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).

• Farm Bill Primer Series: A Guide to Omnibus Legislation on Agriculture and Food Programs [October 11, 2017]

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

  "This report constitutes a guide to a series of two-page reports that examine the various programs and policies that comprise periodic omnibus legislation on farm and food policy, commonly known as 'the farm bill.' The current farm bill (P.L. 113-79) was signed into law in February 2014. Many of the programs authorized by the 2014 farm bill are scheduled to expire in 2018 unless Congress provides for an extension, or reauthorizes them. Without congressional action, key commodity support programs would revert to permanently authorized legislation from the 1930s and 1940s."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  McMinimy, Mark A.

  2017-10-11
• Farm Bill Primer Series: A Guide to Omnibus Legislation on Agriculture and Food Programs [August 7, 2017]

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

  "This report constitutes a guide to a series of two-page reports that examine the various programs and policies that comprise periodic omnibus legislation on farm and food policy, commonly known as 'the farm bill.' The current farm bill (P.L. 113-79) was signed into law in February 2014. Many of the programs authorized by the 2014 farm bill are scheduled to expire in 2018 unless Congress provides for an extension, or reauthorizes them. Without congressional action, key commodity support programs would revert to permanently authorized legislation from the 1930s and 1940s."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  McMinimy, Mark A.

  2017-08-07
• 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 (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) 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
• 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 [November 19, 2014]

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

  "The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) is a potential free trade agreement (FTA) among 12, and perhaps more, countries. The United States and 11 other countries of the Asia-Pacific region--Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, and Vietnam--are negotiating the text of the FTA. With over 20 chapters under negotiation, the TPP partners envision the agreement to be 'comprehensive and high-standard,' in that they seek to eliminate tariffs and nontariff barriers to trade in goods, services, and agriculture, and to establish or expand rules on a wide range of issues including intellectual property rights, foreign direct investment, and other trade-related issues. They also strive to create a '21st-century agreement' that addresses new and cross-cutting issues presented by an increasingly globalized economy. The TPP draws congressional interest on a number of fronts. Congress would have to approve implementing legislation for U.S. commitments under the agreement to enter into force. In addition, under long-established executive-legislative practice, the Administration notifies and consults with congressional leaders, before, during, and after trade agreements have been negotiated. Furthermore, the TPP will likely affect a range of sectors and regions of the U.S. economy of direct interest to Members of Congress and could influence the shape and path of U.S. trade policy for the foreseeable future. This report examines the issues related to the proposed TPP, the state and substance of the negotiations (to the degree that the information is publically available), the specific areas under negotiation, the policy and economic contexts in which the TPP would fit, and the issues for Congress that the TPP presents. The report will be revised and updated as events warrant."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

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

  2014-11-19
• Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) Negotiations and Issues for Congress [November 7, 2014]

  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). […] 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

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

  2014-11-07
• 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
• U.S. Agricultural Trade with Cuba: Current Limitations and Future Prospects [September 21, 2016]

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

  "After more than half a century during which trade relations between the United States and Cuba have evolved from a tight economic embargo to a narrow window of trade in U.S. agricultural and medical products, the diplomatic initiative that President Obama announced in December 2014 to restore more normal relations with Cuba has raised the possibility that bilateral relations could move toward an expansion in commercial opportunities. Many U.S. agricultural and food industry interests believe the Cuban market could offer meaningful export expansion potential for their products--but only if a number of restrictions under the U.S. embargo on trade with Cuba were to be removed. Among the measures most often cited as inhibiting exports of U.S. products, while simultaneously benefiting foreign competitors, are a prohibition on the provision of private financing and credit on sales to Cuba; denial of access to U.S. government credit guarantees and export promotion programs; the ban on general tourism to Cuba; and the general prohibition on U.S. imports of Cuban goods. [...] A concern voiced by some in agriculture is that opening the U.S. market to Cuba could pave the way for a new influx of tropical fruit and vegetable products that would compete directly with winter-season production in Florida, particularly if foreign investors perceive the opportunity to create an export platform for the U.S. market in Cuba. Among the concerns raised is that Cuban production is often subsidized by the government; also, that allowing Cuban produce into the U.S. market could become a conduit for introducing new pests and plant diseases."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  McMinimy, Mark A.

