{ "id": "R45249", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "R", "number": "R45249", "active": true, "source": "CRSReports.Congress.gov, EveryCRSReport.com", "versions": [ { "active": true, "sourceLink": "https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/details?prodcode=R45249", "source_dir": "crsreports.congress.gov", "date": "2021-05-18", "typeId": "R", "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "filename": "files/2021-05-18_R45249_839c0e1329f5a19f75bfabec5fb39a191f5ae6d9.pdf", "url": "https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R45249/33", "sha1": "839c0e1329f5a19f75bfabec5fb39a191f5ae6d9" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/2021-05-18_R45249_839c0e1329f5a19f75bfabec5fb39a191f5ae6d9.html" } ], "type": "CRS Report", "summary": null, "title": "Section 232 Investigations: Overview and Issues for Congress", "retrieved": "2021-06-19T04:03:31.457027", "source": "CRSReports.Congress.gov", "id": "R45249_33_2021-05-18" }, { "active": true, "sourceLink": "https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/details?prodcode=R45249", "source_dir": "crsreports.congress.gov", "date": "2020-08-24", "typeId": "R", "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "filename": "files/2020-08-24_R45249_98b35c3be9d23dd8dadd93f555478747fa630c70.pdf", "url": "https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R45249/30", "sha1": "98b35c3be9d23dd8dadd93f555478747fa630c70" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/2020-08-24_R45249_98b35c3be9d23dd8dadd93f555478747fa630c70.html" } ], "type": "CRS Report", "summary": null, "title": "Section 232 Investigations: Overview and Issues for Congress", "retrieved": "2021-06-19T04:03:31.455298", "source": "CRSReports.Congress.gov", "id": "R45249_30_2020-08-24" }, { "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "id": 622549, "date": "2020-04-07", "retrieved": "2020-04-17T22:21:17.359092", "title": "Section 232 Investigations: Overview and Issues for Congress", "summary": "President Trump has used Section 232 authority to apply new tariffs to steel and aluminum imports and potentially to imports of automobiles and automobile parts. Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 (19 U.S.C. \u00a71862) provides the President with the ability to impose restrictions on certain imports based on an affirmative determination by the Department of Commerce (Commerce) that product under investigation \u201cis being imported into the United States in such quantities or under such circumstances as to threaten to impair the national security.\u201d Congress has interest in Section 232 actions because they are a delegation of its constitutional authority over tariffs and commerce with foreign nations, and raise a number of economic and policy issues. Some Members have introduced legislation to revise Section 232 authorities. \nGlobal overcapacity in steel and aluminum production, mainly driven by China, has been an ongoing concern of Congress. While the United States has extensive antidumping and countervailing duties on Chinese steel imports to counter China\u2019s unfair trade practices, steel industry and other experts argue that the magnitude of Chinese production acts to depress prices globally. The George W. Bush, Obama, and Trump Administrations have each engaged in multilateral discussions to address global steel capacity reduction through the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and other international forums. \nEffective March 23, 2018, President Trump applied 25% and 10% tariffs, respectively, on certain steel and aluminum imports and, in February 2020, expanded the scope of products subject to the additional tariffs. Permanent tariff exemptions in exchange for quantitative limitations on U.S. imports were negotiated covering steel for Brazil and South Korea, and both steel and aluminum for Argentina. Australia was permanently exempted from both tariffs, with no quantitative restrictions. The United States removed tariffs on steel and aluminum imports from Mexico and Canada, in part to secure congressional support for the new United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) and after the three countries agreed to establish an import monitoring mechanism. USMCA includes side letters limiting potential Section 232 tariffs on autos and parts above a certain threshold of imports. \nCommerce is managing a process for exclusions of steel and aluminum products subject to Section 232 tariffs in order to limit potential negative domestic effects of the tariffs on U.S. businesses and consumers. As of early December 2019, of the nearly 94,000 steel exclusion requests, over 47,000 had been granted and over 13,000 had been denied. Commerce has also received over 13,000 aluminum exclusion requests, with almost 6,500 exclusions granted and 900 denied. The remaining requests are pending. Several Members of Congress and the Commerce Inspector General have raised issues and concerns about the exclusion process.\nSeveral U.S. trading partners are challenging the tariffs under World Trade Organization (WTO) dispute settlement rules and have threatened or enacted retaliatory measures. Some analysts view the U.S. unilateral actions as potentially undermining WTO rules, which generally prohibit parties from acting unilaterally, but provide exceptions, including when parties act to protect \u201cessential security interests.\u201d In turn, the United States has initiated cases against other countries\u2019 retaliatory measures under WTO rules. Some U.S. firms are also challenging the Administration\u2019s actions domestically.\nCongress enacted Section 232 during the Cold War when national security issues were at the forefront of national debate. The Trade Expansion Act of 1962 sets clear steps and timelines for Section 232 investigations and actions, and allows the President to make a final determination over the appropriate action to take following an affirmative finding by Commerce that the relevant imports threaten to impair national security. Prior to the Trump Administration, there were 26 Section 232 investigations, resulting in nine affirmative findings by Commerce. In six of those cases the President imposed a trade action.\nAfter imposing steel and aluminum tariffs, the Administration opened three additional Section 232 investigations, intensifying debate over potential legislation to revise the authority. The investigations covered\nautomobile and automobile part imports, initiated May 23, 2018; \nuranium ore and product imports, initiated July 18, 2018; and \ntitanium sponge imports, initiated March 4, 2019. \nCommerce determined imports of each product threaten to impair national security in its final reports, which were submitted to the President, but have not been made public. The President chose not to impose restrictions on uranium and titanium, but potential import restrictions on autos remain pending. \nThe President\u2019s Section 232 tariff actions and investigations raise a number of potential issues for Congress. The focus on imports from traditional U.S. allies has prompted some policymakers to raise questions about the proper interpretation of threats to national security on which Section 232 investigations are based. The tariffs\u2019 economic effects\u2014relatively higher domestic steel and aluminum prices and expansion in production in those sectors, and higher costs for consumers and many end users (e.g., auto manufacturing and construction)\u2014have also prompted reactions from several Members, some in support of the measures and others voicing concerns. To date, Congress has held hearings on the potential economic and broader policy effects of the tariffs, and legislation has been introduced to override the tariffs that have already been imposed, or to revise or potentially limit the authority previously delegated to the President in future investigations.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "active": true, "formats": [ { "format": "HTML", "encoding": "utf-8", "url": "https://www.crs.gov/Reports/R45249", "sha1": "7b3634d8f07478096b182e30b99c2d32063f5c87", "filename": "files/20200407_R45249_7b3634d8f07478096b182e30b99c2d32063f5c87.html", "images": { "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R45249_files&id=/6.png": "files/20200407_R45249_images_975a4f9af6c03b977f30dc4421a5a713d08dcbe5.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R45249_files&id=/12.png": "files/20200407_R45249_images_9cbd1343c9fe9e240ad0a4092afa4c65e15fb802.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R45249_files&id=/8.png": "files/20200407_R45249_images_607cfd6b766783e3d8c71de94ec7455935baf32d.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R45249_files&id=/10.png": "files/20200407_R45249_images_180fadb3771f977bb81108c367d2e9676823e595.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R45249_files&id=/1.png": "files/20200407_R45249_images_0ac1e21062fb7db20e2f1f1379483119570c6f2f.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R45249_files&id=/0.png": "files/20200407_R45249_images_562a738d8a97130d47280f00f334a6d3f3374652.