The Court of International Trade on April 11 dismissed without prejudice a suit from Environment One Corp. seeking to impose a Section 301 exclusion on 31 entries, for failing to state a claim on which relief can be granted. While Judge Mark Barnett ruled against the government's motion to dismiss the case pertaining to 23 of the entries for lack of jurisdiction, the judge ultimately granted the U.S. motion to dismiss the case since the plaintiff failed to include key information about the merchandise at issue in the case's amended complaint. Barnett gave Environment One 10 days to file a second amended complaint lest the case be dismissed with prejudice.
While the Section 232 tariffs increased domestic steel production by 5% and increased smelter utilization by about 15%, there was $3.4 billion less manufacturing across the most impacted metal consuming industries -- industrial machinery, cutlery and handtool factories; motor vehicle suspension and steering components; agricultural/mining/construction manufacturing, and metal fabricators, according to an International Trade Commission report.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of March 6-12:
The International Trade Commission posted Revision 1 to the 2023 Harmonized Tariff Schedule. The update includes a technical correction to the USMCA rules of origin and a minor correction for organic surface-active agents (other than soap). The update also implements the extension through May of exclusions from Section 301 tariffs for 81 medical care products related to COVID-19 (see 2302020065) and implements corrections to descriptions and tariff numbers of two other Section 301 exclusions (see 2302090027). Also, the update removes Western Sahara from country designations and codes in the statistical annexes.
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.
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.
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.
CBP on Dec. 23 released guidance on the recent extension of Section 301 exclusions through September 2023. ACE functionality for the acceptance of the 352 extended product exclusions will be available beginning Dec. 29 at 7 a.m. EST, CBP said.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the weeks of Dec. 5-11 and Dec. 12-18: