Trade Cases
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/0b31a/0b31a6196ed82b4c14618603a2d094ac1efd35d6" alt=""
Leibowitz on Trade: Mercatus Report on Steel Exclusions Process Finds Worrisome Trends
Written by Lewis Leibowitz
July 9, 2019
Trade attorney and Steel Market Update contributor Lewis Leibowitz offers the following update on events in Washington:
Companies have filed thousands of requests seeking exclusions from the Trump administration’s Section 232 tariffs on steel imports, claiming the products they require are not available from domestic sources in the quantities or qualities required. The steel product exclusion process has come under increased scrutiny revealing noteworthy inconsistencies in Commerce’s decision-making and procedures. The Mercatus Center at George Mason University in Virginia has studied the steel exclusion process and decisions through exhaustive analysis. They have calculated the amount of steel products that large domestic producers have claimed the ability to produce. In one instance, with respect to Nucor, George Mason determined that the company objected to exclusion requests totaling 41.31 million metric tons, but that their annual production amounted to a bit more than 24 million metric tons. AK Steel objected to requests for over 30 million metric tons, but only produces about 6 million. Yet only 1 percent of exclusion requests receiving objections are approved by Commerce.
Clearly, if the exclusion process is intended to permit steel users to use imported steel, tariff- and quota-free, when domestic producers are unable to produce sufficient quantities, some method of verifying the ability of objecting producers would be desirable. Trade associations of steel users and their supporters in Congress are increasing their criticism of the exclusion process. A recent article in the newsletter Inside U.S. Trade detailed their complaints.
The process is characterized by delays (most exclusion requests that receive objections remain undecided for months, costing steel users in tariff payments and uncertainty) and minimal analysis. A typical denial decision recently stated, as the sole basis for decision, “ITA recommends finding, based on all of the evidence presented, that the product referenced in the above-captioned exclusion request is produced in the United States in a sufficient and reasonably available amount and of a satisfactory quality, and recommends denying the request for an exclusion.”
In some instances, requests are considered “not complete” because U.S. Customs claims that the tariff classification claimed is incorrect. There is minimal analysis of these claims, as well. For example, one denial stated that the dimensions claimed for the product were not consistent with the requirements of the particular ten-digit classification. Others have been denied because Customs claims the product is “non-alloy” steel rather than “alloy” steel. These are often details that are not relevant to the ability of domestic producers to make the product.
There has not been a legal challenge yet to the process or the legality of some denials. The amount of discretion claimed by Commerce in making these decisions is almost unbounded, making a legal challenge based on abuse of discretion difficult. However, particularly in semifinished steel cases, which have been denied in virtually every case, members of the steel industry itself are being rendered uncompetitive. I expect there will be more complaints about exclusions.
Lewis Leibowitz
The Law Office of Lewis E. Leibowitz
1400 16th Street, N.W.
Suite 350
Washington, D.C. 20036
Phone: (202) 776-1142
Fax: (202) 861-2924
Cell: (202) 250-1551
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/5f73c/5f73c71fbd3766099ce4d40dcc169980c734f19e" alt="Lewis Leibowitz, SMU Contributor"
Lewis Leibowitz
Read more from Lewis LeibowitzLatest in Trade Cases
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/d3a8a/d3a8a44458f8535cda37f74ca219e1e0e2ea9882" alt=""
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.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/cd5cc/cd5ccf8fcd610d16dc861faee6fe045ca677cc79" alt=""
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.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/c1df9/c1df9ccee32d1383fa0b9bd73a6e14fd64318936" alt="The White House"
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.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/c4ede/c4ede29c075e98ef5ee69f321caea25835be56b8" alt=""
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.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/84bda/84bda1ccb5c0ca2fd6f7fcd8c2ca758876bf3bbb" alt=""
Leibowitz: In Trump’s brave new world of tariffs, what will stick and what will courts challenge?
With a chronic trade deficit, the administration will continue to cite more tariffs as necessary. This is in error, as noted above. Yet the base of President Trump’s support does not see it that way. More tariffs are possible. But the only way to reduce the US trade deficit substantially is to close the gap between savings and investment in the United States.