The US Court of International Trade (CIT) has marked its position on keeping sanctions against China in place with recommended amendments for the United States Trade Representative (USTR).
Over 6,000 plaintiffs filed lawsuits in September 2020, challenging the List 3 and List 4A tariffs as unlawful under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974. The plaintiffs argued that the USTR exceeded its authority with it imposed tariffs on Chinese imports without attempting to connect the tariffs to any underlying investigation of China’s trade practices.
A judgement was passed by the court on 17th March, stating that the List 3 and List 4A sanctions will remain in place. The US Trade Representative has been asked by the court, however, to comply with the APA requirement for “reasoned response to comments submitted during the rulemaking proceedings.”
The arguments from the plaintiffs were that USTR violated the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) and exceeded its statutory authority when it shared List 3 and List 4A. USTR’s response adequacy to certain comments and the extent of USTR’s Remand Results which constitute impermissible post hoc reasoning were the other arguments from the plaintiffs.
The apparel industry of the US has mixed views on the China 301 tariffs for US imports, based on several rounds of discussions and the general air regarding the tariffs.
In October 2022, when USTR announced the next steps of its four-year review on the Section 301 tariffs against China, following requests for continuation from the US’ domestic industries, the US apparel industry was oscillating between opposing views on the public comment part of the process.
The apparel, footwear and retail sectors of the US remain at loggerheads with the textile industry, following this, over the impact of Section 301 tariffs on China.
