USTR Lists EU Products Considered for Tariff Retaliation Over Beef Restrictions
The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative is issuing a list of 85 headings and subheadings that could be subject to retaliatory tariffs being considered against the EU, as industry representatives have claimed that the EU is discriminating against U.S. beef exports, USTR said (here). The Obama administration is considering the tariffs (see 1612220023) after members of the U.S. beef industry filed a petition to USTR for their reinstatement, the agency said.
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.
The list of headings and subheadings to be considered for higher tariffs consists of mostly agricultural products, including all products under HTS Headings 0201 (meat of bovine animals, fresh or chilled), 0202 (meat of bovine animals, frozen), 0203 (meat of swine (pork), fresh, chilled or frozen), 0206 (edible offal of bovine animals, swine, sheep, goats, horses, or mules, fresh, chilled or frozen), 0207 (“meat and edible offal of poultry … fresh, chilled or frozen”), and 1601 (sausages and similar products, of meat, meat offal or blood; food preparations based on these products). Also included are other foods and agricultural products in chapters 02, 04, 05, 06, 07, 08, 09, 11, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23; certain glues under chapter 35; certain yarns of chapter 55; hair clippers under chapter 85; and some motorcycles under chapter 87.
The interagency Section 301 Committee will accept through Jan. 30 written comments and requests to appear at a Feb. 15 public hearing to explore whether and how to assess tariffs against any or all EU products being considered for tariff increases, USTR said. Specifically, the committee is inviting comments on what products should be subject to increased tariffs, the most suitable duty rate to encourage a resolution of the dispute, and whether imposing duties would bring “disproportionate economic harm” to U.S. interests, USTR said. Previously, the U.S. assessed duties of 100 percent against designated EU products (see 09050705). The interagency Section 301 Committee will host the public hearing Feb. 15.
The full slate of products under headings 0201 and 0202 were among the initial products that incurred higher U.S. duties after the World Trade Organization Dispute Settlement Body on July 26, 1999, authorized the U.S. to impose retaliation worth $116.8 million yearly. A WTO dispute panel found that EU sanitary and phytosanitary rules applied to U.S. beef imports were inconsistent with the EU’s WTO obligations. USTR is also releasing a list of 34 headings and subheadings that were initially subject to this series of retaliatory tariffs, all of which are included in USTR’s wider list of products currently being considered for tariff increases.
U.S. beef industry members filed a written request for reinstatement of retaliatory tariffs on certain imports from the EU, USTR said. The EU imposes sanitary and phytosanitary measures preventing imports of beef treated with any of six growth-promotion hormones, amounting to a ban of U.S. beef imports not “specially produced,” USTR said. An agreement signed by the EU and U.S. in 2009 to allow EU imports of non-hormone-treated U.S. beef (see 09050705) has not worked as intended, USTR has said (see 1612220023). Although the EU has maintained a 45,000-megaton tariff-rate quota for imports of U.S. beef not fed with growth-promoting hormones since August 2012 (see 13102316), “it has not in practice provided benefits to the U.S. beef industry sufficient to compensate for the economic harm resulting from the EU ban on all but specially-produced U.S. beef,” USTR said. Non-U.S. exporters of the “specially produced” beef have filled a large part of the quota, USTR said.
(Federal Register 12/28/16)