U.S. Government Agencies Involved in Export
Promotion: Overview and Issues for Congress
Shayerah Ilias, Coordinator
Analyst in International Trade and Finance
Charles E. Hanrahan
Senior Specialist in Agricultural Policy
M. Angeles Villarreal
Specialist in International Trade and Finance
May 1, 2012
Congressional Research Service
7-5700
www.crs.gov
R41495
CRS Report for Congress
Pr
epared for Members and Committees of Congress

---

U.S. Government Agencies Involved in Export Promotion: Overview and Issues

Summary
This report provides an overview of the federal government agencies that participate in U.S.
export promotion efforts and the issues that they raise for Congress. The recent global economic
downturn has renewed congressional debate over the role of the federal government in promoting
exports. This debate has been heightened with the Obama Administration’s introduction of the
National Export Initiative (NEI) in the 2010 State of the Union Address. Some Members of
Congress have placed greater priority on understanding the coordination, budgets, and functions
of federal agencies involved in export promotion. Such an understanding may support increased
congressional oversight of export promotion policy and related legislative activity.
Coordination of export promotion activities is conducted through interagency bodies. In 1992,
Congress attempted to enhance coordination of U.S. export promotion policy by creating the
Trade Promotion Coordinating Committee (TPCC), an interagency task force chaired by the
Department of Commerce. The TPCC releases the National Export Strategy (NES), an annual
report that serves as an effort to guide federal export promotion policy, goals, and activity.
Executive Order 13534, issued in March 2010, formalized the NEI and established the Export
Promotion Cabinet (EPC), a higher level coordinating body that is to work with the TPCC to
make the NEI operational.
Approximately 20 federal government agencies are involved in supporting U.S. exports directly
or indirectly. The TPCC has identified nine of these agencies currently as having budgets for
programs or activities directly related to export promotion. They are the Department of
Agriculture (USDA), Department of Commerce, Export-Import Bank (Ex-Im Bank), Overseas
Private Investment Corporation (OPIC), Small Business Administration (SBA), Department of
State, Trade and Development Agency (TDA), Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR),
and Department of the Treasury. The USDA has the largest level of export promotion funding,
followed by Commerce. Some agencies charge fees for their services.
Federal government agencies perform a wide variety of functions that contribute to export
promotion, including providing information, counseling, and export assistance services; funding
feasibility studies; financing and insuring U.S. trade; conducting government-to-government
advocacy; and negotiating new trade agreements and enforcing existing ones.
The export promotion activities of federal government agencies raise a number of issues for
Congress; among the most prominent are the following:
• The economic arguments for and against the involvement of the U.S. government
in promoting exports in the context of issues such as market failures and foreign
governments’ support for their national exports;
• The effectiveness of interagency export promotion coordination through the
TPCC and the EPC;
• The level of U.S. government spending on export promotion; its adequacy and
efficiency of use; and
• The extent to which the export promotion activities conducted by federal
government agencies may be similar or overlapping, and could be reorganized.

Congressional Research Service

---

U.S. Government Agencies Involved in Export Promotion: Overview and Issues

Contents
Introduction...................................................................................................................................... 1
Coordination of Export Promotion Activities.................................................................................. 1
Trade Promotion Coordinating Committee ............................................................................... 1
President’s Export Promotion Cabinet ...................................................................................... 2
Funding for Export Promotion Activities ........................................................................................ 3
Export Promotion Services and Activities ....................................................................................... 5
Key U.S. Government Agencies Charged with Export Promotion.................................................. 6
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) .................................................................................. 6
U.S. Department of Commerce ............................................................................................... 10
Export-Import Bank of the United States (the Ex-Im Bank) ................................................... 12
Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC) .................................................................. 15
Small Business Administration (SBA) .................................................................................... 16
U.S. Department of State......................................................................................................... 16
U.S. Trade and Development Agency (TDA).......................................................................... 17
Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) .................................................................... 18
U.S. Department of the Treasury............................................................................................. 18
Local Export Assistance................................................................................................................. 18
Issues for Congress ........................................................................................................................ 19
Economic Rationales For and Against Federal Export Promotion.......................................... 19
Coordination of Federal Export Promotion Agencies and Activities ...................................... 20
Funding for Export Promotion Activities by Federal Agencies............................................... 21
Reorganization of Federal Agencies Involved in Export Promotion....................................... 22
Congressional Activity on Export Promotion................................................................................ 23

Tables
Table 1. Trade Promotion Coordinating Committee Program Budget Authority, FY2006-
FY2012 ......................................................................................................................................... 4
Table 2. Funding for U.S. Department of Agriculture Market Development and Export
Financing Programs, FY2006-FY2013 Program Level................................................................ 9
Table 3. Funding Levels for the International Trade Administration: FY2002-FY2011 and
Request for FY2012.................................................................................................................... 12
Table 4. Budget of the Export-Import Bank, FY2006-FY2012 and Request for FY2013............. 13
Table 5. Export-Import Bank’s Credit and Insurance Authorizations, FY2009-FY2011 ............. 14

Contacts
Author Contact Information........................................................................................................... 25
Acknowledgments ......................................................................................................................... 25

Congressional Research Service

---

U.S. Government Agencies Involved in Export Promotion: Overview and Issues

Introduction
In times of economic crisis, including the most recent global economic downturn that began in
2007, Congress often has debated on how best to promote U.S. commercial exports as a policy
tool for economic growth and job creation. Congressional interest in U.S. export promotion
policy has risen with President Obama’s announcement of a National Export Initiative (NEI) in
his 2010 State of the Union Address. The NEI is a strategy for doubling U.S. exports over the
next five years in order to help generate 2 million new jobs in the United States through increased
coordination and funding of federal export promotion activities; greater financing for U.S.
exporters; increased government advocacy on behalf of U.S. exporters; and negotiation of new
trade agreements and stronger enforcement of existing U.S. trade agreements.1
With the increased focus on export promotion efforts, some Members of Congress have placed
greater priority on understanding the coordination, budgets, and functions of federal government
agencies involved in export promotion. Such an understanding may support increased
congressional oversight of U.S. export promotion policy and related legislative activity. It also
may assist Members of Congress in supporting the efforts of their constituents to learn about
federal export promotion services and to become involved in exporting.
This report provides an overview of the federal agencies that participate in U.S. export promotion
efforts and the issues that they raise for Congress. It proceeds first by discussing the coordination,
budgets, and functions of federal government agencies involved in promoting exports. Second,
the report provides an overview of the missions and activities of key federal government agencies
that support exports. The third section of the report discusses agency-related issues for Congress.
The report concludes with a summary of legislation introduced in the 112th Congress related to
export promotion.
While this report focuses on the role of the federal government in promoting exports, it is
important to acknowledge that state and local governments, as well as businesses, have an
important role in promoting exports.
Coordination of Export Promotion Activities
Trade Promotion Coordinating Committee
The Trade Promotion Coordinating Committee (TPCC) is an interagency committee whose
objective is to coordinate and set priorities for federal agencies involved in export promotion and
to propose a unified export promotion budget to the President. Title II of the Export Enhancement
Act of 1992 (P.L. 102-429), which added Sections 2312 and 2313 to the Omnibus Trade and
Competitiveness Act of 1988 (P.L. 100-418), established the TPCC. Congress enacted the 1992
act in an attempt to rectify some of the perceived shortfalls in the U.S. export promotion regime,

1 For additional information on federal efforts to promote exports through the NEI and other mechanisms, see CRS
Report R41929, Boosting U.S. Exports: Selected Issues for Congress, by Shayerah Ilias et al.
Congressional Research Service
1

---

U.S. Government Agencies Involved in Export Promotion: Overview and Issues

including concerns that existing export promotion programs lacked coordination and an overall
strategy.2
The TPCC is comprised of 20 member agencies, 9 of which are key federal government agencies
involved in export promotion. The key agencies are the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA),
U.S. Department of Commerce, Export-Import Bank of the United States (Ex-Im Bank), Overseas
Private Investment Corporation (OPIC), U.S. Trade and Development Agency (TDA), Small
Business Administration (SBA), U.S. Department of State, Office of the U.S. Trade
Representative (USTR), and U.S. Department of the Treasury. The Secretary of Commerce chairs
the TPCC.
Since 1993, the TPCC has issued an annual report entitled the National Export Strategy (NES),
which lists U.S. trade promotion priorities and provides estimates of spending levels for trade
promotion by agency and function. In general, U.S. commercial export promotion activities are
guided by the NES. The latest report outlined five major focus areas, based on the NEI: (1)
increasing federal government coordination with state-level export promotion programs and non-
profit associations, including through the federal government web portal http://www.export.gov;
(2) identifying and encouraging exports by U.S. companies selling technology in high-growth
sectors; (3) increasing the federal budget for trade promotion infrastructure, focusing on USDA’s
Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS), the Department of Commerce’s International Trade
Administration (ITA), and Ex-Im Bank; (4) ensuring better data and measurement of the U.S.
services economy; and (5) resolving outstanding issues in and seeking congressional approval of
the then-pending free trade agreements (FTAs) with Korea, Colombia, and Panama.3
President’s Export Promotion Cabinet
The National Export Initiative, announced by President Obama in the 2010 State of the Union
address, introduced a new level of coordination to federal export promotion activities. Executive
Order (E.O.) 13534, which was issued on March 11, 2010, formalized the NEI and, among other
provisions, instructs the U.S. government to enhance and organize federal efforts to promote
exports through high-level coordination. E.O. 13534 created a President’s Export Promotion
Cabinet (EPC or the Cabinet) to ensure that export promotion is a high priority for all relevant
agencies.4 Members of the EPC include the nine key Secretaries or Directors of the export
promotion agencies of the TPCC and senior White House advisors. The Cabinet is to coordinate
with the TPCC in order to “operationalize” the NEI.5
In September 2010, the EPC released a report containing recommendations for implementing the
NEI. The Cabinet, through the TPCC, identified eight priority areas: (1) exports by small and
medium-sized enterprises (SMEs); (2) federal export assistance; (3) trade missions; (4)
commercial advocacy; (5) increasing export credits; (6) macroeconomic rebalancing; (7) reducing

