Trade Adjustment Assistance for Firms:
Economic, Program, and Policy Issues
J. F. Hornbeck
Specialist in International Trade and Finance
February 14August 19, 2011
Congressional Research Service
7-5700
www.crs.gov
RS20210
CRS Report for Congress
Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress
Trade Adjustment Assistance for Firms: Economic, Program, and Policy Issues
Summary
Economists generally acknowledge thatAlthough trade liberalization enhancescan enhance the economic welfare of all
trade partners, but with stiffer global competition, many firms and workers also face difficult
adjustment problems trade partners, it also
causes difficult adjustment problems for some firms and workers. Congress has responded to
these adjustment costs by authorizing four trade
with trade adjustment assistance (TAA) programs to assist trade-impactedfor workers, firms,
farmers, and
communities. This report discusses the TAA program for firms (TAAF). The TAAF program
provides technical assistance to trade-affected firms to help them develop strategies and make
other adjustments to remain competitive in the changing international economy. The 111th
Congress authorized the program through February 12, 2012, and it continues to operate at
FY2010 levels of $15.8 million under a continuing resolution (see CRS Report RL30343,
Continuing Resolutions: Latest Action and Brief Overview of Recent Practices, by Sandy
Streeter.)for Firms (TAAF) program.
Congress first authorized TAA in Title III of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 (P.L. 87-794),
including a new firm and industry assistance program, which is administered by the Economic
Development Administration (EDA) of the U.S. Department of Commerce. It provides technical
assistance to help trade-impactedaffected firms make strategic adjustments, which may allow them to
remain competitive in a global economy to improve their
competitiveness. Originally firm TAA also included loans and loan
guarantees, but Congress
eliminated all direct financial assistance in 1986 because of federal
budgetary cutbacks and
concern over the program’s high default rates and limited effectiveness.
Debate early in the 111th Congress over TAA reauthorization led to a bipartisan agreement on
February 5, 2009, bipartisan
agreement to expand and extend the existing programs for workers, firms, and farmers, and
to add a
fourth program for communities. The agreement became part of the American Recovery and
and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) of 2009 (P.L. 111-5—the Stimulus Bill). Congress changed the TAA for Firms
TAAF program in a number of important ways. It expanded eligibility for trade adjustment assistance to
include services firms, authorized an extension of the program through December 31, 2010to include services firms,
increased annual authorized funding levels from $16 million to $50 million, provided greater
flexibility flexibility
for a firm to demonstrate eligibility for assistance, established new oversight and
evaluation evaluation
criteria, created a new position of Director of Adjustment Assistance for Firms, and
required required
submission to Congress of a detailed annual report on the TAAF program.
AuthorizationAs authorization of the TAA programs was setabout to expire on January 1, 2011. The, Congress passed
the Omnibus Trade Act
of 2010 (H.R. 6517), which the House and Senate passed on December 22, 2010, of 2010 (P.L. 111-344). This act extended the
TAAF program through February 12, 2012. However, because of expiring language in the act,
those expanded provisions
February 12, 2012, but allowed those expanded provisions in P.L. 111-5 covering eligibility for
services firms and other matters passed in the
ARRA all expiredto expire on February 12, 2011, although the program continues to be authorized and
operate at FY2010 levels of $15.8 million under the continuing resolution.
On February 8, 2011, S. 308, the Trade Extenders Act of 2011 was introduced in the Senate. This
bill would authorize the TAA for Firms program to operate through June 30, 2013. It would also
authorize appropriations of $50 million for FY2011 and $37.5 million for the nine months ending
June 30, 2012. Because the TAA for Firms program awards grants to the eleven regional Trade
Adjustment Assistance Centers (TAACs) on July 1 of the fiscal year, S. 308 would allow grants
for FY2011 to be funded at the $50 million level, if Congress fully appropriates that amount, and
a nine-month pro rated share ($37.5 million) would be available for FY2012. Funds would be
awarded for the grant fiscal year July 1, 2012 through June 30, 2013.
Congressional Research Service
Trade Adjustment Assistance for Firms: Economic, Program, and Policy Issues
Contents
Introduction ................................................................................................................................1
Recent Developments..................................................................................................................1
The Economics of Trade Adjustment ...........................................................................................2
The Firm Trade Adjustment Assistance Program .........................................................................3
Eligibility and Certification...................................................................................................4
Program Evaluation ..............................................................................................................6
Economic and Policy Issues ........................................................................................................7
Tables
Table 1. Firm TAA Authorizations and Appropriations, FY2000-2010 .........................................3
Table 2. Trade Adjustment Assistance, Select Program Indicators for FY2003-2009 ....................6
Contacts
Author Contact Information ........................................................................................................8
Congressional Research Service
Trade Adjustment Assistance for Firms: Economic, Program, and Policy Issues
Introduction
Economists generally acknowledge that trade liberalization enhances the economic welfare of all
trade partners, but with stiffer global competition, many firms and workers also face difficult
adjustment problems. Congress has responded to these adjustment costs by authorizing four trade
adjustment assistance (TAA) programs to assist trade-impacted workers, firms, farmers, and
communities. This report discusses the TAA program for firms (TAAF). The TAAF program
provides technical assistance to trade-affected firms to help them develop strategies and make
other adjustments to remain competitive in the changing international economy. The 111th
Congress authorized the program through February 12, 2012, and it continues to operate at
FY2010 levels of $15.8 million under a continuing resolution.
