“Tell the White House: Don’t Tax New TVs” headlines a CTA policy issues post urging readers to lobby Congress, governors and the Trump administration against imposing 25 percent tariffs on goods imported from China. TVs would bear an especially heavy burden under the U.S. Trade Representative’s list of products targeted for tariffs under President Donald Trump’s March 22 memorandum accusing the Chinese of unfair trade practices (see 1804040023). If the tariffs go through, “consumers can expect to pay up to $100 more on TVs from China,” said CTA. Tariffs also would “put at risk 7 million American jobs that are tied to trade with China,” it said, citing a Trade Partnership Worldwide analysis. “You have 30 days to contact the White House before they make their final decision,” said CTA. “Be sure to also urge your member of Congress and governor to tell the Trump administration tariffs are the wrong solution to real problems. There’s a better approach.” Written comments about products on the list are due May 11, and the USTR scheduled a public hearing May 15 at International Trade Commission headquarters. Written requests to testify at the hearing are due April 23. Written comments to rebut testimony presented at the hearing are due May 22.

Re-entering the Trans-Pacific Partnership would empower American tech companies to sell "to millions of customers in the Asia-Pacific region” and boost U.S. competitiveness, TechNet CEO Linda Moore said. She responded Thursday to President Donald Trump wanting to negotiate American re-entry. “The U.S. represents only 4 percent of the world’s population, and modern free trade agreements like the TPP are the key to continue unlocking market access for us to sell to the other 96 percent of the world’s potential customers,” Moore said. “Demagoguing against the TPP was a mistake, and withdrawing from the agreement ceded trade leadership in the region to China,” said Institute for Policy Innovation President Tom Giovanetti, blasting China for “intellectual property theft.”

U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer should focus on securing “strong copyright provisions” in U.S. trade agreements because “robust” intellectual property protections are “essential to American innovation and economic growth,” Sens. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, and Bill Nelson, D-Fla., wrote Lighthizer Friday. “Without adequate global safeguards to combat the growing international incidence of counterfeit goods and intellectual property theft, the strength and vitality of America’s most creative and innovative sectors diminishes.” USTR didn't comment.

Customs and Border Protection is seeking input through the Commercial Customs Operations Advisory Committee about what new statutes or regulations are needed to get CBP more authority over e-commerce issues, two COAC members told us. The request relates to recent testimony from Brenda Smith, executive assistant commissioner in the CBP Office of Trade, who was pressed by lawmakers to describe next steps for gaining such authority (see 1803070009). The agency didn't comment.

It’s “time for quick action” for companies that want to sway the U.S. Trade Representative’s office against imposing Trade Act Section 301 tariffs of 25 percent on 1,200 classifications of goods imported from China in the list released Tuesday (see 1804040054 or 1804040023), said DLA Piper in an "international trade alert." Companies “have the opportunity to present their views on specific products listed under the proposal for higher tariffs before the list is finalized and the tariffs become effective, in an effort to seek the removal of a product from the final list,” said the law firm Wednesday. Written comments are due May 11, with an April 23 deadline for requesting to appear at a May 15 public hearing, it said. May 22 is the deadline for written comments to “rebut statements made at the hearing,” it noted. The USTR notice spells out how someone who wants a product removed from the list should file comments and what those comments should say, said the alert: Commenters “should explain why the inclusion of the specific product will not be effective in curbing China's actions that are targeted by this Section 301 action, and also how the tariff would negatively impact US persons (including the affected company and its customers)." USTR didn't comment Thursday on whether the May 15 public hearing at the International Trade Commission building will be streamed live. The agency's recent history has been to hold hearings "off-camera." U.S.-threatened sanctions and the Chinese response to "reciprocate" are likely stage setting for future negotiations, Merrill Lynch analysts emailed investors. "Despite the exchange of tariff threats, we believe there is still room for negotiation between the US and China," said Helen Qiao and Sylvia Sheng Tuesday. "We maintain our view that China will continue its 'carrot and stick approach,' threatening retaliation but also proposing to expand its imports of US products, cut the auto duty, and ease restrictions for US companies investing and selling in China," they said. "We expect the final version of both the US and China trade measures to be more toned down."

The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative proposed tariffs on some $50 billion worth of Chinese imports, with an accompanying list including some tech and telecom-related products. "Sectors subject to the proposed tariffs include industries such as aerospace, information and communication technology, robotics, and machinery," the USTR announced. The tariffs likely wouldn't take effect before June as a result of the administrative process. A result of a Trade Act Section 301 investigation, the levies are meant as a response to a pattern of forced technology transfers, intellectual property theft and cyber business espionage. The Chinese ambassador to the U.S. warned Monday that China would likely retaliate with tariffs of similar scope in response to Section 301 tariffs. We couldn't reach anyone right away Tuesday at that country's embassy. Tech groups have opposed the U.S. move (see 1803220043). Comments are due May 11, and there is a May 15 USTR hearing, at 10 a.m. in the main hearing room of the International Trade Commission, 500 E St. SW.

