United States General Accounting Office GAO Testimony Before the Subcommittee on International Finance, Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, U.S. Senate For Release on Delivery Expected at 9:30 a.m., EDT EXPORT-IMPORT BANK Thursday, July 17, 1997 Key Factors in Considering Eximbank Reauthorization Statement of JayEtta Hecker, Associate Director, International Relations and Trade Issues, National Security and International Affairs Division GAO/T-NSIAD-97-215 Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee: I am pleased to be here today to discuss issues concerning the reauthorization of the U.S. Export-Import Bank (Eximbank). My statement today will focus on four key factors that the Congress might consider in debating Eximbank reauthorization: • the rationales regarding the Eximbank’s programs, • foreign competitors’ export finance programs, • available options to achieve budgetary savings at the Eximbank, and • the ways in which Eximbank’s assistance is distributed. My comments are based on the results from our current and past reviews of the Eximbank and governmentwide export promotion issues. (A listing of related GAO products is at the end of this statement.) Proponents and opponents continue to debate the economic benefits of Summary Eximbank activity to the U.S. economy and the extent to which it helps achieve U.S. trade and foreign policy objectives. The most compelling case that can be made for these programs is that they help “level the international playing field” for U.S. exporters and provide leverage to induce foreign governments to reduce export subsidies. Their overall contribution to U.S. economic performance is less certain. Seventy-three countries have export credit agencies. However, about half of all export credit support worldwide is extended by the seven largest (Group of 7 (G-7)) industrial nations, each of which maintains various types of export finance assistance programs. Although considerable differences exist among these programs, they all help exporters compete for market share in developing markets by providing loans, guarantees, and insurance. The Eximbank provides similar types of assistance. The Eximbank also administers a tied aid capital projects fund (known as the “war chest”) as part of its programs to counter other countries’ trade-distorting tied aid practices. Tied aid is concessionary (low-interest rate) financing that is linked to the procurement of goods and services from the donor country. During 1994-1996, the Eximbank board of directors approved the use of war chest funds in 40 cases. Overall, the Eximbank financed about 2 percent of total U.S. exports in fiscal year 1995, the lowest level of support provided by G-7 nations’ export credit agencies. Page 1 GAO/T-NSIAD-97-215 Export-Import Bank The Eximbank’s programs require substantial levels of taxpayer support (about $4 billion over the last 5 years). We recently completed a review of Eximbank activities and concluded that it could possibly achieve budgetary savings by raising fees or reducing program risks while still maintaining a competitive position relative to other export credit agencies.1 These options would not require a change in law because they fall within Eximbank’s present authority. However, we recognize that such changes should be considered within the full context of their trade and foreign policy implications and Eximbank’s other statutory obligations. The U.S. government’s ultimate objectives continue to be reducing and eliminating export financing subsidies—allowing exporters to compete on the basis of price, quality, and service—not subsidized financing. The U.S. government continues to use international forums such as the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD)2 in its efforts to reduce and eventually eliminate subsidized export finance programs. We are encouraged that the OECD recently reached agreement to standardize and set minimum fees (beginning in 1999) for all member export credit agencies. This agreement has the potential to reduce government subsidies for these programs. However, given the growing importance of exports to national economic performance, and the belief that government export finance programs contribute to this performance, achieving the ultimate objective of eliminating all financial subsidies may prove difficult. Regarding the ways its financing assistance is distributed, during fiscal years 1994 to 1996, the top 15 users (lead U.S. exporters or contractors) of Eximbank financing accounted for about 38 percent of the value of the Eximbank’s financing commitments. While about 80 percent of its assistance went to support large and medium-sized companies, the Eximbank also reported that 20 percent of its assistance went to support small business during the same period. The Eximbank believes that these small business transactions would not otherwise have been financed by private lenders. In geographical terms, China, Indonesia, and Mexico were Eximbank’s top three markets in fiscal year 1996. 1 See Export-Import Bank: Options for Achieving Possible Budget Reductions (GAO/NSIAD-97-7, Dec. 20, 1996). 