THE CURRENCY EXCHANGE RATE OVERSIGHT REFORM ACT OF 2011

[trooper]

THE CURRENCY EXCHANGE RATE OVERSIGHT REFORM ACT OF 2011

Bumped for those who missed this ...

THE CURRENCY EXCHANGE RATE OVERSIGHT REFORM ACT OF 2011

Specifies Consequences for Countries that Fail to Eliminate Currency Misalignment and Provides Tools to Address Impact of Currency Misalignment of U.S. Industries

The Brown-Schumer-Graham-Snowe-Stabenow-Sessions-Casey-Burr Currency Exchange Rate Oversight Act of 2011 will reform and enhance oversight of currency exchange rates.

This strong, bipartisan bill combines the best elements of a Schumer-Graham bill that was passed by the Senate Finance Committee in 2007 and separate legislation introduced this year by Senators Brown and Snowe that passed the House of Representatives in 2010.

The merged bill uses U.S. trade law to counter the economic harm to U.S. manufacturers caused by currency manipulation. The new combined bill also provides consequences for countries that fail to adopt appropriate policies to eliminate currency misalignment and includes tools to address the impact of currency misalignment on U.S. industries.

Improves Oversight of Currency Exchange Rates. Under current law, Treasury is required to identify countries that manipulate their currency for purposes of gaining an unfair competitive trade advantage. In recent years, Treasury has found that certain countries’ currencies were undervalued.

However, based on its interpretation of the law’s legal standard for a finding of “manipulation,” Treasury has refused to cite such countries as currency manipulators. The bill repeals the currency provisions in current law and replaces them with a new framework, based on objective criteria, which will require Treasury to identify misaligned currencies and require action by the administration if countries fail to correct the misalignment.

Continues ...read more ..

Clarifies Countervailing Duty Law Can Address Currency Undervaluation. Under existing trade laws, if the Commerce Department and the International Trade Commission find that subsidized imports are causing economic harm to American manufacturers and workers, the administration must impose duties on those imports to offset (“countervail”) the benefit conferred on foreign producers and exporters by the government subsidies.

Commerce already has authority under U.S. law to investigate whether currency undervaluation by a government provides a countervailable subsidy, although it has failed to do so despite repeated requests to investigate from a wide range of U.S. industries.

The bill specifies the applicable investigation initiation standard, which will require Commerce to investigate whether currency undervaluation by a government provides a countervailable subsidy if a U.S. industry requests investigation and provides proper documentation.

Includes WTO-Consistent, Key Provision from Brown-Snowe Currency Reform for Fair Trade Act (S.328) and House-passed Currency Legislation.

In previous countervailing duty investigations, Commerce has refused to find an export subsidy if the subsidy is not limited exclusively to circumstances of export(i.e., when non-exporters also may benefit).

The bill precludes Commerce from imposing this bright-line rule, and clarifies that Commerce may not refuse to investigate a subsidy allegation based on the single fact that a subsidy is available in circumstances in addition to export.

This clarification is supported by dispute settlement rulings of the World Trade Organization’s Appellate Body (e.g., in the case involving taxation of foreign sales corporations) and is the key element of the Brown-Snowe currency bill and the currency bill that passed the House (H.R.2378) in September 2010 with overwhelming bipartisan support.

Establishes New Objective Criteria to Identify Misaligned Currencies. The legislation requires Treasury to develop a biannual report to Congress that identifies two categories of currencies:

(1) a general category of “fundamentally misaligned currencies” based on observed objective criteria and

(2) a select category of “fundamentally misaligned currencies for priority action” that reflects misaligned currencies caused by clear policy actions by the relevant government.

Requires New Consultations. The legislation requires Treasury to engage in immediate consultations with all countries cited in the report. For “priority” currencies, Treasury would seek advice from the International Monetary Fund (IMF) as well as key trading partners.

Triggers Tough Consequences. For “priority” currencies, important consequences are triggered unless a country adopts policies to eliminate the misalignment.