2 P.L. 102-429, approved October 21, 1992.
3 Trade Promotion Coordinating Committee (TPCC), 2011 National Export Strategy: Powering the National Export
Initiative, June 2011. Congress passed and President Obama signed into law on October 21, 2011, implementing
legislation for the free trade agreements (FTAs) with Korea (P.L. 112-41), Colombia (P.L. 112-42), and Panama (P.L.
112-43).
4 “National Export Initiative,” Executive Order 13534 of March 11, 2010, 75 Federal Register 12433, March 16, 2010.
5 Department of Commerce, “Commerce Secretary Gary Locke Unveils Details of the National Export Initiative,” press
release, February 4, 2010, http://trade.gov/press/press_releases/2010/nei_020410.asp.
Congressional Research Service
2

---

U.S. Government Agencies Involved in Export Promotion: Overview and Issues

barriers to trade; and (8) export promotion of services. Some of these recommendations focus on
improving federal services that directly support export assistance efforts. Others focus on efforts
to promote exports in broader ways.6
The Cabinet noted that four general themes apply to all eight priority areas: (1) strengthen
interagency information-sharing and coordination; (2) leverage and enhance technology to reach
potential exporters and provide U.S. businesses with the tools necessary to export successfully;
(3) leverage combined efforts of state and local governments and public-private partnerships; and
(4) have unified goals for TPCC member agencies to support the NEI’s implementation.7
Funding for Export Promotion Activities
The TPCC, in its National Export Strategy reports, provides government funding levels for
activities of federal agencies deemed to constitute “trade promotion.” The NES report includes all
or part of the budgets of the TPCC’s member agencies, but does not provide a further budgetary
breakdown on the programs and activities of each agency that are dedicated to export promotion.
The TPCC does not have an independent budget, nor does it have any specific authority to direct
member agencies’ allocation of resources. The TPCC secretariat does not review member agency
budgets in relation to the annual NES and its budgetary needs. Each federal agency has its own
statutory requirements and budgets appropriated by various congressional committees. As a
result, each agency submits its annual budget request separately to the President.8
The individual agencies and the TPCC determine which programs or activities are considered to
constitute trade promotion and therefore included in the annual report of trade promotion budget
authority. However, a breakdown of these activities within each agency is not listed. Instead the
TPCC publishes overall trade promotion spending by agency. For example, it is unclear which
units within the Department of Commerce have programs or activities the TPCC has classified as
“trade promotion” in the NES.
Not all of the TPCC member agencies have budget authority for trade promotion activities.9
Although the NES report lists 20 member agencies as part of the TPCC, 9 of these agencies had
requested budgets for programs or activities directly related to trade promotion in FY2012, the
latest year for which the such data were available from the TPCC (see Table 1).

6 Report to the President on the National Export Initiative: The Export Promotion Cabinet’s Plan for Doubling U.S.
Exports in Five Years, Washington, D.C., September 2010, pp. 5-7.
7 Ibid., pp. 23-24.
8 U.S. General Accounting Office (now the U.S. General Accountability Office), Export Promotion: Mixed Progress in
Achieving a Governmentwide Strategy, GAO-02-850, September 2002. Patrick Mendis and Leah Green, “Government-
Wide Collaboration Boosts National Trade,” The Public Manager, Spring 2010, pp. 43-47.
9 U.S. General Accountability Office (GAO), Export Promotion: Trade Promotion Coordinating Committee’s Role
Remains Limited, GAO-06-660T, April 26, 2006.
Congressional Research Service
3

---

U.S. Government Agencies Involved in Export Promotion: Overview and Issues

Table 1. Trade Promotion Coordinating Committee Program Budget Authority,
FY2006-FY2012
(millions of U.S. dollars)
FY06
FY07
FY08
FY09
FY10
FY11
FY12
Agency
Actual
Actual
Actual
Actual
Actual
Request
Request
U.S. Department of
$819
$674
$642 $515 $674 $642 $515
Agriculture (USDA)
Department of
352
356
339 350 356 339 350
Commerce
Department of
9
---
--- --- --- --- ---
Energy (DOE)
Department of State
170
176
184
198
176
184
198
Department of the
3
3
3 3 3 3 3
Treasury
Export-Import Bank
98 38 1
3 38
1
3
(Ex-Im Bank)
Overseas Private
(161)
(192)
(165) (170) (192) (165) (170)
Investment
Corporation (OPIC)a
Small Business
4
5.2 6 6.4 5.2 6 6.4
Administration (SBA)
U.S. Trade and
50
50
51 51 50 51 51
Development Agency
(TDA)
U.S. Trade
44
44
44 46 44 44 46
Representative
(USTR)
Totalb
1,549
1,346
1,270 1,172 1,346 1,270 1,172
Source: Data from Trade Policy Coordinating Committee (TPCC).
Notes: According to the TPCC, amounts may be restated to reflect new data or definitions. Funding levels
reported may include administrative expenses, transfers, or other adjustments.
a. OPIC fees result in a budget surplus.
b. Totals do not include OPIC.
Between FY2006 and FY2010, the overall trade promotion-related budget of federal agencies, as
reported by the TPCC, declined by about 13%, due to lower funding levels for USDA and the Ex-
Im Bank.
• USDA’s budget on trade promotion declined from about $819 million in FY2006
to $674 million in FY2010. In line with this trend, the USDA’s trade promotion
budget requests in recent years have also decreased, to $642 million for FY2011
and $515 million for FY2012. Nevertheless, USDA remains the agency with the
largest funding levels for trade promotion activity and continues to account for
about half of the federal trade promotion budget.
• The Ex-Im Bank’s trade promotion funding levels have decreased primarily
because the agency became “self-sustaining” for appropriations purposes in
Congressional Research Service
4

---

U.S. Government Agencies Involved in Export Promotion: Overview and Issues

FY2008. The Ex-Im Bank funds its administrative and program costs through fee
income generated from its financing programs.
After USDA, the Departments of Commerce and State have the second- and third-largest fund
levels for trade promotion.
• The Department of Commerce’s funding for trade promotion activities increased
from $352 million in FY2006 to $356 million in FY2010. Recent trade
promotion budget requests by the Department of Commerce have been lower
than the FY2010 enacted amount; the FY2011 request was $339 million and the
FY2012 request was $350 million.
• The Department of State’s trade promotion enacted budget increased from $170
million in FY2006 to $176 million in FY2010. The requested budget for the
Department of State in recent years has been higher than the FY2010 enacted
amount, increasing to $184 million for FY2011 and to $198 million for FY2012.
Funding levels reported by the TPCC do not necessarily show total U.S. agency spending on
export promotion activities. Thus, total budget authority for government agencies and offices may
be higher than the spending levels reported in the NES. For example, the Ex-Im Bank charges
fees to cover its services, and uses offsetting collections to support its activities—spending that is
not necessarily reflected in the TPCC budget. Although the Ex-Im Bank’s FY2011 trade
promotion requested budget authority was $1 million, it authorized $33 billion in credit and
insurance to finance U.S. exports in that year.
Export Promotion Services and Activities
Federal government agencies perform a wide variety of functions that contribute to export
promotion. Some of these services directly assist U.S. companies to overcome information and
market entry barriers related to exporting.
• Export assistance services: The U.S. government provides export assistance
services, such as distribution of trade-related information to exporters, foreign
country market research, and counseling, to both new and seasoned exporters.
Key agencies that offer direct export assistance include the USDA, Department
of Commerce, Department of State, and SBA.
• Feasibility studies: The U.S. government conducts feasibility studies, which
evaluate the economic, financial, technical, and other aspects of proposed
projects in foreign countries that may generate exports of U.S. goods and
services. USDA and TDA both conduct such studies.
• Export financing and insurance: U.S. government agencies may finance and
insure U.S. exports to foreign countries for a number reasons, including (1) to
assume commercial and political risks that exporters or private financial
institutions are unwilling or unable to undertake alone; (2) to overcome maturity
and other limitations in private sector export financing; and (3) to counter
officially backed export credit financing offered to foreign exporters by their
governments. USDA takes the lead on agricultural export financing, while Ex-Im
Bank is the lead agency for providing financing and insurance for non-
agricultural exports. Export financing for small business exporters is available
Congressional Research Service
5

