Advanced search    Help

Clear all search criteria

Only 2/3! You are seeing results from the Public Collection, not the complete Full Collection. Sign in to search everything (see eligibility).

• United States Withdraws from the TPP [May 23, 2017]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "On January 23, President Trump directed the United States Trade Representative (USTR) to withdraw the United States as a signatory to the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) agreement; the acting USTR gave notification to that effect on January 30. The TPP is a proposed free trade agreement (FTA), signed by the United States and 11 Asia-Pacific countries on February 4, 2016. The agreement requires ratification by the member countries before it can become effective. Implementing legislation, the vehicle for U.S. ratification, was not submitted by the President or considered by Congress, in part due to the contentious debate over the agreement. Because the TPP had not taken effect, U.S. withdrawal does not immediately affect U.S. tariffs or other trade commitments. The United States also has existing FTAs with six of the TPP countries (Australia, Canada, Chile, Mexico, Peru, and Singapore), which this announcement does not affect."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Williams, Brock R.; Fergusson, Ian F.

  2017-05-23
• North American Free Trade Agreement: Notification for Renegotiation [May 19, 2017]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "On May 18, 2017, the Trump Administration sent a 90-day notification to Congress of its intent to begin talks with Canada and Mexico to renegotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA)... Under U.S. Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) (P.L. 114-26), the President must consult with Congress before giving the required 90-day notice of his intention to start negotiations... Following the 90-day notice, and at least 30 days prior to the start of negotiations, USTR [U.S. Trade Representative] is to publish 'a detailed and comprehensive summary of the specific objectives with respect to the negotiations, and a description of how the agreement, if successfully concluded, will further those objectives and benefit the United States.' Based on the May 18 notification date, negotiations could start on August 16, 2017, at the earliest."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Villarreal, M. Angeles; Fergusson, Ian F.

  2017-05-19
• United States Withdraws from the TPP [May 4, 2017]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "On January 23, President Trump directed the United States Trade Representative (USTR) to withdraw the United States as a signatory to the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) agreement; the acting USTR gave notification to that effect on January 30. The TPP is a proposed free trade agreement (FTA), signed by the United States and 11 Asia-Pacific countries on February 4, 2016. The agreement requires ratification by the member countries before it can become effective. Implementing legislation, the vehicle for U.S. ratification, was not submitted by the President or considered by Congress, in part due to the contentious debate over the agreement. Because the TPP had not taken effect, U.S. withdrawal does not immediately affect U.S. tariffs or other trade commitments. The United States also has existing FTAs with six of the TPP countries (Australia, Canada, Chile, Mexico, Peru, and Singapore), which this announcement does not affect."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Williams, Brock R.; Fergusson, Ian F.

  2017-05-04
• Trade Implications of the President's Buy American Executive Order [May 2, 2017]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "With the April 18, 2017, issuance of President Trump's Executive Order [EO] on Buy American and Hire American, U.S. procurement obligations with 57 countries under the World Trade Organization (WTO) Government Procurement Agreement (GPA), the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), and other U.S. free trade agreements (FTAs) are coming under scrutiny. Some may question whether the order, when implemented, could conflict with current U.S. obligations under these agreements. More specifically, could the EO run counter to U.S. policy on government procurement, which generally seeks to balance support for U.S. industries with ensuring a competitive, cost-efficient process?"

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Fefer, Rachel F.; Fergusson, Ian F.

  2017-05-02
• Moving On: TPP Signatories Meet in Chile [March 16, 2017]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "On March 14-15, representatives from the 12 original signatories to the proposed Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) free trade agreement (FTA) met in Chile to discuss the future direction of regional integration efforts in the Asia-Pacific (see CRS In Focus IF10000, TPP: Overview and Current Status). China, Colombia, and South Korea were also represented. The meeting follows the Trump Administration's January announcement of U.S. withdrawal from the TPP, which effectively ended the possibility of TPP's entry into force in its current form (see CRS Insight IN10646, The United States Withdraws from the TPP). The United States has existing FTAs with six of the TPP countries, but not with Brunei, Japan, Malaysia, New Zealand, or Vietnam. The Trump Administration says it plans to focus its future trade efforts on possibly renegotiating and modernizing existing FTAs, beginning with the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), and then potentially pursuing new bilateral FTAs with TPP participants, particularly Japan and, possibly, other countries (see CRS Report R42965, The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA))."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Fergusson, Ian F.; Williams, Brock R.