FedEx CEO Fred Smith worries about the impact of President Donald Trump’s recent imposition of “protectionist tariffs” on imported steel and aluminum (see 1803020038) because “history has shown repeatedly that protectionism is counterproductive to economic growth,” he said on a Tuesday earnings call. “The better approach is to encourage open markets and free exchange of products and services and to reduce barriers to trade,” he said. Smith thinks “the correct way to go here is to deal with China on the issues with China,” he said. FedEx will “continue to advocate against any move towards protectionist trade policies that could slow economic growth and undermine all the positive impacts” from the tax overhaul, said Chief Information Officer Rob Carter in Q&A. In the roughly two weeks since Trump announced he would impose the steel and aluminum tariffs on all but Canada and Mexico, “we’ve not seen any quantifiable shipper behavior change” as a result, said Carter.

U.S. tariffs could especially hurt the information and communications technologies (ICT) industry, many groups said Friday and Monday, singling out China. That country's trade practices concern these groups, but they said tariffs aren't the answer. "Imposition of sweeping tariffs would trigger a chain reaction of negative consequences for the U.S. economy, provoking retaliation," said a letter to President Donald Trump from CompTIA, the Computer and Communications Industry Association, CTA, Information Technology Industry Council, Internet Association, TechNet, Telecommunications Industry Association and other tech and trade groups. "Tariffs on electronics, apparel, and other consumer products would increase prices" and do "little to address the fundamental challenges posed by unfair and discriminatory Chinese trade practices," they said. The Information Technology and Innovation Foundation said much the same thing: "Artificially raising the cost of ICT products by levying tariffs on ICT imports from China would reduce growth of U.S. ICT investments." The White House didn't comment Monday.

The National Retail Federation doubled down Friday on its opposition to President Donald Trump’s tariffs on imported steel and aluminum, saying the administration’s trade measures “threaten import growth at container ports” that are the lifeblood of the U.S. retail industry. NRF CEO Matthew Shay on Thursday called the tariffs "an unnecessary tax on every American family and a self-inflicted wound on the nation’s economy" (see 1803080060). Imports at the major U.S. retail container ports are expected to dip slightly this month due to the shutdown of Asian factories for the lunar new year, not the aluminum and steel tariffs, which don’t take effect for another two weeks, said NRF Friday. “With steel and aluminum tariffs already in place, new tariffs on goods from China being threatened and the ongoing threat of NAFTA withdrawal, we could very quickly have a trade war on our hands,” said Jonathan Gold, NRF vice president-supply chain and customs policy, in a statement. “The immediate impact would be higher prices for American consumers that would throw away the gains of tax reform and put a roadblock in front of economic growth.” U.S. ports handled 1.73 million incoming 20-foot-long cargo containers in January, a 0.2 percent increase from December and a 1.8 percent rise from January 2017, said NRF. It estimates February finished with a 13.7 percent increase year-over-year, with March forecast to be down 1.8 percent from the same 2017 month.

President Donald Trump’s decision to impose tariffs on imported steel and aluminum is “ill-advised,” said CTA President Gary Shapiro in a Thursday statement. Trump's proclamation exempts Canada and Mexico from the tariffs, which take effect for others in two weeks. By imposing tariffs, the Trump administration “risks reversing its successes” and “could ultimately cost far more American jobs than it would create, and raise costs on consumer products,” said Shapiro. “The imposition of tariffs will undoubtedly result in previously uninvolved sectors being retaliated against and create a dangerous race to the bottom, which is a threat to our domestic economy and the entire global trading system.” Shapiro fears “retaliation” for the tariffs could pose a “national security threat,” he tweeted last week (see 1803020038). National Retail Federation CEO Matthew Shay agrees the tariffs are "an unnecessary tax on every American family and a self-inflicted wound on the nation’s economy," he said Thursday. Consumers "are just beginning to see more money in their paychecks following tax reform, but those gains will soon be offset by higher prices for products ranging from canned goods to cars to electronics," said Shay. The retail industry is "extremely concerned by the administration’s apparent desire to ignite a trade war, where the net losers will be the very people the president wants to help," Shay said. Retailers are also "troubled by the direction of the ongoing NAFTA [North American Free Trade Agreement] negotiations and the threat of additional tariffs on consumer goods from China," he said, saying building walls blocks "the free flow of commerce in today’s global economy.”