Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo said that the Section 232 25% tariffs on Ukrainian steel will be temporarily lifted. "For steel mills to continue as an economic lifeline for the people of Ukraine, they must be able to export their steel," she said. "Today’s announcement is a signal to the Ukrainian people that we are committed to helping them thrive in the face of Putin’s aggression, and that their work will create a stronger Ukraine, both today and in the future." The tariff reprieve will last one year.
When the Biden administration announced that the U.S. would roll back 25% tariffs on Ukrainian steel for one year, following the U.K. and the EU, there was no pushback from steel interests, and praise from Senate Finance Committee Chairman Ron Wyden, D-Ore.. He issued a statement that said, "As Ukraine continues to valiantly fend off Russia's brutal invasion, it is important that the United States do everything it can to support the Ukrainian economy. Removing the Section 232 tariffs is an appropriate and welcome move from the Biden Administration that makes clear our primary concern is with China's overcapacity, not the people of Ukraine."
The International Trade Commission will produce a report by March 15 next year on the economic impact of Section 301 and Section 232 tariffs on U.S. prices, trade and production in the industries most affected by the tariffs. The commission announced that it will hold a public hearing on July 21, and that requests to appear at that hearing should be filed by July 6. It also will accept written submissions on the topic through Aug. 24.
House Ways and Means Chairman Richard Neal, D-Mass., would also be open to lowering or lifting tariffs on at least some Ukrainian goods, he said during a hallway interview at the Capitol on April 28. Neal said he had just left a meeting with the president of Georgia, and she had told him the U.S. support for Ukraine needed to last. The U.K. has lifted tariffs on all Ukrainian imports, and the EU's parliament is considering doing the same.
The Senate Finance Committee is talking about liberalizing trade with Ukraine, according to Sen. Rob Portman, R-Ohio, who represents many Ukrainian-Americans in his state. He told International Trade Today at the Capitol on April 27 that the proposals being discussed might be broader than just lifting Section 232 tariffs on Ukrainian steel. Lifting 25% tariffs on Ukrainian steel was argued for by Senate Finance Committee member Pat Toomey, R-Pa., and by Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif.
A wide variety of trade groups told the Commerce Department that while they know the administration doesn't intend to tackle tariffs as part of its negotiations with Asian countries, they think offering to lower tariffs on U.S. goods would be the best way to get ambitious commitments in the region, and many said reconsidering the re-named Trans-Pacific Partnership is better than the conceived Indo-Pacific Economic Framework.
International Trade Today is providing readers with the top stories from last week in case they were missed. All articles can be found by searching on the titles or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.
Sen. Pat Toomey, R-Pa., a longtime advocate for free trade, and Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., are asking the Biden administration to lift Section 232 tariffs on steel. In a letter sent April 5, the two said that while the war has severely disrupted Ukraine's ability to export steel, "when the war ends and Ukraine's economy reopens, Ukraine's steel industry will be an integral part of its economic recovery." They said that Ukraine is the 13th largest steel producer globally, and removing the tariffs on its steel would help Ukraine rebuild its economy.
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce continues to argue against including rewrites to antidumping duty and countervailing duty laws, and calls for tariff relief, John Murphy, the lead advocate on trade for the group, blogged about their trade priorities.
A recent Court of International Trade decision says domestic industry can’t use the interested party petition process to challenge individual entries, and are instead limited to challenges of how CBP treats the category of merchandise as a whole, customs lawyer Larry Richardson of Barnes Richardson said in a blog post April 4.