DOCSLIB.ORG

Annual Report on the Impact of the Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act on U.S. Industries and Consumers

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Annual Report on the Impact of the Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act on U.S. Industries and Consumers ANNUAL REPORT ON THE IMPACT OF THE CARIBBEAN BASIN ECONOMIC RECOVERY ACT ON U.S. INDUSTRIES AND CONSUMERS Fourth Report 1988 Report to the Congress and.· the President on Investigation No. 332-227 · Under Section 332 (b) of the Tariff Act of 1930 USITC PUBLICATION 2225 SEPTEMBER 1989 United States International Trade Commission Washington, DC 20436 UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION COMMISSIONERS Anne E. Brunsdale, Chairman Ronald A. Cass, Vice Chairman Alfred E. Eckes Seeley G. Lodwick David B. Rohr Don E. Newquist Office of Economics John W. Suomela, Director Martin F. Smith Chief, Trade Reports Division This report was principally prepared by: L. Lee Tuthill Project Director Constance A. Hamilton Janice R. Fair Susan 0. Bloom Hugh M. Arce With the assistance of Dean M. Moore Laura Stonitsch Supporting assistance was provided by: Paula R. Wells, Secretarial services Linda D. Cooper, Clerical services Address all communications to Kenneth R. Mason, Secretary to the Commission United States International Trade Commission Washington, DC 20436 Annual Rep.ort on the Impact of the Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act on U.S. Industries and Consumers Fourth Report 1988 Investigation No. 332-227 USITC Publication 2225 September 1989 Prepared in Conformity with Section 215(a) of the Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act PREFACE The submission of this study to the Congress and the President continues a series of annual reports by the U.S. International Trade Commission on the impact of the Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act (CBERA) on U.S. industries and consumers. The reports are mandated by section 215(a) of the act, which requires that the· Commission report annually on the operation of the program. The present study fulfills the requirement for calendar year 19 8 8. The CBERA, enacted on August 5, 1983 (Public Law 98-67, 97 Stat. 384), authorized the President to proclaim duty-free treatment to eligible articles from designated beneficiary Caribbean Basin countries. The President proclaimed duty-free treatment on certain eligible articles effective January 1, 1984, and such duty-free treatment is scheduled to remain in effect until September 30, 1995. Section 215 of the act requires the Commission to provide an assessment of the actual and probable future effects of the CBERA on the U.S. economy generally, on U.S. industries producing like or directly competitive products with those imported from beneficiary countries, and on U.S. consumers, and to submit its report to the President and the Congress by September 30 of each year. The provisions of the CBERA are listed and explained in the first CBERA report. The following countries were designated beneficiary countries upon the implementation of the CBERA: Antigua and Barbuda, Barbados, Belize, Costa Rica, Dominica, the Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Grenada, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Jamaica, Montserrat, Netherlands Antilles, Panama, Saint Christopher-Nevis (St. Kitts), Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Trinidad and Tobago, and the Virgin Islands (British). TheBahamas became a beneficiary nation in March 1985. Upon becoming independent of the Netherlands Antilles in April 1986, Aruba was designated as a beneficiary country, effective retroactively to January l, 1986. In April 1988 Panama's beneficiary status was suspended and in November 1988 Guyana was designated as a beneficiary country. The report contains three chapters and three appendices. Chapter 1 analyzes overall U.S. trade with the Caribbean Basin during 1988 and compares trade under special programs (CBERA, the Generalized System of Preferences (GSP), and TSUS items 806.30/807.00). Chapter 2 addresses the actual effects of the CBERA in 1988, the fifth year of the program's operation, covering CBERA's effects on the U.S. economy, U.S. industries, and U.S. consumers. Chapter 3 focuses on the probable future effects of the CBERA. It examines significant investment projects in the region and provides an indication of products most likely to be exported to the United States in the future. Appendix A contains a copy of the Federal Register notice by which the Commission solicited public comment for this investigation and a list of submissions received, appendix B contains a table of the leading imports that benefited from CBERA provisions, by source, and appendix C explains the economic model used to derive the results contained in chapter 2. CONTENTS Page Preface .................................................................. Executive Summary ....................................................... v Chapter 1. U.S. Trade with the Caribbe~n Basin ....................... , ..... 