澳美自由貿易協定 (AUSFAT) 於 2004 年 5 月正式簽署，並 已在 2005 年元旦生效。雖然開啟兩國官方報告所宣稱的將對雙方經濟造成影響，並帶來經濟利益，但是爭取此項協定對澳洲言主要的利益卻是在安全、政治與外交政策目標等非經濟因素。不可避免地，這對不少人而言以經濟考量不當地交換非經濟目標將會帶來風險。澳洲過去的經濟繁榮主要是奠基於以單方面貿易自由化為主的重大經濟改革 ，此一作法成功地將經濟獲益與政治外交政策的因素分隔開。儘管當時的貿易部長與澳洲談判代表對美國堅持將蔗糖排除的作法持保留的看法，但是澳洲仍在前總理霍華德在最後一分鐘直接下指示後與美國簽訂雙邊 FTA 凸顯政治的考量高過經濟的考量。同時，由於澳洲外交通商部（ DFAT ） FTA 委員會的報告遭到嚴重抨擊，再加上官方估算的經濟利益在簽署後也遭到進一步研究所獲得的結果所推翻，當時有幾位澳洲評論家也質疑澳洲簽署該協定的經濟獲利的潛在性。 AUSFTA 是澳洲貿易政策的重要分水嶺。當 2000 年時內閣同意與美國進行自由貿易協定的談判意味著澳洲改變其對 FTA 的貿易政策。在此之前，儘管已有許多國家青睞 FT A ，但澳洲仍然堅定地其所偏愛的單邊主義與多邊主義的策略。事實上， FTA 並不算自由貿易協定，而是優惠（ preferential ）或歧視性的（ discriminatory ）貿易協定。因此與多邊主義（ multilateralism ）是相衝的（雖然我們常聽到兩者是互補的論調），而又對單邊自由化言更是項警訊。 在此背景下，進一步檢視 澳美自由貿易協定給澳洲帶來的 經濟獲利就變得格外重要。 本文主旨即在此，而焦點則置於 AUSFTA 裡的重要構成成分 -- 服務業。更何況，服務業也具有在全球不斷擴大的重要性，且對澳美兩國貿易與未來經濟表現也頗具重要意義。

The Australian US Free Trade Agreement (AUSFAT) became operational from 1 January 2005 (eventually signed in May 2004). While heralded at the time as a great economic outcome for both countries by respective governments and ‘sold' publicly on the perceived economic benefits of a report commissioned by the Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT), Australia's main interests in clinching a trade deal with the US had more to do with non-economic factors (e.g. security, political and foreign policy objectives). While inevitable to many it has the associated dangers that economic considerations will be inappropriately traded off for non-economic goals. Australia 's past economic prosperity has rested substantially on significant reforms to the economy based on unilateral trade liberalization that successfully separated the economic gains from political and foreign policy factors. Australia signed AUSFTA, despite some major reservations held by the Trade Minister and the Australian negotiators over the US 's insistence to exclude sugar, following the last minute direction of the former Prime Minister, reflecting political rather than economic considerations. Moreover, the perceived economic benefits to Australia were questioned at the time by several Australian commentators, with the DFAT-commissioned report severely criticized and the magnitude of the official estimated economic benefits rejected by further studies available after the “deal was done.” USFTA was an important watershed in Australia 's trade policy. It signaled the change in Australia 's trade policy towards FTAs in 2000 when cabinet agreed to negotiate an FTA with the US . As with many other countries FTAs are fashionable and Australia , despite previously being one of the major resistors of such an approach in favour of unilateralism and multilateralism. For a start, FTAs are not free trade areas but rather preferential or discriminatory trade arrangements, and hence run counter to multilateralism (despite the often repeated rhetoric that they are complementary) and more alarmingly to unilateral liberalization. Thus, it is important to examine more closely the purported economic benefits to Australia of AUSFTA. The objective of this article is to do so looking at services, an important component of AUSFTA and of ever expanding significance globally and to both countries in terms of trade but more importantly to their own economic performance. It does this not by proposing new empirical evidence but examining past studies and trying to place the gains from negotiated forms of liberalization, especially from FTAs but also multilateral agreements, in their correct economic perspective. It thus tries to re-balance the importance of unilateral trade-related reforms for Australia 's future economic performance, something lost in recent years in public policy and urgently in need of being re-invigorated.