In the Senate of the United States, 
May 22, 2015. 
Resolved, That the bill from the House of Representa-
tives (H.R. 1314) entitled ‘‘An Act to amend the Internal 
Revenue Code of 1986 to provide for a right to an adminis-
trative appeal relating to adverse determinations of tax-ex-
empt status of certain organizations.’’, do pass with the fol-
lowing 
AMENDMENT: 
Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the 
following: 
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS. 
(a) SHORT TITLE.—This Act may be cited as the 
‘‘Trade Act of 2015’’. 
(b) TABLE OF CONTENTS.—The table of contents for 
this Act is as follows: 
Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents. 
TITLE I—TRADE PROMOTION AUTHORITY 
Sec. 101. Short title. 
Sec. 102. Trade negotiating objectives. 
Sec. 103. Trade agreements authority. 
Sec. 104. Congressional oversight, consultations, and access to information.
† HR 1314 EAS 
Sec. 105. Notice, consultations, and reports. 
Sec. 106. Implementation of trade agreements. 
Sec. 107. Treatment of certain trade agreements for which negotiations have al-
ready begun. 
Sec. 108. Sovereignty. 
Sec. 109. Interests of small businesses. 
Sec. 110. Conforming amendments; application of certain provisions. 
Sec. 111. Definitions. 
TITLE II—EXTENSION OF TRADE ADJUSTMENT ASSISTANCE 
Sec. 201. Short title. 
Sec. 202. Application of provisions relating to trade adjustment assistance. 
Sec. 203. Extension of trade adjustment assistance program. 
Sec. 204. Performance measurement and reporting. 
Sec. 205. Applicability of trade adjustment assistance provisions. 
Sec. 206. Sunset provisions. 
Sec. 207. Extension and modification of Health Coverage Tax Credit. 
Sec. 208. Customs user fees. 
Sec. 209. Child tax credit not refundable for taxpayers electing to exclude foreign 
earned income from tax. 
Sec. 210. Time for payment of corporate estimated taxes. 
Sec. 211. Coverage and payment for renal dialysis services for individuals with 
acute kidney injury. 
Sec. 212. Modification of the Medicare sequester for fiscal year 2024. 
TITLE I—TRADE PROMOTION 
AUTHORITY 
SEC. 101. SHORT TITLE. 
This title may be cited as the ‘‘Bipartisan Congres-
sional Trade Priorities and Accountability Act of 2015’’. 
SEC. 102. TRADE NEGOTIATING OBJECTIVES. 
(a) OVERALL TRADE NEGOTIATING OBJECTIVES.—The 
overall trade negotiating objectives of the United States for 
agreements subject to the provisions of section 103 are— 
(1) to obtain more open, equitable, and recip-
rocal market access; 
(2) to obtain the reduction or elimination of bar-
riers and distortions that are directly related to trade 
and investment and that decrease market opportuni-
† HR 1314 EAS 
ties for United States exports or otherwise distort 
United States trade; 
(3) to further strengthen the system of inter-
national trade and investment disciplines and proce-
dures, including dispute settlement; 
(4) to foster economic growth, raise living stand-
ards, enhance the competitiveness of the United 
States, promote full employment in the United States, 
and enhance the global economy; 
(5) to ensure that trade and environmental poli-
cies are mutually supportive and to seek to protect 
and preserve the environment and enhance the inter-
national means of doing so, while optimizing the use 
of the world’s resources; 
(6) to promote respect for worker rights and the 
rights of children consistent with core labor standards 
of the ILO (as set out in section 111(7)) and an un-
derstanding of the relationship between trade and 
worker rights; 
(7) to seek provisions in trade agreements under 
which parties to those agreements ensure that they do 
not weaken or reduce the protections afforded in do-
mestic environmental and labor laws as an encour-
agement for trade;
† HR 1314 EAS 
(8) to ensure that trade agreements afford small 
businesses equal access to international markets, equi-
table trade benefits, and expanded export market op-
portunities, and provide for the reduction or elimi-
nation of trade and investment barriers that dis-
proportionately impact small businesses; 
(9) to promote universal ratification and full 
compliance with ILO Convention No. 182 Concerning 
the Prohibition and Immediate Action for the Elimi-
nation of the Worst Forms of Child Labor; 
(10) to ensure that trade agreements reflect and 
facilitate the increasingly interrelated, multi-sectoral 
nature of trade and investment activity; 
(11) to recognize the growing significance of the 
Internet as a trading platform in international com-
merce; 
(12) to take into account other legitimate United 
States domestic objectives, including, but not limited 
to, the protection of legitimate health or safety, essen-
tial security, and consumer interests and the law and 
regulations related thereto; and 
(13) to take into account conditions relating to 
religious freedom of any party to negotiations for a 
trade agreement with the United States. 
(b) PRINCIPAL TRADE NEGOTIATING OBJECTIVES.—
† HR 1314 EAS 
(1) TRADE
IN
GOODS.—The principal negoti-
ating objectives of the United States regarding trade 
in goods are— 
(A) to expand competitive market opportu-
nities for exports of goods from the United States 
and to obtain fairer and more open conditions of 
trade, including through the utilization of global 
value chains, by reducing or eliminating tariff 
and nontariff barriers and policies and practices 
of foreign governments directly related to trade 
that decrease market opportunities for United 
States exports or otherwise distort United States 
trade; and 
(B) to obtain reciprocal tariff and nontariff 
barrier elimination agreements, including with 
respect to those tariff categories covered in sec-
tion 111(b) of the Uruguay Round Agreements 
Act (19 U.S.C. 3521(b)). 