2 OECD, created in 1960, is a forum for monitoring economic trends and coordinating economic policy among 29 countries, including the United States, and serves as the forum for negotiating limitations on government export credit subsidies and developing guidelines for export-financing assistance programs. The OECD’s “Arrangement on Guidelines for Officially Supported Export Credits,” which was established in 1978, sets the terms and conditions for official export credits. Page 2 GAO/T-NSIAD-97-215 Export-Import Bank The Eximbank also supports the sale of dual-use (military and civilian) export items provided that the items are non-lethal and for primarily civilian use. The report that we are releasing today shows that dual-use exports constitute a small share of Eximbank’s financing activities and remains well under the 10-percent cap established by law. In fiscal years 1995-97, the Eximbank made financing commitments totaling $226 million—less than 1 percent of its total financing commitments made during that period—to support 10 dual-use exports to 4 countries. Our review indicated that the Eximbank appears to have established procedures that should provide a sound basis for determining whether these exports are nonlethal and primarily used for civilian purposes, as required by law. Created in 1934, the Eximbank is an independent U.S. government agency Background that operates under a renewable congressional charter that expires on September 30, 1997. In conducting its operations, the Eximbank must comply with several statutory requirements. The Eximbank is required to • supplement and encourage, but not compete with private sources of capital; • seek to reach international agreements to reduce government-subsidized export financing; and • provide financing at rates and on terms that are “fully competitive” with those of other foreign government-supported export credit agencies (12 U.S.C. 635 (b)(1)(A)(B)). Eximbank financing programs include • loans to foreign buyers of U.S. exports, • loan guarantees to commercial lenders, • export credit insurance to U.S. exporters and lenders, and • working capital guarantees for pre-export production. Reflecting the growing move toward privatization in the developing world, the Eximbank has recently expanded its activities to include project finance. Project finance involves financing where repayment is provided through the project’s anticipated future revenues rather than through sovereign (government) or other forms of guarantee. Page 3 GAO/T-NSIAD-97-215 Export-Import Bank I would first like to briefly discuss the various rationales that have been Rationales Regarding advanced for and against government involvement in export finance. They Eximbank Programs provide a useful framework for evaluating whether Eximbank should be reauthorized. Supporters of the Eximbank export finance programs say that this assistance provides leverage in trade policy negotiations while helping to “level the international playing field” for U.S. business, corrects “market failures,” and helps to increase exports and employment. Opponents say that the Eximbank’s programs result in no net increase in national employment and output, misallocate resources, and are a form of corporate welfare. Trade Policy Leverage Supporters believe that the Eximbank helps U.S. companies compete against foreign companies that receive government support and provide leverage in trade policy negotiations. As already noted, the Eximbank is required to seek international agreements to reduce government-subsidized export financing. OECD nations, including the United States, have made gradual progress since the late 1970s in negotiating reductions in officially supported export subsidies, including a June 1997 agreement that requires export credit agencies to establish minimum fees based on country risk ratings. U.S. Treasury officials who participate in these negotiations told us that the Eximbank’s programs have provided them with leverage in negotiating subsidy reductions. Industry Effects Another case that proponents make is that markets do not always lead to an optimal allocation of resources and that so-called “market failures” provide an additional justification for government export finance programs. The Eximbank claims that the following are examples of market failures: • Private financial institutions may be unwilling to support exports to emerging markets even when the risk is correctly priced. • Foreign buyers in certain markets may be unable to secure long-term financing for capital equipment. • Finally, and probably the most often-cited example, is that small business exporters may have difficulty in obtaining export financing. Opponents hold that there is no credible evidence that private capital markets do not function efficiently and that government intervention can potentially distort markets. Page 4 GAO/T-NSIAD-97-215 Export-Import Bank Employment and Trade According to the Eximbank, the exports it financed in fiscal year 1996 Effects “supported or maintained” nearly 300,000 jobs.3 It is generally recognized that some jobs are directly supported through the Eximbank’s programs. However, economists and policymakers recognize that employment levels are substantially influenced by macroeconomic policies, including actions of the Federal Reserve. At the national level, under conditions of full employment, government export finance assistance programs may largely shift production among sectors within the economy rather than raise the overall level of employment in the economy. Hence, the jobs figure that the Eximbank reports may not represent net job gains in a period of full employment. Eximbank programs cannot produce a substantial change in the U.S. trade balance.4 The trade