African Growth and Opportunity Act, Electrify Africa Act and Power Africa Program

Jul 31, 2014

Reading Time : 3 min

Power Africa

The Summit will have a special focus on the administration’s Power Africa initiative, announced by President Obama in June 2012. Power Africa is a new initiative to double access to power in sub-Saharan Africa and add more than 10,000 megawatts of cleaner, more efficient electricity generation capacity. It combines the efforts of approximately 12 U.S. government agencies and 40 private companies working in six initial African partner countries: Liberia, Nigeria, Ghana, Kenya, Tanzania and Ethiopia. To date, a total of $21 billion has been committed to Power Africa by both the U.S. government ($7 billion) and private-sector companies ($14 billion). The goal is to help countries develop newly discovered resources responsibly, build out power generation and transmission, and expand the reach of mini-grid and off-grid solutions.

Power Africa builds on Africa’s enormous power potential, including new discoveries of vast reserves of oil and gas, and the potential to develop clean geothermal, hydro, wind and solar energy. According to the International Energy Agency, sub-Saharan Africa will require more than $300 billion in investment to achieve universal electricity access by 2030. Power Africa is designed to bring to bear a wide range of U.S. government tools to support investment in Africa’s energy sector, including long-term financing, insurance, guarantees and credit enhancements.

The U.S. Congress has shown considerable support for Power Africa. On May 8, 2014, the U.S. House of Representatives passed HR 2548 (the Electrify Africa Act) with broad bipartisan support. The Electrify Africa Act mirrors the goals of Power Africa and sets forth certain specific responsibilities for the agencies already implementing Power Africa. The Senate version of the bill, S 2014 (the Energize Africa Act), was reported out of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on June 24. The Energize Africa Act is substantially similar, but would double the goal of Power Africa to 20,000 megawatts. In each case, the U.S. government is changing the way its agencies do business in Africa and increasing access to credit for investments in Africa. Please click here to view our March 11 client alert and here to view our May 16 blog post that are both related to this topic.

African Growth and Opportunity Act

At the center of U.S. economic policy toward Africa is the AGOA. AGOA was signed into law on May 18, 2000, as Title 1 of The Trade and Development Act of 2000. The purpose of AGOA is to assist the economies of sub-Saharan Africa and to improve economic relations between the U.S. and the region. With the existing legislation expiring in 2015, and new legislation currently being drafted by the U.S. Congress, the administration is holding the annual AGOA Forum at the Summit in August to discuss ways to improve trade between the United States and Africa under a new and improved AGOA.

AGOA has become the primary driver in the administration’s economic and development engagement with Africa. In particular, it offers duty-free access to the U.S. market for African products from countries that are making progress toward market-based economies. Proponents of AGOA believe it has proven to be a valuable tool in promoting trade by allowing a certain number of sub-Saharan African countries access to the U.S. market. Critics of AGOA believe that it has not yet done enough to encourage a larger number of countries to take advantage of AGOA by exporting to the United States. The forthcoming renewal and revisions will likely focus on making it easier for countries to qualify for AGOA and improving export strategies to increase the amount of African exports to the United States.

Share This Insight

Previous Entries

Speaking Energy

July 8, 2026

On June 18, 2026, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or the Commission) issued an order to ISO New England Inc. (ISO-NE) directing ISO-NE and ISO-NE participating transmission owners to show cause as to why ISO-NE’s tariff should not be found to be unjust and unreasonable (ISO New England Inc., 195 FERC ¶ 61,215 (2026) (Order)) because it fails to sufficiently:

...

Read More

Speaking Energy

July 7, 2026

On June 29, 2026, the Supreme Court granted a petition for certiorari in Leonard Hoffmann v. WBI Energy Transmission, Inc. (Hoffmann), which presents the question whether section 7 of the Natural Gas Act (NGA) requires pipeline companies using federal eminent domain authority to pay landowners’ attorney’s fees in states where landowners can recover those fees under state law. In the decision giving rise to the Supreme Court’s review, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit held that a group of ranchers were not entitled to recover their $383,300 in attorney’s fees incurred while negotiating their compensation—creating a circuit split with four other courts of appeals. Hoffmann will be heard during the Court’s October 2026 Term, and marks the second time in five years that the Court has agreed to interpret NGA section 7.

...

Read More

Speaking Energy

July 6, 2026

On June 29, 2026, the United States Supreme Court issued Trump v. Slaughter, fundamentally reshaping presidential removal authority over independent regulatory agencies. The decision overruled a 90-year-old precedent established in Humphrey’s Executor v. United States, which had upheld the constitutionality of commissioner removal protections in the Federal Trade Commission Act (FTC Act). As written, the FTC Act permits a commissioner’s removal “only for inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office.” In Slaughter, the Court was asked to reevaluate this standard following the President’s removal of a Democratic-appointed FTC commissioner from office in 2025 without cause. Finding for the President, the Court held that removal was permissible because the FTC Act’s for-cause removal protections for commissioners violate the separation of powers, specifically, the President’s removal power under Article II. The Court explained that the FTC exercises executive power because it promulgates binding rules, investigates and enforces those rules through administrative adjudications, and brings civil enforcement actions in federal court. It found that because it exercises these executive powers, its commissioners “must therefore be controlled by the Chief Executive, in whom such power is vested.” While previous recent cases addressing the scope of the Removal Power, Seila Law LLC v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and Collins v. Yellen purported to preserve some kernel of Humphrey’s, the Court made clear that “[i]f anything more is left of Humphrey’s, we overrule it.”

...

Read More

Speaking Energy

June 25, 2026

On June 18, 2026, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or the Commission) issued an order to the California Independent System Operator Corporation (CAISO) directing CAISO and CAISO transmission owners to show cause as to why CAISO’s tariff should not be found to be unjust and unreasonable (California Indep. Sys. Operator Corp., 195 FERC ¶ 61,214 (2026) (the Order)) because it fails to sufficiently:

...

Read More

© 2026 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.