The de minimis footnote within the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement is cause for "serious concerns" for the Customs Matters and Trade Facilitation Industry Trade Advisory Committee (ITAC 12), the committee said in an addendum to its report on the trade deal. The addendum, which is dated Oct. 24 but was released by the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative this week, is among multiple reports updated after Canada agreed to join the deal between the U.S. and Mexico. While the main advisory committee offered some light criticism in its support of the deal (see 1811060023), individual ITACs included some more pointed concerns.
The aluminum producers of Canada, Mexico and the U.S. have written their leaders -- as well as Mexico's president-elect -- asking that tariffs on aluminum be lifted, without quotas, before Nov. 30. "The USMCA cannot work for the aluminum industry or our many downstream customers without exempting Canada and Mexico from the [Section] 232 tariffs or quotas," the three trade groups wrote in a Nov. 5 letter. They suggested that unnaturally cheap Chinese aluminum cannot come into the U.S. through a free-trade backdoor. "Canada recently moved to align its country of origin marking regime for steel and aluminum products to prevent transshipment and diversion of aluminum and steel. Mexico has initiated an anti-dumping case on aluminum foil imports from China," the letter said, so the tariffs in the region are no longer needed. The U.S. aluminum trade group never supported aluminum tariffs on allies.
International Trade Today is providing readers with some of the top stories for Oct. 29 - Nov. 2 in case they were missed.
The main advisory committee for the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative unanimously supports the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement as "far better than the existing NAFTA," and encouraged Congress to enact it as quickly as possible. The committee includes three union leaders, and the rest of its 21 members are either from right of center think tanks or business interests.
The Commerce Department's Office of Inspector General announced that it has begun an audit of the Section 232 tariff exclusion process, with the objective of determining whether the Bureau of Industry and Security and International Trade Administration are adhering to the procedures to review those product exclusion requests, and whether "decisions are reached in a consistent and transparent manner."
Because less than a quarter of vehicles sold in the U.S. are assembled outside the NAFTA region, if 25 percent tariffs are levied on auto parts, the impact would be uneven across the auto industry. Mexico parts production -- with substantial room to grow -- is shielded from future tariffs as part of a tariff rate quota system outlined in the new NAFTA. Still, the National Automobile Dealers Association believes the hit to auto sales would be swift and severe. Patrick Mazzi, a senior economist for NADA, talked about the impact of the administration's trade policy at the National Economists Club Nov. 1.
No business or labor group came out against the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement, in comments filed to the International Trade Commission, even as some groups expressed concerns about aspects of the deal to replace NAFTA. Comments are due before the ITC holds a hearing on Nov. 15.
International Trade Today is providing readers with some of the top stories for Oct. 22-26 in case they were missed.
The U.S. blocked requests from China, Canada, Mexico, Norway, Russia, Turkey and the European Union to examine the legality of steel and aluminum tariffs at the World Trade Organization on Oct. 29. Panel requests can only be blocked one time, so at the next meeting, the panels will be formed. The U.S. was also seeking panels on retaliatory tariffs from China, Canada, Mexico and the EU, and those were blocked.
The trade group suing the Trump administration over Section 232 tariffs on steel has made another fundraising appeal to help pay its lawyers. The American Institute for International Steel also sent out a similar letter in July (see 1807200023). The case is scheduled for oral argument in the Court of International Trade on Dec. 19. "We are in need of $90-100,000 more in the next two weeks if we are going to maintain the stride and pace that has taken us to this important point," the trade group wrote. Members that have not contributed should "take a moment to calculate what the Section 232 tariffs are costing your business," AIIS Chairman John Foster said. "As an example, of the two port members we spoke with just last week, one is down 50 steel ships this year, while the other is off 30 year on year. These two ports by themselves support a large number of import steel and aluminum related-livelihoods."