S.1864 - A bill to amend the Trade Act of 1974 to respond to the threat of foreign targeting practices.99th Congress (1985-1986)
|Sponsor:||Sen. Mitchell, George J. [D-ME] (Introduced 11/20/1985)|
|Committees:||Senate - Finance|
|Latest Action:||Senate - 11/25/1985 Committee on Finance requested executive comment from OMB, International Trade Commission, Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, Treasury Department, State Department, Commerce Department. (All Actions)|
This bill has the status Introduced
Here are the steps for Status of Legislation:
Summary: S.1864 — 99th Congress (1985-1986)All Information (Except Text)
Introduced in Senate (11/20/1985)
Amends the Trade Act of 1974 to include among the foreign trade practices that may trigger a U.S. response any foreign act, policy, or practice that threatens to burden or restrict U.S. commerce.
Declares that a foreign country's act, policy, or practice burdens U.S. commerce if such act, policy, or practice has an adverse effect on trade between the United States and another foreign country. Sets forth a list of foreign acts, policies, and practices which burden U.S. commerce.
Includes within the meaning of unreasonable foreign trade acts, policies, or practices any combination of unfair trade acts, policies, or practices and any such acts, practices, or procedures that deny: (1) market opportunities (including incipient industry protection); (2) opportunities for the establishment of an enterprise; (3) protection of intellectual property rights; or (4) protection against anti-competitive practices.
Includes within the definition of "service sector access authorization" any authorization that gives access to the U.S. market to a foreign supplier of goods related to a service.
Adds to the factors to be considered in import relief investigations relating to whether increased imports are a threat of serious injury to a domestic industry: (1) any combination of coordinated government actions that are bestowed on a specific enterprise the effect of such is to increase the competitiveness of that enterprise and that causes or threatens to cause serious injury to the domestic industry concerned; (2) the existence of an affirmative antidumping or countervailing duty determination; (3) the extent to which firms in the domestic industry concerned are unable to maintain existing levels of research and development expenses; and (4) the extent to which the U.S. market is the focal point for diversion of exports because of a foreign country's market restraints.