By Land and By Sea
By Land and By Sea
S3.E14 - USTR initiates a section 301 investigation into China (maritime, logistics, and shipbuilding sectors)
Topic of the Week (5/3/24):
USTR officially launched a section 301 investigation into China's Acts, Policies, and Practices Targeting the Maritime, Logistics, and Shipbuilding Sectors for Dominance - what does this mean? We'll discuss...
Office of the U.S. Trade Representative Section 301 China Investigation:
https://ustr.gov/issue-areas/enforcement/section-301-investigations/section-301-china-targeting-maritime-logistics-and-shipbuilding-sectors-dominance
To submit comments or request to appear at the hearing:
https://comments.ustr.gov/s/
The Maritime Professorᵀᴹ presents By Land and By Sea - an attorney breaking down the week in supply chain
with Lauren Beagen (Founder of The Maritime Professorᵀᴹ and Squall Strategiesᵀᴹ)
Let's dive in...
1 - Federal Maritime Commission and Maritime Administration (MARAD) appeared before the U.S. House of Representatives T&I Subcommittee.
https://transportation.house.gov/calendar/eventsingle.aspx?EventID=407402&utm_campaign=197798-345
2 - FLOW: Freight Logistics Optimization Works has named an Executive Board (and an quick overview of FLOW)
https://www.transportation.gov/mission/office-secretary/office-policy/freight/freight-infrastructure-and-policy/freight-logistics
3 - USTR has initiated a section 301 investigation into China's alleged targeting of maritime, logistics, and shipbuilding sectors dominance.
-------------------------------
The Maritime Professorᵀᴹ is an e-learning/educational based company on all things maritime and supply chain - we provide employee trainings, e-content/e-courses, general trainings/webinars, and executive recruiting. Make sure to sign up for the email list so that you will be alerted to when the e-learning content is available, but also, being on the email list will give you exclusive access to promo/discount codes!
Sign up for our email list at https://lnkd.in/eqfZJShQ
Look for our podcast episodes - NOW AVAILABLE:
https://lnkd.in/g4YUbxjs
** As always the guidance here is general and for educational purposes only, it should not be construed to be legal advice and there is no attorney-client privilege created by this video or podcast. If you need an attorney, contact an attorney. **
#ByLandAndBySea
oh, I got soul coming through, flying free skies. I got soul coming through, won't stop in the peace and on top of the world Catwalk to the beat when you see me coming next. Oh, everywhere I go, I'm in the spotlight. This is a good night. Oh, I'm living for it. This is what it looks like. I'm a victim of the world.
Speaker 1:The United States Trade Representative, ustr, has initiated an investigation into China's acts, policies and practices targeting the maritime logistics, targeting the maritime logistics and shipbuilding sectors for dominance. So what does all this mean and how can you actually share your voice? Do you have thoughts on this? Maybe you do. There's an engagement piece here. We're going to talk all about it today.
Speaker 1:Hi, welcome to, by Land and by Scene, an attorney breaking down the weakened supply chain presented by the Maritime Professor me. I'm Lauren Began, founder of Maritime Professor and Squall Strategies. I'm your favorite maritime attorney. Join me every week as we walk through both ocean transport and surface transport topics and the wild world of supply chain. As always, the guidance here is general and for educational purposes only. It should not be considered to be legal advice and there is no attorney client privilege created by this video or this podcast. If you need an attorney, contact an attorney. But before we get into the discussion of the day, let's go through my top three stories of the week. All right, story number one.
Speaker 1:So this week the Federal Maritime Commission Chairman Dan Maffei, spoke in front of the Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation, which is a subcommittee of the House, tni, so the House Representatives Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. It was their budget justification hearing. He appeared with Admiral Phillips from the maritime administrator from MARAD. So Chairman Maffei gave some pretty good overviews. Look, if you listen to this podcast, you pretty much know what the FMC is up to right. But there are a few notable things that I want to bring up. And one notable piece of information that he gave was related to the rulemakings and specifically the rulemaking on unreasonable refusal to deal and negotiate with respect to vessel space accommodations with respect to vessel space accommodations. So I'm going to be reading right off his testimony that was posted. There's going to be a link to it in the show notes here, but there was some pretty interesting stuff. So he said this is reading off his testimony.
