{ "id": "RS20174", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "number": "RS20174", "active": false, "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "versions": [ { "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "id": 102508, "date": "1999-11-05", "retrieved": "2016-05-24T20:41:12.384941", "title": "CBI/NAFTA Parity Proposals: A Comparison", "summary": "The tariff and quota treatment of U.S. imports from Mexico under the North American Free\nTrade\nAgreement has resulted in a distinct and increasing competitive disadvantage for imports from the\nbeneficiary countries of the Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act (CBERA). To eliminate this\ndisadvantage, proposals have been made to extend to imports from Caribbean Basin countries\npreferential treatment equivalent to that accorded imports of identical goods from Mexico. This\nreport compares the provisions of four such proposals: Title I of H.R. 984 , Title I of\n S. 371 , H.R. 1834 , and S. 1389 (including a measure identical\nto S. 1389 , included as Title II in a substitute amendment proposed in the\nSenate to\n H.R. 434 and passed subject to a restrictive amendment). All four would\naccord,\nduring a limited transition period, to imports of certain products (primarily textiles and textile\napparel) from CBERA countries unilateral preferential treatment equivalent to that accorded to\ncomparable imports from Mexico under the NAFTA. This report will be updated as events warrant.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "encoding": null, "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/RS20174", "sha1": "81884ab265356dfb371a28c28ddd2bacef0aa72e", "filename": "files/19991105_RS20174_81884ab265356dfb371a28c28ddd2bacef0aa72e.pdf", "images": null }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/19991105_RS20174_81884ab265356dfb371a28c28ddd2bacef0aa72e.html" } ], "topics": [] } ], "topics": [ "Foreign Affairs", "Industry and Trade" ] }