(2) TRADE IN SERVICES.—(A) The principal ne-
gotiating objective of the United States regarding 
trade in services is to expand competitive market op-
portunities for United States services and to obtain 
fairer and more open conditions of trade, including 
through utilization of global value chains, by reducing 
or eliminating barriers to international trade in serv-
† HR 1314 EAS 
ices, such as regulatory and other barriers that deny 
national treatment and market access or unreason-
ably restrict the establishment or operations of service 
suppliers. 
(B) Recognizing that expansion of trade in serv-
ices generates benefits for all sectors of the economy 
and facilitates trade, the objective described in sub-
paragraph (A) should be pursued through all means, 
including through a plurilateral agreement with those 
countries willing and able to undertake high standard 
services commitments for both existing and new serv-
ices. 
(3) TRADE IN AGRICULTURE.—The principal ne-
gotiating objective of the United States with respect to 
agriculture is to obtain competitive opportunities for 
United States exports of agricultural commodities in 
foreign markets substantially equivalent to the com-
petitive opportunities afforded foreign exports in 
United States markets and to achieve fairer and more 
open conditions of trade in bulk, specialty crop, and 
value added commodities by— 
(A) securing more open and equitable mar-
ket access through robust rules on sanitary and 
phytosanitary measures that—
† HR 1314 EAS 
(i) encourage the adoption of inter-
national standards and require a science- 
based justification be provided for a sani-
tary or phytosanitary measure if the meas-
ure is more restrictive than the applicable 
international standard; 
(ii) improve regulatory coherence, pro-
mote the use of systems-based approaches, 
and appropriately recognize the equivalence 
of health and safety protection systems of 
exporting countries; 
(iii) require that measures are trans-
parently developed and implemented, are 
based on risk assessments that take into ac-
count relevant international guidelines and 
scientific data, and are not more restrictive 
on trade than necessary to meet the in-
tended purpose; and 
(iv) improve import check processes, 
including testing methodologies and proce-
dures, and certification requirements, 
while recognizing that countries may put in 
place measures to protect human, animal, or 
plant life or health in a manner consistent with 
their international obligations, including the
† HR 1314 EAS 
WTO Agreement on the Application of Sanitary 
and Phytosanitary Measures (referred to in sec-
tion 101(d)(3) of the Uruguay Round Agree-
ments Act (19 U.S.C. 3511(d)(3))); 
(B) reducing or eliminating, by a date cer-
tain, tariffs or other charges that decrease mar-
ket opportunities for United States exports— 
(i) giving priority to those products 
that are subject to significantly higher tar-
iffs or subsidy regimes of major producing 
countries; and 
(ii) providing reasonable adjustment 
periods for United States import sensitive 
products, in close consultation with Con-
gress on such products before initiating tar-
iff reduction negotiations; 
(C) reducing tariffs to levels that are the 
same as or lower than those in the United States; 
(D) reducing or eliminating subsidies that 
decrease market opportunities for United States 
exports or unfairly distort agriculture markets to 
the detriment of the United States; 
(E) allowing the preservation of programs 
that support family farms and rural commu-
nities but do not distort trade;
† HR 1314 EAS 
(F) developing disciplines for domestic sup-
port programs, so that production that is in ex-
cess of domestic food security needs is sold at 
world prices; 
(G) eliminating government policies that 
create price depressing surpluses; 
(H) eliminating state trading enterprises 
whenever possible; 
(I) developing, strengthening, and clarifying 
rules to eliminate practices that unfairly de-
crease United States market access opportunities 
or distort agricultural markets to the detriment 
of the United States, and ensuring that such 
rules are subject to efficient, timely, and effective 
dispute settlement, including— 
(i) unfair or trade distorting activities 
of state trading enterprises and other ad-
ministrative mechanisms, with emphasis on 
requiring price transparency in the oper-
ation of state trading enterprises and such 
other mechanisms in order to end cross sub-
sidization, price discrimination, and price 
undercutting; 
(ii) unjustified trade restrictions or 
commercial requirements, such as labeling,
† HR 1314 EAS 
that affect new technologies, including bio-
technology; 
(iii) 
unjustified 
sanitary 
or 
phytosanitary restrictions, including re-
strictions not based on scientific principles 
in contravention of obligations in the Uru-
guay Round Agreements or bilateral or re-
gional trade agreements; 
(iv) other unjustified technical barriers 
to trade; and 
(v) restrictive rules in the administra-
tion of tariff rate quotas; 
(J) eliminating practices that adversely af-
fect trade in perishable or cyclical products, 
while improving import relief mechanisms to 
recognize the unique characteristics of perishable 
and cyclical agriculture; 
(K) ensuring that import relief mechanisms 
for perishable and cyclical agriculture are as ac-
cessible and timely to growers in the United 
States as those mechanisms that are used by 
other countries; 
(L) taking into account whether a party to 
the negotiations has failed to adhere to the provi-
sions of already existing trade agreements with
† HR 1314 EAS 
the United States or has circumvented obliga-
tions under those agreements; 
(M) taking into account whether a product 
is subject to market distortions by reason of a 
failure of a major producing country to adhere 
to the provisions of already existing trade agree-
ments with the United States or by the cir-
cumvention by that country of its obligations 
under those agreements; 
(N) otherwise ensuring that countries that 
accede to the World Trade Organization have 
made meaningful market liberalization commit-
ments in agriculture; 
(O) taking into account the impact that 
agreements covering agriculture to which the 
United States is a party have on the United 
States agricultural industry; 
(P) maintaining bona fide food assistance 
programs, market development programs, and 
export credit programs; 
(Q) seeking to secure the broadest market 
access possible in multilateral, regional, and bi-
lateral negotiations, recognizing the effect that si-
multaneous sets of negotiations may have on
† HR 1314 EAS 
United States import sensitive commodities (in-
cluding those subject to tariff rate quotas); 
(R) seeking to develop an international con-
sensus on the treatment of seasonal or perishable 
agricultural products in investigations relating 
to dumping and safeguards and in any other rel-
evant area; 
(S) seeking to establish the common base 
year for calculating the Aggregated Measurement 
of Support (as defined in the Agreement on Agri-
culture) as the end of each country’s Uruguay 
Round implementation period, as reported in 
each country’s Uruguay Round market access 
schedule; 
(T) ensuring transparency in the adminis-
tration of tariff rate quotas through multilateral, 
plurilateral, and bilateral negotiations; and 
(U) eliminating and preventing the under-
mining of market access for United States prod-
ucts through improper use of a country’s system 
for protecting or recognizing geographical indi-
cations, including failing to ensure transparency 
and procedural fairness and protecting generic 
terms.