---

U.S. Government Agencies Involved in Export Promotion: Overview and Issues

from Ex-Im Bank and SBA. Related to exports also is OPIC’s role in financing
and insuring U.S. private investment for projects overseas. For example, OPIC-
supported investment in infrastructure projects in developing and emerging
markets may lead to the sale of U.S. goods and services for these projects and in
these markets more broadly.
• Government-to-government advocacy: In many situations, U.S. companies
face direct competition from foreign enterprises with access to greater foreign
financing, subsidies, and other forms of support from their governments. The
United States may use diplomatic tools to advocate on behalf of U.S. companies
to ensure that they can compete on a level playing field with foreign competitors
in export markets. Key agencies involved in such efforts are the Departments of
Commerce and State and the USTR.
The federal government also promotes exports in broader ways, such as through negotiating new
multilateral, regional, and bilateral free trade agreements (FTAs) and monitoring the
implementation and enforcement of existing trade agreements. Such efforts work to address
constraints, barriers, and unfair trade practices faced by U.S. exporters, including foreign
countries’ tariff and other import policies, export subsidies, inadequate protection of intellectual
property rights, service barriers, investment barriers, and anti-competitive practices.10 They also
help to develop foreign markets for U.S. goods and services. The lead agency in such efforts is
the USTR. Other agencies, including the Departments of Commerce and State, also play a role in
FTA negotiations and enforcement. In addition, the U.S. government conducts activities that may
help to promote exports indirectly. Government programs, such as OPIC, that are not charged
directly with the promotion of U.S. exports may contribute to the expansion of exports through
their activities.
Key U.S. Government Agencies Charged with
Export Promotion
The export promotion functions of the federal government are distributed across a range of
agencies. This section focuses on the nine agencies that have dedicated budgets to export
promotion, as reported in the NES.
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA)
The USDA, through its Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS), carries out five programs to
develop export markets for U.S. agricultural products.11 These programs are authorized in farm
bills, the most recent being the 2008 farm bill (P.L. 110-246). FAS also provides information,
counseling, and assistance to potential U.S. exporters of agricultural products. In addition, USDA
can guarantee the commercial bank financing of up to $5.5 billion of U.S. agricultural exports
annually and can make available export subsidies for dairy products. All of USDA’s export

10 Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR), 2009 National Trade Estimate Report on Foreign Trade Barriers.
11 For extensive detail on each of these market development program, see FAS Administered Programs—Market
Development Programs, available at http://www.fas.usda.gov/mos/marketdev.asp.
Congressional Research Service
6

---

U.S. Government Agencies Involved in Export Promotion: Overview and Issues

promotion, export financing, and subsidy programs are funded through the borrowing authority of
the Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC).12
The Foreign Market Development Program (FMDP) aims to develop long-term export
markets for U.S. agricultural products. FMDP funds are allocated each fiscal year mainly to non-
profit U.S. agricultural and trade organizations that represent an entire industry or are nationwide
in membership and scope. FMDP agreements with private organizations also are sometimes
approved. FMDP promotes generic U.S. commodities, rather than brand-name products.
Activities financed include consumer promotions, market research, technical assistance, and trade
servicing. The 2008 farm bill (P.L. 110-246) authorizes funding of $34.5 annually for each fiscal
year from FY2008 through FY2012.
The Market Access Program (MAP) helps U.S. producers, exporters, private companies, and
other trade organizations to finance promotional activities for U.S. agricultural products, both
generic and branded products. Activities financed include consumer promotions, market research,
technical assistance, and trade servicing. The 2008 farm bill makes organic produce eligible for
the program for the first time, and funds the program at $200 million each fiscal year from
FY2008 through FY2012.
Both MAP and FMDP work in partnership with the private sector. Both reimburse program
participants for a portion of the cost of carrying out overseas export promotions. One estimate is
that government funding accounts for 37% of export promotion under these two programs while
private sector funding accounts for 63%.13
The Emerging Markets Program (EMP) funds technical assistance activities to promote
exports of U.S. agricultural commodities and products to emerging markets. An emerging market
is any country that “is taking steps toward a market-oriented economy through the food,
agriculture, or rural business sectors of the economy of the country,” and “has the potential to
provide a viable and significant market for United States commodities or products of United
States agricultural commodities.” Activities funded by the EMP include feasibility studies, market
research, sectoral assessments, orientation visits, specialized training, and business workshops.
Funding is set at $10 million each fiscal year from FY2008 through FY2012.
The Quality Samples Program (QSP) helps U.S. agricultural trade organizations provide small
samples of their agricultural products to potential importers in emerging markets overseas.
Focusing on industry and manufacturing, as opposed to end-use consumers, EMP allows
manufacturers overseas to assess how U.S. food and fiber products can meet their production
needs best. Funding for QSP has averaged $2 million annually in recent years.

12 The Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC) is a wholly owned government corporation created in 1933 to stabilize,
support, and protect farm income and prices (federally chartered by the CCC Charter Act of 1948, P.L. 80-806). The
CCC is essentially a financing institution for U.S. Department of Agriculture’s farm price and income commodity
support and agricultural export programs. It is authorized to buy, sell, lend, make payments and engage in other
activities for the purpose of increasing production, stabilizing prices, assuring adequate supplies, and facilitating the
efficient marketing of agricultural commodities. The export programs funded through CCC are administered by the
Foreign Agricultural Service. The CCC has the authority to borrow up to $30 billion from the U.S. Treasury to carry
out its obligations. Net losses from its operations subsequently are restored through the congressional appropriations
process.
13 U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS), The Competition in 2002: U.S. and
Competitor Expenditures on Export Promotion for Agricultural, Forestry, and Fishery Products, August, 2004, viewed
at http://www.fas.usda.gov/cmp/com-study/2002/2002.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
7

---

U.S. Government Agencies Involved in Export Promotion: Overview and Issues

The Technical Assistance for Specialty Crops (TASC) program is designed to assist U.S.
organizations by providing funding for projects that address sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) and
technical barriers that prohibit or threaten the export of U.S. specialty crops.14 Examples of
activities TASC may cover include seminars and workshops, study tours, field surveys, pest and
disease research, and pre-clearance programs. The 2008 farm bill authorized $7 million for TASC
in FY2009.
Separate from these programs, FAS makes available resources, products, and services to help
companies explore the potential for international sales of agricultural products.15 FAS assists both
beginning and experienced exporters, targeting especially SMEs.
USDA operates two export financing programs for U.S. agricultural exports—the Export Credit
Guarantee (GSM-102) Program and the Facilities Guarantee Program (FGP). GSM-102
guarantees against defaults of commercial bank financing of agricultural commodity exports.
FGP provides payment guarantees to facilitate the financing of manufactured goods and services
exported from the United States to improve or establish agriculture-related facilities in emerging
markets. FAS carries out these programs and finances them through the CCC. Both GSM-102 and
the FGP are authorized in farm bills, again most recently in the 2008 farm bill. Financing of an
estimated $5.5 billion of U.S. agricultural exports was guaranteed in FY2011 under GSM-102.16
(See Table 2.) FAS also operates an export subsidy program, the Dairy Export Incentive Program
(DEIP), which allows exporters to sell certain U.S. dairy products in foreign markets at prices
lower than the exporter’s costs of acquiring them.
In addition to USDA programs, U.S. agricultural exporters may receive help in financing the
marketing and distribution of their products abroad through the SBA International Trade Loan
Program, which provides financing for small businesses to expand their market or upgrade their
facilities to improve their competitive position; the Ex-Im Bank, which operates loan, guarantee
and insurance programs for exporters; and OPIC, which provides insurance for overseas
investments (these agencies are described below).