balance is largely determined by macroeconomic conditions, such as savings and investment and the government budget deficit. According to the President’s Council of Economic Advisers, significantly reducing the trade deficit will require macroeconomic policy measures, such as eliminating the federal budget deficit. The six G-7 countries we studied—Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Foreign Competitors’ and the United Kingdom—all have export credit agencies, each with Export Finance different roles and structures (see table I.1). According to Euromoney, a Programs total of 73 export credit agencies now exist worldwide.5 The support the G-7 export credit agencies provide for their exporters can be measured in various ways. In terms of the share of financing commitments extended by export credit agencies in 1995, the Eximbank ranks fourth: Japan, France, and Germany accounted for the largest shares. Japan extended over half (56 percent), followed by France (20 percent), and Germany (9 percent). The United States and Canada extended smaller shares—5 percent each—followed by the United Kingdom (3 percent) and Italy (2 percent).6 3 See Keeping America Competitive: 1996 Annual Report (Washington, D.C.: Eximbank), p. 5. 4 See Export Promotion: Rationales for and Against Government Programs and Expenditures (GAO/T-GGD-95-169, May 23, 1995). 5 Euromoney publishes an annual survey of world export credit agencies. 6 The United States and the six major industrialized countries we studied provided $258 billion of the total $553 billion in total export financing. Page 5 GAO/T-NSIAD-97-215 Export-Import Bank In terms of the percentage of national exports these export credit agencies have financed, the Eximbank is tied for last. In 1995, the Eximbank supported 2 percent of total U.S. exports (the latest year for which comparative data are available). This figure is at the bottom of the range of support provided by the other G-7 nations. In contrast, Japan’s export credit agencies supported 32 percent of its country’s exports in that year. France was second, with 18 percent. The support provided by Canada, Germany, the United Kingdom, and Italy ranged from 7 to 2 percent. Comparing export credit agency programs is difficult for a number of reasons: • Each nation has structured its export financing differently—there is no single export finance model. Export credit agencies in the six nations we studied function as independent government agencies, sections of ministries, or private institutions operating under an agreement with the government. Most of the countries we studied offered overseas investment insurance through their export credit agency. However, in the United States, in addition to the Eximbank insurance program, overseas investment insurance is offered through a separate agency, the Overseas Private Investment Corporation. (Table I.1 provides a summary of the principal differences between the Eximbank and the six export credit agencies we studied.) • Unlike the Eximbank, which is prohibited by law from competing with private sources of capital, other export credit agencies appear to compete to varying degrees with private sources of export financing. For example, the Japanese government’s export insurance provider is Japan’s only export insurer. It reported that it insured about 28 percent ($124 billion) of all Japanese trade transactions in 1995—the highest level of trade and investment insurance underwriting in the world (private or public). Similarly, Canada’s Export Development Corporation does not function as a lender of last resort. • Other export credit agencies we studied cover different amounts of political and commercial risks. Currently, the Eximbank provides 100-percent, unconditional political and commercial risk protection on most of the medium- and long-term coverage (coverage over 5 years) it issues. European export credit agencies (with the exception of the United Kingdom) generally require exporters and banks to assume a portion of the risks (usually 5 to 10 percent) associated with such support. This concept of risk sharing is a fundamental difference between the Eximbank and these export credit agencies. Page 6 GAO/T-NSIAD-97-215 Export-Import Bank • Finally, export credit agencies use different budgetary and reporting standards, thus making it difficult to directly compare the Eximbank’s program costs. The 1990 Federal Credit Reform Act (P.L. 101-508, Nov. 5, 1990) requires the Eximbank to estimate and budget annually for the total long-term costs of its credit programs on a net present value basis.7 Other nations operate on a cash basis8 and are not subject to similar budget requirements. Under this cash approach, a government reimburses an export credit agency for total cash losses sustained on its operations during the year. Moreover, costs reported may not always represent total expenses to the government. For example, Canada’s Export Development Corporation uses a separate national interest account (“Canada Account”) to support some export finance activity. The costs of this support are accounted for separately in its year-end reports. (Table I.2 provides information on the costs of the G-7 nations’ export-financing programs.) Export Credit Agency Although direct cost comparisons between Eximbank and other national Costs Are Difficult to programs are difficult to make, the available cost data we reviewed Compare suggests that several export