Toomey Hopeful for Section 301 Exclusion Language
Hours before the Senate was due to consider his non-binding instruction to negotiators on the China package to retain language directing the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative to reopen a Section 301 exclusion process, Sen. Pat Toomey, R-Pa., warned that if USTR didn't open such a process if the language becomes law, he would see that as a misuse of power.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Export Compliance Daily combines U.S. export control news, foreign border import regulation and policy developments into a single daily information service that reliably informs its trade professional readers about important current issues affecting their operations.
Toomey told International Trade Today during a hallway interview at the Capitol May 4 that his motion to instruct is "identical to the language that was in the bipartisan Wyden-Crapo language," and therefore he's hopeful it can get a lot of Democratic votes. That language says that USTR can avoid a broad Section 301 exclusion process if it "certifies to the appropriate congressional committees that maintaining an exclusion process ... would impair the ability of the United States to maintain effective pressure to remove unreasonable or discriminatory practices burdening commerce in the United States."
While USTR Katherine Tai has said repeatedly that she would be open to a broader exclusion process if it is warranted, she has also repeatedly pushed back on arguments from those who say that since the tariffs have not achieved their aims, and since inflation is high, they should be at least partially rolled back (see 2205030008).
When asked if he's worried if even if the language is included in a bill that becomes law, it might not lead to a broad exclusion process, Toomey said, "That's not the intent of the legislation. I think that would be misusing the authority that is given to the USTR."
The vote on Toomey's motion is expected late at night on May 4. Earlier in the week, Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, urged his colleagues to oppose it. "Those tariffs are in place because of China’s unfair trade practices targeting our industrial base and Ohio jobs," he said. "The AFL-CIO opposes it, USTR opposes it, and the Alliance for American Manufacturing opposes it. They know that any removal of these tariffs needs to be part of a broader strategic approach to trade policy with China.
"The United States learned hard lessons about over-reliance on China for critical goods during the COVID pandemic. We should not be undoing progress by expanding tariff reductions for firms that have failed to adjust and diversify."