Insights

On his first day in office, President Trump rolled out a sprawling set of directives to the heads of numerous government agencies charged with shaping U.S. trade policy.  While stopping short of enacting new tariffs, the Presidential Memorandum defining an “America First Trade Policy” lays the investigative groundwork for potentially sweeping changes to tariffs and the existing trade environment.   The Memorandum requires various agencies—including, e.g., the Department of Commerce, the Department of the Treasury, and the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (“USTR”)—to issue upward of twenty reports by April 1, 2025, each one covering a unique trade-related issue pertaining to certain key themes, including unfair and unbalanced trade with all U.S. trading partners, the relationship and impact of trade relations with the People’s Republic of China, and the state of economic security matters relevant for goods entering and exiting the United States. 

On November 14, 2024, Rep. John Moolenaar (R-Mich.), chair of the House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party, introduced the Restoring Trade Fairness Act, seeking to suspend China’s Permanent Normal Trade Relations (“PNTR”) status.

On June 6, 2022, President Biden issued a White House Fact Sheet (“Fact Sheet”) outlining President Biden’s “Bold Executive Action to Spur Domestic Clean Energy Manufacturing” along with five related Defense Production Act (“DPA”) Presidential Determinations[1] (“Presidential Determinations”) and a Declaration of Emergency and Authorization for Temporary Extensions of Time and Duty-Free Importation of Solar Cells and Module from Southeast Asia (the “Declaration”).  The Fact Sheet states the President is (1) authorizing use of the DPA to accelerate domestic production of clean energy technologies; (2) encouraging domestic solar manufacturing capacity through the use of master supply agreements with enhanced domestic preferences; and (3) creating a two-year trade regulation bridge as domestic manufacturing for solar products scales up.  The White House stated that these actions are being taken to lower energy costs, reduce risks to the power grid, and mitigate climate change.  The Department of Energy (“DOE”) also released a statement on June 6 about the DPA Presidential Determinations which describes DOE’s concerns with regard to each material or technology for which a determination was issued.  The statements made by the White House and DOE also make clear that these actions to employ the DPA are part of the Administration’s broader “all of government” approach to addressing Environmental Justice, with the intention to “strongly encourage projects with environmental justice outcomes that empower the clean energy transition in low income communities historically overburdened by legacy pollution.”

On October 4, 2021, United States Trade Representative (USTR) Katherine Tai delivered a speech at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) detailing the Biden Administration’s new strategy for managing U.S.-China trade relations. Tai announced that the USTR will restart a targeted tariff exclusion process for Section 301 duties. Today (October 6) the USTR published a request for comments regarding possible reinstatement of certain exclusions to the Section 301 tariffs visible here. The exclusion process covers 549 products for which the prior Administration granted exclusion extensions, most of which expired on December 31, 2020.  See here for the list of covered products   The USTR is seeking public comments on whether or not to further extend the exclusion from 301 tariffs on these products.  The comment period opens October 12 and closes December 1 and 11:59 PM EST and can be accessed here.  

The United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) came into force on July 1, 2020. Included in the USMCA are stronger labor provisions Congressional Democrats demanded, with the support of the Trump Administration, that were approved on a bipartisan basis during consideration of the USMCA implementing legislation in late 2019. The stronger labor provisions helped secure the support of key labor groups for the USMCA. Together with overall support from business groups, the USMCA set a framework for more extensive labor commitments in U.S. trade agreements. This is expected to lead to more aggressive enforcement.

On June 2, the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) launched a series of Section 301 trade investigations into digital services taxes (DST) adopted or under consideration by a number of United States (U.S.) trading partners – including Austria, Brazil, the Czech Republic, the European Union, India, Indonesia, Italy, Spain, Turkey and the United Kingdom. The investigations will initially focus on whether these taxes discriminate against U.S. companies, including concerns about “retroactivity and possibly unreasonable tax policy”. The Federal Register Notice provides a complete overview of the investigations.

The government has lost another battle in its fight to prevent refunds of certain excise taxes paid by importers. Earlier this year, the U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT) struck down a regulation issued by the Department of the Treasury and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (Treasury and CBP, collectively the agencies) designed to limit the scope of those refunds. Nat’l Ass’n of Mfrs. v. United States Dep’t of Treasury, No. 19-00053, slip op. at 20-09 (Ct. Int’l Trade Jan. 24, 2020). Although the CIT ruled the regulation invalid, the government sought permission to continue to apply the regulation while it appealed the court’s decision. This would have allowed the government to deny refunds for the excise taxes at issue. Last week, the CIT denied the government’s request. Nat’l Ass’n of Mfrs. v. United States Dep’t of Treasury, No. 19-00053, slip op. at 20-67 (Ct. Int’l Trade May 15, 2020)

The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) is seeking comments to remove Section 301 tariffs on certain imports from China that could help support the United States COVID-19 response. The USTR recently granted approximately 200 exclusions from the tariffs on China that covered personal protective equipment products, including medical masks, examination gloves, antiseptic wipes, and other medical-care related items, as a response to the COVID-19 outbreak.

On January 31, 2020, the Trump administration issued an executive order cracking down on U.S. businesses that import directly or facilitate the import of counterfeit or pirated goods, illegal narcotics and other contraband. The order, entitled “Ensuring Safe & Lawful E-Commerce for US Consumers, Business, Government Supply Chains and Intellectual Property Rights,” directs various government departments and agencies to undertake a series of measures to carry out the president’s effort to combat illegal imports. The initiative has far-reaching implications not only for importers and brand owners but also for e-commerce platforms, government contractors, and service providers in the global supply chain that provide warehouse, customs brokerage and transportation services. Parties that fail to comply with the new measures may be barred from participation in certain transactions involving the federal government and/or banned from importing goods into the United States. Additionally, the Department of Justice will be notified of custom violations that are actionable under the False Claims Act, thus another implication is the potential for increased civil and criminal enforcement actions.

On January 15, President Trump and Chinese Vice Premier Liu He signed a “Phase One” trade agreement, the first formal text agreement between the two sides since the United States initiated the Section 301 investigation in August 2017, which has since led to mounting U.S. and Chinese tariffs affecting bilateral trade.

In this issue:

In this issue:

In this issue:

In this issue:

In this issue:

In this issue:

In this issue:

This news bulletin is provided by the International Trade Group of Crowell & Moring. If you have questions or need assistance on trade law matters, please contact Jeff Snyder or any member of the International Trade Group.

The Chair’s Statements of the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Economic Leaders Meeting (AELM) and APEC Ministerial Meeting (AMM) were released last week, after concluding on 18 November and 15 November respectively without consensus statements. Disagreements were primarily between the United States and China and revolved around a narrow set of issues, notably how the multilateral trading system should be characterized, with the United States pressing for reform and others advocating that the institution be strengthened. These differing views will continue to play front and center in multilateral settings, most immediately the G20 Summit on 30 November – 1 December in Buenos Aires. 

In this issue: