Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962
link to page 1 
Updated April 1, 2022
Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962
Section 232 allows the President to impose import
confidential or classified material) must be published in the
restrictions based on an investigation and affirmative
Federal Register.
determination by the Department of Commerce
Presidential Action and Notification. If Commerce finds
(Commerce) that certain imports threaten to impair U.S.
in the negative, Commerce informs the President and no
national security. President Trump initiated eight Section
further action is required. If Commerce determines in the
232 investigations, and ultimately imposed tariffs under two
affirmative, the President, upon receipt of the report, has 90
investigations on steel and aluminum. Through new
days to (1) determine whether he/she concurs with its
bilateral agreements, President Biden is addressing the
findings; and (2) if so, determine the nature and duration of
Section 232 tariff measures taken by President Trump and
the action to be taken to adjust the subject imports. The
has initiated a new investigation. Actions under Section 232
President may decide to impose tariffs or quotas to offset
have generated debate in Congress and at the multilateral
the adverse effect, without any limits on their duration, or
level in the World Trade Organization (WTO). Some in
take other action. The President may exclude specific
Congress support legislative options to amend the
products or countries. After a determination, the President
congressional delegation of authority.
must implement the action within 15 days, and submit a
Section 232 Process
written statement to Congress explaining the action or
Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 (19 U.S.C.
inaction within 30 days (see Figure 1). The President must
§1862, as amended) allows any department, agency head,
also publish his determination in the Federal Register.
or “interested party” to request that Commerce investigate
Figure 1. Section 232 Investigation Process
to ascertain the effect of specific imports on U.S. national
security. Commerce may also self-initiate an investigation.
Investigation. Once a Section 232 investigation is
requested in writing, Commerce must “immediately initiate
an appropriate investigation to determine the effects on the
national security” of the subject imports. After consulting
with the Secretary of Defense, other “appropriate officers of
the United States,” and the public, if appropriate,
Commerce has 270 days from the initiation date to prepare
a report advising the President on whether the targeted
product is being imported “in certain quantities or under
such circumstances” to impair U.S. national security, and to
provide recommendations based on the findings.
The Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) at Commerce
conducts the investigation (15 C.F.R. §705). In terms of
national security, Commerce considers (1) existing
domestic production of the product; (2) future capacity
Source: CRS graphic based on 19 U.S.C. §1862.
needs; (3) manpower, raw materials, production equipment,
How Does Section 232 Differ from Other
facilities, and other supplies needed to meet projected
Trade Enforcement Tools?
national defense requirements; (4) growth requirements,
Section 232 is one of several U.S. policy tools addressing
including the investment, exploration, and development to
imports. Other tools include Section 201 of the Trade Act
meet them; and (5) any other relevant factors.
of 1974 (19 U.S.C. §§2252 et seq.) to potentially impose
On imports, Commerce must consider (1) the impact of
temporary safeguard measures for import surges of fairly-
foreign competition on the domestic industry deemed
traded goods, based on U.S. International Trade
essential for national security; (2) the effects that the
Commission (ITC) investigations of whether the imports
“displacement of domestic products” cause, including
are causing or threaten to cause serious injury. Rather than
substantial unemployment, decreases in public revenue, loss
focusing on national security, however, Section 201
of investment, special skills, or production capacity; and (3)
investigations aim to help the U.S. industry return to health
any other relevant factors that are causing, or will cause, a
and any actions taken are temporary. Similar to Section
weakening in the national economy. Commerce may
232, presidential action is required under Section 201
request public comments or hold hearings, if appropriate.
before tariffs can be imposed.
An Executive Summary of the final report (excluding any
Other import policy tools include antidumping (AD) and
countervailing duty (CVD) actions, provided when a
https://crsreports.congress.gov
link to page 2
Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962
domestic industry is materially injured, or threatened with
Three Commerce investigations focused on imports used in
material injury, either by sales found to be at less than fair
certain critical infrastructure sectors and national defense
value in the U.S. market (AD) or of products found to be
applications. Commerce found grain-oriented electrical
subsidized by a foreign government or other public entities
steel for transformers imports pose a threat to impair
(CVD). Presidential action is not required in these
national security. Mexico set up a monitoring system to
investigations; it is automatic, based on affirmative findings
avoid potential tariffs on exports of these items. The
jointly by the ITC and Commerce.
petitioner for mobile crane imports withdrew its request;
Prior Section 232 Actions
Commerce ended the investigation. The vanadium imports
Prior to the Trump Administration, Commerce initiated 26
probe found no national security threat.