Immediately upon designation of a “priority” currency, the administration must:

• Oppose any IMF governance changes that benefit a country whose currency is designated for priority action.

• Consider designation of a country’s currency as a “priority” currency when determining whether to grant the country “market economy” status for purpose of U.S. antidumping law.

After 90 days of failure to adopt appropriate policies, the administration must:

• Reflect currency undervaluation in dumping calculations for products produced or manufactured in the designated country.

• Forbid federal procurement of goods and services from the designated country unless that country is a member of the WTO Government Procurement Agreement (“GPA”).

• Request the IMF to engage the designated country in special consultations over its misaligned currency.

• Forbid Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC) financing or insurance for projects in the designated country.

• Oppose new multilateral bank financing for projects in the designated country.

After 360 days of failure to adopt appropriate policies, the administration must:

• Require the U.S. Trade Representative to request dispute settlement consultations in the World Trade Organization with the government responsible for the currency.

• Require the Department of Treasury to consult with the Federal Reserve Board and other central banks to consider remedial intervention in currency markets.

Limits Presidential Waiver. The President could initially waive the consequences that take effect after the first 90 days if such action would harm national security or the vital economic interest of the United States.

However, the President must explain to the Congress in writing how the adverse impact of taking an action would be greater than the potential benefits of such action.

Any subsequent economic waiver would require the President to explain how the adverse impact of taking an action would be substantially out of proportion to the benefits of such action.

Furthermore, any Member of Congress may thereafter introduce a joint resolution of disapproval concerning the President’s waiver. Should the disapproval resolution be approved, the President may veto it, and the Congress would have the opportunity to override the veto.

Establishes New Consultative Body. The bill would create a new body with which Treasury must consult during the development of its report.

Of the nine members, one would be selected by the President and the remainder by the Chairmen and Ranking Members of the Senate Banking and Finance Committees, as well and the Financial Services and House Ways and Means Committees.

The members must have demonstrated expertise in finance, economics, or currency exchange.

The bill is supported by –

• The Fair Currency Coalition (FCC), a group of U.S. manufacturing, service, agricultural, and labor organizations, including over 300 companies and organizations.

• The Committee to support U.S. Trade Laws (CSUSTL), an organization of almost 100 companies, trade associations, labor unions – including farmers unions, workers, and individuals, spanning all sectors, including manufacturing, technology, agriculture, mining and energy, and services.

• The American Wire Producers Association (AWPA), whose members include wire producers, manufacturers and distributors of wire rod, and suppliers of machinery, dies and equipment to the wire industry.

• The AFL-CIO, a voluntary federation of 55 unions, representing 12.2 million members.

• The American Iron and Steel Institute (AISI), whose member companies produce approximately 80 percent of the steel made in the United States.

• The International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace & Agricultural Implement Workers of America (UAW), one of the nation’s most diverse unions, representing workers in manufacturing, health care, higher education, gaming, public service and other sectors.

• The Tooling, Manufacturing & Technologies Association (TMTA), whose members include businesses in the metalworking, manufacturing and technologies industries.

• The United Steel, Paper and Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial and Service Workers International Union (USW), the largest industrial union in North America, with 850,000 active members working in a broad range of industries, including steel, tires, glass, paper, shipbuilding, oil refining, and mining.

• The International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM), representing 720,000 members across North America.

• The Alliance for American Manufacturing (AAM), a labormanagement partnership between USW and American manufacturers.

• The Coalition for a Prosperous America, representing agriculture production, manufacturing and worker interests.

• The United Food and Commercial Workers International Union (UFCW), representing more than 1.3 million workers in retail, meatpacking, food processing, poultry and

manufacturing industries.

link to pdf http://hagan.senate.gov/files/110922_CurrencyBillDetails.pdf

[carlablum]

Thank you for bumping this. It will take me a while to read through it but are sure glad you bumped it up cause it sure looks interresting!

Thanks again!!