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R45249_files&id=/5.png": "files/20200407_R45249_images_83fc68b160690d8690eeaaa023fdb27a843c0514.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R45249_files&id=/7.png": "files/20200407_R45249_images_720eda88d0456ae8e52c98b54f162bdbdb7b1575.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R45249_files&id=/11.png": "files/20200407_R45249_images_31ba5ff46b340c6ee325b2e741acbf00b9c6e701.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R45249_files&id=/3.png": "files/20200407_R45249_images_cfa1b781ba7f18df180aa424f84bc4fb933513cf.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R45249_files&id=/2.png": "files/20200407_R45249_images_eabb70f32cfdee23b8dc811335762fce33786ec1.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R45249_files&id=/4.png": "files/20200407_R45249_images_09687226bd9a6a43cc714a0ca4bff7f2764cece1.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R45249_files&id=/9.png": "files/20200407_R45249_images_7104a28b136db309568cc04df7bf8e6590b90e8f.png" } }, { "format": "PDF", "encoding": null, "url": "https://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R45249", "sha1": "ded0e44375dae5db30c8f99b0863218ca1f98eda", "filename": "files/20200407_R45249_ded0e44375dae5db30c8f99b0863218ca1f98eda.pdf", "images": {} } ], "topics": [ { "source": "IBCList", "id": 4865, "name": "Import Policy" }, { "source": "IBCList", "id": 4866, "name": "U.S. Trade Policy Overview" } ] }, { "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "id": 621510, "date": "2020-03-31", "retrieved": "2020-04-01T22:09:56.505189", "title": "Section 232 Investigations: Overview and Issues for Congress", "summary": "President Trump has used Section 232 authority to apply new tariffs to steel and aluminum imports and potentially to imports of automobiles and automobile parts. Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 (19 U.S.C. \u00a71862) provides the President with the ability to impose restrictions on certain imports based on an affirmative determination by the Department of Commerce (Commerce) that product under investigation \u201cis being imported into the United States in such quantities or under such circumstances as to threaten to impair the national security.\u201d Congress has interest in Section 232 actions because they are a delegation of its constitutional authority over tariffs and commerce with foreign nations, and raise a number of economic and policy issues. Some Members have introduced legislation to revise Section 232 authorities. \nGlobal overcapacity in steel and aluminum production, mainly driven by China, has been an ongoing concern of Congress. While the United States has extensive antidumping and countervailing duties on Chinese steel imports to counter China\u2019s unfair trade practices, steel industry and other experts argue that the magnitude of Chinese production acts to depress prices globally. The George W. Bush, Obama, and Trump Administrations have each engaged in multilateral discussions to address global steel capacity reduction through the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and other international forums. \nEffective March 23, 2018, President Trump applied 25% and 10% tariffs, respectively, on certain steel and aluminum imports and, in February 2020, expanded the scope of products subject to the additional tariffs. Permanent tariff exemptions in exchange for quantitative limitations on U.S. imports were negotiated covering steel for Brazil and South Korea, and both steel and aluminum for Argentina. Australia was permanently exempted from both tariffs, with no quantitative restrictions. The United States removed tariffs on steel and aluminum imports from Mexico and Canada, in part to secure congressional support for the new United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) and after the three countries agreed to establish an import monitoring mechanism. USMCA includes side letters limiting potential Section 232 tariffs on autos and parts above a certain threshold of imports. \nCommerce is managing a process for exclusions of steel and aluminum products subject to Section 232 tariffs in order to limit potential negative domestic effects of the tariffs on U.S. businesses and consumers. As of early December 2019, of the nearly 94,000 steel exclusion requests, over 47,000 had been granted and over 13,000 had been denied. Commerce has also received over 13,000 aluminum exclusion requests, with almost 6,500 exclusions granted and 900 denied. The remaining requests are pending. Several Members of Congress and the Commerce Inspector General have raised issues and concerns about the exclusion process.\nSeveral U.S. trading partners are challenging the tariffs under World Trade Organization (WTO) dispute settlement rules and have threatened or enacted retaliatory measures. Some analysts view the U.S. unilateral actions as potentially undermining WTO rules, which generally prohibit parties from acting unilaterally, but provide exceptions, including when parties act to protect \u201cessential security interests.\u201d In turn, the United States has initiated cases against other countries\u2019 retaliatory measures under WTO rules. Some U.S. firms are also challenging the Administration\u2019s actions domestically.\nCongress enacted Section 232 during the Cold War when national security issues were at the forefront of national debate. The Trade Expansion Act of 1962 sets clear steps and timelines for Section 232 investigations and actions, and allows the President to make a final determination over the appropriate action to take following an affirmative finding by Commerce that the relevant imports threaten to impair national security. Prior to the Trump Administration, there were 26 Section 232 investigations, resulting in nine affirmative findings by Commerce. In six of those cases the President imposed a trade action.\nAfter imposing steel and aluminum tariffs, the Administration opened three additional Section 232 investigations, intensifying debate over potential legislation to revise the authority. The investigations covered\nautomobile and automobile part imports, initiated May 23, 2018; \nuranium ore and product imports, initiated July 18, 2018; and \ntitanium sponge imports, initiated March 4, 2019. \nCommerce determined imports of each product threaten to impair national security in its final reports, which were submitted to the President, but have not been made public. The President chose not to impose restrictions on uranium and titanium, but potential import restrictions on autos remain pending. \nThe President\u2019s Section 232 tariff actions and investigations raise a number of potential issues for Congress. The focus on imports from traditional U.S. allies has prompted some policymakers to raise questions about the proper interpretation of threats to national security on which Section 232 investigations are based. The tariffs\u2019 economic effects\u2014relatively higher domestic steel and aluminum prices and expansion in production in those sectors, and higher costs for consumers and many end users (e.g., auto manufacturing and construction)\u2014have also prompted reactions from several Members, some in support of the measures and others voicing concerns. To date, Congress has held hearings on the potential economic and broader policy effects of the tariffs, and legislation has been introduced to override the tariffs that have already been imposed, or to revise or potentially limit the authority previously delegated to the President in future investigations.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "active": true, "formats": [ { "format": "HTML", "encoding": "utf-8", "url": "https://www.crs.gov/Reports/R45249", "sha1": "8326b0fee58d4c62888e12ffc3f19862691b3507", "filename": "files/20200331_R45249_8326b0fee58d4c62888e12ffc3f19862691b3507.html", "images": { "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R45249_files&id=/6.png": "files/20200331_R45249_images_975a4f9af6c03b977f30dc4421a5a713d08dcbe5.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R45249_files&id=/12.png": "files/20200331_R45249_images_9cbd1343c9fe9e240ad0a4092afa4c65e15fb802.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R45249_files&id=/8.png": "files/20200331_R45249_images_607cfd6b766783e3d8c71de94ec7455935baf32d.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R45249_files&id=/10.png": "files/20200331_R45249_images_180fadb3771f977bb81108c367d2e9676823e595.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R45249_files&id=/1.png": "files/20200331_R45249_images_0ac1e21062fb7db20e2f1f1379483119570c6f2f.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R45249_files&id=/0.png": "files/20200331_R45249_images_562a738d8a97130d47280f00f334a6d3f3374652.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R45249_files&id=/5.png": "files/20200331_R45249_images_83fc68b160690d8690eeaaa023fdb27a843c0514.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R45249_files&id=/7.png": "files/20200331_R45249_images_720eda88d0456ae8e52c98b54f162bdbdb7b1575.