International Trade Today is providing readers with some of the top stories for Feb. 24-28 in case they were missed.
The United Kingdom government emphasized that its National Health Service will not pay more for drugs as a result of a U.S.-United Kingdom free trade deal, and that Britain “will not compromise on our high environmental protection, animal welfare and food standards.” The latter seems to be a reference to sanitary standards that frustrate U.S. exporters, such as a ban on anti-bacterial washes of chicken. The government issued its negotiating objectives and an analysis of the economic benefit to the U.K. of a free trade deal in the March 2 document.
Four more importers have now filed lawsuits challenging Section 232 tariffs on steel and aluminum “derivatives,” and one of them has already been successful in obtaining a court order blocking liquidation of their entries, if not collection of the tariffs. New Supplies and GJ Burkhart (dba Fry Fastening Systems) together filed a suit at the Court of International Trade Feb. 25. Represented by Brenda Jacobs, they told the court that the Justice Department had agreed to an order directing CBP to suspend liquidation until the case is eventually decided. CIT granted the motion and issued the order on Feb. 28.
President Donald Trump said that although it is a fact that there's only one titanium sponge producer in the U.S., and that's a threat to national security, he agrees with the Commerce secretary that measures aside from restricting imports are the best way to deal with the problem. Trump made the announcement Feb. 27. Imports accounted for 68% of U.S. consumption in 2018, the year that TIMET asked for a Section 232 investigation; nearly all come from Japanese suppliers.
The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Feb. 28 ruled that Section 232 tariffs are constitutional, finding itself bound by Supreme Court precedent set in the 1970s. Just as the Court of International Trade ruled in March 2019 in a lawsuit filed by the American Institute of International Steel, the Federal Circuit said it could not overturn the Supreme Court’s 1976 ruling, which found Section 232 to be a constitutional delegation of authority. The CAFC affirmed the CIT's decision “without deciding what ruling on the constitutional challenge would be proper in the absence of” the Supreme Court precedent.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Feb. 28 upheld the constitutionality of Section 232 tariffs on iron and steel products, affirming a 2019 Court of International Trade decision in a closely followed case brought by the American Institute for International Steel.
A Canadian government analysis of NAFTA's replacement -- known as the Canada-U.S.-Mexico Agreement in that country -- estimates that it will increase Canadian GDP by just under 0.25% over five years. The estimate is based on comparing CUSMA to a withdrawal from NAFTA, not from the present trade deal.
The European Union's Committee on International Trade Chairman Bernd Lange, in a roundtable with trade reporters Feb. 27, said that he asked officials from the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative if there's any truth to rumors that the U.S. will either pull out of the government procurement agreement at the World Trade Organization, or that it will seek to raise its bound tariffs, a process that would begin at the WTO. “I got confirmation from all stakeholders this will not happen,” said Lange, who was in Washington to talk with officials from USTR, Congress, unions and think tanks. But, he added, “sometimes decisions in the United States are taken quite quick,” so he can't be sure that answer will be true next week.
The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative would need to provide specific guidance to CBP in order to change treatment of goods from foreign-trade zones that were subject to the recently decreased Section 301 tariffs, CBP said in response to a recent letter from the National Association of Foreign-Trade Zones (see 2002180046). CBP said it enforces the Section 301 duties issued by the USTR “based on CBP laws and regulations, including 19 CFR 146.65(a)(1), unless USTR directs CBP to take different actions pursuant to Section 301.” NAFTZ President Erik Autor said the association is reviewing its next steps.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Feb. 17-23: