International Trade Today is providing readers with the top stories from April 5-9 in case they were missed. All articles can be found by searching on the titles or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.
Christopher Kane, partner at Simon Gluck, expressed optimism over a recent U.S. Court of International Trade ruling striking down an extension of President Donald Trump's Section 232 tariffs to aluminum and steel derivatives (see 2104050049). He believes the ruling spells good news for the massive litigation involving more than 3,700 companies challenging the expansion of the Section 301 tariffs on goods from China. Although based on a different law, Kane believes CIT's April 5 ruling demonstrates the court's willingness to hold the president to account over laws and regulations. In the case of the derivatives, the tariff expansion was eliminated because it was imposed after a 105-day period during which the president can impose Section 232 tariffs after receiving a report on the need for the duties from the Commerce Department.
Although many American liquor exports received a reprieve with the lifting of Boeing tariffs in Europe, bourbon and other American whiskeys continue to face a 25% punitive tariff in the European Union and the United Kingdom because of Section 232 tariffs on those countries' steel and aluminum exports. At the time the tariffs were imposed, Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., was majority leader, so the product choice was considered to create additional pressure on the administration to reverse the action.
The Court of International Trade found that President Donald Trump violated procedural time limits when expanding Section 232 tariffs to steel and aluminum “derivatives,” in an April 5 decision granting refunds to steel nail importer PrimeSource Building Products. Judges Timothy Stanceu and Jennifer Choe-Groves, as part of a three-judge panel, struck down the tariff expansion, ruling that the president exceeded his authority to impose tariffs when he elected to extend them to derivative products. Judge M. Miller Baker, the remaining judge on the panel, dissented from the opinion.
President Donald Trump's addition of Section 232 tariffs on finished products of steel and aluminum was “invalid,” Court of International Trade Judges Timothy Stanceu and Jennifer Choe-Groves said in an April 5 ruling. The ruling is the result of a challenge from PrimeSource Building Products, which said the presidential proclamation that imposed the tariffs on steel and aluminum “derivatives” was improper because it was issued after the statutory deadline.
U.S. Trade Representative Katherine Tai held a video call with Turkey's trade minister, Ruhsar Pekcan. Pekcan apparently brought up Section 232 tariffs on Turkish steel, and according to the U.S. readout, Tai and Pekcan talked about ways to coordinate on “the global overcapacity of steel and aluminum.” Tai also discussed with Pekcan how to coordinate on digital services taxation, and opportunities to increase market access for U.S goods in Turkey and vice versa.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of March 22-28:
Alcohol trade groups and the retailers and restaurants that sell alcoholic beverages are asking for the tariffs on distilled spirits in connection with the Section 232 tariffs to be lifted and the pause in tariffs on wines and spirits in the aircraft subsidy case to be made permanent. Calling themselves the Toasts Not Tariffs Coalition, the 47-member coalition made the call March 23. They noted that European countries continue to tax bourbon and whiskey at 25%, and that that rate is set to double on June 1, because of U.S. tariffs on British and European Union-made steel.
On the same day that 37 trade associations worked to draw attention to a renewed push to eliminate Section 232 tariffs, a left of center think tank published a paper disagreeing with the arguments that the Tariff Reform Coalition is making, that steel and aluminum sanctions cost more jobs in manufacturing than they saved at primary steel producers.
A scholar at the market-oriented Mercatus Center, a research organization at George Mason University, said that although 25% tariffs on steel and 10% tariffs on aluminum have now been in place for three years, there's no sign they've successfully reduced global overcapacity in those metals. Christine McDaniel, a senior research fellow at the center, cited a Wall Street Journal article that found that the steel industry was not revived by the price protection from imports. McDaniel wrote in a research paper that the administration should be asked what it would achieve to leave the tariffs in place indefinitely. But if they are to stay, McDaniel said the exclusions process should be reformed.