Page:United States Statutes at Large Volume 98 Part 3.djvu/624

 98 STAT. 2996

PUBLIC LAW 98-573—OCT. 30, 1984

SEC. 243. DUTY-FREE ENTRY FOR SCIENTIFIC EQUIPMENT FOR THE ELLIS FISCHEL STATE CANCER HOSPITAL, COLUMBIA, MISSOURI.

19 USC 1654.

Notwithstanding any provision of the Tariff Act of 1930 or any other provisions of the law to the contrary, the Secretary of the Treasury shall reliquidate, as duty free, the entries numbered 220286 (dated November 7, 1975) and 235380 (dated January 23, 1976) made at Chicago, Illinois, and covering scientific equipment for the use of the Ellis Fischel Cancer Hospital, Columbia, Missouri, in accordance with the decision of the Department of Commerce in docket numbered 76-00199-33-00530. SEC. 244. DUTY-FREE ENTRY OF ORGANS IMPORTED FOR THE USE OF TRINITY CATHEDRAL OF CLEVELAND, OHIO.

The organs made by Flentrop Orgel Bouw, the Netherlands, that were imported for the use of Trinity Cathedral of Cleveland, Ohio, and entered during 1973-1978 shall be considered to have been admitted free of duty on the dates of entry. If the liquidation of any such entry has become final, the Secretary of the Treasury, if request therefor is filed with the appropriate customs officer within 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, shall reliquidate the entry and make the appropriate refund of any duty paid. SEC. 245. SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING POSSIBLE EEC ACTION ON CORN GLUTEN.

Whereas— (1) the European Council of Ministers has directed the Commission of the European Community (EC) to initiate consultations with the United States and other interested parties under article XXVIII of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) for the purpose of imposing tariff or tariff quota restrictions on imports of nongrain feed ingredients, including corn gluten feed; (2) the EC has considered proposals to impose a domestic consumption tax on vegetable fats and oils, which would undermine the intention of the duty-free binding on certain corn and soybean products imported from the United States; (3) the EC has bound in the GATT that it will impose no import duties on soybeans, soybean meal, com gluten feed, and other com by-products, and such zero-tariff bindings were agreed to in return for United States trade concessions to the EC during previous rounds of trade negotiations; (4) the EC has not demonstrated sound economic justification for restrictions on the import of nongrain feed ingredients and such restrictions would only shift the financial burden of EC Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) reform from the EC to other countries, with negligible improvement in the current EC budget situation; (5) action by the EX^ to breach a negotiated concession would severely erode the basic GATT principle of comparative advantage and set a dangerous precedent which could threaten other previously negotiated concessions and serve as a precursor to restrictions on the import of soybeans and soybean products; and (6) the official position of the United States, as stated by the Secretary of Agriculture, is that there is strong support for the EC efforts to balance the Agricultural budget, but that the

