Export Market Development
Grants Amendment Bill 2004
Date Introduced:
13 May 2004
House: House of Representatives
Portfolio: Foreign Affairs and Trade
Commencement:
On Royal Assent
The Bill amends
the Export Market Development Grants Act 1997 (the Act) to
introduce a not fit and proper person test to be applied by
Austrade in accordance with Ministerial guidelines when assessing
an entitlement to payment of a grant under the Export Market
Development Grants (EMDG) Scheme.
The objective of the EMDG Scheme is set down
in the Export Market Development Grants Act 1997:
3. Object of Act
The object of this Act is to bring benefits to
Australia by encouraging the creation, development and expansion of
foreign markets for Australian goods, services, intellectual
property and know-how. It does so by providing for an assistance
scheme under which small and medium Australian exporters committed
to and capable of seeking out and developing export business are
repaid part of their expenses incurred in promoting those
products.
More specifically, the Scheme is intended to
encourage small and medium Australian businesses to develop
overseas markets through the 50 per cent reimbursement of
expenditure incurred on export promotional activities. The Scheme
is open to Australian companies which meet an expenditure threshold
of $15,000 over a two-year period and have an annual turnover of
less than $30 million. Funding for the Scheme is capped at $150
million a year until 2005-06.
In the 2002-03 financial year, $143.9 million
in grants were distributed to 3,843 exporters. For grants relating
to the 2001-02 grant year, the average grant was $36,280. The
businesses that received grants during this same period generated
$5.5 billion in export income.(1)
According to the Australian Chamber of
Commerce and Industry, the Scheme accounts for more than one-third
of the export income from smaller to medium sized businesses
participating in the program, and without such support these firms
would reduce their export efforts.(2)
Under the current provisions of the Act, an
EMDG grant is not payable if the applicant is not a resident of
Australia, does not have an Australian Business Number, has
outstanding disqualifying convictions, is under insolvency
administration, or is the provider of courses to overseas students
and is not a registered provider of such courses.
As noted in the Minister s Second Reading
Speech, the changes in the Bill add a further test, namely, whether
the applicant or an associate of the applicant is not fit and
proper to receive a grant:
What the legislation does not presently allow for
is the non-payment of a grant to an applicant who may be viewed by
the Australian community as an inappropriate person to represent
and promote the public interest of Australia in relation to trade
outside Australia, whether by reference to his or her trading
history or otherwise.
This Government does not condone behaviour
considered by the Australian electorate to be inconsistent with
accepted community standards or commercial or personal propriety.
We have a duty to taxpayers to ensure that grants paid via
Government schemes are not paid to recipients other than those who
meet these standards.
Austrade will only be able to make such decisions
with reference to Ministerial guidelines, which I will table
shortly. The consent of an applicant or his or her associates will
be required prior to Austrade undertaking criminal or other
relevant checks.
The Minister s Speech, however, does not
indicate whether the guidelines to be followed by Austrade will be
disallowable instruments and, therefore, subject to parliamentary
scrutiny.
On 8 February 2004, Australia s Trade Minister
and the United States Trade Representative (USTR) announced that
agreement had been reached on the text of a Free Trade Agreement
between Australia and the United States (AUSFTA). In terms of
Australia s merchandise trade with the US, the AUSFTA allows for
the removal of almost all tariffs on manufactured exports and
substantial reductions in tariffs on agricultural goods (the
exception being sugar and dairy where tariff rate quota
arrangements will remain).
This is seen as a major gain by Australian
industry because the volume of trade in manufactured goods is
significant and duty-free access to the US market will be available
for a number of very competitive sectors once the AUSFTA comes into
force.
