Future Senate Finance Committee Chairman May Try to Rein in Section 232 Actions
The incoming Senate Finance Committee chairman suggested during a speech that the committee could rein in Trump's use of Section 232 tariffs. Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, said he doesn't mind being creative in negotiations, but he will be reviewing the president's use of those tariffs. "I strongly disagree with the notion that imports of steel and aluminum, automobiles, and auto parts somehow could pose a national security threat," Grassley said, according to his prepared remarks. "Senator Portman and others have already introduced legislation to narrow the scope of how an administration can use the power that Congress authorized in 1962 under the influence of the Cold War (see 1808010048). "I believe that these efforts serve as a prudent starting point for the discussion we need to have on Section 232 authority in the next Congress."
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
Grassley said he intends to move the new NAFTA quickly, but he can't unless the administration works with Congress. He said tariffs are not a long-term solution, and said, "as long as Section 232 tariffs on steel and aluminum imports from Canada and Mexico remain, U.S. farmers and others facing retaliation, along with the American businesses that rely on those imports, will be unable to realize the full potential benefits of" the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement. He did not directly address President Donald Trump's threat to withdraw the U.S. from NAFTA, but said we "collectively have a responsibility to ensure that U.S. farmers, ranchers and businesses face minimal uncertainty from updating NAFTA."
Grassley, who spoke on the Senate floor Dec. 20, again reiterated that a trade deal that leaves out agriculture, as proposed in the European Union talks, is a no-go. "The notion that some people in the EU think there could be an agreement that doesn’t address the many ways they block our good agricultural products from being sold in Europe is ridiculous," he said, with the underlining an emphasis appearing in the copy of the prepared remarks released by his office.