14 Specialty crops include fruit, vegetable, tree nut, and nursery crops. Sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) measures,
according to the World Trade Organization (WTO) definition, are measures “taken to protect against risks linked to
food safety, animal health and plant protection or to prevent or limit damage within the territory of a Member from the
entry, establishment and spread of pests.” WTO, Doha Development Agenda, Trade Capacity Building Database, at
http://tcbdb.wto.org/trta_subcategory.aspx?cat=33113.
15 FAS’s Selling Products Overseas web page has links to various kinds of assistance FAS can provide to potential
exporters, at http://www.fas.usda.gov/agx/exporter_assistance.asp.
16 USDA, Office of Budget and Program Analysis, Budget Summary and Annual Performance Plan, FY2013, viewed at
http://www.obpa.usda.gov/.
Congressional Research Service
8

---

U.S. Government Agencies Involved in Export Promotion: Overview and Issues

Table 2. Funding for U.S. Department of Agriculture Market Development and
Export Financing Programs, FY2006-FY2013 Program Level
(millions of U.S. dollars)
Program
FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12a FY13b
Foreign
246 268 163 170 187 192 183 183
Agricultural
Service
Market
200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200
Access
Program
(MAP)
Foreign
34 34 34 34 34 34 34 c
Market
Development
Program
(FMDP)
Emerging
10 4 10 10 9 10 10 d
Markets
Program
(EMP)
Quality
2 1 1 2 2 2 2
Samples
Technical
2 1 4 7 8 9 9 e
Assistance
for Specialty
Crops
(TASC)
Export
1,363 1,445 3,115 5,357 3,090 4,123 5,500 5,400
Credit
Guarantee
Program
(GSM-102)f
Facilities
0 0 0 0 0 0
100
100
Guarantee
Program
(FGP)g
Dairy Export
0 0 0 19 2 0 0 0
Incentive
Program
Total
1,857 1,953 3,527 5,799 3,532 4,560 6,037 5,883
Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Budget Summaries, FY2006-FY2013.
Notes: According to the USDA, program level “represents the gross value of all financial assistance USDA
provides to the public. This assistance may be in the form of grants, guaranteed or direct loans, cost-sharing,
professional services such as research or technical assistance activities, or in-kind benefits such as commodities.”
a. Estimated
b. Requested
c. Subject to reauthorization
d. Subject to reauthorization
Congressional Research Service
9

---

U.S. Government Agencies Involved in Export Promotion: Overview and Issues

e. Subject to reauthorization
f.
GSM-102 program level is the value of agricultural exports whose financing is guaranteed.
g. FGP program level of U.S. goods and services exports whose financing is guaranteed.
U.S. Department of Commerce
The Department of Commerce, through its International Trade Administration (ITA), is the
lead agency providing export assistance services for U.S. non-agricultural businesses. ITA
resources include (1) trade specialists in over 100 U.S. Export Assistance Centers (USEACs) and
approximately 150 overseas offices; (2) industry experts and market and economic analysts; (3)
market access experts; and (4) import policy and trade compliance analysts. The agency is
divided into four policy units and an Executive and Administrative Directorate.
The Trade Promotion and the U.S. and Foreign Commercial Service (Commercial Service)
is the main trade promotion unit of ITA. It has trade specialists in 109 U.S. cities and in more than
75 countries who work with U.S. companies to help them get started in exporting or increasing
sales in foreign markets. Its services include market research; trade events to promote U.S.
products and services; introductions of qualified buyers and distributors in foreign countries to
U.S. companies; and counseling and advocacy services throughout the export process.17 The
Advocacy Center of this unit serves as an advocate for U.S. companies by assisting them in
pursuing foreign business opportunities and dealing with foreign governments. It also has liaisons
to five Multilateral Development Banks (World Bank, Inter-American Development Bank,
European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, Africa Development Bank, and Asia
Development Bank) to counsel U.S. companies on working with the Banks and on procurement
and contracting issues.
The Manufacturing and Services (MAS) unit works to strengthen the global competitiveness of
U.S. industry, expand market access for U.S. businesses, and increase U.S. exports. As the
research arm of ITA, the MAS undertakes industry economic and trade policy analysis, helps
formulate U.S. trade policy, participates in trade negotiations, organizes trade capacity building
programs, and evaluates the impact of U.S. and foreign regulations on U.S. manufacturing and
service industries. The MAS works with other federal agencies, private sector partners, and
Congress in developing a public policy environment to help advance the competitiveness of U.S.
firms at home and abroad.
The Market Access and Compliance (MAC) unit monitors foreign country compliance with
trade agreements with the United States, identifies compliance problems and market access
obstacles, and informs U.S. firms of foreign business practices and opportunities. The MAC has
country desk officers with expertise on the commercial, economic, and political climates in their
assigned countries. The desk officers focus on resolving trade complaints and market access
issues.
ITA has other functions, such as countering unfair foreign trade practices, in order to boost
exports. The Import Administration (IA) unit is ITA’s lead unit on enforcing trade laws and
agreements. Its primary role is to enforce U.S. anti-dumping and countervailing duty laws and to

17 See https://www.trade.gov for more information on the Trade Promotion and the U.S. and Foreign Commercial
Service of the International Trade Administration (ITA).
Congressional Research Service
10

---

U.S. Government Agencies Involved in Export Promotion: Overview and Issues

develop and implement other policies and programs aimed at countering unfair foreign trade
practices.18
ITA is playing a major role under the NEI’s goal of boosting exports. It is increasing certain
export promotion activities such as conducting trade missions, bringing foreign buyers to U.S.
trade shows, and promoting foreign market access for U.S. companies. The ITA also has
introduced a New Market Exporter Initiative (NMEI), which works with the ITA’s Strategic
Partners to identify customers who sell to at least one international market and support those
customers in expanding to additional markets. ITA’s Strategic Partners include FedEx, UPS, and
the U.S. Postal Service. The effort focuses on U.S. SMEs that already are familiar with
exporting.19
The Obama Administration requested an increase of 131 full time employees and $78.5 million
through the end of 2014 for the NEI and proposed that the ITA support an agency-wide,
comprehensive, multi-year export expansion strategy under the NEI.20 ITA’s strategy is to focus
on increasing U.S. exports to major emerging markets. The strategy also includes leading more
trade missions, bringing more foreign buyers to U.S. trade shows, and providing more business-
to-business matchmaking services to U.S. companies. In addition ITA will continue to assist U.S.
companies in creating trade opportunities by identifying foreign buyers for their exports and by
identifying and overcoming foreign trade barriers. ITA works with large and small businesses to
help ensure that they benefit from U.S. trade agreements.
The budget request for FY2013 for direct funding for ITA is $517 million, an increase of $57
million from the FY2012 estimated funding amount (See Table 3).21 In the 2012 State of the
Union Address, the President called for the creation of a new trade enforcement unit to enhance
U.S. capabilities to aggressively challenge unfair trade practices around the world, particularly in
China. The Administration’s FY2013 request for ITA includes an increase of $24.0 million to help
create a new Interagency Trade Enforcement Center (ITEC) for this purpose. In addition, the
Administration is requesting an increase of $30.3 million to help promote U.S. exports by
enhancing the Foreign Commercial Service’s presence in high-growth markets such as China,
India, and Brazil.22


18 For more information on U.S. anti-dumping and countervailing duty laws, see CRS Report RL32371, Trade
Remedies: A Primer, by Vivian C. Jones.
19 Department of Commerce, ITA, “New Market Exporter Initiative,” available at http://trade.gov/nei/new-market-
exporter-initiative.asp.
20 ITA, FY2012 Budget in Brief, available at http://www.osec.doc.gov.
21 Executive Office of the President, Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year 2013.
22 ITA, Budget Estimates Fiscal Year 2013 Congressional Submission.
Congressional Research Service
11

---

U.S. Government Agencies Involved in Export Promotion: Overview and Issues

Table 3. Funding Levels for the International Trade Administration: FY2002-FY2011
and Request for FY2012
(millions of U.S. dollars)
ITA Unit
FY06
FY07
FY08
FY09
FY10
FY11
FY12
FY13
Actual
Actual
Actual
Actual
Actual
Actual Enacted
Request
U.S.
$236 $235 $242 $243 $263 $260 $270 $307
Commercial
Service
Manufacturing
49 48 42 49 50 49 47 45
and Services
(MAS)
Import
60 61 64 67 70 68 69 92
Administration
(IA)
Market Access
45 44 46 45 47 49 47 48
and
Compliance
(MAC)
Administration
26 26 26 25 27 28 27 25
and Executive
Direction
Direct
416 414 420 429 457 454 460 517
Program
Reimbursable
14 14 17 17 20 23 23 22
Program
Total
430 428 437 446 477 477 483 539
Obligations
Sources: Executive Office of the President, Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Years 2008, 2009,
2010, 2011, 2012, and 2013.
Notes: Not al International Trade Administration (ITA) units have a direct role in export promotion activities.
Export-Import Bank of the United States (the Ex-Im Bank)
The Ex-Im Bank is the official export credit agency (ECA) of the U.S. government. It maintains
finance and insurance programs to facilitate U.S. exports to developing and emerging economies,
especially in circumstances when alternative financing is not available, to contribute to U.S.
employment. Some Ex-Im Bank programs are used to counter officially-backed export credit
financing offered by other countries. Its main programs are direct loans, export credit guarantees,
working capital guarantees, and export credit insurance, and are backed by the full faith and
credit of the U.S. government. The Ex-Im Bank participates in the regional network of USEACs.
The Bank operates under a renewable charter, the Export-Import Bank Act of 1945, as amended.23
Congress has authorized the Ex-Im Bank through May 31, 2012 (P.L. 112-74). The Ex-Im Bank
charges fees for its services and collects interest on its loans. It is a “self-sustaining institution,”

23 For more information on the Export-Import Bank (Ex-Im Bank), see CRS Report R42472, Export-Import Bank:
Background and Legislative Issues, by Shayerah Ilias.
Congressional Research Service
12

