The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of May 30 - June 5:
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.
A week before U.S. Trade Representative Katherine Tai heads to Geneva for the World Trade Organization's ministerial conference, she said she's excited for what the meeting could bring, though she avoided predicting that either an intellectual property waiver for COVID-19 vaccines would be approved, or that the 20-year fisheries negotiations would be closed.
A recent Congressional Research Service report on the phase one deal with China notes that there has been little discussion about how to enforce what China agreed to, and how to address issues that phase one didn't touch but were highlighted in the Section 301 report.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the weeks of May 16-22 and 23-29:
CBP issued the following releases on commercial trade and related matters:
The National Council of Textile Organizations is arguing that the yarn-forward rule for the Dominican Republic-Central America Free Trade Agreement must be retained, because it is driving what it calls "massive investment" in the countries in Central America. The letter it sent to Vice President Kamala Harris on May 31 is timed to her attendance at the Summit of the Americas, and recognizes her role to try to mitigate the poverty and corruption that leads Central Americans to migrate to the U.S. without visas.
An aggressive timeline that aims to file a conference report by June 21 for the House and Senate China packages has lobbyists speculating that none of the proposals in the trade titles will be in the final bill because the two chambers are too far apart. The two chambers have relatively similar renewals of the Generalized System of Preferences benefits program and a big difference in their renewals of the Miscellaneous Tariff Bill. Each chamber has proposals the other doesn't, such as directing the administration to reopen Section 301 exclusions (Senate only); changing antidumping and countervailing duty laws (House only); removing China's eligibility for de minimis benefits (House only); and renewing and expanding Trade Adjustment Assistance (House only).
The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative will extend the exclusions from Section 301 China tariffs on goods used to treat COVID-19 for another six months, it said in a notice posted on the agency's website. The exclusions were set to expire May 31 (see 2111100037), but USTR said it will extend the 81 product exclusions through Nov. 30.
The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative will extend the exclusions from Section 301 China tariffs on goods used to treat COVID-19 for another six months, it said in a notice posted on the agency's website. The exclusions were set to expire May 31, but USTR said it will extend the 81 product exclusions to Nov. 30.
As companies work to move assembly out of China so that the goods they export to the U.S. won't be hit with Section 301 tariffs, they have to grapple with the fact that CBP may still consider a good made in Mexico, Malaysia, Vietnam or elsewhere to be a product of China if enough of its innards were made in China.