The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative seeks comments in connection with its annual review of the eligibility of countries for benefits under the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA), USTR said. The agency will consider, among other things, whether to restore or revoke eligibility for sub-Saharan African countries covered by AGOA. USTR will hold a public hearing on Aug. 16, and the deadline to file requests to testify there or to file any prehearing comments is Aug. 1. Aug. 23 is the final deadline for comments.
The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative is reinstating African Growth and Opportunity Act textile and apparel benefits for Eswatini (formerly known as Swaziland), it said in a notice. Eswatini, which adopted its new name in April, has implemented an effective visa system to prevent transshipment of textiles and apparel, and has put in place customs verification procedures, USTR said. Effective July 3, USTR is directing that the Harmonized Tariff Schedule be amended to add Eswatini to U.S. note 7(a) to subchapter II of chapter 98. USTR is also amending other provisions of the HTS to reflect the country’s name change, deleting “Swaziland” and adding in its place “Eswatini” for U.S. notes 1 and 2(d) to subchapter XIX of chapter 98, was well as for general notes 4(a) and 16(a) of the tariff schedule.
U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer released a lengthy criticism of retaliatory tariffs, saying U.S. tariffs on aluminum and steel are "wholly legitimate and fully justified" and that other countries "concocted a groundless legal theory" that the U.S. tariffs are safeguards rather than national security-based. "Faced with massive excess capacity that puts the very future of our steel and aluminum industries at risk, President [Donald] Trump took certain measures that he deemed essential to the national security of the United States," Lighthizer said in the June 26 statement. "These measures were implemented only after long and careful analysis, and after all trading partners had the chance to address our concerns."
The latest list of goods from China proposed to be subject to 25 percent Section 301 tariffs appears to hit chemicals, plastics, resins and semiconductors, according to a list of tariff subheadings released by the U.S. Trade Representative on June 15 (see 1806150003). Other affected products include cargo containers, tractors and railway equipment. Comments on the list are due July 23 and a hearing is scheduled for July 24 (see 1806190060). New tariffs on 818 other subheadings from the original list take effect July 6.
The Commerce Department extended the comments period by a week to June 29 on its recently launched Section 232 investigation into the national security effects of “imports of automobiles, including cars, SUVs, vans and light trucks, and automotive parts,” it said in a notice. The agency began the investigation into potential tariffs on May 24, amid reports that President Donald Trump wants a 25 percent tariff on cars and auto parts to counter the purported erosion of the U.S. auto industry by imports (see 1805240002). Rebuttal comments in connection with the investigation are due July 13. Commerce will hold a public hearing on the investigation July 19-20 in Washington, with requests to participate also due June 29.
Though the Trump administration’s plan to impose Trade Act Section 301 tariffs of 25 percent on Chinese imports “may have gotten China’s attention, they’re unlikely to change China’s conduct -- and will cause significant collateral damage in the process,” a June 19 Progressive Policy Institute report said. The duties, though applied to “Chinese-origin” products, “would be paid by Americans and impose serious costs on the U.S. economy,” it said. A “smarter strategy” to “confront China’s mercantilism” would be for the U.S. “to work more closely with its trade partners” to curb the allegedly “abusive” trade behavior, the report said. “China’s unfair policies and practices seriously threaten innovative businesses in many countries, and they -- and their governments -- can be key allies in pushing back.” But it’s difficult to build a coalition against China when the administration “needlessly antagonizes allies,” as it did when it imposed steel and aluminum tariffs against its allies, it said. The U.S. also needs to “speak with a single voice” in “focused, results-oriented” trade negotiations with China, the report said. The administration “should designate a single, high-level official to negotiate with China about core trade issues related to China’s unfair innovation practices,” it said. “This official should also actively seek cooperation from allies on those issues.”
The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative posted information on submitting public comments on the new list of products proposed for Section 301 tariffs. The notice again lists the products from China that will see new tariffs starting July 6 (see 1806150003) but doesn't spell out the process for requesting product exclusions. Those details will come in a separate notice, USTR said. The agency's notice also "creates a new Chapter 99 subheading for entry purposes (entries of articles classified in the tariff subheadings identified in Annex A have to use the new Chapter 99 classification as a secondary classification, so the additional 25% duty can be assessed) and addresses foreign trade zone admissions," Baker & McKenzie lawyer Ted Murphy said said in a June 18 blog post
Consultations between the U.S. and India did not resolve the question of whether India's export subsidies are too generous, given the stage of development the country is in (see 1803140039). The U.S. Trade Representative said in a June 18 notice that it is seeking comments as a dispute panel is formed at the World Trade Organization. The notice says that on May 17, the U.S. requested the establishment of a panel, and that the Dispute Settlement Body granted the request on May 28.
U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer met with the trade ministers of Japan and the EU in Paris May 31 and “confirmed their shared view that no country should require or pressure technology transfer from foreign companies to domestic companies” through the use of joint-venture requirements, licensing processes or “other means,” they said. The ministers discussed “the harmful effects of regulatory measures that force foreign companies seeking to license technologies to domestic entities to do so on non-market-based terms that favor domestic entities,” the officials said. They explored the need “to establish and share best practices” to thwart government practices that “unfairly facilitate the systematic investment in, and acquisition of, foreign companies and assets to obtain technologies and intellectual property and generate the transfer of technology to domestic companies,” they said.
Several clothing and retail associations are concerned about revised rules of origin in NAFTA, the groups said in a letter to U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer. "We remain concerned that the newly negotiated rule of origin may contain new onerous chapter notes, such as requirements that pocketing, elastics strips, or sewing thread now need to originate," said the groups, which include the American Apparel and Footwear Association and the Retail Council of Canada. "Such changes, even though they may seem insignificant, add tremendous sourcing costs and compliance burdens when multiplied across the entire supply chain." There also is some worry over changes to tariff preference levels, the groups said. Lighthizer's Canadian and Mexican counterparts also were addressed in the letter.