Safeguards: Section 201 of the Trade Act of 1974

Safeguards: Section 201 of the Trade Act of 1974

Updated January 13, 2021
Safeguards: Section 201 of the Trade Act of 1974
On January 23, 2018, President Trump proclaimed a four-
Factors the ITC must consider when determining injury
year safeguard measure on imports of certain crystalline
include (1) the significant idling of production facilities; (2)
silicon photovoltaic cells (CSPV) cells and modules, and a
the inability of a significant number of firms to carry out
three-year safeguard on large residential washing machines.
domestic production at a reasonable level of profit; and (3)
These safeguards, still in force, were issued under Section
significant unemployment or underemployment within the
201 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. §2251), and
U.S. industry. The ITC also considers import trends and
imposed additional tariffs and quotas on U.S. imports of
other factors, as well as declines in production, profits,
these products. The safeguards were instituted based on
wages, productivity, and employment. The ITC makes its
findings by the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC)
injury determination based on a vote of the Commissioners.
that the goods are being imported into the United States in
If the Commission is equally divided, the President may
such increased quantities that they are a substantial cause of
select either option.
serious injury to U.S. manufacturers. The ITC also
recommended possible steps to remedy the injury.
Figure 1. Section 201 Timeline
What Is Section 201?
Section 201 or “safeguard” actions are designed to provide
temporary relief for a U.S. industry (for example, additional
tariffs or quotas on imports) in order to facilitate positive
adjustment of the industry to import competition. “Positive
adjustment” in the law means the ability of the industry to
compete successfully with imports after termination of the
safeguard measure, or the industry’s orderly transfer of
resources to other productive pursuits; and the ability of
dislocated workers to transition productively. Section 201
actions are deemed consistent with U.S. international
obligations provided that they conform to the World Trade
Organization (WTO) Agreement on Safeguards.
Section 201 Process

Source: Chart by CRS.
Section 201 investigations are generally initiated by a
Note: Timeline is extended if ITC determines case is complicated,
written petition filed by a trade association, firm, union, or
critical circumstances are al eged, or merchandise is perishable.
group of workers representing a U.S. industry. Petitioners
Remedy Recommendations
must also include (with the petition or within 120 days) a
plan to facilitate the industry’s positive adjustment to
If the ITC makes an affirmative injury determination, it
import competition. Investigations may also be triggered by
considers actions that would address the serious injury and
House Ways and Means or Senate Finance Committee
would be most effective in facilitating the industry’s
resolutions, at the request of the U.S. Trade Representative
positive adjustment to import competition. It may
(USTR), or at the ITC’s own initiative.
recommend: (1) an increase in, or imposition of, a duty on
the imports; (2) a tariff-rate quota on the product; (3) a
Injury Investigation
modification, or imposition of, any quantitative restriction
The ITC’s investigative process occurs in two phases. In
on imports; or (4) any combination of these actions. In
each phase, the ITC must hold hearings, solicit public
addition to these remedies, the ITC may also recommend
comments, and publish all findings in the Federal Register.
that the President initiate international negotiations or
otherwise alleviate the injury or threat, or implement any
In the first phase, the focus is on the affected U.S. industry
other action authorized under law to facilitate positive
and whether it is being seriously injured or threatened with
import competition. Only those Commission members who
serious injury; and, if so, whether an increase in imports are
concurred in the affirmative injury determination may vote
a “substantial cause” thereof. This phase must be completed
on the recommended remedy, although other
within 120 days after the filing of the petition, unless the
Commissioners may submit separate views.
ITC determines that the investigation is “extraordinarily
complicated.” In this case, it may take up to 30 additional
ITC Report to the President
days to make an injury determination. The timeline may be
Unless an extension is granted, the ITC must report its
further extended if the petitioner has alleged “critical
findings to the President within 180 days of the petition
circumstances” or the product is perishable; because
filing. After submission, the ITC must also release its
temporary relief may be provided in these cases.
findings (business confidential information redacted) in the
Federal Register.
https://crsreports.congress.gov

