HOUSE FOREIGN AFFAIRS COMMITTEE
JOINT SUBCOMMITTEE HEARING
For questions on the note below, please contact the Delta Strategy Group team.
On July 14, the House Foreign Affairs Committee East Asia and Pacific Subcommittee and South and Central Asia Subcommittee held a hearing entitled “More Bang for the Buck: Aligning Commercial Diplomacy Between State and Commerce.” Witnesses in the hearing were:
- David Fogel, Assistant Secretary, Commerce and Director General of the United States and Foreign Commercial Service, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce
- Caleb Orr, Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Economic, Energy, and Business Affairs, U.S. Department of State
Below are several key takeaways from the hearing prepared by Delta Strategy Group.
KEY TAKEAWAYS
- Commercial diplomacy was framed as central to the administration’s broader agenda of promoting U.S. export growth, facilitating foreign direct investment, securing critical supply chains, re-industrializing the U.S. economy, and establishing energy dominance.
- Fogel and Orr outlined parallel reorganization efforts, including Commerce’s Global Markets modernization and State’s new Commercial Diplomacy Enterprise (CDE), to centralize case tracking and align resources behind the administration’s trade and investment agenda. They cited more than $428 billion in Commerce-facilitated deals and more than $515 billion in State-facilitated outcomes over the past year.
- The current division of commercial diplomacy responsibilities, with Commerce leading where the Foreign Commercial Service (FCS) is present and State leading where it is not, was described by Fogel and Orr as delivering record results. Both opposed the idea of consolidation.
- Discussions raised trade enforcement and agricultural market access, including foreign subsidies, non-tariff barriers, and China’s market flooding and unmet Phase One Trade Deal commitments. Orr highlighted President Trump’s focus on trade barriers affecting U.S. farmers and cited CDE as a centralized tool for tracking agricultural cases and engaging foreign governments.
- Comments emphasized applying commercial diplomacy tools to strategic competition with China, particularly on critical minerals, rare earths, and the American Artificial Intelligence (AI) Export Program, alongside the U.S.’s chairmanship of the Forum on Resource Geostrategic Engagement (FORGE).
DISCUSSION
Commercial Diplomacy, Outcomes, & Administration Priorities
- Fogel outlined how the International Trade Administration’s (ITA) Global Markets business unit advances the administration’s commercial priorities by promoting U.S. export growth, facilitating foreign direct investment, and driving commercial advocacy and diplomacy.
- Orr outlined commercial diplomacy as a key tool of diplomatic statecraft for advancing the administration’s priorities of balancing trade, securing critical supply chains, re-industrializing the U.S. economy, establishing energy dominance, and preserving and growing U.S. global economic leadership.
- Representative Huizenga (R-MI) highlighted export promotion and Commerce-State coordination to help U.S. businesses capitalize on new market access under the Trump administration.
- Representative Bera (D-CA) emphasized commercial diplomacy as a tool for supporting U.S. industries amid intensifying global competition, contrasting it with China’s coordinated government backing, financing, and market access strategies, and warning that the U.S. risks ceding economic and strategic ground.
- Fogel highlighted that Global Markets’ commercial outcomes under the second Trump administration secured $428 billion in client-verified deals, assisted 76,400 U.S. firms, and supported 1.3 million American jobs, more than 2024 and 2023 combined. He cited how the 2026 SelectUSA Investment Summit generated a record $2.5 billion in on-site announcements.
- Orr highlighted the State Department’s commercial outcomes since January 20, 2025, stating that it contributed to more than $515 billion in wins for U.S. companies supporting an estimated 1.4 million U.S. jobs.
Interagency Coordination
- Representative Kim (R-CA) stated that commercial diplomacy responsibilities are spread across agencies and implemented unevenly across overseas posts. She noted that FCS has approximately 200 personnel covering about one-third of U.S. posts, leaving State economic officers to perform commercial diplomacy without dedicated training.
- Representative Kim asked which agency leads international commercial diplomacy. Fogel responded that Commerce leads in markets where FCS officers are present, serving as the primary point of contact and maintaining commercial deal lists. Orr noted that State economic officers already perform FCS functions under FCS supervision in countries where FCS is not directly present.
