Trade Cases
NAFTA Steel Requirements Unclear
Written by Sandy Williams
July 18, 2017
President Trump kicked off “Made in America Week” on Monday with a display of items from 50 states that were made in the U.S.A. The photo-op event immediately garnered criticism of the Trump family businesses that rely heavily on China and other Asian countries to manufacture their goods.
The NAFTA renegotiation objectives were released concurrently on Monday by the U.S. Trade Representative. The objectives include increasing opportunities for U.S. firms to sell U.S. products and services into NAFTA countries. A renegotiation would also keep in place domestic preferential government purchasing programs such as “Buy America” that would prevent Canada and Mexico from bidding on U.S. government contracts. The U.S seeks to “update and strengthen the rules of origin, as necessary, to ensure that the benefits of NAFTA go to products genuinely made in the United States and North America.”
An executive order April 18 set the United States on a protectionist path that stipulates Buy American and Hire American. Whether something can meet the Made in USA label requirement depends on the product. According to the Federal Trade Commission, “for a product to be called Made in USA, or claimed to be of domestic origin without qualifications or limits on the claim, the product must be ‘all or virtually all’ made in the U.S.”
The Commission stipulates that a product’s final assembly or processing must take place in the U.S. It then compares how much of the manufacturing costs can be attributed to U.S. parts and processing. Automobile qualification as Made in USA depends on site of assembly and the percentage of imported parts and processes. For steel intensive products like tools or pipes, the Commission also considers how much of the actual steel was sourced domestically vs. imported.
When defining steel as made in America, all manufacturing processes, from the initial melting stage through the application of coatings, must occur in the United States.
The language in the NAFTA objectives is vague on what will constitute U.S. products and did not specifically mention steel products. It is unclear whether U.S. steel-using industries will need to adhere to the melt-through-finishing requirement for sales within NAFTA. A NAFTA “Made in North America” designation does not appear to be in the works under the present administration.
Sandy Williams
Read more from Sandy WilliamsLatest in Trade Cases
Price on Trade: IEEPA tariffs head to the Supreme Court, DOJ ramps up trade enforcement
International trade law and policy remain a hot topic in Washington and beyond this week. We are paying special attention to the ongoing litigation of the president’s tariff policies and the administration’s efforts to heighten trade enforcement.
Mexico considers stiff tariffs for steel, autos, and other imports
Mexico is considering imposing steep tariffs on imports of steel, automobiles, and over 1,400 other products. Its target? Countries with which it does not have free trade agreements, mainly China, India, Thailand, and other South Asian nations.
Leibowitz: With ‘reciprocal’ tariffs struck down again in court, what happens next?
President Trump’s “reciprocal” tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Policy Act (IEEPA) were struck down again, this time on Aug. 29 by the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC). The legal and policy mess continues, with the next stop being the US Supreme Court.
Market unfazed by US circuit court’s IEEPA decision
Repealing any reciprocal tariffs placed by President Donald Trump on US imports of direct reduced iron (DRI), iron ore, hot-briquetted iron (HBI), and pig iron would have only a nominal impact on the US steel market, market participants said.
ITC votes to keep HR duties after sunset review
The US government determined this week that hot-rolled steel imports from a handful of countries continue to threaten the domestic steel industry.