	Introduction

Members of Congress and Administrations have periodically considered reorganizing the federal government's trade and development functions to advance various U.S. policy objectives. In the United States, the primary provider of development finance is the Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC), but other agencies, such as the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), also provide development finance. Moreover, potential reorganization of the executive branch has been a broader interest of the Trump Administration. The President's FY2019 budget proposed the consolidation of OPIC and other agency development finance functions, specifically noting the Development Credit Authority (DCA) of USAID, into a new U.S. development finance agency to advance a number of U.S. policy objectives. In February 2018, two proposed versions of the Better Utilization of Investments Leading to Development (BUILD) Act, H.R. 5105 in the House and S. 2463 in the Senate, were introduced on a bipartisan, bicameral basis to create a new U.S. International Development Finance Corporation (IDFC). A major difference between the two bills, as introduced, was that S. 2463 H.R. Stakeholders differ in their views of particular aspects of the DFI proposal and certain issues remain open questions. In June 2018, the White House published a government-wide reorganization plan. Modifying Development Finance Functions

At the outset, Congress may consider the rationales for and against the United States being involved in development finance and modifying that involvement. A proposal to create a new DFI has been in the making for some time. Structuring a New DFI

If Congress pursues reorganization, it faces a number of issues regarding how to structure the proposed new DFI. Objective

The BUILD Act would create a new International Development Finance Corporation (IDFC), a wholly owned U.S. government corporation, by consolidating all of OPIC's functions and USAID's DCA, enterprise funds, and development finance technical support functions. The Administration proposal and the legislation both call for USAID to transfer the Development Credit Authority to the new DFI.
Members of Congress and Administrations have periodically considered reorganizing the federal government's trade and development functions to advance various policy objectives. In its 2019 budget request, the Trump Administration included a proposal to consolidate the Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC) and other agency development finance functions, specifically noting the Development Credit Authority (DCA) of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), into a new U.S. development finance agency. The policy objectives that the new agency would aim to support include enhancing the efficiency and effectiveness of government functions and advancing U.S. national security interests. The Administration also proposed the creation of a new Development Finance Institution as part of a comprehensive government-wide reform and reorganization plan released in June 2018.
In February 2018, two proposed versions of the Better Utilization of Investments Leading to Development (BUILD) Act, H.R. 5105 in the House and S. 2463 in the Senate, were introduced on a bipartisan, bicameral basis to create a new U.S. International Development Finance Corporation (IDFC). The companion bills would consolidate all of OPIC's functions and the DCA, enterprise funds, and development finance technical support functions of USAID. While there were some significant discrepancies between the two bills, as introduced, including the period of authorization, amendments made in both chambers have bridged some differences. Stakeholders differ in their views of particular aspects of the proposal and certain issues remain open questions.
Congress would play a major role in any reorganization of federal development finance functions. The proposal to create a new U.S. government agency involves legislative, oversight, and appropriations functions. Key questions for Congress may include the following:
What are the rationales for and against modifying and expanding OPIC's functions? Should development finance functions be reorganized or should alternative approaches be considered? If reorganization is pursued, how should a new development finance institution (DFI) be structured? How should a proposed new DFI be funded? What implications would a proposed new DFI have for USAID and U.S. development objectives? How can adequate coordination be ensured between the new DFI and other U.S. government agencies involved in development? What are the competitiveness and other strategic implications of the proposed DFI?