International Trade Today is providing readers with the top stories from last week in case they were missed. All articles can be found by searching on the titles or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.
Section 301 (too broad)
House Ways and Means Chairman Richard Neal, D-Mass., said that even though the politics around an end-of-year tax extender may change if Congress makes some renewable energy tax credits permanent, he believes it's still likely that the modernization act for the Generalized System of Preferences benefits program and Miscellaneous Tariff Bill can get done by the end of the year.
Although President Joe Biden criticized President Donald Trump's China tariffs on the campaign trail, Peterson Institute for International Economics Senior Fellow Chad Bown said he always thought it was unlikely Biden would roll any of them back, because there are "huge political costs" to doing so, because opponents could label you as "weak on China."
Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., speaking on the floor of the Senate just before the CHIPS bill passed, said he wants the conference committee for the House and Senate China packages to continue negotiating.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of July 18-24:
Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo acknowledged that lifting Section 301 tariffs is one of the few levers the White House has to lower inflation right now, but implied that President Joe Biden is hesitating because unions are arguing it would hurt workers.
Importers of finished goods and manufacturing inputs told the International Trade Commission across three days of testimony that the Section 301 tariffs are damaging profit margins, and in some cases lead to layoffs. But some unions and manufacturers said the Section 301 tariffs are deserved for Chinese abuses, and with the tariffs in place, the goods they make are more competitive. The International Trade Commission is studying the efficacy of Section 301 and Section 232 tariffs, and their economic impact.
Any chances that the Section 301 tariffs on Chinese goods would stimulate U.S. importers to shift their supply chains to alternative countries of origin were obliterated when the COVID-19 pandemic struck in early 2020, Jonathan Gold, National Retail Federation vice president-supply chain and customs policy, told the International Trade Commission in a virtual hearing July 21. The ITC completed three days of public hearings July 22 as part of its Tariff Act Section 332 investigation into the tariffs’ economic impact on U.S. industries.
Across three days of testimony July 20-22, the International Trade Commission heard from dozens of companies, trade groups and advocacy groups about the economic impact of Section 301 tariffs and Section 232 tariffs and quotas. The tariffs and quotas on metals inspired fewer witnesses than the China tariffs, but they were no less emphatic.The United Steelworkers said they strongly supported the tariffs and asked that they remain strong. Pete Trinidad, president of a USW local that represents 3,500 steel workers in Indiana, argued that the tariffs had either a small or no measurable effect on prices, according to a think tank study.
The Court of International Trade in a July 20 opinion redenominated the U.S.'s counterclaim in a customs case brought by importer Cyber Power Systems as a defense, ruling that the U.S. does not have the statutory authority to make the counterclaim. With the ruling, Judge Claire Kelly denied Cyber Power's motion to dismiss the counterclaim as moot. Kelly ruled that none of the sections in the U.S. code cited by the U.S. give a basis for the counterclaim, which sought to reclassify imported cables.