† HR 1314 EAS 
(4) FOREIGN
INVESTMENT.—Recognizing that 
United States law on the whole provides a high level 
of protection for investment, consistent with or great-
er than the level required by international law, the 
principal negotiating objectives of the United States 
regarding foreign investment are to reduce or elimi-
nate artificial or trade distorting barriers to foreign 
investment, while ensuring that foreign investors in 
the United States are not accorded greater substantive 
rights with respect to investment protections than 
United States investors in the United States, and to 
secure for investors important rights comparable to 
those that would be available under United States 
legal principles and practice, by— 
(A) reducing or eliminating exceptions to 
the principle of national treatment; 
(B) freeing the transfer of funds relating to 
investments; 
(C) reducing or eliminating performance re-
quirements, forced technology transfers, and 
other unreasonable barriers to the establishment 
and operation of investments; 
(D) seeking to establish standards for expro-
priation and compensation for expropriation,
† HR 1314 EAS 
consistent with United States legal principles 
and practice; 
(E) seeking to establish standards for fair 
and equitable treatment, consistent with United 
States legal principles and practice, including 
the principle of due process; 
(F) providing meaningful procedures for re-
solving investment disputes; 
(G) seeking to improve mechanisms used to 
resolve disputes between an investor and a gov-
ernment through— 
(i) mechanisms to eliminate frivolous 
claims and to deter the filing of frivolous 
claims; 
(ii) procedures to ensure the efficient 
selection of arbitrators and the expeditious 
disposition of claims; 
(iii) procedures to enhance opportuni-
ties for public input into the formulation of 
government positions; and 
(iv) providing for an appellate body or 
similar mechanism to provide coherence to 
the interpretations of investment provisions 
in trade agreements; and
† HR 1314 EAS 
(H) ensuring the fullest measure of trans-
parency in the dispute settlement mechanism, to 
the extent consistent with the need to protect in-
formation that is classified or business confiden-
tial, by— 
(i) ensuring that all requests for dis-
pute settlement are promptly made public; 
(ii) ensuring that— 
(I) all proceedings, submissions, 
findings, and decisions are promptly 
made public; and 
(II) all hearings are open to the 
public; and 
(iii) establishing a mechanism for ac-
ceptance of amicus curiae submissions from 
businesses, unions, and nongovernmental or-
ganizations. 
(5) INTELLECTUAL
PROPERTY.—The principal 
negotiating objectives of the United States regarding 
trade-related intellectual property are— 
(A) to further promote adequate and effec-
tive protection of intellectual property rights, in-
cluding through— 
(i)(I) ensuring accelerated and full im-
plementation of the Agreement on Trade-Re-
† HR 1314 EAS 
lated Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights 
referred to in section 101(d)(15) of the Uru-
guay Round Agreements Act (19 U.S.C. 
3511(d)(15)), particularly with respect to 
meeting enforcement obligations under that 
agreement; and 
(II) ensuring that the provisions of 
any trade agreement governing intellectual 
property rights that is entered into by the 
United States reflect a standard of protec-
tion similar to that found in United States 
law; 
(ii) providing strong protection for 
new and emerging technologies and new 
methods of transmitting and distributing 
products embodying intellectual property, 
including in a manner that facilitates le-
gitimate digital trade; 
(iii) preventing or eliminating dis-
crimination with respect to matters affect-
ing the availability, acquisition, scope, 
maintenance, use, and enforcement of intel-
lectual property rights; 
(iv) ensuring that standards of protec-
tion and enforcement keep pace with techno-
† HR 1314 EAS 
logical developments, and in particular en-
suring that rightholders have the legal and 
technological means to control the use of 
their works through the Internet and other 
global communication media, and to pre-
vent the unauthorized use of their works; 
(v) providing strong enforcement of in-
tellectual property rights, including through 
accessible, expeditious, and effective civil, 
administrative, and criminal enforcement 
mechanisms; and 
(vi) preventing or eliminating govern-
ment involvement in the violation of intel-
lectual property rights, including cyber theft 
and piracy; 
(B) to secure fair, equitable, and non-
discriminatory market access opportunities for 
United States persons that rely upon intellectual 
property protection; and 
(C) to respect the Declaration on the TRIPS 
Agreement and Public Health, adopted by the 
World Trade Organization at the Fourth Min-
isterial Conference at Doha, Qatar on November 
14, 2001, and to ensure that trade agreements
† HR 1314 EAS 
foster innovation and promote access to medi-
cines. 