  2017-03-16
• North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) [February 22, 2017]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) entered into force on January 1, 1994. […] The overall economic impact of NAFTA is difficult to measure since trade and investment trends are influenced by numerous other economic variables, such as economic growth, inflation, and currency fluctuations. The agreement likely accelerated and also locked in trade liberalization that was already taking place in Mexico, but many of these changes may have taken place without an agreement. Nevertheless, NAFTA is significant, because it was the most comprehensive free trade agreement (FTA) negotiated at the time and contained several groundbreaking provisions. […] The 115th Congress faces numerous issues related to NAFTA and international trade. President Donald J. Trump has proposed renegotiating NAFTA, or possibly withdrawing from it. Congress may wish to consider the ramifications of renegotiating or withdrawing from NAFTA and how it may affect the U.S. economy and foreign relations with Mexico and Canada. It may also wish to examine the congressional role in a possible renegotiation, as well as the negotiating positions of Canada and Mexico. Mexico has stated that, if NAFTA is reopened, it may seek to broaden negotiations to include security, counter-narcotics, and transmigration issues. Mexico has also indicated that it may choose to withdraw from the agreement if the negotiations are not favorable to the country. Congress may also wish to address issues related to the U.S. withdrawal from the proposed Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) free trade agreement among the United States, Canada, Mexico, and 9 other countries."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Villarreal, M. Angeles; Fergusson, Ian F.

  2017-02-22
• United States Withdraws from the TPP [February 13, 2017]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "On January 23, President Trump directed the United States Trade Representative (USTR) to withdraw the United States as a signatory to the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) agreement; the acting USTR gave notification to that effect on January 30. The TPP is a proposed free trade agreement (FTA), signed by the United States and 11 Asia-Pacific countries on February 4, 2016. The agreement requires ratification by the member countries before it can become effective. Implementing legislation, the vehicle for U.S. ratification, was not submitted by the President or considered by Congress, in part due to the contentious debate over the agreement."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Williams, Brock R.; Fergusson, Ian F.

  2017-02-13
• United States Withdraws from the TPP [February 3, 2017]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "On January 23, President Trump directed the United States Trade Representative (USTR) to withdraw the United States as a signatory to the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) agreement; the acting USTR gave notification to that effect on January 30. The TPP is a proposed free trade agreement (FTA), signed by the United States and 11 Asia-Pacific countries on February 4, 2016. The agreement requires ratification by the member countries before it can become effective. Implementing legislation, the vehicle for U.S. ratification, was not submitted by the President or considered by Congress, in part due to the contentious debate over the agreement. TPP supporters argue that the withdrawal could damage U.S. negotiating credibility, undermine U.S. economic leadership in the region, hurt U.S. firms' competitiveness abroad, and give China greater leverage to set regional trade rules. TPP opponents see the withdrawal as preventing greater U.S. import competition and potential job losses."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Williams, Brock R.; Fergusson, Ian F.

  2017-02-03
• Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP): Key Provisions and Issues for Congress [June 14, 2016]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) is a proposed free trade agreement (FTA) among 12 Asia-Pacific countries, with both economic and strategic significance for the United States. The proposed agreement is perhaps the most ambitious FTA undertaken by the United States in terms of its size, the breadth and depth of its commitments, its potential evolution, and its geo-political significance. Signed on February 4, 2016, after several years of negotiations, if implemented, TPP would be the largest FTA in which the United States participates, and would eliminate trade barriers and establish new trade rules and disciplines on a range of issues among TPP partners not found in previous U.S. FTAs or the World Trade Organization (WTO). In addition, the TPP is designed to better integrate the United States into the growing Asia-Pacific region and has become the economic centerpiece of the Administration's 'rebalance' to the region. Congress would need to enact implementing legislation for the agreement to enter into force for the United States. Such legislation would be considered under Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) procedures, unless Congress determines the Administration has not met TPA requirements."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Fergusson, Ian F.; Williams, Brock R.

