Competitive Need Limitations Modernization Act of 2017

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself as much time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I am happy to stand here with my chairman from the great State of Washington, (Mr. Reichert). This is a bipartisan bill.

The Generalized System of Preferences expired December 31, 2017. I rise today to urge my colleagues to support the legislation that would renew what I consider a very important program.

This is a longstanding trade program, Mr. Speaker, that has enjoyed broad bipartisan support since 1974. Since the GSP already expired, it is imperative that we extend the program now.

While this bill makes slight technical corrections, no real substantive changes were made in the existing program. I am open to having a debate on modifications that would enhance GSP in the future. I would have liked to have had it before this debate, had the time that we are debating right now and not have let the program expire, but, unfortunately, I am not in control of the calendar. I am pleased, however, that we agreed to work to renew this program in its current form on a bipartisan, bicameral basis.

Established by the Trade Act of 1974, GSP promotes economic development by eliminating duties on thousands of products when imported from one of approximately 120 designated beneficiary countries and territories. This program not only supports American competitiveness and economic opportunity, but it also encourages developing countries in the program to adopt high labor standards, intellectual property rights, and the rule of law.

So, as part of the current program, the committee known as the GSP Subcommittee of the Trade Policy Staff Committee conducts an annual review of the articles, an annual review of all the countries that are involved, that are eligible for duty-free treatment under this program. This committee is chaired by the United States Trade Representative and comprised of representatives of other executive branch agencies.

The law requires that the President take into account several factors when designating a country as eligible for GSP. These factors include whether a country has taken or is taking steps to afford workers internationally recognized worker rights--that is what the law says-- and the extent to which a country is providing adequate and effective protection of intellectual property rights.

Last year, the administration began a review of Bolivia's compliance, as an example, with the labor eligibility criterion due to concerns regarding the use of child labor and other labor abuses in Bolivia.

The legislation we are considering today includes a new reporting requirement that will improve the effectiveness of congressional oversight of the administration's enforcement of these eligibility criteria and the progress made under effective investigations. Article I, section 8 is very clear of what the legislators in this House have as a responsibility. It is my hope that Congress can further strengthen the enforcement mechanisms of the GSP in the future.

The program also boosts the competitiveness of United States companies and workers by reducing the cost of imports used to manufacture goods in the United States. In 2016, products valued at $18.9 billion entered the United States duty-free under the program. Since the expiration of the program, small- and medium-sized enterprises have borne the burden of higher costs of products imported under the GSP.

Consider Primetac, which is located in Little Ferry, New Jersey, in my district. It is a family-owned business from my district that uses the GSP-eligible goods to support their industrial packaging business. When GSP last expired, Primetac was forced to raise prices to compensate for the new import taxes. This was no small increase. The company estimates it paid about $1.5 million in new tariffs during the program's lapse.

This legislation would provide benefits retroactively to GSP-eligible imports so that small- and medium-sized American companies like Primetac can take full advantage of the benefits of GSP and boost their business' productivity

It is critical that we act quickly. I also want to mention that the GSP is also intended to prevent domestic companies from being harmed. Under the current process, the competitive need limitation provision within the law imposes ceilings on GSP benefits for each product and for each beneficiary country. The GSP statute provides that a beneficiary developing country loses GSP eligibility with respect to a product if the competitive need limitations are exceeded and then no waiver is granted.

In closing, I look forward to considering this legislation. With the successful passage of GSP, I hope that we will be able to issue a joint, bipartisan statement and continue working together to show the strong support for this program.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time to close.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

We have had expiration times in the last 5 or 6 years, but we always come together. We passed last week the Miscellaneous Tariff Bill in Trade. I think that is a good sign moving forward, working together in order to protect--not be protectionists, but protect American industries. I think that this is a very, very important move.

I also think that extending it to 2020 is a great idea. I think this is very, very important, so I won't be back here next year anyway. We have a little foresight here.

So I thank Mr. Reichert for bringing this to the floor. We worked hard to get this here. We hope we will get help from the other side of the building.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 4979) to extend the Generalized System of Preferences and to make technical changes to the competitive need limitations provision of the program, as amended.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 4979, currently under consideration.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to speak today in support of H.R. 4979, a bill to

extend the Generalized System of Preferences and to make technical changes to the competitive need limitations provision of the program. This bipartisan bill helps keep U.S. companies globally competitive by eliminating tariffs on certain imports from developing countries in a manner that does not hurt U.S. producers.

GSP saved U.S. companies more than $865 million in import duties in 2017, providing benefits to thousands of companies and their employees as well as their customers. GSP also provides an important enforcement tool to require all 121 beneficiary developing countries to continue to make progress on eligibility criteria set by Congress. These include critical issues like intellectual property protection, market access for U.S. exporters, and elimination of the worst forms of child labor.

In my home State of Washington, GSP saved companies about $11 million in import duties in 2017, and that is up 30 percent from 2016. As just one example, TRInternational, a small but quickly growing, veteran- owned chemical distributor in Seattle, relies on GSP to obtain certain chemical raw materials at globally competitive prices. Our last renewal of GSP in 2015 allowed TRI to hire more employees and invest in more equipment. Many of TRI's customers are U.S. manufacturers, and TRI's use of GSP to obtain raw materials at lower prices also makes these manufacturers more competitive.

For TRI and other Washington companies like Rain City Music that use the GSP program, their employees, and American consumers, GSP provides significant benefits.

