China as a policy won't comment on Tuesday's U.S. election because it's an "internal affair," said a Foreign Affairs Ministry spokesperson Friday when asked about remarks by a Joe Biden aide that the Democratic nominee, if elected president, would consult with allies on what to do about the Section 301 tariffs on Chinese imports. “China's policy on the United States remains highly stable and consistent,” said the spokesperson. “We are committed to developing a China-U.S. relationship featuring non-conflict, non-confrontation, mutual respect and win-win cooperation.” Biden would seek “collective leverage” against China by bonding with allies to curb Beijing's allegedly unfair trade practices, campaign foreign policy adviser Jeffrey Prescott told Reuters Wednesday. Biden won’t “lock into any premature position before we see exactly what we’re inheriting,” said Prescott when asked if Biden would lift the tariffs unilaterally if elected.

China doesn’t comment on U.S. internal affairs such as its presidential election, a Foreign Affairs Ministry spokesperson said Oct. 30 when asked about comments by a Joe Biden aide that the Democratic Party nominee would consult with allies on what to do about the Section 301 tariffs on Chinese imports if he's elected president. “China's policy on the United States remains highly stable and consistent,” the spokesperson said, according to a transcript of a news conference. “We are committed to developing a China-U.S. relationship featuring non-conflict, non-confrontation, mutual respect and win-win cooperation.” Biden would seek “collective leverage” against China by bonding with allies to curb Beijing's allegedly unfair trade practices, foreign policy adviser Jeffrey Prescott told Reuters Oct. 28. “The failure of the Trump administration has been to go it alone.” Biden won’t “lock into any premature position before we see exactly what we’re inheriting,” Prescott said when asked if Biden would lift the tariffs unilaterally if elected. “Consulting with allies is going to be a central part of that.”

China doesn’t comment on U.S. internal affairs such as its presidential election, a Foreign Affairs Ministry spokesperson said Oct. 30 when asked about comments by a Joe Biden aide that the Democratic Party nominee would consult with allies on what to do about the Section 301 tariffs on Chinese imports if he's elected president. “China's policy on the United States remains highly stable and consistent,” the spokesperson said, according to a transcript of a news conference. “We are committed to developing a China-U.S. relationship featuring non-conflict, non-confrontation, mutual respect and win-win cooperation.” Biden would seek “collective leverage” against China by bonding with allies to curb Beijing's allegedly unfair trade practices, foreign policy adviser Jeffrey Prescott told Reuters Oct. 28. “The failure of the Trump administration has been to go it alone.” Biden won’t “lock into any premature position before we see exactly what we’re inheriting,” Prescott said when asked if Biden would lift the tariffs unilaterally if elected. “Consulting with allies is going to be a central part of that.”

A change in administrations could boost the National Association for Foreign-Trade Zones' rear guard action against a proposal for the USMCA technical fixes bill, lobbyist Brian Hannigan told listeners at the NAFTZ virtual conference Oct. 29.

The World Trade Organization told member countries this week that the U.S. has filed an appeal on a panel report on the legality of its Section 301 tariffs on Chinese imports. Because there is no appellate body, there is no way to appeal a case, but China cannot take action under WTO rules while the appeal is pending. In practical terms, however, China already retaliated years ago for the Section 301 tariffs.

The FCC Enforcement Bureau proposed a $20,000 fine Monday against Puerto Rico’s Osnet Wireless for allegedly modifying network equipment to operate in restricted parts of the wireless communications service band where a license is required. Reacting to a carrier complaint, FCC investigators found in December that two transmitters operated by Osnet were using 2307-2327 MHz because they hadn’t been properly configured to reflect U.S. restrictions, the bureau said. The company then retuned the devices “so that both operated with a center frequency of 2457 MHz with a bandwidth of 20 MHz, which is permitted for unlicensed operations.” The bureau found Osnet "has apparently willfully violated section 301 of the [Communications] Act and has also apparently violated sections 15.1(b) and 15.205 of the Commission’s rules” and proposed the fine. The company didn’t comment.

Importers GHSP and Brose North America have “no doubt” that the first-filed HMTX Industries-Jasco Products complaint should be one of the designated test cases in the massive Section 301 litigation, argued lawyer Paul Vandevert Friday in a response (in Pacer) to DOJ’s Oct. 19 motion for case management procedures (see 2010200020). All the roughly 3,600 complaints seek to vacate the Lists 3 and 4A tariff rulemakings and get the tariffs refunded, alleging the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative overstepped its 1974 Trade Act authority and violated the Administrative Procedure Act. Vandevert is among the few to additionally charge USTR with breaching constitutional protections against federal revenue-raising (see 2010040001). “A number of other cases filed,” including from the GHSP and Brose plaintiffs he represents, “have raised claims that are substantively distinct and discrete” from HMTX-Jasco and should also be weighed as possible test cases, he said. Akin Gump's Sept. 30 motion for a three-judge panel made clear HMTX-Jasco was making no constitutional claim (see 2010010043). Vandevert thinks GHSP and Brose were the first to raise the revenue-raising claim and so should also be considered as first-filed test cases, he said. “It is also our understanding that several other plaintiffs in this Section 301 litigation have amended their complaints to adopt and incorporate the revenue raising claims made by GHSP and Brose,” he said. Vandevert emailed us a list Sunday of 22 complaints that Hogan Lovells filed on behalf of various importers. We reviewed them and found that all but one were filed in September and amended Oct. 9 to add the constitutional claim. The 22nd action (in Pacer), filed Oct. 21 on behalf of spices supplier McCormick, raised the argument as an original claim. The Hogan Lovells complaints also add allegations that USTR violated importers' Fifth Amendment due process rights, a claim that Vandevert didn't argue on behalf of GHSP and Brose. USTR deprived importers of due process on Lists 3 and 4A when it failed to "provide a sufficient opportunity for comment" and didn't "adequately explain" its rationale, said all the various Hogan Lovells complaints. USTR's "predetermined decision-making resulted in the unlawful imposition of tariffs on imports covered by Lists 3 and 4A whose value equals $500 billion," they said. USTR didn't respond to questions Monday. Hogan Lovells declined comment.

The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Oct. 19-25:

International Trade Today is providing readers with the top stories from Oct. 19-23 in case they were missed. All articles can be found by searching on the titles or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.

Law firm Husch Blackwell doesn't object to DOJ’s proposal to designate the first-filed HMTX Industries-Jasco Products complaint as a test case in the massive Section 301 litigation, but “there is no reason that it should be chosen as the only test case without further analysis,” it said Thursday in a partial opposition (in Pacer) to the government’s Oct. 19 motion for case management procedures (see 2010200020). It told the U.S. Court of International Trade it represents 75 “individually named plaintiffs” of the “approximately 6000 plus” importers seeking to vacate the Lists 3 and 4A tariff rulemakings and get the duties refunded.