The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of July 11-17:
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 International Trade Commission published notices in the July 19 Federal Register on the following AD/CV injury, Section 337 patent or other trade proceedings (any notices that warrant a more detailed summary will be in another ITT article):
Congress is abandoning its effort to compromise on its two China packages as the Senate moves to pass a pared-down bill that will provide financial incentives for domestic semiconductor manufacturing. What exactly is in the bill isn't yet known, but none of the trade title is expected to survive.
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.
Republicans who are in the China package negotiations say that Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell's tweet that said that moving even a smaller Build Back Better bill would halt negotiations was not an empty threat. He had said that while Congress was away from Washington, at the beginning of the month (see 2207010039).
Five Republican senators, only one of whom voted for the U.S. Innovation and Competition Act (USICA), are asking that Senate conferees drop the directive to reopen a Section 301 exclusion process, and add a number of trade provisions only found in the House China package. Some House proposals that Sen. Mike Braun, R-Ind., Sen. Dan Sullivan, R-Ala., Sen. Kevin Cramer, R-N.D., and Florida's two senators, Rick Scott and Marco Rubio, both Republicans, want to include:
Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen, one of the most public voices for rolling back some of the Section 301 tariffs on Chinese goods to ease inflation, spoke with Chinese Vice Premier Liu He, the main trade contact, about "unfair, non-market [Chinese] economic practices," according to a readout of the July 4 call.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of June 27 - July 3:
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of June 20-26:
As senators who support subsidies to build semiconductor chips in the U.S. continue to say the trade title differences are holding up the bill, and that it should drop out, House negotiators say it's not time to give up yet.