(6) DIGITAL
TRADE
IN
GOODS
AND
SERVICES 
AND CROSS-BORDER DATA FLOWS.—The principal ne-
gotiating objectives of the United States with respect 
to digital trade in goods and services, as well as 
cross-border data flows, are— 
(A) to ensure that current obligations, rules, 
disciplines, and commitments under the World 
Trade Organization and bilateral and regional 
trade agreements apply to digital trade in goods 
and services and to cross-border data flows; 
(B) to ensure that— 
(i) electronically delivered goods and 
services receive no less favorable treatment 
under trade rules and commitments than 
like products delivered in physical form; 
and 
(ii) the classification of such goods and 
services ensures the most liberal trade treat-
ment possible, fully encompassing both ex-
isting and new trade; 
(C) to ensure that governments refrain from 
implementing trade-related measures that im-
pede digital trade in goods and services, restrict
† HR 1314 EAS 
cross-border data flows, or require local storage 
or processing of data; 
(D) with respect to subparagraphs (A) 
through (C), where legitimate policy objectives 
require domestic regulations that affect digital 
trade in goods and services or cross-border data 
flows, to obtain commitments that any such reg-
ulations are the least restrictive on trade, non-
discriminatory, and transparent, and promote 
an open market environment; and 
(E) to extend the moratorium of the World 
Trade Organization on duties on electronic 
transmissions. 
(7) REGULATORY PRACTICES.—The principal ne-
gotiating objectives of the United States regarding the 
use of government regulation or other practices to re-
duce market access for United States goods, services, 
and investments are— 
(A) to achieve increased transparency and 
opportunity for the participation of affected par-
ties in the development of regulations; 
(B) to require that proposed regulations be 
based on sound science, cost benefit analysis, risk 
assessment, or other objective evidence;
† HR 1314 EAS 
(C) to establish consultative mechanisms 
and seek other commitments, as appropriate, to 
improve regulatory practices and promote in-
creased 
regulatory 
coherence, 
including 
through— 
(i) transparency in developing guide-
lines, rules, regulations, and laws for gov-
ernment procurement and other regulatory 
regimes; 
(ii) the elimination of redundancies in 
testing and certification; 
(iii) early consultations on significant 
regulations; 
(iv) the use of impact assessments; 
(v) the periodic review of existing regu-
latory measures; and 
(vi) the application of good regulatory 
practices; 
(D) to seek greater openness, transparency, 
and convergence of standards development proc-
esses, and enhance cooperation on standards 
issues globally; 
(E) to promote regulatory compatibility 
through harmonization, equivalence, or mutual 
recognition of different regulations and stand-
† HR 1314 EAS 
ards and to encourage the use of international 
and interoperable standards, as appropriate; 
(F) to achieve the elimination of govern-
ment measures such as price controls and ref-
erence pricing which deny full market access for 
United States products; 
(G) to ensure that government regulatory 
reimbursement regimes are transparent, provide 
procedural fairness, are nondiscriminatory, and 
provide full market access for United States 
products; and 
(H) to ensure that foreign governments— 
(i) demonstrate that the collection of 
undisclosed proprietary information is lim-
ited to that necessary to satisfy a legitimate 
and justifiable regulatory interest; and 
(ii) protect such information against 
disclosure, 
except 
in 
exceptional 
cir-
cumstances to protect the public, or where 
such information is effectively protected 
against unfair competition. 
(8) STATE-OWNED AND STATE-CONTROLLED EN-
TERPRISES.—The principal negotiating objective of 
the United States regarding competition by state-
† HR 1314 EAS 
owned and state-controlled enterprises is to seek com-
mitments that— 
(A) eliminate or prevent trade distortions 
and unfair competition favoring state-owned and 
state-controlled enterprises to the extent of their 
engagement in commercial activity, and 
(B) ensure that such engagement is based 
solely on commercial considerations, 
in particular through disciplines that eliminate or 
prevent discrimination and market-distorting sub-
sidies and that promote transparency. 
(9) LOCALIZATION
BARRIERS
TO
TRADE.—The 
principal negotiating objective of the United States 
with respect to localization barriers is to eliminate 
and prevent measures that require United States pro-
ducers and service providers to locate facilities, intel-
lectual property, or other assets in a country as a 
market access or investment condition, including in-
digenous innovation measures. 
(10) LABOR AND THE ENVIRONMENT.—The prin-
cipal negotiating objectives of the United States with 
respect to labor and the environment are— 
(A) to ensure that a party to a trade agree-
ment with the United States—
† HR 1314 EAS 
(i) adopts and maintains measures im-
plementing internationally recognized core 
labor standards (as defined in section 
111(17)) and its obligations under common 
multilateral environmental agreements (as 
defined in section 111(6)), 
(ii) does not waive or otherwise dero-
gate from, or offer to waive or otherwise 
derogate from— 
(I) its statutes or regulations im-
plementing internationally recognized 
core labor standards (as defined in sec-
tion 111(17)), in a manner affecting 
trade or investment between the United 
States and that party, where the waiv-
er or derogation would be inconsistent 
with one or more such standards, or 
(II) its environmental laws in a 
manner that weakens or reduces the 
protections afforded in those laws and 
in a manner affecting trade or invest-
ment between the United States and 
that party, except as provided in its 
law and provided not inconsistent with 
its obligations under common multilat-
† HR 1314 EAS 
eral environmental agreements (as de-
fined in section 111(6)) or other provi-
sions of the trade agreement specifi-
cally agreed upon, and 
(iii) does not fail to effectively enforce 
its environmental or labor laws, through a 
sustained or recurring course of action or 
inaction, 
in a manner affecting trade or investment be-
tween the United States and that party after 
entry into force of a trade agreement between 
those countries; 
(B) to recognize that— 
(i) with respect to environment, parties 
to a trade agreement retain the right to ex-
ercise prosecutorial discretion and to make 
decisions regarding the allocation of enforce-
ment resources with respect to other envi-
ronmental laws determined to have higher 
priorities, and a party is effectively enforc-
ing its laws if a course of action or inaction 
reflects a reasonable, bona fide exercise of 
such discretion, or results from a reason-
able, bona fide decision regarding the allo-
cation of resources; and
† HR 1314 EAS 
(ii) with respect to labor, decisions re-
garding the distribution of enforcement re-
sources are not a reason for not complying 
with a party’s labor obligations; a party to 
a trade agreement retains the right to rea-
sonable exercise of discretion and to make 
bona fide decisions regarding the allocation 
of resources between labor enforcement ac-
tivities among core labor standards, pro-
vided the exercise of such discretion and 
such decisions are not inconsistent with its 
obligations; 
(C) to strengthen the capacity of United 
States trading partners to promote respect for 
core labor standards (as defined in section 
111(7)); 
(D) to strengthen the capacity of United 
States trading partners to protect the environ-
ment through the promotion of sustainable devel-
opment; 
(E) to reduce or eliminate government prac-
tices or policies that unduly threaten sustainable 
development; 
(F) to seek market access, through the elimi-
nation of tariffs and nontariff barriers, for
† HR 1314 EAS 
United States environmental technologies, goods, 
and services; 
(G) to ensure that labor, environmental, 
health, or safety policies and practices of the 
parties to trade agreements with the United 
States do not arbitrarily or unjustifiably dis-
criminate against United States exports or serve 
as disguised barriers to trade; 
(H) to ensure that enforceable labor and en-
vironment obligations are subject to the same 
dispute settlement and remedies as other enforce-
able obligations under the agreement; and 
(I) to ensure that a trade agreement is not 
construed to empower a party’s authorities to 
undertake labor or environmental law enforce-
ment activities in the territory of the United 
States. 