Recent Developments
Debate early in the 111th Congress over TAA reauthorization led to a February 5, 2009, bipartisan
agreement to expand and extend existing programs for workers, firms, and farmers, and to add a
fourth program for communities. The agreement became part of the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act (ARRA) of 2009 (P.L. 111-5—the Stimulus Bill). Congress changed the TAA
for Firms program in a number of important ways. It expanded eligibility for trade adjustment
assistance to include services firms, authorized an extension of the program through December
31, 2010, increased annual funding levels from $16 million to $50 million, provided greater
flexibility for a firm to demonstrate eligibility for assistance, established new oversight and
evaluation criteria, created a new position of Director of Adjustment Assistance for Firms, and
required submission to Congress of a detailed annual report on the TAAF program.
Authorization of the TAA programs was set to expire on January 1, 2011. The Omnibus Trade Act
of 2010 (H.R. 6517), which the House and Senate passed on December 22, 2010, extended the
TAAF program through February 12, 2012.1 However, because of expiring language in the act,
those expanded provisions covering eligibility for services firms and other matters passed in the
ARRA all expired on February 12, 2011, although the program remains authorized and continues
to operate at FY2010 levels of $15.8 million under a continuing resolution.
On February 8, 2011, S. 308, the Trade Extenders Act of 2011 was introduced in the Senate. This
bill would authorize the TAAF program to operate through June 30, 2013. It would also authorize
appropriations of $50 million for FY2011 and $37.5 million for the nine months of FY2012
ending June 30, 2012.
The TAAF program operates by awarding grants to the regional Trade Adjustment Assistance
Centers (TAACs). The grants are awarded on July 1 of the fiscal year in which appropriations are
made. Therefore, TAACs are currently working off FY2010 funds and the TAACs are scheduled
to be awarded FY2011 grants on July 1, 2011, so no interruption of operations in the near term is
expected. However, the program is funded under a continuing resolution. The implications of S.
1
This legislation affected the workers program more, with many provisions expired on February 12, 2011. See: CRS
Report RL34383, Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) for Workers: Current Issues and Legislation, by John J.
Topoleski.
Congressional Research Service
1
Trade Adjustment Assistance for Firms: Economic, Program, and Policy Issues
308 are, that if passed by Congress, grants for FY2011 would be funded at the $50 million level,
with a nine-month pro rated portion ($37.5 million) made available for FY2012. Grants would
likely be awarded to TAACs on July 1 of that year.
The Economics of Trade Adjustment
Economists tend to agree that in defining the rules of exchange among countries, freer trade is
preferable to protectionism. Insights from traditional trade theory (comparative advantage) point
to the mutual gains for countries trading on their differences, producing those goods at which they
are relatively more efficient, while trading for those at which they are relatively less so.
Additional gains are realized from similar, intra-industry trade based on efficiencies from
segmented and specialized production.2 Firm-level evidence supports theory. Trade appears to
“enable efficient producers within an industry, and efficient industries within an economy, to
expand,” leading to a reallocation of resources that increases a country’s productivity, output, and
income. 3 Consumers (both firms and households) also gain from a wider variety of goods at lower
prices.
13, 2011. The TAAF program remains
authorized and continues to operate at FY2010 spending levels of $15.8 million under a full-year
continuing resolution, so no interruption of operations is expected in the near term.
The pre-ARRA TAA program authorizations are set to expire in early 2012 and the 112th
Congress is considering legislation to extend all TAA programs. Although there are multiple bills
addressing TAA that range in scope from repealing the authorizing legislation to providing
expanded multiyear extensions, the issue is taking form as part of the debate on passage of
implementing legislation for the proposed free trade agreements (FTAs) with Colombia, Panama,
and South Korea. As Congress seeks to resolve this debate, two issues dominate the discussion:
(1) reauthorization of TAA programs; and (2) procedural issues on how to move TAA legislation.
At present, a bipartisan compromise is being considered to reauthorize TAA programs through
December 31, 2013, including many, but not all, of the enhanced programs and funding levels
contained in the ARRA. The firms program would be reauthorized at an annualized level of $16
million. Procedural issues over how to move the TAA and FTA implementing bills are still under
discussion, but include moving TAA legislation either as part of an FTA implementing bill or in
separate legislation. A final determination has not been announced.
For a broader policy discussion on TAA, see CRS Report R41922, Trade Adjustment Assistance
(TAA) and Its Role in U.S. Trade Policy.
Congressional Research Service
Trade Adjustment Assistance for Firms: Economic, Program, and Policy Issues
Contents
Introduction and Recent Developments........................................................................................... 1
The Economics of Trade Adjustment............................................................................................... 1
The Firm Trade Adjustment Assistance Program ............................................................................ 2
Eligibility and Certification....................................................................................................... 3
Program Evaluation ................................................................................................................... 5
Economic and Policy Issues ............................................................................................................ 6
Proposed Legislation ....................................................................................................................... 7
Tables
Table 1. Firm TAA Authorizations and Appropriations, FY2001-2011........................................... 3
Table 2. Trade Adjustment Assistance, Select Program Indicators for FY2003-2010..................... 5
Contacts
Author Contact Information............................................................................................................. 8
Congressional Research Service
Trade Adjustment Assistance for Firms: Economic, Program, and Policy Issues
Introduction and Recent Developments
Although trade liberalization can enhance the economic welfare of all trade partners, it can also
causes difficult adjustment problems for some import-competing firms and workers. Congress has
responded to these adjustment costs with trade adjustment assistance (TAA) programs for
workers, firms, farmers, and communities. This report discusses the Trade Adjustment Assistance
for Firms (TAAF) program, which provides technical assistance to trade-affected firms to help
them develop strategies to remain competitive in a dynamic international economy.