1-1 Two-way trade ..................................................... , ..... 1-1 U.S. imports .................................................... , ....... 1-2 Total imports from nondesignated countries ............................ ; ..... 1-2 Total imports from designated CBERA countries ....................... , ...... 1-2 Product composition of total imports ................................ , ...... 1-5 Dutiability and special duty-free programs ............................... i •••••• 1-7 Dutiable value of imports ..........................................•....... 1-7 Duty-free value of imports ......................................... , ...... 1-7 MFN duty-free imports .......................................... ; ...... 1-9 TSUS items 806.30 and 807.00 ................................... ; ...... 1-9 GSP duty-free imports ........... , . , ............................ • ....... 1-9 CB ERA duty-free imports .......................................... ; ..... 1-9 Product composition of imports under the CBERA ...................... ; ...... 1-10 Product eligibility under the CBERA ......................................... 1-12 Leading CBERA beneficiaries ........................................ ; ...... 1-12· Chapter 2. Impact of the CBERA in 1988 .................................... 2-1 Products most affected by CBERA ....................... ; .................. 2-1 Description of items benefiting from CBERA ................................. 2-1 Products that benefited the most from CBERA in 1988 ............... , .•....... 2-3 Beef and veal ......................................................... 2-3 Pineapples ............................................................ , 2-3 Sugar, sirups, and molasses ....... , ............................ , . ; ...... 2-3 Resistors . , . 2-3 Electrical capacitators ........................................... , ....... 2-3 Measuring the net-welfare cost of CBERA in 1988 ............................. 2-4 Analytical approach .............................................. ; ...... 2-4 Measurement of net-welfare effects of CBERA ........................ , ...... 2-5 Quantitative results ................................................ , ..... 2-5 Description of items analyzed .................................... ; ....... '2-5 Effects on the U.S. economy in 1988: Net-welfare costs and the displacement of domestic output ................................ 2-5 Chapter 3. Probable future effects of the CBERA .............. , .............. 3-1 Methodology ....................................................... : .... 3-i Overview of investment and export potential .................................. 3-1 Summary of investment activities and trends ................................... 3-4 Investment projects by product category ..................................... 3-4 Investment in nontraditional products ....... ; ............................... 3-7 Investment projects by country ............................................ 3-7 Central American beneficiary countries .................................... 3-8 Eastern Caribbean islands ............................................... 3-8· Central Caribbean ...................·. ·.................................. 3-8 Oil-producing countries ................................................. 3-8 Investment in infrastructure ......................................... ,. ..... 3-8. Investment by Asian NIEs in CBERA countries · .............................. 3-9 Section 936 of the internal revenue code ·........................... ~: ........ 3-10 Section 936 financing ............. : ...................................... 3-11 Financing obstacles ........... ~ ......... ·................................. 3-11 Twin-plant program ..................................................... 3-13 iii CONTENTS-Continued Page Chapter 3. Probable ruture errects of the CBERA-Continued CBI II legislation ......................................................... 3-13 Repeal of termination .................................................... 3-14 Expansion of eligible products ............................................. 3-14 Treatment of articles assembled from U.S. components ........................ 3-14 Textiles and apparel ...................................................... 3-14 Injury determination ............................................· ........... 3-15 Eastern Caribbean Region .................... , ........................... 3-15 Restoration of sugar quotas ....................... ·........................ .3-15 Ethanol ............................................................... 3-15 Promotion of tourism and duty-free allowances ............................... 3-16 Reporting requirement ................................................... 3-16 Appendices A. Federal Register notice and list of submissions ................... ~ .......
