HR-1615-119
Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
Sponsored by Young Kim (R-CA)
What it does
This bill would allow the Export-Import Bank of the United States (EXIM) to exclude specific financing transactions from the calculation used to determine whether EXIM has hit its 2% default rate cap. Specifically, it would exempt financing provided under the China and Transformational Exports Program — which covers sectors like artificial intelligence, biotechnology, and wireless communications — as well as financing to U.S. exporters competing against foreign entities on the Commerce Department's Entity List or under Treasury Department sanctions. If EXIM's default rate reaches 2%, its lending is immediately frozen; this bill would prevent those excluded transactions from triggering that freeze.
Who benefits
U.S. exporters in high-tech sectors (AI, biotechnology, wireless communications, and others covered by the China and Transformational Exports Program) who compete with Chinese or sanctioned foreign firms. Small and mid-sized U.S. manufacturers who rely on EXIM financing to compete in global markets. U.S. workers in export-oriented industries that could secure more contracts abroad. Foreign buyers of U.S. goods who gain access to more competitive financing. Indirectly, U.S. national security and economic competitiveness interests if the bill achieves its stated goal of countering Chinese export competition.
Who is hurt
U.S. taxpayers who bear the risk if excluded high-risk loans default, since those losses would not trigger the safety mechanism designed to protect EXIM's financial health. Domestic competitors of EXIM-financed exporters who do not receive the same financing advantages. Foreign exporters — particularly Chinese firms on the Entity List — who face a more competitive U.S. export financing environment. EXIM's long-term financial stability could be weakened if excluded transactions default at higher-than-average rates, potentially requiring future federal bailouts or recapitalization.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that the 2% default rate cap was designed as a general financial safeguard, not as a tool to constrain strategic competition with China in critical technology sectors. They contend that China's state-backed export credit agencies face no equivalent lending limits, putting U.S. exporters at a structural disadvantage in markets for AI, 5G, and biotech products. By carving out these targeted transactions, the bill would allow EXIM to deploy financing where U.S. national security and economic interests are most at stake without being hamstrung by a cap triggered by unrelated loan performance.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that the default rate cap exists precisely to prevent EXIM from taking on excessive risk with taxpayer-backed funds, and that exempting entire categories of loans — potentially the riskiest ones — undermines the only meaningful financial guardrail on EXIM's lending. They contend that if these transactions are genuinely high-risk, removing them from the default calculation does not eliminate the losses; it simply hides them from the oversight mechanism Congress created. Critics also argue this sets a precedent for eroding EXIM's financial discipline under the cover of national security rationale.