AAFA Urges Congress to Fix Broken Dominican Republic Apparel Import Program
Despite annual calls for changes to the Dominican Republic “Two for One” Earned Import Allowance Program, Congress has displayed a puzzling lack of will to resolve problems that render the program unusable to industry, said the American Apparel & Footwear Association in comments to the International Trade Commission dated April 11. Every year since the program’s inception in 2009, the ITC has told Congress of issues with the program, said AAFA. Yet every year, apparel imports from the Dominican Republic have declined while Congress has failed to act.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
If your job depends on informed compliance, you need International Trade Today. Delivered every business day and available any time online, only International Trade Today helps you stay current on the increasingly complex international trade regulatory environment.
“We are puzzled why Congress, after four years of reports showing how the program has failed to satisfy its goals, does not take action to rectify the situation,” said the letter. “This lack of action is perplexing as there was strong bipartisan and bicameral support for the program when it was first enacted.”
The program is meant to boost apparel imports from the Dominican Republic, but in recent years imports have instead plummeted, said the AAFA. “In 2013, U.S. apparel imports under the EIAP equaled $2.7 million. This represents a 76 percent drop from 2012 levels of $11.4 million. The 2012 levels in turn represent a 45 percent drop from the 2011 levels of $20.6 million (which in turn represents a 37 percent drop from 2010 levels). Data for the first two months of 2014 are running at an annualized level of about 1/10 of the already depressed 2013 levels.”
The association echoed past recommendations from industry on changes that are needed to fix the program and halt the decline. It said Congress should lower the 2-for-1 ratio of U.S. to foreign fabric to a 1-for-1 ratio; expand the program’s coverage to enable other kinds of fabrics and products to get benefits; and reverse the Commerce Department’s interpretation that the law requires “wholly formed” fabrics be dyed and finished in the United States.