Debate early in the 111th Congress over TAA reauthorization led to a bipartisan agreement on
February 5, 2009 to expand and extend the existing programs for workers, firms, and farmers, and
to add a fourth program for communities. The agreement became part of the American Recovery
and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) of 2009 (P.L. 111-5—the Stimulus Bill). Congress changed the
TAAF program in a number of important ways. It expanded eligibility to include services firms,
increased authorized funding levels from $16 million to $50 million, provided greater flexibility
for a firm to demonstrate eligibility for assistance, established new oversight and evaluation
criteria, created a new position of Director of Adjustment Assistance for Firms, and required
submission to Congress of a detailed annual report on the TAAF program.
As authorization of the TAA programs was about to expire on January 1, 2011, Congress passed
the Omnibus Trade Act of 2010 (P.L. 111-344). This act extended the TAAF program through
February 12, 2012, but allowed those expanded provisions in the ARRA covering eligibility for
services firms and other matters to expire on February 13, 2011. The program remains authorized
and continues to operate at FY2010 spending levels of $15.8 million under a full-year continuing
resolution, so no interruption of operations is expected in the near term. There is, however, a
debate in the 112th Congress over reauthorizing the program, and whether to reinstate some or all
of the recently expired provisions.1
The Economics of Trade Adjustment
Economists tend to agree that in defining the rules of exchange among countries, freer trade is
preferable to protectionism. Insights from trade theory point to the mutual gains for countries
trading on their differences, producing those goods at which they are relatively more efficient,
while trading for those at which they are relatively less so. Additional gains are realized from
similar, intra-industry trade based on efficiencies from segmented and specialized production.2
Firm-level evidence supports theory. Trade appears to “enable efficient producers within an
industry, and efficient industries within an economy, to expand,” leading to a reallocation of
resources that increases a country’s productivity, output, and income.3 Consumers (both firms and
households) also gain from a wider variety of goods at lower prices.
1
For a broader discussion on the policy debate over TAA, see CRS Report R41922, Trade Adjustment Assistance
(TAA) and Its Role in U.S. Trade Policy, by J. F. Hornbeck and Laine Elise Rover.
2
For an accessible summary of these effects, see Paul Krugman, “The Increasing Returns Revolution in Trade and
Geography,” American Economic Review, vol. 99, no. 3 (June 2009), pp. 561-571.
3
On how trade affects total factor productivity based on U.S. manufacturing firm and plant level data, see Andrew B.
Bernard and J. Bradford Jensen, “Exporting and Productivity in the USA,” Oxford Review of Economic Policy, vol. 20,
no. 3 (2004), pp. 343-344, 350, 352, and 356.
Congressional Research Service
1
Trade Adjustment Assistance for Firms: Economic, Program, and Policy Issues
It is also true, and commonly cited, that increased competition from trade liberalization creates
both “winners and losers,” presenting adjustment problems for all countries. The more efficient
firms and plants may grow as they expand into overseas markets; the less efficient may contract,
merge, or perhaps even fail when faced with greater foreign competition. While the adjustment
process may be healthy from a macroeconomic perspective, much like market-driven adjustments
that occur for reasons other than trade (e.g., technological change), it can be a harsh transition for
some firms and their workers.4
Critics of free trade agreements often highlight the adjustment costs of reducing trade barriers. To
avoid business closures and layoffs, trade-impacted firms often seek to weaken, if not defeat,
trade liberalizing legislation. This makes economic sense from the perspective of affected
industries, firms, and workers, but economists argue that in the long run it can be more costly for
the country as a whole. The costs of protection arise because competition is suppressed, reducing
pressure on firms to innovate, operate more efficiently, and become lower cost producers. The
brunt of these costs falls to consumers, both individuals and businesses, who must pay higher
prices, but the national economy is also denied higher standards of living because of forgone
productivity gains.
One way to balance the large and broad-based gains from freer trade with the smaller and more
highly concentrated costs is to address the needs of firms negatively affected. Congress has done
so in authorizing the trade adjustment assistance (TAA) programs, including the one for firms.5
2
For an accessible summary of these effects, see Paul Krugman, "The Increasing Returns Revolution in Trade and
Geography," American Economic Review, vol. 99, no. 3 (June 2009), pp. 561-571.
3
On how trade affects total factor productivity based on U.S. manufacturing firm and plant level data, see Bernard,
Andrew B. and J. Bradford Jensen, “Exporting and Productivity in the USA,” Oxford Review of Economic Policy, vol.
20, no. 3 (2004). pp. 343-344, 350, 352, and 356.Supporters justify TAA policy on grounds that (1) it helps those who are hurt by trade
liberalization (the “losers”), (2) the economic costs are lower than protectionism and can be borne
by society as a whole (“the winners”), and (3) given rigidities in the adjustment process, it may
help redeploy economic resources more quickly, thereby reducing productivity losses and related
public sector costs (e.g., unemployment compensation). Others dispute these claims and have
raised concerns over the effectiveness and costs of the program, arguing that it should be limited
or discontinued.6
The Firm Trade Adjustment Assistance Program7
Congress first authorized TAA in Title III of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 (P.L. 87-794),
including a new firm and industry assistance program, which is administered by the Economic
Development Administration (EDA) of the U.S. Department of Commerce.8 It provides technical
assistance to help trade-impacted firms make strategic adjustments that may allow them to
remain competitive in a global economy. Originally, firm TAA also included loans and loan
guarantees, but Congress eliminated all direct financial assistance in 1986 because of federal
4
Both the benefits and costs of trade derive from resources moving from less to more productive plants (intra-industry)
and firms (inter-industry). Employment dislocation is the most noticeable cost, giving rise to congressional interest in
TAA programs. Ibid., pp. 345 and 356.
5
Howard F. Rosen, Strengthening Trade Adjustment Assistance, Peterson Institute for International Economics, Policy
Brief PB08-2, Washington, D.C., January 2008, pp. 1-2.
Congressional Research Service
2
Trade Adjustment Assistance for Firms: Economic, Program, and Policy Issues
Supporters justify TAA policy on grounds that (1) it helps those who are hurt by trade
liberalization (the “losers”), (2) the economic costs are lower than protectionism and can be borne
by society as a whole (“the winners”), and (3) given rigidities in the adjustment process, it helps
redeploy economic resources more quickly, thereby reducing productivity losses and related
public sector costs (e.g., unemployment compensation).
The Firm Trade Adjustment Assistance Program6
Congress first authorized TAA in Title III of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 (P.L. 87-794),
including a new firm and industry assistance program, which is administered by the Economic
Development Administration (EDA) of the U.S. Department of Commerce. 7 It provides technical
assistance to help trade-impacted firms make strategic adjustments that may allow them to
remain competitive in a global economy. Originally, firm TAA also included loans and loan
guarantees, but Congress eliminated all direct financial assistance in 1986 because of federal
6
Details may be found in CRS Report R41922, Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) and Its Role in U.S. Trade Policy,
by J. F. Hornbeck and Laine Elise Rover.
7
Based on 13 C.F.R. § 315, which provides details for applying for TAAF assistance.
8
The TAA for firms program was originally administered jointly by the Tariff Commission (predecessor to the USITC)
and the U.S. Department of Commerce.
Congressional Research Service
2
Trade Adjustment Assistance for Firms: Economic, Program, and Policy Issues
budgetary cutbacks and concern over the program’s high default rates and limited effectiveness.
Congress has amended the program many times over the nearly half century that it has been in
existence,
most recently in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (P.L. 111-5).
Key changes include extending eligibility to services firms, increasing funding, and introducing
greater flexibility to demonstrate eligibility for assistance These
amendments have since expired, with program rules reverting to those in pre-2009 statutes.
TAA authorizations and appropriations for fiscal years 2000-20102001-2011 appear in Table 1. The TAA for
firms program has been reauthorized through December 31, 2010, at an annual level of $50
million. Historically, appropriated funds have fallen short of authorized spending levels, which
remains the case under the most recent authorization and appropriations actsFebruary 12, 2012, and is currently operating under
a full-year continuing resolution at an annual appropriated level of $15.8 million.
Table 1. Firm TAA Authorizations and Appropriations, FY2000-2010FY2001-2011
($ millions)
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Authorizations
10.0
10.0
1016.0
16.0
16.0
16.0
16.0
16.0
1650.0
50.0
500.0
Appropriations
10.5
10.5
10.5
10.0
11.9
11.0
12.8
12.8
14.1
15.8
15.8
15.8
Data Source: U.S. Department of Commerce. Economic Development Administration and P.L. 111-5.
In practice, technical assistance is provided through one of the 11 Trade Adjustment Assistance
Centers (TAACs), which apply for grants from EDA to operate their programs. All appropriated
funds have beenare used to support the TAAC process; no funds go directly to firms. TAACs may
operate operate
through universities, private firms, or non-profit associations. They provide or contract
for for
technical assistance to assist firms from the initial certification process through
implementation of the adjustment proposal adjustment
proposal implementation. TAACs are staffed by professionals with broad
business expertise who
can help firms develop “recovery strategies” and also identify financial
resources. They are, in
effect, consultants specializing in business turnaround strategies specific
6
Based on 13 C.F.R. § 315, which provides details for applying for TAAF assistance. Note that many of these rules
expired on February 12, 2011 and it remains to be seen if Congress will reinstate them.
7
The TAA for firms program was originally administered jointly by the Tariff Commission (predecessor to the USITC)
and the U.S. Department of Commerce.
Congressional Research Service
3
Trade Adjustment Assistance for Firms: Economic, Program, and Policy Issues
to the needs of each
firm, which typically faces adjustments in many areas to compete with lowerpricedlower-priced imports.8
Eligibility and Certification
The process for receiving TAA unfolds in three phases. First, a firm must submit a petition to
become certified as eligible. EDA is statutorily required to accept or reject the petition within 40
days of receiving all materials. The firm must demonstrate eligibility by documenting that (1) “a
significant number or proportion of workers”99
Eligibility and Certification
There are three phases to successful completion of a trade adjustment assistance project. First, to
receive TAA, a firm must demonstrate that it is eligible to apply for assistance. The firm submits
a petition for eligibility documenting that it has met three conditions:
(1) “a significant number or proportion of workers”10 in the firm have become or are threatened to
become totally or partially separated;
(2) sales, or production, or both of an article decreased absolutely, or sales, or production, or both
of any article that accounted for not less than 25% of total sales or production of the firm
during the 12-month period preceding the most recent 12-month period for which data are
available have decreased absolutely; and
(3) increased imports of competing articles “contributed importantly”11 to the decline in sales,
production, and/or workforce.
