Trade agreements act of 1979

385

eral Trade Negotiations on an article produced in that possession on which excise taxes are levied by the United States, and

(B) whether the sum of the amounts transferred and paid over to that possession attributable to such taxes for calendar year 1978 were equal to, or greater than, an amount equal to 10 percent of the tax revenues (not including revenues associated with petroleum or petroleum products) of that possession for 1978.

(2) ANNUAL DETERMINATIONS.-If the determinations of the Secretary under subparagraphs (A) and (B) of paragraph (1) are affirmative, then he shall determine, within 3 months after the close of each of the

fiscal years 1980 through 1984, whether that concession contributed importantly to a reduction in the sum of the amounts transferred and paid over to that possession on account of such excise taxes for the most

19 recently closed fiscal year. In making his determination, the Secretary shall take into account the extent

to which other factors may have contributed to the reduction. The Secretary shall determine the amount of

the reduction by subtracting the amount so transferred

and paid over for the fiscal year from the amount

which would have been transferred and paid over for

386

the fiscal year if the products of the possession with

respect to which the excise tax is imposed had maintained a share of the United States market for that

product which was the share of the United States market for the product for fiscal year 1979.

(b) INCLUSION OF COMPENSATORY COMPENSATORY AMOUNT IN 7 BUDGET OF THE UNITED STATES.-If the Secretary deter8 mines an amount under subsection (a)(2), he shall advise the 9 President of that amount and the President may include, in 10 the first Budget or Supplemental Budget submitted under the 11 Budget and Accounting Act, 1921, after receiving such 12 advice, an amount, equal to the amount so determined by the 13 Secretary, for payment to the government of that possession 14 to offset the amount of the reduction. If the President in15 cludes an amount different from the amount determined by 16 the Secretary or no amount, the President shall promptly 17 submit a report to the Congress setting forth his reasons for 18 submitting such a different amount. Upon appropriation, such 19 sums shall be paid promptly to the government of such pos20 session. There are authorized to be appropriated such sums 21 as may be necessary for the purposes of this section for fiscal 22 years 1981 through 1985.

(c) REPORT TO THE CONGRESS.-On January 31, 24 1984, the President shall report to the Congress on the oper25 ation of this section, the reductions in revenues determined

387

1 under this section, and any reductions which are likely to 2 occur in fiscal years beginning after September 30, 1984. If 3 he determines that such action is warranted, he shall recom4 mend to the Congress in such report an extension of the ap5 plication of this section to such fiscal years.

6 SEC. 1113. NO BUDGET AUTHORITY FOR ANY FISCAL YEAR

BEFORE FISCAL YEAR 1981.

Nothing in this Act shall be construed as authorizing the

9 enactment of new budget authority for any fiscal year begin

10 ning before October 1, 1980.

11 SEC. 1114. EFFECTIVE DATE.

Except as otherwise provided in this title, this title shall

13 take effect on the date of enactment of this Act.

Senator RIBICOFF. The committee will be in order.

Six years ago the Tokyo round of multilateral trade negotiations began. Today the Subcommittee on International Trade is considering legislation to implement the results of those negotiations for the United States.

The MTN has produced tangible results. It did not end in a whimper. This alone is a remarkable achievement.

The negotiations began during a worldwide boom. Since then we have had the OPEC price increases, a global recession and changes in administration in every major trading country.

The productive conclusion of the MTN is due largely to the leadership of the United States. Several Presidents and many Government officials have contributed to this effort. However, there is no doubt that without Robert S. Strauss there could have been no conclusion to the MTN and no Trade Agreements Act of 1979. The legislation before us today marks the end of the negotiations. It may mark the beginning of a new era both in international and in U.S. trade policy.

Internationally, the MTN agreements on subsidies, government procurement, product standards, antidumping, customs valuation and import licensing may permit governments to resolve conflicts before they become confrontations. This should promote increased trade and higher standards of living throughout the world.

I say may and should because the MTN agreements are merely rules. Rules mean nothing unless they are enforced.

Domestically, the MTN should provide some immediate benefits. In the long run, the MTN agreements could benefit the United States significantly by opening up new markets and discouraging unfair competition. Again, I say "should" and "could." This is because the benefits of the MTN to the United States depend entirely upon our ability to take advantage of those agreements. If history is any indication, international enforcement of the new trade rules will depend on the United States. Our ability to enforce the MTN agreements and to promote the short- and long-term economic interests of the United States require some fundamental changes.

First, Congress and the President must continue to work closely together on international economic issues. The era of the trade agreements program, as we have known it, is over. U.S. negotiators will never again make trade agreements for the United States without close congressional review.

The MTN was a successful constitutional experiment in coordination between the two branches of Government. We must apply the lessons we have learned during MTN to future negotiations.

Second, the executive branch trade policy agencies must be reorganized. We can no longer afford the luxury of dispersing political responsibility for international economic policymaking among many agencies. We can no longer afford limp enforcement of our unfair trade laws and uncoordinated attempts at export promotion. We must establish a strong trade policy agency. Without such an agency, the benefits of the MTN for the United States will be minimal.

Parenthetically, it was my impression that the administration was to send to us its recommendations for the reorganization of our

387