On Tuesday, January 28, I was invited by Joseph Profaci, Executive Director of the North American Olive Oil Association to join him, Bob Bauer, President of the Association of Food Industries and Mouna Aissaoui from Pompeian and Roger Murry from Akin Gump, met with the staff of several congressional offices. The purpose of our meetings was two-fold: to urge Congress i) to weigh-in and persuade USTR that olive oil should not be on the tariffs lists at all—and that in any case the olive oil tariffs should not be increased either in rate or in applicability (i.e., to bulk oils or oils from other countries) and ii) to pass legislation to provide refunds of duties for product that were on the water when the tariffs were published. In addition I asserted that small importers of wine, olive oil and specialty foods are suffering the brunt of the current tariffs and their businesses will cease to exist with the proposed tariffs of 100% as well as the tsunami wave effects of the tariffs across the US trade industries of wine, olive oil and specialty foods. We also asked that these items be removed from the carousel of every 120 days a new set of items are placed on the tariff list.
I came away with the impression that none of the staffers felt they could sway USTR’s decision to include or exclude anything on the list, although a couple said that they would try to call USTR to urge the removal of olive oil. But there seemed fairly unanimous support for the “goods-on-the-water” reimbursement bill.
It is important to note that in one of the meetings, the staffer from Senator Grassley’s office stated that he had met with USTR staff earlier in the day. He reported that it seems almost definite that USTR will issue an announcement on next steps on February 15. We pressed him for details, but he had nothing to share, except to say that it was his impression that the revised list would have more of an impact directly on Airbus than the first list. He also told us that he had asked USTR whether this time they would give advanced notice of the tariffs to avoid the unfairness of what happened in October, and they told him they did not plan to give additional notice.
Therefore, to the extent feasible, any importers with products on the current or proposed list should avoid shipping any product at this point that will not arrive by February 15th. If that is not possible and such shipments could be adversely impacted by the February 15 announcement. There is no exception for “On the Water Imports” with the EU tariffs, as there was for the Chinese Tariffs.
But listed in the Review of action in December were the following items and their associated HTS codes: These would be AirBus Parts imported to the AirBus assembly facility in Mobile, Alabama. I don’t wish anyone to have to deal with these tariffs, but THIS would be appropriate action of tariffs directed to the entity that has received the subsidies.
HTS statistical reporting No. Product description
8802.11.0030 New helicopters, non-military, of an unladen weight not exceeding 998 kg.
8802.11.0045 New helicopters, non-military, of an unladen weight exceeding 998 kg but not exceeding 2,000 kg.
8802.12.0040 New helicopters, non-military, of an unladen weight exceeding 2,000 kg.
8802.40.0040 * New aircraft, passenger transports, non-military, of an unladen weight exceeding 15,000 kg but less than or equal to 30,000 kg.
8802.40.0060 * New aircraft, cargo transports, non-military, of an unladen weight exceeding 15,000 kg but less than or equal to 30,000 kg.
8802.40.0070 * New aircraft, non-military, nesoi (including passenger/cargo combinations), of an unladen weight exceeding 15,000 kg but less than or equal to 30,000 kg.
8803.20.0030 * Undercarriages and parts thereof for use in new civil aircraft, not for use by the Department of Defense or the U.S. Coast Guard, of an unladen weight exceeding 15,000 kg provided for in statistical reporting numbers 8802.40.0040, 8802.40.0060 and 8802.40.0070.
8803.30.0030 * Fuselages and fuselage sections, predominantly aluminum wings and wing assemblies, and horizontal and vertical stabilizers for use in new civil airplanes, not for use by the Department of Defense or the U.S. Coast Guard, of an unladen weight exceeding 15,000 kg provided for in statistical reporting numbers 8802.40.0040, 8802.40.0060 and 8802.40.0070.
8803.90.9030 * Other parts, nesoi, for use in new civil aircraft, not for use by the Department of Defense or the U.S. Coast Guard, of an unladen weight exceeding 15,000 kg provided for in statistical reporting numbers 8802.40.0040, 8802.40.0060 and 8802.40.0070.
It’s worth noting that the December 12 Federal Register notice has the potentially affected HTS codes broken up into 16 (I think that’s the number) separate sections in Annex II. These are the products not yet subject to additional tariffs. It leaves a sliver of hope that not all the sections will be enacted.
Of course when they originally implemented the Airbus tariffs they whacked everything in every section.
Nola, can you share with us the argument for treating olive oil differently than other specialty food products? I mean, I suspect we are all 100% with you on the profound unfairness of this tariff regime, but why olive oil and not, say, cheese?
Understood. I am just trying to understand if there is a product-specific reason that applies for olive oil that doesn’t to other things (Nola said she was trying to “persuade USTR that olive oil should not be on the tariffs lists at all”)
The only "product specific reason they had for Olive Oil is that is considered a Healthy Food. The USTR choose not to tariff medications or medical devices imported because the “Health” of the nation would suffer. I was asked to join this team because of the uniqueness of my situation and that I am such a small importer that the effects of the tariffs could be (correction) is devastating for me.
