The latest list of goods from China proposed to be subject to 25 percent Section 301 tariffs appears to hit chemicals, plastics, resins and semiconductors, according to a list of tariff subheadings released by the U.S. Trade Representative on June 15 (see 1806150003). Other affected products include cargo containers, tractors and railway equipment. Comments on the list are due July 23 and a hearing is scheduled for July 24 (see 1806190060). New tariffs on 818 other subheadings from the original list take effect July 6.
Section 301 Tariffs
Section 301 Tariffs are levied under the Trade Act of 1974 which grants the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) authority to investigate and take action to protect U.S. rights from trade agreements and respond to foreign trade practices. Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 provides statutory means allowing the United States to impose sanctions on foreign countries violating U.S. trade agreements or engaging in acts that are “unjustifiable” or “unreasonable” and burdensome to U.S. commerce. Prior to 1995, the U.S. frequently used Section 301 to eliminate trade barriers and pressure other countries to open markets to U.S. goods.
The founding of the World Trade Organization in 1995 created an enforceable dispute settlement mechanism, reducing U.S. use of Section 301. The Trump Administration began using Section 301 in 2018 to unilaterally enforce tariffs on countries and industries it deemed unfair to U.S. industries. The Trump Administration adopted the policy shift to close what it deemed a persistent "trade gap" between the U.S. and foreign governments that it said disadvantaged U.S. firms. Additionally, it pointed to alleged weaknesses in the WTO trade dispute settlement process to justify many of its tariff actions—particularly against China. The administration also cited failures in previous trade agreements to enhance foreign market access for U.S. firms and workers.
The Trump Administration launched a Section 301 investigation into Chinese trade policies in August 2017. Following the investigation, President Trump ordered the USTR to take five tariff actions between 2018 and 2019. Almost three quarters of U.S. imports from China were subject to Section 301 tariffs, which ranged from 15% to 25%. The U.S. and China engaged in negotiations resulting in the “U.S.-China Phase One Trade Agreement”, signed in January 2020.
The Biden Administration took steps in 2021 to eliminate foreign policies subject to Section 301 investigations. The administration has extended and reinstated many of the tariffs enacted during the Trump administration but is conducting a review of all Section 301 actions against China.
New Chinese 25 percent tariffs on goods from the U.S. set to take effect on July 6 (see 1806150037) are mostly focused on meat, agriculture and cars. China said it would impose initial tariffs on those and other goods mentioned in a first list on the same date the U.S will impose its Section 301 tariffs on goods from China (see 1806150003). China said it also plans to eventually add tariffs to goods mentioned in a second list, which includes chemical products, medical equipment and energy products.
Though the Trump administration’s plan to impose Trade Act Section 301 tariffs of 25 percent on Chinese imports “may have gotten China’s attention, they’re unlikely to change China’s conduct -- and will cause significant collateral damage in the process,” a June 19 Progressive Policy Institute report said. The duties, though applied to “Chinese-origin” products, “would be paid by Americans and impose serious costs on the U.S. economy,” it said. A “smarter strategy” to “confront China’s mercantilism” would be for the U.S. “to work more closely with its trade partners” to curb the allegedly “abusive” trade behavior, the report said. “China’s unfair policies and practices seriously threaten innovative businesses in many countries, and they -- and their governments -- can be key allies in pushing back.” But it’s difficult to build a coalition against China when the administration “needlessly antagonizes allies,” as it did when it imposed steel and aluminum tariffs against its allies, it said. The U.S. also needs to “speak with a single voice” in “focused, results-oriented” trade negotiations with China, the report said. The administration “should designate a single, high-level official to negotiate with China about core trade issues related to China’s unfair innovation practices,” it said. “This official should also actively seek cooperation from allies on those issues.”
Republicans and Democrats on the Senate Finance Committee criticized Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross on June 20 over the steel and aluminum tariffs and the implementation of granting exclusions for certain imports subject to those tariffs. Democrat Sen. Claire McCaskill, who described a nail maker in her home state of Missouri who is laying off more than half its 500-person workforce as its inputs' cost increases, told him: "it appears to me a chaotic and, frankly, incompetent manner you're picking winners and losers." Only Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, asked supportive questions during the hearing on tariffs.
Despite repeated lobbying trips from Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross, the Senate passed a version of the defense authorization bill June 18 that includes an amendment designed to retain the seven-year export ban on Chinese telecommunications equipment manufacturer ZTE. However, the way the amendment is written, the Commerce Department would retain the discretion to allow ZTE to continue importing semiconductors from U.S. sources.
International Trade Today is providing readers with some of the top stories for June 11-15 in case they were missed.
The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative posted information on submitting public comments on the new list of products proposed for Section 301 tariffs. The notice again lists the products from China that will see new tariffs starting July 6 (see 1806150003) but doesn't spell out the process for requesting product exclusions. Those details will come in a separate notice, USTR said. The agency's notice also "creates a new Chapter 99 subheading for entry purposes (entries of articles classified in the tariff subheadings identified in Annex A have to use the new Chapter 99 classification as a secondary classification, so the additional 25% duty can be assessed) and addresses foreign trade zone admissions," Baker & McKenzie lawyer Ted Murphy said said in a June 18 blog post
Importers should be reviewing options toward reducing the impact of any of the Section 301 tariffs on goods from China, Baker & McKenzie lawyer Ted Murphy said in a June 19 blog post. President Donald Trump on June 18 announced plans for 10 percent duties on $200 billion worth of goods from China (see 1806180058) if China moves forward on planned retaliations to the initial Section 301 tariffs (see 1806150028). "While there is still time for the two countries to reach a negotiated settlement and avoid a trade war (the first tranche of duties does not go into effect until July 6th), that does not appear likely, at this point," Murphy said.
Most of the computer, aviation and automotive, electrical and machinery products that will be hit by tariffs under Section 301 are produced by foreign companies operating in China, according to an updated study from the Peterson Institute for International Economics. The think tank says it aims to do "truth telling about the benefits of globalization" as well as study labor market adjustment due to globalization and how to find a sustainable growth model for mature economies.
The U.S. plans to impose a 10 percent tariff on an additional $200 billion worth of goods from China in response to China's retaliatory tariffs, President Donald Trump said in a June 18 statement. China's decision to implement 25 percent tariffs on $34 billion in U.S. imports, mirroring the Section 301 tariffs, shows China "has no intention of changing its unfair practices related to the acquisition of American intellectual property and technology," said Trump. "The latest action by China clearly indicates its determination to keep the United States at a permanent and unfair disadvantage."