(11) CURRENCY.—The principal negotiating ob-
jective of the United States with respect to currency 
practices is that parties to a trade agreement with the 
United States avoid manipulating exchange rates in 
order to prevent effective balance of payments adjust-
ment or to gain an unfair competitive advantage over 
other parties to the agreement, such as through coop-
† HR 1314 EAS 
erative mechanisms, enforceable rules, reporting, mon-
itoring, transparency, or other means, as appropriate. 
(12) FOREIGN CURRENCY MANIPULATION.—The 
principal negotiating objective of the United States 
with respect to unfair currency practices is to seek to 
establish accountability through enforceable rules, 
transparency, 
reporting, 
monitoring, 
cooperative 
mechanisms, or other means to address exchange rate 
manipulation involving protracted large scale inter-
vention in one direction in the exchange markets and 
a persistently undervalued foreign exchange rate to 
gain an unfair competitive advantage in trade over 
other parties to a trade agreement, consistent with ex-
isting obligations of the United States as a member 
of the International Monetary Fund and the World 
Trade Organization. 
(13) WTO AND MULTILATERAL TRADE AGREE-
MENTS.—Recognizing that the World Trade Organi-
zation is the foundation of the global trading system, 
the principal negotiating objectives of the United 
States regarding the World Trade Organization, the 
Uruguay Round Agreements, and other multilateral 
and plurilateral trade agreements are— 
(A) to achieve full implementation and ex-
tend the coverage of the World Trade Organiza-
† HR 1314 EAS 
tion and multilateral and plurilateral agree-
ments to products, sectors, and conditions of 
trade not adequately covered; 
(B) to expand country participation in and 
enhancement of the Information Technology 
Agreement, the Government Procurement Agree-
ment, and other plurilateral trade agreements of 
the World Trade Organization; 
(C) to expand competitive market opportu-
nities for United States exports and to obtain 
fairer and more open conditions of trade, includ-
ing through utilization of global value chains, 
through the negotiation of new WTO multilateral 
and plurilateral trade agreements, such as an 
agreement on trade facilitation; 
(D) to ensure that regional trade agree-
ments to which the United States is not a party 
fully achieve the high standards of, and comply 
with, WTO disciplines, including Article XXIV 
of GATT 1994, Article V and V bis of the Gen-
eral Agreement on Trade in Services, and the 
Enabling Clause, including through meaningful 
WTO review of such regional trade agreements; 
(E) to enhance compliance by WTO mem-
bers with their obligations as WTO members
† HR 1314 EAS 
through active participation in the bodies of the 
World Trade Organization by the United States 
and all other WTO members, including in the 
trade policy review mechanism and the com-
mittee system of the World Trade Organization, 
and by working to increase the effectiveness of 
such bodies; and 
(F) to encourage greater cooperation be-
tween the World Trade Organization and other 
international organizations. 
(14) TRADE INSTITUTION TRANSPARENCY.—The 
principal negotiating objective of the United States 
with respect to transparency is to obtain wider and 
broader application of the principle of transparency 
in the World Trade Organization, entities established 
under bilateral and regional trade agreements, and 
other international trade fora through seeking— 
(A) timely public access to information re-
garding trade issues and the activities of such 
institutions; 
(B) openness by ensuring public access to 
appropriate meetings, proceedings, and submis-
sions, including with regard to trade and invest-
ment dispute settlement; and
† HR 1314 EAS 
(C) public access to all notifications and 
supporting documentation submitted by WTO 
members. 
(15) ANTI-CORRUPTION.—The principal negoti-
ating objectives of the United States with respect to 
the use of money or other things of value to influence 
acts, decisions, or omissions of foreign governments or 
officials or to secure any improper advantage in a 
manner affecting trade are— 
(A) to obtain high standards and effective 
domestic enforcement mechanisms applicable to 
persons from all countries participating in the 
applicable trade agreement that prohibit such at-
tempts to influence acts, decisions, or omissions 
of foreign governments or officials or to secure 
any such improper advantage; 
(B) to ensure that such standards level the 
playing field for United States persons in inter-
national trade and investment; and 
(C) to seek commitments to work jointly to 
encourage and support anti-corruption and anti- 
bribery initiatives in international trade fora, 
including through the Convention on Combating 
Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in Inter-
national Business Transactions of the Organiza-
† HR 1314 EAS 
tion for Economic Cooperation and Development, 
done at Paris December 17, 1997 (commonly 
known as the ‘‘OECD Anti-Bribery Conven-
tion’’). 