- Representative Kim questioned why the Departments of Commerce and State reported different commercial diplomacy metrics for investment and job creation. Orr explained that State’s broader foreign policy mandate allows it to count Advocacy Center cases and advocacy conducted through its national interest process, including regulatory changes preserving U.S. companies’ market access. Fogel added that Commerce reports only client-verified wins, including SelectUSA-facilitated foreign direct investment, tying reported outcomes directly to Commerce’s assistance.
- Representatives Burchett (R-TN) and Barr (R-KY) asked whether State and Commerce duplicate resources, whether commercial diplomacy should be consolidated, and how the Departments deconflict responsibilities. Fogel stated that Commerce does not view duplication as a concern, describing CDE as a collaborative effort that helps State leadership advocate more forcefully for U.S. business, and opposed Department consolidation.
- Fogel outlined that the current division is delivering record results, that consolidation would create overlap, and that most cases are already handled collaboratively between Commerce commercial officers and State economic officers.
- Orr referenced how State uses the CDE to complement Commerce’s Advocacy Center by reinforcing approved advocacy cases through Secretary Rubio’s engagement while also supporting broader foreign policy objectives in cases where no U.S. company is available to compete.
- Orr emphasized the complementary roles of State, Commerce, and Energy in advancing the administration’s trade and investment agenda, highlighting State’s global diplomatic presence of more than 1,500 economic officers across more than 170 countries, collaboration with Commerce’s FCS, Advocacy Center, and Partner Post program, and coordination with the Department of Energy on initiatives including Deal Teams.
- Orr highlighted the Partner Post program as a mechanism for extending Commerce’s commercial services where the Department does not maintain a direct overseas presence, stating that the program delivered 116 client-verified commercial wins totaling more than $13.7 billion and assisted more than 3,000 U.S. companies in FY 2025, compared to $2.98 billion in FY 2024.
Institutional Organization & Operations
- Fogel emphasized the integrated structure of Global Markets and ITA, highlighting coordination among FCS, SelectUSA, the Advocacy Center, and other Commerce offices. He noted that the Advocacy Center’s record $244 billion in advocacy wins relied on FCS to amplify U.S. advocacy overseas.
- Orr highlighted CDE as State’s most significant reorganization of its economic statecraft capacity in years, explaining how it centralizes economic and commercial cases, addresses data fragmentation and coordination challenges, elevates commercial cases for Department leadership, shares strategic deal opportunities with interagency partners, and integrates commercial diplomacy into the Department’s core functions using State and interagency tools.
- Representative Kim highlighted the Boost American Business Act, which would provide targeted commercial diplomacy training to State personnel where the FCS is absent and establish a Foreign Service specialization without duplicating FCS efforts or displacing Commerce personnel. She clarified that the bill would strengthen training rather than consolidate commercial diplomacy or displace FCS.
- Orr supported additional commercial diplomacy training, highlighting Secretary Rubio’s reorganization to strengthen posts and regional Bureaus and combine State’s regional expertise with greater commercial expertise. Fogel also supported additional training but argued that the FCS’s coverage of more than ninety percent of global GDP and decades of institutional knowledge are not easily transferred through training alone.
- Representative Bera highlighted declining staffing at the State Department and the Commerce Department’s Foreign Commercial Service, arguing that fewer experts overseas reduce support for U.S. companies and limit the ability to identify commercial opportunities and challenges, and emphasized the need for additional resources, staffing, institutionalized coordination, digital tools, and adaptation of U.S. institutions for the 21st century.
- Representative Olszewski (D-MD) emphasized that commercial diplomacy depends on stable institutions, reliable infrastructure, a skilled workforce, transparent regulations, and the rule of law, highlighting that development assistance complements those efforts by reducing risk and strengthening market institutions. Orr agreed that foreign assistance should drive the type of development that enables durable commercial investment.
- Representative Moylan (R-GU) highlighted his USDA Modernization Act of 2026, framing how outdated income classifications can limit U.S. commercial diplomacy in small, high-income countries despite their strategic importance, and asked how the U.S. can strengthen commercial diplomacy to improve export competitiveness and compete with adversarial actors. Fogel pointed to Global Markets’ focus on identifying strategically important opportunities and helping U.S. companies enter fair bidding processes earlier.
