Repealing Outdated and Unilateral Tariff Authorities Act
- Sponsor
- Rep. Schneider, Bradley Scott [D-IL-10]
- Committees
- Ways and Means Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Mar 27, 2025
Bottom line
This bill aims to eliminate a long-standing presidential authority to impose retaliatory tariffs against countries deemed to be discriminating against U.S. trade, shifting towards potentially more multilateral approaches.
What it actually does
This bill proposes to repeal Section 338 of the Tariff Act of 1930, which grants the President authority to impose retaliatory tariffs and other restrictions on imports from countries that discriminate against U.S. commerce. The repeal would remove this specific statutory tool for unilateral trade enforcement from the President's toolkit.
Proponents argue
Supporters argue that Section 338 is an outdated and potentially counterproductive tool that can escalate trade disputes, harm domestic consumers and businesses through higher import costs, and undermine multilateral trade agreements. They contend that modern trade challenges are better addressed through international cooperation and established dispute resolution mechanisms rather than unilateral actions that can lead to trade wars.
Opponents contend
Opponents would likely argue that Section 338 provides crucial leverage for the U.S. to protect its economic interests and respond swiftly to unfair trade practices by other nations. They might assert that removing this authority would weaken the President's ability to defend American industries and workers against discriminatory foreign policies, potentially leading to a less level playing field for U.S. businesses abroad.
The bill text is exceptionally brief and easy to understand, allowing for quick comprehension of its direct impact.
Section 2
Repeal of Section 338 of the Tariff Act of 1930
This section explicitly repeals Section 338 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1338), which currently grants the President the power to impose additional duties or other restrictions on imports from countries found to be discriminating against U.S. commerce. The repeal would remove this specific statutory authority for the President to take unilateral retaliatory trade actions, thereby altering the U.S.'s approach to addressing foreign trade discrimination.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that repealing this section would encourage more collaborative and rules-based approaches to resolving trade disputes, aligning U.S. trade policy more closely with multilateral frameworks like the WTO. They believe it would reduce the likelihood of tit-for-tat tariff wars that can harm global supply chains and domestic consumers.
Critics contend
Opponents contend that Section 338 is a vital tool for the President to respond swiftly and decisively to unfair trade practices that harm American businesses and workers. They argue that its repeal would disarm the U.S. in critical trade negotiations and leave American industries vulnerable to discriminatory actions by foreign governments without an effective immediate recourse.
Tradeoffs
The provision highlights a tension between unilateral trade enforcement as a means of national leverage and a preference for multilateral, rules-based approaches to global trade. It trades the potential for swift, independent action for a greater reliance on international consensus and established dispute resolution processes.