To set the record straight, that’s not exactly what I was thinking. When you wrote…

The U.S. will want Korea to amend its engine-displacement tax regime in favor of something based on efficiency (MPG) of the engine instead, so that U.S. cars are not discriminated against.

… I was wondering if you felt that Detroit and Washington thought the barriers were the primary cause of Detroit’s woes.

But I also wanted to know what is it about switching from engine displacement to MPG that will reduce the “barriers” in any way? I think MPG-related car fees might now be a more appropriate way to encourage economical car purchases than engine displacement size, but aren’t all cars (including Korean) subject to this? How is it a barrier to American cars (or foreign cars) specifically? Is this a red herring on Detroit/Washington’s part?

It just seems to me that Washington would be wasting a lot of political capital for very little gain by trying to get Korea to change its entire car user fee scheme just for an FTA. Should California be forced to drop some of its environment-related car regulations for that same FTA?

By the way, I know everyone is down on Detroit quality, but for certain classes of vehicle, especially large ones, isn’t Detroit pretty good at making quality vehicles? There are some types of vehicle where the American ones are the best (right?), especially workhorse vehicles. Reducing the barriers, though, won’t change much if Ford, Chrysler, and GM don’t feel there’s enough of a market for a Suburban to justify importing them and putting them up in expensive show rooms.

Anyway, I’d also like someone more knowledgeable about this issue to give a rundown on what the barriers are to foreign vehicles right now.

Once I know the relevant data, it would be easier to support or refute the idea that trade barriers are the primary cause of Detroit’s woes (if the woes really exist) in Korea.

Anyway, I’m really curious if changing from engine displacement to gas mileage would make a difference in how well Detroit does here.

I hope you’ll note that I did not advance any argument that trade barriers were the primary cause of Detroit’s woes in Korea. My opinion is the cars tend to suck, and Korean consumers are less likely to pay a high price for a sucky American automobile with no brand cachet.

Ideologically speaking I’m roughly at the opposite end of the spectrum.

GM raising cash:

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03.....uzuki.html

“I think that these vehicles are viewed as being more exotic than high-quality vehicles manufactured in the US”

high-quality vehicles like the GM suvs that knock?
GM brought its high quality processes here in Korea. You must have heard of the recall of Lacettis?

Once I know the relevant data, it would be easier to support or refute the idea that trade barriers are the primary cause of Detroit’s woes (if the woes really exist) in Korea.

Anyway, I’m really curious if changing from engine displacement to gas mileage would make a difference in how well Detroit does here.

And come to think of it, since big Korean cars are also subject to the engine displacement regulations (right?), then why should Korea be expected to change that entire system just because the US wants it? Is that really a necessary part of an FTA?

Asking, not speaking rhetorically.