Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

There's several problems with that.

It's true that the US government does make those demands, but it's very important to note that the US government organization is not a reseller of goods. It is almost exclusively a consumer. It is not in direct competition in the same marketplace with private industry outside of a few select industries (e.g., USPS, limited healthcare).

Next, MFN tariffs kind of by definition only affect international commerce. For Amazon, a 100% domestic manufacturer producing goods would need to comply.

Finally, MFN is something defined by WTO treaty. If you have to abide by MFN when importing goods into the US, it's almost certainly because your nation is also a WTO member. Because almost all of them are. The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade requires WTO members to extend MFN treatment to like products of other WTO members. It's literally the the first article of the treaty agreement. [0]

[0]: https://www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/gatt47_01_e.htm




You are confusing unrelated things. As used here, "MFN" refers to a common type of term found in standard business contracts that have nothing to do with the WTO or the government. This discussion is about Amazon's use of MFN terms when contracting with ordinary domestic businesses.


That's not what you used the term for. If there is conflating going on, it started with your post.


Nothing I wrote suggests your interpretation. The US government uses MFN terms in domestic vendor contracts in the same way Amazon does. This was plainly obvious in context, since the term was introduced in relation to Amazon. It has nothing to do with international trade and nothing I wrote implied that, "MFN" is a standard term if art in ordinary vendor contracts.

You are the only person that introduced the notion that this had anything to do with the WTO, international treaties, etc.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: