Bill Overview
Title: PASS Act of 2022
Description: This bill places the Secretary of Agriculture on the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS). Further, the bill requires CFIUS to review certain agriculture-related transactions, including those related to biotechnology. The bill also prohibits persons who are acting on behalf of a prohibited country (i.e., China, Russia, Iran, or North Korea) from carrying out any merger, acquisition, or takeover that could result in foreign control of a U.S. agricultural company.
Sponsors: Rep. Stefanik, Elise M. [R-NY-21]
Target Audience
Population: Entities involved in agriculture-related transactions, specifically U.S. agricultural companies and foreign investors.
Estimated Size: 500000
- The bill affects entities involved in agricultural transactions, especially those related to mergers, acquisitions, or biotechnology.
- Foreign entities from China, Russia, Iran, or North Korea seeking to invest in U.S. agriculture will be directly impacted because they are prohibited from such activities.
- U.S. agricultural companies will be impacted as they will be subject to scrutiny when dealing with foreign investments or transactions.
- The inclusion of the Secretary of Agriculture in CFIUS may influence policy directions and decisions, impacting stakeholders in the agricultural sector.
- Biotechnology companies related to agriculture may face additional regulations and scrutiny based on this bill.
Reasoning
- The target population includes U.S. agricultural companies, stakeholders, and those involved in agricultural biotechnology, which would be directly impacted by increased scrutiny and restrictions on foreign investments.
- The budget constraints limit the manpower and resources that will be available to enact these regulatory changes, but the policy will still reach a range of companies subject to review under CFIUS.
- Impact variance will depend on geography (e.g., states with more agricultural activity), company size, and the degree of foreign involvement or investment.
- Smaller companies with less exposure to foreign investments might not feel direct impact but could experience indirect effects through changes in market competition.
- Large agricultural companies constantly dealing with mergers, acquisitions, or foreign investments will likely feel a significant direct impact of this policy.
Simulated Interviews
Corn Farmer (Iowa)
Age: 54 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I believe this policy will protect local farmers from being undercut by foreign investments, which could affect market prices.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Biotechnology Researcher (California)
Age: 39 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This act adds an extra layer of complexity to our funding and partnership strategies, which might slow down research progress.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Agricultural Equipment Manufacturer (Texas)
Age: 65 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think restricting foreign control is necessary for national security but might limit our market growth.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
CFIUS Regulatory Officer (Nebraska)
Age: 48 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy adds a significant workload to CFIUS, requiring more resources to handle agricultural cases efficiently.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 3 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 3 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 3 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 4 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 6 |
Venture Capitalist (New York)
Age: 29 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This could detract foreign investor interest in U.S. agri-tech, reducing potential growth opportunities.
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 | 7 | 9 |
Soybean Exporter (Illinois)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy might secure the domestic market but could complicate export relationships.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Local Grocer (Ohio)
Age: 61 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope this can help keep food prices stable, though it might increase costs if investment fluctuates.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Policy Analyst (Washington)
Age: 33 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy is crucial to ensure our agriculture isn't influenced by potentially adversarial foreign entities.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Peanut Farmer (Georgia)
Age: 52 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This act might not impact me directly, but I worry about long-term market shifts affecting us all.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Financial Analyst (Florida)
Age: 27 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy introduces more caution and diligence in agricultural investments, which can be both a challenge and opportunity.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $10000000 (Low: $7000000, High: $13000000)
Year 2: $10500000 (Low: $7350000, High: $13650000)
Year 3: $11025000 (Low: $7717500, High: $14332500)
Year 5: $12155000 (Low: $8508500, High: $15801500)
Year 10: $14880250 (Low: $10416175, High: $19344325)
Year 100: $40303119 (Low: $28212183, High: $52394055)
Key Considerations
- The benefits of preventing foreign influence in the agriculture sector should be weighed against the potential costs of reduced foreign investment.
- Care should be taken to ensure that the inclusion of biotechnology in transaction reviews does not unduly hinder innovation within the sector.
- CBO acknowledges potential indirect effects on employment in foreign-invested agriculture companies, which might see shifts in ownership or operational changes.