Load more

Recommended publications
  • C:\Working Papers\11751.Wpd
    NBER WORKING PAPER SERIES WHY DON’T MORE PUERTO RICAN MEN WORK? THE RICH UNCLE (SAM) HYPOTHESIS María E. Enchautegui Richard B. Freeman Working Paper 11751 http://www.nber.org/papers/w11751 NATIONAL BUREAU OF ECONOMIC RESEARCH 1050 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, MA 02138 November 2005 The views expressed herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Bureau of Economic Research. ©2005 by María Enchautegui and Richard B. Freeman. All rights reserved. Short sections of text, not to exceed two paragraphs, may be quoted without explicit permission provided that full credit, including © notice, is given to the source. Why Don’t More Puerto Rican Men Work? The Rich Uncle (Sam) Hypothesis María Enchautegui and Richard B. Freeman NBER Working Paper No. 11751 November 2005 JEL No. J4, J6 ABSTRACT Puerto Rico has an extraordinarily low employment rate for men. We document the low employment rate using Census of Population and labor force survey data and offer “the rich uncle (Sam) hypothesis” that the connection of the relatively poor economy of Puerto Rico to the wealthier US has created conditions that generate low employment. In support of the hypothesis, we show: 1) that GNP and GDP have diverged on the island, distorting the relationship between GDP and employment, due potentially to federal tax benefits to companies operating in Puerto Rico; 2) transfers to Puerto Rican families funded mainly by the federal government, which account for about 22 percent of personal income; 3) open borders to the U.S. that give men with high desire for work incentive to migrate to the US, and potentially creates a lower bound to wages on the island; (4) a wage structure with relatively higher earnings in low paid jobs; and (5) employment in the informal sector, which is unmeasured in official statistics.
    [Show full text]
  • PROMESA, Puerto Rico and the American Empire Pedro Caban [email protected]
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by University at Albany, State University of New York (SUNY): Scholars Archive University at Albany, State University of New York Scholars Archive Latin American, Caribbean, and U.S. Latino Studies Latin American, Caribbean, and U.S. Latino Studies Faculty Scholarship Summer 5-17-2018 PROMESA, Puerto Rico and the American Empire Pedro Caban [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.library.albany.edu/lacs_fac_scholar Part of the Latin American Studies Commons, and the Political Economy Commons Recommended Citation Caban, Pedro, "PROMESA, Puerto Rico and the American Empire" (2018). Latin American, Caribbean, and U.S. Latino Studies Faculty Scholarship. 33. https://scholarsarchive.library.albany.edu/lacs_fac_scholar/33 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Latin American, Caribbean, and U.S. Latino Studies at Scholars Archive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Latin American, Caribbean, and U.S. Latino Studies Faculty Scholarship by an authorized administrator of Scholars Archive. For more information, please contact [email protected]. PROMESA, Puerto Rico and the American Empire When President Barak Obama signed the Puerto Rico Oversight, Management and Economic Stability Act (PROMESA) he reignited a debate on Puerto Rico’s role within the American empire that had been publicly dormant for years. PROMESA became law soon after the Puerto Rican government announced it could not pay down a $74 billion debt obligation to investors holding Puerto Rican municipal bonds. This landmark legislation established a Financial and Management Oversight Board for Puerto Rico (FMOB), “to provide a method for a covered territory to achieve fiscal responsibility and access to capital markets” (Public Law 114-187 2016).
    [Show full text]
  • Restoring Growth and Prosperity
    2021 Fiscal Plan for Puerto Rico Restoring Growth and Prosperity DRAFT FOR CONSIDERATION by the Financial Oversight and Management Board for Puerto Rico April 23, 2021 DISCLAIMER The Financial Oversight and Management Board for Puerto Rico (the “FOMB,” or “Oversight Board”) has formulated this 2021 Fiscal Plan based on, among other things, information obtained from the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico (the “Commonwealth,” or the “Government”). This document does not constitute an audit conducted in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards, an examination of internal controls or other attestation or review services in accordance with standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants or any other organization. Accordingly, the Oversight Board cannot express an opinion or any other form of assurance on the financial statements or any financial or other information or the internal controls of the Government and the information contained herein. This 2021 Fiscal Plan is directed to the Governor and Legislature of Puerto Rico based on underlying data obtained from the Government. No representations or warranties, express or implied, are made by the Oversight Board with respect to such information. This 2021 Fiscal Plan is not a Title III plan of adjustment. It does not specify classes of claims and treatments. It neither discharges debts nor extinguishes liens. The 2021 Fiscal Plan may be amended from time to time, as appropriate in the sole discretion of the Oversight Board. This 2021 Fiscal Plan is based on what the Oversight Board believes is the best information currently available to it. To the extent the Oversight Board becomes aware of additional information after it certifies this 2021 Fiscal Plan that the Oversight Board determines warrants a revision of this 2021 Fiscal Plan, the Oversight Board will so revise it.