Section 232 national security investigations, beginning in
Following recommendations in the Biden Administration’s
1963 (Figure 2). Five positive findings addressed
supply chain review, in September 2021, Commerce
petroleum products or crude oil, resulting in actions that
launched an investigation into neodymium magnets used in
included two embargos (on crude oil from Iran in 1979 and
some defense and critical infrastructure systems.
on crude oil from Libya in 1982). Before the Trump
Figure 2. Section 232 Investigations 1963-2022
Administration, a president last imposed tariffs or other
trade restrictions under Section 232 in 1986.
Recent Use of Section 232
The Trump Administration opened eight Section 232
investigations. Commerce initiated two investigations, into
steel and aluminum imports, in April 2017. In each,
Commerce analyzed current and future requirements for
national defense and 16 specific critical infrastructure
sectors. The agency determined that the quantities and
circumstances of the imports threatened to impair U.S.
Source: CRS graphic based on BIS data (https://www.bis.doc.gov/).
national security and recommended presidential action.
WTO Implications
President Trump concurred with Commerce’s findings, and
Under WTO agreements, Article XXI of the General
in March 2018, applied tariffs of 25% and 10% on certain
Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) allows WTO
imports of steel and aluminum, respectively, covering most
members to take measures in order to protect “essential
U.S. trading partners. In January 2020, he expanded the
security interests.” Several WTO trading partners, such as
scope of the tariffs to include certain derivative goods.
China and India, have challenged the current Section 232
Permanent exemptions were granted to Brazil and South
tariffs by alleging that they violate GATT Article I, which
Korea for steel and to Argentina for steel and aluminum in
obligates WTO members to treat one country’s goods no
exchange for quotas. Australia was exempted from both
less favorably than another member’s; and GATT Article
tariffs. President Trump later lifted the tariffs on imports
II, which generally prohibits members from placing tariffs
from Canada and Mexico and announced a joint monitoring
on goods above the upper limits to which they agreed.
and consultation system. More recently, under the Biden
India, Russia, Turkey and China have also asserted that the
Administration, the United States reached separate
U.S. actions violate the WTO Agreement on Safeguards
agreements with the European Union (EU), Japan, and the
and have imposed counter tariffs on U.S. imports without
United Kingdom (UK) to replace the U.S. tariffs with tariff-
WTO authorization, which also may raise questions about
rate quota systems. Under these agreements, U.S. trading
whether those members are upholding similar WTO
partners agreed to remove their retaliatory tariffs and jointly
commitments. The EU suspended, but did not cancel, its
establish monitoring and cooperation efforts to restore
case after negotiating the tariff rate quota.
market-oriented conditions globally while addressing
Issues for Congress
overcapacity and greenhouse gas emissions. The
The Biden Administration continues to maintain certain
agreements contain provisions on market-specific
Section 232 tariffs on steel and aluminum imports from
circumstances, such as audits of UK producers under
several U.S. trading partners and may consider new actions.
Chinese ownership. Japan chose to exclude aluminum from
The recent investigations and actions may raise a number of
its agreement.
issues for Congress, including:
Under President Trump, Commerce initiated six more
Should Congress consider amending current delegated
Section 232 investigations. Commerce concluded that
authorities under Section 232, such as by requiring an
imports of automobiles and certain automotive parts posed
economic impact study or congressional consultation?
a national security threat—President Trump did not act.
Have the Section 232 tariffs achieved the stated goals?
President Trump did not concur with the Commerce finding
that imports of uranium ore and related products threatened
How should Congress work with the Administration to
to impair national security, but did establish a working
review the existing Section 232 tariffs and actions?
group to address the issue. President Trump agreed with the
How do U.S. unilateral actions impact the multilateral
finding of a national security threat posed by imports of
trading system and could they encourage similar
titanium sponge and instructed officials to negotiate with
actions by other trading partners?
Japan to ensure U.S. access, rather than to restrict imports.
https://crsreports.congress.gov
Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962
IF10667
Rachel F. Fefer, Analyst in International Trade and
Finance
Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff to
congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of Congress.
Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of information that has
been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the
United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be
reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include
copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you
wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.
https://crsreports.congress.gov | IF10667 · VERSION 28 · UPDATED
Updated April 1, 2022
Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962
Section 232 allows the President to impose import
confidential or classified material) must be published in the
restrictions based on an investigation and affirmative
Federal Register.
determination by the Department of Commerce
Presidential Action and Notification. If Commerce finds
(Commerce) that certain imports threaten to impair U.S.
in the negative, Commerce informs the President and no
national security. President Trump initiated eight Section
further action is required. If Commerce determines in the
232 investigations, and ultimately imposed tariffs under two
affirmative, the President, upon receipt of the report, has 90
investigations on steel and aluminum. Through new
days to (1) determine whether he/she concurs with its
bilateral agreements, President Biden is addressing the
findings; and (2) if so, determine the nature and duration of
Section 232 tariff measures taken by President Trump and
the action to be taken to adjust the subject imports. The
has initiated a new investigation. Actions under Section 232
President may decide to impose tariffs or quotas to offset
have generated debate in Congress and at the multilateral
the adverse effect, without any limits on their duration, or
level in the World Trade Organization (WTO). Some in
take other action. The President may exclude specific
Congress support legislative options to amend the
products or countries. After a determination, the President
congressional delegation of authority.
must implement the action within 15 days, and submit a
Section 232 Process
written statement to Congress explaining the action or
Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 (19 U.S.C.
inaction within 30 days (see Figure 1). The President must
§1862, as amended) allows any department, agency head,
also publish his determination in the Federal Register.
or “interested party” to request that Commerce investigate
Figure 1. Section 232 Investigation Process
to ascertain the effect of specific imports on U.S. national
security. Commerce may also self-initiate an investigation.
Investigation. Once a Section 232 investigation is
requested in writing, Commerce must “immediately initiate
an appropriate investigation to determine the effects on the
national security” of the subject imports. After consulting
with the Secretary of Defense, other “appropriate officers of
the United States,” and the public, if appropriate,
Commerce has 270 days from the initiation date to prepare
a report advising the President on whether the targeted
product is being imported “in certain quantities or under
such circumstances” to impair U.S. national security, and to
provide recommendations based on the findings.
The Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) at Commerce
conducts the investigation (15 C.F.R. §705). In terms of
national security, Commerce considers (1) existing
domestic production of the product; (2) future capacity
Source: CRS graphic based on 19 U.S.C. §1862.
needs; (3) manpower, raw materials, production equipment,
How Does Section 232 Differ from Other
facilities, and other supplies needed to meet projected
Trade Enforcement Tools?
national defense requirements; (4) growth requirements,
Section 232 is one of several U.S. policy tools addressing
including the investment, exploration, and development to
imports. Other tools include Section 201 of the Trade Act
meet them; and (5) any other relevant factors.
of 1974 (19 U.S.C. §§2252 et seq.) to potentially impose
On imports, Commerce must consider (1) the impact of
temporary safeguard measures for import surges of fairly-
foreign competition on the domestic industry deemed
traded goods, based on U.S. International Trade
essential for national security; (2) the effects that the
Commission (ITC) investigations of whether the imports
“displacement of domestic products” cause, including
are causing or threaten to cause serious injury. Rather than
substantial unemployment, decreases in public revenue, loss
focusing on national security, however, Section 201
of investment, special skills, or production capacity; and (3)
investigations aim to help the U.S. industry return to health
any other relevant factors that are causing, or will cause, a
and any actions taken are temporary. Similar to Section
weakening in the national economy. Commerce may
232, presidential action is required under Section 201
request public comments or hold hearings, if appropriate.
before tariffs can be imposed.
An Executive Summary of the final report (excluding any
Other import policy tools include antidumping (AD) and
countervailing duty (CVD) actions, provided when a
https://crsreports.congress.gov
link to page 2
Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962
domestic industry is materially injured, or threatened with
Three Commerce investigations focused on imports used in
material injury, either by sales found to be at less than fair
certain critical infrastructure sectors and national defense
value in the U.S. market (AD) or of products found to be
applications. Commerce found grain-oriented electrical
subsidized by a foreign government or other public entities
steel for transformers imports pose a threat to impair
(CVD). Presidential action is not required in these
national security. Mexico set up a monitoring system to
investigations; it is automatic, based on affirmative findings
avoid potential tariffs on exports of these items. The
jointly by the ITC and Commerce.
petitioner for mobile crane imports withdrew its request;
Prior Section 232 Actions
Commerce ended the investigation. The vanadium imports
Prior to the Trump Administration, Commerce initiated 26
probe found no national security threat.