  2016-06-14
• Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP): Key Provisions and Issues for Congress [May 4, 2016]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) is a proposed free trade agreement (FTA) among 12 Asia-Pacific countries, with both economic and strategic significance for the United States. The proposed agreement is perhaps the most ambitious FTA undertaken by the United States in terms of its size, the breadth and depth of its commitments, its potential evolution, and its geo-political significance. Signed on February 4, 2016, after several years of negotiations, if implemented, TPP would be the largest FTA in which the United States participates, and would eliminate trade barriers and establish new trade rules and disciplines on a range of issues among TPP partners not found in previous U.S. FTAs or the World Trade Organization (WTO). In addition, the TPP is designed to better integrate the United States into the growing Asia-Pacific region and has become the economic centerpiece of the Administration's 'rebalance' to the region. Congress would need to enact implementing legislation for the agreement to enter into force for the United States. Such legislation would be considered under Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) procedures, unless Congress determines the Administration has not met TPA requirements."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Fergusson, Ian F.; Williams, Brock R.

  2016-05-04
• Canadian Prime Minister Trudeau's State Visit, March 2016 [March 7, 2016]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is scheduled to make a state visit to the United States on March 10, 2016. It will be the first state visit by a Canadian leader since 1997, when then-President Clinton hosted then-Prime Minister Jean Chrétien. Occurring less than five months after Trudeau's Liberal Party regained power following 10 years of Conservative Party rule, the state visit may provide an opportunity to reset the U.S.-Canadian relationship, which has been strained in recent years."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Meyer, Peter J.; Fergusson, Ian F.

  2016-03-07
• Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP): In Brief [February 9, 2016]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) is a proposed free trade agreement (FTA) among 12 Asia-Pacific countries, which the Obama Administration casts as comprehensive and high standard, with economic and strategic significance for the United States. The 12 countries (including the United States) announced the conclusion of the TPP negotiations and released the text of the agreement in late 2015. Trade ministers from the TPP countries signed the final agreement text on February 4, 2016, but Congress would need to pass implementing legislation for the agreement to enter into force for the United States. It would be eligible to receive expedited legislative consideration under Trade Promotion Authority (TPA), P.L. 114-26, if Congress determines the Administration has advanced the TPA negotiating objectives, and has met various notification and consultation requirements. Through the TPP, the participating countries seek to liberalize trade and investment and establish new rules and disciplines in the region beyond those that already exist in the World Trade Organization (WTO). The FTA is envisioned as a living agreement open to future members and new issues and may become a vehicle to advance a wider Asia-Pacific free trade area. Indonesia, the Philippines, and South Korea have recently indicated their interest in joining the TPP. It is also a U.S. policy response to the rapidly increasing economic and strategic linkages among Asian-Pacific nations and has become the economic centerpiece of the Administration's 'rebalance' toward the region. […]This report briefly summarizes some of the key provisions listed generally in alphabetical order. Additional analysis of the agreement will be forthcoming."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Fergusson, Ian F.; McMinimy, Mark A.; Williams, Brock R.

  2016-02-09
• Trans-Pacific Partnership: Strategic Implications [February 4, 2016]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  From the report summary: "On February 4, 2016, Ministers of the 12 countries participating in the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) negotiations signed the proposed free trade agreement (FTA). TPP is one of the Obama Administration's signature trade policy initiatives, an effort to reduce and eliminate trade and investment barriers and establish new rules and disciplines to govern trade and investment among the 12 countries. TPP proponents, including Administration officials, argue that the proposed TPP would have substantial strategic benefits for the United States in addition to its direct economic impact. They argue that the agreement would enhance overall U.S. influence in the economically dynamic Asia-Pacific region and advance U.S. leadership in setting and modernizing the rules of commerce in the region and potentially in the multilateral trading system under the World Trade Organization (WTO). [...] China is not a TPP member, but features prominently in discussion of the agreement's potential strategic effects. Some argue that China is attempting to create a regional order that seeks to minimize U.S. presence and power. In this line of reasoning, the TPP serves as a counter to growing Chinese economic and political influence, implying that failure to conclude TPP could, in effect, allow China to shape regional rules of commerce and diplomacy through its own trade and investment initiatives. Others, however, argue that TPP is complementary to other FTAs and trade agreements throughout the region, including those championed by China, and that new members--possibly including China--will be critical for the TPP to influence regional norms."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Williams, Brock R.; Dolven, Ben; Fergusson, Ian F. . . .

  2016-02-04
• Trans-Pacific Partnership: Strategic Implications [February 3, 2016]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  From the Summary: "On October 5, 2015, Ministers of the 12 Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) countries announced conclusion of their free trade agreement (FTA) negotiations. The agreement is one of the Obama Administration's signature trade policy initiatives, an effort to reduce and eliminate trade and investment barriers and establish new rules and disciplines to govern trade and investment among the 12 countries. TPP proponents, including Administration officials, argue that the proposed TPP would have substantial strategic benefits for the United States in addition to its direct economic impact. They argue that the agreement would enhance overall U.S. influence in the economically dynamic Asia-Pacific region and advance U.S. leadership in setting and modernizing the rules of commerce in the region and potentially in the multilateral trading system under the World Trade Organization (WTO)."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Williams, Brock R.; Dolven, Ben; Fergusson, Ian F. . . .

  2016-02-03
• Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP): In Brief [January 8, 2016]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) is a proposed free trade agreement (FTA) among 12 Asia-Pacific countries, with both economic and strategic significance for the United States. If approved, it would be the largest FTA in which the United States participates. The 12 countries announced the conclusion of the TPP negotiations on October 5, 2015, after several years of ongoing talks. The President released the text of the agreement and notified Congress of his intent to sign on November 5, 2015. Congress would need to pass implementing legislation for a final TPP agreement to enter into force for the United States. [...] The Obama Administration, joined by many analysts as well as many policymakers in the region, has argued that the strategic value of a potential TPP agreement parallels its economic value, contending that the agreement would strengthen U.S. allies and partners and reaffirm U.S. economic leadership in the region. The President has repeatedly highlighted the importance of maintaining U.S. leadership in crafting global trade rules, notably with reference to potentially alternative Chinese initiatives. China is not a party to the TPP. Others argue that past trade pacts have had a limited impact on broad foreign policy dynamics."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Fergusson, Ian F.; McMinimy, Mark A.; Williams, Brock R.

  2016-01-08
• Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP): In Brief [November 19, 2015]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  From the Summary: "The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) is a proposed free trade agreement (FTA) among 12 Asia-Pacific countries, with both economic and strategic significance for the United States. If approved, it would be the largest FTA in which the United States participates. The 12 countries announced the conclusion of the TPP negotiations on October 5, 2015, after several years of ongoing talks. The President released the text of the agreement and notified Congress of his intent to sign on November 5, 2015. Congress would need to pass implementing legislation for a final TPP agreement to enter into force for the United States. Such legislation would be eligible to receive expedited legislative consideration under the recent grant of Trade Promotion Authority (TPA), P.L. 114-26, if Congress determines the Administration has advanced the TPA negotiating objectives, and met various notification and consultation requirements. TPP negotiating parties include Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, the United States, and Vietnam. […] The Obama Administration, joined by many analysts as well as many policymakers in the region, has argued that the strategic value of a potential TPP agreement parallels its economic value, contending that the agreement would strengthen U.S. allies and partners and reaffirm U.S. economic leadership in the region. The President has repeatedly highlighted the importance of maintaining U.S. leadership in crafting global trade rules, notably with reference to potentially alternative Chinese initiatives."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Fergusson, Ian F.; McMinimy, Mark A.; Williams, Brock R.

  2015-11-19
• Canada's October 2015 Elections [September 22, 2015]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  From the Document; "Canada's next election is scheduled for October 19, 2015. It is being held at a time of slowing economic growth and ongoing controversies over anti-terrorism legislation and Canada's role in combating the Islamic State. The outcome of the election may have implications for the United States, which is Canada's largest trading partner, largest energy consumer, and NATO ally. […] Canada is a constitutional monarchy (Elizabeth II is Queen of Canada) with a bicameral Westminster-style Parliament that includes an elected House of Commons and an appointed Senate. In the upcoming election, 338 Members of Parliament will be elected from individual districts ('ridings') under a first-past-the-post system, which only requires a plurality of the vote to win a seat. The party winning the most seats typically gets the first chance to form a government. A government lasts as long as it can command a parliamentary majority for its policies, for a maximum of four years. If no single party holds a majority of seats, a minority government can be formed that attempts to pass legislation on a vote-by-vote basis. If a government loses a vote of confidence, new elections can be called, or the Governor-General (the Queen's representative) can offer other parties a chance to form a government."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Meyer, Peter J.; Fergusson, Ian F.

  2015-09-22
• Softwood Lumber Imports From Canada: Current Issues [August 27, 2015]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "Softwood lumber imports from Canada have been of concern to Congress for many years. Under the Constitution, Congress has the power to regulate interstate commerce and exercises authority over trade relations with foreign nations. Lumber production is a significant industry in many states, and U.S. lumber producers are concerned they are at an unfair competitive disadvantage in the domestic market against Canadian lumber producers because of Canada's timber pricing policies. This has resulted in four major disputes (so-called 'lumber wars') between the United States and Canada since the 1980s. The last major dispute was resolved when the 2006 Softwood Lumber Agreement (SLA) was signed. Under the agreement, Canadian softwood lumber shipped to the United States is subject to export charges and quota limitations when the price of U.S. softwood products falls below a certain level. That agreement is set to expire on October 12, 2015, although both countries are prohibited from filing for trade protections for one year after the expiration."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Hoover, Katie; Fergusson, Ian F.

  2015-08-27
• Canada's October 2015 Elections [August 19, 2015]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  From the Document: "Canada's next election is scheduled for October 19, 2015. It is being held at a time of slowing economic growth and ongoing controversies over anti-terrorism legislation and Canada's role in combating the Islamic State. The outcome of the election may have implications for the United States, which is Canada's largest trading partner, largest energy consumer, and NATO [North Atlantic Treaty Organization] ally[.]"

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Meyer, Peter J.; Fergusson, Ian F.

  2015-08-19
• Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) and the Role of Congress in Trade Policy [June 15, 2015]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "TPA [Trade Promotion Authority] is the process Congress has made available to the President to enable legislation to approve and implement certain international trade agreements to be considered under expedited legislative procedures for limited periods, provided the President observes certain statutory obligations. TPA defines how Congress has chosen to exercise its constitutional authority over a particular aspect of trade policy, while giving the President added leverage to negotiate trade agreements by effectively assuring U.S. trade partners that final agreements will be given timely and unamended consideration. On July 30, 2013, President Obama first publicly requested that Congress reauthorize TPA, and he reiterated his request for TPA in his January 20, 2015, State of the Union address. Legislation to renew TPA was introduced in the 113th Congress (H.R. 3830) (S. 1900), but it was not acted upon. […] Although there appears to be support for renewal of TPA in Congress, the details of the legislation are likely to be subject to considerable debate, including the specific treatment of any related TAA [Trade Adjustment Assistance] program reauthorization. This report presents background and analysis on the development of TPA, a summary of the major provisions under the expired authority, and a discussion of the issues that have arisen in the debate over TPA renewal. It also explores some of the policy options available to Congress."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Fergusson, Ian F.

