It requires that payment be received by the exporter or the seller's agent prior to the goods being shipped from the U.S. port rather than before title and control is transferred to the Cuban buyer. This provision is identical to one that both the House and the Senate included in the FY2006 Transportation-Treasury appropriations bill, which was dropped by conferees in response to a veto threat (for background, see "Legislative Developments—109 th Congress—Debate over Cash in Advance Payment Definition"). 5426 , as enacted by P.L. TSRA codified the lifting of U.S. sanctions on commercial sales of food, agricultural commodities, and medical products to Iran, Libya, North Korea, and Sudan, and extended this policy to Cuba (see below). Provisions Enacted in 2000 to Exempt Food and Medical Products from U.S. Economic Sanctions

		Overview of TSRA

The most significant policy change made by the Trade Sanctions Reform and Export Enhancement Act of 2000 exempts commercial sales of agricultural and medical products to Cuba from the longstanding U.S. trade embargo on that country. Congressional Role in Future Sanctions on Exempted Products

TSRA, in effect, gives Congress veto power over a President's proposal to impose a future unilateral agricultural or medical sanction. The U.S. Role in Cuba's Market under TSRA's Policy

Though sales to Iran, Libya, and Sudan under the Clinton Administration's 1999 exemption policy were small relative to their total agricultural imports, U.S. farmers, commodity groups, and agribusiness eyed Cuba as a promising market. Though top Cuban officials initially stated these cash purchases were a one time event, this stance changed in the following months. From December 2001 through April 2006, U.S. exporters have shipped to Cuba $1.25 billion in agricultural and food products. Debate on 2002 Farm Bill Provision

The Bush Administration "strongly opposed" the Senate-passed farm bill provision (Section 355 of S. 1731 ) that would have repealed the prohibition on private U.S. financing of U.S. sales of agricultural commodities to Cuba. The compromise struck between the Bush Administration and key Senators modified one circumstance under which TSRA's food/medical exemption would not apply, codified that agricultural and medical product sales to the Taliban-controlled area of Afghanistan are subject to TSRA's export licensing requirements that apply to Cuba and to governments of other countries determined to be sponsors of international terrorism, and expressly allows eligible export sales to be made also to any other entity in Syria or North Korea without the need for an exporter to secure a license. Conferees dropped two provisions in FY2005 spending bills that would have relaxed TSRA restrictions. H.R. H.R. Amendment supporters argued that the Bush Administration has used the rules to delay or to refuse to issue travel licenses to those seeking to make farm sales in Cuba. To signal continued opposition to the Administration's intent to change the timing of payment for U.S. agricultural product sales to Cuba and to amend certain TSRA provisions, some Members of the House and Senate introduced identical measures ( H.R. 719 / S. 328 ) in early February 2005. 1339 / S. 634 would only redefine this term, using language identical to Section 5 in H.R. 281 and S.Amdt. On June 14, 2006, identical language was added by voice vote as an amendment to the FY2007 Transportation-Treasury appropriations bill (Section 950 of H.R. 5576 ).
In approving the FY2001 agriculture appropriations act, Congress codified the lifting of unilateral sanctions on commercial sales of food, agricultural commodities, medicine, and medical products to Iran, Libya, North Korea, and Sudan, and extended this policy to apply to Cuba (Title IX of H.R. 5426, as enacted by P.L. 106-387; Trade Sanctions Reform and Export Enhancement Act of 2000, or TSRA). Other provisions place financing and licensing conditions on sales to these countries. Those that apply to Cuba, though, are permanent and more restrictive. TSRA also gives Congress the authority in the future to veto a President's proposal to impose a sanction on the sale of agricultural or medical products.
Codifying the food and medical sales exemption for Cuba generated much debate. Exemption proponents argued that prohibiting sales to Cuba harmed the U.S. agricultural sector, and that opening up limited trade would be one way to pursue a "constructive engagement" policy. Opponents countered that an exemption would undercut U.S. policy to pressure the Castro government to make political and economic reforms. Though top Cuban officials initially stated no purchases would be made with TSRA's conditions in place, food stock losses due to a hurricane and a shift in Cuban strategy led to almost $1.25 billion in cash purchases by Cuba of U.S. food and farm commodities from December 2001 to April 2006. Agricultural sales to Iran, Libya, and Sudan under TSRA have totaled $313 million.
Congressional opponents of TSRA's prohibitions on private U.S. financing of agricultural sales, public financing of eligible exports, and tourist travel to Cuba have introduced bills since 2000 to repeal these provisions. Though several amendments to repeal or relax TSRA provisions relative to Cuba were adopted by committees or passed during floor debate, all were dropped in conference action. The Bush Administration's policy is to allow sales under TSRA, but not to change any aspect of the embargo until political and economic reforms occur in Cuba. Reflecting this, Administration officials continually signal to conferees they will advise the President to veto any bill that would change TSRA's prohibitions against Cuba.
In the 109th Congress, H.R. 719/S. 328, H.R. 1339/S. 634, S.Amdt. 281 and S.Amdt. 282 to S. 600, and amendments to appropriations bills seek to change a rule issued in early 2005 which defined "payment of cash in advance" to mean that payment must be received by the U.S. exporter prior to when agricultural products are shipped from a U.S. port, rather than before title and control is transferred to the Cuban buyer. Fearing lost sales, farm groups and some congressional opposition to this rule has led to ongoing debate on this issue. Responding to congressional pressure, the Bush Administration in July 2005, revised this rule slightly to allow for goods to be shipped from a U.S. port once a third-country bank receives payment for the U.S. exporter from the Cuban purchaser. In recent floor action, the House on June 14, 2006, adopted an amendment to the FY2007 Transportation-Treasury spending bill (section 950 of H.R. 5576) to prohibit implementation of this rule. Conferees dropped identical language in FY2006's Treasury's bill (H.R. 3058) in response to a presidential veto threat.