Australia s main exports to the US are durable
manufacturing products which account for one-third of total
exports. Exports of machinery and equipment, which includes medical
instruments and appliances ($1.2 billion), manufactures ($1.2
billion), metals ($1 billion) and automotive products ($0.9
billion), are among the top six commodities exported from Australia
to the US.(3)
In the past the USTR regarded Australia s
domestic industry support programs, such as the EMDG Scheme, as
little more than export subsidies and a barrier to freer trade. The
2003 and previous US National Trade Estimate Reports on Foreign
Trade Barriers listed the following trade barrier:
Export Subsidies
The Australian Government uses the Export Market
Development Grants scheme (EMDG) to encourage Australian exporters
to develop overseas markets for its goods, services, tourism,
industrial property rights and technology. These grants are
available only to small-and-medium-sized Australian firms to
reimburse partially (up to 50 per cent) eligible expenditures
(primarily marketing costs) while they are developing overseas
markets. In August 2000, the Australian Government committed to
continue the scheme until 2005. Automotive and textile, clothing
and footwear (TCF) producers benefit from industry specific grants
which replaced schemes that previously provided export-contingent
benefits. Automotive and automotive parts producers benefit from
the Automotive Competitiveness and Investment Scheme (ACIS) which
currently provides around $A600 million per year in the form of
import duty credits designed to promote production, investment, and
research and development. This scheme was originally scheduled to
run from January 1, 2001 to December 31, 2005. However, the
Australian Government decided to compensate for planned additional
tariff reductions by extending the program for the ten years after
2005. The grant program that benefits TCF producers is the TCF
Strategic Investment Program (SIP), which provides funding for
research and development, innovation, restructuring and investment,
to assist firms to restructure and achieve efficiency gains prior
to legislated tariff cuts in this sector in 2005. The U.S.
Government is monitoring the WTO consistency of these
programs.(4)
Notwithstanding these concerns, the Government
s industry support programs for the automotive and TCF industries
and EMDG scheme which cost altogether around
$1 billion annually are not affected by the
AUSFTA.(5)
According to the study by the Centre for
International Economics (CIE) which examined the impact of the
AUSFTA on selected industries, Australian exports to the US are
expected to grow, in particular exports of light metals and
automotive products.(6) The CIE estimated the percentage
increase in manufactured exports: manufactures (23.6 per cent),
transport equipment (16.6 per cent), leather products (12.9 per
cent), and motor vehicle, trucks and parts (7.8 per
cent).(7) Across sectors, manufacturing and construction
are the two largest beneficiaries from the AUSFTA.
Person or associate is not fit and proper
Item 2 of Schedule
1 adds a new subsection which gives Austrade the power to
ask an applicant for consent to seek information about the
applicant or an applicant s associate in determining whether the
applicant or any associate of the applicant is not fit and proper
to receive an EMDG grant. If consent is not given, then section 73
of the Act empowers Austrade to refuse to consider the
application.
Item 4 provides that where
Austrade determines in accordance with the ministerial guidelines
that the applicant or an associate of the applicant is not fit and
proper to receive an EMDG grant, a grant is not payable.
Item 5 amends the Act to
explicitly provide that a not fit and proper determination is
subject to review in the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.
-
Austrade,
Annual Report 2002-03, Chapter 5: Outcomes and Outputs
for 2002-03, p. 40.
-
Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry,
Export Market Development Grants Scheme, May 2003, p.
1.
-
Centre for International Economics,
Economic analysis of AUSFTA: Impact of the bilateral free trade
agreement with the United States, April 2004,
Australia-United States Trade, p. 7.
-
United States Trade Representative, 2003
National Trade Estimate Report on Foreign Trade Barriers:
Australia, p. 10.
-
See Productivity Commission, Trade
& Assistance Review 2002-03, Table A. 3: Australian
Government budgetary assistance to the manufacturing sector,
2000-01 to 2003-04, pp. A.11 to A.16. The Government s total
budgetary assistance to the manufacturing sector in 2003-04 was
$1.75 billion.
-
See
Economic analysis of AUSFTA: Impact of the bilateral free trade
agreement with the United States, Case studies: Light
metals, Passenger motor vehicles and parts, pp. 116-125.
-
See
Economic analysis of AUSFTA: Impact of the bilateral free trade
agreement with the United States, Sectoral effects of
AUSFTA, pp. 84-86.
This paper has been prepared for general distribution to
Senators and Members of the Australian Parliament. While great care
is taken to ensure that the paper is accurate and balanced, the
paper is written using information publicly available at the time
of production. The views expressed are those of the author and
should not be attributed to the Information and Research Services
(IRS). Advice on legislation or legal policy issues contained in
this paper is provided for use in parliamentary debate and for
related parliamentary purposes. This paper is not professional
legal opinion. Readers are reminded that the paper is not an
official parliamentary or Australian government document.
Published by the Parliamentary Library, 2004.