China's lack of worker rights, weak environmental standards "and anticompetitive subsidies are the hallmarks of China’s artificial comparative advantage. It is an advantage that puts others out of business and violates any notion of fair competition," the annual trade policy agenda from the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative said, and the administration is looking to advance fair competition "through all available avenues," including coordinating with other countries, using existing trade agreements, or new tools, it said.
Mara Lee
Mara Lee, Senior Editor, is a reporter for International Trade Today and its sister publications Export Compliance Daily and Trade Law Daily. She joined the Warren Communications News staff in early 2018, after covering health policy, Midwestern Congressional delegations, and the Connecticut economy, insurance and manufacturing sectors for the Hartford Courant, the nation’s oldest continuously published newspaper (established 1674). Before arriving in Washington D.C. to cover Congress in 2005, she worked in Ohio, where she witnessed fervent presidential campaigning every four years.
House Republicans on the Ways and Means Committee told U.S. Trade Representative Katherine Tai that she needs to provide "a detailed analysis" of how China did or did not live up to the phase one trade deal. "We have great confidence in your abilities to address the many challenges China presents to the United States and other market economies, and we hope you will expand detailed communication on these matters so that Congress and the Administration can be partners in developing effective U.S. responses," they wrote Feb. 24.
The European Commission published a 69-page directive that is meant to be the foundation for European Union legislation requiring that large companies implement due diligence on environmental and social costs in their supply chains. The European Parliament and European Council will vote on the proposal, and if it is adopted, EU countries will have two years to write national laws to implement it.
Sanctions, rather than additional tariffs, are the most likely result of political pressure to not look soft on China, Bank of America analysts Ethan Harris and Aditya Bhave predicted. The two wrote in a Feb. 18 note that it's not surprising that China did not purchase the volume of U.S. exports it promised, but "what's unusual is the lack of follow-through from either side so far, other than empty rhetoric."
Sen. Todd Young, R-Ind., co-sponsor of the Endless Frontiers Act that was rolled up into a larger China competition package, said during a Bipartisan Policy Center program broadcast Feb. 18, "I think we’re poised to … have a genuine sit-down conference." There has been talk in the Capitol that there would be a negotiating process led by the leaders of the Republican and Democratic caucuses in the House and Senate, and that while committee chairs would have a say on the sections of the bills under their jurisdiction, there would not be a formal conference committee, whose discussions would be open to the public (see 2202020055). "That is the most methodical, I think, responsible process, and collaborative process," he added.
Federal Maritime Commissioner Carl Bentzel says that audits have already led to investigations at the FMC, but that the agency is underpowered, with about 115 employees and just six investigators. He said there have been billions of dollars worth of detention and demurrage charges, and that the FMC will be issuing a notice of proposed rulemaking to create further guidance about proper detention and demurrage charges.
The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative laid out the externalities to other economies of China's state-led economy in a 72-page annual report to Congress. "Since last year’s report, our assessment of China’s record in terms of transitioning to a market economy has not changed," the report said. While the report's framing is about how China complies with World Trade Organization rules, the authors minimized the WTO's ability to constrain China and emphasized that countries must expand domestic trade remedies or develop other tools to deal with China's rise.
Rep. Mike Gallagher, R-Wis., and 27 Republican colleagues, introduced a bill that would require the administration to impose Magnitsky Act sanctions if any member or person associated with the International Olympic Committee supported "a gross violation of internationally recognized human rights" against any Olympic or Paralympic Winter games participant. However, the president can choose not to impose sanctions if he determines that a waiver is in the country's national security interests. The text of the bill, which was published Feb. 10, says that participants aren't just athletes -- they can be spectators, members of the press, "government and private officials ... and persons involved in economic activity related to the Games."
Alaska's two Republican senators, Dan Sullivan and Lisa Murkowski, introduced a bill that would ban the import of Russian seafood products. Russia doesn't import U.S. seafood products anymore, in retaliation for sanctions Western nations imposed after Russia invaded Crimea, part of Ukraine, a region that it later annexed. The bill, which the senators announced Dec. 11 but introduced earlier this week, is called the U.S.-Russian Federation Seafood Reciprocity Act.
Rep. Rick Larsen, D-Wash., told a virtual audience Feb. 9 hosted by the National Committee on U.S.-China Relations that there are more members of Congress who want to punish China or decouple from its economy than there are those who see themselves as trying to salvage the relationship.