Carla

[trooper]

Thank you for bumping this. It will take me a while to read through it but are sure glad you bumped it up cause it sure looks interresting!

Thanks again!!

Carla

Sorry about bumping this.. It should have been taken out... Inside joke...

[FrankenSLI]

China hates this.

[treeman0405]

so i am new to this is this a good thing or bad i have been reading alot that u guys say it gets confusing i dident know anything about the dinar until my buddy told me to buy them so i spent 6 grand on them is that good ???????

[randalln]

This also applies to Iraq, UAE,Indonesia

Thats why there in a hurry cant slap China and not slap Iraq

[Chooch]

The bill is just designed to piss off China... no worries it will NEVER pass.

[NWGUY]

Thank you for the post!!! This is good stuff!! Don't know really what they can do about punishing these countries, China, specifically, but I am sure that they are going to have an eye on Iraq too! Wonder why???

Maybe, we can pressure them, and not let them have a McDonalds francise??? Maybe, not let them have their Nike Tennis Shoes???

I take this as good news, but we will have to wait to see how they plan on implementing this process??

Go RV!!!

[The Machine]

so i am new to this is this a good thing or bad i have been reading alot that u guys say it gets confusing i dident know anything about the dinar until my buddy told me to buy them so i spent 6 grand on them is that good ???????

Is that good .... well it all depends how much dinar you got for your $6K .... anyway most people here (as in 99%) dont really talk abut how much they have .... it doesnt really matter ... everyone has exactly what they were comfortable buying ..... you spent $6,000 I spent £xx,xxx I'm sure people here spent $60,000 and others only $60 ..... it doesnt matter as long as you weren't ripped off for what you got..... I really hope you didnt go out and buy a whole load of lower denoms

[k98nights]

Bump

[mrref]

so i am new to this is this a good thing or bad i have been reading alot that u guys say it gets confusing i dident know anything about the dinar until my buddy told me to buy them so i spent 6 grand on them is that good ???????

Read it again, you'll get it....

[Danneedsrvnow]

The bill is just designed to piss off China... no worries it will NEVER pass.

Actually....I agree, I highly doubt it would ever pass.

Certainly nowhere in the near future.

[okane]

so i am new to this is this a good thing or bad i have been reading alot that u guys say it gets confusing i dident know anything about the dinar until my buddy told me to buy them so i spent 6 grand on them is that good ???????

Try to find it as close to a dollar per thousand as you can, ie. one mil per grand.

[dacraigo]

I honestly think it will pass, the world is shuttering in fear of a world wide recession...we shall see.

[billbill]

Thanks for the refresher!

[dog53]

This bill was directy aimed at china. Not the arab nations.

[dacraigo]

This bill was directy aimed at china. Not the arab nations.

Yet this bill singles out no country, yes, current economic situations would point to china, but their are others out their that need reform that will not make changes as needed.

[3keepfaith]

so i am new to this is this a good thing or bad i have been reading alot that u guys say it gets confusing i dident know anything about the dinar until my buddy told me to buy them so i spent 6 grand on them is that good ???????

Did you read it? It's pretty much self explanitory.

[BrokeNoMore]

COOL!!!

This bill was voted on by the Senate 10/3/2011, and passed 79 to 19.

And it is directed at China. It's ABOUT TIME!

[blueskygal]

frankly it PISSES me OFF...

They are trying to protect our manufacturing????? REALLY??? After they sent all the business to China? and everywhere else? Now OUR unemployment is through the roof - we have no manufacturing left really - except for our "educational institutions" and government jobs. So NOW our IMPORTS will be more expensive resulting in US PAYING MORE FOR OUR STUFF!!!!

Private boarding schools now have the highest # of international students EVER EVER - some could actually FILL their schools with kids from China - IM SERIOUS. I was at one 2 weeks ago where the Amissions Director told me that they coudl have taken 100 Chinese students at full pay but they are trying to keep Americans in the MIX! Also, these foreign students are making boarding school more affordable for our financial aid families because 2 full pay international students allow for a discount for a needy domestic. IRONY. And these Chinese families pay FULL FARE - which equates to $38,000-$46,000 PER YEAR TUITION!!!

