PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
Congressional Research Service
Version 17 · Reported to House with amendment(s) · Sep 28, 2010
Currency Reform for Fair Trade Act - (Sec. 2) Amends the Tariff Act of 1930 to include as a "countervailable subsidy" requiring action under a countervailing duty or antidumping duty proceeding the benefit conferred on merchandise imported into the United States from foreign countries with fundamentally undervalued currency.
Defines "benefit conferred," in cases where the currency of a foreign country is exchanged for foreign currency (i.e., U.S. dollars) obtained from export transactions, as the difference between: (1) the amount of currency provided by a foreign country in which the subject merchandise is produced; and (2) the amount of currency such country would have provided if the real effective exchange rate of its currency were not fundamentally undervalued.
Declares that the fact that such a subsidy is also provided in circumstances not involving export shall not, for that reason alone, mean it cannot be considered export contingent and actionable under a countervailing duty and antidumping duty proceeding.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires the administering authority to determine that the currency of a foreign country is fundamentally undervalued if for an 18-month period: (1) the government of the country engages in protracted, large-scale intervention in one or more foreign exchange markets; (2) the country's real effective exchange rate is undervalued by at least 5%; (3) the country has experienced significant and persistent global current account surpluses; and (4) the country's government has foreign asset reserves exceeding the amount necessary to repay all its debt obligations falling due within the coming 12 months, 20% percent of the country's money supply, and the value of the country's imports during the previous 4 months.
Requires the use, for calculating a country's "real effective exchange rate undervaluation," of certain guidelines of the Consultative Group on Exchange Rate Issues of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) or, if those guidelines are not available, generally accepted economic and econometric techniques and methodologies. Requires the use, also, of inflation-adjusted, trade-weighted exchange rates.
(Sec. 3) Directs the Comptroller General to report to Congress on the implementation of this Act.
People & committees
Rep. Ryan, Tim [D-OH-17] · D–OH
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
The title of the measure was amended. Agreed to without objection.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On passage Passed by recorded vote: 348 - 79 (Roll no. 554). (text: CR H7259-7260)
House roll call 554 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by recorded vote: 348 - 79 (Roll no. 554).(text: CR H7259-7260)
House roll call 554 · Individual votesThe previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule. (consideration: CR H7272)
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H.Res. 1674, the House proceeded with one hour of debate on H.R. 2378, as amended.
Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 847 and H.R. 2378. With respect to H.R. 847, the rule grants a closed rule providing one hour of debate in the House, with 30 minutes equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Energy and Commerce, 20 minutes equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on the Judiciary, and 10 minutes equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Ways and Means.
Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 1674. (consideration: CR H7259-7273)
Rule H. Res. 1674 passed House.
Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 1674 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 847 and H.R. 2378. With respect to H.R. 847, the rule grants a closed rule providing one hour of debate in the House, with 30 minutes equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Energy and Commerce, 20 minutes equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on the Judiciary, and 10 minutes equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Ways and Means.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 386.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Ways and Means. H. Rept. 111-646.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Ways and Means. H. Rept. 111-646.
Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Dec 5, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.2378 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.2378 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.2378 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.2378 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.