link to page 2
July 30, 2020
National Infrastructure Bank: Proposals in the 116th Congress
Introduction
operate as a revolving fund, such that credit assistance and
The term “infrastructure” generally refers to long-lived,
administrative costs are limited to the size of the
capital-intensive systems and facilities in the areas of
appropriation, but funds from borrowers’ payments could
transportation, energy, water, and telecommunications.
be used to make new loans. In some formulations, an
Some broader definitions also include facilities for
infrastructure bank would raise its own capital through
education, recreation, and health. Although the condition
bond issuance.
and performance of these systems are generally thought to
be important for the nation’s well-being, there is less
Advantages and Disadvantages
agreement on the optimal level of infrastructure investment,
Advantages of a national infrastructure bank potentially
how to maximize the effectiveness of spending, and the
include the leveraging of state, local, and private-sector
appropriate role of the federal government.
investment, data-driven project selection, and a highly
skilled staff with expertise in infrastructure financing.
State and local governments and the private sector provide
Drawbacks might include the limited number of suitable
the bulk of infrastructure investment. The federal role in
projects for support, the duplication of existing programs,
infrastructure investment is important but limited in size
and pressure to allocate loans according to political criteria.
and scope. For example, the federal government was
A bank may also not be the lowest-cost means of increasing
responsible for 26% of total government highway outlays in
infrastructure spending. The Congressional Budget Office
2017. The federal government supports infrastructure
notes that a special entity issuing its own debt would not be
investment in four ways: (1) direct investment in federally
able to offer the low interest and issuance costs of the U.S.
owned infrastructure; (2) grants to nonfederal entities,
Treasury. Some see a larger federal role in infrastructure as
especially state and local governments; (3) tax preferences
a drawback as well, and suggest that Congress might
that forgo federal revenue to provide incentives for
enhance the operation of state infrastructure banks as an
nonfederal investment in infrastructure; and (4) loans and
alternative.
other types of credit assistance to nonfederal entities.
National Infrastructure Bank
Legislative Proposals in the 116th Congress
Most infrastructure bank bills introduced in the 116th
A national infrastructure bank is typically seen as a way for
Congress would create a financing entity to support projects
the federal government to provide loans, loan guarantees,
across several infrastructure sectors. These include the
and lines of credit to support infrastructure projects being
National Infrastructure Development Bank Act of 2019
carried out by nonfederal entities. Many different
(H.R. 658, Representative DeLauro); the National
formulations have been proposed over the years, but policy
Infrastructure Investment Corporation Act of 2019 (H.R.
choices typically include the following:
4780, Representative Carbajal); the National Infrastructure
Infrastructure type. Some proposals focus on one type,
Bank Act of 2020 (H.R. 6422, Representative Danny
such as transportation or energy, but most would support a
Davis); the Infrastructure Bank for America Act of 2020
wider spectrum of sectors.
(H.R. 7231, Representative Webster); and the Reinventing
Economic Partnerships and Infrastructure Redevelopment
Institutional form and governance. Most current
(REPAIR) Act (S. 1535, Senator Warner). Several other
proposals would create a wholly owned government
bills would create an entity to support infrastructure
corporation overseen by a board whose members are
projects that aim to improve resilience and reduce
selected by the President or Congress. But other models
greenhouse gas emissions. These include the National
exist, including placing the bank inside an existing federal
Green Bank Act of 2019 (H.R. 3423, Representative
agency and creating a government-sponsored enterprise
Himes); the National Climate Bank Act (H.R. 5416,
with an independent board.
Representative Dingell); and the National Climate Bank
Funding source. Under the Federal Credit Reform Act of
Act (S. 2057, Senator Markey). Details of five selected bills
1990 (FCRA; 2 U.S.C. §661(a)), credit assistance by the
can be seen in Table 1.
bank would be supported by an appropriation that pays the
subsidy cost and federal administrative cost. According to
The REPAIR Act, for example, would create the
FCRA, the subsidy cost is “the estimated long-term cost to
Infrastructure Financing Authority (IFA), a wholly owned
the government of a direct loan or a loan guarantee ...
government corporation, with a $10 billion appropriation
calculated on a net present value basis.” An appropriation
and the ability to collect fees from borrowers. The IFA’s
would leverage larger loan amounts from the U.S. Treasury.
funding would leverage a larger amount from the Treasury.
Assuming a 10% subsidy cost, every $1 appropriated
Because loan repayments go to the Treasury, the IFA would
beyond the amount of administrative costs would enable the
likely require future appropriations. Infrastructure sectors
bank to lend $10 to projects. Loan repayments would go to
supported would include transportation, energy, and water,
the Treasury (not the bank). Alternatively, a bank could
but with the board of directors authorized to modify this
https://crsreports.congress.gov