The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative on March 23 announced the extension of 352 exclusions from Section 301 tariffs on China. The exclusions, all of which had expired, resume effect as of Oct. 12, 2021, and will remain in effect through Dec. 31, 2022, USTR said.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of March 14-20:
The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative is wading into “unchartered waters” if it tries extending the lists 1 and 2 Section 301 tariffs on China past their four-year expiration deadlines under the 1974 Trade Act (see 2203140004), David Olave, a Sandler Travis associate and trade policy adviser, said in an email. List 1 is due to expire July 6, List 2 only seven weeks later on Aug. 23.
The government can seek reclassification of an importer's merchandise in court at a higher duty rate, even when CBP didn't previously pursue the rate increase against the importer, DOJ said in March 15 brief in support of its counterclaim in a tariff classification suit brought by Cyber Power -- which says the counterclaim sets a dangerous precedent (Cyber Power Systems (USA) Inc. v. United States, CIT #21-00200).
Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., reacting to a report in Inside U.S. Trade that the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative decided not to launch a new Section 301 investigation on China yet, sent a letter March 15 to USTR Katherine Tai asking whether the report is accurate and if so, why. A USTR spokesman didn't respond to a request for comment on the letter. Cotton wrote that the Chinese Communist Party "has shown nothing but malice towards this nation and should be shown no leniency in our response to its economic aggression. For this reason, I am deeply disappointed to learn that USTR is not pursuing an expansive set of Section 301 investigations into China’s anti-competitive and illegal trade practices."
Two chainsaw chain and blade importers, TriLink Saw Chain and TriLink Global, agreed to pay $525,000 to settle allegations that the companies misclassified their imports, the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Northern District of Iowa said. The U.S. alleged that the importers purposely classified their chain saw chains and blades from September 2018 through June 2019 under the wrong Harmonized Tariff Schedule subheading to avoid paying Section 301 China tariffs -- a violation of the False Claims Act.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of March 7-13:
July 6 marks the fourth anniversary of the List 1 Section 301 tariffs' taking effect on Chinese imports, and the 1974 Trade Act requires their expiration after four years, “unless some conditions are met,” said David Olave, a Sandler Travis associate and trade policy adviser, on a recent podcast. “No unilateral 301 action that I know has made it through the four years, so we’re about to witness trade policy procedural history,” he said.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Feb. 28 - March 6:
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.