9
P.L. 93-618, Section 253, as amended and U.S. Department of Commerce. Economic Development Administration.
http://www.taacenters.org.
10
5% of a firm’s work force or 50 workers, whichever is less, with EDA discretion to set other parameters in special
cases.
Congressional Research Service
3production, or both of a firm “decreased
absolutely;”10 and (3) increased imports of competing articles “contributed importantly”11 to the
decline in sales, production, and/or workforce. Declines in these variables must be demonstrated,
but may be done so in five different ways to establish “minimum certification thresholds” for
eligibility:
•
Twelve-month decline—using all three criteria, compare the most recent 12month period for which data are available with the immediately preceding 12month period.
•
Twelve-month versus twenty-four-month decline—using all three criteria,
compare the most recent 12-month period for which data are available with the
immediately preceding 24-month period, using average annual data for sales and
production.
•
Twelve-month versus thirty-six-month decline—using all three criteria,
compare the most recent 12-month period for which data are available with the
immediately preceding 36-month period, using average annual data for sales and
production.
•
Interim sales or production decline—using all three criteria, but defining a
base period based on sales and production figures that compares at a minimum a
most recent six-month period during the most recent 12-month period for which
data are available, with data in the same six-month period for the immediately
preceding 12-month period.
•
Interim employment decline— using all three criteria, but defining a base
period based on employment data that compares at a minimum a most recent sixmonth period during the most recent 12-month period for which data are
available with data in the same six-month period for the immediately preceding
12-month period.
8
P.L. 93-618, Section 253, as amended and U.S. Department of Commerce. Economic Development Administration.
http://www.taacenters.org.
9
5% of a firm’s work force or 50 workers, whichever is less, with EDA discretion to set other parameters in special
cases.
10
A firm’s sales or production or both (or of any article or service that accounted for not less than 25% of total sales or
production ) have declined by a minimum of 5% relative to statutory comparison guidelines below.
11
A cause which is important, but not necessarily more important than any other cause. A firm must provide a list of
four important customers, of which the TAAC must interview two, to help evaluate whether the firm has been “tradeimpacted.” U.S. Department of Commerce. Economic Development Administration, "Program Announcement for the
Trade Adjustment Assistance for Firms Program," 73 Federal Register 6925, February 6, 2008.
Congressional Research Service
4
Trade Adjustment Assistance for Firms: Economic, Program, and Policy Issues
Second, once certified as eligible, a firm has two years to develop and submit its adjustment
proposal. Approval of the adjustment proposal depends on EDA’s finding that it (1) is reasonably
calculated “to materially contribute” to the economic adjustment of the firm; (2) gives adequate
consideration to the interests of the firm’s workers; and (3) demonstrates that the firm will use its
own resources for adjustment. EDA typically makes a determination within two to four weeks.
Third, the firm has five years to implement an approved adjustment proposal. The standard time
to completion tends to beSuccessful firms
typically implement the adjustment proposal within two years.12
EDA can provide technical assistance to a firm for preparation of the petition for eligibility
certification, and to a certified eligible firm for developing and implementing an approved
adjustment proposal. EDA is statutorily required to make a final determination on petitions within
60 days. In recent years, this time has averaged six weeks. There is no cost for assistance provided in developing the petition, but the
firm must pay at least 25% of the cost to prepare the adjustment proposal and at least 25% of any
awarded adjustment assistance. For project assistance exceeding $30,000, a firm must cover at
least 50% of the total cost.13 In
provided in developing the petition.13
The TAACs also provide detailed assistance in formulation of the adjustment proposal, which
seeks to identify business planning and practices that can be enhanced to improve firm
competitiveness. EDA has another 60 days to accept or reject the adjustment proposal. In
practice, because technical assistance is provided in the
preparation of the petition and adjustment
proposal, there is a high formal acceptance rate, likely because petitions are
completed these submissions are completed
correctly and poor proposals or candidates can be weeded out early in the process.
The TAACs also provide detailed assistance in formulation of the adjustment proposal, which
seeks to identify business planning and practices that can be enhanced to improve firm
competitiveness in at least three major areas. First, since firms must be experiencing falling sales
or declining production to be The firm must pay at least
25% of the cost to prepare the adjustment proposal and at least 25% of any awarded adjustment
assistance. For project assistance exceeding $30,000, a firm must cover at least 50% of the total
cost.14
Adjustment proposals may involve strategic restructuring of various aspects of business
operations. First, because firms must be experiencing falling sales or declining production to be
eligible, TAACs often focus on marketing or sales strategies to
identify new markets, new
products, promotional initiatives, and export opportunities. The core idea is to increase revenue.
Second, Second,
production inefficiencies are correctedoften targeted to reduce firm costs and improve price
competitiveness.
Third, TAACs can develop debt restructuring strategies and frequently act as intermediaries in
in finding new sources of business financing. In 2009, 65% of petitioning firms proposed projects to
improve marketing-sales or production-engineering, and 35% proposed projects to enhance
support services or management systems. 14
Table 2. summarizes trade adjustment data for fiscal years 2003-2009. The TAAF program targets
small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), which is borne out in the firm data. In 2009, firms
tended to have fewer than 100 employees and less than $11 million in sales. The federal
government provided 48.5% of adjustment costs, for an average $60,123 per firm.