  2016-09-21
• U.S. Agricultural Trade with Cuba: Current Limitations and Future Prospects [October 1, 2015]

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

  "After more than half a century during which trade relations between the United States and Cuba have evolved from a tight economic embargo to a narrow window of trade in U.S. agricultural and medical products, the diplomatic initiative that President Obama announced in December 2014 to restore more normal relations with Cuba has raised the possibility that bilateral relations could move toward an expansion in commercial opportunities. Many U.S. agricultural and food industry interests believe the Cuban market could offer meaningful export expansion potential for their products--but only if a number of restrictions under the U.S. embargo on trade with Cuba were to be removed. Among the measures most often cited as inhibiting exports of U.S. products, while simultaneously benefiting foreign competitors, are a prohibition on the provision of private financing and credit on sales to Cuba; denial of access to U.S. government credit guarantees and export promotion programs; the ban on general tourism to Cuba; and the general prohibition on U.S. imports of Cuban goods. Some Members of Congress have introduced legislation in the 114th Congress that would ease U.S. economic sanctions on Cuba. These bills span a broad range of approaches, from a narrow focus on removing the ban on providing private financing and credit for the sale of agricultural goods to Cuba to far broader legislative initiatives that seek to lift the Cuban embargo altogether."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  McMinimy, Mark A.

  2015-10-01
• U.S. Agricultural Trade with Cuba: Current Limitations and Future Prospects [July 23, 2015]

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

  "After more than half a century during which trade relations between the United States and Cuba have evolved from a tight economic embargo to a narrow window of trade in U.S. agricultural and medical products, the diplomatic initiative that President Obama announced in December 2014 to restore more normal relations with Cuba has raised the possibility that bilateral relations could move toward an expansion in commercial opportunities. Many U.S. agricultural and food industry interests believe the Cuban market could offer meaningful export expansion potential for their products--but only if a number of restrictions under the U.S. embargo on trade with Cuba were to be removed. Among the measures most often cited as inhibiting exports of U.S. products, while simultaneously benefiting foreign competitors, are a prohibition on the provision of private financing and credit on sales to Cuba; denial of access to U.S. government credit guarantees and export promotion programs; the ban on general tourism to Cuba; and the general prohibition on U.S. imports of Cuban goods. Some Members of Congress have introduced legislation in the 114th Congress that would ease U.S. economic sanctions on Cuba. These bills span a broad range of approaches, from a narrow focus on removing the ban on providing private financing and credit for the sale of agricultural goods to Cuba to far broader legislative initiatives that seek to lift the Cuban embargo altogether."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  McMinimy, Mark A.

  2015-07-23
• U.S. Sugar Program Fundamentals [April 22, 2015]

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

  "The U.S. sugar program provides a price guarantee to producers of sugar beets and sugarcane and to the processors of both crops. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), as program administrator, is directed to administer the program at no budgetary cost to the federal government by limiting the amount of sugar supplied for food use in the U.S. market. To achieve both objectives, USDA uses four tools--as reauth orized without change by the 2014 farm bill (P.L. 113-79) and found in chapter 17 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedules of the United States-- to keep domestic market prices above guaranteed levels. These are: [1] price support loans at specified levels--the basis for the price guarantee; [2] marketing allotments to limit the amount of sugar that each processor can sell; [3] import quotas to control the amount of sugar entering the U.S. market; [4] a sugar-to-ethanol backstop--available if marketing allotments and import quotas are insufficient to prevent a sugar surplus from developing, which in turn could result in market prices falling below guaranteed levels. To supplement these policy tools in supporting sugar prices above government loan levels, while avoiding costly loan forfeitures, important administrative changes were adopted in late 2014. These included imposing limits on U.S. imports of Mexican sugar and establishing minimum prices for Mexican sugar imports, actions that fundamentally recast the terms of bilateral trade in sugar."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  McMinimy, Mark A.

  2015-04-22
• U.S. Sugar Program Fundamentals [April 6, 2016]

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

  "The U.S. sugar program provides a price guarantee to producers of sugar beets and sugarcane and to the processors of both crops. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), as program administrator, is directed to administer the program at no budgetary cost to the federal government by limiting the amount of sugar supplied for food use in the U.S. market. To achieve both objectives, USDA uses four tools--as reauthorized without change by the 2014 farm bill (P.L. 113-79) and found in chapter 17 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedules of the United States--to keep domestic market prices above guaranteed levels."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  McMinimy, Mark A.

