In another sense, one of the EU`s usual assertions is that EPAs should serve as the basis for afCFTA. Development packages negotiated under the EPAs could indeed support the process of regional integration in Africa, to the extent that these packages provide technical assistance for capacity building for African trade leaders and help ease some of the restrictive restrictions on intra-regional trade in Africa.B, such as trade facilitation, trade logistics, access to energy, the informal economy, domestic innovation and technology transfers. (d) they may simply be “different” from those produced on the national territory.  To do so, they rely on Feenstra and Weinstein (2017), which indicate that competition disciplines are an important source of commercial and distribution benefits. More comprehensive data from industrialized countries indicate that low-income consumers benefit from lower commercial prices than high-income consumers, as more of their income is spent on traded products. If we look at people as workers, those with high-skilled or high-paying jobs may have earned more than low-skilled workers. This is because they are subject to increased competition for imports from developing countries and their inputs may be easier to replace and/or offshore. Most economic changes translate into winners and losers, and so do changes in trade. In this section, we look at what stimulates international trade and why trade can have such distribution consequences. For example, products imported from the EU that are subject to tariff liberalisation under the EPA will compete with imports from the rest of the continent, subject to the same liberalisation.
The range of products liberalised in the EPA and the extent of tariff liberalization are therefore important to afCFTA, as it determines the preferential margins that African countries can agree on each other on the same customs lines. Negotiations on sensitive products, excluded from the liberalisation of tariffs in EPAs, favour the political space available to African countries to monitor their local agricultural and industrial development, without the benefits of AfCFTA being minimal.  Broda and Weinstein (2006). See also Hsieh et al. (2016) on the impact of the Canada-U.S. free trade agreement on well-being in Canada, which generates overall welfare benefits from lower consumer prices, but argue that the variety losses of domestic companies leaving the Canadian market are more than offset. Businesses: Negative effects on businesses could result from long-term changes in competitiveness (for example. B decline in the textile or steel industry in the United Kingdom); In the context of competition, even in seemingly competitive sectors (z.B. Honda is closing its Swindon plant); either by sudden increases in imports that could be the result of other countries` trade practices or trade sanctions (for example. B for U.S. War Rights).
How are the benefits and costs of a customs union distributed among Member States? The results depend on the comparative advantage of the members, relative to each other and relative to the rest of the world.