credit agencies in the six countries we studied have reported improved financial results. France, Germany, and the United Kingdom all reported positive financial results for their export credit agencies in 1995, the most recent year for which complete information was available. The Berne Union reported that among its member countries there was an aggregate loss of $501 million in 1995 compared with $6.5 billion in 1994.9 According to the Berne Union, this change was attributed to an improved global debt scenario and tighter export credit agency underwriting standards. As part of the reauthorization debate, the Congress may wish to focus on Opportunities for ways to achieve greater Eximbank operating efficiencies. In our recent Achieving Possible report,10 we identified two options for reducing the cost of the Eximbank’s Budget Reductions programs while allowing it to remain competitive with other export credit 7 Present value analysis calculates the value today of a future stream of income or expenses. 8 Under cash-based budgeting, receipts are recorded when received and expenditures are recorded when paid regardless of the accounting period in which the receipts are earned or the costs incurred. 9 The Berne Union is an association of 43 export credit insurance agencies that includes the G-7 nations’ export credit agencies. 10 See (GAO/NSIAD-97-7). Page 7 GAO/T-NSIAD-97-215 Export-Import Bank agencies: (1) raising the fees11 charged for Eximbank financing and (2) reducing the risk of its programs by, for example, limiting program availability in higher risk markets or offering less than 100-percent risk protection. These options fall within its present authority and would not require a change in the Export-Import Bank Act of 1945, as amended. Both of these options could result in significant reductions in the Eximbank’s subsidy costs. To illustrate the potential savings associated with fee increases, we estimated that the Eximbank could have saved about $84 million in fiscal year 1995 if had raised its fees to the mid-range of those charged by other export credit agencies. The second option, reducing program risks, would have resulted in larger subsidy savings in the same year—up to $157 million—with only a slight effect on the overall level of U.S. exports supported with Eximbank financing. The Congressional Budget Office concurs with our assessment that subsidy savings could occur. Their work concluded that (1) increasing fees could save the Eximbank up to $450 million over 5 years and (2) reducing program risks could save up to $1.2 billion over 5 years.12 In our report, we acknowledged that these options could raise several trade and foreign policy issues that decisionmakers would need to address before making any changes in the Eximbank’s programs. For example, a large share of the Eximbank’s subsidy budget is spent supporting transactions to high-risk markets, such as the newly independent states of the former Soviet Union, that exhibit promising long-term potential. In fiscal year 1996, financing commitments for high-risk markets represented about one-fourth of total financing commitments yet absorbed almost three-fourths of the Eximbank’s total subsidy budget. Our report also stated that any proposed fee increases should be considered in the broader context of ongoing OECD efforts to negotiate minimum fee schedules and that the magnitude and timing of such an increase should take into account progress in these negotiations. Thus, we are encouraged by the recent progress made in OECD to establish minimum fees across all major export credit agencies. These new rules will take effect on April 1, 1999, and should help eliminate some of the trade distorting effects of subsidized export financing. Although many details of the new agreement have yet to be worked out, these new rules will likely 11 The Eximbank must set fees that are “fully competitive” with the pricing and coverage offered by other major export credit agencies. 12 See Addressing the Deficit: Budgetary Implications of Selected GAO Work for Fiscal Year 1998 (GAO/OCG-97-2, Mar. 14, 1997). Page 8 GAO/T-NSIAD-97-215 Export-Import Bank require the Eximbank to raise its fees for many transactions and could allow it to operate at reduced taxpayer cost. During fiscal years 1994-96, the Eximbank provided an annual average of Distribution of $12.8 billion in export financing commitments (loans, guarantees, and Eximbank Financing insurance) at an annual average program cost of $877 million. The Eximbank projects that it will provide about $16.5 billion of export finance support in fiscal year 1997, an all-time high. (See table II.1 for a more detailed description of Eximbank’s past and projected financing commitments and program costs.) In fiscal year 1996, China was the Eximbank’s top export market ($1.2 billion), followed by Indonesia ($825 million), Mexico ($753 million), Trinidad and Tobago ($632 million), and Brazil ($488 million). (See fig. II.1 for a list of the Eximbank’s top 10 markets and their associated program costs for fiscal year 1996.) Relative to total U.S. goods13 exported to these markets, the Eximbank supported about 11 percent of U.S. exports to China, about 22 percent of U.S. exports to Indonesia, about 1 percent of U.S. exports to Mexico, about 93 percent of U.S. exports to Trinidad and Tobago, and about 4 percent of U.S. exports to Brazil. During fiscal years 1994 through 1996, the 15 most frequent users (lead U.S. exporters or contractors) of Eximbank financing accounted for about $14.4 billion, or about 38 percent, of the Eximbank’s total export-financing commitments made during that period (see fig. II.2). The export finance transactions involving these companies absorbed about 27 percent of the Eximbank’s total program budget, or about $682 million over the same period. These data do not capture the full range of U.S. companies associated with Eximbank-financed deals such as subcontractors and other suppliers. While about 80 percent of the Eximbank’s assistance was provided to large and medium-sized companies, about 20 percent ($7.5 billion) of the Eximbank’s financing commitments—about 79 percent of its total transactions—went to small business, primarily through its insurance programs.14 (See table II.2.) 13 Department of Commerce data on service exports to these markets were unavailable. 14 Since 1986, the Eximbank has been legislatively required to allot at least 10 percent of its financing authorizations to small business concerns as defined by the Small Business Administration regulations. Page 9 GAO/T-NSIAD-97-215 Export-Import Bank The Eximbank has participated in international (OECD) negotiations to limit the use of tied aid and has used its tied aid capital projects fund (also known as the “war chest”) to counter foreign countries’ use of tied aid. The OECD efforts have resulted in a decrease in reported international levels of tied aid—the annual average level of tied aid decreased from about $10 billion in 1992 to approximately $4 billion in 1995.15 During 1994-96, the Eximbank board of directors approved the use of war chest funds in 40 instances. (See app. III for a list of transactions in which tied aid funds were actually used.) The balance in the tied aid war chest was $343 million as of June 30, 1997. The Eximbank also supports the sale of dual-use (military and civilian) export items provided that the items are nonlethal and for primarily civilian use (see app. IV). The report that we are releasing today shows that dual-use exports constitute a small share of Eximbank’s financing activities and remains well under the 10-percent cap established by law. In fiscal years 1995-97, the Eximbank made financing commitments totaling $226 million—less than 1 percent of its total financing commitments made during that period—to support 10 dual-use exports to 4 countries. Only one of these exports—involving aircraft parts and services to Indonesia—has actually been delivered overseas. Our review indicated that the Eximbank appears to have established procedures that should provide a sound basis for determining whether these exports are nonlethal and primarily used for civilian purposes, as required by law. In the spring of 1997, for the one dual-use export that has taken place, Eximbank officials, assisted by other U.S. government officials, were able to verify that it was primarily used for civilian purposes. Since fiscal year 1993, the Eximbank has issued guarantees related to 25 project finance deals totaling $6.4 billion (the estimated value of these projects was $22.6 billion). In fiscal year 1997, the Eximbank estimates project-financing deals will account for about 30 percent of its total financing commitments (these deals accounted for about 14 percent of its assistance in 1996). (See table V.1.) Because these projects tend to be large, the Eximbank often shares project risk with other export credit agencies, the Overseas Private Investment Corporation, or multilateral institutions such as the International Finance Corporation. In sum, the Congress may wish to consider Eximbank’s reauthorization Conclusion within the context of the international competition. While the export 15 Tied aid notifications occur through the OECD’s reporting mechanism. Page 10 GAO/T-NSIAD-97-215 Export-Import Bank credit agencies we identified operate under different mandates and are subject to different budgeting and reporting standards than the Eximbank, they all help their exporters compete for contracts in the world market. The costs of the Eximbank’s programs need to be weighed against their benefits to exporters and the leverage they provide in international negotiations to reduce foreign government support for these types of programs. Our recent work identified some options—raising fees and reducing program risks—that the Congress may wish to consider in reducing the cost of these programs while still allowing the Eximbank to assist U.S. exporters and support efforts to reach additional international agreements to reduce export subsidies. Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee that concludes my prepared statement. I will be happy to answer any questions you may have. Page 11 GAO/T-NSIAD-97-215 Export-Import Bank Appendix I Comparison of G-7 Nations’ Export Credit Agency Structures and Roles Table I.1: G-7 Nations’ Export Credit Agency Organizations and Roles Country Export credit agency Public or private Role United States U.S. Export-Import Bank Public, independent government —Statutory mandate to supplement (Eximbank) agency. and encourage, but not compete with, private sources of capital. —Receives a credit subsidy appropriation each year from the U.S. Congress. Canada Export Development Corporation Public, independent government -Some competition with private (EDC) agency. sector. -Aims to be financially self-sustaining. France COFACE provides export finance