Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
This bill directs the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System to study the collective impact of every tariff issued by the United States beginning in 2017 and each year thereafter on the cost of goods and services for U.S. consumers and small businesses. The Board must submit a report of the study's findings to Congress within 270 days after enactment.
Whether the Federal Reserve should conduct trade-impact studies
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a straightforward statutory study directive: it clearly identifies the subject, responsible agency, and a statutory deadline for a report to Congress.
This bill directs the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System to study the collective impact of every tariff issued by the United States beginning in 2017 and each year thereafter on the cost of goods and services for U.S. consumers and small businesses.
The Board must submit a report of the study's findings to Congress within 270 days after enactment.
Informational, low-cost proposal with moderate political sensitivity about tariffs; committee approval likely, full-chamber passage and enactment less certain.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a straightforward statutory study directive: it clearly identifies the subject, responsible agency, and a statutory deadline for a report to Congress. It lacks substantive methodological guidance, any acknowledgement of costs or resource needs, and integration with existing legal authorities or reporting regimes. Basic accountability is present (a required report), but other implementation safeguards and specifications are minimal.
Whether the Federal Reserve should conduct trade-impact studies
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Whether the Federal Reserve should conduct trade-impact studies
Likely supportive because the study could document how tariffs have raised consumer prices and harmed small businesses.
Would view data as useful to advocate for pro-consumer trade and tax policy changes, while noting the bill’s narrow focus.
Generally favorable toward a data-driven review, but cautious about Fed capacity and potential politicization.
Would press for clear methodology, nonpartisan framing, and allocated resources to ensure credible findings.
Skeptical: may view the requirement as politically motivated scrutiny of tariffs used to protect industry or leverage trade negotiations.
Might accept analysis if explicitly neutral and encompassing national-security or domestic-industry benefits.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Informational, low-cost proposal with moderate political sensitivity about tariffs; committee approval likely, full-chamber passage and enactment less certain.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Whether the Federal Reserve should conduct trade-impact studies
Informational, low-cost proposal with moderate political sensitivity about tariffs; committee approval likely, full-chamber passage and ena…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a straightforward statutory study directive: it clearly identifies the subject, responsible agency, and a statutory deadline for a report to Congress. It lacks sub…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.