The Andean Trade Preference Act: A Comparison of House and Senate Versions of H.R. 3009

Publication Date: June 2002

Publisher: Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

Author(s):

Research Area: Trade

Type:

Abstract:

In 1991, the 102nd Congress passed the Andean Trade Preference Act (ATPA), which provided for preferential treatment of selected U.S. imports from Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador, and Peru as part of an incentive system to encourage legal trade as an alternative to illicit drug production. ATPA expired in December 2001 and reauthorization legislation is being considered in the 107th Congress. This report compares two versions of H.R. 3009, the Andean Trade Promotion and Drug Eradication Act, passed by the House on November 14, 2001, and the Andean Trade Preference Expansion Act, Title XXXI of the Trade Act of 2002, passed by the Senate on May 23, 2002. The bills would amend the preferential tariff treatment accorded ATPA beneficiary countries. Congressional findings in both bills support the overall ATPA program, and in general, the two bills also agree on expanding duty-free treatment to previously excepted articles, increasing the requirements to qualify as a beneficiary country, and enhancing customs procedures to make them essentially equivalent to those in the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).

There are, however, some differences between the House and Senate bills. For example, the House would make many non-apparel articles duty free, whereas the Senate bill would allow them to enter the United States under a NAFTA-equivalent rule. In most cases, this amounts to the same duty-free treatment. Both bills would extend and expand preferential tariff treatment to different dates in 2006, anticipating a possible Free Trade Area of the Americas. There are also subtle differences in the treatment of specific articles, particularly apparel, tuna, and footwear. The House version amends the Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act and the African Growth and Opportunity Act, provisions not addressed by the Senate bill and outside the ATPA, and so not discussed in this report.

Proposed changes in tariff treatment address eight categories of goods that were excepted from preferential treatment under the original act. To summarize broadly: 1) duty-free treatment is extended to carefully defined groups of apparel articles in both bills; 2) footwear (not eligible under the GSP preferences) is given duty-free treatment under the House and equal treatment under the Senate, but with a few specific exceptions; 3) tuna shipped in airtight containers would enter duty free under the House, but the amount would be capped under the Senate; 4) petroleum products would enter duty free under both bills; 5) watches that do not include material from HTS column two countries would enter duty free under both bills; 6) selected leather goods would enter duty free under the House and given reduced-duty treatment under the Senate; 7) sugars, syrups, and sugar products would be excepted from preferential treatment under both bills; and 8) rum and tafia would enter duty-free under the Senate bill, but would be excepted from duty-free treatment under the House bill.

For a detailed side-by-side comparison of the Trade Promotion Authority bills, see: CRS Report RL31445, Trade Promotion (Fast-Track)Authority: A Comparison of Bills Approved by the House (H.R. 3005) and the Senate (Title XXI of H.R. 3009), by Lenore Sek and William H. Cooper.