    [Show full text]
  • Guide to Theecological Systemsof Puerto Rico
    United States Department of Agriculture Guide to the Forest Service Ecological Systems International Institute of Tropical Forestry of Puerto Rico General Technical Report IITF-GTR-35 June 2009 Gary L. Miller and Ariel E. Lugo The Forest Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture is dedicated to the principle of multiple use management of the Nation’s forest resources for sustained yields of wood, water, forage, wildlife, and recreation. Through forestry research, cooperation with the States and private forest owners, and management of the National Forests and national grasslands, it strives—as directed by Congress—to provide increasingly greater service to a growing Nation. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual’s income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD).To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Authors Gary L. Miller is a professor, University of North Carolina, Environmental Studies, One University Heights, Asheville, NC 28804-3299.
    [Show full text]
  • Potential Economic Impacts of Changes in Puerto Rico's Status Under S
    CBO PAPERS POTENTIAL ECONOMIC IMPACTS OF CHANGES IN PUERTO RICO'S STATUS UNDER S. 712 April 1990 CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE SECOND AND D STREETS, S.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20515 NOTES Puerto Rican fiscal years start on July 1 of the preceding calendar year. U.S. fiscal years start on October 1 of the preceding calendar year. Details in the text and tables of this report may not add to totals because of rounding. Puerto Rican gross product is referred to as gross national product (GNP). The provisions of S. 712 considered in this report are those contained in the bill as reported by the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Corporations in Puerto Rico that, if current status continues, would qualify under the provisions of Section 936 of the Internal Revenue Code are referred to throughout this report as "Section 936 corporations." This designation is used here for convenience, even though S. 712 stipulates that, for such firms, application of the provisions of Section 936 would be phased out under statehood and would be eliminated under independence. PREFACE Puerto Rico is scheduled to hold a referendum in the summer of 1991 to determine its future as a political entity: citizens will vote on whether to remain a commonwealth within the United States, to become a state of the Union, or to become an independent nation. A bill now pending in Congress, S. 712, would make the results of the referendum binding under specific legal and financial terms that are set out in the bill. The Senate Finance Committee has requested that the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) study the important consequences that any of the three "status options" could have for Puerto Rico's economy.
    [Show full text]
  • University Microfilms, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan the ROLE of the COIX0NVJEALTH GOVERNMENT in the GROWTH and DEVELOPMENT of the PUERTO RICO TOUHTST IHDUSTRT
    ThU dissertation has b#«n microfilmed wearily as received 67-2498 MINGS, Robert Charles, 1935- THE ROLE OF THE COMMONWEALTH GOVERNMENT IN THE GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE PUERTO RICO TOURIST INDUSTRY. The Ohio State University, Ph.D„ 1966 G eography University Microfilms, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan THE ROLE OF THE COIX0NVJEALTH GOVERNMENT IN THE GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE PUERTO RICO TOUHTST IHDUSTRT DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University * IJy R obert CrMLngs, B.S., M.A.T. The Ohio State University 1966 Approved hF ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The cordial and unlimited cooperation extended by members of the Puerto Rican Government made this study possible. The untiring assist- ance of Mr. Hector Berrios of the Puerto Rico Government Development Bank was most valuable. Considerable help was provided by Dr. Rafael Pico,. President