And of course, I urge my colleagues to join us in supporting this bill, and I am pleased to be working with my good friend Bill Pascrell, who joins us here tonight.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield as much time as he may consume to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Brady), the chairman of the Ways and Means Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Indiana (Mrs. Walorski), one of the distinguished members of the Ways and Means Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Curbelo), another member of the Ways and Means Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Norman), who has been a leader on this issue.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I thank my friend from New Jersey because we have worked on a lot of issues together over the past almost 14 years now, and I do agree with him. There are few moments where we have a chance to sort of have a kumbaya moment. MTB, a week or two ago, was one of those.

Tonight, on GSP, is another one that doesn't sound--you know, GSP, people ask: What is that? And we tried to explain it tonight.

It is a complicated issue, but the bottom line is that this is good for American businesses. It creates jobs, energizes the economy. Coupled with tax reform and fair trade agreements that we are also working together on, I think we can look forward to a bright, bright future here in the United States for our working men and women and our families.

So our last renewal of GSP in 2015 allowed TRI to hire more employees, as I said. So we are looking forward to, you know, more jobs being created. And TRI, I know, is going to be very pleased by the fact that this is going to be voted on tonight.

It is clear that H.R. 4979 has strong bipartisan support, and for good reason. Renewing GSP will benefit U.S. companies, workers, and consumers. Any additional delay in renewing this important program has real costs in

my home State, as I mentioned, and throughout the country.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 4979, which extends the Generalized System of Preferences--or GSP-- program through 2020.

GSP helps American manufacturers, both big and small, cut input costs, which, in turn, lowers prices for consumers. Companies saved $865 million in import duties in 2017 alone.

I thank the chairman, in particular, for including my bipartisan bill, H.R. 4068, the Competitive Need Limitation Modernization Act, which I introduced with my friends, the gentlewoman from Nevada (Ms. Titus) and the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Ross).

My bill makes two small but important technical fixes to the competitive need limitation--or CNL--process. CNLs are exemptions granted by the government on products that exceed the dollar or percentage thresholds for GSP eligibility. They can be granted for a number of reasons, including national security, no domestic production, or low import levels.

Manufacturers in my district reached out to my office when they were denied a CNL on a type of wood not found in the U.S. But because of a government spreadsheet that stated there was a domestic product that was like or directly competitive as of January 1, 1995, they were denied. There was no information beyond that, just that date and that spreadsheet. The manufacturers even had sworn affidavits from producers in the industry saying there was actually nothing like or directly competitive to this wood in the U.S., but it didn't matter.

This arbitrary and inflexible date forces manufacturers like the ones in my district to pay millions in unnecessary duties, hurting American workers and consumers. And it hurts domestic producers that have brought jobs back to the U.S. since 1995 because that date is all that matters in a CNL application.

My bill changes that date to the last three calendar years to better reflect current domestic production. It also better synchronizes CNL application dates and the date that full-year trade data is released to provide more certainty.

I am glad we are taking this step to reauthorize GSP and to ensure that it is working the way Congress intended. I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of this bipartisan bill to renew the Generalized System of Preferences program for 3 years.

I thank Congressman Reichert for his leadership of the Trade Subcommittee and the good work that Mr. Pascrell has done as well.

This program, known as GSP, is incredibly important for the competitiveness of our local businesses and our local workers. It helps our families and our communities by reducing tariffs, which are essentially taxes, on products that many of us use every day. Through GSP, we secure tax-free access to thousands of products from around the world.

Last year, this saved American businesses more than $865 million. In Texas alone, our local job creators saved more than $76 million. Of course, this is money that our businesses can instead use to hire more workers, to expand, and innovate.

But, really, think about what it means for families. Think about that single mom in the grocery store carefully reading every price tag so she can stretch every dollar to the max. For her, GSP makes everyday essentials more affordable, as well as the occasional treat that saves money. It provides her with real peace of mind.

GSP delivers all these benefits in an accountable way that doesn't hurt American workers or businesses.

I thank all the Members who worked on this important pro-growth, pro- family bill; in particular, our Ways and Means Committee members: Congressman Neal, my ranking member; Congressmen Reichert and Pascrell, our Trade Subcommittee chairman and ranking member; and Congresswoman Jackie Walorski, who has been an outstanding leader in this effort.

Now, let's pass this bill, provide certainty for our job creators, and deliver the tax relief that American families deserve.

Mr. Speaker, I thank Chairman Reichert and Ranking Member Pascrell for their important work on this legislation.

I am proud to be a cosponsor of H.R. 4979, to provide a 3-year renewal of the Generalized System of Preferences. The GSP program provides duty-free access to the U.S. market for selected goods from 121 developing countries.

As a member of the Ways and Means Committee, I have always been an advocate of policies that allow businesses and consumers to acquire products of their choice at the best possible price. The GSP program gives our businesses and consumers that choice by promoting economic growth in developing countries while creating jobs here at home.

In 2017, U.S. importers enjoyed nearly $865 million in savings on import duties under the GSP program. During the same year, my home State of Florida had $1.2 billion of imports covered by the program and a total savings of $59 million on import duties. Mr. Speaker, that is about a 40 percent increase in savings from 2016.

I want to share the story of Mr. Bruce Price, a small-business owner in my district who would benefit from renewing the GSP program. He recently told my office he expects savings in the range of $25,000 to $45,000 per year if the program is renewed. For Mr. Price, those savings go a long way and make a major difference in determining his business decisions.

I commend the work the Ways and Means Subcommittee on Trade has done to reinforce our commitment to free and fair trade partnerships around the world. I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of H.R. 4979 to help Mr. Price and other small-business owners hire more workers all across our country.