CRS-美国对古巴农产品贸易的现状与展望（英文）-2021.5正文版.doc

《CRS-美国对古巴农产品贸易的现状与展望（英文）-2021.5正文版.doc》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《CRS-美国对古巴农产品贸易的现状与展望（英文）-2021.5正文版.doc（16页珍藏版）》请在淘文阁 - 分享文档赚钱的网站上搜索。

1、U.S. Agricultural Trade with Cuba:Current Limitations and Future ProspectsMay 14, 2021Congressional Research Servicehttps:/crsreports.congress.govR46791U.S. Agricultural Trade with Cuba:Current Limitations and Future ProspectsSUMMARYR46791May 14, 2021For most of the period since the early 1960s, the

2、 United States has imposed comprehensiveAnita RegmiSpecialist in Agriculturaleconomic sanctions on Cuba, including a trade embargo, in opposition to the countrysPolicyauthoritarian government and poor human rights record. Although Congress authorized U.S.commercial agricultural exports to Cuba in th

3、e Trade Sanctions Reform and Export Enhancement Act of 2000 (TSRA; P.L. 106-387, Title IX), that law also prohibited U.S. government support and private financing for such exports. As a result, U.S. shipments to Cuba have remained low,accounting for a fraction of 1% of U.S. agricultural exports in r

4、ecent years. The United States imports no agricultural products from Cuba.Prior to 1960, Cuba was the ninth-largest export market for U.S. agricultural products. Currently, U.S. agricultural exports to Cuba are minor, with chicken meat accounting for over 90% of the $157 million of shipments in 2020

5、. Many U.S. food and agricultural industry interests believe the Cuban market could offer meaningful export expansion potential for their products if a number of U.S. restrictions on trade with Cuba were removed. Among the measures most often cited as inhibiting exports of U.S. products are a prohib

6、ition on the provision of private financing and credit for exports to Cuba, denial of access to U.S. government credit guarantees and USDA export promotion programs, the ban on general tourism to Cuba, and the general prohibition on U.S. imports of Cuban goods.Two government studies have also conclu

7、ded that U.S. agricultural exports to Cuba could expand markedly if key elements of the embargo against Cuba were removed. In 2015, a U.S. Department of Agriculture study asserted that basic commodities including U.S. rice, wheat, dry beans, and dried milkcould readily gain market share in Cuba unde

8、r more normal trade relations in view of the close proximity of U.S. ports to Cuba compared with export competitors. The study found that higher-value food and agricultural products might also make inroads in Cuba, particularly if Cuba could increase its access to foreign exchange by selling its pro

9、ducts in the United States. Similarly, a 2016 U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC) report on Cuban imports and the effects of U.S. restrictions on U.S. agricultural exports to Cuba, issued at the request of the Senate Finance Committee, concluded that the removal of U.S. restrictions on trade

10、 could result in significant gains for U.S. agricultural exports.While Cuba was once a leading sugar producer and the largest foreign supplier to the U.S. market prior to the embargo, its sugar industry has undergone a decline since the demise of the Soviet Union. Cuba continues to export limited qu

11、antities of sugar and might request access to the lucrative U.S. sugar market if normal trade relations were restored. U.S. sugar imports from Cuba face a variety of inhibitions. Section 620(a)(2) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (P.L. 87-195) denies a quota authorizing the importation of Cuban

12、 sugar into the United States, and Section 902(c) of the Food Security Act of 1985 (P.L.99-198) denies a sugar import quota to Cuba or to other countries that may export Cuba -origin sugar to the United States. If trade is normalized between the United States and Cuba, both countries sugar trade pat

13、terns might shift , even though Cubas total exports and the United States total sugar import volume might change only minimally. Any such opportunity wouldmost likely be the result of a negotiated agreement between the United States and Cuba.One bill pending in the 117th Congress (S. 249) would lift

14、 the trade embargo on Cuba and allow bilateral agricultural trade between the two countries. Another bill (H.R. 1090) would continue existing trade restrictions and impose additional restrictions on software downloaded from Cuba. In the 116th Congress, among other bills that would have maintained tr

15、ade restrictions, two (H.R. 1898 and S. 1447) would have removed prohibitions on financing of agricultural exports to Cuba. Neither bill was enacted.Congressional Research ServiceU.S. Agricultural Trade with Cuba: Current Limitations and Future ProspectsContentsIntroduction1Background on U.S.-Cuba A

16、gricultural Trade1Identified Barriers to Expand Agricultural Exports to Cuba2U.S. Agricultural Exports to Cuba3Assessment of Cuban Market Potential5U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC) Assessment5USDA, Economic Research Service (ERS) Report8Other Studies8Cubas Agricultural Exports9Cuban Sugar

