The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative is making minor changes to product exclusions from Section 301 tariffs on products from China. The agency said it is amending an exclusion from List 2 tariffs for certain goods of subheading 8407.90.9010 so that it now refers to “Gas (natural or liquid propane (LP))” engines, instead of “Gasoline or liquid propane (LP)” engines. The change affects U.S. Note 20(o)(14), which provided for this exclusion for entries Aug. 23, 2018, through July 31, 2020, as well as U.S. Note 20(ggg)(4), which provides for the exclusion as extended to Dec. 31, 2020, USTR said in notices released Nov. 17. Subheading 8407.90.9010 covers “Gas (natural or LP) engines,” so the changes appear to align the exclusion with the language in the underlying tariff provision.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Nov. 9-15:
International Trade Today is providing readers with the top stories from Nov. 9-13 in case they were missed. All articles can be found by searching on the titles or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.
While it seems clear that Joe Biden wants to “team up with our allies” to confront China, less clear is how that will work in reality, Mayer Brown international trade lawyer Tim Keeler said during a Nov. 17 Mayer Brown webinar about trade policy in the incoming administration. Keeler, who is a former chief of staff in the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, said a majority of Congress believes the Section 301 tariffs have been a source of leverage, while the European Union thinks the tariffs violated World Trade Organization rules.
A number of U.S. trade groups questioned the evidence behind the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative's assertions that Vietnam is importing illegal timber, and the assertion that those logs end up in exported products going to the U.S. The groups said in comments to the agency that the notice initiating the Section 301 investigation contained no citations for these claims. Both trade groups and companies asked for a virtual public hearing, and the right to rebut others' submissions.
The majority of comments from U.S. interests submitted on whether the U.S. should do anything to pressure Vietnam to stop manipulating its currency favor not putting tariffs on Vietnamese imports. Many comments filed in the docket express disagreement with the very premise of the investigation. HanesBrands, which manufacturers apparel in Vietnam that is exported to the U.S., Australia, Canada, the European Union and China, requested a public hearing on the investigation, and quoted the statute that requires such a hearing if requested by any interested person.
Although President-elect Joe Biden has said he wants to focus on domestic issues before turning to trade, Brian Pomper, a former chief international trade counsel when the Senate Finance Committee was controlled by Democrats, said he's going to have to deal with trade right away if the Trump administration imposes tariffs on France on Jan. 1 over its digital services tax proposal.
Americans for Free Trade, a trade group opposed to Section 301 tariffs, wrote to U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer asking that the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative extend Section 301 tariff exclusions scheduled to expire Dec. 31. “As American businesses continue to recover from the COVID-19 pandemic, they should not have to face the uncertainty of tax increases on January 1 because of a reimposition of tariffs on previously excluded products. It remains unclear whether USTR intends to offer additional product exclusion extension opportunities for the remaining exclusions. We believe it is crucial for USTR to do so,” the letter said. The group also asked USTR to extend all product exclusions that are currently in force for at least six months.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Nov. 2-8:
CBP has been swamped with hundreds of thousands of protests related to Section 301 litigation on lists 3 and 4A China tariffs, as importers seek to preserve their rights to refunds if the lawsuits are successful, Robert Silverman of Grunfeld Desiderio said Nov. 9. Negotiations are ongoing with the Department of Justice to untether claims from liquidation dates, which would free importers from potentially having to file the protests to protect their rights, Silverman said, speaking at the Coalition of New England Companies for Trade’s virtual Northeast Cargo Symposium. “We’re trying to get DOJ to agree that liquidation is irrelevant. If they do, then we can stop filing these silly protests,” he said.