(16) DISPUTE
SETTLEMENT
AND
ENFORCE-
MENT.—The principal negotiating objectives of the 
United States with respect to dispute settlement and 
enforcement of trade agreements are— 
(A) to seek provisions in trade agreements 
providing for resolution of disputes between gov-
ernments under those trade agreements in an ef-
fective, timely, transparent, equitable, and rea-
soned manner, requiring determinations based 
on facts and the principles of the agreements, 
with the goal of increasing compliance with the 
agreements; 
(B) to seek to strengthen the capacity of the 
Trade Policy Review Mechanism of the World 
Trade Organization to review compliance with 
commitments; 
(C) to seek adherence by panels convened 
under the Dispute Settlement Understanding 
and by the Appellate Body to— 
(i) the mandate of those panels and the 
Appellate Body to apply the WTO Agree-
† HR 1314 EAS 
ment as written, without adding to or di-
minishing rights and obligations under the 
Agreement; and 
(ii) the standard of review applicable 
under the Uruguay Round Agreement in-
volved in the dispute, including greater def-
erence, where appropriate, to the fact find-
ing and technical expertise of national in-
vestigating authorities; 
(D) to seek provisions encouraging the early 
identification and settlement of disputes through 
consultation; 
(E) to seek provisions to encourage the pro-
vision of trade-expanding compensation if a 
party to a dispute under the agreement does not 
come into compliance with its obligations under 
the agreement; 
(F) to seek provisions to impose a penalty 
upon a party to a dispute under the agreement 
that— 
(i) encourages compliance with the ob-
ligations of the agreement; 
(ii) is appropriate to the parties, na-
ture, subject matter, and scope of the viola-
tion; and
† HR 1314 EAS 
(iii) has the aim of not adversely af-
fecting parties or interests not party to the 
dispute while maintaining the effectiveness 
of the enforcement mechanism; and 
(G) to seek provisions that treat United 
States principal negotiating objectives equally 
with respect to— 
(i) the ability to resort to dispute set-
tlement under the applicable agreement; 
(ii) the availability of equivalent dis-
pute settlement procedures; and 
(iii) the availability of equivalent rem-
edies. 
(17) TRADE REMEDY LAWS.—The principal ne-
gotiating objectives of the United States with respect 
to trade remedy laws are— 
(A) to preserve the ability of the United 
States to enforce rigorously its trade laws, in-
cluding the antidumping, countervailing duty, 
and safeguard laws, and avoid agreements that 
lessen the effectiveness of domestic and inter-
national disciplines on unfair trade, especially 
dumping and subsidies, or that lessen the effec-
tiveness of domestic and international safeguard 
provisions, in order to ensure that United States
† HR 1314 EAS 
workers, agricultural producers, and firms can 
compete fully on fair terms and enjoy the bene-
fits of reciprocal trade concessions; and 
(B) to address and remedy market distor-
tions that lead to dumping and subsidization, 
including overcapacity, cartelization, and mar-
ket access barriers. 
(18) BORDER TAXES.—The principal negotiating 
objective of the United States regarding border taxes 
is to obtain a revision of the rules of the World Trade 
Organization with respect to the treatment of border 
adjustments for internal taxes to redress the dis-
advantage to countries relying primarily on direct 
taxes for revenue rather than indirect taxes. 
(19) TEXTILE
NEGOTIATIONS.—The principal 
negotiating objectives of the United States with re-
spect to trade in textiles and apparel articles are to 
obtain competitive opportunities for United States ex-
ports of textiles and apparel in foreign markets sub-
stantially equivalent to the competitive opportunities 
afforded foreign exports in United States markets and 
to achieve fairer and more open conditions of trade 
in textiles and apparel. 
(20) COMMERCIAL PARTNERSHIPS.—
† HR 1314 EAS 
(A) IN GENERAL.—With respect to an agree-
ment that is proposed to be entered into with the 
Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership 
countries and to which section 103(b) will apply, 
the principal negotiating objectives of the United 
States regarding commercial partnerships are 
the following: 
(i) To discourage actions by potential 
trading partners that directly or indirectly 
prejudice or otherwise discourage commer-
cial activity solely between the United 
States and Israel. 
(ii) To discourage politically motivated 
actions to boycott, divest from, or sanction 
Israel and to seek the elimination of politi-
cally motivated nontariff barriers on Israeli 
goods, services, or other commerce imposed 
on the State of Israel. 
(iii) To seek the elimination of state- 
sponsored unsanctioned foreign boycotts 
against Israel or compliance with the Arab 
League Boycott of Israel by prospective 
trading partners. 
(B) DEFINITION.—In this paragraph, the 
term ‘‘actions to boycott, divest from, or sanction
† HR 1314 EAS 
Israel’’ means actions by states, non-member 
states of the United Nations, international orga-
nizations, or affiliated agencies of international 
organizations that are politically motivated and 
are intended to penalize or otherwise limit com-
mercial relations specifically with Israel or per-
sons doing business in Israel or in Israeli-con-
trolled territories. 
(21) GOOD GOVERNANCE, TRANSPARENCY, THE 
EFFECTIVE OPERATION OF LEGAL REGIMES, AND THE 
RULE OF LAW OF TRADING PARTNERS.—The principal 
negotiating objectives of the United States with re-
spect to ensuring implementation of trade commit-
ments and obligations by strengthening good govern-
ance, transparency, the effective operation of legal re-
gimes and the rule of law of trading partners of the 
United States is through capacity building and other 
appropriate means, which are important parts of the 
broader effort to create more open democratic societies 
and to promote respect for internationally recognized 
human rights. 
