KUALA LUMPUR, Dec 11 — The government believes that renegotiating the Agreement on Reciprocal Trade Agreement (ART) between Malaysia and the United States is unnecessary at this time, said the Investment, Trade, and Industry Ministry (MITI).
This is because the ART has not yet been ratified or entered into force.
“However, under Article 7.3 ‘Modifications and Amendments’, the government may request reasonable amendments to any provision after the agreement comes into effect.
“Any amendment request must be made in writing, and the other party must consider the request in good faith.
“Both parties must agree in writing to amend the agreement,” it said in a written reply to the Dewan Negara published on the Parliament’s website.
Miti was responding to Senator Musoddak Ahmad’s query about a proposal to renegotiate the ART, which is considered one-sided.
It added that finalising the ART could contribute to Malaysia’s economic growth by strengthening bilateral trade, increasing flows of high-quality investment, facilitating technology transfer, boosting the competitiveness of domestic industries, and reinforcing global supply chains.
Meanwhile, Miti said the ART was signed to provide transparency and certainty in the two countries’ trade relationship, thereby reducing the policy uncertainty that could undermine investor and business confidence in Malaysia.
It was responding to Senator Nik Mohamad Abduh Nik Abdul Aziz’s query on the ART’s economic and strategic impact on Malaysia’s economic agenda and whether the government has conducted a comprehensive risk analysis of the use of exit clauses.
Miti noted that the government has taken proactive steps by conducting impact analyses to identify industry sectors that may require adjustments in strategy or policy support.
The government has also developed several strategies to mitigate the impact of tariff implementation on the country’s export and investment performance.
“Regarding the exit clause, Miti and related agencies, such as the Attorney-General’s Chambers, have thoroughly examined that provision, including its legal implications for national sovereignty,” it said.
