Language in the 2002 Homeland Security Act prohibited federal contracts for companies that put most of their operations offshore to limit their tax liabilities.  You may remember that the Obama White House has been trying to find some of those accounts in the Cayman Islands, Switzerland, etc.  They have been negotiating with Swiss Banks to get their lists.

 This week the Senate financial services bill is including language that would ease the ban.  The US Chamber of Commerce, that bastion of free and unfettered enterprise has been lobbying heavily for it, along with other groups.  Some think it is answer to President Obama slapping a tariff on Chinese tires; I don't think they need a reason.

A representative of the Chamber is claiming that the former ban is "inconsistent with US obligations under international agreements."  Nope, wouldn't want to violate any trade agreements, would we?

 The US Public Interest Group (PIRG) spokesperson says the language undermines the intent of the original legislation, and will cost the American taxpayers billions.  I'll bet.

 The spending bill has not been brought to the floor for a vote yet; the House bill contains no such language. 

 Susan Collins (R-Maine) was in favor of the ban before she was against of it.  "These companies create phony foreign headquarters in a file folder or a mailbox to escape taxes and then use other people's taxes to turn a profit," Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) said at the time.  (2002)  She 'doesn't believe' the new language undermines the ban .

Which body's language will be in the final bill?  Come on; take a guess.

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/61925-senate-loosens-ban-on-companies-with-offshore-businesses