12
U.S. Department of Commerce. Economic Development Administration, "Trade Adjustment Assistance for Firms
Program Fiscal Year 2009 Annual Report," 75 Federal Register, January 15, 2010, p. 2495.
13
2010, 35% of adjustment assistance focused on
improving marketing-sales, 32% on production-manufacturing, and 25% on enhancing support or
management systems.15
(...continued)
11
A cause which is important, but not necessarily more important than any other cause. A firm must provide a list of
four important customers, of which the TAAC must interview two, to help evaluate whether the firm has been “tradeimpacted.” U.S. Department of Commerce. Economic Development Administration, “Program Announcement for the
Trade Adjustment Assistance for Firms Program,” 73 Federal Register 6925, February 6, 2008.
12
U.S. Department of Commerce. Economic Development Administration, Annual Report to Congress on the Trade
Adjustment Assistance for Firms Program for Fiscal Year 2010, Washington, D.C., December 15, 2010, p. 5.
13
The recently expired legislative changes in P.L. 111-5 reduced the time required for EDA to make a final
determination on the petition to 40 days.
14
13 CFR 315.6 (c)(2) and Federal Register. Program Announcement for the Trade Adjustment Assistance for Firms
Program. February 6, 2008. Vol. 73. No. 25. p. 6925
1415
U.S. Department of Commerce. Economic Development Administration, "Trade Annual Report to Congress on the Trade
Adjustment Assistance for Firms
Program for Fiscal Year 2010, Washington, D.C., December 15, 2010, p. 38Fiscal Year 2009 Annual Report," 75 Federal Register 2492, January 15, 2010, p. 2508.
Congressional Research Service
54
Trade Adjustment Assistance for Firms: Economic, Program, and Policy Issues
Table 2. summarizes trade adjustment data for fiscal years 2003-2010. The TAAF program targets
small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), which is borne out in the firm data. By 2010,
however, firms averaged over 100 employees and sales had grown to an average of $19 million.
The federal government provided 48.6% of adjustment costs, for an average $61,953 per firm.
Table 2. Trade Adjustment Assistance, Select Program Indicators for FY2003-20092010
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
Number of Firms AssistedAssisteda
162
177
132
137
126
139
172
265
Avg Firm Sales (millions)
$7.2
$11.6
$8.4
$10.6
$11.2
$13.1
10.73
19.1
68
88
64
91
68
82
77
Govt79
138
Gov’t Share (millions)
$8.1
$8.5
$5.9
$6.7
$7.1
$7.9
10.3
16.4
Firm Share (millions)
$7.4
$8.1
$5.4
$6.0
$5.9
$7.5
9.8
15.6
Total TAA (millions)
$15.5
$16.6
$11.3
$12.7
$13.0
$15.4
20.2
32.1
$50,000
$48,023
$44,697
$48,905
$56,449
$56,827
60,123835
59,884
61,953
Avg Firm Employees
Avg TAA Per FirmaFirmb
Data Source: U.S. Department of Commerce. Economic Development Administration.
a Annual Report To
Congress on the Trade Adjustment Assistance for Firms Program. Fiscal Year 2010. December 15, 2010. pp. 23-24.
a.
Number of adjustment proposals approved.
b.
Government share of TAA Firm program divided by the number of accepted adjustment proposals.
Program Evaluation
Historically, program evaluation has been limited, with EDA lacking a formal evaluation process. Congress
addressed this issue by requiring EDA to submit an annual report on the TAAF program by
December 15 of each year. Earlier
Early efforts to analyze the TAAF program includeincluded comprehensive
studies by the Urban Institute
in 1998 and the Government Accountability Office (GAO) in
2000.1516 Both found deficiencies
with the TAAF program, such as a cumbersome certification
process, long approval times, and
little oversight and evaluation of projects. Many of these
criticisms have been corrected. The petition and adjustment proposal approval process has been
automated and streamlined. In fact, over the past two years, the time between submission of
petitions for certification and acceptance has fallen from an average of 28 to 11 days. The average
time between acceptance of the petition and certification has been 45 days, higher than the
statutory 40 days. EDA notes that a 49% increase in petitions caused processing time to increase
for 2009.16
EDA reports that TAACs are now allocated funds in part based on performance measures
Congress addressed some of these issues by requiring
EDA to submit an annual report on the TAAF program by December 15 of each year, putting
stricter time frames on processing petitions for assistance, and providing additional funding for
TAAF staff, requirements that have expired.17
Under the expired 2009 statute, EDA has released two annual reports that point to administrative
and operational improvements. In addition, TAACs are now allocated funds in part based on
performance measures (number of firm certifications and adjustment proposals generated) and quality measures
developed in part from a firm survey feedback mechanism. Created by Dunn & Bradstreet, it is
intended to provide some indication of “successful interventions” and “program best practices.”
This survey has helped reduce the time between submission of the petition and approval of final
adjustment proposal. 17 Anecdotal evidence points
quality measures.18 Anecdotal evidence from the TAACs also point to numerous “success”
stories, but more
sophisticated analysis is needed to estimate adequately the effectiveness of this
16the effectiveness of this program approach. It is
difficult to isolate the effects of the firm TAA program in determining why a particular firm might
15
U.S. Department of Commerce. Economic Development Administration. Effective Aid to Trade-Impacted
Manufacturers: An Evaluation of the Trade Adjustment Assistance Program. Prepared by the Urban Institute,
Washington, D.C., November 1998 and. GAO. Trade Adjustment Assistance: Impact of Federal Assistance to Firms Is
Unclear. Report GAO-01-12. Washington, DC. December 2000.
