Category Archives: Washington Newsline

Members,

Further to our member update yesterday, we have received notice that the US Trade Representatives Offices changes to to list 3 items duty rates are scheduled to appear in the Federal Register tomorrow.  A copy of the notice can be found here:

Modification of Section 301 Action: China’s Acts, Policies, and Practices Related to Technology Transfer, Intellectual Property, and Innovation

Excerpts from the document noting the time of implementation read as follows:

Effective with respect to goods (i) entered for consumption, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after 12:01 a.m. eastern daylight time on May 10,2019, and (ii) exported to the United States on or after May 10, 2019, subchapter III of chapter 99 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is modified.

We will update members as we learn more.
Best Regards
Gemini Shippers Group

As announced on Sunday,  President Trump tweeted that the duty rates on the 3^rd list of products (https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/301/2018-0026%20China%20FRN%207-10-2018_0.pdf) will increase from 10 percent to 25 percent on Friday, May 10^th, at 12:01 a.m.  According to Steven Mnuchin, Treasury Secretary, and Robert Lighthizer, U.S. Trade Representative, China backtracked on some of the agreements they had previously made during their ongoing negotiations.

Additionally, a 4^th tranche, or list, of products will be announced shortly which had not previously been hit with additional duty, but will be subject to an additional 25 percent tariff.

The U.S. and China are still planning to continue their negotiations in Washington, D.C., on Wednesday and Thursday of this week.

As soon as we receive additional details, we will advise.

Today, May 5^th, President Trump announced by tweet that the additional tariffs on the third group of products from China will increase from 10 percent to 25 percent on Friday, May 10^th.   The increase had originally been scheduled for earlier this year, but was postponed while trade negotiations with China were ongoing.   The tariff numbers for the third group, or tranche, are listed on the following document:   https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/301/2018-0026%20China%20FRN%207-10-2018_0.pdf.

Additionally, Trump announced that another $325 billion of products from China, that have not previously been hit with a duty increase, will shortly be subject to an additional 25 percent duty.

U.S. State Department officials delivered a blunt message to industry groups and companies that attended a meeting in New York City. They discussed what jewelry businesses must know about their product and declare where all their materials originate from or they will be subject to new regulations.  The government believes that jewelry materials and other minerals are funding conflict and rogue regimes, specifically mentioning Iran, Venezuela, and certain countries in Africa. But it’s also interested in more than those areas.   Jewelry buyers and producers need to know the source of any piece or component that is imported. State Department officials have expressed frustration with the slow rate of change in the industry at meetings before. But this felt a little different, said those in attendance.  There were threats of new regulations on the industry, though attendees received few specifics.  Some speculated it could be a new law or executive order. It was made clear this was coming from the top, President Trump and Secretary of State Pompeo. Industry stakeholders have long maintained that it’s often impossible to determine the exact origination of every part of a jewelry item, given that many materials are recycled, reused, and traded through a secondary market. The discussion touched on existing mechanisms to guarantee provenance, like the Responsible Jewelry Council’s Chain of Custody certification. This Chain of Custody (CoC) Standard requires companies to have a policy and risk  management framework for conflict sensitive sourcing practices. Money laundering was specifically mentioned as an issue. The meeting ended with six takeaways:

– The “threat assessment” is higher than it has been in the past.
– The Kimberley Process is inadequate to solve the current problems.
– Insuring a chain of custody for all materials is important to the U.S. government.
– The government plans to hold U.S. suppliers and purchasers accountable.
– More industry education is needed on these issues.
– The government is looking to do more enforcement of existing rules and regulations, specifically mentioning those pertaining to anti–money laundering.

This meeting appeared to be an about-face by the Trump administration, which had previously said it wouldn’t enforce the one regulation that has seemingly boosted transparency in gold
sourcing: section 1502 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, Conflict Minerals.

Gemini Shippers Group ; Gemini Shippers Association, Fashion Accessories Shipper Association (FASA)  and the Fashion Jewelry and Accessories Trade Association (FJATA) joined other trade association in a letter to Senator Kyrsten Sinema on state mandated warning lables

April 12, 2019

Senator Kyrsten Sinema

United States Senate

317 Hart Senate Office Building

Washington D.C. 20510

Dear Senator Sinema:

We, the undersigned organizations, are deeply concerned about the growing number of state-mandated warning labels and disclosure requirements being imposed on a range of consumer products. We request your assistance and leadership on federal legislation to address this growing patchwork of state laws that will continue confusing the consumer and directly impact interstate commerce.

Our respective industries are committed to providing meaningful transparency to consumers. However, states and localities have either implemented or are readily proposing dozens of ingredient disclosure and/or warning label requirements related to food, beverages, agriculture, and other consumer products that may be based on limited or insufficient information.

States do not uniformly have the scientific capacity and robust infrastructure to ensure adherence to the highest standards of scientific integrity and risk analysis when establishing their own content disclosure or ingredient warning label requirements. These state labeling proposals and enacted legislation especially affect industries that have a significant economic footprint in Arizona, including the manufacturing, agriculture and food and beverage industries.

For example, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals recently blocked a 2015 San Francisco ordinance that requires advertisers of sugar-sweetened beverages to post health warnings, arguing that the warning conflicts with statements by the Food and Drug Administration. Despite this ruling, similar proposals have been introduced in Hawaii, Massachusetts, New York and Baltimore, Maryland. Legislation has also been introduced in other states that would impose additional labeling and disclosure requirements on a variety of products, from cell phones to multivitamins.

Now is the time to establish a federal, science-based solution. State- and locally-mandated labeling schemes that require unjustified warning labels on every day products (including caffeine, aloe vera and clothing) damage consumer confidence, hinder interstate commerce, and often disparage new science and technology.

This important issue needs a timely solution before a patchwork of labeling schemes causes additional burdens for Arizona farmers, small businesses, retailers and manufacturers. On behalf of a coalition representing over 90 national, state and local organizations, we urge you to be the lead Democratic cosponsor on a bill that will establish a federal standard for labeling and disclosure requirements. Such a solution will ensure that consumers will have appropriate, meaningful information based on a credible, scientific standard when making purchasing decisions.

Sincerely,

Adhesive and Sealant Council

Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers 2

American Agri-Women

American Apparel & Footwear Association

American Bakers Association

American Beverage Association

American Brush Manufacturers Association

American Chemistry Council

American Cleaning Institute

American Coatings Association

American Composites Manufacturers Association

American Farm Bureau Federation

American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers

American Home Furnishings Alliance

American Seed Trade Association

American Soybean Association

Animal Health Institute

Arizona Cattle Feeders

Arizona Farm and Ranch Group

Arizona Farm Bureau Federation

Arizona Food Marketing Alliance

Asphalt Roofing Manufacturers Association

Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers

Association of the Nonwoven Fabrics Industry

Auto Care Association

Bashas’ Inc.

Biotechnology Innovation Organization

Calorie Control Council

Can Manufacturers Institute

Consumer Technology Association

Corn Refiners Association

CropLife America

Council for Responsible Nutrition

EPS Industry Alliance

Fashion Accessories Shippers Association

Fashion Jewelry & Accessories Trade Association

Flavor & Extract Manufacturers Association

Flexible Vinyl Alliance

Food Marketing Institute

Foodservice Packaging Institute

Fragrance Creators Association

Frozen Potato Products Institute

Gemini Shippers Association

Global Cold Chain Alliance

Greater Pheonix Chamber

Halogenated Solvents Industry Alliance

Home Furnishings Association

Independent Bakers Association

Infant Nutrition Council of America

Institute of Shortening and Edible Oils

International Bottled Water Association

International Dairy Foods Association

International Food Additives Council

Juice Products Association

Kitchen Cabinet Manufacturers Association

Napthalene Council

National Association of Chemical Distributors National Association of Convenience Stores

National Association of Manufacturers

National Candle Association

National Cattlemen’s Beef Association

National Corn Growers Association

National Cotton Council

National Council of Farmer Cooperatives

National Council of Textile Organizations

National Grocers Association

National Milk Producers Federation

National Pork Producers Council

National Potato Council

National Retail Federation

National Sunflower Association

Natural Products Association

Outdoor Power Equipment Institute, Inc.

