The Commission reported the results of its investigation to the President on May 31, 1957.53 On the basis of its investigation, the Commission unanimously found that tung oil was being, and was practically certain to continue to be, imported under such conditions and in such quantities as to render or tend to render ineffective, or materially interfere with, the price-support program for tung nuts and tung oil undertaken by the Department of Agriculture pursuant to section 201 of the Agricultural Act of 1949, as amended, and to reduce substantially the amount of products processed in the United States from domestically produced tung nuts and tung oil with respect to which such program is undertaken. To prevent such interference, the Commission recommended to the President that for an indefinite period an import fee of 3 cents per pound but not more than 50 percent ad valorem be imposed on imports of tung oil. By June 30, 1957, the end of the period covered by this report, the President had not acted on the Commission's recommendation with respect to tung oil.

Rye, rye flour, and rye meal

On May 13, 1957, at the direction of the President, the Tariff Commission instituted an investigation of rye, rye flour, and rye meal, under the provisions of section 22. The Commission held a public hearing on June 3, 1957.

The Commission reported the results of its investigation to the President on June 18, 1957.54 In its report, the Commission unanimously found that rye, rye flour, and rye meal were practically certain to be imported after June 30, 1957, under such conditions and in such quantities as to interfere materially with and to tend to render ineffective the pricesupport program for rye undertaken by the Department of Agriculture, and to reduce substantially the amount of products processed from domestic rye. To prevent such interference, the Commission recommended that a quota of 95,200,000 pounds, of which not more than 8,000 pounds might be rye flour or rye meal, be imposed for succeeding 12month periods beginning July 1, 1957. The Commission also recommended that, of the total annual quota, 93,296,000 pounds be allocated to Canada and 1,904,000 pounds, to all other countries. The Commission further recommended that imports of certified or registered seed rye for seeding and crop-improvement purposes be exempted from the quota. On June 27, 1957, the President issued a proclamation imposing for 2 years an annual quota of 186,000,000 pounds on imports of rye, rye flour, and rye meal. In its report, the Tariff Commission had recommended the imposition of an annual quota of 95,200,000 pounds for an

53 U. S. Tariff Commission, Tung Oil: Report to the President on Investigation No. 15 Under Section 22 . . ., 1957 [processed].

54 U. S. Tariff Commission, Rye and Rye Flour and Rye Meal: Report to the President on Investigation 9b Under Section 22. 1957 [processed].

indefinite period. In accepting the Tariff Commission's findings that import restriction would remain necessary after June 30, 1957, the President decided to continue for 2 years the then existing annual quota of 186,000,000 pounds. His proclamation continued the historical allocation of the quota-182,280,000 pounds for imports from Canada and 3,720,000 pounds for imports from other countries. The proclamation specified that, of the total permissible imports, not more than 15,000 pounds might be of rye flour or rye meal.

Certain articles containing butterfat

On May 21, 1957, at the direction of the President, the Tariff Commission instituted an investigation of certain articles containing butterfat," under the provisions of section 22. The Commission held a public hearing on June 11, 1957.

The Commission reported the results of its investigation to the President on July 2, 1957.56 In its report, the Commission found (Commissioners Talbot and Dowling dissenting in part) that certain articles containing 45 percent or more of butterfat or of butterfat and other fat or oil were being or were practically certain to be imported under such conditions and in such quantities as to materially interfere with the pricesupport program undertaken by the Department of Agriculture with respect to whole milk and butterfat, or to reduce substantially the amount of products processed in the United States from domestic milk and butterfat. To prevent such interference, the Commission recommended to the President (Commissioners Talbot and Dowling dissenting) that imports of such products be prohibited.

By June 30, 1957, the end of the period covered by this report, the President had not acted on the Commission's recommendations with respect to certain articles containing butterfat.

Almonds

On June 28, 1957, at the direction of the President, the Tariff Commission instituted an investigation of shelled almonds and blanched, roasted, or otherwise prepared or preserved almonds, under the provisions of section 22. The investigation was still in process on June 30, 1957, the close of the period covered by this report.

