An aggressive timeline that aims to file a conference report by June 21 for the House and Senate China packages has lobbyists speculating that none of the proposals in the trade titles will be in the final bill because the two chambers are too far apart. The two chambers have relatively similar renewals of the Generalized System of Preferences benefits program and a big difference in their renewals of the Miscellaneous Tariff Bill. Each chamber has proposals the other doesn't, such as directing the administration to reopen Section 301 exclusions (Senate only); changing antidumping and countervailing duty laws (House only); removing China's eligibility for de minimis benefits (House only); and renewing and expanding Trade Adjustment Assistance (House only).
As companies work to move assembly out of China so that the goods they export to the U.S. won't be hit with Section 301 tariffs, they have to grapple with the fact that CBP may still consider a good made in Mexico, Malaysia, Vietnam or elsewhere to be a product of China if enough of its innards were made in China.
A group of 54 members of the House led by Rep. Stephanie Murphy, D-Fla., and Rep. Jackie Walorski, R-Ind., are asking leadership of both chambers to make changes to Competitive Need Limitations in the Generalized System of Preferences benefits program proposed by the pair in H.R. 6171 (see 2112100058).
The AFL-CIO told China bill conferees that renewing Trade Adjustment Assistance, making changes to trade remedies laws, creating outbound investment screening and removing Chinese exports from de minimis eligibility "should be included in any competitiveness package that purports to challenge China's increasing economic dominance."
Members of the Senate Finance Committee and the House Ways and Means Committee who spoke at the first meeting of that conference committee to find a compromise China competition package sounded more combative than cooperative.
A letter sent by 23 trade associations and about 250 companies asks congressional leaders to renew the Generalized System of Preferences benefits program at least through Jan. 1, 2027, and to reform the competitive need limitations.
The top Republican on the House Ways and Means Committee, who will be one of the negotiators for the compromise China package, expressed pessimism that a version of the bill can be found that can get a majority vote in both the House and Senate. The Senate passed its version, the U.S. Innovation and Competition Act, with 67 votes; the House version, known as the Competes Act, only had one Republican on board.
With negotiations expected to begin in earnest soon on the House and Senate's trade packages, staffers in both chambers of Congress say there could be support for antidumping and countervailing duty reform and language around Section 301 tariff exclusions, but the likelihood of a dramatic de minimis change seems somewhat remote.
House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., said it would be good if the House and Senate could name their respective conferees to the committee that will aim to hash out a compromise between the two chambers' China packages. He said the next two weeks, when Congress will not be in Washington, could be put to good use by the members. But Hoyer suggested the House will wait until the Senate passes its motion to go to conference, and gives its negotiating instructions.
The National Electrical Manufacturers Association is asking House and Senate leadership to "expeditiously advance" a compromise China package by resolving differences between the U.S. Innovation and Competition Act (USICA) and the America Creating Opportunities for Manufacturing Pre-Eminence in Technology and Economic Strength (America Competes) Act.