Pavement Coatings Technology Council

Plastics Industry Association

Plastic Pipe and Fittings Association

Plastics Pipe Institute

PVC Pipe Association

Resilient Floor Covering Institute

Retail Industry Leaders Association

Roof Coatings Manufacturers Association

Simmons Wood Products, Inc.

Single Ply Roofing Industry, Inc.

SNAC International

Specialty Graphic Imaging Association

Sugar Association

The Chlorine Institute

The Vision Council

Travel Goods Association

Treated Wood Council

United Fresh Produce Association

U.S. Canola Association

U.S. Chamber of Commerce

Vinyl Institute

Western Growers Association

Gemini Shippers Group ; Gemini Shippers Association, Fashion Accessories Shipper Association (FASA)  and the Fashion Jewelry and Accessories Trade Association (FJATA) joined other trade association in a letter to Ambassador Lighthizer in support of India GSP

April 12, 2019
The Honorable Robert Lighthizer
United States Trade Representative
600 17th Street, NW
Washington, DC 20508

Dear Mr. Ambassador:

We are writing today regarding the Administration’s recent decision to terminate
Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) benefits with respect to U.S. imports from India.
Like you, we strongly support U.S. jobs that rely on two‐way trade. We recognize that
your decision with respect to India is intended to support U.S. export‐related jobs by
encouraging India to undertake market access reforms and other commitments that will open
opportunities for U.S. firms. We agree that all countries, including India, should do more to
open their markets to U.S. goods and services.
However, we fear that GSP revocation or suspension in the middle of the Indian
elections will not achieve its intended goal of applying pressure for reform. Rather, it is likely to
exacerbate political differences over trade issues, trigger retaliatory actions by the government
of India, and undermine the business climate for U.S. businesses trading with and doing
business in India.
At the same time, withdrawal of India’s GSP status will have an adverse impact on many
U.S. workers who now depend on global value chains that use imports from India. The ability to
import items on a duty‐free basis, including inputs used for manufacturing in the U S., means
U.S. companies can invest those tariff savings into U.S. jobs or pass them along to U.S.
consumers.
Finally, this action seems to disregard the way in which this program helps lift hundreds
of millions of people out of extreme poverty, as we have witnessed since its inception in 1974.
In fact, Congress prioritized this development imperative, as the original intent of GSP was to
“further…the economic development of developing countries through the expansion of their
exports” and years later in its renewal remained “to assist their economic development and
diversification through preferential market access.”
It is our hope that we can still support U.S. jobs on both sides of the trade ledger by
preserving India’s GSP status AND continuing negotiations past the 60‐day window triggered by
the White House’s March 4 notice of its intent to terminate India’s GSP benefits.
2
Therefore, we urge that any final revocation or suspension be deferred for at least 60
days to allow the new government to appoint officials to engage in bilateral negotiations. Such
a move would preserve those jobs that currently depend on U.S.‐Indian trade while producing
an action‐forcing event that will afford a further opportunity to address the trade issues that
led to this decision.

Sincerely,
American Apparel & Footwear Association (AAFA)
American Association of Exporters and Importers (AAEI)
American Association of Port Authorities (AAPA)
Association of Food Industries
Coalition for GSP
CONECT ‐ Coalition of New England Companies for Trade
Council of Fashion Designers of America (CFDA)
Fashion Accessories Shippers Association (FASA)
Fashion Jewelry and Accessories Trade Association (FJATA)
Footwear Distributors and Retailers of America (FDRA)
Gemini Shippers Association
Halloween Industry Association, Inc. (HIA)
Juvenile Products Manufacturers Association (JPMA)
National Association of Chemical Distributors (NACD)
National Retail Federation (NRF)
The Oriental Rug Importers Association, Inc.
Outdoor Industry Association (OIA)
Promotional Products Association International (PPAI)
Retail Industry Leaders Association (RILA)
Sports & Fitness Industry Association (SFIA)
The Accessories Council
Travel Goods Association (TGA)
U.S. Chamber of Commerce
U.S.‐India Business Council
U.S. Fashion Industry Association (USFIA)
U.S. Global Value Chain Coalition (USGVC)