Like Causes?

Install the App
TRY NOW

senate Bill S. 819

Reauthorizing and Reforming the Export-Import Bank

Argument in favor

These reforms will help ensure that the Export-Import Bank is a trustworthy steward of taxpayer dollars, while allowing it to continue helping American businesses sustain jobs and compete in the global economy.

Elizabeth's Opinion
···
07/18/2015
Small businesses, like NC's own Miss Jenny's Pickles rely on the Ex-Im bank to help expand their markets overseas.
Like (5)
Follow
Share
Christopher's Opinion
···
09/07/2015
Many other countries in the world have their own export-import bank to promote their business interests around the world. The idea that we would close our own ex-im bank in a time of heightened global competition is ludicrous!
Like (3)
Follow
Share
JonRunyan's Opinion
···
09/28/2015
Everyone forgets about but the little guy who will struggle with out this!
Like (2)
Follow
Share

Argument opposed

The Export-Import Bank is nothing more than taxpayer-backed corporate welfare. Export subsidies -- like those provided by the Ex-Im Bank -- don’t create jobs, and primarily help large, well-connected businesses.

John's Opinion
···
09/03/2015
NO NO NO. there is absolutely no reason the American tax payer should be put on the hook for loans to corporations when there is plenty of credit available in the marketplace. This is nothing more than crony capitalism and it needs to die. Permanently!
Like (10)
Follow
Share
operaman's Opinion
···
09/02/2015
Do away with taxpayers "free" money going to foreign business for U.S. Products. No IM-EX bank
Like (7)
Follow
Share
GrumpyMSgt's Opinion
···
09/03/2015
No! let corporations secure loans from commercial banks not the government.
Like (4)
Follow
Share

What is Senate Bill S. 819?

This bill would reauthorize the Export-Import Bank through September 2019, and reforms both its management hierarchy and the policies that it operates under.


A Risk Management Committee would be established, and a Chief Risk Officer position would be created -- both of which would provide oversight of the Bank’s operations. Also, a Chief Ethics Officer would oversee ethics practices among Bank employees.

The Bank’s lending cap would be reduced from $140 billion to $135 billion, and the minimum share of small business-related activity would rise from 20 percent to 25 percent. There would be independent audits of the Bank’s portfolio, and the Bank would be required to increases its reserves held for losses.

Any profits generated by the bank’s lending activities would be returned to the Department of the Treasury to be used in deficit reduction.

Officials at the Ex-Im Bank would be prohibited from discriminating against any energy source in the course of their work -- including coal. This provision negates existing policies that had been adopted to prevent the financing of overseas power plants that don’t adopt greener technologies.

The Treasury Secretary and the President would be directed to enter into international negotiations to eliminate export credit financing within 10 years of this bill’s enactment.

Impact

Businesses utilizing the Export-Import Bank, the Export-Import Bank, the Department of the Treasury, Congress, and the Secretary of the Treasury.

Cost of Senate Bill S. 819

A CBO cost estimate is unavailable.

More Information

In-Depth: This bill was introduced with bipartisan support from four Democratic and four Republican Senators. Sen. Mark Kirk (R-IL), the lead sponsor, praised the inclusion of “over a dozen reforms” that brought the coalition together. Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV) cited the Bank’s facilitation of $37.4 billion in exports in 2014, while Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) pointed out that “China’s export credit agencies financed more last year than the United States, Germany, Canada, and the United Kingdom combined.”

The Export-Import Bank (or Ex-Im Bank) has been criticized as corporate welfare because several of of the companies that benefit the most from its existence are among the largest corporations in the U.S. About 40 percent of the Ex-Im Bank’s 2014 authorizations benefited Boeing alone, and nearly two-thirds of the Bank’s 2013 money went to 10 U.S. companies that include General Electric, Caterpillar, and Ford along with Boeing. Of the $2.3 trillion that the U.S. exported in 2013, the Ex-Im Bank only approved $27.3 billion of loan guarantees for those which amounts to about 1.2 percent of the value of that year’s exports.

Proponents of the Ex-Im Bank point out that nearly 90 percent of the Bank’s total transactions involved small businesses, and in 2014 those transactions were valued at about $5 billion, making up around 20 percent of the total value of the Bank’s activity that year. It has also been noted by the Bank’s supporters that these activities supported over 160,000 U.S. jobs in 2014.


