Overview

Title

To modify the bases for ineligibility for countries to benefit from the Generalized System of Preferences, and for other purposes.

ELI5 AI

The bill wants to change the rules for helping other countries grow their economies by making sure they play fair with digital trade and protect people's online data. It checks if a country makes it hard to do business online or doesn't keep people's personal information safe.

Summary AI

H. R. 6990 seeks to update the criteria for determining which countries are eligible to benefit from the Generalized System of Preferences, a program aimed at promoting economic growth in developing countries. The bill proposes to amend the Trade Act of 1974 to include digital trade considerations in the eligibility criteria, assessing whether a country imposes unnecessary digital trade barriers or fails to support digital consumer protections. Additionally, it introduces new conditions that emphasize the importance of open digital ecosystems and the protection of personal information.

Published

2024-01-12
Congress: 118
Session: 2
Chamber: HOUSE
Status: Introduced in House
Date: 2024-01-12
Package ID: BILLS-118hr6990ih

Keywords AI

generalized system of preferences digital trade barriers trade act of 1974 digital consumer protections economic growth developing countries strategic interests data protection online protections eligibility criteria

Sources

Bill Statistics

Size

Sections:
2
Words:
496
Pages:
3
Sentences:
10

Language

Nouns: 133
Verbs: 31
Adjectives: 23
Adverbs: 1
Numbers: 16
Entities: 22

Complexity

Average Token Length:
3.72
Average Sentence Length:
49.60
Token Entropy:
4.46
Readability (ARI):
23.74

AnalysisAI

General Summary of the Bill

H.R. 6990, introduced in the House of Representatives on January 12, 2024, aims to modify the criteria determining which countries can benefit from the Generalized System of Preferences (GSP), a program designed to promote economic growth in developing countries. The bill specifically targets digital trade issues, emphasizing the United States' interest in establishing fair digital trade practices. It proposes amendments to the Trade Act of 1974 to ensure countries benefiting from the GSP do not impose digital trade barriers that could harm U.S. interests.

Summary of Significant Issues

The bill introduces key modifications but also raises several issues:

  1. Subjective Language: The use of subjective terms such as "detriment of United States development goals, strategic interests, or competitiveness" could lead to varying interpretations. Such ambiguity presents challenges in implementing the bill consistently and may invite political controversies or legal disputes.

  2. Complex Legal Structure: The language and structure used in the bill, particularly with nested subparagraphs and the frequent use of semicolons, could make it difficult for individuals without a legal background to understand. This complexity might hinder transparency and public engagement.

  3. Lack of Oversight Mechanisms: The bill does not explicitly outline oversight or evaluation processes for assessing digital trade barriers or consumer protections. This absence raises concerns about accountability and how determinations regarding eligibility for GSP benefits are made.

Impact on the Public

For the general public, the bill's focus on digital trade aims to create a more balanced and fair global digital marketplace. By targeting countries that restrict digital trade unfairly, the bill could enhance opportunities for U.S. businesses abroad, potentially fostering economic growth and creating jobs domestically.

However, the lack of clarity in the bill's language might lead to inconsistent enforcement, possibly affecting the reliability of international trade relations. This unpredictability could have downstream effects on businesses and consumers relying on digital goods and services.

Impact on Specific Stakeholders

For U.S. Businesses: The proposed changes might benefit businesses by reducing digital trade barriers that limit access to foreign markets. This could enhance competitiveness and strategic advantages for companies operating internationally.

For Developing Countries: While the bill aims to open digital trade, it may place additional pressure on developing countries that do not meet the new standards. These countries could face exclusion from the GSP, potentially hindering their economic growth.

For Policy Makers and Legal Experts: The subjective nature of some terms used in the bill could demand careful interpretation and consistent application, necessitating expertise in international trade law and diplomatic negotiations.

In conclusion, while H.R. 6990 aims to better align U.S. trade interests with digital development goals, its successful implementation hinges on addressing the issues of subjective language, complex structure, and lack of oversight, which could significantly impact both domestic and international stakeholders.

Issues

  • The amendment in Section 2, which introduces subparagraph (D) under subsection (b)(2), uses subjective terms like 'detriment of United States development goals, strategic interests, or competitiveness' that could be open to interpretation and lead to varied implementations, potentially causing political controversy or disputes (related to Section 2).

  • In Section 2, subsection (c) paragraph (8), the terms 'unnecessary or discriminatory' are subjective without precise definitions, which might lead to legal ambiguities or disputes in interpretation (related to Section 2).

  • There are concerns about the lack of explicit oversight or evaluation mechanisms for the determinations regarding digital trade barriers or consumer protections in the amendments, raising accountability issues (related to Section 2).

  • The complex language and structure introduced in the amendments, with nested subparagraphs and frequent semicolons, could make the bill challenging to understand without specialized legal knowledge, potentially impacting transparency and public comprehension (related to Section 2).

  • The short title clause in Section 1 does not provide sufficient context or details related to specific spending or allocations, making it difficult to scrutinize for potential wasteful spending or other issues (related to Section 1).

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 first section of the bill states the official name of the legislation, which is the "Digital Trade for Development Act."

2. Modifications to authority to designate countries Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

This section modifies the Trade Act of 1974 by adding that the President can consider if a country is restricting digital trade in ways that harm U.S. interests. It also requires looking at whether a country avoids unnecessary digital trade barriers and supports online protections for consumers and personal data.