Speaker 1:I anticipate that there will be an announcement on unreasonable or physical deal within the next few months and one on shipping exchange registries by the end of the calendar year. Parts of the rulemaking on unfair or unjustly discriminatory methods, specifically the provision prohibiting carriers from unreasonably denying space accommodations to US exports, will be incorporated into the rulemaking on unreasonable or feasible to deal. That's that little piece that I keep talking about. They're folding in some of this unfair or unjustly discriminatory methods definitions into the unreasonable or feasible to deal. That's what he's talking about. He continues the remaining areas not included in that rule will be addressed in a separate rulemaking. So that's the unfair and just the discriminatory methods. They're folding part of it in, but the parts that they're not folding in are going to be in their own standalone rulemaking.
Speaker 1:No real indication on when that standalone rulemaking might come out. Sounds like probably not this year, maybe this year, but probably not this year. They're focused on the unreasonable refusal to negotiate, saying within the next few months. And then the shipping exchange registries, the assignment tasking, I guess, by Congress trying to figure out how to say it best, by the end of the year. So he continued on a little later. I thought that that was at least interesting, saying you know next few months. We've been kind of saying that, that I thought that they were going to try to get that out before the two-year mark. Next few months doesn't necessarily put us before June 16th, with it being May 3rd today, put us before June 16th, with it being May 3rd today. So we'll see that I mean maybe July, hopefully before the end of summer.
Speaker 1:He continued on a little later, though, saying further. The commission is using its audit program to engage the nine largest by volume ocean carriers, calling the Port of Baltimore to remind them of their responsibilities and obligations in adjusting their operations. We are scrupulously examining fees and surcharges implemented following the disruptions that have taken place resulting from the events in Baltimore, panama and the Gulf of Aden and Red Sea region to ensure they comport with the law. Our Office of Consumer Affairs and Dispute Resolution Services is prepared to help informally resolve issues shippers are having resulting from these disruptions. Our Bureau of Enforcement Investigations and Compliance, beic, will pursue any substantive allegations of misconduct and the Bureau of Trade Analysis continues with its review of carrier conduct and marketplace conditions.
Speaker 1:So they had the Federal Management Commission had released a few like don't forget, the Shipping Act is still at play on a few of these disruptions that were happening. Specifically, they had a hearing on the Gulf of Aden and the Red Sea disruptions and it had to do with some of their emergency provisions of changes to tariffs and essentially they were kind of just reminding the whole global ocean shipping world. They weren't necessarily only talking to the carriers, they were talking to everybody saying, look, we're still paying attention, you still have to play fair, but we understand that things are a little bit difficult out there. One thing that came, I thought, from the hearing the Red Sea hearing and the Gulf of Aden hearing was that shippers seem to understand that they and this is something that Chairman Maffei actually mentioned in the hearing as well shippers seem to understand that there might be increased costs. They just want some visibility into what those increased costs are either going toward or what they're for or how they will be applied. A little bit of a breakdown If it's extra fuel. If it's extra, you know if you're saving money on not going through the Suez but then you're having to pay extra fuel going around. That was some of the things. Those are some of the things that I remember from the hearing that Chairman Maffei kind of harkened back to when he was talking about this provision. But this was just his opening testimony. Another interesting point that he made was this. I'm going to read off of his testimony again Global trade on our oceans continues to grow, nonetheless.
Speaker 1:Shifting ocean carrier alliances, international emissions regulations, changes in the geography of supply chain, sourcing and geopolitical developments all will affect ocean-borne commerce. A capable, well-resourced Federal Maritime Commission is necessary to guarantee US companies and consumers have access to reliable, efficient and affordable ocean transportation services for both import and export trades. So remember, this hearing is for the budget justification. So they're requesting their budget and they're kind of singing for their supper here. So they want to make sure that they are showcasing their effectiveness but then also saying, look, we need funding for this. So he continues on.
