Pro-trade Democrats said that given the barrier of Section 232 tariffs, the fact that Mexico has not yet passed labor law reform, and other concerns, it's premature to be talking about the timing of a vote in the House of Representatives to ratify the new NAFTA. The president of the New Democrats, as well as two other trade leaders in the pro-growth caucus, talked to reporters April 2 after meeting with Canada's U.S. Ambassador David MacNaughton at the Capitol.
Senate Finance Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, complained again April 2 that President Donald Trump doesn't understand that to get the new NAFTA ratified, he has to lift tariffs on Mexican and Canadian aluminum and steel. "The president has to come to the conclusion," he told reporters on a conference call, "and I don’t know why it’s taking him so long, because he wants U.S.-Mexico-Canada [Agreement] to get through. It’s a real victory for him. It’s a real campaign promise kept. So why the slow movement on it? Get rid of them!"
Steel of West Virginia submitted a petition to CBP asking it to reclassify steel parts so that the parts face Section 232 tariffs upon import, CBP said in a notice. The petitioner, which makes steel shapes for sale to forklift truck operators, seeks a new classification for “incomplete steel mast rails and finger bars,” the agency. Specifically, the parts should be classified in subheading 7216.50.00, which covers “Angles, shapes and sections of iron or nonalloy steel: Other angles, shapes and sections, not further worked than hot-rolled, hotdrawn or extruded.” That subheading is duty-free but is covered by the Section 232 tariffs.
International Trade Today is providing readers with some of the top stories for March 25-29 in case they were missed.
Tariffs levied in the name of national security, whether under Section 232 or other statutes, could only last 120 days without affirmative congressional approval under a proposed bill from Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., and Sen. Tom Carper, D-Del. This approach is similar to what's being considered in the Senate Finance Committee, but this bill, introduced March 27, also provides more information and consultation for Section 301 tariffs, such as those currently applied to Chinese goods. Under Section 301, the International Trade Commission would receive descriptions about what products will face tariffs, and at what rates, how long a tariff would last, and the ITC would produce a report on the impact on the economy. The bill would allow Congress to pass a joint resolution of disapproval of these tariffs, but that vote could be vetoed by the president. The bill is called the ‘‘Reclaiming Congressional Trade Authority Act of 2019.’’
Sen. Pat Toomey, R-Pa., is leading the charge to roll back Section 232 tariffs and put Congress in the driver's seat for future 232 actions, but he doesn't know how close the consensus Senate Finance Committee bill will come to his vision for how to address what he called an antiquated law.
Two Ohio Democrats who voted against the original NAFTA -- Rep. Marcy Kaptur and Sen. Sherrod Brown -- have clearly not been won over by the efforts of U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer to satisfy union autoworkers that the revised deal will stop the flow of jobs to Mexico. According to the Ohio state government, auto parts, auto manufacturing, and RV, tire and trailer manufacturing jobs employed more than 107,000 workers in 2019 -- though that included 1,700 who just lost their jobs at GM's Lordstown plant. That closure follows more than 38,500 jobs lost in the industry in the state between 2007 and 2009.
Nine members of the New Democrats -- free-trade oriented members whose votes will be needed to ratify the new NAFTA -- wrote to President Donald Trump March 27 arguing that imported cars are not a security threat and noting his response during a TV interview that acknowledged that they are not a threat. In the interview, he immediately added that the trade deficit is a threat. The letter, led by Rep. Terri Sewell, whose Alabama district is home to both Hyundai and Mercedes car plants, said, "We are pleased to hear that we are in agreement that no national security threat exists. Therefore, we urge you to remove any threat of unilateral tariffs on automobiles and auto parts under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act as soon as possible. Imposing tariffs under Section 232 on autos and auto parts for reasons not related to national security concerns clearly oversteps the authority granted by Congress."
As momentum seems to build in the Senate to rein in Section 232 tariffs, steel company CEOs told a sympathetic group of Congress members that the tariffs are working to increase domestic producers' market share and increase profits as well as employment numbers and pay for steelworkers. "The U.S. steel industry is still vulnerable. Now is not the time to blink," U.S. Steel CEO David Burritt said. Section 232 tariffs or a hard quota "must continue to be applied to all steel-producing countries, especially the top import sources. If the Section 232 doesn't apply everywhere, it's nowhere as border leaks will continue from global excess capacity."
Senate Finance Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, is finding a way to bridge the gap between an approach that would roll back existing Section 232 tariffs and prevent any new ones without congressional assent and an approach that would leave metals tariffs in place and give Congress the opportunity to rein in Section 232 authority only by disapproving tariffs that have been levied. The latter tack would require a veto-proof majority (see 1902120033).