Trade Cases
AIIS: Terminate Section 232
Written by Sandy Williams
October 4, 2017
The American Institute for International Steel, representing 120 companies supporting 1.2 million jobs in the steel-using sectors and 84,000 direct and indirect jobs in the marine transportation system, wrote to the president this week requesting termination of the Section 232 investigation on steel imports.
AIIS said they appreciate that a significant part of the rationale for the investigation is to address steel market distortions caused by global overcapacity. However, trade restrictions imposed by Section 232 will do nothing to counter the use of state subsidies by countries, such as China, which encourage overcapacity.
The United States steel industry is currently profitable and one of the most protected sectors in the country, said AIIS. The majority of antidumping and countervailing rulings listed by Commerce concern the steel industry.
Retaliation by the nation’s trading partners, particularly on the agriculture sector, is likely should the United States impose Section 232 restrictions on steel imports, they said.
“Mr. President, as you know, trade retaliation is always a ‘lose-lose’ proposition,” wrote AIIS. The association cited the trade dispute in 2009 when China retaliated with tariffs on U.S. chicken exports in response to duties placed on imported Chinese tires.
Although the United States may eventually prevail in a trade dispute over steel imports, said AIIS, the legal battle may take years and cost millions of dollars while irretrievably losing market share for the U.S.
Trade restrictions bring unintended consequences to the supply chain. Ocean vessels carrying inbound steel to the United States are also the vessels that carry U.S. grain exports overseas. With import restrictions in place on steel imports, fewer vessels will be available at U.S. ports to transport grain, putting 50,000 American jobs at risk.
AIIS told President Trump that while they absolutely support a strong steel industry, it is the entire steel supply chain that makes America great.
“Let us not attempt to further protect the few at the expense of the many. Let us terminate the Section 232 investigation now, and keep our country’s ports, and the many Americans whose livelihoods depend on them, working.”
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.