Speaker 1:That said, there is no desire, at least not on my part, to put the commission on a path where it seeks continuous growth and additional jurisdiction. The commission has had to grow to meet the vision of Congress and be a potent regulator of international ocean transportation. That growth was reflected in OSRA 22, and the FMC's budget requests have followed the budget and staff trajectories included in that legislation staff trajectories included in that legislation. If the Congress does decide to give us additional qualitative responsibilities, I only ask that you give us the additional resources to fulfill those new demands or understand when implementation is delayed or when other vital capabilities are cut. The commission is requesting $48,452,000 to fund its fiscal year 2025 operation. So $48 million is what they're requesting and Chairman Maffei is saying look, we are maxed out. If you want us to do more, we need more funding.
Speaker 1:$48 million, I mean some agencies, a lot of agencies, give that money out as grant money. More than $48 million is doled out in grant money than the FMC uses to be the independent regulator for all things ocean transport for the benefit of the US importer, exporter and consumer. I mean, they're a trade competition authority for ocean shipping for the US and they're're working on 48 million as their overall budget and that's wild. Right, and we've talked about this before. They used to be about 120 people. They're, I think, trying to get up to about 150, 160, 160 people. But that has to include everybody, right? That has to include administrative positions. Not everybody is going to be subject matter specific, right? You still have to run the agency. So 150 maybe people working to cover 90% of everything that moves by ocean transit. It's wild.
Speaker 1:I'm happy to see that Congress is paying attention to the FMC in that they seem to be supportive of the FMC. Certainly, they're giving them things to do through ASRA, but I definitely echo Chairman Maffei here in that if the FMC is going to be asked to be doing more things, they're going to need support by way of funding, and I know there's only so much money to go around. But look, the FMC is a very important agency, whether people realize that or not I think now they do. Whether people realize that or not doesn't really matter. It still remains a very important agency and one that should be funded, probably more than the 48 point, almost five, 48 point, almost five million, uh, that they're they're requesting and, um, I just I don't know, I I think for the amount of coverage that their subject matter uh covers with shipping act, it's just wild that it's 48 million.
Speaker 1:So one last point that I wanted to highlight, um, where he said he talked about the incentive principle a little bit, which I thought was an interesting little quip here. So it he said we continue to elaborate on the incentive principle interpretive rule in the manner prescribed by Congress. The incentive principle rule, authored by Commissioner Rebecca Dye and approved unanimously by the FMC in spring 2020, I believe it was May 18th 2020, established that for a detention or demurrage charge to be reasonable, established that for a detention or demurrage charge to be reasonable, it must help promote the efficient movement of cargo and or equipment and not be for some other purpose. So that's the incentive principle. He recounted or recalled what the incentive principle was. So interesting, right, I mean. So. Perhaps he highlighted that because the FMC actually received a little bit of a pushback from some members of Congress saying that the FMC is applying the incentive principle perhaps a little incorrectly, or certainly that the congressman that wrote the letter said that they thought that they were applying it incorrectly, saying that MTOs charging D&D detention uh, detention, demurrage on holidays or weekends is. This is what the congressional letter basically said I'm kind of paraphrasing saying that the charging of D&D on holiday and weekends is in line with the incentive principle, although, uh, the FMC, through an informal case, the Evergreen case said and they even made an announcement about it said that the case, in that case, the holidays and weekends when you charge detention to merge for holidays and weekends, it goes against the incentive principle because of the impossibility of pickup due to terminal closure. The argument made in that congressional letter was basically saying, look, because we might charge. Over the weekend we see an increase in compliance and people trying to rush to get their goods, their containers, picked up before the weekend or certainly a holiday weekend, because they know that there's going to be three days that they're going to get charged for. But the FMC's point is yeah, but those three days nobody can pick up, so why are you charging for something? So it remains to be seen what will happen with that discussion in the long term, but for right now it seems like Chairman Maffei is kind of doubling down saying look, this incentive principle was established for a detention to merge charge to be reasonable. It must help promote the efficient movement of cargo and or equipment and not be for some other purpose. The Evergreen case, I believe. I haven't checked in a while but I believe it's on appeal, everything's on appeal, right. So that might still be in the works, but the FNC even made like an announcement about it and that's a rare thing that they make an announcement about one of their cases, certainly an informal case, and I believe it was over 500 bucks, so interesting. I think we're going to see the incentive principle come back up again in conversation. But I thought that that was. It was just. It struck me as interesting that he brought that up because of the conversation that had happened over the fall, I guess was when that letter came in and kind of early winter. So just a little roundup of where we are, and this is still just story number one.
