With negotiations expected to begin in earnest soon on the House and Senate's trade packages, staffers in both chambers of Congress say there could be support for antidumping and countervailing duty reform and language around Section 301 tariff exclusions, but the likelihood of a dramatic de minimis change seems somewhat remote.
Senators on the committee that oversees trade pressed U.S. Trade Representative Katherine Tai repeatedly on why the administration isn't engaged in negotiations with other countries to get them to lower their tariffs, so that U.S. exporters, particularly agricultural producers, can gain more market share. Both Democrats and Republicans questioned the decision to pursue the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework as something other than a traditional free trade agreement,
A dozen trade groups sent Congress a letter saying changes to antidumping duty and countervailing duty laws, colloquially known as Leveling the Playing Field 2.0, shouldn't be part of the compromise between the respective House and Senate China packages. Though the legislation originated in the Senate, it was inserted into the House trade title of the America Competes Act.
The House China package's trade title includes a major rewrite of antidumping duty and countervailing duty laws, but the Senate China package doesn't, so a conference committee from both chambers would have to agree to get the changes into law. Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, who co-sponsored the Senate bill colloquially known as Leveling the Playing Field Act 2.0, said in a Capitol hallway interview that he thinks the chances of that happening are good.
Steel industry interests testified Feb. 16 that duty evasion is pervasive, and that customs enforcement cannot keep up. "Customs and duty evasion and circumvention occurs because there's opportunity and because there's lack of enforcement," said Scott Paul, president of the Alliance for American Manufacturing. "Our border protections with regards to fairly traded goods are underfunded."