On October 13, President Biden issued a Fact Sheet entitled Biden Administration Efforts to Address Bottlenecks at Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, Moving Goods from Ship to Shelf to help address the “delays and congestion” across the transportation supply chain. As has been widely reported in recent weeks and months, the global supply chain has been hard hit by large increases in e-commerce and delays and shutdowns implemented to curb the spread of COVID-19. The release confirms public and private commitments to move goods more quickly and to secure the resiliency of American and global supply chains. To do so, the Biden Administration is focusing on the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, which act as the ports of entry to the United States for 40% of containers received. The President, together with leadership from these ports, are undertaking a series of public and private commitments as noted below.
Continue Reading Biden Administration Works with Industry Stakeholders to Address Supply Chain Delays at the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach

On October 4, 2021, United States Trade Representative (USTR) Katherine Tai delivered a speech at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) detailing the Biden Administration’s new strategy for managing U.S.-China trade relations. Tai announced that the USTR will restart a targeted tariff exclusion process for Section 301 duties. Today (October 6) the USTR published a request for comments regarding possible reinstatement of certain exclusions to the Section 301 tariffs visible here. The exclusion process covers 549 products for which the prior Administration granted exclusion extensions, most of which expired on December 31, 2020.  See here for the list of covered products   The USTR is seeking public comments on whether or not to further extend the exclusion from 301 tariffs on these products.  The comment period opens October 12 and closes December 1 and 11:59 PM EST and can be accessed here.

The factors the USTR will consider in deciding whether or not to extend exclusions are similar to those considered in the prior Administration, including:

  1. whether the particular product is available in the United States or other countries;
  2. how changes in the global supply chain since September 2018 or any other relevant industry developments have impacted product availability;
  3. the efforts the importers or U.S. purchases have undertaken since September 2018 to source the product from the U.S. or other countries; and
  4. domestic capacity for production in the United States.

The USTR is also considering additional criteria for granting exclusions, such as whether or not reinstating the exclusion will impact or result in severe economic harm to the commenter or to other U.S. interests, such as small businesses, employment, manufacturing, or critical supply chains. It remains to be seen if other criteria, possibly relevant to broader administration goals such as promoting efforts to advance climate change, might also be considered.

If the USTR reinstates exclusions, then such exclusions would be reinstated retroactively. Importers may seek 301 duty refunds on all subject entries that are not “liquidated” by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) at the time the importer makes a claim for a refund with CBP.  CBP typically liquidates an entry 314 days after entry, so the sooner importers file for and receive an exclusion extension the greater the potential duty refunds.
Continue Reading U.S.-China Trade: USTR Restarts Tariff Exclusion Process for Section 301 Duties

On August 20, 2021, China’s national legislature passed the Personal Information Protection Law (“PIPL”), which will become effective on November 1, 2021. As China’s first comprehensive system for protecting personal information, the PIPL is an extension of the personal information and privacy rights enshrined in China’s Civil Code, and also a crucial element of a set of recent laws in China that seek to strengthen data security and privacy. Among other things, the PIPL sets out general rules for processing and cross-border transfer of personal information. A number of provisions, notably various obligations imposed on data processors, restrictions on cross-border transfer, and hefty fines, will have significant impact on multinational corporations’ HR activities, including recruitment, performance monitoring, cross-border transfers, compliance investigations, termination of employment relationships, and background checks.

This alert will highlight specifically how the PIPL will apply to workplace scenarios in China and provide suggestions to help ensure data privacy compliance for multinational corporations’ China labor and employment operations.

Employee Consent and Exceptions to Consent

Under Article 4 of the PIPL, “personal information” is defined broadly as information related to natural persons recorded electronically or by other means that has been used or can be used to identify such natural persons, excluding information that has been anonymized. Specific types of personal information have been noted for additional protection under Article 28 of the PIPL as “sensitive personal information”. Sensitive personal information is defined under the law as personal information that is likely to result in damage to the personal dignity, physical wellbeing or property of any natural person, and includes, among others, information such as biometric identification, religious belief, special identity, medical health, financial account, physical location tracking and whereabouts, and personal information of those under the age of 14.
Continue Reading Employee Personal Information Protection in China – Are You Up to Speed?

