International Trade Today is providing readers with the top stories from last week in case they were missed. All articles can be found by searching on the titles or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.

The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative sought confidential advice from “private-sector advisory committees,” believed to be under the Industry Trade Advisory Committee (ITAC) program managed jointly by USTR and the Commerce Department, before imposing the List 3 Section 301 tariffs on Chinese imports, Stephen Vaughn, the agency’s then-general counsel, wrote then-USTR Robert Lighthizer on Sept. 17, 2018. The document was one of about a dozen “decision memos” spanning 488 pages that DOJ filed March 24 in the Section 301 litigation docket (In Re Section 301 Cases, CIT #21-00052) at the Court of International Trade as an “appendix” to oral argument held Feb. 1 (see 2202010059).

The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative sought confidential advice from “private-sector advisory committees,” believed to be under the Industry Trade Advisory Committee (ITAC) program managed jointly by USTR and the Commerce Department, before imposing the List 3 Section 301 tariffs on Chinese imports, Stephen Vaughn, the agency’s then-general counsel, wrote USTR Robert Lighthizer Sept. 17, 2018. The document was one of about a dozen “decision memos” spanning 488 pages that DOJ filed Thursday in the Section 301 litigation docket (1:21-cv-52) at the U.S. Court of International Trade as an “appendix” to oral argument held there Feb. 1 (see 2202010053).

A senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute says U.S. Trade Representative Katherine Tai "seems unable to persuade the White House" to fashion new tools to confront China, and complains that if the administration has postponed a second Section 301 investigation, that's a mistake.

The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:

A leading voice in the House behind the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act introduced a bipartisan bill that would remove permanent normal trade relations from China and instead would require annual affirmations from the administration that "the Chinese government is making serious and sustained improvement in respecting human rights" in order to retain most-favored-nation tariffs.

Consumer tech products barely figure at all on the list of 352 exclusions from Section 301 tariffs on China that were reinstated Wednesday by the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative. Of the newly granted 352 exclusions -- about 64% of those that were "eligible" for reinstatement because they previously had been extended -- most had expired at the end of 2020, but some had lapsed by midyear 2021.

The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:

After the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative agreed to reinstate 64% of expired Section 301 tariff exclusions (see 2203230070), business interests said it should go further, while the Coalition for a Prosperous America said the decision was wrongheaded.

The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative is wading into “unchartered waters” if it tries extending the lists 1 and 2 Section 301 tariffs on China past their four-year expiration deadlines under the 1974 Trade Act (see 2203140004), David Olave, a Sandler Travis associate and trade policy adviser, said in an email. List 1 is due to expire July 6, List 2 only seven weeks later on Aug. 23.