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R45249_files&id=/11.png": "files/20200331_R45249_images_31ba5ff46b340c6ee325b2e741acbf00b9c6e701.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R45249_files&id=/3.png": "files/20200331_R45249_images_cfa1b781ba7f18df180aa424f84bc4fb933513cf.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R45249_files&id=/2.png": "files/20200331_R45249_images_eabb70f32cfdee23b8dc811335762fce33786ec1.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R45249_files&id=/4.png": "files/20200331_R45249_images_09687226bd9a6a43cc714a0ca4bff7f2764cece1.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R45249_files&id=/9.png": "files/20200331_R45249_images_7104a28b136db309568cc04df7bf8e6590b90e8f.png" } }, { "format": "PDF", "encoding": null, "url": "https://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R45249", "sha1": "54cce0909ceb0bd653331394abe172b92a6a3a57", "filename": "files/20200331_R45249_54cce0909ceb0bd653331394abe172b92a6a3a57.pdf", "images": {} } ], "topics": [ { "source": "IBCList", "id": 4865, "name": "Import Policy" }, { "source": "IBCList", "id": 4866, "name": "U.S. Trade Policy Overview" } ] }, { "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "id": 595652, "date": "2019-04-02", "retrieved": "2019-12-20T19:35:41.968464", "title": "Section 232 Investigations: Overview and Issues for Congress", "summary": "President Trump has used Section 232 authority to apply new tariffs to steel and aluminum imports and potentially on automobile and automobile parts and other sectors currently under investigation. These actions have raised a number of policy issues and some Members of Congress have introduced legislation to revise various Section 232 authorities. Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 (19 U.S.C. \u00a71862) provides the President with the ability to impose restrictions on certain imports based on an affirmative determination by the Department of Commerce (Commerce) that the product under investigation \u201cis being imported into the United States in such quantities or under such circumstances as to threaten to impair the national security.\u201d Section 232 actions are of interest to Congress because they are a delegation of Congress\u2019s constitutional authority \u201cTo lay and collect ... Duties\u201d and \u201cTo regulate Commerce with foreign Nations.\u201d \nGlobal overcapacity in steel and aluminum production, mainly driven by China, has been an ongoing concern of Congress. The George W. Bush, Obama, and Trump Administrations each engaged in multilateral discussions to address global steel capacity reduction through the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). While the United States has extensive antidumping and countervailing duties on Chinese steel imports to counter China\u2019s unfair trade practices, steel industry and other experts argue that the magnitude of Chinese production acts to depress prices globally. \nEffective March 23, 2018, President Trump applied 25% and 10% tariffs, respectively, on certain steel and aluminum imports. The President temporarily exempted several countries from the tariffs pending negotiations on potential alternative measures. Permanent tariff exemptions in exchange for quantitative limitations on U.S. imports were eventually announced covering steel for Brazil and South Korea, and both steel and aluminum for Argentina. Australia was permanently exempted from both tariffs with no quantitative restrictions. In August 2018, President Trump raised the tariff to 50% on steel imports from Turkey. The proposed United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) would not resolve or address the Section 232 tariffs on imported steel and aluminum from Canada and Mexico. \nCommerce is managing a process for potential product exclusions in order to limit potential negative domestic effects of the tariffs on U.S. businesses and consumers. Of the nearly 70,000 steel exclusion requests, over 16,000 have been granted, and about 46,000 have been denied to date. Commerce also received about 10,000 aluminum exclusion requests, with 3,000 exclusions granted and 500 denied. Several Members have raised issues and concerns about the exclusionary process.\nU.S. trading partners are challenging the tariffs under World Trade Organization (WTO) dispute settlement rules and have threatened or enacted retaliatory measures. Some analysts view the U.S. unilateral actions as potentially undermining WTO rules, which generally prohibit parties from acting unilaterally, but provide exceptions, including when parties act to protect \u201cessential security interests.\u201d \nCongress enacted Section 232 during the Cold War when national security issues were at the forefront of national debate. The Trade Expansion Act of 1962 sets clear steps and timelines for Section 232 investigations and actions, but allows the President to make a final determination over the appropriate action to take following an affirmative finding by Commerce that the relevant imports threaten to impair national security. Prior to the Trump Administration, there were 26 Section 232 investigations, resulting in nine affirmative findings by Commerce. In six of those cases the President imposed a trade action. \nThe Trump Administration has launched three additional Section 232 investigations. On May 23, 2018, Commerce initiated an investigation on U.S. automobile and automobile part imports; on July 18, 2018, Commerce launched a Section 232 investigation into uranium ore and product imports; and on March 4, 2019, Commerce began an investigation into titanium sponge imports. The latter two investigations were in response to petitions by U.S. firms. These investigations, as well as the Administration\u2019s decision to apply the steel and aluminum tariffs on imports from Canada, Mexico, and the EU\u2014all major suppliers of the affected imports\u2014have prompted further questions by some Members of Congress and trade policy analysts on the appropriate use of the trade statute and the proper interpretation of threats to national security on which Section 232 investigations are based. These actions have also intensified debate over potential legislation to constrain the President\u2019s authority with respect to Section 232.\nThe steel and aluminum tariffs are affecting various stakeholders in the U.S. economy, prompting reactions from several Members of Congress, some in support of the measures and others voicing concerns. In general, the tariffs are expected to benefit some domestic steel and aluminum manufacturers, leading to potentially higher domestic steel and aluminum prices and expansion in production in those sectors, while potentially negatively affecting consumers and many end users (e.g., auto manufacturing and construction) through higher costs. To date, Congress has held hearings on the potential economic and broader policy effects of the tariffs, and legislation has been introduced to override the tariffs that have already been imposed, or to revise or potentially limit the authority previously delegated to the President in future investigations.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "active": true, "formats": [ { "format": "HTML", "encoding": "utf-8", "url": "https://www.crs.gov/Reports/R45249", "sha1": "06109ba4f0e779efa955abe3be9bfbc119083795", "filename": "files/20190402_R45249_06109ba4f0e779efa955abe3be9bfbc119083795.html", "images": { "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R45249_files&id=/6.png": "files/20190402_R45249_images_2ee2472acdfc3270d34e4442935281722344d0c1.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R45249_files&id=/3.png": "files/20190402_R45249_images_782bbd336151b4e65a3b8d9313ac509d562981fb.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R45249_files&id=/2.png": "files/20190402_R45249_images_d93e8eef5d353e835d79b9f94404db26cc2bd397.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R45249_files&id=/4.png": "files/20190402_R45249_images_f7fcc7a6309d54032d13d15e9a4afa5dc8b8ea11.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R45249_files&id=/5.png": "files/20190402_R45249_images_258412bee78ee82a1e18282e6346a2d33aa6cc79.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R45249_files&id=/1.png": "files/20190402_R45249_images_d8f9f5b24b918bf3670888af2dbabf712bd1e285.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R45249_files&id=/0.png": "files/20190402_R45249_images_562a738d8a97130d47280f00f334a6d3f3374652.png" } }, { "format": "PDF", "encoding": null, "url": "https://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R45249", "sha1": "3483d505901bab746f84e294ba4d807c59739c59", "filename": "files/20190402_R45249_3483d505901bab746f84e294ba4d807c59739c59.pdf", "images": {} } ], "topics": [ { "source": "IBCList", "id": 4865, "name": "Import Policy" }, { "source": "IBCList", "id": 4866, "name": "U.S. Trade Policy Overview" } ] }, { "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "id": 587885, "date": "2018-11-21", "retrieved": "2018-11-26T13:54:37.023694", "title": "Section 232 Investigations: Overview and Issues for Congress", "summary": "Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 (19 U.S.C. \u00a71862) provides the President with the ability to impose restrictions on certain imports based on an affirmative determination by the Department of Commerce (Commerce) that the product under investigation \u201cis being imported into the United States in such quantities or under such circumstances as to threaten to impair the national security.