Policy Impact Analysis - 117/S/3958

Bill Overview

Title: China Trade Cheating Restitution Act of 2022

Description: This bill requires the Department of Homeland Security to deposit into special accounts certain interest earned on antidumping and countervailing duties collected by U.S. Customs and Border Protection on or after October 1, 2000. Currently, the applicable date is October 1, 2014. Amounts in special accounts are distributed to affected domestic producers.

Sponsors: Sen. Tester, Jon [D-MT]

Target Audience

Population: Domestic Producers Affected by Dumping and Subsidized Imports

Estimated Size: 50000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Steel Manufacturer (Pittsburgh, PA)

Age: 52 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy is a much-needed relief for us who've struggled against unfair competition from overseas.
  • Receiving restitution will help our business reinvest in new technology and workforce training.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Textile Manufacturer (Houston, TX)

Age: 34 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 4

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • If this policy can offer us a way to compete more fairly, it's going to be crucial for our survival.
  • The date revision could mean significant restitution for our past losses.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Electronics Manufacturer (Columbus, OH)

Age: 45 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • It's a boon to see this policy address the international competition issue.
  • The extended date helps us capture more duties collected over time.

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 7 6
Year 10 6 6
Year 20 6 6

Apparel Manufacturer (Los Angeles, CA)

Age: 39 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 2.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Any financial support resulting from this policy will allow us to sustain our operations amidst intense international competition.
  • I believe this could help us focus on expanding local manufacturing.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Automotive Parts Manufacturer (Detroit, MI)

Age: 61 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • It's promising that this policy potentially addresses long-standing equity issues in the trade sector.
  • Past affected companies will have a better chance to reclaim losses and compete.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Economist (New York, NY)

Age: 28 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy seems well-directed to address unresolved trade tensions and compensates companies for past unfair treatment.
  • The long-term implications could strengthen domestic resilience.

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 6 6
Year 20 6 6

Agricultural Producer (Minneapolis, MN)

Age: 55 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Fair trade practices are essential, and this policy seems to address some of our historical challenges.
  • A better future could be possible with this policy.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Metal Component Manufacturer (Kansas City, MO)

Age: 48 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 4

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • We could possibly see a significant improvement in competition fairness due to this policy.
  • The fact that this policy looks at older duty collections is promising.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Chemicals Manufacturer (Atlanta, GA)

Age: 49 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy provides an opportunity to stabilize our pricing and expand our workforce.
  • The approach feels long overdue; it will help level the international playing field.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Footwear Manufacturer (Chicago, IL)

Age: 42 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 2.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy might not affect us too much directly, but any move towards fairer trade is positive.
  • Looking forward to seeing how this pans out and if more policies like this will follow.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

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

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $50000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $70000000)

Year 2: $50000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $70000000)

Year 3: $50000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $70000000)

Year 5: $50000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $70000000)

Year 10: $50000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $70000000)

Year 100: $50000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $70000000)

Key Considerations