Speaker 1:The FMC is working through the three rulemakings and the one RFI request for information that they were directed to undertake by the Ocean Shiproom Form Act and certainly through their work with the MTDI. So the open rulemakings are. We obviously know the billing practices of detention and demurrage that one's out, that one goes into effect May 28th. There is a pending petition. Looks like movement and filings are going to start around May 20th. So we might get some clarity on whether that petition is going to have any effect on the effective date. But as of right now looks like the petition dates are like May 20th, the effective date of that rule, except for the contents of the invoice. But the effective date of that rule is May 28th, so eight days later. So we'll probably see something out of the court around the 20th. We'll see. I don't think as of right now the FNC has not made any indication that anything is changing. He even brought up that petition and didn't say anything about that having any effect yet on the rulemaking. So May 28th is still the date.
Speaker 1:The other open rulemakings that we have the defining unreasonable refusal to deal or negotiate with respect to vessel space accommodations provided by an ocean common carrier we just talked about that one. He said a few more months maybe. Ocean Common Carrier we just talked about that one. He said a few more months maybe. And then the Defining Unfair and Justly Discriminatory Methods still waiting on that language, even though they're folding some of it into that unreasonable refusal.
Speaker 1:And then the RFI is out for the Maritime Transportation Data Initiative. Go, take a look. It's pretty interesting. It's very operational on data exchanges. Remember, if you're going to be filing comments on that, keep it general enough that you're not mentioning specific companies or specific instances. Keep it kind of trends. That's going to be the most helpful, and I mean not legal advice, but hopefully keep you out of trouble, right? If you keep it in kind of a trend conversation. I mean, they want specifics but they don't want business name level specifics. So yeah, take a look. There's some guidance on that. And again, that's not legal advice directly related to your matter. But take a look at the request for information out of the Maritime Transportation Data Initiative.
Speaker 1:All right, story number two. So this week, flow it's a program under the department of transportation, flow announced that it is named a 2024 flow executive board to help guide the overall progress and direction of flow. Um, I think that's kind of cool they're. They're kind of giving the uh, the reins to the industry, uh, which I mean, ultimately, that's kind of what the program is, right. But, um, so some of the companies representative in the executive board are CH Robinson Robinson. So some of the companies representative in the executive board are CH Robinson, land, o'lakes, hoppike, lloyd, home Depot, dollar General, true Value, msc, ups, dcli, ralph Lauren, road, one, target, I mean CMA, cgm. You got some big names right working on this executive board. So that's kind of cool. To see just the range, it's quite a big executive board 26, 19, 12, 13, 15, 16, 17, 20. So 20 people are on this board. I just had to count real quick.
Speaker 1:So look, we've talked about FLO before, but I thought it might be a good time actually just to make sure that everybody's on the same page, right? So what is FLO? So FLO the acronym it's actually an acronym stands for Freight Logistics Optimization Works and what it does, and this is from the website, from the Department of Transportation's website. Flo program collects purchase order information from importers in addition to logistics, supply, demand and throughput data from participants For example, beneficial cargo owners, ocean carriers, ports, terminals, railways and the Bureau of Transportation Statistics anonymizes regionally, segments and aggregates the data. So they put all that data kind of into this system, but they make sure that it's all anonymous. So there aren't any secret business data being shared, right, but they're trying to look for those trends.