\u201d Section 232 actions are of interest to Congress because they are a delegation of Congress\u2019s constitutional authority \u201cTo lay and collect ... Duties\u201d and \u201cTo regulate Commerce with foreign Nations.\u201d They also have important potential economic and policy implications for the United States.\nGlobal overcapacity in steel and aluminum production, mainly driven by China, has been an ongoing concern of Congress. The George W. Bush, Obama, and Trump Administrations each engaged in multilateral discussions to address global steel capacity reduction through the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). While the United States has extensive antidumping and countervailing duties on Chinese steel imports to counter China\u2019s unfair trade practices, steel industry and other experts argue that the magnitude of Chinese production acts to depress prices globally.\nBased on concerns about global overcapacity and certain trade practices, in April 2017 the Trump Administration initiated Section 232 investigations on U.S. steel and aluminum imports. Effective March 23, 2018, President Trump applied 25% and 10% tariffs, respectively, on certain steel and aluminum imports. The President temporarily exempted several countries from the tariffs pending negotiations on potential alternative measures. Permanent tariff exemptions in exchange for quantitative limitations on U.S. imports were eventually announced covering steel for Brazil and South Korea, and both steel and aluminum for Argentina. Australia was permanently exempted from both tariffs with no quantitative restrictions. In August 2018, President Trump raised the tariff to 50% on steel imports from Turkey, and the President announced in a tweet he would increase the tariff to 20% on certain aluminum imports from Turkey. The proposed United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) did not resolve or address the Section 232 tariffs on imported steel and aluminum from Canada and Mexico. Commerce is also managing a process for potential product exclusions in order to limit potential negative domestic effects the tariff may have on U.S. businesses and consumers. Over 38,000 steel exclusion requests have been received, of which about 12,600 have been granted, and about 4,400 have been denied. Commerce also received about 6,500 aluminum exclusion requests, of which, with 830 exclusions granted and 142 denied. U.S. trading partners are challenging the tariffs under World Trade Organization (WTO) dispute settlement rules and have threatened or enacted retaliatory measures, risking potential escalation of retaliatory tariffs. Some analysts view the U.S. unilateral actions as potentially undermining WTO rules, which generally prohibit parties from acting unilaterally, but provide exceptions, including when parties act to protect \u201cessential security interests.\u201d \nCongress enacted Section 232 during the Cold War when national security issues were at the forefront of national debate. The Trade Expansion Act of 1962 sets clear steps and timelines for Section 232 investigations and actions, but allows the President to make a final determination over the appropriate action to take following an affirmative finding by Commerce that the relevant imports threaten to impair national security. Prior to the Trump Administration, there have been 26 Section 232 investigations resulting in nine affirmative findings by Commerce. In six of those cases the President imposed a trade action. \nOn May 23, 2018, the Trump Administration initiated an additional Section 232 investigation on U.S. automobile and automobile part imports, and on July 18, launched a Section 232 investigation into uranium ore and product imports. These investigations, as well as the Administration\u2019s decision to apply the steel and aluminum tariffs on imports from Canada, Mexico, and the EU\u2014all major suppliers of the affected imports\u2014have prompted further questions by some Members of Congress and trade policy analysts on the appropriate use of the trade statute and the proper interpretation of threats to national security on which Section 232 investigations are based. These actions have also intensified debate over potential legislation to constrain the President\u2019s authority with respect to Section 232.\nThe steel and aluminum tariffs are affecting various stakeholders in the U.S. economy, prompting reactions from several Members of Congress, some in support of the measures and others voicing concerns. In general, the tariffs are expected to benefit some domestic steel and aluminum manufacturers, leading to potentially higher steel and aluminum prices and expansion in production in those sectors, while potentially negatively affecting consumers and many end users (e.g., auto manufacturing and construction) through higher costs. To date, Congress has held hearings on the potential economic and broader policy effects of the tariffs, and legislation had been introduced to override the tariffs that have already been imposed, or to revoke or potentially limit the authority it previously delegated to the President in future investigations.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "active": true, "formats": [ { "format": "HTML", "encoding": "utf-8", "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/R45249", "sha1": "1186e4a9e9170d7131c311fe78bb1567d2006e6e", "filename": "files/20181121_R45249_1186e4a9e9170d7131c311fe78bb1567d2006e6e.html", "images": { "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R45249_files&id=/4.png": "files/20181121_R45249_images_caaf0adb964578f955775f049351d090c411c0b4.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R45249_files&id=/2.png": "files/20181121_R45249_images_e5019da25a8733e1adc077b3a83fa4447eb14f0a.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R45249_files&id=/0.png": "files/20181121_R45249_images_562a738d8a97130d47280f00f334a6d3f3374652.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R45249_files&id=/3.png": "files/20181121_R45249_images_0b3bd29ef93ba98b57d15a0483ae7de12b893f54.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R45249_files&id=/1.png": "files/20181121_R45249_images_4fbc5fe918d58d7f8c62edabdaaeeedc31dd992b.png" } }, { "format": "PDF", "encoding": null, "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R45249", "sha1": "717252550220ee26c1c50277417cdbd20191db92", "filename": "files/20181121_R45249_717252550220ee26c1c50277417cdbd20191db92.pdf", "images": {} } ], "topics": [ { "source": "IBCList", "id": 4865, "name": "Import Policy" }, { "source": "IBCList", "id": 4866, "name": "U.S. Trade Policy Overview" } ] }, { "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "id": 585009, "date": "2018-09-11", "retrieved": "2018-10-05T22:27:25.739378", "title": "Section 232 Investigations: Overview and Issues for Congress", "summary": "Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 (19 U.S.C. \u00a71862) provides the President with the ability to impose restrictions on certain imports based on an affirmative determination by the Department of Commerce (Commerce) that the product under investigation \u201cis being imported into the United States in such quantities or under such circumstances as to threaten to impair the national security.\u201d Section 232 actions are of interest to Congress because they are a delegation of Congress\u2019s constitutional authority \u201cto regulate Commerce with foreign Nations.\u201d They also have important potential economic and policy implications for the United States.\nGlobal overcapacity in steel and aluminum production, mainly driven by China, has been an ongoing concern of Congress. The George W. Bush, Obama, and Trump Administrations each engaged in multilateral discussions to address global steel capacity reduction through the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). While the United States has extensive antidumping and countervailing duties on Chinese steel imports to counter China\u2019s unfair trade practices, steel industry and other experts argue that the magnitude of Chinese production acts to depress prices globally.\nBased on concerns about global overcapacity and certain trade practices, in April 2017 the Trump Administration initiated Section 232 investigations on U.S. steel and aluminum imports. Effective March 23, 2018, President Trump applied 25% and 10% tariffs, respectively, on certain steel and aluminum imports. The President temporarily exempted several countries from the tariffs pending negotiations on potential alternative measures. Permanent tariff exemptions in exchange for quantitative limitations on U.S. imports were eventually announced covering steel for Brazil and South Korea, and both steel and aluminum for Argentina. Australia was exempted from both tariffs with no quantitative restrictions. Commerce is also managing a process for potential product exclusions to limit potential negative domestic effects the tariff may have on U.S. businesses and consumers. To date, over 30,000 applications have been received.