Miscellaneous Trade Bill Still Delayed by Earmarks Issue
The “earmark and limited tariff benefit” issue is still having a negative impact on prospects for quick enactment of an omnibus Miscellaneous Trade Bill. The House Ways and Means and Senate Finance Committees are continuing efforts to resolve the issue and move forward on an MTB.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Export Compliance Daily combines U.S. export control news, foreign border import regulation and policy developments into a single daily information service that reliably informs its trade professional readers about important current issues affecting their operations.
(On March 11, 2010, the House Republican Conference adopted a policy unilaterally banning its members from requesting a congressional earmark1, limited tax benefit, or limited tariff benefit (i.e., a provision that modifies the Harmonized Tariff Schedule in a manner that benefits 10 or fewer entities).
In addition, various resolutions and bills have been introduced (primarily in the House) to take action (ban, increase transparency, etc.) on earmarks, limited tariff benefits, etc. None of these resolutions and bills have been enacted.)
Prior to Earmark Issue, Progress Was Being Made on Smaller MTB for Early 2010
Prior to the earmark issue, action on smaller MTB had been expected in early 2010. This smaller bill was to include certain (i)House extensions of expired suspensions and reductions, (ii) Senate extensions of expired suspensions and reductions, and (iii) new suspensions and reductions which both the House and Senate have cleared. Under this scenario, any remaining individual MTBs could have been considered later in 2010.
(Congress adjourned at the end of 2009 without passing an Omnibus MTB. As a result, hundreds of HTS 9902 tariff numbers, which provided temporary duty suspensions or reductions to certain products, expired on December 31, 2009.
Just before adjournment, Representatives Levin (D) and Brady (R) introduced H.R. 4380, the "Miscellaneous Trade and Technical Corrections Act of 2009” to renew certain HTS 9902 expired provisions and create certain new HTS 9902 provisions. A Senate MTB has not been introduced as the Finance Committee has not yet completed the process of vetting the individual MTBs introduced in the Senate in 2009 and those bills have not yet been compiled into a Senate Omnibus MTB.)
1The House Rules define a congressional earmark as a provision or report language included primarily at the request of a member, providing, authorizing, or recommending a specific amount of discretionary spending authority for a contract, loan, loan guarantee, grant, or other expenditure with or to an entity or targeted to a specific State, etc. other than through a statutory or administrative formula-driven or competitive award process.
(See ITT’s Online Archives or 03/31/10 news, (Ref: 10033110), for previous BP summary on the impact of the earmark issue on the MTB.
See ITT’s Online Archives or 01/15/10 news, (Ref: 10011505), for BP summary of Congress’ plans for a smaller MTB in early 2010.
(See ITT's Online Archives or 12/31/09 news, (Ref: 09123105), for BP summary on the expiration of hundreds of HTS 9902 numbers.
See ITT's Online Archives or 11/06/09 news, (Ref: 09110615), for BP summary of Senate Finance's request for comments on hundreds of miscellaneous trade duty suspension/reduction and technical corrections bills under consideration for inclusion for 2009 omnibus MTB.)