Trump vs. China? Tariffs under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 Revisited

This study challenges the common belief that the ‘Trump tariffs’ are protectionist or a deliberate attack on China, the USA’s economic rival. By focusing specifically on Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 and equating its use to Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, this study instead demonstrates how the U.S. administration is actively repurposing protectionist laws to function as unilateral enforcement tools. Thus, this study argues that the tariffs enacted on steel and aluminium in 2018 under the guise of national security are not meant to protect the domestic market or to hurt the Chinese, but rather to ‘protect’ the ability of U.S. businesses to make profits abroad. By contrasting the justification for the tariffs to factual application, China is not identified as a target but rather as a convenient fig leaf. The article goes into further detail to demonstrate how the U.S. (ab)uses these tariffs during negotiations with South Korea, Japan, and other nations and finds multiple examples of how others have been affected significantly more than China. Here, the article describes how U.S. officials have mastered the art of simultaneously creating leverage, exchanging it for concessions, and keeping it.

A Comparative Study of China and Japan’s Response to Section 301 Investigations of the United States

Japan is the country with the most Section 301 investigations initiated by the United States. Meanwhile, the ongoing Section 301 investigation case against China is the most complicated and tough case until now. The different responses of Japan and China will be the core theme of this paper. Originally, Japan, little by little, accepted all the demands of the United States under American pressure in the semiconductor conflict and then began to resist its unreasonable demands; eventually, Japan forced the United States to withdraw its excessive requirement in auto parts conflict. In the case of China, previous Section 301 investigations were resolved by bilateral or multilateral agreements although it was difficult. In this time, the Chinese government has taken a countermeasure against the United States’ bullying, evident from the very beginning. The situation is that China and the United States conducted bilateral negotiations on the stretch. Meanwhile, the United States continued to extend the scope of tariff goods and escalate the tariff rate against China, and the Chinese government immediately published the same amount and tariff rate for imported products from the United States. China and other countries are jointly suffering the sanction from the United States and are trying to restrain the trade hegemony of the United States.