| |
Trump Admin Seeks to Replace Tariffs 03/12 06:27
The Trump administration on Wednesday opened a new trade investigation into
manufacturing in foreign countries -- an effort that comes after the Supreme
Court struck down President Donald Trump's previous use of tariffs by declaring
an economic emergency.
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Trump administration on Wednesday opened a new trade
investigation into manufacturing in foreign countries -- an effort that comes
after the Supreme Court struck down President Donald Trump's previous use of
tariffs by declaring an economic emergency.
Trump and his team have made clear that they're seeking to replace the
hundreds of billions of dollars in lost revenues after the Supreme Court's
February ruling by using different laws to establish new tariffs.
In this case, the administration is starting investigations under Section
301 of the Trade Act of 1974, which could eventually lead to new import taxes.
But U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer, in a Wednesday call with
reporters, said he didn't want to prejudge the outcome of the process.
"The policy remains the same -- the tools may change depending on, you know,
the vagaries of courts and other things," said Greer, stressing that the goal
was to protect American jobs.
The start of the process to fully replace Trump's prior tariffs could invite
a return of much of the drama that rattled the global economy last year. The
since-overturned tariffs led to new frameworks with U.S. trade partners -- and
it's unclear what impact a new set of import taxes could have on those
agreements. Greer described the trade frameworks as standing on their own and
suggested they were separate from the new investigation.
This new set of tariffs could play out against the backdrop of a war in Iran
and midterm elections in which Democrats are running against Trump's Republican
allies by emphasizing that the public is owed tariff refunds following the
Supreme Court decision.
Greer said that the investigation would examine excess industrial capacity
and government backing that could give foreign companies an unfair advantage
over U.S. companies.
The entities subject to the investigation include China, the European Union,
Singapore, Switzerland, Norway, Indonesia, Malaysia, Cambodia, Thailand, South
Korea, Vietnam, the self-governing island of Taiwan, Bangladesh, Mexico, Japan
and India. The government is looking for what it deems to be persistent trade
surpluses with the U.S. and policies such as subsidies and the suppression of
workers' wages, among other factors.
The administration is also rolling out a Section 301 investigation to ban
the importing of goods made by forced labor.
Greer indicated that there could be additional Section 301 investigations
over issues such as digital service taxes, pharmaceutical drug pricing and
ocean pollution, among other possibilities. The Commerce Department has
separate trade investigations under Section 232 of the 1962 Trade Expansion Act.
There are timeline pressures for the administration to complete its
investigations. The administration has imposed 10% tariffs on foreign-made
goods under section 122 of the 1974 Trade Act, but those expire after 150 days
on July 24. Trump said he planned to raise that import tax to 15%, but he has
yet to do so.
Greer said the administration is "keying off" the new investigation based on
the 150-day deadline, saying that the goal is to bring "potential options" to
Trump as soon as possible.
Greer said the investigations would be separate from the trade frameworks
announced last year by Trump that set baseline tariff rates, which led to 15%
rates charged on goods from the European Union, Japan and South Korea, among
other places, that have since been overturned by the Supreme Court. Still, he
suggested that the frameworks could play a factor.
"My sense is that these countries continue to want to deal, and President
Trump continues to want the deal," Greer said, adding that since tariffs are in
play the commitments that the countries have made and the implementation of the
frameworks would be considered as they "bump" against the demands of the
Section 301 process.
|
|