of the Puerto Rico Government Development Bank; Mr. Miguel % Barasorda, Director, Division of Facility Development, Department of Tourism; Mr, Roberto Bouret, Executive Director of the Puerto Rico Hotel Association; and Miss Mirsonia Rivera Boucher, economist, Office of Eco­ nomic Research, Economic Development Administration. The names of other Puerto Rican people who have made significant contributions to this study are too numerous to list. My adviser, Dr. John R. Randall, deserves special thanks for his advice and patience. Also, I am grateful to Dr. Edward J. Taaffe and Dr. George P. Patten for their comments and suggestions. The drafting work of Mr. Terry Campbell and Mr. Richard Cotterman is appreciated very much. The criticism s and suggestions of colleagues, Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Oversight Hearing Committee on Natural Resources U.S
    THE NEED FOR THE ESTABLISH- MENT OF A PUERTO RICO FINAN- CIAL STABILITY AND ECONOMIC GROWTH AUTHORITY OVERSIGHT HEARING BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON INDIAN, INSULAR AND ALASKA NATIVE AFFAIRS OF THE COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED FOURTEENTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION Tuesday, February 2, 2016 Serial No. 114–30 Printed for the use of the Committee on Natural Resources ( Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.fdsys.gov or Committee address: http://naturalresources.house.gov U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE 98–458 PDF WASHINGTON : 2016 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800 Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001 VerDate Mar 15 2010 08:36 Jul 01, 2016 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 5011 Sfmt 5011 J:\114TH CONGRESS\INDIAN, INSULAR & ALASKA NATIVE AFFAIRS\02-02-16\98458.TXT COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES ROB BISHOP, UT, Chairman RAU´ L M. GRIJALVA, AZ, Ranking Democratic Member Don Young, AK Grace F. Napolitano, CA Louie Gohmert, TX Madeleine Z. Bordallo, GU Doug Lamborn, CO Jim Costa, CA Robert J. Wittman, VA Gregorio Kilili Camacho Sablan, CNMI John Fleming, LA Niki Tsongas, MA Tom McClintock, CA Pedro R. Pierluisi, PR Glenn Thompson, PA Jared Huffman, CA Cynthia M. Lummis, WY Raul Ruiz, CA Dan Benishek, MI Alan S. Lowenthal, CA Jeff Duncan, SC Matt Cartwright, PA Paul A. Gosar, AZ Donald S. Beyer, Jr., VA Rau´ l R. Labrador, ID Norma J.
    [Show full text]
  • Austerity Versus Green Growth for Puerto Rico
    Challenge ISSN: 0577-5132 (Print) 1558-1489 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/mcha20 Austerity Versus Green Growth for Puerto Rico Amanda Page-Hoongrajok, Shouvik Chakraborty & Robert Pollin To cite this article: Amanda Page-Hoongrajok, Shouvik Chakraborty & Robert Pollin (2017) Austerity Versus Green Growth for Puerto Rico, Challenge, 60:6, 543-573, DOI: 10.1080/05775132.2017.1399644 To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/05775132.2017.1399644 Published online: 02 Jan 2018. Submit your article to this journal Article views: 2 View related articles View Crossmark data Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=mcha20 Challenge, 60(6):543–573, 2017 Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLC ISSN: 0577-5132 print/1558-1489 online DOI: 10.1080/05775132.2017.1399644 none defined Austerity Versus Green Growth for Puerto Rico AMANDA PAGE-HOONGRAJOK, SHOUVIK CHAKRABORTY and ROBERT POLLIN Well before Hurricane Maria wrought devastation on Puerto Rico, the island’s economy was in crisis. Puerto Rico’s economic output had already fallen sharply from its 2005 level. Even after what is hoped to be a successful recovery from the hurricane’s damage— no small task—proposals to reform the Puerto Rican economy being discussed by the government would make matters worse. The authors discuss how Puerto Rico descended into its prehurri- cane distress and offer a bold set of counterproposals based on green investments, a carbon tax, and debt forgiveness by Puerto Rico’s creditors. Hurricanes Irma and Maria pummeled Puerto Rico in quick succession last September.
