July 5, 2012
As ordered reported by the House Committee on Natural Resources on June 7, 2012
CBO estimates that implementing H.R. 3210 would have no significant impact on the federal budget. Enacting the legislation could reduce revenues from civil penalties collected under the Lacey Act (a law that prohibits trade in wildlife, fish, and plants that have been illegally taken, possessed, transported, or sold); thus, pay-as-you-go procedures apply. However, CBO estimates that any such reduction would be minimal. Enacting the bill would not affect direct spending.
H.R. 3210 would amend the Lacey Act to make it legal to possess certain plants that were imported and certain plant products that were produced prior to May 22, 2008. The bill also would exempt individuals from having to declare certain imported plant and tree products. Finally, the bill would require the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) to evaluate certain enforcement procedures under the Lacey Act and report its findings to the Congress. Based on information provided by the USFWS, CBO estimates that implementing the bill would have no significant impact on the agency’s workload because it would not significantly change the way the agency enforces the Lacey Act. In addition, because the agency focuses its enforcement efforts on commercial trafficking and illegal logging, CBO estimates that reducing the number of plant products that are illegal to possess under the Lacey Act would have a minimal effect on the amount of civil penalties collected under the act.
H.R. 3210 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and would not affect the budgets of state, local, or tribal governments.