Ambassadors from the United Kingdom, Brazil, the European Union and Australia discussed on a Feb. 8 panel how to improve trading relationships with the U.S. and deal with the challenge China poses to the international trading system but had no insights into how to make breakthroughs on either.
International Trade Today is providing readers with the top stories from Feb. 1-5 in case they were missed. All articles can be found by searching on the titles or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.
The panels tasked with deciding whether Section 232 tariffs on steel and aluminum imports truly meet the national security exemption at the World Trade Organization notified WTO ambassadors that those decisions will be released no sooner than “the second half of 2021” because of delays caused by the global COVID-19 pandemic. Multiple panels are considering the tariffs against various countries and the European Union. Although the panels were assigned the cases a year ago, with decisions to be made in six months or less, all the panels told Geneva officials Feb. 8 that their decisions will be released in July at the earliest.
The Congressional Steel Caucus, co-led by Rep. Conor Lamb, D-Pa., an early congressional endorser of Joe Biden, is asking the new administration to retain tariffs and quotas on imported steel that were imposed under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act. They said imports have fallen by 8% as a result of the protection. “This remedy has benefited the industry,” the Feb. 1 letter said. “[I]t is important that these tariffs and quotas remain in place to ensure the industry can continue its road to recovery.” The letter was signed by 51 House members, Republicans and Democrats, and across the ideological spectrum within each party.
Rep. Kevin Brady, R-Texas, the top Republican on the House Ways and Means Committee, said the House Advisory Group on Negotiations talked about moving forward with negotiating a United Kingdom trade deal, World Trade Organization reforms, and renewing the Generalized System of Preferences benefits program and the Miscellaneous Tariff Bill. The HAGON includes Brady, Committee Chairman Richard Neal, D-Mass., and three other Ways and Means members.
More than 12.7 million counterfeit face masks were seized by CBP during fiscal year 2020, part of more than 950 seizures of either FDA-prohibited drugs or test kits, or counterfeit or fraudulent products aimed at fighting COVID-19, the agency said in its annual fiscal year report, released Feb. 4. About 51% came from China; 24% were discovered in the mail; and 53% were sent by express couriers. For general intellectual property seizures, 90% were in either international mail or express shipments.
Two Senate Finance Committee members pressed commerce secretary nominee Gina Raimondo to study the cost of Section 232 tariffs on downstream companies, but she did not agree to do so in her written replies to their questions. “If confirmed as Secretary, I plan to review any work the Department of Commerce has already done on the impact of the tariffs and will ensure that any review is up to date,” she replied.
The Court of International Trade on Feb. 4 denied a broad challenge to Section 232 tariffs on steel products (see 1912040033), finding against a group of steel importers that had challenged the initial proclamation that set the tariffs, as well as procedural steps that formed the basis for the action. One of several recent cases challenging the tariffs, this one differed in its focus on the Commerce Department report that preceded the tariffs, as well as the proclamation's failure to set an explicit expiration date. The trade court found in favor of the government on both issues, holding that the Commerce report was not a final agency action that could be challenged in court and that the law behind Section 232 does not require the president to decide a date when the tariffs will end.
The Court of International Trade on Feb. 4 rejected a broad challenge to Section 232 tariffs on steel. Universal Steel Products, joined by several other importers, had challenged the Commerce Department report upon which all Section 232 steel tariffs were based, as well as President Donald Trump’s failure to set an expiration date for the tariff action, among other things. But the trade court found in favor of the government, holding the report was not a final action and could not be challenged, and that the president’s edict that the tariffs remain in effect so long as national security is threatened satisfied Section 232’s requirement that he set a “duration” for the tariffs.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Jan. 25-31: