Although experts gathered to talk about what legislative initiatives a House select committee on China might recommend, and they did that, they couldn't resist speculating about what the Biden administration will do to confront China's broken promises to liberalize and open up. The program, organized by the Washington International Trade Association, was held May 19.
Section 301 Tariffs
Section 301 Tariffs are levied under the Trade Act of 1974 which grants the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) authority to investigate and take action to protect U.S. rights from trade agreements and respond to foreign trade practices. Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 provides statutory means allowing the United States to impose sanctions on foreign countries violating U.S. trade agreements or engaging in acts that are “unjustifiable” or “unreasonable” and burdensome to U.S. commerce. Prior to 1995, the U.S. frequently used Section 301 to eliminate trade barriers and pressure other countries to open markets to U.S. goods.
The founding of the World Trade Organization in 1995 created an enforceable dispute settlement mechanism, reducing U.S. use of Section 301. The Trump Administration began using Section 301 in 2018 to unilaterally enforce tariffs on countries and industries it deemed unfair to U.S. industries. The Trump Administration adopted the policy shift to close what it deemed a persistent "trade gap" between the U.S. and foreign governments that it said disadvantaged U.S. firms. Additionally, it pointed to alleged weaknesses in the WTO trade dispute settlement process to justify many of its tariff actions—particularly against China. The administration also cited failures in previous trade agreements to enhance foreign market access for U.S. firms and workers.
The Trump Administration launched a Section 301 investigation into Chinese trade policies in August 2017. Following the investigation, President Trump ordered the USTR to take five tariff actions between 2018 and 2019. Almost three quarters of U.S. imports from China were subject to Section 301 tariffs, which ranged from 15% to 25%. The U.S. and China engaged in negotiations resulting in the “U.S.-China Phase One Trade Agreement”, signed in January 2020.
The Biden Administration took steps in 2021 to eliminate foreign policies subject to Section 301 investigations. The administration has extended and reinstated many of the tariffs enacted during the Trump administration but is conducting a review of all Section 301 actions against China.
The leaders of the House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on the Indo-Pacific are trying to pass legislation to give the president the ability to respond to economic coercion of allies, but Chair Young Kim, R-Calif., asked witnesses at a subcommittee hearing she convened to advise what else could be done to stand up to China's economic aggression.
Former U.S. trade representative Robert Lighthizer, who got the most attention from members of a House select committee at a lengthy hearing on Chinese economic aggression, argued that the actions President Donald Trump took to discourage imports from China were not nearly enough, and that even removing China from most favored nation status would not be enough to protect American manufacturers from China's predation, because some of the Column 2 tariffs, such as those on cars, are not high enough. Ending China's MFN status "would be one of the greatest things you could possibly do for American manufacturing," he declared.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of May 8-14:
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.
Senate Finance Committee ranking member Mike Crapo, R-Idaho, said that he and Chairman Ron Wyden, D-Ore., have not delved into details about what they might keep and what they might drop from the U.S. Innovation and Competition Act trade title as the Senate tries for a second China competition bill. But, Crapo said, with regard to the Section 301 exclusion process directive that was part of the June 2021 package, it may not be on the agenda.
Sen. Josh Hawley, a populist Republican from Missouri, said he's linking a proposal to hike tariffs on Chinese imports to the debt ceiling and budget deficit debate because he believes it could revive "good-paying manufacturing jobs" in America. In his view, the loss of these jobs is a "huge" driver of the federal government's deficit, as it doesn't bring in enough revenue to cover its spending.
The inability of CBP to stop all goods made with Uyghur forced labor was one of the focuses of a trade hearing hosted on Staten Island by the House Ways and Means Committee, and when committee Chairman Jason Smith, R-Mo., asked a witness what more could be done to crack down, Uyghur activist Nury Turkel said the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act should be expanded to cover all of China.
Senate Finance Committee Chairman Ron Wyden, D-Ore., said he'll use the 2021 trade title from the Senate China package as his committee works on its contribution to a second China package envisioned by Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., to address economic competition with China and to deter Chinese aggression toward Taiwan.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the weeks of April 10-16 and 17-23.