Overview
Title
To limit the authority of the President to impose new or additional duties with respect to articles imported from countries that are major agricultural trade partners with the United States.
ELI5 AI
H.R. 2842 is a bill that says the President needs to ask permission from Congress before adding new taxes on imported food from countries that trade a lot of farm products with the U.S. This means Congress has to agree first to help make sure food prices don't go up too quickly.
Summary AI
H.R. 2842, titled the “Stop Raising Prices on Food Act,” aims to limit the President’s authority to impose new or additional tariffs on goods imported from countries that are major agricultural trade partners with the United States. The bill stipulates that before any such tariff can be introduced or increased, the President must request approval from Congress. This request must include specific objectives, explanations, and an assessment of the impact on the U.S. agricultural economy. A joint resolution from Congress must then be enacted to approve the new or increased tariff.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
General Summary of the Bill
The bill, titled the "Stop Raising Prices on Food Act," aims to limit the President's power to impose new or increased tariffs on agricultural imports from countries that are major trade partners with the United States. According to the bill, the President must seek Congressional approval before acting, providing a detailed request that outlines the objectives of the proposed tariff, reasons for not pursuing diplomatic alternatives, and an assessment of the potential impact on the U.S. agricultural economy. To proceed, Congress must pass a joint resolution supporting the President's request.
Summary of Significant Issues
One major issue with the bill pertains to its definition of "covered country." By focusing only on the top five importers of U.S. agricultural goods from the previous fiscal year, the bill may overlook countries with long-standing, consistent trade relationships that do not stand out in any given year but are nonetheless significant.
Another concern arises from the specific legislative acts that define a "covered duty." By limiting it to particular sections, there is a risk of inadvertently excluding other applicable duties, which could lead to regulatory gaps.
The requirement for the President to submit a request to Congress can cause delays, especially in urgent situations where quick action is needed. This procedural step could hamper timely responses to developments in international trade that demand immediate attention.
Moreover, the necessity for the President to justify not using diplomatic solutions might lead to disputes over the adequacy of these explanations. This requirement could instigate legal challenges questioning whether the President's reasons were substantial enough to bypass diplomacy.
Finally, the process of obtaining a joint resolution of approval may be hampered by Congressional procedures and potential political gridlock, leading to further delays in the implementation of necessary duties.
Impact on the Public
Broadly speaking, this bill could influence consumer prices, particularly the cost of food. By restricting the President's authority to impose tariffs abruptly, the legislation might help avoid sudden spikes in food costs linked to increased tariffs. This could have an indirect stabilizing effect on the public's grocery bills, benefiting consumers by maintaining more predictable food prices.
Impact on Stakeholders
Farmers and Agricultural Producers: For U.S. agricultural producers, the bill could provide a buffer against retaliation from major trade partners that might result from unpredictable changes in tariff policy. It offers a more stable environment for exports, which is crucial for planning and investment.
International Trade Partners: Trading partners might view this bill favorably as it reduces the likelihood of sudden tariff policy changes. It could foster a more stable trade environment and possibly enhance diplomatic relations.
The Executive Branch: The bill places additional constraints on the President, limiting executive flexibility in responding quickly to international trade issues. This could weaken the U.S. bargaining position in international negotiations if quick tariff adjustments are required to protect domestic interests.
Congress: This legislative proposal gives Congress greater oversight and a decisive role in trade policy, thereby enhancing its influence over important economic decisions affecting national imports and trade relationships. However, it could also increase pressure on Congress to act expediently and effectively in response to detailed and potentially urgent requests from the President.
In summary, the Stop Raising Prices on Food Act introduces a structured approach to tariff adjustments on agricultural products from major trade partners. While it provides a methodical pathway to imposing or increasing duties, it also introduces complexities and potential delays that might impact its efficacy in swiftly addressing international trade issues.
Issues
The definition of 'covered country' in Section 2(a)(1) is potentially ambiguous or contentious as it prioritizes the top 5 countries based on the previous fiscal year's import data. This could exclude countries with more consistent trading relationships over long periods and might result in frequent changes that affect the stability of trade relations and policy making.
The definition of 'covered duty' in Section 2(a)(2), which limits its application to specific acts, might inadvertently leave out other relevant duties, creating loopholes or gaps in regulation. This could impact the reach and effectiveness of the legislation in controlling duties.
The requirement under Section 2(b)(1) for the President to submit a detailed description and assessment to Congress before imposing a new or increased duty may cause delays in situations requiring swift action. This procedural hurdle could impede timely responses to urgent trade issues.
The explanation required in Section 2(b)(1)(B) for not using diplomatic means or other mechanisms may be viewed as subjective, potentially leading to disputes about whether the President's justifications are sufficient. This could be a point of contention and legal challenge.
The processes around the 'Joint resolution of approval' in Section 2(c) may be complex and vulnerable to procedural delays, particularly during political gridlock in Congress. This complication could hinder the timely issuance of necessary trade duties.
Sections
Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.
1. Short title Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section titled "Short title" states that this law can be referred to as the “Stop Raising Prices on Food Act.”
2. Limitation on authority of the President to impose duties on agricultural trading partners of the United States Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section outlines limitations on the President's power to impose or increase tariffs on agricultural imports from certain countries. The President must request Congress's approval, explain the objectives for such tariffs, and assess the impacts on the U.S. agricultural economy, with Congress needing to pass a joint resolution to authorize the action.