Trade professionals and a trade scholar, talking on a panel that compared the Trump and Biden administrations' trade policies, said that not as much has changed on trade as might have been expected. Christine McDaniel, an economist at George Mason University, said she doesn't expect any of the Section 301 tariffs or the steel and aluminum tariffs to be lifted before the end of 2021. "I haven’t seen any indication they’re going to pull back on the tariffs," she said during a seminar at the Virginia Small Business Development Center on Sept. 21. "I’ve heard people say that the Trump trade policy is just being continued by the Biden administration, minus the rhetoric. You can make the argument for that."
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.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Sept. 13-19:
A day after the White House's primary spokesperson said that if there's an opportunity to renegotiate the Trans-Pacific Partnership, that's a discussion the U.S. could join, a former White House trade negotiator said the path to reentering the TPP is so steep that he doesn't think it's likely in the next few years.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Sept. 6-12:
International Trade Today is providing readers with the top stories from Sept. 7-10 in case they were missed. All articles can be found by searching on the titles or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.
Citing unnamed sources, Bloomberg reported that the U.S. feels its leverage has faded from 25% tariffs on hundreds of millions of dollars worth of Chinese goods and 7.5% tariffs on most of the rest. So, the report said, the administration is considering initiating another Section 301 report, which would focus on the impact on American businesses from Chinese subsidization of its industry. The same story said officials are "leaning toward" reinstituting tariff exclusions on some of the products already subject to tariffs, but also said no decision has been made.
Sept. 10 is the one-year anniversary of the first-filed Section 301 complaint alleging the lists 3 and 4A tariffs on Chinese goods are unlawful under the 1974 Trade Act and violate the 1946 Administrative Procedure Act. Virtually all the roughly 3,800 cases from 6,500 or more importers that have since inundated the Court of International Trade seek to vacate the lists 3 and 4A tariff rulemakings and get the duties refunded with interest. A court order Sept. 8 vacated components of its July 6 preliminary injunction order instructed the government to liquidate customs entries from China with lists 3 and 4A tariff exposure “in the ordinary course” and refund the money with interest if the tariffs are declared unlawful, once the litigation becomes “final and conclusive” (see 2107060077). The order also frees the litigation to return to arguments on the merits after a prolonged battle over many months over refund relief. Oct. 1 is the deadline for Department of Justice to file papers supporting its June 1 dispositive motion and response to the plaintiffs’ Aug. 2 cross-motion. Nov. 15, the last date listed on the court’s April 13 briefing schedule, is when the plaintiffs file their reply.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Aug. 30 - Sept. 5:
The American Association of Exporters and Importers, IBM and U.S. subsidiaries of the Foxconn Technology Group all disagree with CBP's proposed use of Part 102 rules of origin in non-preferential claims and procurement under USMCA (see 2107010045), they said in the comments recently posted in the docket for the proposal. Meanwhile, lithium-ion battery producer, Inventus Power, and the American Iron and Steel Institute voiced support for the changes in their comments. So far, the comments show a deep split between industries in support (see 2107270049) and against (see 2109010006) the proposal.
The National Association of Manufacturers CEO is calling on the Biden administration to "act as quickly as possible to finalize and publicize [its China] strategy. Such a clear, robust strategy on China, including U.S.-China trade, would be critical in bolstering manufacturers’ efforts to retain and hire American workers, invest in domestic operations and adjust supply chains, and providing meaningful opportunities for manufacturers to seek targeted relief from broad application of Section 301 tariffs."