Tech companies and trade associations favor working more closely with U.S. trade partners to diversify information and communications technology (ICT) supply chains and make them more resilient to disruption and bottlenecks, several commented Nov. 4 in BIS-2021-0021. The Commerce Department’s Bureau of Industry and Security sought comment to help the secretaries of Commerce and Homeland Security prepare a report to the White House on supply chain disruptions in the “critical sectors and subsectors” of the ICT “industrial base” by the one-year anniversary of President Joe Biden’s Feb. 24 executive order (see 2109170029).
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 following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Oct. 25-31:
IRobot slashed operating income projections for the fiscal year ending Jan. 1 on concerns over higher supply chain costs, price increases and Section 301 tariffs, Chief Financial Officer Julie Zeiler said on an Oct. 28 earnings call. Q3 gross margin declined by 11 percentage points, with 60% of the decrease due to an unexpected $14 million in tariff costs and “supply chain headwinds.”
The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative voiced support for the current CAFTA-DR rules of origin as the best way to support the textile industry in the Northern Triangle countries, following an Oct. 29 meeting with a domestic industry textiles group. Imports from Central American countries covered by the Dominican Republic-Central America Free Trade Agreement have been flat since the agreement came into effect 15 years ago and some have talked about loosening restrictive textile rules of origin to boost production there.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Oct. 18-24:
Eleven of the 49 Democratic senators have told U.S. Trade Representative Katherine Tai that the inputs for manufacturing protective gowns and masks and finished masks and surgical gowns should not continue to receive exclusions to Section 301 duties. The previous administration decided that goods needed to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic should not face higher tariffs, but these senators, led by Ohio's Sen. Sherrod Brown and Wisconsin's Tammy Baldwin, argue that domestic manufacturers need the tariff barrier to be competitive.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Oct. 11-17:
An executive with a logistics company with more than 100,000 customers talked about tariffs as a contributor to supply chain strains. So did the owner of a 200-person candy manufacturer, and a board member from the National Association of Home Builders. While tariffs were not the top concern for businesses mentioned at the hearing on how global supply chain kinks are hurting small businesses, companies said lifting them, even temporarily, would ease the pain of high shipping costs.
RANCHO MIRAGE, California -- Lawyers are seeing a rise in cases filed against customs brokers for failing to meet their fiduciary duties, said Cameron Roberts, a Roberts & Kehagiaras trade attorney. Many of the cases involve importers who allege their brokers didn’t correctly advise them about issues related to forced labor, Section 301 tariffs and certain agriculture imports, he said. “All of these issues are being put at the foot of the broker,” Roberts said, speaking during the Oct. 15 Western Cargo Conference.
International Trade Today is providing readers with the top stories from Oct. 11-15 in case they were missed. All articles can be found by searching on the titles or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.