![\"Han](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/korea\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/news-p.v1.20260724.b6b0819c6d874435a637458a6d46480a_P1.png\"\/ "\\"Korea")
Han Chang-wan, attorney at Bae, Kim & Lee LLC.<\/p>\nHan Chang-wan, attorney at Bae, Kim & Lee LLC.<\/p>\n
Korea must seriously pursue joining the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP). Korea’s CPTPP clock has been stuck at the “review” stage for far too long. The CPTPP has already established itself as a major trade norm in the Asia-Pacific region. With the agreement taking effect for the United Kingdom in 2024, the number of member states grew to 12, making it a massive trade platform covering about 15% of global gross domestic product (GDP). While Korea continues to review membership, member states are adjusting the terms of trade and investment within a platform that encompasses tariff reductions, rules of origin accumulation, digital trade, state-owned enterprises, and environmental and labor norms.<\/p>\n
The significance of joining the CPTPP does not stop at short-term trade expansion effects. More important is that the “hidden costs” may grow ever larger while Korea remains outside. While Korea stays outside the CPTPP, companies within the region can reshape their supply chains to align with new norms and rules of origin.<\/p>\n
Rules of origin accumulation standards are particularly important. Under the CPTPP, origin is determined by aggregating materials produced and processes carried out in member states. This encourages companies to source, process, and invest in parts within the region. If Korea continues to remain outside the agreement, it could become a relatively less attractive investment destination for companies designing supply chains. The costs of non-membership are not immediately visible, but they accumulate over time.<\/p>\n
The timing of accession also matters. The later a country joins, the less room it has to participate in shaping the norms. As member states increase and negotiation agendas expand, Korea will inevitably move closer to the position of a rule-taker forced to accept conditions already formed\u2014in other words, closer to being the weaker party.<\/p>\n
Discussions on joining the CPTPP became official during the Moon Jae-in administration. There has been no substantial progress since, but the necessity of joining itself has never disappeared. If anything, the global trade environment has grown rougher. As protectionism strengthens, a country as trade-dependent as Korea must secure a place within predictable trade norms.<\/p>\n
The intention to pursue membership was reaffirmed on the occasion of the Korea-Japan summit early this year, and discussions with the Japanese side were reportedly held in a positive atmosphere. But no notable progress has been heard of since. Now, when Korea-Japan relations are being managed stably, is a critical time to move membership discussions into actual negotiations.<\/p>\n
Korea is a country that grew through trade and has reaped the greatest benefits under predictable norms. The more protectionism intensifies, the more important the message of participating in a rules-based multilateral trade order becomes. Pursuing CPTPP membership could also serve as a starting point for reexamining the supply chain strategies of domestic industries. This is no longer a time to remain in “careful review.” Before it is too late, discussions on joining the CPTPP must be moved into actual negotiations.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Han Chang-wan, attorney at Bae, Kim & Lee LLC. Korea must seriously pursue joining the Comprehensive and Progressive…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":99487,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[3],"tags":[28282,51484,8103,51486,41463,51485,112,321,51487],"class_list":["post-99486","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-seoul","tag-cptpp","tag-korea-trade-policy","tag-korea-japan-relations","tag-multilateral-trade","tag-protectionism","tag-rules-of-origin","tag-seoul","tag-supply-chain","tag-trade-norms"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/korea\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/99486","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/korea\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/korea\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/korea\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/korea\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=99486"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/korea\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/99486\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/korea\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/99487"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/korea\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=99486"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/korea\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=99486"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/korea\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=99486"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}