\nU.S. trading partners are challenging the tariffs under World Trade Organization (WTO) rules and have threatened or enacted retaliation, risking potential escalation of retaliatory tariffs. Some analysts view the U.S. unilateral actions as potentially undermining WTO rules, which generally allow parties to act to protect \u201cnational security.\u201d \nCongress enacted Section 232 during the Cold War when national security issues were at the forefront of national debate. The Trade Expansion Act sets clear steps and timelines for Section 232 investigations and actions, but allows the President to make a final determination over the appropriate action to take following an affirmative finding by Commerce that the relevant imports threaten to impair national security. Prior to the Trump Administration, there have been 26 Section 232 investigations resulting in nine affirmative findings by Commerce. In six of those cases the President imposed a trade action. \nOn May 23, 2018, the Trump Administration initiated an additional Section 232 investigation on U.S. automobile and automobile part imports, and on July 18, launched a Section 232 investigation into uranium ore and product imports. These investigations as well as the Administration\u2019s decision to apply the steel and aluminum tariffs on imports from Canada, Mexico, and the EU\u2014all major suppliers of the affected imports\u2014have prompted further questions by some Members of Congress and trade policy analysts on the appropriate use of the trade statute and the proper interpretation of threats to national security on which Section 232 investigations are based. These actions have also intensified debate over potential legislation to constrain the President\u2019s authority with respect to Section 232.\nThe steel and aluminum tariffs are affecting various stakeholders in the U.S. economy, prompting reactions from several Members of Congress, some in support and others voicing concerns. In general, the tariffs are expected to benefit the domestic steel and aluminum industries, leading to potentially higher steel and aluminum prices and expansion in production in those sectors, while potentially negatively affecting consumers and downstream domestic industries (e.g., manufacturing and construction) through higher costs. To date, Congress has conducted oversight of the Section 232 investigations and examined the potential economic and broader policy effects of the tariffs. Congress may consider legislation to override the tariffs that have already been imposed or to revoke or further limit the authority it previously delegated to the President going forward in future investigations.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "active": true, "formats": [ { "format": "HTML", "encoding": "utf-8", "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/R45249", "sha1": "2ec5aaa01ccae39fdfd4f81ac3ad9cba19788cf8", "filename": "files/20180911_R45249_2ec5aaa01ccae39fdfd4f81ac3ad9cba19788cf8.html", "images": { "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R45249_files&id=/4.png": "files/20180911_R45249_images_13ee45a8d114c31203e632434617eca3d47f9e93.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R45249_files&id=/2.png": "files/20180911_R45249_images_e5019da25a8733e1adc077b3a83fa4447eb14f0a.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R45249_files&id=/0.png": "files/20180911_R45249_images_562a738d8a97130d47280f00f334a6d3f3374652.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R45249_files&id=/3.png": "files/20180911_R45249_images_0b3bd29ef93ba98b57d15a0483ae7de12b893f54.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R45249_files&id=/1.png": "files/20180911_R45249_images_4fbc5fe918d58d7f8c62edabdaaeeedc31dd992b.png" } }, { "format": "PDF", "encoding": null, "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R45249", "sha1": "3967b16d00ee3edfd0cd0c127fa6d19709ea7694", "filename": "files/20180911_R45249_3967b16d00ee3edfd0cd0c127fa6d19709ea7694.pdf", "images": {} } ], "topics": [ { "source": "IBCList", "id": 4866, "name": "U.S. Trade Policy Overview" } ] }, { "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "id": 584697, "date": "2018-09-06", "retrieved": "2018-09-10T13:11:11.073822", "title": "Section 232 Investigations: Overview and Issues for Congress", "summary": "Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 (19 U.S.C. \u00a71862) provides the President with the ability to impose restrictions on certain imports based on an affirmative determination by the Department of Commerce (Commerce) that the product under investigation \u201cis being imported into the United States in such quantities or under such circumstances as to threaten to impair the national security.\u201d Section 232 actions are of interest to Congress because they are a delegation of Congress\u2019s constitutional authority \u201cto regulate Commerce with foreign Nations.\u201d They also have important potential economic and policy implications for the United States.\nGlobal overcapacity in steel and aluminum production, mainly driven by China, has been an ongoing concern of Congress. The George W. Bush, Obama, and Trump Administrations each engaged in multilateral discussions to address global steel capacity reduction through the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). While the United States has extensive antidumping and countervailing duties on Chinese steel imports to counter China\u2019s unfair trade practices, steel industry and other experts argue that the magnitude of Chinese production acts to depress prices globally.\nBased on concerns about global overcapacity and certain trade practices, in April 2017 the Trump Administration initiated Section 232 investigations on U.S. steel and aluminum imports. Effective March 23, 2018, President Trump applied 25% and 10% tariffs, respectively, on certain steel and aluminum imports. The President temporarily exempted several countries from the tariffs pending negotiations on potential alternative measures. Permanent tariff exemptions in exchange for quantitative limitations on U.S. imports were eventually announced covering steel for Brazil and South Korea, and both steel and aluminum for Argentina. Australia was exempted from both tariffs with no quantitative restrictions. Commerce is also managing a process for potential product exclusions to limit potential negative domestic effects the tariff may have on U.S. businesses and consumers. To date, over 30,000 applications have been received.\nU.S. trading partners are challenging the tariffs under World Trade Organization (WTO) rules and have threatened or enacted retaliation, risking potential escalation of retaliatory tariffs. Some analysts view the U.S. unilateral actions as potentially undermining WTO rules, which generally allow parties to act to protect \u201cnational security.\u201d \nCongress enacted Section 232 during the Cold War when national security issues were at the forefront of national debate. The Trade Expansion Act sets clear steps and timelines for Section 232 investigations and actions, but allows the President to make a final determination over the appropriate action to take following an affirmative finding by Commerce that the relevant imports threaten to impair national security. Prior to the Trump Administration, there have been 26 Section 232 investigations resulting in nine affirmative findings by Commerce. In six of those cases the President imposed a trade action. \nOn May 23, 2018, the Trump Administration initiated an additional Section 232 investigation on U.S. automobile and automobile part imports, and on July 18, launched a Section 232 investigation into uranium ore and product imports. These investigations as well as the Administration\u2019s decision to apply the steel and aluminum tariffs on imports from Canada, Mexico, and the EU\u2014all major suppliers of the affected imports\u2014have prompted further questions by some Members of Congress and trade policy analysts on the appropriate use of the trade statute and the proper interpretation of threats to national security on which Section 232 investigations are based. These actions have also intensified debate over potential legislation to constrain the President\u2019s authority with respect to Section 232.\nThe steel and aluminum tariffs are affecting various stakeholders in the U.S. economy, prompting reactions from several Members of Congress, some in support and others voicing concerns. In general, the tariffs are expected to benefit the domestic steel and aluminum industries, leading to potentially higher steel and aluminum prices and expansion in production in those sectors, while potentially negatively affecting consumers and downstream domestic industries (e.g., manufacturing and construction) through higher costs. To date, Congress has conducted oversight of the Section 232 investigations and examined the potential economic and broader policy effects of the tariffs. Congress may consider legislation to override the tariffs that have already been imposed or to revoke or further limit the authority it previously delegated to the President going forward in future investigations.