The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative is doing a “top-to-bottom review” of the U.S.-China “trade and economic relationship” through the agency’s “lens,” USTR Katherine Tai told a Thursday House Ways and Means Committee hearing on President Joe Biden’s trade policy agenda. This began at the request of Sen. Rob Portman, R-Ohio, who did a similar study when he was USTR under President George W. Bush, said Tai. “This is a really important opportunity” to look at “all the components” here, including phase one trade agreement, Section 301 tariffs on Chinese imports and tariff exclusions, she said. It gives her agency the chance to “strategically think through what are the components going to be of an effective strategy,” she said. “What in what we have right now is effective? What can be more effective, and how do we turn the direction of this very important challenge towards a vision that is going to serve the interests of the U.S. economy today, in the medium term and also in the long term?”

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

The following are short summaries of recent CBP “NY” rulings issued by the agency's National Commodity Specialist Division in New York:

The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of May 3-9.

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

The Biden-Harris administration should settle the massive Section 301 litigation that’s inundating the U.S. Court of International Trade and “alleviate the economic and social harms” the Lists 3 and 4A tariffs have caused to U.S. companies, workers and the “overall U.S. economy,” about 225 of the litigation’s more than 6,000 plaintiffs wrote President Joe Biden May 7. All the cases allege the tariffs violate the 1974 Trade Act and the 1946 Administrative Procedure Act and should be vacated and the duties refunded, said the letter. Plaintiffs are confident the court “will agree,” it said. HMTX Industries and Jasco Products, plaintiffs in the court’s designated Section 301 sample case, were lead signatories to the letter, signed mostly by small importers, but also big companies, including HP, Volkswagen and TCT Mobile, TCL’s smartphone subsidiary. Akin Gump attorneys for HMTX-Jasco declined comment Wednesday, but they made no secret in court proceedings of their desire to see the litigation move forward as expeditiously as possible because the tariffs continue to be a daily burden on importers with Lists 3 and 4A exposure. We learned that a draft of the letter was circulated to plaintiffs about a month ago, but many declined to sign because they viewed a White House settlement agreement to refund billions in paid tariffs as a long shot. Others never had the opportunity to review the draft. The White House didn’t comment.

The Biden-Harris administration should settle the massive Section 301 litigation that’s inundating the U.S. Court of International Trade and “alleviate the economic and social harms” the Lists 3 and 4A tariffs have caused to U.S. companies, workers and the “overall U.S. economy,” about 225 of the litigation’s more than 6,000 plaintiffs wrote President Joe Biden May 7. All the cases allege the tariffs violate the 1974 Trade Act and the 1946 Administrative Procedure Act and should be vacated and the duties refunded, said the letter. Plaintiffs are confident the court “will agree,” it said. HMTX Industries and Jasco Products, plaintiffs in the court’s designated Section 301 sample case, were lead signatories to the letter, signed mostly by small importers, but also big companies, including HP, Volkswagen and TCT Mobile, TCL’s smartphone subsidiary. Akin Gump attorneys for HMTX-Jasco declined comment Wednesday, but they made no secret in court proceedings of their desire to see the litigation move forward as expeditiously as possible because the tariffs continue to be a daily burden on importers with Lists 3 and 4A exposure. We learned that a draft of the letter was circulated to plaintiffs about a month ago, but many declined to sign because they viewed a White House settlement agreement to refund billions in paid tariffs as a long shot. Others never had the opportunity to review the draft. The White House didn’t comment.

U.S. Trade Representative Katherine Tai generally avoided being pinned down on timing as she was asked about rekindling trade negotiations with the United Kingdom and Kenya, the pause on tariffs on European imports, and a solution for steel overcapacity that could make way for the lifting of Section 232 tariffs.

U.S. Trade Representative Katherine Tai, in her second day of testimony on Capitol Hill, heard again and again from members of Congress who are hearing from companies in their districts that they want Section 301 tariff exclusions back. She heard repeatedly that the 9% countervailing duties on Canadian lumber are making a bad situation worse. And she heard that the Miscellaneous Tariff Bill and Generalized System of Preferences benefits program should be renewed. On each topic, both Democrats and Republicans shared concerns, though on GSP, Republicans only spoke of the cost to importers, while Democrats worried about the effects of GSP on the eligible countries. Tai testified for more than four hours in front of the House Ways and Means Committee on May 13.

A group of importers involved in the litigation over the Section 301 tariffs sent a letter on May 7 to the White House urging a settlement in the case to "alleviate the economic and social harms these tariffs have caused to U.S. companies, U.S. workers and the overall U.S. economy." Led by the importers selected to serve as the test case for the litigation, HMTX Industries and Jasco Products Company, the companies told the White House they are seeking an end to the tariffs and a full refund of the "unlawfully" collected lists 3 and 4A duties collected from the companies. The case is currently making its way through the Court of International Trade.