Trade Cases
GAO: Commerce Needs to Fix Section 232 Exclusion Process
Written by David Schollaert
September 17, 2020
Importers of steel and aluminum who have been critical of the Commerce Department’s handling of Section 232 exclusion requests have found an ally in the Government Accountability Office. In a report released Tuesday, the GAO called for Commerce to improve and speed up the process it uses to review tariff exclusion requests. The report noted that nearly three-quarters of all steel and aluminum exclusion decisions regarding Section 232 duties failed to meet the DOC’s established timeliness guidelines from March 2018 to November 2019.
GAO’s probe was initiated in April 2019 in response to the 25 percent tariffs imposed by President Trump in March 2018 on imports of steel and aluminum products, citing the Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962. The administration maintains that surges of unfairly priced imports pose a threat to the domestic metals industries and thus to national security. The DOC established a process to provide relief, or exclusion, from the tariffs to companies that can prove they are dependent on imports of products that are not available in sufficient quality or quantity domestically. The GAO found, however, that the process for exclusion was ladened with obstacles that impeded proper review and timely decisions.
The report noted that the DOC received more than 106,000 requests for exclusions and rejected more than 19,000 of them “prior to decision due to incorrect or incomplete information.” Additionally, the report revealed that the DOC did not take any steps to understand or address the causes of these paperwork errors. Although the DOC did implement some changes to improve timelines, three-quarters of the requests were not addressed within the required guidelines, 841 of those took more than a year to be decided, and there was a backlog of 29,000 requests as of November 2019.
GAO added, “Until Commerce takes additional steps, companies will continue to encounter delays in obtaining relief.” The audit noted that the DOC has failed to address the impact of imposed tariffs, as there is evidence to suggest that U.S. steel and aluminum imports and markets have both seen downward corrections after initial surges. “Evaluating whether the tariffs have achieved the intended goals and how they affect downstream sectors requires more in-depth economic analysis. Without assigning responsibility for conducting regular reviews and documenting the results, Commerce may be unable to consistently assess if adjustments to the tariffs are needed,” the report concluded.
As a result, GAO recommended the DOC take the following steps to improve their process: “Identify, analyze, and respond to factors in the process that may cause submission errors; take steps to improve timeliness of exclusion request decisions and address the backlog; and assign responsibility for reviewing the tariffs’ impact and document the results.”
David Schollaert
Read more from David SchollaertLatest in Trade Cases
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.
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.