Bill Overview
Title: Israel Anti-Boycott Act
Description: This bill prohibits participation by certain entities and individuals in boycotts or requests for boycotts imposed by international governmental organizations (i.e., the United Nations and the European Union). Specifically, the bill applies to covered persons the prohibition of specified actions in compliance with or in support of a boycott against a country that is friendly to the United States and that is not itself the object of a U.S. boycott. The bill defines a covered person as a domestic concern, the U.S. government or a state government, or a representative or official of such domestic concern or government. The bill also adds to the list of specified prohibited actions the act of furnishing information to any foreign country or international governmental organization that furthers an imposed boycott. Under current law, a person who violates the prohibitions against such boycotts may be subject to a monetary fine or imprisonment; however, the bill removes imprisonment as a potential penalty for certain violations.
Sponsors: Rep. Zeldin, Lee M. [R-NY-1]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals and entities potentially involved in international boycotts of friendly countries to the U.S.
Estimated Size: 500000
- The law primarily impacts individuals and entities in the United States since it prohibits participation in boycotts initiated by international governmental organizations like the UN and EU.
- The target population includes covered persons which are defined as domestic concerns, the U.S. government or a state government, or representatives and officials thereof.
- Additionally, the bill affects people and organizations in countries friendly to the U.S. that are targeted by international boycotts, although indirectly, as it prevents U.S. persons from participating.
Reasoning
- The Israel Anti-Boycott Act mainly affects individuals and organizations that conduct business with or have economic ties to countries friendly to the U.S. and are involved in international trade or politics.
- The policy specifically impacts those at intersecting points of international law and commerce, including corporations with global operations, employees in international relations roles, and individuals involved in advocacy.
- Most individuals in the U.S. may not directly feel the policy's impacts; however, those in targeted industries may see changes depending on company practices and international partnerships.
- Given the policy aims to restrict participation in certain boycotts, the effects will most likely manifest in how organizations conduct international operations rather than immediately altering day-to-day life for most American citizens.
- The policy budget of $50 million in year 1 and $500 million over 10 years likely focuses on compliance enforcement and monitoring, which suggests a narrow and specific target group rather than widespread national implications.
Simulated Interviews
International Trade Lawyer (New York, NY)
Age: 43 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy might complicate legal considerations for clients involved in European markets.
- I'm concerned about the potential chilling effect on international trade and negotiations.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 9 |
Tech Industry Manager (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 35 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I believe compliance costs might increase due to more stringent monitoring requirements.
- I'm optimistic about the reduced penalties, which could lessen the policy's overall negative impact.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
Non-profit Advocacy Coordinator (Houston, TX)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy could inhibit our ability to align with international partners on certain advocacy issues.
- It seems more symbolic with minimal direct impacts on daily operations.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Automobile Manufacturing Executive (Detroit, MI)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I don't expect immediate changes; our main concerns are maintaining effective supply chains.
- Regulatory compliance is always on our radar, but this policy doesn't drastically change things.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
Corporate Compliance Officer (Chicago, IL)
Age: 32 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Our corporation will need to update compliance protocols to ensure adherence to this policy.
- It's not ideal, but maintaining global partnerships is a priority.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
Government Policy Analyst (Washington, D.C.)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy is more about sending a political message than executing drastic changes.
- I am interested in monitoring its implementation and actual on-ground impacts.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 9 |
Import/Export Business Owner (Miami, FL)
Age: 39 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- As a small business owner, I worry about the indirect costs of adapting to international policy changes.
- So far, this policy seems likely to have minimal direct impacts on my operations.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
Media Executive (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This could shift the narrative focus in our reporting sectors.
- It's another geopolitical layer that could intrigue our audience.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
University Researcher (Seattle, WA)
Age: 27 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy provides an interesting case study for current research on economic sanctions.
- It highlights the intersection of politics and business practices.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
Supply Chain Logistics Specialist (Atlanta, GA)
Age: 42 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- We already ensure compliance with international laws, so new policy layers aren't unexpected.
- It's part of the continuous changes in our field that we adapt to regularly.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $50000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $70000000)
Year 2: $50000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $70000000)
Year 3: $50000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $70000000)
Year 5: $50000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $70000000)
Year 10: $50000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $70000000)
Year 100: $50000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $70000000)
Key Considerations
- International political relations may influence how this bill is received and enforced by the U.S., potentially affecting trade relations with allied countries.
- The bill could face opposition or legal challenges based on free speech and trade law arguments, impacting its enforceability.