---

U.S. Government Agencies Involved in Export Promotion: Overview and Issues

using offsetting collections to cover its operations.24 As part of the annual appropriations process,
Congress sets an upper limit on the level of the Bank’s financial activities (see Table 4).
Though the Ex-Im Bank’s export promotion budget level reported by the TPCC is small
compared to the other federal agencies, the Ex-Im Bank is considered by many to have a key role
in federal export promotion efforts. In FY2011, the Ex-Im Bank approved 3,751 transactions of
credit and insurance support, which amounted to about $33 billion in authorizations—the third
consecutive year of record high levels of authorizations for the Bank. The Ex-Im Bank estimated
that credit and insurance activities supported about $41 billion in U.S. exports of goods and
services in FY2011, up from an estimated $34 billion worth of exports in FY2010. The Ex-Im
Bank also estimated that the exports supported by its financing were associated with 290,000 U.S.
jobs in FY2011, up from 227,000 U.S. jobs in FY2010. While the Ex-Im Bank finances less than
5% of U.S. exports annually, a significant portion of Ex-Im Bank financing is for exports of
capital-intensive U.S. goods.
Table 4. Budget of the Export-Import Bank, FY2006-FY2012 and Request for FY2013
(millions of U.S. dollars)

FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13
Est.
Req.
Inspector General amount
1
1
1
1
2.5
2.5
5
4.4
Subsidy
amount
100 NA 68 41 58 58 58 38
Administrative
expenses
73 NA 78 82 84 84 90 104
Sources: Executive Office of the President, Budget of the United States Government, various years.
Note: Subsidy refers to program activities (the cost of direct loans, loan guarantees, insurance, and tied aid)
conducted by the Export-Import Bank (Ex-Im Bank).
Ex-Im Bank programs must comply with certain congressional directives. The Bank’s charter
requires it to make available not less than 20% of its aggregate loan, guarantee, and insurance
authority to finance exports directly by small business. The charter also requires the Bank to
promote the export of goods and services related to renewable energy sources. In recent years,
appropriations language further has specified the Bank should make available not less than 10%
of its aggregate credit and insurance authority for the financing of exports of renewable energy
technologies or energy efficient end-use technologies. In FY2011, the Ex-Im Bank continued to
provide enhanced levels of support to small business exporters and exporters of renewable energy
exporters (see Table 5). The Ex-Im Bank also continued to engage in outreach to and advocacy
for small businesses, including through its regional offices.

24 Ex-Im Bank, Annual Report 2010.
Congressional Research Service
13

---

U.S. Government Agencies Involved in Export Promotion: Overview and Issues

Table 5. Export-Import Bank’s Credit and Insurance Authorizations,
FY2009-FY2011
(millions of U.S. Dollars)
Number of Authorizations
Amount Authorized
Program
2009 2010 2011 2009 2010 2011
Total Financing






Loans
16
15
18 $3,033 $4,261 $6,323
Loan
Guarantees
619
719
784 $11,475 $13,106 $19,400
Medium- and Long-Term
146
162
178
$9,943
$10,927
$16,172
Working Capital
473
557
606
$1,531
$2,179
$3,228
Insurance 2,256
2,798
2,949
$11,474
$7,101
$7,004
Total
Authorizations
2,891 3,532 3,751 $21,021 $24,468 $32,727
Selected Types of Financing
Exports by Smal Business
2,540
3,091
3,247
$4,360
$5,053
$6,037
Percent of Total
87.9%
87.5%
86.6%
20.7%
20.7%
18.4%
Environmental y Beneficial
Exports
88 108 142 $394 $536 $890
Percent of Total
3.0%
3.1%
3.8%
1.9%
2.2%
2.7%
Renewable Energy Exports
13
27
45
$93
$332
$721
Percent of Total
0.4%
0.8%
1.2%
0.4%
1.4%
2.2%
Exports to Sub-Saharan Africa
109
129
170
$412
$813
$1,381
Percent of Total
3.8%
3.7%
4.5%
2.0%
3.3%
4.2%
Source: Ex-Im Bank Annual Reports data adapted by CRS.
Note: The Ex-Im Bank distinguishes between financing for “environmental y beneficial” and “renewable energy”
exports.
Ex-Im Bank financing support also must meet several other statutory and policy criteria.25
Congress requires that Ex-Im Bank projects have no adverse effect on U.S. industry. Chiefly, the
Ex-Im Bank may not support projects that enable foreign production of an exportable good that
would compete with U.S. production of a same, or similar, good and that would cause
“substantial injury” to U.S. producers. The Ex-Im Bank also may not support projects that result
in the foreign production of a good that is substantially the same as a good subject to specified
U.S. trade measures, such as anti-dumping or countervailing duty investigations. In addition, the
Bank places certain limits on the maximum amount of foreign content that can be included in the
transactions it supports. The Ex-Im Bank is permitted to deny applications for credit for non-
financial or non-commercial considerations only in situations where the President, after
consultation with relevant congressional committees, determines that such action would be in the
national interest and would advance U.S. policy in areas such as international terrorism, nuclear

25 Additional information about Ex-Im Bank’s policies are available at http://www.exim.gov/products/policies/
index.cfm.
Congressional Research Service
14

---

U.S. Government Agencies Involved in Export Promotion: Overview and Issues

proliferation, environmental protection, and human rights. The power to make such a
determination has been delegated to the Secretary of State.26
Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC)
OPIC seeks to promote economic growth in developing and emerging economies by providing
investment insurance, project financing, and other services for U.S. businesses in those countries,
in support of U.S. foreign policy goals. OPIC’s programs are intended to promote U.S. private
investment by mitigating risks, such as political risks (including currency inconvertibility,
expropriation, political violence, and terrorism), for U.S. firms making qualified investment
overseas. OPIC conducts its activities on a self-sustaining basis to mobilize and facilitate private
capital investment in developing countries.27 OPIC operates in about 150 developing countries
and emerging markets.28 OPIC's governing legislation is the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (P.L.
87-195), as amended. Congress has authorized OPIC through FY2012 (P.L. 112-74).
For FY2012, Congress authorized $54.99 million for OPIC's administrative expenses (up from
$52.31 million in FY2011) and a transfer of $25 million from OPIC's noncredit account to
conduct its credit and administrative programs (up from $18.115 million in FY2011). For
FY2013, the Administration requested $60.78 million for OPIC's administrative expenses and a
transfer of $31 million from OPIC's noncredit account to conduct its credit and administrative
programs.
Since its inception, OPIC has funded, guaranteed, or insured nearly $200 billion in investments.
By OPIC's estimates, its activities have helped to generate $74 billion in U.S. exports and to
support more than 275,000 American jobs. In FY2011, OPIC provided $3.2 billion for 92
transactions in new market-based financing and political risk insurance to U.S. businesses.29
OPIC reported that about $1 billion of its project commitments in that year involved U.S. small
businesses. In addition, in FY2011, OPIC provided $1.1 billion in financing and insurance for
projects in the renewable energy sector.30
OPIC has general statutory requirements that govern its support for international investment
projects. Under the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as amended, OPIC is required to ensure that
its projects contribute to the economic and social development of a country and also do not have
an adverse effect on the U.S. economy or U.S. employment.31 OPIC-supported projects can be
implemented only in countries that currently have, or are taking steps to adopt and implement,
laws that uphold internationally recognized worker rights.32 The act includes a national economic
interest waiver on the worker rights provision, which states that OPIC shall not be prohibited
“from providing any insurance, reinsurance, guaranty, or financing with respect to a country if the

26 U.S. Code Title 12, Chapter 6a, Section 635(b)(1)(B)(ii).
27 For more information on the Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC), see CRS Report 98-567, The
Overseas Private Investment Corporation: Background and Legislative Issues, by Shayerah Ilias.
28 OPIC website, http://www.opic.gov. OPIC, OPIC 2010 Annual Report.
29 Ibid.
30 OPIC, "OPIC Records Net Income of $269 Million in FY2011, Helping to Reduce U.S. Budget Deficit for 34th
Consecutive Year," press release, January 3, 2012, http://www.opic.gov/news/press-releases/2009/pr010312. Exposure
information not reported. To date, OPIC’s FY2011 annual policy report has not been published.
31 Sec. 231(1) and Sec. 231(3)(e)(2)(k), et seq. of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (P.L. 97-195), as amended.
32 Sec. 231A(1) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (P.L. 97-195), as amended.
Congressional Research Service
15