  2015-06-15
• Trade Promotion Authority (TPA): Frequently Asked Questions [June 12, 2015]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "Legislation to reauthorize Trade Promotion Authority ('TPA'), sometimes called 'fast track,' was introduced as the Bipartisan Congressional Trade Priorities and Accountability Act of 2015 (TPA- 2015; H.R. 1890/S. 995) on April 16, 2015. The legislation was reported by the Senate Finance Committee on April 22, 2015, and by the House Ways and Means Committee on April 23, 2015. TPA requires that if the President negotiates an international trade agreement that would reduce tariff or non-tariff barriers to trade in ways that require changes in U.S. law, the United States can implement the agreement only through the enactment of legislation. If the trade agreement and the process of negotiating it meet certain requirements, TPA allows Congress to consider the required implementing bill under expedited ('fast track') procedures, pursuant to which the bill may come to the floor without action by the leadership, and can receive a guaranteed up-or-down vote with no amendments. […] The issue of TPA reauthorization raises a number of questions regarding TPA itself and the pending legislation. This report addresses a number of those questions that are frequently asked, including the following: (1) What is trade promotion authority? (2) Is TPA necessary? (3) What are trade negotiating objectives and how are they reflected in TPA statutes? (4) What requirements does Congress impose on the President under TPA? (5) Does TPA affect congressional authority on trade policy? This report describes aspects of the proposed TPA-2015 introduced on April 16, 2015."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Fergusson, Ian F.; Beth, Richard S.

  2015-06-12
• Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) and the Role of Congress in Trade Policy [May 28, 2015]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "TPA [Trade Promotion Authority] is the process Congress has made available to the President to enable legislation to approve and implement certain international trade agreements to be considered under expedited legislative procedures for limited periods, provided the President observes certain statutory obligations. TPA defines how Congress has chosen to exercise its constitutional authority over a particular aspect of trade policy, while giving the President added leverage to negotiate trade agreements by effectively assuring U.S. trade partners that final agreements will be given timely and unamended consideration. On July 30, 2013, President Obama first publicly requested that Congress reauthorize TPA, and he reiterated his request for TPA in his January 20, 2015, State of the Union address. Legislation to renew TPA was introduced in the 113th Congress (H.R. 3830) (S. 1900), but it was not acted upon. […] Although there appears to be support for renewal of TPA in Congress, the details of the legislation are likely to be subject to considerable debate, including the specific treatment of any related TAA [Trade Adjustment Assistance] program reauthorization. This report presents background and analysis on the development of TPA, a summary of the major provisions under the expired authority, and a discussion of the issues that have arisen in the debate over TPA renewal. It also explores some of the policy options available to Congress."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Fergusson, Ian F.

  2015-05-28
• Trade Promotion Authority (TPA): Frequently Asked Questions [May 28, 2015]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "Legislation to reauthorize Trade Promotion Authority ('TPA'), sometimes called 'fast track,' was introduced as the Bipartisan Congressional Trade Priorities and Accountability Act of 2015 (TPA- 2015; H.R. 1890/S. 995) on April 16, 2015. The legislation was reported by the Senate Finance Committee on April 22, 2015, and by the House Ways and Means Committee the next day. TPA, as incorporated into H.R. 1314 by substitute amendment, passed the Senate on May 22 by a vote of 62-37. TPA requires that if the President negotiates an international trade agreement that would reduce tariff or non-tariff barriers to trade in ways that require changes in U.S. law, the United States can implement the agreement only through the enactment of legislation. If the trade agreement and the process of negotiating it meet certain requirements, TPA allows Congress to consider the required implementing bill under expedited ('fast track') procedures, pursuant to which the bill may come to the floor without action by the leadership, and can receive a guaranteed up-or-down vote with no amendments."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Fergusson, Ian F.; Beth, Richard S.

  2015-05-28
• Trade Promotion Authority (TPA): Frequently Asked Questions [May 7, 2015]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "Legislation to reauthorize Trade Promotion Authority ('TPA'), sometimes called 'fast track,' was introduced as the Bipartisan Congressional Trade Priorities and Accountability Act of 2015 (TPA- 2015; H.R. 1890/S. 995) on April 16, 2015. The legislation was reported by the Senate Finance Committee on April 22, 2015, and by the House Ways and Means Committee on April 23, 2015. TPA requires that if the President negotiates an international trade agreement that would reduce tariff or non-tariff barriers to trade in ways that require changes in U.S. law, the United States can implement the agreement only through the enactment of legislation. If the trade agreement and the process of negotiating it meet certain requirements, TPA allows Congress to consider the required implementing bill under expedited ('fast track') procedures, pursuant to which the bill may come to the floor without action by the leadership, and can receive a guaranteed up-or-down vote with no amendments. […] The issue of TPA reauthorization raises a number of questions regarding TPA itself and the pending legislation. This report addresses a number of those questions that are frequently asked, including the following: (1) What is trade promotion authority? (2) Is TPA necessary? (3) What are trade negotiating objectives and how are they reflected in TPA statutes? (4) What requirements does Congress impose on the President under TPA? (5) Does TPA affect congressional authority on trade policy? This report describes aspects of the proposed TPA-2015 introduced on April 16, 2015."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Fergusson, Ian F.; Beth, Richard S.

