H.R.3575 - Axing Nonmarket Tariff Evasion Act; ANTE Act (119th Congress)
Summary
H.R.3575, the Axing Nonmarket Tariff Evasion Act (ANTE Act), aims to amend the Trade Act of 1974. It authorizes the United States Trade Representative (USTR) to impose remedial measures on entities that evade or attempt to evade duties imposed on goods from nonmarket economy countries. The bill targets companies that establish operations in third countries to circumvent these tariffs.
The USTR can initiate inquiries and, with presidential direction, impose duties on goods produced in those third countries. The bill defines 'covered entities' as those owned, controlled, or significantly influenced by nonmarket economy countries.
The Act seeks to prevent tariff evasion and protect domestic industries from unfair trade practices.
Expected Effects
The bill's enactment would likely lead to increased scrutiny of foreign investments by entities connected to nonmarket economies. It could result in higher tariffs on goods produced in third countries by these entities. This may deter tariff evasion but could also increase costs for consumers and businesses relying on these supply chains.
Potential Benefits
- Protection of Domestic Industries: By preventing tariff evasion, the bill aims to safeguard American businesses from unfair competition.
- Increased Revenue: Imposing duties on goods produced through tariff evasion could generate additional revenue for the U.S. government.
- Fair Trade Practices: The bill promotes fair trade by discouraging companies from circumventing tariffs.
- Strengthened Trade Enforcement: It provides the USTR with additional tools to enforce trade laws and agreements.
- Deterrence of Unfair Practices: The bill may deter nonmarket economy countries from engaging in unfair trade practices.
Potential Disadvantages
- Increased Costs for Consumers: Tariffs on goods produced in third countries could increase prices for American consumers.
- Supply Chain Disruptions: The bill could disrupt supply chains if companies are unable to easily shift production away from targeted entities.
- Retaliatory Measures: Nonmarket economy countries could retaliate with their own tariffs or trade restrictions.
- Administrative Burden: Investigating and imposing remedial measures could create an administrative burden for the USTR.
- Potential for Legal Challenges: The bill's provisions could be subject to legal challenges from affected companies or countries.
Constitutional Alignment
The bill aligns with Congress's power to regulate commerce with foreign nations, as granted by Article I, Section 8, Clause 3 of the Constitution. It also relates to the power to lay and collect duties, also in Article I, Section 8, Clause 1. The bill delegates authority to the USTR, which is permissible as long as Congress provides clear standards for the exercise of that authority.
The bill's focus on trade and tariffs does not directly implicate individual rights or liberties protected by the Bill of Rights. The due process clause of the Fifth Amendment could be relevant if the USTR's actions are challenged as arbitrary or unfair, but the bill includes provisions for inquiry and determination, which provide a degree of procedural fairness.
Overall, the bill appears to be within the constitutional powers of Congress and does not obviously infringe upon individual rights.
Impact Assessment: Things You Care About ⓘ
This action has been evaluated across 19 key areas that matter to you. Scores range from 1 (highly disadvantageous) to 5 (highly beneficial).