The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in a June 9 opinion dismissed a broad challenge to President Donald Trump's Section 232 steel and aluminum tariffs. The plaintiffs, led by USP Holdings, argued that the Commerce Department report preceding presidential action violated the law since it failed to outline an imminent threat to the domestic industry as required by the statute and was unsupported by substantial evidence. A three-judge panel at the court ruled against these arguments, holding that there is no "imminence requirement" in the statute and that the threat determination is not reviewable under the "arbitrary and capricious" standard since the secretary's action "is only reviewable for compliance with the statute."
The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in a June 9 opinion dismissed a broad challenge to President Donald Trump's Section 232 steel and aluminum tariffs. The plaintiffs, led by USP Holdings, argued that the Commerce Secretary's report preceding presidential action violated the law since it failed to outline an imminent threat to the domestic industry as required by the statute and was unsupported by substantial evidence. A three-judge panel at the court ruled against these arguments, holding that there is no imminence requirement in the statute and that the threat determination is not reviewable under the "arbitrary and capricious" standard since the Secretary's action "is only reviewable for compliance with the statute." Judge Timothy Dyk, author of the opinion, also ruled that the statute grants the president the discretion to set the nature and duration of the tariffs.
Even if the Commerce Department finds that solar panels from Southeast Asia are circumventing antidumping and countervailing duty actions against Chinese exports, no AD/CVD will be collected for the next two years, the Biden administration announced on June 6. Trade lawyers were astonished by the action, which is based on the authority to temporarily suspend AD/CVD when imports are needed to respond to natural disasters "or other emergencies."
CBP issued the following releases on commercial trade and related matters:
Steel that was melted and poured in the U.K. prior to further processing in the EU will be eligible to enter under a new tariff rate quota for U.K. steel that begins June 1 in lieu of Section 232 steel tariffs, according to a proclamation issued by President Joe Biden May 31 alongside a similar proclamation establishing a TRQ for U.K. aluminum.
The removal of Ukraine from the countries whose steel exports face 25% tariffs, announced in early May (see 2205090041), will take effect on June 1. A presidential proclamation said Ukrainian steel that is in foreign-trade zones and entered under foreign privileged status will still face 25% Section 232 tariffs when it enters into commerce after that date. The break from national security tariffs will last one year, the proclamation said.
Almost 40 agricultural trade groups, along with two port and perishable logistics trade groups, asked the U.S. trade representative to reduce, lift or suspend tariffs so that China would lift its retaliatory tariffs on U.S. crops. “Tariff relief could not come at a more important time,” the trade groups said in a letter. “Rural America and small businesses are facing significant challenges due to the lingering impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic, logistical and supply chain disruptions, record levels of inflation, and the increasing impacts of Russia’s war on Ukraine. "
The Court of International Trade dismissed two cases brought by steel importer Voestalpine USA and steel purchaser Bilstein Cold Rolled Steel seeking to retroactively apply a Section 232 steel and aluminum tariff exclusion that was originally issued with a clerical error. Judge Mark Barnett said that the plaintiffs did not seek any relief that the court could grant since the entries eligible for the exclusion had already been liquidated, and the court does not have the power to order their reliquidation.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of May 9-15:
While the Biden administration faces very little legal constraint to continuing the Section 301 tariffs on the vast majority of Chinese imports, trade experts at the Wiley firm said that the administration is under pressure for a variety of reasons to make a decision on whether they are going to change their approach to the tariffs. So far, the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative has reinstated fewer than 500 exclusions, either due to the COVID-19 pandemic or to a limited review, and has not offered to renew the bulk of the 2,129 exclusions that were granted during the previous administration.