  2015-05-07
• Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) and the Role of Congress in Trade Policy [April 27, 2015]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "Legislation to reauthorize Trade Promotion Authority (TPA), formerly called fast track, was introduced as the Bipartisan Congressional Trade Priorities and Accountability Act of 2015 (TPA- 2015)(H.R. 1890/S. 995) in the Senate and the House on April 16, 2015. The previous grant of authority expired on July 1, 2007, Trade Promotion Authority (TPA-previously known as fast track) expired. TPA is the authority Congress grants to the President to enter into certain reciprocal trade agreements, and to have their implementing bills considered under expedited legislative procedures, provided the President observes certain statutory obligations. TPA defines how Congress has chosen to exercise its constitutional authority over a particular aspect of trade policy, while giving the President added leverage to negotiate trade agreements by effectively assuring U.S. trade partners that final agreements will be given timely and unamended consideration. On July 30, 2013, President Obama first publicly requested that Congress reauthorize TPA and he reiterated his request for TPA in his January 20, 2015, State of the Union address. Legislation to renew TPA was introduced in the 113th Congress (H.R. 3830) (S. 1900), but it was not acted upon."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Fergusson, Ian F.

  2015-04-27
• Keystone XL Pipeline: Overview and Recent Developments [April 1, 2015]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "TransCanada's proposed Keystone XL Pipeline would transport oil sands crude from Canada and shale oil produced in North Dakota and Montana to a market hub in Nebraska for further delivery to Gulf Coast refineries. The pipeline would consist of 875 miles of 36-inch pipe with the capacity to transport 830,000 barrels per day. Because it would cross the Canadian-U.S. border, Keystone XL requires a Presidential Permit from the State Department based on a determination that the pipeline would 'serve the national interest.' To make its national interest determination (NID), the department considers potential effects on energy security; environmental and cultural resources; the economy; foreign policy, and other factors. Effects on environmental and cultural resources are determined by preparing an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The NID process also provides for public comment and requires the State Department to consult with specific federal agencies."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Parfomak, Paul W.; Luther, Linda G.; Lattanzio, Richard K. . . .

  2015-04-01
• Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) Negotiations and Issues for Congress [March 20, 2015]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) is a proposed regional free trade agreement (FTA) being negotiated among the United States, Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, and Vietnam. […] As a leading trade policy initiative of the Obama Administration, the TPP serves several strategic goals. It is a manifestation of the Administration's 'rebalance' to the Asia-Pacific, and if concluded, may serve to shape the economic architecture of the region. It has the potential to harmonize existing agreements with U.S. FTA partners, attract new participants, and establish regional rules on new policy issues facing the global economy--possibly providing impetus to future multilateral liberalization under the WTO [World Trade Organization]. As the negotiations proceed, a number of issues important to Congress have emerged. One is whether the United States can balance its vision of creating a 'comprehensive and high standard' agreement with a large and expanding group of countries, while not insisting on terms that other countries will reject. Another issue is how Congress will consider the TPP, if concluded. The present negotiations are not being conducted under the auspices of formal trade promotion authority (TPA)--the latest TPA expired on July 1, 2007--although the Administration informally is following the procedures of the former TPA. Different views exist regarding the appropriate timing of potential TPA legislation relative to the possible conclusion of the TPP. Other issues include whether the current chapters included in the agreement appropriately address congressional trade policy concerns and how the potential agreement may impact the multilateral trading system and other trade negotiations, including for a proposed U.S.-EU Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (T-TIP) agreement."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Fergusson, Ian F.; McMinimy, Mark A.; Williams, Brock R.

