A 25 percent tariff on shoes from China "would be catastrophic for our consumers [and] our companies," according a letter signed by more than 150 European and U.S. shoe manufacturers and shoe retailers, which was sent to President Donald Trump May 20. Footwear is not currently on the Section 301 list, but the president is considering adding tariffs on all Chinese imports.
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.
International Trade Today is providing readers with some of the top stories for May 13-17 in case they were missed.
The International Trade Commission recently issued two updates to the Harmonized Tariff Schedule to reflect changes for Section 301 tariffs on products from China. In Revision 4, the ITC implemented the increase in duties on tranche three of goods subject to the tariffs from 10 to 25 percent, as announced in early May (see 1905060040). The increase in duty rates for subheadings 9903.88.03 and 9903.88.04, as well as U.S. Notes 20(e) and 20(g) to subchapter III of chapter 99, took effect May 10. The subsequently issued Revision 5 implemented a new batch of exclusions from tranche one of the tariffs under new subheading 9903.88.08 and U.S. Note 20(k) to subchapter III, and made conforming changes to U.S. Note 20(a) and U.S. Note 20(b). It also implemented new subheading 9903.88.09 for goods subject to tranche three of duties that are still subject to a 10 percent duty because they were exported from China before May 10 and entered before June 1. U.S. Note 20(l) explains the new provision. Also in Revision 5 but unrelated to Section 301 tariffs, the ITC updated Statistical Annexes A and B of the HTS to reflect the new name of North Macedonia.
A Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson sidestepped questions at a Beijing news conference May 17 about media reports suggesting new U.S.-China trade talks are off the table for now. Presidents Donald Trump and Xi Jinping “have maintained contact through various means,” the spokesperson said. The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative didn’t comment. The U.S. and China “intend to continue further discussions,” a USTR notice in the Federal Register said, officially proposing the 25 percent Section 301 tariffs on $300 billion in Chinese goods not previously dutied. Requests to appear at public hearings on the proposed List 4 tariffs are due June 10 in docket USTR–2019–0004 at regulations.gov, and written comments are due June 17, the same day the hearings are set to begin. Post-hearing rebuttal comments are due seven days after the hearings end.
CBP has responded to fast-moving developments in international trade with predictability and transparency, said Brenda Smith, CBP executive assistant commissioner-trade, while speaking May 16 at a U.S. Chamber of Commerce event. With the Section 301 tariffs and other trade remedies, the agency has given the trade community the necessary information "as quickly as we can provide it," Smith said. "Just last week, in response to a setback in the ongoing U.S.-China trade talks, CBP responded rapidly to the 15 percent increase in China 301 duties. We consulted closely with USTR and the International Trade Commission to streamline the operational impact of the administration's policy goals, provided guidance to CBP field employees and the trade community and expedited programming changes" to ACE "to ensure that trade continued to flow."
Though allegations that China’s “retreat” from previous commitments in the trade talks with the U.S. were the Trump administration’s grounds for hiking the List 3 Section 301 tariffs to 25 percent and proposing a fourth tranche of duties on remaining Chinese imports not previously dutied, it was the U.S. side that actually reneged, suggested a Chinese Foreign Affairs Ministry spokesperson May 16. “It takes sincerity to make a consultation meaningful,” the spokesperson said during a press conference. “Judging from what the U.S. did in previous talks, there are two things we have to make clear,” he said. “First, we need to follow the principle of mutual respect, equality and mutual benefit. Second, words must be matched with deeds. Flip-flopping is the last thing we need.” During the various rounds of trade negotiations, the U.S. “repeatedly rejected rules in consultations and brought difficulties to the talks, while China, on the other hand, has been acting in a constructive spirit all along,” he said. “The international community bears witness to all this.” The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative didn’t comment.
CBP on May 14 added the ability in ACE for importers to file entries with the fourth group of exclusions from the first tranche of Section 301 tariffs, it said in a CSMS message. Filers of imported products that were granted an exclusion should report the regular Chapter 84, 85 or 90 Harmonized Tariff Schedule number, as well as subheading 9903.88.08 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. “Do not submit the corresponding Chapter 99 HTS number for the Section 301 duties when HTS 9903.88.08 is submitted,” CBP said.
Only 453 8-digit Harmonized Tariff Schedule subheadings would not be covered by Section 301 tariffs on products from China, should the duties be imposed on the proposed fourth tranche of goods without any changes from the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative’s list. That’s only about 4 percent of the over 11,000 8-digit subheadings in the HTS, with the remainder being subject to tariffs of up to 25 percent.
As the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative considers which European products to target in retaliation for launch subsidies to Airbus aircraft, it's getting divergent messages from U.S. aerospace interests. Boeing says it's not a time for half-measures or gradual steps, after 15 years of negotiations and legal action at the World Trade Organization. Instead, USTR should put 100 percent tariffs on Airbus planes, wings, tails and fuselages, said the aircraft maker's chief executive for regulatory and legislative affairs, Theodore Austell. He argued that if it's not at 100 percent, "we're unlikely to get their attention."
The top Democrat on the Senate Finance Committee said he thinks China cheats in trade, but that consumers are going to bear the brunt of this confrontation. Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore, speaking to International Trade Today in a brief hallway interview May 14, said, "It is really harder and harder to divine this administration's strategy on trade. It's almost wash, rinse and repeat. They threaten something, the financial markets react badly, consumers express concern, then they pull back and start a process and you kind of get the feeling it may just be this way from now until Election Day 2020. I believe deeply in fighting trade cheating. I wrote the Enforce [and Protect] Act. With respect to say, China, I hope the Chinese cave."