(c) CAPACITY BUILDING AND OTHER PRIORITIES.—In 
order to address and maintain United States competitive-
ness in the global economy, the President shall—
† HR 1314 EAS 
(1) direct the heads of relevant Federal agen-
cies— 
(A) to work to strengthen the capacity of 
United States trading partners to carry out obli-
gations under trade agreements by consulting 
with any country seeking a trade agreement with 
the United States concerning that country’s laws 
relating to customs and trade facilitation, sani-
tary and phytosanitary measures, technical bar-
riers to trade, intellectual property rights, labor, 
and the environment; and 
(B) to provide technical assistance to that 
country if needed; 
(2) seek to establish consultative mechanisms 
among parties to trade agreements to strengthen the 
capacity of United States trading partners to develop 
and implement standards for the protection of the en-
vironment and human health based on sound science; 
(3) promote consideration of multilateral envi-
ronmental agreements and consult with parties to 
such agreements regarding the consistency of any such 
agreement that includes trade measures with existing 
environmental exceptions under Article XX of GATT 
1994; and
† HR 1314 EAS 
(4) submit to the Committee on Ways and Means 
of the House of Representatives and the Committee on 
Finance of the Senate an annual report on capacity- 
building activities undertaken in connection with 
trade agreements negotiated or being negotiated pur-
suant to this title. 
SEC. 103. TRADE AGREEMENTS AUTHORITY. 
(a) AGREEMENTS REGARDING TARIFF BARRIERS.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—Whenever the President deter-
mines that one or more existing duties or other im-
port restrictions of any foreign country or the United 
States are unduly burdening and restricting the for-
eign trade of the United States and that the purposes, 
policies, priorities, and objectives of this title will be 
promoted thereby, the President— 
(A) may enter into trade agreements with 
foreign countries before— 
(i) July 1, 2018; or 
(ii) July 1, 2021, if trade authorities 
procedures are extended under subsection 
(c); and 
(B) may, subject to paragraphs (2) and (3), 
proclaim— 
(i) such modification or continuance of 
any existing duty,
† HR 1314 EAS 
(ii) such continuance of existing duty 
free or excise treatment, or 
(iii) such additional duties, 
as the President determines to be required or ap-
propriate to carry out any such trade agreement. 
Substantial modifications to, or substantial addi-
tional provisions of, a trade agreement entered into 
after July 1, 2018, or July 1, 2021, if trade authori-
ties procedures are extended under subsection (c), 
shall not be eligible for approval under this title. 
(2) NOTIFICATION.—The President shall notify 
Congress of the President’s intention to enter into an 
agreement under this subsection. 
(3) LIMITATIONS.—No proclamation may be 
made under paragraph (1) that— 
(A) reduces any rate of duty (other than a 
rate of duty that does not exceed 5 percent ad va-
lorem on the date of the enactment of this Act) 
to a rate of duty which is less than 50 percent 
of the rate of such duty that applies on such date 
of enactment; 
(B) reduces the rate of duty below that ap-
plicable under the Uruguay Round Agreements 
or a successor agreement, on any import sen-
sitive agricultural product; or
† HR 1314 EAS 
(C) increases any rate of duty above the 
rate that applied on the date of the enactment of 
this Act. 
(4) AGGREGATE REDUCTION; EXEMPTION FROM 
STAGING.— 
(A) AGGREGATE
REDUCTION.—Except as 
provided in subparagraph (B), the aggregate re-
duction in the rate of duty on any article which 
is in effect on any day pursuant to a trade 
agreement entered into under paragraph (1) 
shall not exceed the aggregate reduction which 
would have been in effect on such day if— 
(i) a reduction of 3 percent ad valorem 
or a reduction of 1⁄10 of the total reduction, 
whichever is greater, had taken effect on the 
effective date of the first reduction pro-
claimed under paragraph (1) to carry out 
such agreement with respect to such article; 
and 
(ii) a reduction equal to the amount 
applicable under clause (i) had taken effect 
at 1-year intervals after the effective date of 
such first reduction. 
(B) EXEMPTION FROM STAGING.—No stag-
ing is required under subparagraph (A) with re-
† HR 1314 EAS 
spect to a duty reduction that is proclaimed 
under paragraph (1) for an article of a kind 
that is not produced in the United States. The 
United States International Trade Commission 
shall advise the President of the identity of arti-
cles that may be exempted from staging under 
this subparagraph. 
(5) ROUNDING.—If the President determines that 
such action will simplify the computation of reduc-
tions under paragraph (4), the President may round 
an annual reduction by an amount equal to the lesser 
of— 
(A) the difference between the reduction 
without regard to this paragraph and the next 
lower whole number; or 
(B) 1⁄2 of 1 percent ad valorem. 
(6) OTHER LIMITATIONS.—A rate of duty reduc-
tion that may not be proclaimed by reason of para-
graph (3) may take effect only if a provision author-
izing such reduction is included within an imple-
menting bill provided for under section 106 and that 
bill is enacted into law. 
(7) OTHER
TARIFF
MODIFICATIONS.—Notwith-
standing paragraphs (1)(B), (3)(A), (3)(C), and (4) 
through (6), and subject to the consultation and lay-
† HR 1314 EAS 
over requirements of section 115 of the Uruguay 
Round Agreements Act (19 U.S.C. 3524), the Presi-
dent may proclaim the modification of any duty or 
staged rate reduction of any duty set forth in Sched-
ule XX, as defined in section 2(5) of that Act (19 
U.S.C. 3501(5)), if the United States agrees to such 
modification or staged rate reduction in a negotiation 
for the reciprocal elimination or harmonization of du-
ties under the auspices of the World Trade Organiza-
tion. 