  2016-04-06
• Trade Adjustment Assistance for Farmers [December 15, 2014]

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

  From the summary: "The Trade Adjustment Assistance for Farmers (TAAF) program provides technical assistance and cash benefits to producers of farm commodities and fishermen who experience adverse economic effects from increased imports. Congress first authorized this program in 2002, and made significant changes to it in the 2009 economic stimulus package (P.L. 111-5). The 2009 revisions were aimed at making it easier for farmers and fishermen to qualify for program benefits, and provided over $200 million in funding through December 2010. Subsequently, P.L. 112-40 (enacted in October 2011) authorized $202.5 million through December 2013. No new program activity has occurred since December 2010 because Congress has not appropriated funds. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) is required to follow a two-step process in administering TAAF. First, a group of producers must be certified eligible to apply. Second, a producer in a certified group must meet specified requirements to be approved for benefits."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  McMinimy, Mark A.

  2014-12-15
• Agricultural Exports and 2014 Farm Bill Programs: Background and Issues [August 25, 2014]

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

  From the report summary: "U.S. agricultural exports have long been a bright spot in the U.S. balance of trade, with exports exceeding imports in every year since 1960. The most recent forecast for FY2014 is that U.S. agricultural exports will reach a record high of $149.5 billion. U.S. agricultural imports are forecast to reach $110.5 billion in FY2014, resulting in a $39 billion agricultural trade surplus, which would rank second only to the FY2011 surplus of $42.9 billion. Exports are a major outlet for many farm commodities, in some cases absorbing over one-half of U.S. output. [...] The 2014 farm bill broke new ground in directing the Secretary of Agriculture to reorganize the export and import activities of the USDA, while creating a new Under Secretary of Agriculture position with the aim of coordinating the government's response to trade-related sanitary and phytosanitary issues affecting agricultural products, as well as nontariff trade barriers. Issues for Congress include determining the role and effectiveness of the public vs. private sector for investing in the development of new markets; monitoring the effect of policy changes in the farm bill on the Brazil WTO [World Trade Organization] case against U.S. cotton subsidies and possible implications for trade relations; and overseeing the Secretary's plans to reorganize USDA's trade-related functions."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  McMinimy, Mark A.

  2014-08-25
• EPA Delays Decision on 2014 Renewable Fuel Standard to 2015 [December 1, 2014]

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

  "The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced in November 2014 that it will delay issuing a long-awaited final 2014 Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) until 2015. The RFS sets the annual minimum use requirements for biofuels in the nation's transportation fuel supply. EPA is required by statute to announce the RFS for various categories of biofuels by November 30 of the preceding year, which for 2014 would have been November 30, 2013. The agency has missed such deadlines before, but not by such a wide margin […]. In announcing the delay, the agency cited 'significant comment and controversy' over its proposal for a reduction in biofuel use mandates for 2014. At this date, EPA has also missed the November 30, 2014, deadline for issuing the 2015 RFS. […] The decision to delay the final rule for the 2014 RFS into 2015 has provoked criticism from Members of Congress who hold diverse viewpoints on the utility of the RFS, as well as from numerous industry stakeholders with a direct interest in the administration of the program. Given that the EPA has missed the November 30 deadline in recent years, and that the delays have grown longer, some in Congress might want to review what costs this may impose on regulated parties and other biofuels stakeholders; whether there are actions EPA might take to reduce delays in future years; and whether a legislative response is needed to facilitate an efficient and timely process."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  McMinimy, Mark A.

