Exactly how the U.S. Trade Representative has agreed to change the 10-year biologics exclusivity period in the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement is unclear, but insiders are saying it will be less favorable to the pharmaceutical industry.

President Donald Trump has “no deadline” for striking a trade deal with China, he told reporters Tuesday during a meeting in London with NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg. “I like the idea of waiting until after the election for the China deal.” The Chinese “want to make a deal now, and we’ll see whether or not the deal’s going to be right,” he said. “It’s got to be right.” A trade agreement is “dependent on one thing -- do I want to make it?” Trump said. “We’re doing very well with China right now. We can do even better with the flick of a pen.” China didn’t comment. Trump previously suggested Chinese negotiators would drag their feet in the trade talks in hopes of landing a more favorable deal under a possible Democratic administration. But the Chinese understand that “waiting out” Trump’s term “is not an option,” said Myron Brilliant, the top global relations point man at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, in October (see 1910100029). Extending the U.S.-China trade war for another year past the 2020 election would be a “bad deal” for “every segment of the economy,” said David French, senior vice president-government relations at the National Retail Federation, virtually the only group to comment Tuesday on Trump's remarks. “We want and need to see a deal as soon as possible,” said French. Four rounds of Section 301 tariffs on Chinese goods at 15 percent and higher “continue to hurt U.S. businesses, workers and consumers and are a substantial drag on the U.S. economy,” he said.

Exactly how the U.S. Trade Representative has agreed to change the 10-year biologics exclusivity period in the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement is unclear, but insiders are saying it will be less favorable to the pharmaceutical industry.

President Donald Trump has “no deadline” for striking a trade deal with China, he told reporters Tuesday during a meeting in London with NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg. “I like the idea of waiting until after the election for the China deal.” The Chinese “want to make a deal now, and we’ll see whether or not the deal’s going to be right,” he said. “It’s got to be right.” A trade agreement is “dependent on one thing -- do I want to make it?” Trump said. “We’re doing very well with China right now. We can do even better with the flick of a pen.” China didn’t comment. Trump previously suggested Chinese negotiators would drag their feet in the trade talks in hopes of landing a more favorable deal under a possible Democratic administration. But the Chinese understand that “waiting out” Trump’s term “is not an option,” said Myron Brilliant, the top global relations point man at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, in October (see 1910100029). Extending the U.S.-China trade war for another year past the 2020 election would be a “bad deal” for “every segment of the economy,” said David French, senior vice president-government relations at the National Retail Federation, virtually the only group to comment Tuesday on Trump's remarks. “We want and need to see a deal as soon as possible,” said French. Four rounds of Section 301 tariffs on Chinese goods at 15 percent and higher “continue to hurt U.S. businesses, workers and consumers and are a substantial drag on the U.S. economy,” he said.

Switzerland is “absolutely convinced” it needs a free trade agreement with the U.S., which could benefit U.S. agricultural exporters, a Switzerland ambassador and Switzerland trade expert said during a Dec. 3 Heritage Foundation panel. But a deal may be unlikely, particularly because Switzerland faces the difficult decision of accepting U.S. agricultural safety standards over those of the European Union, a trade expert said. That decision presents a significant barrier to a potential trade deal.

Jasco Products didn’t conceal its anger in seeking exclusions from the 15 percent List 4A Section 301 tariffs it pays on the plastic AC outlet safety covers and seven other classifications of tech accessories it imports from China. Jasco is “being forced by its own federal government to undergo a worldwide scouting expedition” for alternative sourcing, “and is actively evaluating several dozen suppliers outside of China,” said the supplier in each of its eight exclusion requests posted Monday in the Office of U.S. Trade Representative’s public docket. Finding alternative sourcing “will take years and tens of millions of dollars along with extensive business disruption due to the time and resource commitment involved,” said Jasco. “It takes time to identify potential suppliers and perform audits to ensure that the factories meet Jasco’s rigorous standards for quality, safety, labor conditions, and environmental protections.” Even if Jasco “qualifies viable factories,” it will take “tens of millions of dollars redeveloping existing products since tools and molds cannot easily be transferred between factories in different countries,” it said. Landing U.S. regulatory approvals for the redesigned goods also will be “time consuming and costly,” it said. The Trump administration “is essentially requiring Jasco to waste tens of millions of dollars redeveloping existing products Jasco already sells with no discernable return on investment at the expense of developing new innovative products to drive future growth,” it said. Jasco’s effort to shift sourcing outside China “all presupposes that these factories have readily available capacity they are not already utilizing for their existing customers,” said the company. “These factories will need to expand their operations significantly to support the volume from Jasco and other companies working to avoid Chinese tariffs which will take years.” USTR didn’t comment.

FCC Chairman Ajit Pai’s Monday push for Congress to repeal a provision of the 2012 spectrum law that mandates public safety move off the 470-512 MHz T band by 2021 could help spur lawmakers, particularly Republicans, to address the longstanding issue, said stakeholders in interviews. Congressional T-band action isn't expected at least until after the start of 2020, given a backlog of other priorities and broader political issues, lobbyists said. The GAO recommended in June that Congress consider letting public safety incumbents continue to use the T band amid a lack of feasible alternative spectrum (see 1906210050).

Jasco Products didn’t conceal its anger in seeking exclusions from the 15 percent List 4A Section 301 tariffs it pays on the plastic AC outlet safety covers and seven other classifications of tech accessories it imports from China. Jasco is “being forced by its own federal government to undergo a worldwide scouting expedition” for alternative sourcing, “and is actively evaluating several dozen suppliers outside of China,” the supplier said in each of its eight exclusion requests posted Dec. 2 in the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative’s public docket. Finding alternative sourcing “will take years and tens of millions of dollars along with extensive business disruption due to the time and resource commitment involved,” Jasco said. “It takes time to identify potential suppliers and perform audits to ensure that the factories meet Jasco’s rigorous standards for quality, safety, labor conditions, and environmental protections.”

The Hawaiian Broadband Initiative and National Congress of American Indians (NCAI) petitioned the FCC on priority filing window eligibility rules for tribes seeking 2.5 GHz spectrum licenses. In a docket 18-120 posting Tuesday, the Hawaii agency said native Hawaiians not being listed as an eligible party for window participation wasn't raised with the agency before its October order because no reasonable party would have anticipated the FCC's saying Hawaiian homelands are eligible for the window but omit native Hawaiians from the list of eligible applicants to participate. Gov. David Ige (D) (see here) and state Office of Hawaiian Affairs (see 1911250040) also raised eligibility red flags. NCAI said the FCC should reconsider limiting off-reservation lands including tribal trust lands from the eligibility window because that limit will especially affect rural tribal nations without reservations or that have service populations located in noncontiguous parcels of off-reservation trust land. It said the agency should reconsider its requirement that an area be "rural" to qualify for the tribal priority window. The commission didn't comment.

The FCC priority filing window eligibility rules for tribes seeking spectrum licenses in the 2.5 GHz educational broadband service band wrongly exclude native Hawaiians even though Hawaiian home lands qualify as rural tribal lands, the state Office of Hawaiian Affairs said in a docket 18-120 posting Monday. It said the eligibility rule should be revised in consultation with native Hawaiians before the window opens.