Private. Both COFACE and BFCE — COFACE exercises a dual role by insurance and guarantees. have recently been privatized. administering export-financing BFCE provides interest-rate support Government covers deficits incurred support on behalf of the French on commercial bank loans on state account activities. government and offering export finance assistance through its own programs. Germany Hermes, C&L Deutsche Revision, Private consortium. Hermes and —Hermes and C&L exercise a dual and KfW C&L Deutsche Revision jointly role by operating the government’s administer German export finance export finance programs and program on behalf of the state. KfW offering export finance assistance offers export loans to German privately. exporters. Government covers deficits on state account activities. Italy Special Section for Export Credit Public agencies. —Some competition with private Insurance (SACE) and Central sector as Mediocredito Centrale Institute for Medium Term Credits also functions as commercial bank. (Mediocredito Centrale) Japan Export-Import Bank of Japan Public. JEXIM is an independent — JEXIM aims to supplement and (JEXIM) provides financing. Export government agency. EID-MITI is encourage commercial bank Insurance Division-Ministry of housed in Japan’s Ministry of financing but not compete with it. International Trade and Industry International Trade and Industry. —EID-MITI competes with private (EID-MITI) provides insurance sector providers. United kingdom Export Credits Guarantee Public, independent government —Short-term business was Department (ECGD) department. privatized. —Has a specific mandate to break even financially. Legend BFCE = Banque Francaise du Commerce Exterieur COFACE = Compagnie Francaise d’Assurance Pour Le Commerce Exterieur KfW = Kreditanstalt fur Wiederaufbau Page 12 GAO/T-NSIAD-97-215 Export-Import Bank Appendix I Comparison of G-7 Nations’ Export Credit Agency Structures and Roles Table I.2: Reported Financial Results of Government-Supported Export-Financing Programs in the United States and Six Competitor Countries, 1994-96 U.S. dollars in millions Country ECA 1994 1995 1996 United Statesa Eximbank ($979) ($716) ($934) Canadab EDC N/A N/A N/A France COFACE and BFCE ($503) $7 $1,151 Germanyc Hermes/C&L and Deutsche Revision ($1,985) $38 $605 Italy SACE and Mediocredito Centrale ($1,501) ($1,821) ($822) Japand JEXIM and EID-MITI ($80) ($113) N/A United Kingdome ECGD $29 $362 N/A Legend N/A = Not available. Note 1: There are several caveats with regard to how the numbers in this table should be interpreted. The type and nature of each nation’s export credit agency (ECA) business varies in ways that ultimately influence its costs. In the case of Japan’s Export-Import Bank, 44 percent of its fiscal year 1995 commitments were for loans not “tied” to Japanese exports, 37 percent were for overseas investment loans, and 8 percent for import loans. Only 11 percent of JEXIM’s total financing in that year was reported to have been used for export loans. Where there are two ECAs, we have combined financial results. Note 2: Amounts in parentheses indicate a deficit. Positive amounts indicate a surplus. a The figures for the Eximbank represent the credit subsidy obligation and administrative costs obligated for the fiscal year. b Canada’s EDC reported net income of $171 million, $44 million, and $112 million in 1994, 1995, and 1996, respectively. However, these amounts do not include the support separately provided through the Canadian national interest account ($200 million in 1996 but not available for 1994 and 1995). EDC conducts a significant (42 percent) level of business with Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) nations, which influences its profitability. c The totals for Germany include interest revenues from debt reschedulings. d The Japanese fiscal year ends March 31. The figures for Japan’s EID-MITI include direct transfers from the Ministry of Finance for Paris Club debt writeoff of $272 million in fiscal year 1994 and $233 million in 1995. e The United Kingdom’s fiscal year ends March 31. ECGD figures include amounts spent on foreign exchange insurance and interest rate subsidies. Page 13 GAO/T-NSIAD-97-215 Export-Import Bank Appendix II Distribution of Eximbank Financing Table II.1: Eximbank Financing Commitments and Program Costs, 1994-98 Dollars in millions Fiscal year 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998a Value of export financing commitments $14,886.4 $11,864.9 $11,516.9 $16,521.7 N/A Administrative costs 42.6 41.4 40.8 46.6 48.6 Estimated program costs 936.7 674.8 893.6 726.0 632.0 Total costsb $979.3 $716.2 $934.4 $772.6 $680.6 Legend N/A = Not available. Note: The cost figures for 1994-96 are based on amounts obligated, while the 1997 figures represent the amount appropriated. Under the Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990 (P.L. 101-508, Nov. 5, 1990), the Eximbank is required to estimate and budget for the total long-term costs of their credit programs on a net present value basis. Present value analysis calculates the value today of a future stream of income or expenses. The Congress funds the Eximbank’s estimated credit subsidy costs through the annual appropriations process. Subsidy costs arise when the estimated program disbursements by the government exceed the estimated payments to the government on a net present value basis. Administrative expenses receive a separate appropriation