The Trump Administration’s Plan B: The USTR announces 76 new Section 301 investigations

The key takeaways, discussed in more detail below, are as follows: 

• Both investigations invoke Section 301’s “discretionary action” authority, which allows the USTR to self-initiate investigations of another country’s trade practices that are unreasonable or discriminatory and burden or restrict US commerce.
• The deadline to submit written comments and requests to appear at the hearings for both investigations is April 15, 2026. The members of the Eversheds Sutherland International Trade team are available to assist with public comments and requests to appear. 
• Following the investigation, the USTR may take certain remedial actions against the investigated economies, including imposing tariffs, adopting import restrictions, or negotiating trade commitments. 
• Businesses with global supply chains or trading relationships with the countries under investigation should assess their exposure now.

I. Background: Section 301

Section 301 is a law that permits the USTR to respond to and address unfair foreign trade practices that burden or restrict US commerce. In responding to unfair practices, the USTR may suspend trade agreements, impose duties or other import restrictions on goods, impose fees or restrictions on services of a foreign country, or negotiate and enter into new trade agreements to address the unfair practice. Action taken under Section 301 must be reviewed after four years, and will terminate unless the USTR extends the duration of the remedy. If the USTR imposes tariffs pursuant to a Section 301 investigation, there is no limit on the rate that may be imposed.

The Trump Administration has previously utilized Section 301 to investigate and impose tariffs against China and Nicaragua, with active investigations into Brazil, Vietnam, and the European Union still ongoing.

II. The New Section 301 Investigations 

The USTR has initiated these new Section 301 investigations under Section 301’s discretionary prong. Section 301(b) permits the USTR to take action when a foreign country’s acts, policies, or practices are unreasonable or discriminatory and burden or restrict US commerce. An act, policy, or practice can be “unreasonable” so long as it is unfair under normal trade relations, and does not need to rise to a violation of international law.

Historically, Section 301 investigations have been initiated against a single foreign country at a time (other than the European Union). These new multiple investigations mark the first instances where Section 301 investigations have simultaneously targeted multiple foreign countries at once.

a: Structural Excess Capacity and Production

Announced on March 11, the USTR’s first series of investigations will explore whether certain trading partners have structural excess capacity and production in their manufacturing sector that is not reflective of domestic and global demand. 

In essence, the USTR is concerned that certain foreign economies have more manufacturing capacity than their markets demand, leading to a surplus of goods sent to the United States. In the USTR’s view, this excess capacity undermines and displaces domestic production in the United States and makes it more difficult for US manufacturers to compete globally. It is currently unclear whether these foreign economies actually have excess capacity, or whether this focus is simply a response to policy goals within the USTR. One question likely to arise in these cases is whether an alleged excess capacity is a product of governmental policy and therefore actionable (i.e., a conscious policy choice of the relevant government), rather than a market condition that has arisen and, arguably, might not be a basis for a remedy.

The excess capacity investigations cover 16 economies: China, the European Union, Singapore, Switzerland, Norway, Indonesia, Malaysia, Cambodia, Thailand, Korea, Vietnam, Taiwan, Bangladesh, Mexico, Japan, and India. 

b: Forced Labor 

The USTR’s second series of investigations, announced on March 12, will look into whether various economies have failed to impose and enforce a ban on the importation of goods produced with forced labor. These investigations reflect a concern that certain countries are not adequately enforcing import bans against goods produced with forced labor, thereby permitting importers to source, and profit from, goods made with forced labor. The allegation is that US exporters with competitive products are at a disadvantage, because products made with forced labor are sold at a lower price that no ethical producer could replicate.

This group of investigations covers 60 economies, including China, the European Union, Canada, Mexico, Japan, India, and the United Kingdom. 

III. Key Deadlines and Action Items 

 Below is a summary of the key deadlines applicable to each investigation: 

The outcome of these investigations is likely to result in the imposition of new tariffs, given the Trump Administration’s previous indications that they will use Section 301 as an alternative to IEEPA tariffs. As such, importers should review their international trade and supply chain strategies now.

Participate in the Section 301 investigations. Importers should consider submitting public comments and/or requesting to appear at the public hearings. By doing so, importers can provide relevant data or concerns about potential tariffs or import restrictions that the USTR may take into account when implementing remedial trade actions. 

Mitigate exposure to duties and import restrictions. Importers should also assess their supply chain exposure and determine whether any suppliers, manufacturers, or trading relationships involve any of the economies subject to investigation. Understanding exposure now can help importers adjust their import procedures and existing supply agreements to account for duties or import restrictions that may be imposed pursuant to these investigations. 

Eversheds Sutherland will continue to monitor developments, and our attorneys remain available to assist with strategy, submitting public comments, and preparing hearing testimony.

__________

If you have any questions about this Legal Briefing, please feel free to contact any of the attorneys listed or the Eversheds Sutherland attorney with whom you regularly work.