- Orr thanked Congress for providing DFC with greater flexibility to invest in countries previously classified as high-income by the World Bank, stating that investment decisions should reflect U.S. foreign policy and national security priorities.
- Orr cited Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Venezuela as examples of the administration’s use of commercial diplomacy and economic engagement to advance broader foreign policy objectives.
Trade, Agriculture, & Market Access
- Representative Barr (R-KY) asked how Commerce collaborates with the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) to ensure trade policy and commercial diplomacy work in lockstep to open foreign markets. Fogel stated that ITA leadership is in constant communication with USTR, highlighting how ITA’s nationwide network of U.S. Export Assistance Centers relays trade barriers and other business concerns to USTR.
- Representative Gallagher (R-CA) highlighted trade pressures facing U.S. agricultural producers and asked how commercial diplomacy can address foreign subsidies and trade barriers that create an uneven playing field. Orr responded that President Trump has been “laser focused” on addressing trade barriers affecting U.S. farmers, explaining that while Commerce and the Advocacy Center focus on individual business transactions, State’s economic officers focus on changing foreign government policies that create such barriers. He referenced CDE as a centralized tool for tracking agricultural cases and engaging foreign governments on barriers affecting U.S. farmers.
- Representative Gallagher highlighted China’s use of market flooding and trade barriers that undermine U.S. agricultural exports, asking how the administration is combating such practices. Orr stated that President Trump is treating the U.S.-China relationship as the most important structural geopolitical relationship and has made China’s commitments to purchase U.S. agricultural products a key priority, noting that China has not lived up to its Phase One Trade Deal commitments.
- Fogel outlined how USTR and Treasury lead U.S. policy on China, while Commerce plays a leading role in addressing non-tariff barriers through its Enforcement and Compliance division, which analyzes trade agreements and monitors compliance in coordination with State.
- Representatives Biggs (R-SC) and Barr (R-KY) raised country-specific market access concerns. Fogel stated that the U.S. Commercial Service supports exporters by engaging foreign ministries to reduce non-tariff barriers and connecting businesses through Export Assistance Centers.
Strategic Sectors: Critical Minerals & Artificial Intelligence
- Representative Kim praised the administration’s announcement that the U.S. will chair FORGE to secure critical mineral supply chains with allies and asked whether Congress should codify U.S. participation. Orr highlighted FORGE as part of the administration’s efforts to address global critical mineral supply chain bottlenecks, noting that Secretary Rubio hosted the largest ministerial in the State Department’s history with 55 delegations focused on critical minerals and has assumed the chairmanship of FORGE.
- Orr cited the administration’s 28 bilateral critical minerals agreements as providing the foundation for foreign assistance to support critical mineral development, allowing the U.S. to map critical mineral resources in partner countries.
- Representative Bera highlighted the DOMINANCE Act, outlining how it codifies the Minerals Security Partnership, strengthens interagency coordination through Energy Security Pacts, builds the workforce through critical mineral exchange programs, and supports efforts to diversify supply chains from adversarial control.
- Representative Gallagher emphasized the importance of a coordinated whole-of-government strategy to address China’s approximately ninety percent control of rare earth minerals, urging continued coordination between State and Commerce.
- Representative Barr (R-KY) asked how FCS should prioritize personnel and resources across strategic sectors, including critical minerals, energy, semiconductors, artificial intelligence, and emerging technologies. Fogel highlighted Global Markets’ prioritization of Strategic Exports of American-Made Goods and Services (STREAM) sectors, including artificial intelligence, energy, critical minerals, and U.S. manufacturing.
- Representative Huizenga highlighted the American AI Export Program as a key pillar of the administration’s economic promotion strategy, explaining that its dual-prong approach complements export controls by promoting global adoption of American AI technologies among partners, allies, and emerging markets, and noted that FCS is the lead agency implementing the program globally.
- Fogel, responding to a request for an implementation update one year after the AI Action Plan, said the program is intended to ensure the U.S. comes in first vis-à-vis China while balancing export promotion with Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) export controls to prevent China from gaining access to U.S. AI technology.
- Representative Bera discussed how commercial diplomacy should promote AI, support U.S. firms competing for major infrastructure and development projects, strengthen critical mineral and supply chains, and reduce reliance on strategic competitors.