A fourth round of talks included a U.S. call for a sunset clause that would end the deal in five years unless the three countries agree to maintain it, a provision that U.S. Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross says would allow countries to end the deal if it doesn`t work. Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau met with the House Ways and Means Committee because Congress would have to pass legislation that would push back the terms of the treaty if Trump tried to withdraw from the pact.  Although NAFTA could not deliver on everything its proponents had promised, it remained in force. In fact, in 2004, the Central American Free Trade Agreement (CEFTA) extended NAFTA to five Central American countries (El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Costa Rica and Nicaragua). In the same year, the Dominican Republic joined the group by signing a free trade agreement with the United States, followed by Colombia in 2006, Peru in 2007 and Panama in 2011. According to many experts, the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), signed on October 5, 2015, represented an extension of NAFTA on a much larger scale. According to a 2013 article by Jeff Faux published by the Economic Policy Institute, California, Texas, Michigan and other states with a high concentration of manufacturing jobs have been the hardest hit by job losses due to NAFTA.  According to a 2011 article by EPI economist Robert Scott, about 682,900 U.S. jobs were “lost or displaced” by the trade deal.  Recent studies were consistent with Congressional Research Service reports that NAFTA had only a modest impact on manufacturing employment and that automation accounted for 87% of manufacturing job losses.
 Many critics of NAFTA viewed the deal as a radical experiment developed by influential multinationals that sought to increase their profits at the expense of ordinary citizens of the countries concerned. Opposition groups argued that the general rules imposed by NAFTA could undermine local governments by preventing them from passing laws or regulations to protect the public interest. Critics also argued that the treaty would lead to a significant deterioration in environmental and health standards, promote the privatization and deregulation of key public services, and displace family farmers in signatory countries. About one-quarter of all U.S. imports, such as crude oil, machinery, gold, vehicles, fresh produce, livestock and processed foods, come from Canada and Mexico, the second and third largest suppliers of imported goods to the United States. In addition, about one-third of U.S. exports, particularly machinery, vehicle parts, minerals, and oil and plastics, are destined for Canada and Mexico. Key NAFTA provisions provided for the gradual dismantling of tariffs, tariffs and other barriers to trade between the three members, with some tariffs being lifted immediately and others over up to 15 years.