Paris, April 25

It would be the world’s biggest ever trade deal, linking the United States and Europe Union, two giant economies, which are home to 850 million people.

Despite its vaunted economic benefits, many people on each side of the Atlantic are either deeply suspicious or flat-out opposed to the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP).

Here are three key questions:

What are the benefits?

The pact, negotiated largely behind closed doors since 2013 with many of its details still undisclosed, aims to topple regulatory and tariff barriers to trade and investment between the US and Europe.

If the two sides reach an ambitious and comprehensive deal, it could give an economic boost of 120 billion euros ($135 billion) to the EU and 95 billion euros to the US by 2027, according to a 2013 study by London-based Centre for Economic Policy Research.

“To be clear, this does not mean that the result of the agreement will be just a single, one-off GDP bonus of 214 billion euros in 2027. The gains it predicts are much greater as they in fact represent a permanent increase in amount of wealth that the European and American economies can produce every year, as a result of more open markets and more aligned regulatory systems agreed under the TTIP,” it said.

A European family of four would see its annual disposable income rise by average of 545 euros a year because of the deal, says the study, funded by European Commission.

What are the concerns?

Critics say it would amount to a giveaway to big corporations, coming at the expense of jobs, consumers and the environment.

Even in export powerhouse Germany, which counts the United States as its biggest trade partner, there is suspicion about the deal with tens of thousands of people demonstrating in Hanover at the weekend to voice their opposition.

Only one in five Germans thinks the pact would be a good thing, and one in three rejects it completely, as per a survey published this month by German foundation Bertelsmann Stiftung. In the United States, by contrast, only 18 per cent of respondents were opposed, it said.

People are worried about possible lowering of product standards, consumer protection and the labour market, the foundation said.

Other opponents cite a threat to the protection of geographic indications, such as champagne.

One source of concern is a provision for settling rows between firms and countries — so-called investor state dispute settlement (ISDS).

The EU says it would allow a company to sue a state for compensation if, for example, a new law discriminates against foreign firms.

But an alliance of opponents, Stop TTIP, argues that it would let investors sue for any action that damages their profit expectations. “ISDS can be used to undermine environmental standards, to prevent regulation or to pocket taxpayers’ money,” says Stop TTIP Spokesman Karl Baer.

Why the rush?

After meeting with German Chancellor Merkel in Hanover on Sunday, US President Barack Obama said a deal is possible by the end of this year, although ratification will likely take longer.

If talks drag on into 2017, ‘political transitions’ in the United States and Europe could delay it for much longer, warned Obama, who leaves office in January next year.

In the US, leading Democrat and Republican contenders for the White House have criticised aspects of the deal in the run-up to November elections. There is similar opposition among many in Europe, where both Germany and France hold elections in 2017.