Policy Impact Analysis - 117/HR/7935

Bill Overview

Title: Opportunities in the Americas Act

Description: This bill provides assistance to eligible companies relocating manufacturing from China to a qualifying Latin American or Caribbean country, generally a country in the region that has a free trade agreement with the United States and is not a foreign adversary. For example, the U.S. International Development Finance Corporation must use at least 10 percent of its funding for each fiscal year to provide assistance, such as financing eligible costs for moving and workforce development, to businesses relocating manufacturing from China to a qualifying Latin American or Caribbean country, subject to various conditions and requirements. The bill also provides tax benefits related to certain property acquired and placed in service in connection with such a relocation of manufacturing.

Sponsors: Rep. Espaillat, Adriano [D-NY-13]

Target Audience

Population: Individuals in Latin America and Caribbean employed in manufacturing

Estimated Size: 250000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Supply Chain Manager (Austin, Texas)

Age: 45 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I think this policy could provide a great opportunity for my company to cut costs and improve supply chain efficiency.
  • There may be initial disruptions during the transition, but long-term benefits should outweigh them.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 6
Year 2 7 6
Year 3 8 6
Year 5 8 6
Year 10 9 6
Year 20 9 6

Logistics Coordinator (Miami, Florida)

Age: 34 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy will likely boost job security in our department as we expand our operations to new regions.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 5
Year 2 6 5
Year 3 7 5
Year 5 7 5
Year 10 8 5
Year 20 8 5

Financial Analyst (Chicago, Illinois)

Age: 28 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 4.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • There are strategic tax incentives that could lead to long-term savings for our company.
  • Personally, the move opens up professional growth opportunities in new regions.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 7
Year 2 8 7
Year 3 8 7
Year 5 9 7
Year 10 9 7
Year 20 9 7

HR Specialist (Detroit, Michigan)

Age: 40 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy provides a chance to explore new markets, but there will be challenges in managing employee relocations effectively.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 6
Year 2 7 6
Year 3 7 6
Year 5 8 6
Year 10 8 6
Year 20 8 6

Business Owner (San Jose, California)

Age: 55 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 1.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I'm skeptical about the practicality of relocating—it sounds costly, even with incentives.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 8
Year 2 7 8
Year 3 7 8
Year 5 7 8
Year 10 7 8
Year 20 7 8

Tax Consultant (New York City, New York)

Age: 30 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 4.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The tax incentives are a boon for clients looking to optimize expenses—I'm excited for the potential growth in advisory roles.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 7
Year 2 8 7
Year 3 8 7
Year 5 8 7
Year 10 9 7
Year 20 9 7

Warehouse Operator (Los Angeles, California)

Age: 29 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 2.0 years

Commonness: 9/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I'm concerned about how this will affect my job security if operations shift locations.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 4 5
Year 2 4 5
Year 3 5 5
Year 5 5 5
Year 10 5 5
Year 20 5 5

Manufacturing Engineer (Dallas, Texas)

Age: 50 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy will certainly increase the workload, but also presents a chance to innovate in new locations.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 6
Year 2 7 6
Year 3 7 6
Year 5 8 6
Year 10 8 6
Year 20 8 6

Software Developer (Atlanta, Georgia)

Age: 37 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 2.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy might lead to a growth in developers working on new market-specific adaptations for software systems.

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 8
Year 10 8 8
Year 20 8 8

Economic Consultant (Houston, Texas)

Age: 42 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy could reshape US-Latin American economic relationships positively, with new business opportunities.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 7
Year 2 8 7
Year 3 9 7
Year 5 9 7
Year 10 9 7
Year 20 9 7

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $500000000 (Low: $450000000, High: $550000000)

Year 2: $500000000 (Low: $450000000, High: $550000000)

Year 3: $500000000 (Low: $450000000, High: $550000000)

Year 5: $500000000 (Low: $450000000, High: $550000000)

Year 10: $500000000 (Low: $450000000, High: $550000000)

Year 100: $500000000 (Low: $450000000, High: $550000000)

Key Considerations