    [Show full text]
  • The Economic Implications of Puerto Rican Statehood
    The Economic Implications of Puerto Rican Statehood Vanessa Badillo Haverford College Professor Saleha Jilani April 29, 2005 The Economic Implications of Puerto Rican Statehood Table of Contents I. Introduction...................................................................................................................1 II. Related Work................................................................................................................6 III. Data Sources..............................................................................................................11 IV. Assessing Impact of Key Economic Factors A. Federal Taxation..................................................................................................11 B. Earned Income Tax Credit.................................................................................14 C. Tax Incentives for U.S. Companies....................................................................20 D. Tariffs....................................................................................................................25 E. Welfare Benefits...................................................................................................28 F. Tourism.................................................................................................................34 G. U.S. Military in Puerto Rico................................................................................40 V. Concluding Remarks..................................................................................................43
    [Show full text]
  • General Assembly Distr.: Limited 22 April 2010
    United Nations A/AC.109/2010/L.4 General Assembly Distr.: Limited 22 April 2010 Original: English Special Committee on the Situation with regard to the Implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples Special Committee decision of 15 June 2009 concerning Puerto Rico* Report prepared by the Rapporteur of the Special Committee, Bashar Ja’afari (Syrian Arab Republic) Contents Page I. Introduction ................................................................... 2 II. Background information ......................................................... 2 A. General................................................................... 2 B. Constitutional and political status ............................................. 3 III. Recent developments............................................................ 7 A. Political developments ...................................................... 7 B. Military developments ...................................................... 11 C. Economic developments..................................................... 14 IV. Previous action taken by the United Nations ........................................ 16 A. General................................................................... 16 B. Action taken by the Special Committee ........................................ 16 C. Action taken by the General Assembly ......................................... 17 * This document was submitted on 22 April 2010 to allow for inclusion of up-to-date information. 10-32480 (E) 030610
    [Show full text]
  • What Ever Happened to the Puerto Rican Sugar Manufacturing Industry?*
    Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis Research Department Staff Report 477 December 2012 What Ever Happened to the Puerto Rican Sugar Manufacturing Industry?* Benjamin Bridgman Bureau of Economic Analysis Michael Maio University of Minnesota and Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis James A. Schmitz, Jr. Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis Arilton Teixeira FUCAPE, Brazil *We thank the members of the Research Library of the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis—particularly Shawne Osborne—who have found, procured, and delivered many, many documents, reports, and so on for this project. We also thank Sam Brunell for excellent research assistance. The views expressed herein are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis or the Federal Reserve System. ABSTRACT __________________________________________________________________________ Beginning in the early 1900s, Puerto Rican sugar has entered the U.S. mainland tariff free. Given this new status, the Puerto Rican sugar industry grew dramatically, soon far outstripping Louisiana’s production. Then, in the middle 1960s, something amazing happened. Production collapsed. Manufacturing sugar in Puerto Rico was no longer profitable. Louisiana, in contrast, continued to produce and grow sugar. We argue that local economic policy was responsible for the industry’s demise. In the 1930s and 1940s, the local Puerto Rican government enacted policies to stifle the growth of large cane-farms. As a result, start- ing in the late 1930s, farm size fell, mechanization of farms essentially ceased, and the Puerto Rican sugar industry’s productivity (relative to Louisiana) rapidly declined until the industry collapsed. The overall Puerto Rican economy also began to perform poorly in the late 1930s.
    [Show full text]
  • Puerto Rico, Colonialism, and Neocolonialism
    Chapter published in the The Palgrave Encyclopedia of Imperialism and Anti-Imperialism, 2019 The publication is available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-91206-6_125-2 To cite this article: Cruz-Martinez G. (2019) Puerto Rico, Colonialism, and Neocolonialism. In: Ness I., Cope Z. (eds) The Palgrave Encyclopedia of Imperialism and Anti-Imperialism. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham, DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-91206-6_125-2 Puerto Rico, Colonialism, and Neocolonialism Gibrán Cruz-Martínez Institute of Public Goods and Policies, CSIC [email protected] Abstract: This essay aims to briefly collect the historical context of colonialism in Puerto Rico since the Spanish era but primarily focuses on revealing the reasons to consider Puerto Rico as a colony and non-self-governing territory of the US – rather than a neocolony of the US. Later, the article addresses the three non-colonial options recognized by the 1514 United Nations (UN) Resolution and the results of the five referendums on the political status of the Caribbean archipelago held over the last five decades. The essay concludes that Puerto Rico is undoubtedly a colony and asks for the United Nations and the sovereign countries of the world to denounce this illegal colonial relationship that subordinates residents of Puerto Rico to the will of the US Congress where they have no voting representatives. Keywords: Caribbean; Imperialism; Latin America; Small island state; United States 1 Description Puerto Rico was a Spanish colony from 1508 to 1898 and has been officially an unincorporated territory of the United States (US) since 1898. Simply put, Puerto Rico is a colony of the US subordinated to the plenary powers of the US Congress under the Territorial Clause of the US Constitution.
    [Show full text]