17、 Production and Exports9Legislative Restrictions and Efforts to Ease Them11FiguresFigure 1. U.S. Agricultural Exports to Cuba, 2001-20203Figure 2. Major Cuban Agricultural Import Suppliers in 20204Figure 3. U.S. and Cuban Sugar Production and Trade10TablesTable 1. Major U.S. Agricultural Exports to

18、Cuba5Table 2. Potential Commodity Effects of Removing U.S. Trade Restrictions on Cuba7Table 3. Global Imports of Agricultural Products from Cuba9ContactsAuthor Information12Congressional Research ServiceU.S. Agricultural Trade with Cuba: Current Limitations and Future ProspectsIntroductionPolitical

19、and economic developments in Cuba, a one-party authoritarian state with a poor human rights record, have frequently been the subject of intense congressional concern since the 1959 Cuban revolution.1 For most of the period since the early 1960s, the United States has imposed comprehensive economic s

20、anctions on Cuba, including a trade embargo. Although Congress authorized U.S. commercial agricultural exports to Cuba in the Trade Sanctions Reform and Export Enhancement Act of 2000 (TSRA; P.L. 106-387, Title IX), that law also prohibited U.S. government support and private financing for such expo

21、rts. As a result, U.S. shipments to Cuba have remained low, accounting for a fraction of 1% of U.S. agricultural exports in recent years. The United States imports no agricultural products from Cuba.2Proposed legislation in the 117th Congress (S. 249) would remove the trade embargo and the prohibiti

22、ons in TSRA on using U.S. public or private financing for agricultural exports.3 This report provides background on U.S.-Cuba agricultural trade, describes the current trade relationship, and considers prospects for future trade in agricultural products should the embargo be relaxed or repealed.Back

23、ground on U.S.-Cuba Agricultural TradePrior to the 1959 Cuban revolution, the United States and Cuba conducted a brisk trade in agricultural products. During the three fiscal years immediately before the revolutionFY1956-FY1958Cuba ranked as the ninth-largest market for U.S. agricultural exports and

24、 the second-largest supplier of U.S. agricultural imports. Rice, lard, pork, and wheat flour led the list of U.S. farm exports to Cuba in value terms, with Cuba ranking as the largest foreign market for U.S. long-grain rice. Cane sugar, molasses, tobacco, and coffee topped the list of U.S. agricultu

25、ral imports from Cuba during that period.4In 1962, President John F. Kennedy imposed an embargo on trade with Cuba that was later expanded to prohibit most financial transactions and to freeze Cuban government assets in the United States. With the imposition of sanctions, U.S. agricultural trade wit

26、h Cuba halted. Congress subsequently strengthened sanctions on Cuba with the passage of the Cuban Democracy Act of 1992 (P.L. 102-484) and the Cuban Liberty and Solidarity (LIBERTAD) Act of 1996 (P.L. 104-114).Congress opened the door to U.S. agricultural exports to Cuba in 2000 with the passage of

27、TSRA (P.L. 106-387, Title IX), albeit with restrictions on U.S. government assistance and private financing. Those limitations remained in place until 2014, when the Obama Administration1 For more, see CRS Report R45657, Cuba: U.S. Policy in the 116th Congress and Through the Trump Administration ,

28、by Mark P. Sullivan.2 U.S. Census T rade Data accessed via U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS), May 2021, https:/apps.fas.usda.gov/gats/ExpressQuery1.aspx.3 Another bill (H.R. 1090) would continue existing trade restrictions and impose additional restrictions on

29、 software downloaded from Cuba. A group of 75 Members of Congress have requested that President Biden remove the embargo. See Representative Bobby Rush, “ Rush, Cohen, Lee, Moore, 75 Democratic Colleagues Urge President Biden to Reverse T rump Administrations Cruel Policy T owards Cuba,” press relea

30、se, March 2, 2021, https:/rush.house.gov/ media-center/press-releases/rush-cohen-lee-moore-75-democratic-colleagues-urge-president -biden-to.4 Steven Zahniser et al., U.S.-Cuba Agricultural Trade: Past, Present, and Possible Future, USDA, Economic Research Service (ERS), AES-87, June 2015, https:/ww

31、w.ers.usda.gov/webdocs/outlooks/35794/53141_aes87.pdf?v= 8279.4.Congressional Research Service1U.S. Agricultural Trade with Cuba: Current Limitations and Future Prospectsinitiated a policy of engagement. In 2015 and early 2016, the Administration issued a policy of general approval for exports to Cu

