The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative is starting an out-of-cycle review of Thailand’s “Special 301” status because of positive steps the country has taken in its intellectual property regime, USTR announced Sept. 15. USTR put Thailand on the Special 301 priority watch list in its 2017 Special 301 report released in April. USTR had “noted that the United States was prepared to review that status if Thailand continued to take positive action on IP issues and made substantial progress in addressing the concerns described in the Special 301 report,” the agency said in a statement. The Trump administration has been “closely engaging” with Thailand on improving IP protection and enforcement, and the nation has taken recent steps to improve enforcement against pirated and counterfeit goods, including enhanced agency coordination and a continuing focus on investigations and raids, USTR said. Thailand also acceded to the Protocol Relating to the Madrid Agreement Concerning the International Registration of Marks in August, which makes it easier for U.S. companies to file for trademark protection, USTR said.

The World Trade Organization is “not equipped” to mitigate the economic effects spawned by the large, mercantilist Chinese economy, which poses unprecedented challenges for international commerce, U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer said during an address Sept. 18 at the Center for International and Strategic Studies. “I believe that there is one challenge on the current scene that is substantially more difficult than those faced in the past, and that is China,” Lighthizer said. “The sheer scale of their coordinated efforts to develop their economy, to subsidize, to create national champions, to force technology transfer, and to distort markets in China and throughout the world is a threat to the world trading system that is unprecedented.”

The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative’s initiation of a Section 301 investigation into reportedly unfair Chinese forced technology transfers and intellectual property policies could “severely” undermine the U.S.-China bilateral relationship, Chinese government media reported on Aug. 28. “Until recently, it had been hard to see where the next financial crisis could come from,” says an article published by China’s Global Times. “But imposing trade sanctions could trigger the pricking of China's credit bubble, engendering social and political unrest, exacerbating China's economic woes and thwarting its economic advance.”

U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer on Aug. 18 initiated an investigation into China under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, to determine whether acts, policies and practices related to technology transfer, intellectual property and innovation are “unreasonable or discriminatory” and “burden or restrict” U.S. commerce, the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative announced. Per statute, the investigation must be completed within one year of initiation. Section 301 gives the president broad authority, including import duties, to retaliate against restrictions found to “burden or restrict” U.S. commerce. President Donald Trump on Aug. 14 issued a memorandum directing Lighthizer to determine whether to launch the investigation (see 1708150027). “After consulting with stakeholders and other government agencies, I have determined that these critical issues merit a thorough investigation,” Lighthizer said in a statement.

President Donald Trump's order to review whether China's trade practices discriminate against American companies' IP (see 1708140060) is generally viewed optimistically by industry, and experts told us they hope this at least improves trade relations incrementally. “This is a measured step that raises fair questions [and] it provides ample opportunity to avoid unnecessary escalating trade tension by improving the treatment of American IP in China," said Sentinel Worldwide CEO Steve Tepp. "It's a smart move.”

President Donald Trump's order to review whether China's trade practices discriminate against American companies' IP (see 1708140060) is generally viewed optimistically by industry, and experts told us they hope this at least improves trade relations incrementally. “This is a measured step that raises fair questions [and] it provides ample opportunity to avoid unnecessary escalating trade tension by improving the treatment of American IP in China," said Sentinel Worldwide CEO Steve Tepp. "It's a smart move.”

President Donald Trump's order to review whether China's trade practices discriminate against American companies' IP (see 1708140060) is generally viewed optimistically by industry, and experts told us they hope this at least improves trade relations incrementally. “This is a measured step that raises fair questions [and] it provides ample opportunity to avoid unnecessary escalating trade tension by improving the treatment of American IP in China," said Sentinel Worldwide CEO Steve Tepp. "It's a smart move.”

The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative is asking for input as it builds its 2017 Notorious Markets List. The list is an out-of-cycle review based on the annual Special 301 Report. The list identifies “online and physical marketplaces that reportedly engage in and facilitate substantial copyright piracy and trademark counterfeiting,” the USTR notice said. Those commercial areas include foreign trade zones, USTR said. The 2016 Notorious Markets List, published in December, identified counterfeit marketplaces across the globe (see 1612210072). Comments are due by midnight Oct. 2.

President Donald Trump on Aug. 14 issued a memorandum directing U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer to determine whether to investigate Chinese “laws, policies, practices, or actions” that might be harming U.S. intellectual property rights, innovation or technological development. The memo pointed to language in the Trade Act of 1974 that requires the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative to undertake several requirements in self-initiating an investigation under Section 301 of that law. Section 301 gives the president broad authority, including import duties, to retaliate against restrictions found to “burden or restrict” U.S. commerce.

A surety is on the hook for $2.2 million in uncollected duties even though the underlying bonds had missing information and errors, the Court of International Trade said in a decision issued Aug. 10. Hartford Fire Insurance argued the bonds violated customs regulations and were not enforceable contracts, but the court found those errors didn’t invalidate them, especially given that Hartford accepted premiums and submitted the bonds to CBP.