Trade Law Daily is a service of Warren Communications News.
Subscriber Login

Section 301 tariffs

Section 301 Tariffs are levied under the Trade Act of 1974 which grants the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) authority to investigate and take action to protect U.S. rights from trade agreements and respond to foreign trade practices. Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 provides statutory means allowing the United States to impose sanctions on foreign countries violating U.S. trade agreements or engaging in acts that are “unjustifiable” or “unreasonable” and burdensome to U.S. commerce. Prior to 1995, the U.S. frequently used Section 301 to eliminate trade barriers and pressure other countries to open markets to U.S. goods.

The founding of the World Trade Organization in 1995 created an enforceable dispute settlement mechanism, reducing U.S. use of Section 301. The Trump administration began using Section 301 in 2018 to unilaterally enforce tariffs on countries and industries it deemed unfair to U.S. industries. The Trump administration adopted the policy shift to close what it deemed a persistent "trade gap" between the U.S. and foreign governments that it said disadvantaged U.S. firms. Additionally, it pointed to alleged weaknesses in the WTO trade dispute settlement process to justify many of its tariff actions -- particularly against China. The administration also cited failures in previous trade agreements to enhance foreign market access for U.S. firms and workers.

The Trump Administration launched a Section 301 investigation into Chinese trade policies in August 2017. Following the investigation, President Trump ordered the USTR to take five tariff actions between 2018 and 2019. Subsequent rounds of Section 301 actions against China have continued since. The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative administers Section 301 tariffs, and has also created an exclusion process for importers to seek exemptions from the tariffs.

to
articlessource documents
Refine Trend Search
Clear Terms

Search Primer

Term list: Separate terms with spaces, not commas or semicolons.

Multi-word term: Place inside quotes to ensure an exact match (e.g. "China import").

Acronyms: Use all capital letters to ensure the search is not looking for that letter sequence instead.

Required term: If a term must be included in any resulting articles, prefix it with a plus sign (e.g., +CBP).

Excluded term: If a term should be excluded from any articles being found, prefix it with a minus sign (e.g., -ruling).

Singular form: Always use the singular form when doing multi-word terms (e.g. "russian export control" instead of "russian export controls").

Shortest word form: When you have different word forms in a quoted (multi-word) term, you want to only include the shortest version if it is the last part of the expression (e.g., "entity list" instead of "entity listing" or "entity listed").

German Tool Company to Pay $1.9 Million to Settle Customs Fraud Claims
December 5, 2023 by Jacob Kopnick|Penalties

German company KingKong-Tools GmbH & Co KG, along with its American subsidiary King Kong Tools, will pay $1.9 million to resolve allegations of customs fraud, the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Northern District of Georgia announced. The office alleged that King Kong falsely said its tool imports were made in Germany when they were made in China, misrepresenting their country of origin in violation of the False Claims Act.

Topics:Country of origin cases
Bamboo Furniture Importer Says CBP Illegally Stripped It of Section 301 Exclusion
November 29, 2023 by Jacob Kopnick|Litigation

CBP improperly levied Section 301 duties against Greenington's bamboo furniture imports from China, the importer argued in a Nov. 27 complaint at the Court of International Trade. Greenington said CBP wasn't supported in finding that its entries didn't qualify for a Section 301 exclusion under Harmonized Tariff Schedule subheading 9903.88.67, which covers "household furniture of high-pressure laminated bamboo, other than babies' or children's furniture" set under subheading 9403.82.0015 (Greenington v. United States Customs and Border Protection, CIT # 23-00243).

Topics:Court of International Trade activity
CBP Finds China to Be Country of Origin for Lexmark Printers
November 21, 2023 by Noah Garfinkel|Customs Rulings

China is the country of origin for Lexmark printers imported from Mexico for both Section 301 trade duties and country of origin marking, CBP said in a recently released ruling. CBP found that the printer transports incorporated into the printer, which were made in China, were critical for the printer to feed the paper and to print copies, and were the component that imparted essential character, rather than the printed circuit board assemblies, which were assembled in Mexico.

Topics:Country of origin cases
US Adds 2 DOJ Attorneys in Massive Section 301 Case at CAFC
November 21, 2023 by Jacob Kopnick|Litigation

The U.S. added two attorneys to its litigation team in the massive Section 301 case at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Filing an amended notice of appearance on Nov. 20, the government tacked on Melissa Patterson and Joshua Koppel -- two attorneys in DOJ's Civil Appellate Division -- to the appellee team for the U.S. (HMTX Industries v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 23-1891).

Topics:Court of International Trade activity
CIT Grants Importer's Bid to Toss Its Customs Suit on Railway Parts
November 17, 2023 by Jacob Kopnick|Litigation

The Court of International Trade agreed to dismiss importer Strato's customs suit on the classification of the company's parts of railway or tramway locomotives or rolling stock, hooks and other coupling devices, buffer and parts thereof. Strato filed the suit to claim that its goods were substantially transformed and thus should not be hit with Section 301 duties. The U.S. agreed with the dismissal of the action but no reason was provided for why the suit was ditched (Strato v. United States, CIT # 23-00142).

Topics:Court of International Trade activity