(8) AUTHORITY UNDER URUGUAY ROUND AGREE-
MENTS ACT NOT AFFECTED.—Nothing in this sub-
section shall limit the authority provided to the Presi-
dent under section 111(b) of the Uruguay Round 
Agreements Act (19 U.S.C. 3521(b)). 
(b) AGREEMENTS REGARDING TARIFF AND NONTARIFF 
BARRIERS.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—(A) Whenever the President 
determines that— 
(i) 1 or more existing duties or any other 
import restriction of any foreign country or the 
United States or any other barrier to, or other 
distortion of, international trade unduly burdens 
or restricts the foreign trade of the United States
† HR 1314 EAS 
or adversely affects the United States economy, 
or 
(ii) the imposition of any such barrier or 
distortion is likely to result in such a burden, re-
striction, or effect, 
and that the purposes, policies, priorities, and objec-
tives of this title will be promoted thereby, the Presi-
dent may enter into a trade agreement described in 
subparagraph (B) during the period described in sub-
paragraph (C). 
(B) The President may enter into a trade agree-
ment under subparagraph (A) with foreign countries 
providing for— 
(i) the reduction or elimination of a duty, 
restriction, barrier, or other distortion described 
in subparagraph (A); or 
(ii) the prohibition of, or limitation on the 
imposition of, such barrier or other distortion. 
(C) The President may enter into a trade agree-
ment under this paragraph before— 
(i) July 1, 2018; or 
(ii) July 1, 2021, if trade authorities proce-
dures are extended under subsection (c). 
Substantial modifications to, or substantial addi-
tional provisions of, a trade agreement entered into
† HR 1314 EAS 
after July 1, 2018, or July 1, 2021, if trade authori-
ties procedures are extended under subsection (c), 
shall not be eligible for approval under this title. 
(2) CONDITIONS.—A trade agreement may be en-
tered into under this subsection only if such agree-
ment makes progress in meeting the applicable objec-
tives described in subsections (a) and (b) of section 
102 and the President satisfies the conditions set forth 
in sections 104 and 105. 
(3) BILLS QUALIFYING FOR TRADE AUTHORITIES 
PROCEDURES.—(A) The provisions of section 151 of 
the Trade Act of 1974 (in this title referred to as 
‘‘trade authorities procedures’’) apply to a bill of ei-
ther House of Congress which contains provisions de-
scribed in subparagraph (B) to the same extent as 
such section 151 applies to implementing bills under 
that section. A bill to which this paragraph applies 
shall hereafter in this title be referred to as an ‘‘im-
plementing bill’’. 
(B) The provisions referred to in subparagraph 
(A) are— 
(i) a provision approving a trade agreement 
entered into under this subsection and approving 
the statement of administrative action, if any,
† HR 1314 EAS 
proposed to implement such trade agreement; 
and 
(ii) if changes in existing laws or new stat-
utory authority are required to implement such 
trade agreement or agreements, only such provi-
sions as are strictly necessary or appropriate to 
implement such trade agreement or agreements, 
either repealing or amending existing laws or 
providing new statutory authority. 
(c) EXTENSION DISAPPROVAL PROCESS FOR CONGRES-
SIONAL TRADE AUTHORITIES PROCEDURES.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in section 
106(b)— 
(A) the trade authorities procedures apply 
to implementing bills submitted with respect to 
trade agreements entered into under subsection 
(b) before July 1, 2018; and 
(B) the trade authorities procedures shall be 
extended to implementing bills submitted with 
respect to trade agreements entered into under 
subsection (b) after June 30, 2018, and before 
July 1, 2021, if (and only if)— 
(i) the President requests such exten-
sion under paragraph (2); and
† HR 1314 EAS 
(ii) neither House of Congress adopts 
an extension disapproval resolution under 
paragraph (5) before July 1, 2018. 
(2) REPORT
TO
CONGRESS
BY
THE
PRESI-
DENT.—If the President is of the opinion that the 
trade authorities procedures should be extended to im-
plementing bills described in paragraph (1)(B), the 
President shall submit to Congress, not later than 
April 1, 2018, a written report that contains a re-
quest for such extension, together with— 
(A) a description of all trade agreements 
that have been negotiated under subsection (b) 
and the anticipated schedule for submitting such 
agreements to Congress for approval; 
(B) a description of the progress that has 
been made in negotiations to achieve the pur-
poses, policies, priorities, and objectives of this 
title, and a statement that such progress justifies 
the continuation of negotiations; and 
(C) a statement of the reasons why the ex-
tension is needed to complete the negotiations. 
(3) OTHER REPORTS TO CONGRESS.— 
(A) REPORT
BY
THE
ADVISORY
COM-
MITTEE.—The President shall promptly inform 
the Advisory Committee for Trade Policy and
† HR 1314 EAS 
Negotiations established under section 135 of the 
Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2155) of the deci-
sion of the President to submit a report to Con-
gress under paragraph (2). The Advisory Com-
mittee shall submit to Congress as soon as prac-
ticable, but not later than June 1, 2018, a writ-
ten report that contains— 
(i) its views regarding the progress 
that has been made in negotiations to 
achieve the purposes, policies, priorities, 
and objectives of this title; and 
(ii) a statement of its views, and the 
reasons therefor, regarding whether the ex-
tension requested under paragraph (2) 
should be approved or disapproved. 
(B) REPORT
BY
INTERNATIONAL
TRADE 
COMMISSION.—The President shall promptly in-
form the United States International Trade 
Commission of the decision of the President to 
submit a report to Congress under paragraph 
(2). The International Trade Commission shall 
submit to Congress as soon as practicable, but 
not later than June 1, 2018, a written report 
that contains a review and analysis of the eco-
nomic impact on the United States of all trade