January 31, 2024

If you’re going to ask the government to protect your business from “unfair” trade practices, shouldn’t you have to demonstrate that your products compete with imports? And that your business has been harmed as a result?

Thankfully, that’s a basic premise of U.S. trade remedy law. It’s the reason why you don’t see Tesla engaged in an international trade dispute against gas-powered vehicles or Lululemon pushing a claim against foreign-made hockey masks. You cannot be injured by a product your company does not make or sell.

Which brings us to Cleveland-Cliffs, the giant Ohio-based steelmaker. Last year, Cleveland-Cliffs petitioned the U.S. government for outrageous anti-dumping tariffs of up to 300 percent on eight nations that export tin plate steel to the U.S. The company alleged that foreign steel was being dumped into the U.S., thus under-cutting its business. But the truth refutes this — and shows how easy it is for a cynical company and its CEO to undermine U.S. trade remedy law and seek government tariffs instead of fairly competing in the marketplace.

Tin plate (or tin mill) steel is a ubiquitous material used throughout our economy in electronics, jewelry, hardware, and countless other household products. It’s most commonly used in the manufacturing of cans for the many food items in every family’s cupboard — which could have increased in price by a whopping 58 cents per can if Cleveland-Cliffs’ demands had been granted.

Earlier this year, the Department of Commerce outright denied tariffs on four nations named in the petition, but agreed to substantially lower tariff increases for Germany, Canada, China, and Korea. Now, the International Trade Commission is set to vote on February 6 on whether to ratify these new tariffs, which would jeopardize U.S. food and manufacturing jobs while raising grocery bills on consumers even higher.

 

Read full article here: