Bill Overview
Title: To suspend normal trade relations treatment for the Russian Federation and the Republic of Belarus, and for other purposes.
Description: This bill suspends normal trade relations with Russia and Belarus. It also prohibits the importation of energy products from Russia. Specifically, the bill authorizes the President to proclaim increases in the rates of duty applicable to products of Russia or Belarus. This authority terminates on January 1, 2024. The President may restore normal trade relations with Russia and Belarus, subject to congressional disapproval. Additionally, the bill prohibits the importation of Russian products that are classified under chapter 27 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule (which includes mineral fuels, mineral oils and products of their distillation, bituminous substances, and mineral waxes). The bill directs the U.S. Trade Representative to take certain actions, including to consider steps to suspend Russia's participation in the World Trade Organization and seek to halt the accession process of Belarus.
Sponsors: Rep. Brady, Kevin [R-TX-8]
Target Audience
Population: People reliant on Russian and Belarusian trade and energy products
Estimated Size: 4500000
- The suspension of normal trade relations with Russia and Belarus means that tariffs will rise on goods imported from these countries, likely affecting consumers and businesses that rely on these imports globally.
- Prohibition of energy imports from Russia will most significantly impact countries and industries dependent on Russian energy resources.
- Increased tariffs and import prohibitions can lead to price increases for certain goods in countries that import from Russia and Belarus.
- Energy price shocks may arise if alternative energy sources are not readily available to replace Russian energy exports.
- U.S. consumers and businesses might experience increases in costs associated with goods imported from Russia and Belarus.
- Because of global markets, the economic impacts might ripple beyond direct trade partners.
Reasoning
- The policy would disproportionately impact industries and consumers dependent on Russian and Belarusian imports, particularly in sectors such as manufacturing and energy.
- Given the budget constraint, the policy's financial ramifications are limited, but its strategic implications, such as energy security and trade dynamics, could have significant knock-on effects beyond the immediate economic impact.
- The population directly impacted by the policy is relatively small, but those within manufacturing and energy sectors, including employees and business owners, will experience notable shifts in operational costs and pricing structures.
- Considering the potential rise in energy costs and the availability of alternate energy sources, households with tight budgets might see a noticeable impact on their expenses.
- Businesses that find alternative suppliers could mitigate the impact, but those with fewer options will face greater challenges adjusting to the new trade constraints.
Simulated Interviews
Energy Sector Engineer (Houston, TX)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm concerned about potential job instability as the energy sector adjusts to changes in import dynamics.
- The policy could drive up costs and make our operations more expensive.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 9 |
Import/Export Trade Specialist (New York, NY)
Age: 35 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm wary this policy will complicate existing trade agreements and create logistical nightmares.
- Long-term, we could refocus efforts on other markets, but short-term chaos is expected.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
Automotive Manufacturer (Detroit, MI)
Age: 52 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Our supply chain is going to reel from this restriction on metals and resources.
- Increased costs may force us to lay off workers or pass the cost to consumers.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 4 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 4 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 8 |
Startup Founder (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The restrictions might deter my plans to expand into Eastern European markets.
- I'll need to navigate carefully to find suitable partners elsewhere.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
Environmental Consultant (Seattle, WA)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- While challenging, this policy could push more investments into sustainable energy.
- A positive change could arise from the focus on cleaner energy solutions.
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 | 10 | 9 |
Small Business Owner (Chicago, IL)
Age: 42 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'll have to find new suppliers or change my product line to match what's available.
- Rising costs might hurt sales, but only temporarily, hopefully.
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 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 9 |
Supply Chain Analyst (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 58 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy will create ripple effects we'll have to contend with across various clients.
- I anticipate supply chain disruptions will prompt a broader reevaluation of sources.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 9 |
Chemical Engineer (Cleveland, OH)
Age: 39 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The tariff increase could raise our costs significantly.
- We might need to explore alternatives quickly to offset these impacts.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
Policy Analyst (Washington, DC)
Age: 26 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- From a strategic standpoint, this policy could strengthen alliances with other countries by diversifying trade.
- Economically, the short-term impacts could be disruptive to affected sectors.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
Logistics Coordinator (Atlanta, GA)
Age: 47 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Our logistics operations will need to adapt to the changing landscape of international trade.
- Emerging costs will need to be transmitted down the supply chain.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 9 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $50000000 (Low: $40000000, High: $60000000)
Year 2: $51000000 (Low: $41000000, High: $61000000)
Year 3: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 5: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- The balance between increased tariff revenue and reduced import volumes needs careful monitoring.
- Energy sector impacts might necessitate further policy adjustments to ensure security and affordability.
- Industries with high dependency on Russian imports might require support or transition assistance.