Safeguards: Section 201 of the Trade Act of 1974
Presidential Action
After the President receives the ITC review and consults
After receiving the ITC’s report, the President has 60 days
with the Secretaries of Commerce and Labor, he may
to decide which, if any, of the ITC’s recommendations to
modify, reduce, or terminate the action if he determines that
implement. The deadline may be extended another 15 days
the industry has not made adequate efforts toward positive
if the President requests additional information from the
adjustment or if the action is no longer effective due to
ITC. The President may opt to implement the ITC’s
economic circumstances. The President may also terminate
recommendations, modify them, or do nothing. When
or change the remedy if the industry petitions him to do so
making a determination under Section 201, the President
on the basis of positive adjustment to import competition.
must consider the:

Section 201 Actions
recommendations and report of the ITC;

The ITC conducted 75 Section 201 investigations between
degree to which workers and firms are already
1975 and 2018. There were no new Section 201
benefiting from adjustment assistance and worker
investigations initiated between 2001 and the cases initiated
retraining programs;

in the Trump Administration. In these investigations, the
industry’s efforts (including proposals outlined in the
ITC determined in the negative in 33 cases (including 3 tie
adjustment plan) to make a positive adjustment to
votes for which the President accepted the ITC’s negative
import competition;

determination, meaning that the investigation ended). The
probable effectiveness of the ITC’s proposed actions to
facilitate the industry’s positive adjustment;
President did not grant relief in 14 cases. The 28 times in


which the President granted relief, it was in the form of
short- and long-term economic and social costs of the
tariff increases (9), adjustment assistance (6), tariff-rate or
actions as opposed to the potential benefits; and

import quotas (3), marketing agreements (1), combinations
position of the domestic industry in the U.S. economy.
of these actions (6); and in 3 instances, more open-ended
The President must also weigh U.S. national economic and
types of relief (voluntary restraint agreement, income
security interests, including the proposed remedy’s possible
supports, retraining/relocation of workers).
impact on U.S. consumers and on other U.S. industries. If
Figure 2. Section 201 Outcomes, 1975-2018
the President decides to impose a remedy, he has several
options. He may:
 proclaim a tariff, tariff increase, tariff-rate quota, or
quota on imports;
 implement adjustment measures for U.S. firms and
workers;
 negotiate and implement agreements limiting exports
with other countries;
 proclaim procedures for the auction of import licenses;
 initiate international negotiations;
 submit legislative proposals to Congress;
 take any other actions under the President’s legal

authority; or
Source: CRS Chart based on GAO and Federal Register documents.
 use any combination of these actions.
Status of Current Safeguards
Congressional Role
The safeguard on large residential washers is due to expire
On the day the President takes action (or decides to take no
on February 8, 2021, unless extended by the President. On
action) under Section 201, he is required to report to
December 14, 2020, the ITC recommended the extension of
Congress in writing, describing the action and the reasons
the safeguard action “in order to prevent or remedy serious
for it. If the President’s action differs from the ITC’s
injury.” The President has not extended the safeguard as of
recommendation, or if the President opts to take no action,
this writing. The safeguard on CSPV cells and modules is
Congress may enact a joint resolution of disapproval within
set to expire in February 2022 unless extended.
90 days of receiving the President’s report. If a resolution is
WTO Challenges
enacted, the ITC’s recommendation becomes the remedy,
and the President must proclaim it within 30 days.
On May 14, 2018, South Korea requested WTO
consultations with the United States regarding both of the
Duration and Review
U.S.-implemented safeguards on washing machines
The President may grant import relief for an initial period
(DS546) and CSPV products (DS545), and on August 16,
of up to four years and extend it one or more times, up to a
2018, formally requested that WTO dispute settlement
maximum of eight years. The ITC must monitor Section
panels be established. On August 14, 2018, China requested
201 actions as long as they are in effect, especially with
consultations with the United States on the safeguard on
respect to the efforts and progress of the domestic industry
CSPV products (DS562). Dispute settlement panels have
and workers to adjust positively to import competition. If
been established in each case, but no panel reports have
the initial period of the action exceeds three years, the ITC
been released as of this writing.
is also required to submit a midterm review to the President
and Congress.
Vivian C. Jones, Specialist in International Trade and
Finance
https://crsreports.congress.gov

Safeguards: Section 201 of the Trade Act of 1974

IF10786

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 | IF10786 · VERSION 8 · UPDATED