Continue Reading UK and Canada Announce New Measures to Combat Forced Labor and Human Rights Violations

The United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) came into force on July 1, 2020. Included in the USMCA are stronger labor provisions Congressional Democrats demanded, with the support of the Trump Administration, that were approved on a bipartisan basis during consideration of the USMCA implementing legislation in late 2019. The stronger labor provisions helped secure the support

A proposed law issued by the People’s Republic of China (PRC) on October 21, 2020, the draft Personal Information Protection Law, seeks to impose restrictions on entities and individuals, including those operating outside of China, that collect and process personal data and sensitive information on subjects in China. The proposed law also provides for penalties

For the first time in nearly two decades, China is revamping its export control regime and issuing its first unified Export Control Law, which combines concepts from more than a dozen existing Chinese laws and related regulations. This alert summarizes the most significant changes from current Chinese export control practice, highlights what may be

Global Trade Talks is a podcast that shares brief perspectives on key global issues on international trade, current events, business, law and public policy as they impact our lives.

In the latest episode, hosts Nicole Simonian and Ambassador Robert Holleyman interview Fred Hochberg, former Chairman and President of the Export-Import Bank of the United States.

U.S.-China trade relations and economic policy are highly politicized within the United States, and are key issues in the campaigns of both President Donald Trump and the Democratic nominee, former Vice President Joe Biden. A theme has emerged in the campaign messaging battles, with neither candidate ceding any ground on their “tough on China” bona fides. But as divergent as Trump and Biden are on many policy issues, when it comes to China and trade, there is some overlap between Trump’s executive actions and Biden’s campaign agenda.

Aggressive U.S. policymaking to call-out and sanction interests within China has strong bipartisan support among Washington officials. The expansion of national security laws in Hong Kong, the treatment of the Uyghurs in Xinjiang, China’s trade practices and industrial policies, the COVID-19 pandemic, and South China Sea have all converged to put China into the spotlight of the U.S. elections, even more so than in 2016. It can be expected that a challenging U.S.-China relationship will continue regardless of who wins the White House in November. For global businesses, these growing geopolitical and regulatory challenges do not present a static ‘new normal’ to adjust to, but rather an increasingly dynamic environment, requiring more nimble and proactive strategic planning, sourcing, policy, and compliance efforts.Continue Reading Election 2020: U.S.-China Tensions Will Remain Regardless of Who Wins the White House

The new United States Mexico Canada Agreement (USMCA), which replaced the 1994 North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), became effective on July 1, 2020. Historically, free trade agreements like the NAFTA have been criticized for their lack of strong labor provisions to address low wages and inadequate labor standards that advocates argue support worker rights and improve economic growth in developing countries. The USMCA seeks to address those concerns. In fact, as a precondition to the passage of the USMCA, the U.S. Congress reopened the negotiations at the end of 2019 and amended the agreement to bolster Mexican workers’ rights and to include stronger enforcement provisions like the Rapid Response Mechanism to hold companies in Mexico accountable for violating the rights of free association and collective bargaining.

What is the Rapid Response Mechanism?

The Rapid Response Mechanism is perhaps the most novel aspect of the labor provisions of the USMCA. It applies between the U.S. and Mexico, and between Canada and Mexico, but not between the U.S. and Canada. Within the U.S., the Rapid Response Mechanism can be triggered when any person in the U.S. files a petition claiming the “denial of rights” at a “covered facility” in a “priority sector” in Mexico to the Interagency Labor Committee for Monitoring and Enforcement (“Interagency Labor Committee”), co-chaired by the U.S. Trade Representative and the Secretary of Labor. The Interagency Labor Committee can request that Mexico conduct a review to determine whether there is indeed a denial of rights, or. If Mexico does not agree to conduct a review, the Interagency Labor Committee may request a panel to be convened to conduct its own verification under the USMCA.Continue Reading Labor Provisions of the USMCA: What Multinational Employers Should Know