---

U.S. Government Agencies Involved in Export Promotion: Overview and Issues

President determines that such activities by OPIC would be in the national economic interests of
the United States. Any such determination shall be reported in writing to the Congress, together
with the reasons for the determination.”33 OPIC further takes into account developmental,
environmental, health, safety, human rights, and other considerations when screening projects.34
Small Business Administration (SBA)35
SBA provides export financing and promotion services to small businesses. SBA’s Office of
International Trade (OIT) assists with four stages of export promotion: (1) identifying small
businesses interested in export promotion; (2) preparing small businesses to export successfully;
(3) connecting small businesses to export opportunities; and (4) supporting small businesses once
they find export opportunities. SBA also participates in the regional network of USEACs. In
FY2011, the OIT assisted 1,346 small business exporters to access capital through its export loan
programs in the amount of $924 million through 387 lenders, which supported $1.8 billion export
sales, according to SBA.36 The FY2012 enacted budget for SBA was $919.8 million, and the
Administration requested $1,115.4 million for FY2013.
U.S. Department of State37
The State Department promotes exports through U.S. embassies abroad that collect and
disseminate trade and economic data, identify trade opportunities, brief U.S. businesses, provide
advocacy on behalf of U.S. firms, and participate in trade negotiations and monitoring of trade
agreements. The Bureau of Economic and Business Affairs (EB) plays a key role in the State
Department’s export promotion activities.
EB’s Trade and Policy Programs (TPP) section participates in formulating U.S. trade policy
and negotiating positions under the coordination of the USTR to ensure that U.S. foreign policy
goals are considered in trade policy formulation. It also promotes the use and understanding of
agricultural biotechnology overseas, and works to maintain open markets for U.S. biotechnology
products. In addition, TPP’s Intellectual Property Enforcement Office promotes intellectual
property rights protection worldwide, in coordination with other U.S. agencies such as USTR and
the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). The unit also works to ensure that foreign
governments comply with their trade commitments, sometimes through foreign missions.
Commercial and Business Affairs (CBA), another section of EB, provides support to U.S.
embassies assisting U.S. business operating abroad. Such assistance includes help with resolving
regulatory and investment problems, ensuring U.S. firms are afforded equal opportunity, and
providing market analysis and commercial information to maximize U.S. commercial

33 Sec. 231A(3) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (P.L. 97-195), as amended.
34 OPIC, OPIC Annual Policy Report, Fiscal Year 2008, March 2008.
35 For more information about the Small Business Administration (SBA), see CRS Report RL33243, Small Business
Administration: A Primer on Programs, by Robert Jay Dilger.
36 SBA, FY2013 Congressional Budget Justification and FY2011 Annual Performance Report, p. 60,
http://www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/files/1-
508%20Compliant%20FY%202013%20CBJ%20FY%202011%20APR%281%29.pdf.
37 This section draws on language written by Ian F. Fergusson.
Congressional Research Service
16

---

U.S. Government Agencies Involved in Export Promotion: Overview and Issues

opportunities. For countries without Commercial Service officers, CBA uses the Business
Facilitation Incentive Fund to engage in trade promotion activities.
U.S. Embassies and Consulates advocate for U.S. businesses overseas. Embassies can provide
U.S. exporters with country-specific market information, assist in commercial and investment
disputes, and provide expertise on foreign judicial systems.38
U.S. Trade and Development Agency (TDA)
The U.S. Trade and Development Agency (TDA) is a foreign assistance agency that operates
under a dual mission of promoting economic development and U.S. commercial interests in
developing and middle-income countries. It was spun out of the U.S. Agency for International
Development (AID) in the 1980s as a tool for achieving a commercial return on U.S. foreign
assistance. TDA links U.S. businesses to export opportunities by funding feasibility studies,
reverse trade missions, technical assistance, and other activities while creating sustainable
infrastructure and economic growth in partner countries.39 TDA provides grants to overseas
project sponsors (both public and private sector grantees) who select U.S. companies (primarily
small- and medium-sized businesses) to conduct TDA-funded projects to help them make
informed investment decisions. For FY2012, Congress appropriated $50.0 million for TDA, and
for FY2013, the Administration requested $57.6 million for TDA.
TDA-funded projects may help open markets for increased U.S. exports by positioning U.S.
companies to compete successfully as suppliers of goods and services for follow-on projects. For
instance, feasibility studies provide analysis, evaluation, and empirical data to assist major
overseas infrastructure investments in securing financing and implementation. These
infrastructure investments may present opportunities for U.S. exports of goods and services. TDA
reports, for example, that a TDA-funded feasibility study led to a Colombia refinery receiving
approval in 2011 of a $2.8 billion loan/loan guarantee from Ex-Im Bank, to finance the purchase
of equipment and services from U.S. engineering/design, equipment supply, contracting, and
process license firms.40
In FY2011, TDA provided $41.1 million in funding for projects. Feasibility studies (which
evaluate the economic, financial, technical and other aspects of proposed projects in foreign
countries that may generate U.S. exports) represented 42% ($17.3 million) of TDA FY2011
obligations. Technical assistance (which supports legal and regulatory reform in partner
countries) constituted nearly one-third ($11.3 million) of obligations. Reverse trade missions
(which provide opportunities for foreign delegates to meet with U.S. businesses and to foster
commercial relationships) have constituted an increasing proportion of TDA activities,
accounting for about one-fifth of the value of TDA obligations in FY2011 ($8.7 million). Other
activities include studies, workshops, conferences, and trade-related training. TDA identified $4.9
billion in U.S. exports supported by its programs in FY2011.41

38 Department of State, Bureau of Public Affairs, “The National Export Initiative: Stimulating Global Economic
Growth Through U.S. Exports,” press release, March 24, 2010, http://www.state.gov/r/pa/scp/fs/2010/134811.htm.
39 U.S. Trade and Development Agency (TDA), “USTDA At-A-Glance,” http://www.ustda.gov/about/ataglance.asp.
40 TDA, U.S. Trade and Development Agency 2011 Annual Report, http://www.ustda.gov/pubs/annualreport/2011/.
41 Ibid.
Congressional Research Service
17

---

U.S. Government Agencies Involved in Export Promotion: Overview and Issues

TDA conducts a International Business Partnership Program, an initiative to host reverse trade
missions that will bring prospective overseas buyers to the United States to meet with U.S.
companies that export goods and services. TDA also is increasing engagement with the
Department of Commerce’s Advocacy Center to identify new reverse trade missions and grant
opportunities for U.S. exporters.42
Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR)
The USTR, within the Executive Office of the President (EOP), develops and implements the
coordination of U.S. trade policy, and leads the United States’ bilateral, regional, and multilateral
trade negotiations, among other responsibilities. The USTR has sought to reduce both tariff and
non-tariff barriers to trade through these negotiations. For example, the USTR presently is
negotiating the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) Agreement. The USTR also seeks to enforce U.S.
rights secured through existing trade agreements. In addition, the USTR investigates unfair
foreign trade practices and enforcement of FTAs affecting U.S. goods and services, and it is
authorized statutorily to negotiate the removal of these barriers. The USTR’s primary role in
export promotion is to expand international market access for U.S. exporters of goods and
services.
U.S. Department of the Treasury
The Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) administers and
enforces economic and trade sanctions based on U.S. foreign policy and national security goals
against targeted foreign countries, terrorists, international narcotics traffickers, and those engaged
in activities related to the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.
The Department of the Treasury is involved in broader efforts with the Administration to address
global economic imbalances and to promote an international economic climate that is more
supportive of exports, such as through reforming the U.S. financial system and tackling foreign
currency exchange issues. While such macroeconomic efforts may help to promote exports, they
may not be included in the TPCC’s trade promotion budget for the Treasury. According to the
National Export Strategy reports, a very small portion of Treasury’s budget is directed at export
promotion activities.
Local Export Assistance
Led by the Department of Commerce’s ITA, U.S. Export Assistance Centers (USEACs) constitute
a key component of support services provided by federal government agencies to U.S. exporters.
The Department of Commerce, together with SBA, Ex-Im Bank, and USDA, are part of a
nationwide network of USEACs that serve as a “one-stop shop” for firms—primarily small- and
medium-sized business—that are new to exporting or want to expand their exporting activities.
They provide export counseling, planning, and financing services, such as working with firms to
identify target markets, to formulate marketing strategies, and to identify export financing

42 TDA, “Statement by Leocadia I. Zak, Director, U.S. Trade and Development Agency, National Export Initiative,
Denver, CO,” press release, March 22, 2010, http://www.ustda.gov/news/speeches/2010/US/
NEIOutreachLZRemarks_032210.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
18