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "active": true, "formats": [ { "format": "HTML", "encoding": "utf-8", "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/R45249", "sha1": "0696c817c182af998be5103f8a5a95c2f247d0c2", "filename": "files/20180906_R45249_0696c817c182af998be5103f8a5a95c2f247d0c2.html", "images": { "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R45249_files&id=/4.png": "files/20180906_R45249_images_13ee45a8d114c31203e632434617eca3d47f9e93.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R45249_files&id=/2.png": "files/20180906_R45249_images_e5019da25a8733e1adc077b3a83fa4447eb14f0a.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R45249_files&id=/0.png": "files/20180906_R45249_images_562a738d8a97130d47280f00f334a6d3f3374652.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R45249_files&id=/3.png": "files/20180906_R45249_images_0b3bd29ef93ba98b57d15a0483ae7de12b893f54.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R45249_files&id=/1.png": "files/20180906_R45249_images_4fbc5fe918d58d7f8c62edabdaaeeedc31dd992b.png" } }, { "format": "PDF", "encoding": null, "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R45249", "sha1": "67890e3141eca992039ea89f5b3473955fb70578", "filename": "files/20180906_R45249_67890e3141eca992039ea89f5b3473955fb70578.pdf", "images": {} } ], "topics": [ { "source": "IBCList", "id": 4866, "name": "U.S. Trade Policy Overview" } ] }, { "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "id": 584540, "date": "2018-08-31", "retrieved": "2018-09-05T13:35:29.966953", "title": "Section 232 Investigations: Overview and Issues for Congress", "summary": "Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 (19 U.S.C. \u00a71862) provides the President with the ability to impose restrictions on certain imports based on an affirmative determination by the Department of Commerce (Commerce) that the product under investigation \u201cis being imported into the United States in such quantities or under such circumstances as to threaten to impair the national security.\u201d Section 232 actions are of interest to Congress because they are a delegation of Congress\u2019s constitutional authority \u201cto regulate Commerce with foreign Nations.\u201d They also have important potential economic and policy implications for the United States.\nGlobal overcapacity in steel and aluminum production, mainly driven by China, has been an ongoing concern of Congress. The George W. Bush, Obama, and Trump Administrations each engaged in multilateral discussions to address global steel capacity reduction through the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). While the United States has extensive antidumping and countervailing duties on Chinese steel imports to counter China\u2019s unfair trade practices, steel industry and other experts argue that the magnitude of Chinese production acts to depress prices globally.\nBased on concerns about global overcapacity and certain trade practices, in April 2017 the Trump Administration initiated Section 232 investigations on U.S. steel and aluminum imports. Effective March 23, 2018, President Trump applied 25% and 10% tariffs, respectively, on certain steel and aluminum imports. The President temporarily exempted several countries from the tariffs pending negotiations on potential alternative measures. Permanent tariff exemptions in exchange for quantitative limitations on U.S. imports were eventually announced covering steel for Brazil and South Korea, and both steel and aluminum for Argentina. Australia was exempted from both tariffs with no quantitative restrictions. Commerce is also managing a process for potential product exclusions to limit potential negative domestic effects the tariff may have on U.S. businesses and consumers. To date, over 30,000 applications have been received.\nU.S. trading partners are challenging the tariffs under World Trade Organization (WTO) rules and have threatened or enacted retaliation, risking potential escalation of retaliatory tariffs. Some analysts view the U.S. unilateral actions as potentially undermining WTO rules, which generally allow parties to act to protect \u201cnational security.\u201d \nCongress enacted Section 232 during the Cold War when national security issues were at the forefront of national debate. The Trade Expansion Act sets clear steps and timelines for Section 232 investigations and actions, but allows the President to make a final determination over the appropriate action to take following an affirmative finding by Commerce that the relevant imports threaten to impair national security. Prior to the Trump Administration, there have been 26 Section 232 investigations resulting in nine affirmative findings by Commerce. In six of those cases the President imposed a trade action. \nOn May 23, 2018, the Trump Administration initiated an additional Section 232 investigation on U.S. automobile and automobile part imports, and on July 18, launched a Section 232 investigation into uranium ore and product imports. These investigations as well as the Administration\u2019s decision to apply the steel and aluminum tariffs on imports from Canada, Mexico, and the EU\u2014all major suppliers of the affected imports\u2014have prompted further questions by some Members of Congress and trade policy analysts on the appropriate use of the trade statute and the proper interpretation of threats to national security on which Section 232 investigations are based. These actions have also intensified debate over potential legislation to constrain the President\u2019s authority with respect to Section 232.\nThe steel and aluminum tariffs are affecting various stakeholders in the U.S. economy, prompting reactions from several Members of Congress, some in support and others voicing concerns. In general, the tariffs are expected to benefit the domestic steel and aluminum industries, leading to potentially higher steel and aluminum prices and expansion in production in those sectors, while potentially negatively affecting consumers and downstream domestic industries (e.g., manufacturing and construction) through higher costs. To date, Congress has conducted oversight of the Section 232 investigations and examined the potential economic and broader policy effects of the tariffs. Congress may consider legislation to override the tariffs that have already been imposed or to revoke or further limit the authority it previously delegated to the President going forward in future investigations.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "active": true, "formats": [ { "format": "HTML", "encoding": "utf-8", "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/R45249", "sha1": "76ba0d7e16cb444ce93945d7f72c0d7caa481da7", "filename": "files/20180831_R45249_76ba0d7e16cb444ce93945d7f72c0d7caa481da7.html", "images": { "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R45249_files&id=/4.png": "files/20180831_R45249_images_13ee45a8d114c31203e632434617eca3d47f9e93.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R45249_files&id=/2.png": "files/20180831_R45249_images_e5019da25a8733e1adc077b3a83fa4447eb14f0a.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R45249_files&id=/0.png": "files/20180831_R45249_images_562a738d8a97130d47280f00f334a6d3f3374652.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R45249_files&id=/3.png": "files/20180831_R45249_images_0b3bd29ef93ba98b57d15a0483ae7de12b893f54.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R45249_files&id=/1.png": "files/20180831_R45249_images_4fbc5fe918d58d7f8c62edabdaaeeedc31dd992b.png" } }, { "format": "PDF", "encoding": null, "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R45249", "sha1": "5f5709bc5fb584daed70d64d41d81e5ec4133ac1", "filename": "files/20180831_R45249_5f5709bc5fb584daed70d64d41d81e5ec4133ac1.pdf", "images": {} } ], "topics": [ { "source": "IBCList", "id": 4866, "name": "U.S. Trade Policy Overview" } ] }, { "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "id": 583954, "date": "2018-08-21", "retrieved": "2018-08-23T13:08:01.539121", "title": "Section 232 Investigations: Overview and Issues for Congress", "summary": "Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 (19 U.S.C. \u00a71862) provides the President with the ability to impose restrictions on certain imports based on an affirmative determination by the Department of Commerce (Commerce) that the product under investigation \u201cis being imported into the United States in such quantities or under such circumstances as to threaten to impair the national security.\u201d Section 232 actions are of interest to Congress because they are a delegation of Congress\u2019 constitutional authority \u201cto regulate Commerce with foreign Nations.