikh, F.M (2009), “Analysis of Bilateral Trade Liberalization and the Southern Free Trade Agreement (SAFTA) on Pakistan`s economy by using CGE model,” Journal of International Trade Law and Policy, Vol. 8 No. 3, pp. 227-251. In this study, the positive EV Index reflects the positive economic outlook for Vietnam`s accession to NAFTA. In concrete terms, the abolition of customs duties on the industrial sector increases social benefits by 9.13% (see Table VIII). This result is similar to that of Doanh and Heo (2009) and shows that reducing tariffs will increase social welfare if Vietnam joins the World Trade Organization. Ganguly, A.
and Das, K. (2017), “Multi-sector analysis of foreign investment and trade liberalization in India: a CGE modelling approach,” Global Business Review, Vol. 18 No. 5, pp. 1345-1372. A better solution than protectionism is the inclusion in trade agreements of rules that protect against inconvenience. Before simulating tax policy, one of the key tasks is to arrive at a reliable reference model that reflects the real level of the economy. . . .