---

U.S. Government Agencies Involved in Export Promotion: Overview and Issues

options. Through USEACs, the agencies work to coordinate their export education, promotion,
and finance services to U.S. businesses.43 USEACs coordinate with Foreign Commercial Service
posts that provide export assistance services.44 USEACs also work closely with non-federal
export service providers, such as state agencies and world trade centers, to provide export
assistance for U.S. businesses. USEACs are located in over 100 U.S. cities. Some USEAC
services are free, while others are fee-based.45
Issues for Congress
Congressional interest in federal agencies involved in export promotion centers is rooted in an
underlying issue of effectiveness. How effective are federal export promotion efforts at
supporting U.S. exports and, in turn, supporting U.S. jobs? What agency-specific issues can be
addressed to enhance this effectiveness?
Economic Rationales For and Against Federal Export Promotion
A starting point for congressional debates on export promotion often is the economic rationales
for and against the involvement of U.S. government agencies in promoting U.S. exports.
Advocates of the federal government’s export promotion activities argue that such efforts are
critical for addressing market failures, such as imperfect information and barriers to entry. Export
assistance services to overcome such barriers may be particularly useful for small business
exporters, which tend to face greater challenges than larger firms in entering overseas markets.
Federal export promotion efforts also can help to counter foreign governments’ export promotion
activities to help create a “level playing field” for U.S. companies competing in international
markets. Some supporters consider international export promotion competition to be significant.
For example, according to a 2011 Ex-Im Bank report on international export credit competition,
in 2010, new medium- and long-term (MLT) official export credit financing by the Group of 7
(G-7) countries totaled $65.4 billion. Among the G-7 countries, Germany provided the largest
level of support at $22.5 billion, followed by France at $17.4 billion and the United States at
$13.0 billion. In comparison to the G-7, the emerging economies of Brazil, China, and India—
which are not a part of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development’s
international arrangement on export credits—conducted a total of $72.7 billion in new MLT
financing in 2010, surpassing that of the G-7.46
Others, including some economists, view government-funded trade promotion efforts as a subsidy
which distorts free markets, because they encourage commercial activities that are not

43 U.S. General Accounting Office (now the U.S. General Accountability Office), U.S. Export Assistance Centers’
Efforts to Support U.S. Business, GAO/T-NSIAD-99-252, September 9, 1999. Telephone conversation with Ex-Im
Bank official, March 5, 2009.
44 GAO, Export Promotion: Increases in Commercial Service Workforce Should Be Better Planned, GAO-10-874,
August 2010, p. 7.
45 Department of Commerce, CommerceConnect, “U.S. Export Assistance Centers,”
http://www.commerceconnect.gov/connections/programs/program000078.asp.
46 Ex-Im Bank, Report to the U.S. Congress on Export Credit Competition and the Export-Import Bank of the United
States, June 2011. The report notes that data on export credit volumes for Brazil, China, and India are approximations
of activity based on available information and may be overstated due to analytic assumptions used by Ex-Im Bank.
Congressional Research Service
19

---

U.S. Government Agencies Involved in Export Promotion: Overview and Issues

commercially viable, and in doing so, may encourage an inefficient use of resources. Those
critical of the government’s involvement in export promotion contend that there is little in the
way of evidence suggesting that export promotion by the government can have significant effects
on U.S. export levels. While critics concede that federal export assistance may help individual
firms, they contend that such activities do not influence the overall level of employment and may,
in fact, simply shift production among sectors within the economy. Critics also assert that
macroeconomic factors, such as global economic growth and exchange rates, hold greater sway
over a nation’s level of exports.
While there is no consensus on the economic rationales for and against export promotion, it
appears that, in light of the recent global economic downturn, U.S. trade policy has converged
around the notion of promoting U.S. exports as a way to support U.S. economic growth and
employment. U.S. export promotion also has emerged as a means to achieve a rebalancing of the
U.S. economy by depending less on domestic consumption for gross domestic product (GDP)
growth and more on other sectors of the economy, including exports. As such, many
policymakers have turned to more agency-specific issues in export promotion that are discussed
below.
Coordination of Federal Export Promotion Agencies and Activities
Coordination of the U.S. government’s export promotion activities has been a long-standing issue
of interest for Congress. Since the inception of the TPCC in 1992, the Government Accountability
Office (GAO), at the request of Congress, has conducted several studies on the effectiveness of
the TPCC in coordinating the export promotion activities of federal government agencies. The
TPCC has a mandate to establish a set of priorities for federal export promotion activities, to
coordinate a government-wide export promotion framework, and to propose a unified export
promotion budget to the President. In practice, however, its effectiveness in fostering interagency
coordination often has been more limited.
Interagency coordination by the TPCC inherently is complicated by the fact that multiple
agencies are involved in export promotion. These are independent agencies with their own
missions, goals, and priorities. Many of these agencies prioritize the promotion of exports, but
often, it is within the context of their own agency missions.
The GAO reports that the TPCC has made progress in improving its coordination of export
promotion activities, but continues to report shortcomings. Positive developments include
improvements in interagency training, joint outreach by agencies to serve small businesses, and
enhanced support for the trade promotion activities conducted at U.S. embassies.47 While the
GAO has reported previously that the objectives and priority markets identified in the NES have
changed on an annual basis without reflection of the outcomes of the previous year, in 2009
testimony, the GAO noted that the 2008 NES contained information about the status of priority
initiatives identified in the prior year’s report.48

47 GAO-06-660T, April 26, 2006, pp. 9-11. GAO, International Trade: Effective Export Programs Can Help in
Achieving U.S. Economic Goals, GAO-09-480T, March 17, 2009, p. 3.
48 GAO, International Trade: Effective Export Programs Can Help in Achieving U.S. Economic Goals, GAO-09-480T,
March 17, 2009, p. 3.
Congressional Research Service
20

---

U.S. Government Agencies Involved in Export Promotion: Overview and Issues

Nevertheless, the GAO has identified a number of areas of ongoing concern related to the TPCC.
For example, according to the GAO, the annual National Export Strategy reports have several
limitations that affect the TPCC’s ability to coordinate trade promotion activities. In March 2009,
the GAO testified that the NES continues to lack an overall review of member agencies’
allocation of resources relative to government-wide export promotion priorities.49 This may
constrain the TPCC’s ability to guide progress toward achievement of export promotion goals. In
addition, the GAO has testified that the TPCC continues to have limited influence over its
member agencies’ allocation of resources for trade promotion.
Through the NEI, there is a cabinet-level interagency development that may further enhance
interagency coordination. Some policymakers welcome the concerted effort to coordinate export
promotion at the federal level through the creation of the Export Promotion Cabinet. Supporters
believe that the elevation of export promotion as a policy issue to the cabinet level will ensure
that it is given national priority.50 However, some critics contend that the NEI essentially is a
bureaucratic maneuver that overlays the newly created Export Promotion Cabinet over the
existing TPCC. They contend that it does not bring substantive reforms or improvements to
coordination of U.S. export promotion.51
Funding for Export Promotion Activities by Federal Agencies
Congress has an ongoing interest in the level of U.S. government spending on export promotion
activities by federal agencies, and the extent to which such spending is effective and efficient.
Over the years, some policymakers have called for greater federal funding for export promotion
activities, such as export financing. Supporters argue that increased resources would improve the
ability of the U.S. government to provide support to U.S. exporters. For example, in 2006, the
GAO reported that the Commerce Department’s budget authority for security at overseas offices
has risen in recent years, leaving few resources for trade promotion activities at foreign
missions.52 Supporters also contend that the low level of federal spending on export promotion
activities, compared to those of foreign governments, places U.S. firms at a competitive
disadvantage in the global marketplace.53 Greater spending, they argue, would enhance the ability
of the federal government to equip U.S. firms with the tools necessary to compete with foreign
firms that have access to similar support through their national programs. It also would allow the
United States to counter the unfair trading practices of foreign countries and help “level the
playing field” for U.S. exporters.
Some critics of policy proposals to increase funding contend that these programs are funded
adequately, and that the challenge primarily is about using resources efficiently. For example,
some groups may take issue with the fact that while agricultural goods accounted for nearly one-
tenth of total U.S. exports in 2010, federal support for agricultural exports accounted for nearly
half of the TPCC export promotion budget in that year.54 They may contend that federal

49 GAO-09-480T, March 17, 2009, p. 3.
50 Diana Ransom, “Obama’s Math: More Exports Equals More Jobs,” Wall Street Journal, February 5, 2010.
51 Sherle R. Schwenninger and Samuel Sherraden, Getting Serious About Doubling U.S. Exports, New America
Foundation, Talking Points, March 17, 2010.
52 GAO-06-660T, April 26, 2006, p. 8.
53 Kent Hoover, “Business groups praise export plan, but want more,” Washington Business Journal, February 15,
2010, http://www.bizjournals.com/extraedge/washingtonbureau/archive/2010/02/15/bureau1.html.
54 CRS analysis, data from U.S. Census Bureau and U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, U.S. Department of
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
21

