International Trade Today is a service of Warren Communications News.
Subscriber Login

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. Subsequent rounds of Section 301 actions against China have continued since. The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative administers Section 301 tariffs, and has also created an exclusion process for importers to seek exemptions from the tariffs.

to
articlessource documents
Refine Trend Search
Clear Terms

Search Primer

Multi-word term: Place inside quotes to ensure an exact match together (e.g. "China import").

Term list: Separate terms with spaces, not commas or semicolons to find either word (e.g. AD/CVD antidumping).

Acronyms: Use all capital letters (e.g., ACE).

Required term: If a term must be included in any resulting articles, prefix it with a plus sign (e.g., CBP +releases).

Excluded term: If a term should be excluded from any articles being found, prefix it with a minus sign (e.g., -ruling).

Singular form: Use the singular form when doing multi-word terms (e.g. "russian export control" instead of "russian export controls").

Shortest word form: When you have different word forms in a quoted term, include the shortest version if it is the last part of the expression (e.g., "entity list" instead of "entity listing" or "entity listed").

Syringe Importer Says 100% Tariff Hike Not Related to Section 301 Action, Violated Trade Act
September 27, 2024 by Jacob Kopnick|Top News

Texas-based syringe importer Retractable Technologies took to the Court of International Trade to contest the 100% increase of Section 301 tariffs recently imposed on needles and syringes from China. The complaint is seeking a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction against the duties, claiming that the tariffs could send the company out of business (Retractable Technologies v. United States, CIT # 24-00185).

NCBFAA Supports Removing Section 301 Goods From de Minimis Eligibility
September 24, 2024 by Mara Lee|Top News

The National Customs Brokers & Forwarders Association of America, in a conference session preparing its members for a day lobbying on Capitol Hill, said that the NCBFAA is not arguing for or against a de minimis restriction proposal from Senate Finance Committee Chairman Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore. The proposal would require all goods entering in de minimis to be classified with a 10-digit Harmonized Tariff Schedule code and would bar apparel, footwear and other "import-sensitive" goods from eligibility.

De Minimis Enforcement Increasing, but Catching Excess Shipments Tricky
September 23, 2024 by Mara Lee|Top News

While a top CBP official didn't give any specifics on how many brokerages were suspended from a pilot that allows electronic clearance of de minimis packages (see 2405310054), he told attendees at an annual National Customs Brokers & Forwarders Association of America conference not to "be afraid of that enforcement," as the brokers who were suspended were so lax that there wasn't even anything that the companies could argue about with CBP.

Topics:Entry Type 86 , Customs duty
Comments Sought on New Tariffs on Tungsten, Silicon, Chemicals for Electronics
September 20, 2024 |USTR

The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative will open a docket for comments on Sept. 23 for views on proposed new Section 301 tariffs on 8101.94.00 (Tungsten, unwrought); 8101.99.10 (Tungsten bars, rods, plates, sheets, strip and foil); 8101.99.80 (Tungsten, articles nesoi); 2804.61.00, Silicon; and 3818.00.00 (Chemical elements doped for use in electronics.