and are reported separately in the budget. a President’s fiscal year 1998 budget request. b Total costs are defined as the Eximbank’s program costs and administrative costs. Source: Eximbank. Page 14 GAO/T-NSIAD-97-215 Export-Import Bank Appendix II Distribution of Eximbank Financing Figure II.1: Top 10 Country Recipients of Eximbank Financing Authorizations (and Associated Estimated Program Costs), Fiscal Year 1996 Dollars in millions 1500 1,272 1000 825 753 632 488 480 500 370 351 334 262 79 71 87 53 49 48 14 25 0 0 0 China (Mainland) Indonesia Mexico Trinidad and Tobago Brazil Argentina Ghana Russia Pakistan Republic of Korea Financing committments Estimated program costs Source: Eximbank. Page 15 GAO/T-NSIAD-97-215 Export-Import Bank Appendix II Distribution of Eximbank Financing Figure II.2: Top 15 Recipients of Eximbank Financing, Fiscal Years 1994-96 Dollars in millions 5,000 4,426 4,000 3,000 1,923 2,000 1,259 938 1,000 813 745 704 662 540 530 434 431 366 357 254 312 1 74 37 95 37 46 9 39 33 15 47 4 15 3 0 g on el ri c. l s a in tri c ht ve la s le & T iona uo r dy ie ny CC el e he c c o g E A T t l u n o g a & z u Bo yt El e Be B ou e na F L ol p om ntal E e Ra al wn llD o us t er t & c hn C Ven r o In n e ne Br nn e gh e tT e gy in e Ge e a o s tin s o n a rg e n n er o nt ol. d cD i S tr As e Ed Lu c lE C Pe M W Ca Financing Committments Estimated program costs Source: Eximbank. Page 16 GAO/T-NSIAD-97-215 Export-Import Bank Appendix II Distribution of Eximbank Financing Table II.2: Eximbank Small Business Financing Commitments, Fiscal Years 1994-96 Dollars in millions Percentage of Number of financing Eximbank financing Total commitments Value of financing commitments to Eximbank supporting small Percentage of total made to small small business Fiscal year transactions businessa transactions business 1994 1,984 1,576 79 2,690 18 1995 2,415 1,910 79 2,461 21 1996 2,422 1,934 80 2,405 21 Total 6,821 5,420 Average for period: 79% $7,556 Average for period: 20% Source: Eximbank. a See table II.1 for Eximbank budget figures for fiscal years 1994-96. Page 17 GAO/T-NSIAD-97-215 Export-Import Bank Appendix III U.S. Firms That Received Tied Aid War Chest Assistance, 1994-96 Total Eximbank Firm financing Contributing Country/recipient country Sector Ellicott Machine Corp., International $21,994,295 Norway/Indonesia Transport U.S. China Industrial Exchange 2,921,520 Austria/China Medical U.S. China Industrial Exchange 2,921,520 Austria/China Medical U.S. China Industrial Exchange 2,921,520 Austria/China Medical Motorola, Inc. 43,870,988 U.K. and European Community/Indonesia Telecommunication Cubic Automatic Revenue Collection Group 35,948,268 Germany/China Transport Zond Systems, Inc. 3,700,073 Denmark/China Power Zond Systems, Inc. 3,675,075 Denmark/China Power Zond Systems, Inc. 3,695,400 Denmark/China Power Interdigital Communications 35,928,415 France and Australia/Indonesia Telecommunication Source: Eximbank. Page 18 GAO/T-NSIAD-97-215 Export-Import Bank Appendix IV Eximbank’s Financing of Dual-Use Exports For the last 3 fiscal years, the Eximbank has had the authority to finance exports of nonlethal defense items whose primary end use is for civilian purposes. The Eximbank is authorized to use up to 10 percent of its annual commitments to finance the exports of these dual-use (military and civilian) items. As depicted in the following tables, the Eximbank has financed several items but well below the 10-percent annual cap. The Eximbank’s authority to finance these items expires on September 30, 1997. We are required to report to the Congress no later than September 1, 1997, on the end use of these items. We plan to issue a report to the Congress on this matter on July 17, 1997. Table IV.1: Summary of Eximbank’s Cap on Dual-Use Financing Commitments, 1995-97 Dollars in millions Dual-use financing Amount allowed under commitments as a Total financing dual-use financing Dual-use financing percent of total export Fiscal year commitments commitment cap commitments financing commitments 1995 $11,864.9 $1,186.5 $15.4 0.1 1996 11,516.9 1,151.7 102.4 0.9 a b 1997 16,521.7 1,652.2 108.3 0.7 a Projected commitment. b As of June 1997. Source: Eximbank. Page 19 GAO/T-NSIAD-97-215 Export-Import Bank Appendix IV Eximbank’s Financing of Dual-Use Exports Table IV.2: Eximbank Dual-Use Financing Commitments, Fiscal Years 1995-97 Dollars in millions Type of Eximbank Recipient financing / Amount of Eximbank Fiscal year country description of export financing End user Intended end use 1995 Indonesia Loan/aircraft parts $15.4 Indonesian Territorial and services Air Force development 1996 Romania Guarantee/air traffic 79.5 Romanian civil Civil air traffic control control system aviation authority Indonesia Loan/helicopters 22.9 Indonesian Territorial Army development 1997 Venezuela Guarantee/radio 8.8 Venezuelan Territorial systems Army development Venezuela Guarantee/radio 3.4 Venezuelan Civil air traffic control systems Air Force Brazil Loan/aircraft 34.0 Brazilian Territorial components Air Force development Venezuela Guarantee/trucks 25.5 Venezuelan Territorial Army development Venezuela Guarantee/trucks 14.1 Venezuelan Territorial Army development Venezuela Guarantee/aircraft 10.1 Venezuelan Territorial parts Army development Venezuela Guarantee/motor 12.4 Venezuelan Territorial vehicles Army development Source: Eximbank. Page 20 GAO/T-NSIAD-97-215 Export-Import Bank Appendix V Project