Speaker 1:So what it says is participants can then receive or view flow data providing a broad, daily view of the current conditions of the overall logistics network beyond what they might observe within their own operations. Because, right, you're taking from a larger swath of data through these purchase order informations. So I mean pretty interesting, right, I mean it's a pretty interesting idea. So it says the benefits of flow data Participants use flow data to develop more responsive operation strategies to improve their supply chain throughput and resilience, because importer purchase orders drive the demand for logistics services. Aggregating future demand data for example, purchase orders, incoming container volumes, origin and or destination regions, coupled with regional supply and throughput data across different transportation modes ocean, truck and rail enables participants to forecast how current capacity and throughput will fare against the future demand. Participants then use the insight to optimize operations and ensure healthy throughput. It really is kind of an interesting idea. I mean I keep saying interesting, but it really is a fascinating thing that they are looking at these trends right and trying to future create future demand forecasts and and looking to, like they say, optimize operations and ensure healthy throughput. Uh, if, if you can get a handle on the movement of goods, you can hopefully position things correctly. I think is the perhaps one of the benefits here. So it also says by sharing aggregated regional data from multiple participants, flow provides a broad and timely level of transparency beyond the visibility and scope of any single company's operations. Participants can use this data to better understand how regional logistics capacity can serve as current and future demand, as well as how demand fluctuations may impact their own utilization of assets and logistics throughput. That's right. That's what I was saying about the repositioning of things. Because demand data is shared in advance of when respective logistics services would be required, supply-side optimizations, such as modifying supply capacity levels, service level mixes and service expectations, can be made by participants in a more proactive and responsive manner. This in turn can help the industry mitigate bottlenecks and service level volatility. So that's what Flow is and, like I said, they just named an executive board. So we'll see how the executive board specifically helps guide, as they say, the overall progress and direction of flow. So pretty cool, pretty interesting.
Speaker 1:So story number three is actually that the United States Trade Representative initiated a Section 301 investigation, which is also our topic of the day. So let's get right into it, let's get into the meat and potatoes of the day, all right. So USTR, like I said, initiated a Section 301 investigation on April 17th. So recall that we talked a little bit about this as a possibility when I first brought up the United Steelworkers Union and actually other labor unions, five in total, filing a Section 301 petition at the USTR, calling on the United States Trade Representative to initiate an investigation of Chinese commercial shipbuilding, among other things. Right, and I keep calling this the steel workers petition. But there were actually five petitioners in total, five labor unions here. So they were. The five petitioners are the United Steel, paper and Forestry, rubber Manufacturing, Energy, allied Industrial and Service Workers International Union, the AFL, cio, clc, the international brotherhood of electrical workers, the international brotherhood of boiler makers, iron ship builders, blacksmiths, foragers and helpers, afl, cio, clc, ibb, the international associations of machinists and Aerospace Workers, iam and the Maritime Trades Department of the AFL-CIO-MTD. So those are the five unions, but I just kind of call it the steelworkers petition. But now you know, ustr summarized the petition as follows. So if you go and look at the Federal Register filing, they summarize the petition. I think they did it quite well so I'm just going to read it off.
Speaker 1:On March 12, 2024, five labor unions filed a Section 301 petition regarding the acts, policies and practices of China to dominate the maritime logistics and shipbuilding sector. The petition was filed pursuant to Section 302A1 of the Trade Act of 1974, requesting action pursuant to Section 302A1 of the Trade Act of 1974, requesting action pursuant to Section 301B. Petitioners allege that China targets the maritime logistics and shipbuilding sector for dominance and engages in a wide range of unreasonable or discriminatory acts, policies and practices that provide unfair advantages across maritime industries, such as shipbuilding, shipping and maritime equipment. So they said, this is including implementing this is what they're alleging that China's doing implementing industrial planning and policies that are designed to unfairly capture market share, distort global markets and advantage Chinese enterprises, directing mergers and anti-competitive activities, providing non-market advantages to Chinese firms to dominate key upstream inputs and technologies, providing advanced financial mechanisms advantaging Chinese industry, creating a Chinese network of upstream suppliers. I mean all of these things. They're basically just saying look, china is trying to unfairly discriminate here, right or unfairly distort the global market, tolerating intellectual property theft and industrials espionage and, they say, controlling shipping freight rates and capacity allocations. The petitioners also allege that China threatens to discriminate against US commerce and disrupt supply chains. So they say that these acts by China, these acts, policies and practices restrict US commerce by dramatically increasing China's shipbuilding excess capacity and global market share, artificially depressing prices, making it more difficult for US companies to compete. They impede US investment, production and employment. They reduce the number of US produced ships, providing unfair advantages and preferences that burden or restrict trade and inputs and burden or restrict trade opportunities for upstream inputs. So in addition, the petitioners assert that China threatens to undermine US national and economic security.
