Final answer:
While a trading partner agreement can potentially eliminate the need for the traditional three-way match, it depends on the specific stipulations of the agreement and the level of trust established. Regional trading agreements are intended to streamline trade and reduce trading barriers among member countries, yet they do not ensure balanced trade with every partner.
Step-by-step explanation:
When a trading partner agreement is in place, it is possible, but not guaranteed, that the traditional three-way match of the purchase order, the receipt of goods, and the vendor's invoice can be eliminated. This is often the case because such agreements may stipulate specific terms that ensure the quality and quantity of goods or services provided meet the agreed-upon standards, thus reducing the need for the additional checks that a three-way match provides. However, the elimination of the three-way match depends on the specific terms and trust levels established in the trading partner agreement. It is true that the efficiency and efficacy of business operations, including procurement and payment processes, can be greatly improved by these agreements. Furthermore, recent floods of regional trading agreements, such as the USCMA/NAFTA, the EU, and TPP, aim to simplify and boost trade between member countries while reducing tariffs, import quotas, and non-tariff barriers as described by an economist's "spaghetti bowl" metaphor of the complex network of trade agreements. However, these agreements do not inherently guarantee balanced trade with each trading partner, as the overall balance of trade does not imply balanced trade with each individual partner.