2018

President Trump has announced that the United States will withdraw from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA, also informally known as the Iran nuclear deal) that was entered into in 2015 by Iran, the United States, China, France, Germany, Russia and the United Kingdom. The JCPOA was negotiated in an effort to ensure that Iran’s nuclear program would be used exclusively for non-military, peaceful means. On January 16, 2016, the JCPOA was formally implemented and certain trade and economic sanctions against Iran were relaxed by the other parties to the deal. From its inception, the Iran nuclear deal has had its share of proponents and critics, and was a hot-button issue during the 2016 presidential election. During the campaign, and since, President Trump repeatedly stated that the deal was “one of the worst and most one-sided transactions the United States has ever entered into.” In making today’s announcement, President Trump stated that the JCPOA was “defective at its core” since it would not prevent Iran from ultimately developing a nuclear bomb. He argued that the sunset provisions of the deal and the onsite inspection provisions were clearly inadequate, and at the time when the United States had “maximum leverage,” it entered into a deal that gave Iran, a “leading state sponsor of terrorism,” billions of dollars. The president called the agreement “a great embarrassment to me as a citizen and all citizens of the United States.”

Top trade officials from the United States, Canada and Mexico will resume negotiations over revisions to NAFTA this week in an effort to finalize an agreement. Reports indicate that while progress has been made, a number of issues remain, including rules of origin pertaining to automobiles, dispute settlement, government procurement and labor.

All parties agree…

With the deadline approaching for full implementation of the Section 232 tariffs on certain steel and aluminum imports, President Trump on April 30, 2018 relented to increasing pressure and extended the tariff exemptions for key U.S. allies until June 1, 2018. In making the announcement, the Trump administration announced that it had previously reached a…

In its self-initiated investigation, the Department of Commerce has preliminarily determined that countervailing duties (CVD) should be assessed for imports of aluminum sheet from China to counteract Chinese government subsidies. Commerce calculated a 31.20 percent CVD rate for Chinese respondent Yong Jie New Material Co., Ltd.; a 34.99 percent CVD rate for respondents Henan Mingtai Industrial Co., Ltd. and Zhengzhou Mingtai Industry Co., Ltd.; and a 33.10 percent CVD rate for all other Chinese producers and exporters. Due to their failure to cooperate in the investigation, Commerce assigned a 113.30 percent CVD rate to respondents Chalco Ruimin Co., Ltd. and Chalco-SWA Cold Rolling Co., Ltd.

On April 12, 2018, the House of Representatives’ Committee on Ways and Means held a hearing to explore the effects on the U.S. economy and jobs of the tariff increases related to Section 232 and Section 301 investigations. Before the hearing, Chairman Kevin Brady stated, “In enforcing our trade laws, we should always take a targeted approach to address unfair practices while avoiding harm to U.S. workers and job creators. Our private sector witnesses will discuss the impact of recently announced U.S. tariff increases on their businesses, including product and country coverage of the tariffs, the process to comment on and apply for exclusions from the tariffs, and the effects of possible retaliation on U.S. exporters.” In his opening comments, Brady highlighted China’s questionable trade policies and practices, but also asked, “How do you avoid punishing Americans for China’s misbehavior?”

On April 11, 2018, the Senate Committee on Finance held a hearing regarding the challenges that U.S. businesses, manufacturers and service providers face when trying to access the Chinese market. Links to the witnesses’ written testimony are provided below. Before the committee, these industry witnesses consistently indicated that a long-term strategy – with clear objectives and a timeline – was needed to address China’s trade practices. Perhaps, most poignantly, Dean Garfield, president and CEO of the Information Technology Industry Council, stated, “The U.S.-China relationship is as complex as it is important. The relationship has always been – and likely will continue to be – one of both competition and cooperation. We need to approach managing difficulties in the bilateral trade relationship with the nuance and deliberation they deserve, recognizing that both action and inaction will have consequences for years to come, in positive and negative respects.” He later added that the United States, regardless of China’s practices, must rebalance its approach to strengthening the U.S. economy because, “Regardless of whether China plays by the rules or not, it will continue to develop significant capacity for technological development, innovation, and growth. The United States must be prepared to compete.”

The U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), in consultation with the Department of State, has sanctioned numerous Russian oligarchs and the companies they own or control, 17 senior Russian government officials, and a state-owned Russian weapons trading company. In his announcement, Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin stated, “The Russian government engages…

The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) has released its annual report on significant foreign trade barriers, providing an inventory of the most important foreign barriers affecting U.S. exports of goods and services, foreign direct investment by U.S. persons and protection of intellectual property rights. The term “trade barriers” does not have a fixed definition but is broadly defined by the USTR as government laws, regulations, policies or practices that either protect domestic goods and services from foreign competition, artificially stimulate exports of particular domestic goods and services, or fail to provide adequate and effective protection of intellectual property rights. The report classifies foreign trade barriers into 10 different categories, including import policies, government procurement, export subsidies, lack of intellectual property protections and service/investment barriers.

Announcing that China’s unfair trade practices in the areas of technology transfers and intellectual property result in harm to the U.S. economy of at least $50 billion per year, President Trump issued a Presidential Memorandum announcing the findings of his administration’s Section 301 investigation into these practices by the People’s Republic of China. This trade…

As expected, President Trump has formally requested from Congress a three-year extension of Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) pursuant to the Bipartisan Congressional Trade Priorities and Accountability Act of 2015. In requesting the extension of TPA, which is due to expire July 1, 2018, the president noted, “Extension of trade authorities procedures is essential to fulfill…