Speaker 1:So after the petition was filed so that's kind of the USCR version of the summary of what they said was in the petition. But after the petition was filed by the five labor unions, the steel workers petition, they were then joined by six US senators that signed a letter on April 10th supporting that petition. So those were and we've talked about this before but those six senators were Tammy Baldwin, a Democrat from Wisconsin, elizabeth Warren, democrat from Massachusetts, john Fetterman, a Democrat from Wisconsin, elizabeth Warren, democrat from Massachusetts, john Fetterman, a Democrat from Pennsylvania, bob Casey, also Democrat from Pennsylvania, sherrod Brown, democrat from Ohio, and Mazie Hirono, a Democrat from Hawaii. So once we saw the six senators, I thought you know, ustr is probably going to have to respond to this right, they're probably going to have to take some sort of note here on what's going on. And that's what they did. Not only did they not, they had 45 days to respond from the petition on whether they were going to initiate, and that's what they did.
Speaker 1:So in the Federal Register announcement which was posted on April 22nd, ustr said that, pursuant to Section 302 of the Trade Act, the US Trade Representative reviewed the allegations of the petition and, after receiving the advice of the Section 301 committee, the US Trade Rep determined to initiate an investigation regarding the issues raised in the petition. They said, in accordance with the Section 303A of the Trade Act, ustr is requesting consultations with the government of China. So they're already starting right. They're saying look, we've already reached out to the offending country, china, and we would like to consult with them. So they're saying the petitioners have requested a public hearing as well and so, in accordance with 302A4 and with the agreement of the petitioners, the Section 301 committee will hold a public hearing on this matter on May 29th 2024. So there's going to be a public hearing. Not only did they initiate the investigation, but there's going to be a public hearing so that they can talk about this more. So they also wanted to explain their authority to open the investigation. That's very routine, right? So USTR said that the Trade Act authorizes USTAR to initiate an investigation to determine whether an act, policy or practice of a foreign country is actionable under Section 301.
Speaker 1:Actionable matters under 301 include acts, policies and practices of a foreign country that are unreasonable or discriminatory and burden or restrict US commerce. So they just have to be unreasonable or discriminatory and burden or restrict US commerce. An act, policy or practice is unreasonable if, while not necessarily in violation of or inconsistent with the international legal rights of the US, it is otherwise unfair, inequitable. So they're saying it doesn't necessarily even have to be a legal violation or a violation of international legal rights. It can just be unfair and inequitable. So the statute provides that acts, policies and practices that are unreasonable include any act, policy or practice, or any combination of acts, policies and practices which constitutes export targeting. Export targeting means any government plan or scheme consisting of a combination of coordinated actions, whether carried out severally or jointly, that are bestowed upon a specific enterprise so like aimed at a specific industry or group thereof, the effect of which is to assist the enterprise, industry or group to become more competitive in the export of a class or kind of merchandise.
Speaker 1:This statute also provides that an act, policy or practice of a foreign country that burns or restrict US commerce may include the provision, directly or indirectly, by that foreign country, for the construction of vessels used in the commercial transportation of water by goods, that foreign country for the construction of vessels used in the commercial transportation of water by goods. It's a lot to say, but look, they're saying I hearken back to it when I paused on that they don't have to violate any law or restrict any rights, but if it's unjust or unfair that's what all this is saying. That's where USTR can determine if this is something that they should take action on and if they determine that they should take action, where USTR can determine if this is something that they should take action on. And if they determine that they should take action, then USTR will have to determine what action is appropriate. So now, what can you do? Right? So you want to kind of pay attention here. It looks like this is going to be something that might turn into. I mean, right, this is an election year, there's senators getting involved, there's a lot of anti-China rhetoric in this petition as it was submitted, there's going to be some public comments that you can submit if you'd like, right, so it's open for public comment right now. You can submit written comments on any issue covered by the investigation, but USTR put out some things that they specifically want to hear more about. Right, they have the petition from the five labor unions, they have the weigh-in from the senators, but also they would like to know do you have any other thoughts on these following things and I'm going to read them off again so that way you can start to think about do you have any thoughts on this? Is your industry specifically affected by any of this? So here they are.