Of Note: The Export-Import Bank was reauthorized in September 2014 for nine months, meaning that it is due to expire on June 30, 2015. In addition to doubts about the Ex-Im Bank’s benefits, it has been maligned for its cost -- its price tag was estimated at $2 billion between 2015 and 2024 by the Congressional Budget Office.

Doubts about the long-term survival of the Ex-Im Bank date back at least as far as December 2011, when the White House drafted a contingency plan to be put into place if Congress failed to authorize the Bank’s appropriations during that budget cycle.


Media:

Summary by Eric Revell
(Photo Credit: Flickr user Derell Licht)

AKA

Export-Import Bank Reform and Reauthorization Act of 2015

Official Title

A bill to reauthorize and reform the Export-Import Bank of the United States, and for other purposes.

bill Progress


  • Not enacted
    The President has not signed this bill
  • The house has not voted
  • The senate has not voted
      senate Committees
      Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs
    IntroducedMarch 19th, 2015
    Small businesses, like NC's own Miss Jenny's Pickles rely on the Ex-Im bank to help expand their markets overseas.
    Like (5)
    Follow
    Share
    NO NO NO. there is absolutely no reason the American tax payer should be put on the hook for loans to corporations when there is plenty of credit available in the marketplace. This is nothing more than crony capitalism and it needs to die. Permanently!
    Like (10)
    Follow
    Share
    Do away with taxpayers "free" money going to foreign business for U.S. Products. No IM-EX bank
    Like (7)
    Follow
    Share
    No! let corporations secure loans from commercial banks not the government.
    Like (4)
    Follow
    Share
    Many other countries in the world have their own export-import bank to promote their business interests around the world. The idea that we would close our own ex-im bank in a time of heightened global competition is ludicrous!
    Like (3)
    Follow
    Share
    Everyone forgets about but the little guy who will struggle with out this!
    Like (2)
    Follow
    Share
    They cost 1% the federal budget and subsidize 2% of our exports (which make up about 12% of GDP.) So they don't actually help that much (unless you're Boeing or GE or Caterpillar, who make up half of their business.)
    Like (2)
    Follow
    Share
    The Ex-Im bank is not a monster as it is portrayed among conservatives or in the media. It has helped U.S. business. At a time when the economy is still fragile from the last genius conservative idea, let's not hurt the economy any more than it has been by following Ronald Reagan & George W. into disaster!
    Like (2)
    Follow
    Share
    We have to cut corporate tax breaks and incentives. The US debt needs to be brought under control. This can only be done be everybody paying their fair share. Stop the tax payer funding of government handouts.
    Like (1)
    Follow
    Share
    Reform is the most important part of this bill. This will open up resources to small businesses that were only available to large corporations previously. If the reform doesn't work this also gives the option to get rid of this down the road.
    Like (1)
    Follow
    Share
    Am tried of a certain few with all the benefits!
    Like (1)
    Follow
    Share
    I have no problem with the U.S. exporting some goods that don't cause Americans to have to pay more for them. I do, however, object that we import products manufactured in countries so that companies don
    Like (1)
    Follow
    Share
    This is a program that works and provides US jobs for export markets. It also provides financing to poorer countries which is good for them and for US foreign relations.
    Like (1)
    Follow
    Share
    I read through the comments and it's always about how the wealthy and 1 percenters are benefitting. Yes, that may be true, but it is also good for the "working/little man" which is a group I am also part. It is creating jobs. So, if the 1 percenters are doing well and creating jobs for all of us, why do we continue to discuss cutting off our nose despite our face? If the 1 percenters figured out how to get to the top through free market enterprise, hedging to reduce risk in the market, which creates jobs for the rest of us, the only reason I can see that people have for this silly argument is as simple as jealousy of their hard work or good fortune. Stop being childish and grow up.
    Like (1)
    Follow
    Share
    It is a significant job maker and a positive impact on balance of trade. Don't screw this up!
    Like (1)
    Follow
    Share
    No, the gov't should not be in that business
    Like
    Follow
    Share
    I have reservations about money going to BIG Businesses from this set up. The money should go to a FUND, not a deficit pay down, which is the problem. We should not have a GENERAL fund, have the parts of government have a source of money (TAXES) or illuminate them.
    Like
    Follow
    Share
    Tax payers can't continue supporting corporations.
    Like
    Follow
    Share
    No, it needs to dissolved and break up all the rats and crooks
    Like
    Follow
    Share
    I like the original idea behind this bank. Unfortunately, it has become welfare for mainly large corporations that don't need it. And this bill takes out the restriction against funding coal plants. That's a double no for me.
    Like
    Follow
    Share
    MORE