Finance Table V.1: Eximbank Project Finance Transactions, Fiscal Years 1993-97 Dollars in millions Fiscal year Project Country Sector Eximbank support Total project size 1993 Pagbilao Philippines Power $185 $933 1994 Upper Mahiao Philippines Power 166 229 Mahanagdong Philippines Power 200 320 1995 Paiton Indonesia Power 540 2,600 Samalayuca Mexico Power 477 644 Cilicap Indonesia Petrochemical 296 633 Sual Philippines Power 164 1,200 El Abra Chile Mining 151 1,400 Termobarranquilla Colombia Power 161 756 Marmara Turkey Power 228 544 Comsigua Venezuela Manufacturing 67 270 1996 Jawa Indonesia Power 390 1,600 Saba Pakistan Power 84 141 Leyte Philippines Power 50 69 Uch Pakistan Power 255 612 Farmland Trinidad Petrochemical 235 335 Alumbreraa Argentina Mining 228 600b Atlantic LNGa Trinidad Petrochemical 391 1,100b 1997 Avantel Mexico Telecom. 292 1,200 Halliburton Angola Petrochemical 88 200b Alestra Mexico Telecom. 307 670b Batu Hijau Indonesia Mining 425 2,000c Qatargas Qatar Petrochemical 60 300 Quezon Philippines Power 457 828 Ras Laffan Qatar Petrochemical 465 3,400 Grand Total $6,362 $22,584 Source: Eximbank. a Political risk coverage only. b Project has been authorized, but deal has not closed. c Awaiting congressional approval. Page 21 GAO/T-NSIAD-97-215 Export-Import Bank Appendix V Project Finance Table V.2: Infrastructure Projects in Emerging Markets Utilizing ECA Financing Emerging market Export credit agency Turkey Thailand China Indonesia India Argentina Brazil Mexico Japan • • • • • N/A United States • N/A • • • • Germany • • • • • N/A N/A United Kingdom • N/A • N/A N/A France • • N/A N/A N/A N/A Austria • • N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Italy N/A N/A N/A N/A Belgium • N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Spain N/A • N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Netherlands N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Switzerland N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Sweden N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Norway N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Canada N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Brazil N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Korea N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Legend N/A = Not applicable because no projects reported. • At least one completed project with ECA financing. Proposed project(s) with ECA financing. Source: Compiled from U.S. government information and foreign data. Page 22 GAO/T-NSIAD-97-215 Export-Import Bank Page 23 GAO/T-NSIAD-97-215 Export-Import Bank Related GAO Products U.S. Export-Import Bank: Process in Place to Ensure Compliance With Dual-Use Export Requirements (GAO/NSIAD-97-211, July 17, 1997). Ex-Im Bank’s Retention Allowance Program (GAO/GGD-97-37R, Feb. 19, 1997). Export Finance: Federal Efforts to Support Working Capital Needs of Small Business (GAO/NSIAD-97-20, Feb. 13, 1997). Export-Import Bank: Options for Achieving Possible Budget Reductions (GAO/NSIAD-97-7, Dec. 20, 1996). Retention Allowances: Usage and Compliance Vary Among Federal Agencies (GAO/GGD-96-32, Dec. 11, 1995). Export Finance: Comparative Analysis of U.S. and European Union Export Credit Agencies (GAO/GGD-96-1, Oct. 24, 1995). Export Promotion: Rationales for and Against Government Programs and Expenditures (GAO/T-GGD-95-169, May 23, 1995). International Trade: U.S. Efforts to Counter Competitors’ Tied Aid Practices (GAO/T-GGD-95-128, Mar. 28, 1995). International Trade: Combating U.S. Competitors’ Tied Aid Practices (GAO/T-GGD-94-156, May 25, 1994). Export Finance: Challenges Facing the U.S. Export-Import Bank (GAO/T-GGD-94-46, Nov. 3, 1993). Export Finance: The Role of the U.S. Export-Import Bank (GAO/GGD-93-39, Dec. 23, 1992). (711289) Page 24 GAO/T-NSIAD-97-215 Export-Import Bank Ordering Information The first copy of each GAO report and testimony is free. Additional copies are $2 each. Orders should be sent to the following address, accompanied by a check or money order made out to the Superintendent of Documents, when necessary. VISA and MasterCard credit cards are accepted, also. Orders for 100 or more copies to be mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent. Orders by mail: U.S. General Accounting Office P.O. Box 6015 Gaithersburg, MD 20884-6015 or visit: Room 1100 700 4th St. NW (corner of 4th and G Sts. NW) U.S. General Accounting Office Washington, DC Orders may also be placed by calling (202) 512-6000 or by using fax number (301) 258-4066, or TDD (301) 413-0006. Each day, GAO issues a list of newly available reports and testimony. To receive facsimile copies of the daily list or any list from the past 30 days, please call (202) 512-6000 using a touchtone phone. A recorded menu will provide information on how to obtain these lists. For information on how to access GAO reports on the INTERNET, send an e-mail message with "info" in the body to: email@example.com or visit GAO’s World Wide Web Home Page at: http://www.gao.gov PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER United States Bulk Rate General Accounting Office Postage & Fees Paid Washington, D.C. 20548-0001 GAO Permit No. G100 Official Business Penalty for Private Use $300 Address Correction Requested
Export-Import Bank: Key Factors in Considering Eximbank Reauthorization
Published by the Government Accountability Office on 1997-07-17.
Below is a raw (and likely hideous) rendition of the original report. (PDF)