32、ba of certain categories of goods and followed this up in January 2016 by permitting U.S. private export financing of these goods. Agricultural products, however, continue to be excluded from private U.S. financing due to TSRA. In June 2016, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the Cuban Mi

33、nistry of Agriculture signed a memorandum of understanding for cooperation in agriculture and related fields. 5 In January 2017, the two countries signed an agreement to promote technical cooperation in plant- and animal-health-related issues in agriculture, with the aim of preventing the introducti

34、on and spread of plant and animal pests, diseases, and their vectors in the United States and Cuba.6The Trump Administration unveiled a new policy toward Cuba that increased sanctions and rolled back efforts to normalize relations.7 This policy did not affect the agricultural agreements between the

35、two countries signed in 2016 and 2017. In the 2018 farm bill (P.L. 115-334), Congress included provisions that allow USDA export promotion funding for certain activities in Cuba. However, prohibitions against the provision of credit and financing for U.S. exports and against access to U.S. governmen

36、t programs and commercial facilities that would otherwise be available to facilitate U.S. agricultural exports to Cuba remain in place.Identified Barriers to Expand Agricultural Exports to CubaIn April 2015 testimony before the Senate Agriculture Committee, Michael T. Scuse, USDA Under Secretary for

37、 Farm and Foreign Agriculture, identified a number of factors that inhibited the United States from becoming “a major trading partner with Cuba” in agricultural products, considering that Cuba imports around 80% of its food and that U.S. exporters enjoy significant logistical advantages over their m

38、ajor export competitors in Brazil and Europe. These factors included the prohibition on any U.S. government export assistance under TSRA, such as credit guarantees and market promotion programs;8 Cubas limited supply of foreign exchange; and its requirement that all imports from the United States be

39、 funneled through Cubas state trading corporation, Alimporta requirement that is not imposed on all of Cubas trading partners.9Later that same year, USDAs Economic Research Service (ERS) cited restrictions imposed by TSRA on the terms of payments and financing as a “major inhibitor of U.S. agricultu

40、ral exports to Cuba.”10 Under TSRA, payment or financing terms are limited to either cash in advance or financing by third-country financial institutions, with the latter being a more laborious process than making a conventional payment directly from the buyers financial institution in Cuba to the s

41、ellers financial institution in the United States. ERS concluded that the inability to extend credit5 USDA, “ Agriculture Secretary Vilsack Announces Historic Agreements for U.S. -Cuba Agriculture Sectors,” press release, March 21, 2016, https:/www.fas.usda.gov/newsroom/agriculture-secretary-vilsack

42、-announces-historic-agreements-us-cuba-agriculture-sectors.6 FAS, “ U.S.-Cuba Animal and Plant Health Memorandum of Understanding, ” January 19, 2017, https:/www.fas.usda.gov/sites/default/files/2017-02/signed_animal_plant _health_mou_english_spanish_01_ 2017.pdf.7 For more, see CRS Report R45657, C

43、uba: U.S. Policy in the 116th Congress and Through the Trump Administration , by Mark P. Sullivan.8 T he 2018 farm bill (P.L. 115-334) allows USDA export promotion funding for certain activities in Cuba, but restrictions remain on credit guarantees and other financing.9 T estimony of Michael T . Scu

44、se, USDA Under Secretary for Farm and Foreign Agriculture, April 21, 2015, https:/www.fas.usda.gov/newsroom/testimony-agricultural-trade-cuba-under-secretary-michael-scuse-senate-agriculture.10 Steven Zahniser et al., U.S.-Cuba Agricultural Trade: Past, Present, and Possible Future, ERS, AES-87, Jun

45、e 2015, https:/www.ers.usda.gov/webdocs/o utlooks/35794/53141_aes87.pdf?v=8279.4.Congressional Research Service2U.S. Agricultural Trade with Cuba: Current Limitations and Future Prospectsto Cuban buyers placed U.S. agricultural exporters at a competitive disadvantage in relation to other exporting c

46、ountries.In 2016, under the Obama Administration, the Department of the Treasury altered its interpretation of “cash in advance” from requiring cash payment before the shipment of goods from a U.S. port of departure to requiring cash payment before transfer of title. Moreover, U.S. institutions were

47、 allowed to open correspondent accounts at Cuban financial institutions. Additionally, restrictions imposed on travelincluding eliminating people-to-people educational travel, limiting direct air travel between the United States and Cuba, prohibiting cruise ship travel, and prohibiting U.S. traveler

48、s from staying at over 400 hotels and private residences for renttargeted Cubas revenue from foreign tourists, affecting a source of foreign exchange that Cuba could otherwise use to purchase imports.11U.S. Agricultural Exports to CubaFollowing the imposition of the U.S. embargo on trade with Cuba in 1