  2014-12-01
• Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and U.S. Agriculture [May 29, 2015]

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

  "The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) is a potential free trade agreement (FTA) being negotiated among 12 countries of the Asia-Pacific region: the United States, Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, and Vietnam. The TPP negotiations, which the United States joined in 2008, cover a broad range of trade topics from government procurement to foreign investment to trade in services, to cite just a few. Negotiations over market access for agricultural products have figured prominently in the discussions as one of a number of agricultural topics under negotiation. […] Trade is vital for U.S. agriculture, absorbing about 20% of total agricultural production, with exports claiming a far larger portion than that of the output of a number of important commodity crops, including cotton, rice, wheat, soybeans, almonds, and pecans, to cite a few. By adding to the demand for U.S. farm products, exports support commodity prices and contribute materially to higher farm income. U.S. consumer demand for food is growing slowly, while exports allow farm products to tap into higher growth foreign markets. Given that some 95% of the world's population resides outside the United States, and that this population controls 80% of the world's consumer purchasing power, the importance to U.S. agriculture and food industries of capturing a share of the faster growth of demand for food in developing countries is imperative. Moreover the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has pointed out that most of the expected increase in middle-class households--those with real purchasing power parity incomes in excess of $20,000 a year--numbering some 300 million between 2013 and 2023 is expected to occur in developing countries. Furthermore, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development projects that by 2030, 66% of the world's middle class will reside in Asia."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  McMinimy, Mark A.

  2015-05-29
• Biomass Crop Assistance Program (BCAP): Status and Issues [January 12, 2015]

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

  "The Biomass Crop Assistance Program (BCAP) is intended to assist with some of the feedstock supply challenges facing the cellulosic biofuels industry. One ongoing hurdle for cellulosic biofuels development and manufacturing is the need for a constant supply of available biomass. However, the cellulosic biofuels industry has struggled with the quintessential 'chicken and egg' problem--investors are reluctant to invest in processing plants based on a technology (i.e., the conversion of cellulosic biomass to biofuels) that has yet to achieve success at a commercial scale, while producers are unwilling to devote land and resources to planting a dedicated biomass crop without nearby biofuels plants to buy it. In other words, the development of a cellulosic biofuels industry hinges simultaneously on the effective availability and use of new biomass feedstocks. This report provides a description of BCAP's main components--annual & establishment payments, matching payments, and project areas--as outlined in USDA's final rule, along with a discussion of program funding and implementation issues."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  McMinimy, Mark A.

  2015-01-12
• American Agriculture and the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) Agreement [January 8, 2016]

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

  "The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) is a regional free trade agreement (FTA), which the United States concluded with 11 other Pacific-facing nations in October 2015: Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, and Vietnam. Approval by Congress (through implementing legislation) is required before TPP can enter into force. If the United States and the other 11 governments ratify the deal, TPP would materially increase the overseas markets to which U.S. agricultural products would have preferential access. Exports account for around one-fifth of U.S. farm production, so foreign sales provide material support to commodity prices and farm income."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  McMinimy, Mark A.

  2016-01-08
• Financing U.S. Agricultural Exports to Cuba [June 24, 2016]

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

  "In December 2014, President Obama announced a new policy approach toward Cuba that in part seeks to reduce the role of long-standing U.S. sanctions on commercial relations with Cuba while also promoting greater engagement and normal relations with the island nation. For U.S. agriculture, the most significant change to emerge from the altered U.S. policy stance toward Cuba has been a revised interpretation of the definition of 'payment of cash in advance' that conditions sales of agricultural commodities to Cuba under the Trade Sanctions Reform and Export Enhancement Act of 2000 (TSRA, Title IX of P.L. 106-387). In January 2015, the U.S. Department of the Treasury revised its interpretation of 'cash in advance' from one that limits such transactions to cash payment before the shipment to the current interpretation that cash payment is required before transfer of title. For additional information on U.S. policy toward Cuba and bilateral relations, see CRS [Congressional Research Service] Report R43926, Cuba: Issues for the 114th Congress, by Mark P. Sullivan."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  McMinimy, Mark A.

  2016-06-24
• Revisiting U.S.-Mexico Sugar Agreements [August 12, 2016]

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

  "Numerous reports in the business trade press in recent months have quoted U.S. government officials, lawmakers, and sugar industry leaders commenting on negotiations the U.S. Department of Commerce (DOC) is conducting with the government of Mexico to consider changes to two sugar suspension agreements the United States and Mexico entered into in December 2014. The suspension agreements, which are currently in force, establish limits on exports of Mexican sugar to the United States, including quantitative limits and minimum prices. Previously, Mexican sugar had been the only unmanaged source of sugar in the U.S. market, unique access that Mexico had achieved through the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). Mexico currently is the leading foreign source of sugar to the U.S. market, supplying about 10% of total U.S. supplies, so any changes to these agreements could have important implications for stakeholders in the U.S. sugar market."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  McMinimy, Mark A.

  2016-08-12
• Agricultural Exports and 2014 Farm Bill Programs: Background and Current Issues [May 9, 2016]

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

  "U.S. agricultural exports have long been a bright spot in the U.S. balance of trade, with exports exceeding imports in every year since 1960. But the trend of recent years-increasing export sales and a wider agricultural trade surplus-was reversed in FY2015 [Fiscal Year], and the reversal is expected to be more pronounced in FY2016. After climbing to a record $152.3 billion in FY2014, U.S. farm exports declined to $139.7 billion in FY2015, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) projects a further reduction to $125 billion in FY2016. Meanwhile, the value of U.S. agricultural imports has continued to climb: In consequence, the U.S. agricultural trade surplus fell to $25.7 billion in FY2015 from a peak of $43.1 billion in FY2014, and it is projected to narrow further to $6.5 billion in FY2016. Exports are a major outlet for many farm commodities, representing about 20% of the value of farm production, making exports an important contributor to farm income. Among the key variables affecting the value of U.S. agricultural exports are commodity prices, the value of the U.S. dollar vis-a-vis currencies of trading partners, and the pace of economic growth-particularly in developing and emerging countries. According to USDA, factors contributing to a continued downturn in U.S. farm exports in FY2016 include low commodity prices, a strong U.S. dollar, relatively weak importer demand, and strong foreign competition."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  McMinimy, Mark A.

  2016-05-09
• TPP: American Agriculture and the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) Agreement [August 30, 2016]

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

  "The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) is a regional free trade agreement (FTA), which the United States concluded with 11 other Pacific-facing nations in October 2015: Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, and Vietnam. Approval by Congress (through implementing legislation) is required before TPP can enter into force. If the 12 TPP countries ratify the deal, TPP would materially increase the overseas markets to which U.S. agricultural products would have preferential access. Exports account for around one-fifth of U.S. farm production, providing material support to commodity prices and farm income. For U.S. agriculture and food industry interests, much of the potential benefit from TPP lies in improving access to TPP markets by eliminating or lowering tariffs, and also increasing the quantity of products that may be imported on preferential terms under tariff rate quotas (TRQs). TRQs allow imports of a given product to enter duty-free, or at a reduced rate, within the quota amount. Quantities in excess of the quota are subject to higher duties that can be prohibitive. The opportunity to increase sales of farm and food products is expected to be greatest in the five TPP countries with which the United States has not concluded FTAs, particularly Japan and Vietnam. […] As of August 2016, numerous major farm and food trade organizations had endorsed the TPP agreement, but support within the farm and food sector has not been universal. The National Farmers Union, the United Food and Commercial Workers Union, and organizations representing tobacco leaf growers are among those groups that have expressed opposition to the agreement."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  McMinimy, Mark A.

  2016-08-30
• Major Agricultural Trade Issues in the 114th Congress [February 10, 2015]

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

  From the Document: "Trade, particularly exports, is critical to the vitality of American agriculture. On average, foreign markets absorb about one-fifth of U.S. agricultural production, thus contributing significantly to the health of the farm economy. […] Farm product exports make up about 10% of total U.S. exports and contribute positively to the U.S. balance of trade. The economic benefits of agricultural exports also extend across rural communities, while overseas farm sales help to buoy a wide array of industries linked to agriculture, including transportation, processing, and farm input suppliers. Moreover, most of the future growth in food demand is expected to occur in developing countries. Trade, including agricultural trade, is clearly on the national agenda in the 114th Congress. The United States is engaged in negotiating two large regional trade agreements--the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) among 12 Pacific-facing nations, and the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (T-TIP) with the European Union. These agreements hold the potential to expand foreign markets for U.S. farmers and food processors by eliminating, or substantially lowering, tariffs and restrictive quotas around certain commodities, such as rice and pork in Japan, or by dismantling supply management programs that protect poultry, eggs, and dairy in Canada. Also on the negotiating agenda are non-tariff trade barriers, including certain sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) measures that governments employ to safeguard human, animal, and plant health, but which may also be used to deter imports. […]"

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Cowan, Tadlock; Greene, Joel L.; Johnson, Renée . . .

  2015-02-10