55 The articles with respect to which the investigation related were articles containing butterfat, the butterfat content of which is commercially extractable, or which are capable of being used for any edible purpose for which products containing butterfat are used, but not including the following: (1) Articles the importation of which is restricted under quotas established pursuant to section 22 of the Agricultural Adjustment Act, as amended; (2) cheeses the importation of which is not restricted by quotas established pursuant to the said section 22; (3) evaporated milk and condensed milk; and (4) products imported packaged for distribution in the retail trade and ready for use by the purchaser at retail for an edible purpose or in the preparation of an edible article.

56 U. S. Tariff Commission, Certain Articles Containing 45 Percent or More of Butterfat or of Butterfat and Other Fat or Oil: Report to the President on Investigation No. 16 Under Section 1957 [processed].

22

Restrictions Under the Sugar Act

Beginning with the Sugar Act of 1934 57 and continuing with the Sugar Acts of 1937 58 and 1948,59 all sugar for the United States market, whether domestic or imported, has been limited by absolute quotas, except during periods of emergency when the President has exercised his authority to suspend the quotas. On September 1, 1951, the President approved legislation, which became effective January 1, 1953, to extend the Sugar Act of 1948, in amended form, for 4 years.60 On May 29, 1956, the President approved legislation which further amended the Sugar Act of 1948 and extended it for a period of 5 years from January 1, 1956.81 Under the system of restrictions employed, the Secretary of Agriculture determines the quantity of sugar needed each year to supply the requirements of consumers in continental United States, taking into account "prices which will not be excessive to consumers and which will fairly and equitably maintain and protect the welfare of the domestic sugar industry." The quantity is then allocated, in the manner specified by law, among the producing areas in continental United States and its outlying territories and possessions and in the Republic of the Philippines, Cuba, and other foreign countries.

Except for the Philippines,62 the allocations have been apportioned according to the shares of domestic consumption that were supplied by the respective sources before the controls were imposed. Under current legislation, the allocations are made in two stages. First, for a quantity of sugar determined by the Secretary of Agriculture in each year up to 8,350,000 tons, the quotas for domestic areas (continental United States, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands) and the Philippines are absolute quantities. The remainder of the total amount determined by the Secretary of Agriculture (up to 8,350,000 tons) is allocated proportionately to Cuba (96 percent) and to other foreign countries exclusive of the Philippines (4 percent). Second, for any part of the quantity of sugar determined by the Secretary of Agriculture that is in excess of 8,350,000 tons, domestic areas are allocated a 55-percent share and foreign countries other than the Philippines, a 45-percent share. Beginning in 1957, the

57 48 Stat. 670.

58 50 Stat. 903.

59 61 Stat. 922; 7 U.S.C. 1100.

80 65 Stat. 318.

61 70 Stat. 217.

62 Under the Philippine Trade Agreement Revision Act of 1955 the Philippine quota on sugar is fixed at 952,000 short tons. This quota, expressed in terms of 96° sugar (the basis of quota allocation in the Sugar Act of 1948, as amended), is equivalent to about 980,000 short tons. 63 The amount of 8,350,000 tons was that initially determined by the Secretary of Agriculture as United States consumption requirements for 1956.

“In 1956 any quantity in excess of 8,350,000 tons allocable to foreign countries other than the Philippines was to be prorated to Cuba (96 percent) and other foreign countries (4 percent).

share allocated to foreign countries other than the Philippines has been prorated to Cuba (29.59 percent), Mexico (5.10 percent), the Dominican Republic (4.95 percent), Peru (4.33 percent), and other countries (1.03 percent). Under the legislation in effect immediately before January 1, 1956, any increment in total estimated United States requirements as a result of expanded consumption was conferred on Cuba (96 percent) and on other foreign countries except the Philippines (4 percent). Under current legislation, however, domestic areas are granted 55 percent of future increments in total estimated requirements, and foreign countries other than Cuba and the Philippines are granted considerably larger shares of such increments than they previously had (15.41 percent, compared with 4 percent). The allocation to the Philippines, as noted above, is a fixed amount.

The sugar act provides for reallocation of deficits from any supplying area, and for some areas limits the quantity that may be supplied as refined (direct consumption) sugar. The act also provides for separate and additional quotas on imports of liquid sugar from foreign countries.

Restrictions Under the Philippine Trade Agreement Revision Act of 195565

The Philippine Trade Agreement Revision Act of 1955 66 modified substantially the provisions of the Philippine Trade Act of 1946. Under the 1946 act, most United States imports from the Philippines were dutiable at progressively increasing percentages of the United States rates, but some imports from the Philippines (including a few of the above) were subject to either declining duty-free quotas or absolute quotas. Under the 1955 revised agreement between the United States and the Philippines, the absolute quotas established in the 1946 agreement on imports of Philippine sugar 67 and cordage were continued, but those on imports of Philippine rice, cigars, cigar filler and scrap tobacco, coconut oil, and pearl or shell buttons were eliminated. United States imports of

"The United States-Philippine trade agreement was not concluded under the authority of the Trade Agreements Act of 1934, as amended. Both the Philippine Trade Act of 1946 and the Philippine Trade Agreement Revision Act of 1955, which authorized the President of the United States to enter into the original and revised agreements with the Philippines, specifically prohibited the United States from entering into a trade agreement with the Philippines under the authority of the Trade Agreements Act as long as the United StatesPhilippine trade agreement remained in force. Because of the preferential duty arrangement between the United States and the Philippines, and the quotas established by the trade agreement on imports of Philippine products entering the United States, however, the quota provisions of the United States-Philippine trade agreement are discussed briefly here. 69 Stat. 413.

67 The Philippine Trade Agreement Revision Act of 1955 provides that "the limitations on the amounts of Philippine raw and refined sugar that may be entered, . . . shall be without prejudice to any increases which the Congress of the United States might allocate to the Philippines in the future."

Philippine rice ceased to be subject to any quota under the revised agreement; imports of cigars, cigar filler and scrap tobacco, coconut oil, and pearl or shell buttons, however, continued to be subject to declining duty-free quotas. The schedule of declining duty-free quotas in the revised agreement followed the same pattern as the schedule of increases in United States import duties—that is, the quantity of each of the categories of Philippine articles that is entitled to duty-free entry was reduced, not at the uniform rate of 5 percent of the base quantity each year as provided in the 1946 agreement, but by the same progression as United States import duties were to be increased. The base quantities of the articles on which the annual quotas were to be calculated were the same in the revised agreement as in the 1946 agreement.

UNITED STATES ACTIONS RELATING TO CUSTOMS

PROCEDURES

Among other objectives, the Contracting Parties to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade have sought to simplify customs regulations and procedures, establish uniform treatment with respect to marks of origin, establish uniform standards of valuation for customs purposes, and protect contracting parties from "dumping" or injurious subsidization. Article VIII of the agreement, for example, establishes standards intended to prevent the use of customs fees and formalities as disguised barriers to imports. Article IX is designed to prevent marking requirements from being used to restrict imports. Article VII states that value for customs purposes should be based on actual value, and establishes standards for determining actual value. Article VI condemns dumping if it threatens or causes material injury to an established industry, or retards the establishment of an industry, in the territory of another contracting party. It also provides that an injured country may use antidumping or countervailing duties, but provides against their excessive or unwarranted use.69

For a number of years the Contracting Parties—with the cooperation of the International Chamber of Commerce-have studied the problems

* For a detailed discussion of the provisions of the Philippine Trade Agreement Revision Act of 1955, including the schedule of declining duty-free quotas, see Operation of the Trade Agreements Program (ninth report), pp. 107-110.

Under the Protocol of Provisional Application of the General Agreement, contracting parties were required only to apply these articles to the fullest extent not inconsistent with legislation existing on October 30, 1947. At their Ninth Session in 1954–55, the Contracting Parties prepared a resolution which provided that a definitive acceptance of the agreement would be valid even if accompanied by a reservation that legislation presently acceptable under the provisional application of the agreement would remain acceptable under the definitive application of the agreement. The resolution entered into force at the 11th Session of the Contracting Parties in 1956, after it had been accepted by all the contracting parties.