So basically, unless we have manufacturing jobs and plants here that need workers - our economy will NOT benefit from this AT ALL.

GREAT IDEA :-)

Classic bait and switch!

O yeah we will send our manufacturing to YOU so you can build a middle class and economy and then we will stab u later sucka!

BTW, if I am WRONG, can an economist please show me the light? Thank you :-)

[treeman0405]

Did you read it? It's pretty much self explanitory.

[BrokeNoMore]

frankly it PISSES me OFF...

They are trying to protect our manufacturing????? REALLY??? After they sent all the business to China? and everywhere else? Now OUR unemployment is through the roof - we have no manufacturing left really - except for our "educational institutions" and government jobs. So NOW our IMPORTS will be more expensive resulting in US PAYING MORE FOR OUR STUFF!!!!

Private boarding schools now have the highest # of international students EVER EVER - some could actually FILL their schools with kids from China - IM SERIOUS. I was at one 2 weeks ago where the Amissions Director told me that they coudl have taken 100 Chinese students at full pay but they are trying to keep Americans in the MIX! Also, these foreign students are making boarding school more affordable for our financial aid families because 2 full pay international students allow for a discount for a needy domestic. IRONY. And these Chinese families pay FULL FARE - which equates to $38,000-$46,000 PER YEAR TUITION!!!

So basically, unless we have manufacturing jobs and plants here that need workers - our economy will NOT benefit from this AT ALL.

GREAT IDEA :-)

Classic bait and switch!

O yeah we will send our manufacturing to YOU so you can build a middle class and economy and then we will stab u later sucka!

BTW, if I am WRONG, can an economist please show me the light? Thank you :-)

I believe you are right. But at least they are closing some of the huge gaps. It is the tiniest move in the right direction. If we level the playing field, then some of our jobs just might come back. Of course, they will be coming back largely to an "entitlement" society that really doesn't want to work, but wants to sit on their ever widening butts and collect unemployment and welfare. The entire mess with our economy, IMO, has been engineered for failure since...the 1960's.

[chocolate1]

I think its just Public Relations.

We are way past ever being able to 'punish any country as another poster has stated. I've seen these sort of PR moves before. They're just meant to placate a stirring and moaning populace over these sorts of issues.

[abby01]

We need to do some research on this bill. I owned a small business where some of the products were made in China. Some of the big boys in the US manufacturing got together and took legal action on China. Some of these products were made of wood and the US businesses were required to meet high standards to protect the environment and other standards that cost the American manufacturers much more money and they could not fairly compete with China. They wanted tariffs against China's products. They accomplished their goals (I do not know how it was accomplished because I lost interest) and now there is a more level playing field in this one area. I think some of the big boys who try to support the US with jobs, are sick and tired of the unfair advantages given to businesses/countries overseas. It is part of the reason we have so much unemployment. I hope they put teeth to this bill for many reasons.

Edited October 6, 2011 by abby01

[TrinityeXchange]

They are trying to protect our manufacturing????? REALLY??? After they sent all the business to China? and everywhere else? Now OUR unemployment is through the roof - we have no manufacturing left really - except for our "educational institutions" and government jobs. So NOW our IMPORTS will be more expensive resulting in US PAYING MORE FOR OUR STUFF!!!!

BTW, if I am WRONG, can an economist please show me the light? Thank you :-)

i couldn't have said it better my friend. its ridiculous. the overall scheme appears to be that america will replace its manufacturing base with the services of global security. whether homeland or abroad, it is the face of the new america. we have extended our manufacturing base to such a degree i fear that a true attack on our soil will catch us off balance, unable to even produce a formidable tank force without gathering parts from abroad. couple that with the fact that even our national guard is away from home make most of us shudder.

we are the new world police force.