Speaker 1:Ustr invites comments on China's acts, policies and practices targeting the maritime logistics and shipbuilding sectors for dominance, whether China's acts, practices and policies targeting maritime logistics shipbuilding sectors are unreasonable or discriminatory. China's efforts to dominate the global maritime logistics shipbuilding sectors, including the upstream and downstream supply chain, as well as shipping services. Information on other acts, policies and practices of China relating to maritime logistics and shipbuilding sectors, including political guidance, directives and control within state and private enterprises. Activities of state-owned or state-controlled enterprises. Market access and investment restrictions. Opaque regulatory preferences and discrimination. Wage-suppressing labor practices. State-supportive industry, including government guidance funds. Forced technology transfer, including state-sponsored cyber, theft of intellectual property or other means employed by China to achieve its goal, which might be included in this investigation or be addressed through other applicable mechanisms.
Speaker 1:They also continue on saying they want to know whether China's acts, policies and practices burden or restrict US commerce and, if so, the nature and level of the burden or restriction, and such comments may include economic assessment of the burden or restrictions on any sector or industry, as well as an assessment of the burden or restriction on labor in the US related to the acts, the determinations required under Section 304 of the Trade Act and any other concerning issues raised in the petition. Those are all the things that the USTR is putting out there saying look, if you have something to say, we want to hear it. They want those comments by May 22nd. So you really don't have a ton of time, right? You have less than 20 days here from today, but they put this out a week or two ago. So the public hearing is actually going to be on May 29th. So they're getting the written comments into May 22nd. You could maybe still submit after May 22nd, but look, they're only saying this is when to be assured of consideration, which kind of suggests to me they might accept late filed. Fmc usually accepts late filed. I don't know if the USTR is going to accept late filed, but what they're saying is look, you want to be, you want your voice to be heard. Get it in by May 22nd.
Speaker 1:The Section 301 committee will convene a public hearing on May 29th in the main hearing room of the United US International Trade Commission in DC. But they're also going to be having a. I believe I thought I read and I don't see it here now, but I believe that they're going to be having a link to that. So if they are, I'll try to find it. I'll try to put it in the show notes here they say that the remarks of the hearing are limited to five minutes to allow for possible questions from the Section 301 Committee.
Speaker 1:This one has some potential right. So things that might come up here is tariffs and trades Again, we saw this under the Trump administration with Section 301, tariffs and trades. Again, we saw this under the Trump administration with Section 301, tariffs and taxes. So that's maybe something that'll come up here, but right now all we're in is this has gone from a petition from industry labor unions saying look, there's a problem. We think there's a problem. This is hindering our ability to do our job and hindering the United States in, as they say, national security and economic security. And now USTR United States Trade Rep said OK, we think that there's something here, we're going to look into it and that's where we're at. So May 22nd these are the dates. Keep in mind May 22nd if you have written comments, if you want to submit comments on any of those things, anything that relates to this, basically and May 29th keep it on your on your calendar in case you want to try to tune in. Um, hopefully they'll be putting that up online. Like I said, I thought I read that there was a link to that, but, um, this one's going to be interesting to follow, so I'll keep watch of it. Um, but that's all we have for today.
Speaker 1:I wanted to let you know that the USTR did in fact initiate the investigation, but, as always, the the guidance here is general, for educational purposes. It should not be considered to be legal advice directly related to your matter. You need an attorney, contact an attorney. But if you do have specific legal questions, feel free to reach out to my legal companies, call Strategies. Otherwise, for the non-legal questions, the e-learning, the general industry information and insights, come find me at the Maritime Professor. If you like these videos, let me know, comment, like and share. If you want to listen to these episodes on demand, or if you missed any previous episodes, check out the podcast by Landon Bysie. If you prefer to see the video, they live on my YouTube page by Landon Bysie, presented by the Maritime Professor, and while you're at it, check out the website MaritimeProfessorcom. So until next week. This is Lauren Began, the.