Policy Impact Analysis - 117/HR/9194

Bill Overview

Title: Domestic Water Protection Act of 2022

Description: This bill imposes an excise tax on the sale of a water-intensive crop. The tax is 300% of the price for which the crop is sold and is paid by the manufacturer, producer, or importer of the crop. The bill defines water-intensive crop as a crop grown in an area experiencing prolonged drought (i.e., an area experiencing severe, extreme, or exceptional drought lasting more than six months) at the time such crop is grown, and by a manufacturer, producer, or importer that is a foreign corporation or foreign government.

Sponsors: Rep. Gallego, Ruben [D-AZ-7]

Target Audience

Population: Individuals involved in the production, distribution, and consumption of water-intensive crops

Estimated Size: 30000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Soybean Farmer (California)

Age: 45 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 15/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I'm worried about the potential shift in demand for crops.
  • This might actually benefit local agriculture as we could see less competition from imports.

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 8 7
Year 10 8 7
Year 20 7 7

Restaurant Owner (New York)

Age: 35 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Ingredient prices might go up, impacting menu prices.
  • Adapting to this change will be a challenge.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Supply Chain Manager (Nebraska)

Age: 50 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 12/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Supply chains will need significant adjustments.
  • Could lead to supply issues and higher costs initially.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Food Scientist (Arizona)

Age: 28 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Encourages companies to explore more sustainable practices.
  • Might increase research in alternative crops.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Economist (Texas)

Age: 60 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 9

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy will stimulate discussion on sustainable practices.
  • Could shift market dynamics in agriculture.

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 10 9
Year 10 10 9
Year 20 10 9

Import Business Owner (Florida)

Age: 33 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Concerns about increased costs affecting profitability.
  • Exploration of alternative sources will be necessary.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 4 5
Year 2 5 5
Year 3 6 5
Year 5 6 5
Year 10 7 6
Year 20 7 6

Agricultural Policy Analyst (Colorado)

Age: 40 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Policy encourages responsible water use in agriculture.
  • Potential long-term positive impact on water resources.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Agroforestry Expert (Washington)

Age: 45 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 2/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy supports the movement towards sustainable agriculture.
  • Could lead to more funding and research in agroforestry.

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 9 8
Year 10 9 8
Year 20 9 8

College Student (Illinois)

Age: 22 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 20/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This bill aligns with my vision for sustainable agriculture.
  • Eager to see how it impacts global trade practices.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Corn Farmer (Iowa)

Age: 55 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 18/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • May see some benefit as attention shifts to less water-intensive crops.
  • Potential for changes in crop prices globally.

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 6
Year 10 6 6
Year 20 6 6

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $25000000 (Low: $20000000, High: $35000000)

Year 2: $27000000 (Low: $22000000, High: $37000000)

Year 3: $28000000 (Low: $23000000, High: $38000000)

Year 5: $29000000 (Low: $24000000, High: $39000000)

Year 10: $30000000 (Low: $25000000, High: $40000000)

Year 100: $30000000 (Low: $25000000, High: $40000000)

Key Considerations