Bill Overview
Title: A bill to withdraw normal trade relations treatment from, and apply certain provisions of title IV of the Trade Act of 1974 to, products of the Russian Federation, and for other purposes.
Description: This bill withdraws normal trade relations treatment from Russia. Additionally, the bill requires the President to encourage U.S. allies and partners to (1) consider taking similar actions; and (2) condemn, at the World Trade Organization (WTO), Russia's aggression in Ukraine. Further, the President must direct the U.S. Permanent Representative to the WTO to seek suspension of Russia's membership in the WTO. The President may proclaim modifications to the applicable duty rates on products from Russia (under column 2 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule) if the President determines that the modifications are necessary to protect the essential security of the United States.
Sponsors: Sen. Wyden, Ron [D-OR]
Target Audience
Population: global consumers and businesses affected by trade with Russia
Estimated Size: 20000000
- Withdrawal of normal trade relations will likely increase tariffs on Russian products, impacting consumers reliant on affordable goods from Russia.
- U.S. businesses that import goods from Russia will face increased costs, which could be passed on to consumers.
- Other countries importing from Russia might face trade imbalances and rush to find alternative suppliers, impacting global markets.
- Russian businesses exporting products will lose market competitiveness, affecting their revenues and employees.
- A shift in trade relations could lead to broader economic consequences affecting global supply chains.
Reasoning
- The policy will likely affect businesses and consumers in the U.S. who rely on Russian imports, particularly in industries such as energy, metals, and consumer goods. Businesses that rely heavily on Russian products may face increased costs due to higher tariffs, which can impact their profitability and lead to higher prices for consumers. However, the impact will vary depending on how integral Russian imports are to these businesses' supply chains.
- The population affected by this policy is not very large relative to the entire U.S., so most people will experience minimal direct effects. The well-being impacts are more subtle and related to economic shifts, such as industry-specific cost increases or disruptions in trade relationships.
- The policy is intended to exert international pressure on Russia, and while it aims for a strategic long-term impact internationally, the immediate effects on U.S. well-being might not be dramatic for the average person unless they are closely tied to relevant industries.
Simulated Interviews
Petroleum Engineer (Houston, Texas)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm worried about the increased cost and potential scarcity of some of the materials we rely on due to higher tariffs.
- It's challenging for our company to find alternative suppliers quickly.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 4 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 4 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Small Business Owner (Los Angeles, California)
Age: 38 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm concerned that importing from Russia will become a cost challenge, and I'll need to pass these costs to customers.
- Finding new suppliers quickly isn't always feasible for a small business.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Policy Analyst (New York, New York)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could reshape international trade standards, impacting long-term global economic stability.
- In the short term, companies unprepared for such shifts might suffer, but adaptation is possible.
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 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
Graduate Student (Chicago, Illinois)
Age: 27 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Observing the policy impacts will be insightful for my research.
- These changes offer practical examples of economic theories I study.
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 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Automotive Parts Manufacturer (Detroit, Michigan)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The impact on steel prices might make production costs rise, hurting our competitiveness.
- We weren't heavily reliant on Russian steel, but any increase is not ideal.
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 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Tech Entrepreneur (Seattle, Washington)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm not directly affected by this policy, but any economic instability can ripple through to tech investments.
- Stability in international relations is crucial for tech project funding.
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 |
Import/Export Business Owner (Miami, Florida)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Higher tariffs could mean negotiating new contracts or finding new suppliers.
- Although Russia isn't our main supplier, this policy complicates our logistics.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Environmental Scientist (Denver, Colorado)
Age: 48 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could incentivize countries to adopt more sustainable trade practices.
- I support reducing dependency on certain imports for environmental reasons.
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 |
Retail Manager (Phoenix, Arizona)
Age: 33 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm concerned about having to change suppliers rapidly if prices rise.
- A rise in tariffs could force us to reduce our line-up of affordable goods.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Financial Analyst (Boston, Massachusetts)
Age: 42 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy may lead to increased volatility in the markets briefly, but can also create new opportunities.
- Adapting investment strategies to shifting trade policies is part of my job.
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 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 10 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $500000000 (Low: $300000000, High: $800000000)
Year 2: $200000000 (Low: $150000000, High: $400000000)
Year 3: $200000000 (Low: $150000000, High: $400000000)
Year 5: $200000000 (Low: $150000000, High: $400000000)
Year 10: $200000000 (Low: $150000000, High: $400000000)
Year 100: $200000000 (Low: $150000000, High: $400000000)
Key Considerations
- Impact on global supply chains due to reduced Russian exports.
- Potential for U.S. industries to innovate or seek alternative suppliers.
- Long-term geopolitical and economic impacts on U.S.-Russia relations.