A lawyer, a lobbyist and a think tank scholar all agreed -- the Section 301 tariff review is unlikely to result in significant changes to the punitive tariffs on most Chinese goods.
House Select Committee on China Chairman Mike Gallagher, R-Wis., said that the committee will definitely want to look into how the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act is being enforced, and he expects there to be joint committee hearings on the topic.
Despite concerns from customs brokers that new provisions in CBP’s recent Part 111 final rule could hurt their client relationships, a new reporting requirement for termination of the broker-client relationship should rarely come up, and another provision on record-keeping by brokers when they discover client compliance issues carries with it some silver linings, customs experts said on a Jan. 25 webinar.
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.
A U.S. manufacturer and a labor union seek the imposition of new antidumping duties on tin mill products from Canada, China, Germany, the Netherlands, South Korea, Taiwan, Turkey and the U.K., as well as new countervailing duties on tin mill products from China, they said in petitions filed with the Commerce Department and the International Trade Commission Jan. 18. Commerce will now decide whether to begin AD/CVD investigations, which could result in the imposition of permanent AD/CVD orders and the assessment of AD and CVD on importers. Cleveland-Cliffs and the United Steelworkers Union filed the petitions.
Dozens of firms, large and small -- along with trade groups from agriculture and manufacturing -- asked the U.S. Trade Representative to retain or even increase Section 301 tariffs on their competitors' exports. The companies that said the Section 301 tariffs are providing leverage and leveling the playing field included a number of politically important and large steel industry players, such as Nucor, U.S. Steel and Cleveland-Cliffs. Opponents argued in the same docket that the tariffs had not met their aim, were driving inflation, or having unintended consequences on manufacturers (see 2301180029).
Hundreds of companies, as well as trade groups from agriculture, retailers and manufacturing, have told the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative that the Section 301 tariffs on $350 million in Chinese goods have not achieved their aim, have hurt U.S. businesses and, often, have not even moved production to other countries in Asia or to Mexico.
A study sponsored by five trade groups said that while tariffs of 7.5% to 25% on Chinese consumer goods imports have caused some trade diversion out of China, the primary result has been higher prices for customers.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Jan. 9-15:
U.S. Chamber of Commerce CEO Suzanne Clark, in her annual "State of American Business" speech Jan. 12, said that if the Biden administration fails to strike a balance on how to respond to China's economic posture, it "could undermine our security, our economy, our competitiveness, and our future."