1617
U.S. Department of Commerce. Economic Development Administration, "Trade Annual Report to Congress on the Trade
Adjustment Assistance for Firms
Program for Fiscal Year 2010, Washington, D.C., December 15, 2010, p. 7 and 39.
18Fiscal Year 2009 Annual Report," 75 Federal Register 2491-2495, January 15, 2010.
17
U.S. Department of Commerce. Economic Development Administration, "“Program Announcement for the Trade
Adjustment Assistance for Firms Program,"” 73 Federal Register 6926, February 6, 2008, and correspondence with
EDA.
Congressional Research Service
65
Trade Adjustment Assistance for Firms: Economic, Program, and Policy Issues
program approach. It is difficult to isolate the effects of the firm TAA program in determining
why a particular firm might succeed in its turnaround effort. Previous studies mentioned above have suggested
suggest that many
firms might have been able to do so on their own. The fact that small- and medium-sized firms
are targeted, however, suggests that the program is attempting to reach that pool of firms most
vulnerable to increased globalization and with the fewest resources for undertaking adjustment.
Without a more in-depth analysis, however, the issue of TAAF effectiveness remains a somewhat
speculative, if not open question.
Economic and Policy Issues
By any measure, firm and industry trade adjustment assistance is a small federal program; it
remains, nonetheless, controversial. Critics point to fundamental arguments opposing TAA that
have been debated since before the program was initiated in 1962. First, if competition resulting
from trade liberalization is not considered “unfair trade,” why should the federal government be
involved? Second, why should federal assistance be necessary for adjustment to trade competition
when there is no similar assistance for adjustment to domestic competitive pressures? Third,
should not this adjustment process simply be accepted as part of a dynamic market economy
working to allocate resources more efficiently and in a way that is in the country’s long-term
interests?
Proponents of the program argue that TAA is only modestly funded and provides benefits to
firms, owners, managers, and workers that amount to many times the value of federal
expenditures. Also, if changes in national trade policy have altered the rules under which
businesses compete, does not the federal government have some responsibility for assisting firms
that bear the costs of adjustment?18 Finally, a point in favor of firm TAA is that it focuses on
adjustment, not long-term financial assistance. Firms must commit their own resources and have
every incentive to adjust successfully to ensure their very survival. They are not faced with the
potential for dependency on long-term cash payments, which critics charge is a problem with
some federal assistance programs.
In addition to economic concerns, political considerations also define the TAA debate. Congress
has accepted, with some reservations, that freer trade is in the long-term interests of the United
States. While those skeptical of trade liberalization may support TAA for the assistance it
provides to affected workers and firms, proponents of freer trade may also embrace TAA as a
complement to an open trade policy along with other domestic economic policy adjustments.19 To
the extent that TAA can address some of the concerns of adversely affected firms, it may support
trade liberalization as a continuing foundation of U.S. trade policy and temper calls for relief
through increased tariffs, quotas, or other restrictions on trade. Advocates of trade liberalization
may find support for firm TAA as compelling from a cost-benefit perspective, if it leads to
broader acceptance of trade opening legislation.
18
Citing President Kennedy prior to congressional passage of the first TAA statute, “There is an obligation to render
assistance to those who suffer as a result of national trade policy.” Howard F. Rosen, Strengthening Trade Adjustment
Assistance, Peterson Institute for International Economics, Policy Brief PB08-2, Washington, D.C., January 2008, p. 1.
19
Ibid.
Congressional Research Service
7
Trade Adjustment Assistance for Firms: Economic, Program, and Policy Issues
Author Contact Information
J. F. Hornbeck
Specialist in International Trade and Finance
jhornbeck@crs.loc.gov, 7-7782 firms might have been able to do so on their own.
The FY2010 TAAF annual report illuminates two other interesting points. First, over a two-year
assessment period, firms that fully implemented their adjustment proposals experienced on
average a 14% increase in sales, a 3% rise in productivity, and a 16% decrease in employment.19
The fall in employment may be a common result for firms in decline. It is also possible that a
longer evaluation period may be necessary to fully capture employment effects, which often lag
behind recovery, particularly in the aftermath of the recent deep recession. Second, of the 102
firms that left the TAAF program in 2010, 56% completed the program and were operational. The
remaining 44% did not complete the program for various reasons, including exceeding the fiveyear threshold (23%); going out of business (11%); or losing interest, being sold, or having
inadequate funds (10%). Given that TAAF focuses on firms facing bankruptcy, in part because of
foreign competition, these results may not be surprising.
Economic and Policy Issues
The 112th Congress is considering reauthorizing and extending the TAAF program. Should
Congress decide to do so, a key issue, in addition to deciding the size and spending limits of the
program, is whether to reinstate some or all of the statutory changes added in 2009 under the
ARRA (P.L. 111-5). These affect multiple aspects of the TAAF program and include the
following, all of which expired on February 13, 2011:
1. Service Firm Eligibility—first time service firms were eligible for assistance.
2. Change in Certification Requirements: to demonstrate eligibility, firms were allowed to
expand the “look back” period for determining declines in sales, production, and employment
beyond the 12 months set out prior to the 2009 legislation. The expanded “look back” included:
•
Twelve-month decline—using production, sales, and employment criteria,
compare the most recent 12-month period for which data are available with the
immediately preceding 12-month period (currently only program criterion).
