SHARE

FEATURED STORY May 25, 2022

US Trade Representative Requests Comments for Section 301 Duties

You've Reached Your
Free Article Limit This Month
Subscribe now to get unlimited access to all Law.com OnPractice content. Your subscription is free.
Subscribe Now

Key Takeaways

  • The four-year review of the Section 301 tariffs on China begins this summer and USTR has requested comments for the first two tranches of products.

Manufacturers in the U.S. should take note of a new request for comment from the United States Trade Representative as a lack of support may lead to removal of the tariffs and surge in unfairly priced imports.

What Are the Section 301 Duties?

In 2018 and 2019, the Trump administration placed 25% duties (301 duties) on approximately $250 billion worth of Chinese imports. These duties remain in place today and are reviewed every four years as required by the Trade Act of 1974.

Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 allows the Office of the United States Trade Representative to enforce U.S. rights under trade agreements and address unfair foreign barriers to U.S. exports. Section 301 authorizes USTR to take various actions, including increased tariffs on goods imported into the U.S. from the country under investigation. The Trump administration conducted a Section 301 investigation into China's economic practices and imposed tariffs on Chinese goods imported into the U.S. market for (1) forced technology transfer requirements; (2) cyber-enabled actions to acquire U.S. IP and trade secrets illegally; (3) discriminatory and nonmarket licensing practices; and (4) state-funded strategic acquisition of U.S. assets.

However, recent statements by officials seem to suggest that the Biden administration is considering lifting the 301 duties or allowing them to expire.

U.S. Trade Representative's Request for Comments

The four-year review of the Section 301 tariffs on China begins this summer. USTR published a notice in the Federal Register on May 5, 2022, requesting comments from U.S. manufacturers for the first two tranches of products to continue the tariffs. The deadline for comments is July 5 for tranche 1 and August 22 for tranche 2. Any products for which USTR does not receive comments will not advance to the second stage of review. Put another way, any product for which there are no comments from a U.S. manufacturer supporting the Section 301 tariffs, USTR will likely remove the tariff later this fall.

Impact of Removing the Section 301 Duties

The Biden administration is exploring modifying or terminating the Section 301 tariffs in part to help with inflation. However, should the duties be removed then Chinese imports will become 25% cheaper virtually overnight and U.S. manufacturers will likely face a surge in imports.

China has also imposed lockdowns on Shanghai and Beijing to help combat COVID-19. A side effect of the lockdowns has been a slowdown in the internal Chinese supply chain and exports, along with congestion at Chinese ports. As the lockdowns end, Chinese factories will be looking to make up for lost time by increasing production and exports. 

Filing comments to support Section 301 tariffs with USTR by July 5 may provide meaningful relief for U.S. manufacturers that have previously been injured due to competition with unfairly priced Chinese imports.

ALM expressly disclaims any express or implied warranty regarding the OnPractice Content, including any implied warranty that the OnPractice Content is accurate, has been corrected or is otherwise free from errors.

More From Buchanan Ingersoll & Rooney

Relief for US Companies Against Unfair Import Pricing and Foreign Subsidization

By Daniel B. Pickard Buchanan Ingersoll & Rooney June 21 , 2022

As concerns rise over the threat of Section 301 duties being removed from Chinese imports, Dan Pickard, Chair of Buchanan’s International Trade & National Security Practice, explains why more and more manufacturers are turning to combined antidumping and countervailing actions for relief and protection.

Know Your (Crypto) Customer: Anti-Money Laundering and Crypto Regulation

By Mark A. Kasten Buchanan Ingersoll & Rooney May 27 , 2022

As volatility in the cryptocurrency market has increased, regulators in the United States and around the world have indicated a willingness to impose tougher compliance requirements related to crypto assets. As a result, there is an increasing likelihood that companies that hold or deal in crypto assets may be subject to additional regulations in the coming years.

FDA Issues Flurry of Warning Letters to Companies Making Unapproved Claims about CBD and Delta-8 Products

By William A. Garvin Buchanan Ingersoll & Rooney May 26 , 2022

The FDA has become increasingly concerned about products containing cannabidiol (CBD) and/or delta-8 tetrahydrocannabinol (delta-8), stating that such products are potentially unsafe, make claims in violation of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) and “are packaged and labeled in ways that may appeal to children.” These concerns along with recent reports related to delta-8 and CBD products led to the issuance of five additional warning letters.

More From Manufacturing

Relief for US Companies Against Unfair Import Pricing and Foreign Subsidization

By Daniel B. Pickard Buchanan Ingersoll & Rooney June 21 , 2022

As concerns rise over the threat of Section 301 duties being removed from Chinese imports, Dan Pickard, Chair of Buchanan’s International Trade & National Security Practice, explains why more and more manufacturers are turning to combined antidumping and countervailing actions for relief and protection.

California State Assembly Introduces Legislation to Establish Digital Financial Assets Law

By Barbara A. Jones Greenberg Traurig June 10 , 2022

On June 7, 2022, California State Assembly Banking and Finance Committee Chair Timothy Grayson introduced legislation, Assembly Bill (AB) 2269, sponsored by the Consumer Federation of California, that will establish the Digital Financial Assets Law. The legislation aims to give the cryptocurrency industry regulatory clarity and consumer protections by licensing and regulating the activities of cryptocurrency exchanges.

Fifth Circuit Decision Could Undermine Constitutionality of HHS Civil Money Penalty Laws

By Robert P. Charrow Greenberg Traurig May 20 , 2022

On May 18, 2022, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit issued its decision in Jarkesy v. Securities and Exchange Comm’n, in which it examined the constitutionality of an agency civil money penalty enforcement proceeding.

Featured Stories
Closeclose
Search
Menu

Working...