The Commerce Department issued Federal Register notices on its recently initiated antidumping duty investigations on utility scale wind towers from Canada, Indonesia, South Korea and Vietnam (A-122-867, A-560-833, A-580-902, A-552-825), as well as its new countervailing duty investigations on utility scale wind towers from Canada, Indonesia and Vietnam (A-122-868, A-560-834, A-552-825).
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 Office of the U.S. Trade Representative is publishing its first list of product exclusions from the third tranche of $200 billion in Section 301 tariffs on China (see 1908050002). This list of exclusions includes 10 subsets of tariff numbers in chapters 39, 54, 56, 73, 87 and 89. The new exclusions take effect retroactively from Sept. 24, 2018, when the $200 billion in tariffs originally entered into force, and will remain for one year following publication of USTR’s notice. USTR is creating Harmonized Tariff Schedule subheading 9903.88.13 for the new set of exclusions.
The majority of companies and a trade group representing metal fabricators oppose the inclusion of brass and other copper alloys on the Airbus retaliation list, but two firms said Germany's dominance in the field is unfair and should be countered. Sixteen players in the metals industry, 14 in the U.S. and two from Europe, testified Aug. 5 at a hearing considering what items should be put on the retaliation list for Europe's subsidies of Airbus launches. The World Trade Organization has ruled that the European Union has not complied with rulings on the subsidies, and that the U.S. is entitled to rebalancing tariffs, but an arbitrator has not yet said how large the tariff action can be (see 1904090031).
The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative issued its first set of product exclusions from the third group of Section 301 tariffs on goods from China. The new exclusions from the tariffs include "10 specially prepared product descriptions" and cover 15 separate requests, according to the notice. The product exclusions apply retroactively to Sept. 24, 2018, the date the third set of tariffs took effect at 10 percent. The tariffs were subsequently increased to 25 percent. The exclusions will remain in effect until one year after the notice is published.
CBP added the ability in ACE for importers to file entries with the first group of excluded goods from the second tranche of Section 301 tariffs on Aug. 1, it said in a CSMS message. Filers of imported products that were granted an exclusion (see 1907290023) should report the regular Chapters 39, 84, 85, 86, 87 and 90 Harmonized Tariff Schedule number, as well as subheading 9903.88.12, for products subject to Section 301 duties on products from China but that have been granted an exclusion by the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative. “Importers shall not submit the corresponding Chapter 99 HTS number for the Section 301 duties when HTS 9903.88.12 is submitted,” CBP said.
U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer told Sen. Todd Young, R-Ind., that the stacking of Section 301 tariffs on tool sets is being reviewed by the agency. Young mentioned the issue in written questions, submitted for the record of Lighthizer's June 18 hearing before the Senate Finance Committee, that the committee recently released. Young said he'd "been informed that some tool manufacturers are facing tariff rates of more than 50 percent" as a result of CBP rulings on the sets and the application of the 301 tariffs on goods from China. Young said that while so far, it's only affecting one industry, if List 4 tariffs go into effect, there could be a wider problem.
President Donald Trump, angry that China neither stopped the flow of fentanyl nor returned to buying U.S. soybeans, announced on Twitter Aug. 1 that tariffs on nearly 3,800 8-digit tariff lines will begin Sept. 1. Just like with List 3, the tariffs will start at 10 percent.
President Donald Trump said a 10 percent tariff on imported goods from China on List 4 -- nearly all the remaining imports that have not been hit in Section 301 -- will start on Sept. 1. He linked the punishment to a lack of agriculture purchases and the fact that "my friend President Xi" did not stop the sale of fentanyl to the U.S.
U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer and Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin traveled to Shanghai for July 30 and 31 talks on a comprehensive U.S.-China trade deal, the White House said July 30. Vice Premier Liu He and Commerce Minister Zhong Shan led the Chinese delegation, it said. “The two sides discussed topics such as forced technology transfer, intellectual property rights, services, non-tariff barriers, and agriculture.” The Chinese “confirmed their commitment to increase purchases” of U.S. agricultural exports, it said. “The meetings were constructive, and we expect negotiations on an enforceable trade deal to continue” in Washington in early September, it said. The Shanghai meetings were the 12th round of negotiations that started in December, and were the first face-to-face talks between the sides since the negotiations broke down in May over Trump administration allegations that the Chinese reneged on previously agreed-to commitments. Overhanging the talks is the threat that the administration could put the List 4 Section 301 tariffs into effect at any time on virtually all Chinese goods not previously dutied.
U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer addressed the recent end to India's Generalized System of Preferences benefits eligibility (see 1906050043) in written responses to two senators on the Senate Finance Committee. Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, asked about GSP and the possibility of Section 301 actions against India at a June 18 hearing at which Lighthizer appeared. Lighthizer replied, "A USTR team ... recently visited New Delhi to meet with a variety of Indian government officials in an attempt to make progress on the broad range of trade barriers we have highlighted. We remain committed to finding solutions to the myriad of trade concerns we have with India. I hope that the Government of India demonstrates a comparable commitment to resolving our concerns."