\u201d They also have important potential economic and policy implications for the United States.\nGlobal overcapacity in steel and aluminum production, mainly driven by China, has been an ongoing concern of Congress. The George W. Bush, Obama, and Trump Administrations each engaged in multilateral discussions to address global steel capacity reduction through the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). While the United States has extensive antidumping and countervailing duties on Chinese steel imports to counter China\u2019s unfair trade practices, steel industry and other experts argue that the magnitude of Chinese production acts to depress prices globally.\nBased on concerns about global overcapacity and certain trade practices, in April 2017 the Trump Administration initiated Section 232 investigations on U.S. steel and aluminum imports. Effective March 23, 2018, President Trump applied 25% and 10% tariffs, respectively, on certain steel and aluminum imports. The President temporarily exempted several countries from the tariffs pending negotiations on potential alternative measures. Permanent tariff exemptions in exchange for quantitative limitations on U.S. imports were eventually announced covering steel for Brazil and South Korea, and both steel and aluminum for Argentina. Australia was exempted from both tariffs with no quantitative restrictions. Commerce is also managing a process for potential product exclusions to limit potential negative domestic effects the tariff may have on U.S. businesses and consumers. To date, over 27,000 applications have been received.\nU.S. trading partners are challenging the tariffs under World Trade Organization (WTO) rules and have threatened or enacted retaliation, risking potential escalation of retaliatory tariffs. Some analysts view the U.S. unilateral actions as potentially undermining WTO rules, which generally allow parties to act to protect \u201cnational security.\u201d \nCongress enacted Section 232 during the Cold War when national security issues were at the forefront of national debate. The Trade Expansion Act sets clear steps and timelines for Section 232 investigations and actions, but allows the President to make a final determination over the appropriate action to take following an affirmative finding by Commerce that the relevant imports threaten to impair national security. Prior to the Trump Administration, there have been 26 Section 232 investigations resulting in nine affirmative findings by Commerce. In six of those cases the President imposed a trade action. \nOn May 23, 2018, the Trump Administration initiated an additional Section 232 investigation on U.S. automobile and automobile part imports, and on July 18, launched a Section 232 investigation into uranium ore and product imports. These investigations as well as the Administration\u2019s decision to apply the steel and aluminum tariffs on imports from Canada, Mexico, and the EU\u2014all major suppliers of the affected imports\u2014has prompted further questions by some Members of Congress and trade policy analysts on the appropriate use of the trade statute and the proper interpretation of threats to national security on which Section 232 investigations are based. These actions have also intensified debate over potential legislation to constrain the President\u2019s authority with respect to Section 232.\nThe steel and aluminum tariffs are affecting various stakeholders in the U.S. economy, prompting reactions from several Members of Congress, some in support and others voicing concerns. In general, the tariffs are expected to benefit the domestic steel and aluminum industries, leading to potentially higher steel and aluminum prices and expansion in production in those sectors, while potentially negatively affecting consumers and downstream domestic industries (e.g., manufacturing and construction) through higher costs. To date, Congress has conducted oversight of the Section 232 investigations and examining the potential economic and broader policy effects of the tariffs. Congress may consider legislation to override the tariffs that have already been imposed or to revoke or further limit the authority it previously delegated to the President going forward in future investigations.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "active": true, "formats": [ { "format": "HTML", "encoding": "utf-8", "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/R45249", "sha1": "b21e5a48f9d77edfe7404fc3b89258584f682334", "filename": "files/20180821_R45249_b21e5a48f9d77edfe7404fc3b89258584f682334.html", "images": { "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R45249_files&id=/4.png": "files/20180821_R45249_images_13ee45a8d114c31203e632434617eca3d47f9e93.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R45249_files&id=/2.png": "files/20180821_R45249_images_e5019da25a8733e1adc077b3a83fa4447eb14f0a.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R45249_files&id=/0.png": "files/20180821_R45249_images_562a738d8a97130d47280f00f334a6d3f3374652.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R45249_files&id=/3.png": "files/20180821_R45249_images_0b3bd29ef93ba98b57d15a0483ae7de12b893f54.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R45249_files&id=/1.png": "files/20180821_R45249_images_4fbc5fe918d58d7f8c62edabdaaeeedc31dd992b.png" } }, { "format": "PDF", "encoding": null, "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R45249", "sha1": "b5c9b4461c71bf766e0d84032bc6a0ed6b3b6281", "filename": "files/20180821_R45249_b5c9b4461c71bf766e0d84032bc6a0ed6b3b6281.pdf", "images": {} } ], "topics": [ { "source": "IBCList", "id": 4866, "name": "U.S. Trade Policy Overview" } ] }, { "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "id": 583446, "date": "2018-07-27", "retrieved": "2018-08-07T13:47:33.519431", "title": "Section 232 Investigations: Overview and Issues for Congress", "summary": "Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 (19 U.S.C. \u00a71862) provides the President with the ability to impose restrictions on certain imports based on an affirmative determination by the Department of Commerce (Commerce) that the product under investigation \u201cis being imported into the United States in such quantities or under such circumstances as to threaten to impair the national security.\u201d Section 232 actions are of interest to Congress because they are a delegation of Congress\u2019 constitutional authority \u201cto regulate Commerce with foreign Nations.\u201d They also have important potential economic and policy implications for the United States.\nGlobal overcapacity in steel and aluminum production, mainly driven by China, has been an ongoing concern of Congress. The George W. Bush, Obama, and Trump Administrations each engaged in multilateral discussions to address global steel capacity reduction through the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). While the United States has extensive antidumping and countervailing duties on Chinese steel imports to counter China\u2019s unfair trade practices, steel industry and other experts argue that the magnitude of Chinese production acts to depress prices globally.\nBased on concerns about global overcapacity and certain trade practices, in April 2017 the Trump Administration initiated Section 232 investigations on U.S. steel and aluminum imports. Effective March 23, 2018, President Trump applied 25% and 10% tariffs, respectively, on certain steel and aluminum imports. The President temporarily exempted several countries from the tariffs pending negotiations on potential alternative measures. Permanent tariff exemptions in exchange for quantitative limitations on U.S. imports were eventually announced covering steel for Brazil and South Korea, and both steel and aluminum for Argentina. Australia was exempted from both tariffs with no quantitative restrictions. Commerce is also managing a process for potential product exclusions to limit potential negative domestic effects the tariff may have on U.S. businesses and consumers. To date, over 27,000 applications have been received.\nU.S. trading partners are challenging the tariffs under World Trade Organization (WTO) rules and have threatened or enacted retaliation, risking potential escalation of retaliatory tariffs. Some analysts view the U.S. unilateral actions as potentially undermining WTO rules, which generally allow parties to act to protect \u201cnational security.