Senate and House Committees Markup and Approve Different Versions of Customs Bill

Apr 29, 2015

Reading Time : 2 min

The Customs Bill also includes provisions targeting the evasion of antidumping and countervailing duty orders, although each chamber’s version of the Customs Bill tackles the issue in a different way. While the Senate version sets deadlines for CBP to handle evasion complaints, the House version shifts the authority for investigating these complaints to the U.S. Department of Commerce. 

The two versions differ to an even greater degree as a result of each committee’s markup of the Customs Bill last week. While the HWMC approved only one amendment to the Customs Bill (relating to the maintenance and distribution of post-liquidation interest that CBP receives from payments collected under a customs bond), the SFC included several controversial additions, including an amendment that would place the administration of the miscellaneous tariff bill process at the International Trade Commission. The SFC also approved amendments that would establish an Interagency Trade Enforcement Center and a chief manufacturing negotiator at the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative. The SFC also appended to the Customs Bill a controversial currency manipulation provision, which would permit the U.S. Department of Commerce to initiate an investigation into whether undervalued currency qualifies as a countervailable subsidy. Chairman Orrin Hatch (R-UT) has indicated that the inclusion of this provision – as well as the provision, on the MTB process, will complicate matters with the House, whose version of the Customs Bill does not include similar language. 

At this time, there is no official word on when either the House or Senate chamber will send the Customs Bill to the floor for debate and consideration. Sources expect that the full Senate will consider a bill extending trade promotion authority (TPA) to the president during the first week of May. The committees marked up the TPA Bill at the same session that they marked up the Customs Bill (as well as a bill on trade adjustment assistance and trade preference programs), but it is unclear if Senate leadership will send all four of the trade bills to the floor for consideration at the same time. Similar to what Chairman Hatch said, Ways and Means Trade Subcommittee Chairman Pat Tiberi (R-OH) noted last week that, because the Senate and House versions of the Customs Bill include key differences, the Customs Bill will have to go to conference. In addition, sources have noted that, because the president and the Republican leadership want to quickly pass the TPA bill, members in either chamber who want to highlight trade issues may end up offering amendments to the Customs Bill, since leadership and the president want to keep the TPA Bill clean and free of controversial additions. This strategy suggests that the Customs Bill will come to the Senate and/or House floors at approximately the same time as the TPA Bill, but the Customs Bill may have a dimmer chance of passing if more members add controversial amendments to it during the floor debate.   

 

Share This Insight

Previous Entries

Trade Law

2023-01-26

At the end of last year, World Trade Organization (WTO) members agreed that the 13th Ministerial Conference (MC13) of the WTO will take place in Abu Dhabi, the capital of the United Arab Emirates (UAE), in February 2024. There is no doubt that the WTO is facing headwinds and is in need of a vigorous push forward. The UAE’s success in transforming itself into a global trade and digital hub and a leader in services trade could serve to drive a successful outcome at MC13.

...

Read More

Trade Law

2023-01-17

On December 21, 2022, the appeal arbitrators in the Colombia – Frozen Fries (DS591) World Trade Organization (WTO) dispute circulated their award (the “Award”). This was the second appeal conducted under Article 25 of the WTO’s Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU) and the first appeal under the Multi-Party Interim Appeal Arbitration Arrangement (MPIA), a framework created by a group of WTO members to overcome the challenges posed by the non-operational Appellate Body.

...

Read More

Trade Law

2022-02-10

The United Kingdom just issued a new statutory instrument, effective immediately, which extends the authority to designate persons and entities under the U.K. sanctions against Russia.

...

Read More

Trade Law

2020-06-10

We are pleased to share a recording of Akin Gump’s webinar, “Protecting the Crown Jewels - New U.K. National Security Rules for Foreign Investment in a Post-COVID-19, Post-Brexit World.

...

Read More

Trade Law

2020-05-07

The clock is ticking down to the entry into force of the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) on July 1, 2020.  Leading up to that date, businesses have a unique advocacy opportunity to influence the implementing regulations and associated processes, such as legislative changes to Mexico’s domestic laws. Additionally, the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), along with their Mexican and Canadian counterparts, have begun issuing guidance for the trade community seeking to obtain the benefits of the agreement. At this time, these guidance documents include a petition process for automakers to request alternative staging for the automotive rules of origin as well as general interim implementation instructions for USMCA entries. Still to come are regulations regarding the automotive labor value content requirements and Uniform Regulations regarding the customs provisions. Akin Gump and our partners at Dorantes Advisors in Mexico City have jointly developed brief summaries of these guidance documents and a timeline of key actions still to take place prior to entry into force. The materials are available here in both English and Spanish.

...

Read More

Trade Law

2020-03-02

Last week, in a highly anticipated decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Federal Circuit) concluded that Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 does not offend the non-delegation doctrine. To most observers, the ruling does not come as a surprise, but the story on Section 232 and the non-delegation doctrine is not yet over.

...

Read More

© 2024 Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP. All rights reserved. Attorney advertising. This document is distributed for informational use only; it does not constitute legal advice and should not be used as such. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Akin is the practicing name of Akin Gump LLP, a New York limited liability partnership authorized and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority under number 267321. A list of the partners is available for inspection at Eighth Floor, Ten Bishops Square, London E1 6EG. For more information about Akin Gump LLP, Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP and other associated entities under which the Akin Gump network operates worldwide, please see our Legal Notices page.