Policy Impact Analysis - 117/S/3812

Bill Overview

Title: Emergency Relief from Duties Act

Description: This bill provides for a temporary waiver of countervailing and antidumping duties relating to fertilizer or fertilizer ingredients in emergency situations. Specifically, a covered party (e.g., a manufacturer, trade association, or other interested party) may petition the U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC) to waive countervailing or antidumping duties assessed for fertilizer or fertilizer ingredients (or renew such a waiver) in emergency situations that limit the production or supply of fertilizer or fertilizer ingredients. The bill requires the USITC to (1) allow the public to submit comments on any petition for a waiver or renewal; and (2) issue, within 30 days after the close of the public comment period, a final decision concerning the waiver or renewal. Any waiver or renewal shall be for a period of one year.

Sponsors: Sen. Marshall, Roger [R-KS]

Target Audience

Population: People depending on agricultural productivity, food prices, or directly involved in the fertilizer industry globally

Estimated Size: 50000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Corn Farmer (Iowa)

Age: 45 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 15/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy could help me reduce my production costs if fertilizer prices drop, meaning more money to invest back into the farm.
  • There's uncertainty about whether the savings will be passed down to farmers like me.

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 9 5
Year 20 9 5

Fertilizer Manufacturing Worker (Ohio)

Age: 36 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • If the duties are waived, our company might face new competition from international producers.
  • I'm worried about job stability if others enter the market easily.

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 6 5
Year 10 7 5
Year 20 8 5

Vineyard Owner (California)

Age: 55 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 2.0 years

Commonness: 12/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This initiative could help stabilize the cost of the minerals we use in winemaking.
  • I'm supportive of anything that helps agricultural producers stay competitive.

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 7
Year 20 8 7

Economist (Texas)

Age: 50 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 2.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy has a dual-edged sword effect—it might benefit producers but risks opening US markets to potentially subsidized foreign goods.
  • We need very precise implementation to protect local industries.

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 7 8

Agricultural Policy Analyst (Florida)

Age: 28 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 4.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This could help small-scale farmers in emergencies, but we need safeguards to ensure they truly benefit.
  • The policy should include measures to support affected workers in the US fertilizer industry.

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

Retired Grain Farmer (Nebraska)

Age: 62 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 1.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Waiving duties could dramatically lower costs in emergency situations, benefiting farmers who face disaster-related shortages.
  • I'm concerned about the long-term implications on domestic producers.

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 7 7
Year 20 7 7

Soybean Farmer (North Carolina)

Age: 30 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 14/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • We hope this leads to friendlier fertilizer prices, making organic investments more feasible.
  • I'm watching to see how much the cost savings trickle down to small farms like ours.

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 4

Agricultural Supply Chain Manager (Illinois)

Age: 42 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 4.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The waiver can influence supply chain dynamics significantly.
  • Could lead to a boost in competitiveness worldwide, but we must consider the balance with local economic impacts.

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 8 6
Year 20 8 5

Agricultural Extension Officer (Georgia)

Age: 39 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 13/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Reducing input costs can make sustainable farming more accessible.
  • This policy should be complemented with education on sustainable practices.

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 8 7
Year 10 9 7
Year 20 9 7

Wheat Farmer (Kansas)

Age: 47 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 4

Duration of Impact: 6.0 years

Commonness: 9/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • In emergencies like droughts, this waiver could be crucial by easing supply constraints and reducing costs.
  • I hope this is coupled with effective disaster relief policies.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 4
Year 2 6 4
Year 3 7 5
Year 5 8 5
Year 10 8 4
Year 20 8 3

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $1500000000 (Low: $1000000000, High: $2000000000)

Year 2: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)

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