\u201d \nCongress enacted Section 232 during the Cold War when national security issues were at the forefront of national debate. The Trade Expansion Act sets clear steps and timelines for Section 232 investigations and actions, but allows the President to make a final determination over the appropriate action to take following an affirmative finding by Commerce that the relevant imports threaten to impair national security. Prior to the Trump Administration, there have been 26 Section 232 investigations resulting in nine affirmative findings by Commerce. In six of those cases the President imposed a trade action. \nOn May 23, 2018, the Trump Administration initiated an additional Section 232 investigation on U.S. automobile and automobile part imports, and on July 18, launched a Section 232 investigation into uranium ore and product imports. These investigations as well as the Administration\u2019s decision to apply the steel and aluminum tariffs on imports from Canada, Mexico, and the EU\u2014all major suppliers of the affected imports\u2014has prompted further questions by some Members of Congress and trade policy analysts on the appropriate use of the trade statute and the proper interpretation of threats to national security on which Section 232 investigations are based. These actions have also intensified debate over potential legislation to constrain the President\u2019s authority with respect to Section 232.\nThe steel and aluminum tariffs are affecting various stakeholders in the U.S. economy, prompting reactions from several Members of Congress, some in support and others voicing concerns. In general, the tariffs are expected to benefit the domestic steel and aluminum industries, leading to potential higher steel and aluminum prices and expansion in production in those sectors, while potentially negatively affecting consumers and downstream domestic industries (e.g., manufacturing and construction) through higher costs. To date, Congress has exercised its authority on this issue by conducting oversight of the Section 232 investigations and examining the potential economic and broader policy effects of the tariffs. Congress may consider legislation to revoke or further limit the authority it previously delegated to the President.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "active": true, "formats": [ { "format": "HTML", "encoding": "utf-8", "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/R45249", "sha1": "69a20624b74f47fd3850b7d044872c7b183d6b02", "filename": "files/20180727_R45249_69a20624b74f47fd3850b7d044872c7b183d6b02.html", "images": { "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R45249_files&id=/1.png": "files/20180727_R45249_images_4fbc5fe918d58d7f8c62edabdaaeeedc31dd992b.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R45249_files&id=/0.png": "files/20180727_R45249_images_562a738d8a97130d47280f00f334a6d3f3374652.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R45249_files&id=/3.png": "files/20180727_R45249_images_0b3bd29ef93ba98b57d15a0483ae7de12b893f54.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R45249_files&id=/2.png": "files/20180727_R45249_images_e5019da25a8733e1adc077b3a83fa4447eb14f0a.png" } }, { "format": "PDF", "encoding": null, "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R45249", "sha1": "c2d3c9ac28ac6fcbbc0e3c0389932c2475d3cb73", "filename": "files/20180727_R45249_c2d3c9ac28ac6fcbbc0e3c0389932c2475d3cb73.pdf", "images": {} } ], "topics": [ { "source": "IBCList", "id": 4866, "name": "U.S. Trade Policy Overview" } ] }, { "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "id": 582624, "date": "2018-07-05", "retrieved": "2018-07-10T20:04:59.058350", "title": "Section 232 Investigations: Overview and Issues for Congress", "summary": "Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 (19 U.S.C. \u00a71862) provides the President with the ability to impose restrictions on certain imports based on an affirmative determination by the Department of Commerce (Commerce) that the product under investigation \u201cis being imported into the United States in such quantities or under such circumstances as to threaten to impair the national security.\u201d Section 232 actions are of interest to Congress because they are a delegation of Congress\u2019 constitutional authority \u201cto regulate Commerce with foreign Nations.\u201d They also have important potential economic and policy implications for the United States.\nGlobal overcapacity in steel and aluminum production, mainly driven by China, has been an ongoing concern of Congress. The George W. Bush, Obama, and Trump Administrations each engaged in multilateral discussions to address global steel capacity reduction through the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). While the United States has extensive antidumping and countervailing duties on Chinese steel imports to counter China\u2019s unfair trade practices, steel industry and other experts argue that the magnitude of Chinese production acts to depress prices globally.\nBased on concerns about global overcapacity and certain trade practices, in April 2017 the Trump Administration initiated Section 232 investigations on U.S. steel and aluminum imports. Effective March 23, 2018, President Trump applied 25% and 10% tariffs, respectively, on certain steel and aluminum imports. The President temporarily exempted several countries from the tariffs pending negotiations on potential alternative measures. Permanent tariff exemptions in exchange for quantitative limitations on U.S. imports were eventually announced covering steel for Brazil and South Korea, and both steel and aluminum for Argentina. Australia was exempted from both tariffs with no quantitative restrictions. Commerce is also managing a process for potential product exclusions to limit potential negative domestic effects the tariff may have on U.S. businesses and consumers. To date, over 20,000 applications have been received.\nU.S. trading partners are challenging the tariffs under World Trade Organization (WTO) rules and have threatened or enacted retaliation, risking potential escalation of retaliatory tariffs. Some analysts view the U.S. unilateral actions as potentially undermining WTO rules, which generally allow parties to act to protect \u201cnational security.\u201d \nCongress enacted Section 232 during the Cold War when national security issues were at the forefront of national debate. The Trade Expansion Act sets clear steps and timelines for Section 232 investigations and actions, but allows the President to make a final determination over the appropriate action to take following an affirmative finding by Commerce that the relevant imports threaten to impair national security. Prior to the Trump Administration, there have been 26 Section 232 investigations resulting in nine affirmative findings by Commerce. In six of those cases the President imposed a trade action. \nOn May 23, 2018, the Trump Administration initiated an additional Section 232 investigation on U.S. automobile and automobile part imports. This investigation as well as the Administration\u2019s decision to apply the steel and aluminum tariffs on imports from Canada, Mexico, and the EU\u2014all major suppliers of the affected imports\u2014has prompted further questions by some Members of Congress and trade policy analysts on the appropriate use of the trade statute and the proper interpretation of threats to national security on which Section 232 investigations are based. These actions have also intensified debate over potential legislation to constrain the President\u2019s authority with respect to Section 232.\nThe steel and aluminum tariffs are affecting various stakeholders in the U.S. economy, prompting reactions from several Members of Congress, some in support and others voicing concerns. In general, the tariffs are expected to benefit the domestic steel and aluminum industries, leading to potential higher steel and aluminum prices and expansion in production in those sectors, while potentially negatively affecting consumers and downstream domestic industries (e.g., manufacturing and construction) through higher costs. Congress may exercise its authority on this issue by conducting oversight of the Section 232 investigations, examining the potential economic and broader policy effects of the tariffs, or potentially considering legislation to revoke or further limit the authority it previously delegated to the President.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "active": true, "formats": [ { "format": "HTML", "encoding": "utf-8", "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/R45249", "sha1": "d32bd04520644715f8d463055ebddcab748e658b", "filename": "files/20180705_R45249_d32bd04520644715f8d463055ebddcab748e658b.html", "images": { "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R45249_files&id=/2.png": "files/20180705_R45249_images_e5019da25a8733e1adc077b3a83fa4447eb14f0a.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R45249_files&id=/0.png": "files/20180705_R45249_images_562a738d8a97130d47280f00f334a6d3f3374652.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R45249_files&id=/3.png": "files/20180705_R45249_images_0b3bd29ef93ba98b57d15a0483ae7de12b893f54.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R45249_files&id=/1.png": "files/20180705_R45249_images_2d214fe3fc6d424d34cb97b21bfe841d86c60771.png" } }, { "format": "PDF", "encoding": null, "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R45249", "sha1": "4c38c4093c42f8ebbff65a8a110269f7c3101492", "filename": "files/20180705_R45249_4c38c4093c42f8ebbff65a8a110269f7c3101492.pdf", "images": {} } ], "topics": [ { "source": "IBCList", "id": 4866, "name": "U.S. Trade Policy Overview" } ] } ], "topics": [ "Economic Policy", "Foreign Affairs", "Industry and Trade", "National Defense" ] }