---

U.S. Government Agencies Involved in Export Promotion: Overview and Issues

government support for agricultural exports is inefficient. Some critics assert that it is difficult to
make assessments of which federal export promotion programs should receive greater federal
funding. As mentioned before, the GAO continues to find that the NES lacks “an overall review
of agencies’ allocation of resources relative to government-wide export promotion priorities.”55
Reorganization of Federal Agencies Involved in Export Promotion
Over the past few decades, Congress, successive Administrations, and policy stakeholders have
considered proposals to reorganize trade policy functions, such as consolidating all U.S. export-
or trade-related programs under one federal agency to provide the U.S. exporting community with
a “one-stop” source of export promotion services. There has been renewed interest on the part of
the Obama Administration and Congress in reorganizing the trade policy functions of the federal
government in order to enhance the effectiveness of U.S. export promotion efforts, improve U.S.
trade policy coordination, avoid duplication of functions and activities, and for other reasons.
Given the multiple different federal government agencies involved in export promotion, some
policymakers are concerned that certain functions and activities of the agencies may be
duplicative. Some also are concerned that export promotion responsibilities are spread too
diffusely across the U.S. government. In addition, some observers consider the diverse range of
policy goals that fall under U.S. export promotion policy challenging to balance. Goals range
from increasing the level of exports to lowering the U.S. trade deficit to supporting SME
exporters to promoting renewable energy and clean technology exports.
On the one hand, proponents of consolidation proposals believe that they may eliminate
duplication of federal export promotion services, provide a more streamlined rationale for U.S.
export promotion services based on more clearly defined goals, and reduce overall costs of such
programs. They argue that federal export promotion efforts could be enhanced through a more
centralized government body. On the other hand, critics contend that such proposals could result
in the creation of a large, costly federal bureaucracy. They also assert that the diffusion of export
promotion responsibilities across federal government agencies helps to advance various aspects
of U.S. export promotion policy. Advocates of particular types of exporters, such as SMEs or
agricultural exporters, may be concerned that such a “one-stop” federal source may not be
responsive to their unique needs.
On January 13, 2012, President Obama asked Congress for authority to reorganize and
consolidate the business- and trade-related functions of six federal entities into one department in
an effort to streamline the federal government: Department of Commerce, Ex-Im Bank, OPIC,
SBA, TDA, and the USTR.56 The reorganization authority required by the President is currently
dormant; it was available to Presidents periodically between 1932 and 1984, and allowed the
President to present reorganization plans to Congress under an expedited process.57 On February
16, 2012, President Obama sent draft legislation, entitled the Reforming and Consolidating

(...continued)
Commerce, U.S. International Trade in Goods and Services: Annual Revision for 2010, June 9, 2011.
55 GAO-09-480T, March 17, 2009, p. 3.
56 The White House, "Government Reorganization Fact Sheet," press release, January 13, 2012,
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/01/13/government-reorganization-fact-sheet.
57 For additional information on the reorganization process, see CRS Report R41841, Executive Branch Reorganization
Initiatives During the 112th Congress: A Brief Overview, by Henry B. Hogue.
Congressional Research Service
22

---

U.S. Government Agencies Involved in Export Promotion: Overview and Issues

Government Act of 2012, to Congress that would give him the authority to reorganize and
consolidate the federal government. The legislation, introduced as S. 2129 (Lieberman) on
February 17, 2012, would reinstate an authority granted to past Presidents to reorganize the
executive branch.58
On February 17, 2012, the President issued a memorandum announcing his intention to move
administratively to ensure the effectiveness of federal programs and functions supporting trade
and investment, while seeking reorganizational authority from Congress. The President directed
the EPC, in coordination with the TPCC, to develop strategies and initiatives in support of the
Administration’s strategic trade and investment goals and priorities. The President also stated that
the Assistant to the President and Deputy National Security Advisor for International Economics
shall coordinate the activities of the TPCC. The President directed the EPC to support efforts to
create BusinessUSA, an online platform intended to be a central resource for accessing federal
business programs and services.59 In addition, the President directed the EPC, in consultation with
the TPCC, to present a unified federal trade budget consistent with the Administration’s strategic
trade and investment goals and priorities, as well as to take steps to ensure the most efficient use
of its members’ domestic and foreign offices and distribution networks.60
The presidential memorandum provides for administrative tools for attempting to enhance the
effectiveness of federal trade-related programs and functions. It outlines steps that the executive
branch can take to enhance trade policy coordination, such as strengthening the role of the EPC,
and to ensure the use of federal resources more efficiently, such as through better allocation of
resources across federal agencies’ domestic and foreign offices and distribution networks. The
memorandum addresses long-standing policy concerns related to the U.S. trade policy
organizational structure. Since the presidential memorandum has only been recently issued, it is
unclear what effect it will have on overall trade policy.
Congressional Activity on Export Promotion
The 112th Congress has introduced legislation related to the coordination of federal export
promotion activities and the role of federal agencies in export promotion, including the following.
• H.R. 4041 (Berman), introduced on February 15, 2012, would provide the TPCC
with greater authority to assess current export promotion programs; direct
improvements, review, and approve annual export promotion budget
submissions, taking into account recommendations of U.S. exporters (especially
SMEs and representatives of U.S. workers); and direct the implementation of
export promotion activities by other agencies. The bill also would provide for the
redeployment of Commercial Service officers based on assessments conducted
by the Secretary of Commerce on overseas markets with the greatest potential for

58 The White House, “President Obama Calls on Congress to Partner on Government Reform,” press release, February
16, 2012, http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/02/16/president-obama-calls-congress-partner-
government-reform.
59 The beta version of BusinessUSA is accessible at: http://business.usa.gov/.
60 The White House, "Presidential Memorandum--Maximizing the Effectiveness of Federal Programs and Functions
Supporting Trade and Investment," press release, February 17, 2012, http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-
office/2012/02/17/presidential-memorandum-maximizing-effectiveness-federal-programs-and-fu.
Congressional Research Service
23

---

U.S. Government Agencies Involved in Export Promotion: Overview and Issues

increasing U.S. exports. In addition, the bill would require each chief of mission
to develop a plan for effective diplomacy to remove or reduce obstacles to U.S.
exports. H.R. 4041 was ordered to be reportedly favorably to the full House (as
amended) by unanimous content on March 7, 2012.61 The Senate version of the
bill, S. 2171 (Pryor), was introduced on March 7, 2012, and referred to Senate
committee.
• H.R. 2988 (Berman), introduced on September 21, 2011, would require the
Secretary of Commerce to establish a public directory for foreign buyers to
identify U.S. manufacturers and service providers prepared to export clean and
efficient energy and environmental products and services; require the Secretary
of Commerce to establish a governmental database on foreign sales opportunities
in clean and efficient energy and environmental products and services; require
the Secretary of Commerce to monitor and evaluate U.S. export promotion
activities with respect to clean and efficient energy and environmental products
and services; and require the GAO to submit reports to Congress comparing the
effectiveness of U.S. export promotion activities with respect to clean and
efficient energy and environmental products and services with those of other
major trade competitors. H.R. 2988 was referred to House subcommittee on
October 25, 2011.
• H.R. 3976 (Velazquez), introduced on February 8, 2012, would, among other
things, direct the SBA Office of International Trade to compile and update
annually a document for small businesses that contains tariff schedules of foreign
countries and other trade and market data. It also would direct the OIT to identify
and advertise programs and services to small businesses, including federal
assistance, that facilitate the matching of foreign customers to small businesses.
In addition, H.R. 3976 would increase Ex-Im Bank financing for small business
exports and OPIC financing for small business investment. H.R. 3976 was
referred to House subcommittee on February 23, 2012.
• H.R. 4221 (Smith), introduced on March 20, 2012, is intended to create jobs in
the United States by expanding U.S. trade and investment programs that increase
U.S. exports to Africa. The bill would expand the role of federal agencies
involved in export promotion, such as the Department of Commerce, the Ex-Im
Bank, and OPIC, with respect to Africa. Among other things, the bill would
direct the Ex-Im Bank to make more financing available for projects in Africa
and to use not less than $250 million of its total capitalization to counter
concessional loans made by foreign governments. H.R. 4221 was referred to
House subcommittee on April 26, 2012. Its companion bill, S. 2215 (Durbin),
was introduced on March 21, 2012, and referred to Senate committee.
• Legislation has been introduced to reauthorize the Ex-Im Bank until FY2015:
H.R. 2072 (Miller); S. 1547 (Johnson); S.Amdt. 1836 (Cantwell), an amendment
to H.R. 3606; and H.R. 4302 (Larsen). The pieces of legislation differ to some
degree on the changes that they would make to the Ex-Im Bank's authority and

61 H.R. 4041 is virtually identical to H.R. 2987 (Berman), which was introduced on September 21, 2011, and referred to
House subcommittee on October 25, 2011.
Congressional Research Service
24

---

U.S. Government Agencies Involved in Export Promotion: Overview and Issues

activities. Legislation also has been introduced to terminate the Bank: H.R. 4268
(Amash).62
• H.R. 2762 (Manzullo), introduced on August 1, 2011, would reauthorize OPIC
through FY2015. It was referred to House subcommittee on October 25, 2011.

Author Contact Information

Shayerah Ilias, Coordinator
M. Angeles Villarreal
Analyst in International Trade and Finance
Specialist in International Trade and Finance
silias@crs.loc.gov, 7-9253
avillarreal@crs.loc.gov, 7-0321
Charles E. Hanrahan

Senior Specialist in Agricultural Policy
chanrahan@crs.loc.gov, 7-7235


Acknowledgments
The authors wish to thank the following CRS colleagues who provided helpful input on this
report: Raymond J. Ahearn, William H. Cooper, Mary A. Irace, Wayne M. Morrison, and Carolyn
C. Smith.

62 For additional information on Ex-Im Bank reauthorization legislation, see CRS Report R41829, Reauthorization of
the Export-Import Bank: Issues and Policy Options for Congress, by Shayerah Ilias.
Congressional Research Service
25

---