Section 232 national security investigations, beginning in
Following recommendations in the Biden Administration’s
1963 (Figure 2). Five positive findings addressed
supply chain review, in September 2021, Commerce
petroleum products or crude oil, resulting in actions that
launched an investigation into neodymium magnets used in
included two embargos (on crude oil from Iran in 1979 and
some defense and critical infrastructure systems.
on crude oil from Libya in 1982). Before the Trump
Figure 2. Section 232 Investigations 1963-2022
Administration, a president last imposed tariffs or other
trade restrictions under Section 232 in 1986.
Recent Use of Section 232
The Trump Administration opened eight Section 232
investigations. Commerce initiated two investigations, into
steel and aluminum imports, in April 2017. In each,
Commerce analyzed current and future requirements for
national defense and 16 specific critical infrastructure
sectors. The agency determined that the quantities and
circumstances of the imports threatened to impair U.S.
Source: CRS graphic based on BIS data (https://www.bis.doc.gov/).
national security and recommended presidential action.
WTO Implications
President Trump concurred with Commerce’s findings, and
Under WTO agreements, Article XXI of the General
in March 2018, applied tariffs of 25% and 10% on certain
Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) allows WTO
imports of steel and aluminum, respectively, covering most
members to take measures in order to protect “essential
U.S. trading partners. In January 2020, he expanded the
security interests.” Several WTO trading partners, such as
scope of the tariffs to include certain derivative goods.
China and India, have challenged the current Section 232
Permanent exemptions were granted to Brazil and South
tariffs by alleging that they violate GATT Article I, which
Korea for steel and to Argentina for steel and aluminum in
obligates WTO members to treat one country’s goods no
exchange for quotas. Australia was exempted from both
less favorably than another member’s; and GATT Article
tariffs. President Trump later lifted the tariffs on imports
II, which generally prohibits members from placing tariffs
from Canada and Mexico and announced a joint monitoring
on goods above the upper limits to which they agreed.
and consultation system. More recently, under the Biden
India, Russia, Turkey and China have also asserted that the
Administration, the United States reached separate
U.S. actions violate the WTO Agreement on Safeguards
agreements with the European Union (EU), Japan, and the
and have imposed counter tariffs on U.S. imports without
United Kingdom (UK) to replace the U.S. tariffs with tariff-
WTO authorization, which also may raise questions about
rate quota systems. Under these agreements, U.S. trading
whether those members are upholding similar WTO
partners agreed to remove their retaliatory tariffs and jointly
commitments. The EU suspended, but did not cancel, its
establish monitoring and cooperation efforts to restore
case after negotiating the tariff rate quota.
market-oriented conditions globally while addressing
Issues for Congress
overcapacity and greenhouse gas emissions. The
The Biden Administration continues to maintain certain
agreements contain provisions on market-specific
Section 232 tariffs on steel and aluminum imports from
circumstances, such as audits of UK producers under
several U.S. trading partners and may consider new actions.
Chinese ownership. Japan chose to exclude aluminum from
The recent investigations and actions may raise a number of
its agreement.
issues for Congress, including:
Under President Trump, Commerce initiated six more
Should Congress consider amending current delegated
Section 232 investigations. Commerce concluded that
authorities under Section 232, such as by requiring an
imports of automobiles and certain automotive parts posed
economic impact study or congressional consultation?
a national security threat—President Trump did not act.
Have the Section 232 tariffs achieved the stated goals?
President Trump did not concur with the Commerce finding
that imports of uranium ore and related products threatened
How should Congress work with the Administration to
to impair national security, but did establish a working
review the existing Section 232 tariffs and actions?
group to address the issue. President Trump agreed with the
How do U.S. unilateral actions impact the multilateral
finding of a national security threat posed by imports of
trading system and could they encourage similar
titanium sponge and instructed officials to negotiate with
actions by other trading partners?
Japan to ensure U.S. access, rather than to restrict imports.
https://crsreports.congress.gov
Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962
IF10667
Rachel F. Fefer, Analyst in International Trade and
Finance
Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff to
congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of Congress.
Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of information that has
been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the
United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be
reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include
copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you
wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.
https://crsreports.congress.gov | IF10667 · VERSION 28 · UPDATED