  2015-03-20
• Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) Negotiations and Issues for Congress [January 30, 2015]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) is a proposed regional free trade agreement (FTA) being negotiated among the United States, Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, and Vietnam. U.S. negotiators and others describe and envision the TPP as a 'comprehensive and high-standard' FTA that aims to liberalize trade in nearly all goods and services and include rules-based commitments beyond those currently established in the World Trade Organization (WTO). The broad outline of an agreement was announced on the sidelines of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) ministerial in November 2011, in Honolulu, HI. If concluded as envisioned, the TPP potentially could eliminate tariff and nontariff barriers to trade and investment among the parties and could serve as a template for a future trade pact among APEC members and potentially other countries. […] Another issue is how Congress will consider the TPP, if concluded. The present negotiations are not being conducted under the auspices of formal trade promotion authority (TPA)--the latest TPA expired on July 1, 2007--although the Administration informally is following the procedures of the former TPA. Different views exist regarding the appropriate timing of potential TPA legislation relative to the possible conclusion of the TPP. Other issues include whether the current chapters included in the agreement appropriately address congressional trade policy concerns and how the potential agreement may impact the multilateral trading system and other trade negotiations, including for a proposed U.S.-EU Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (T-TIP) agreement."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Fergusson, Ian F.; McMinimy, Mark A.; Williams, Brock R.

  2015-01-30
• U.S. Natural Gas Exports: New Opportunities, Uncertain Outcomes [January 28, 2015]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "As estimates for the amount of U.S. natural gas resources have grown, so have the prospects of rising U.S. natural gas exports. The United States is expected to go from a net importer of natural gas to a net exporter by 2016. With recent natural gas prices relatively low compared to global prices and historically low for the United States, producers are looking for new markets for their natural gas. Projects to export liquefied natural gas (LNG) by tanker ship have been proposed--cumulatively accounting for over 60% of current gross U.S. natural gas production. Pipeline exports, which accounted for 99% of all exports of U.S. natural gas in 2013, are also likely to continue rising. However, under the Natural Gas Act, the Department of Energy (DOE) and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) must authorize the export of the natural gas commodity and related facilities, respectively. This overarching federal role in the expansion of U.S. natural gas exports has been the subject of ongoing oversight and debate in Congress. […] Environmental groups are split regarding natural gas use, with some favoring increased use to curb emissions of certain pollutants, while others oppose expanded use of natural gas because it is not as clean as renewable forms of energy, such as wind or solar. The use of hydraulic fracturing to produce shale gas for export markets has also raised concerns among environmental groups particularly concerned with its possible impacts on groundwater quality. The possibility of a significant increase in U.S. natural gas exports will factor into ongoing debates on the economy, energy independence, climate change, and energy security."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Parfomak, Paul W.; Luther, Linda G.; Fergusson, Ian F. . . .

  2015-01-28
• Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) and the Role of Congress in Trade Policy [January 23, 2015]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "Legislation to renew TPA is expected to be introduced in the 114th Congress. On July 1, 2007, Trade Promotion Authority (TPA--previously known as fast track) expired. TPA is the authority Congress grants to the President to enter into certain reciprocal trade agreements, and to have their implementing bills considered under expedited legislative procedures, provided the President observes certain statutory obligations. […] TPA renewal may become a more pressing issue in the 114th Congress because current trade negotiations on the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), and the Trade in Services Agreement (TISA) are in progress. Technically, TPA is not necessary to begin or even conclude trade negotiations, but it is widely understood to be a key element of defining congressional authority, and of passing trade agreement implementing legislation. Therefore, its renewal can be construed as signaling serious congressional support for moving ahead with trade negotiations. Addressing congressional concerns over the definition and operation of TPA may be a central part of the debate. Although there appears to be support for renewal of TPA in Congress, the details of the legislation are likely to be subject to considerable debate, including the specific treatment of any related TAA program reauthorization. This report presents background and analysis on the development of TPA, a summary of the major provisions under the expired authority, and a discussion of the issues that have arisen in the debate over TPA renewal. It also explores some of the policy options available to Congress."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Fergusson, Ian F.

  2015-01-23