Trade Cases
SMU Market Trends: Most Feel Auto Imports Not a Real Threat
Written by Tim Triplett
July 9, 2018
Are imports of motor vehicles and auto parts a threat to the security of the United States? More than three out of four respondents to last week’s Steel Market Update market trends questionnaire say no.
Citing the same argument that it used to justify the tariffs on steel and aluminum under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, the Trump administration contends imports of cars and trucks are a danger to a healthy domestic automotive industry. “Core industries such as automobiles and automotive parts are critical to our strength as a nation,” said the White House.
In late May, President Trump instructed Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross to investigate whether imports of foreign-made vehicles and parts pose a threat to U.S. automakers, and thus to national security. The administration reportedly is considering tariffs of 25 percent, up from the current 2.5 percent. Public hearings on the proposal, which faces strong opposition from both inside and outside the auto sector, are set for July 19-20 in Washington.
Only 24 percent of the steel industry executives polled by SMU support the administration’s plan for automotive tariffs. Following is a sampling of respondents’ comments:
• “Stupefyingly ridiculous!”
• “None of this is justified, but it’s still happening.”
• “The current administration is determined to rebalance trade deficits and will do whatever they feel they need to do in order to achieve this—at the expense of all common sense and with disregard for the negative long-term high-cost effects on the U.S. economy.”
• “Ford, GM and Fiat also import parts from other countries for their assembly plants. The Big Three could end up as collateral damage.”
• “Yes, it’s justified on cars made outside of the United States. Especially luxury cars. Tax them more; they are bought by the wealthy anyway.”
Tim Triplett
Read more from Tim TriplettLatest in Trade Cases
Price: Should billions in Section 232 revenue go to foreign manufacturers or to the American people?
Do we want the benefits of the Section 232 tariffs to flow to the bottom lines of foreign steel and aluminum producers or to the US government and, ultimately, domestic manufacturers and their workers? In our view, the answer is simple. Section 232 exceptions do nothing more than lead to underserved profits for foreign manufacturers who are harming the US industrial base. That revenue could be used to pursue the Trump administration’s other policy priorities - such as deficit reduction or expanded tax cuts.
Mills allege ‘critical circumstances’ in CORE trade case vs. South Africa, UAE
"Recent activity in the marketplace strongly indicates that these imports are being rushed into the United States in an effort to avoid the imposition of antidumping duties," petitioners said.
European Commission eyes retaliation vs. Trump steel tariffs: Report
The European Commission is looking into making current quotas on steel imports stricter as a countermeasure to President Trump’s recently announced tariffs on steel and aluminum imports to the US, according to an article in Reuters.
Trump could levy tariffs on auto imports in April: Report
President Donald Trump said last week that he could place tariffs on auto imports, according to an article in Politico.
Section 232 tariffs are headed downstream
The Trump administration has revealed the list of derivative steel products being added to the Section 232 tariff list.