•
Twelve-month versus twenty-four-month decline—using all three criteria,
compare the most recent 12-month period for which data are available with the
immediately preceding 24-month period, using average annual data for sales and
production.
•
Twelve-month versus thirty-six-month decline—using all three criteria,
compare the most recent 12-month period for which data are available with the
immediately preceding 36-month period, using average annual data for sales and
production.
•
Interim sales or production decline—using all three criteria, but defining a
base period based on sales and production figures that compares at a minimum a
most recent six-month period during the most recent 12-month period for which
19
Productivity is defined as sales per worker, a simple measure that can be used across industries, but which may have
limitations for evaluative purposes.
Congressional Research Service
6
Trade Adjustment Assistance for Firms: Economic, Program, and Policy Issues
data are available, with data in the same six-month period for the immediately
preceding 12-month period.
•
Interim employment decline—using all three criteria, but defining a base period
based on employment data that compares at a minimum a most recent six-month
period during the most recent 12-month period for which data are available with
data in the same six-month period for the immediately preceding 12-month
period.
3. Basis for Determinations—increases of like or directly competitive articles or services may
be determined by firm customer certification representing a significant percentage of the decrease
in sales or production of the firm.
4. Determination Time for Petition on Eligibility—was reduced from 60 to 40 days.
5. Notification Requirement—the Secretary of Commerce, upon receiving information from
the Secretary of Labor that workers were covered under the TAA for workers program, is required
to notify the related firm that it too is potentially eligible for TAA for firms.
6. Oversight and Administration—requires alignment of annual contracting schedules of the
TAACs and standardized formula for distribution of funds based on new annual reporting
requirements. The formula is to be determined in consultation with the House Ways and Means
and Senate Finance Committees, and funds are to be allocated promptly.
7. Authorization of Appropriations—increased for $16 million to $50 million annually, with
$350,000 made available for full-time positions in EDA to administer the TAAF program,
including a new Director of Adjustment Assistance for firms.
8. Enhanced Penalties—for firms misrepresenting information on petitions for assistance or
the adjustment proposals.
9. Annual Report—requires enhanced and detailed report on the TAAF program by EDA to be
completed by December 15 following the most recent fiscal year.
Proposed Legislation
The pre-ARRA TAA program authorizations are set to expire in early 2012 and the 112th
Congress is considering legislation to extend all TAA programs. Although there are multiple bills
addressing TAA that range in scope from repealing the authorizing legislation to providing
expanded multiyear extensions, the issue is taking form as part of the debate on passage of
implementing legislation for the proposed free trade agreements (FTAs) with Colombia, Panama,
and South Korea. As Congress seeks to resolve this debate, two issues dominate the discussion:
(1) reauthorization of TAA programs; and (2) procedural issues on how to move TAA legislation.
At present, a bipartisan compromise is being considered on TAA that would allow for extension
through December 31, 2013, of many, but not all, of the enhanced programs and funding levels
contained in the ARRA.20 The language incorporated in the draft implementing bill for the
20
“Congressional Staff Close to Deal on How to Move FTAs, TAA,” Inside U.S. Trade, July 27, 2011.
Congressional Research Service
7
Trade Adjustment Assistance for Firms: Economic, Program, and Policy Issues
proposed U.S.-South Korea Free Trade Agreement (KORUS FTA) provides a preliminary view of
this compromise. The draft bill would reauthorize the TAA for firms program at annualized levels
of $16 million through calendar year 2013. It would also reinstate eligibility for services firms
and the more detailed reporting requirements stipulated in the ARRA.21
Procedural issues over how to move the TAA and FTA implementing bills are still under
discussion. The two Houses of Congress first debated whether to attach TAA to the KORUS FTA
draft implementing bill. The Senate Finance Committee completed a “mock markup” of the
KORUS FTA draft implementing bill on July 7, 2011, that included TAA. The House Ways and
Means Committee, in a simultaneous mock markup, approved a draft bill without it. Including
TAA as part of a trade agreement implementing bill has proven problematic because opinions
differ over how rules governing the treatment of FTA implementing bills under Trade Promotion
Authority (TPA) would apply in this case.22
Because TAA and the three FTAs are controversial issues, Members also have differing
viewpoints on each of the four possible bills. Many, therefore, would like the chance to vote
separately on each of them.23 Congress is now considering the possibility of taking up TAA in a
separate bill. This option has presented a sequencing problem, with congressional leaders still
debating the order in which the various bills might be taken up to ensure that all will be
considered, if not voted on.24 A final determination on how Congress may proceed has not been
announced.25
Author Contact Information
J. F. Hornbeck
Specialist in International Trade and Finance
jhornbeck@crs.loc.gov, 7-7782
21
U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Finance, United States-South Korea Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act
Statement of Administrative Action, Draft, 112th Cong., 1st sess., June 28, 2011, pp. 32, 36-39.
22
“Finance Approves FTAs, TAA at Mock Markup, Rejects All Amendments,” Inside U.S. Trade, July 8, 2011.
23
“Some Progress on FTAs,” Washington Trade Daily, July 14, 2011.
24
“Congressional Staff Close to Deal on How to Move FTAs, TAA,” Inside U.S. Trade, July 27, 2011.
25
For more on this policy discussion see, CRS Report R41922, Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) and Its Role in U.S.
Trade Policy, by J. F. Hornbeck and Laine Elise Rover.
Congressional Research Service
8